With the publication of one complete edition of the journal Expedition in 1989 on Hasanlu project by American archaeologists, engaged there during pre-revolutionary period, the present study highlights some of the accepted mistakes in the explanation and interpretation of the facts in the articles of that journal on one hand, and the beginning of the activities by Iranian archaeologists in 2000 which necessitated the changes in chronology and stratification, on the other. Dyson also implied tracing the relics found at Hasanlu IV with the Mannaean state despite the opposition by some of the investigators. However, the accepted errors with regards to the lineage of 2nd defensive wall to Mannaean, although formally declared to that of Urartian and the continuation of Urartian in Hasanlu up to later 7th and early 6th century B.C. and attributing of rooms inside the fort to them, is not verifying the findings of Iranian team. Further, going through the part of the Urartian mud brick defensive wall and the way the layer was stratified need more study and consultation. With regards to the above –mentioned changes, writer, being the head of Iranian team at Hasanlu present a new chronological chart against the one presented by Dyson in 1989.
