logo

Search published articles


Showing 3 results for Cuneiform

Rouhollah Yousefi Zoshk, Sahar Yazdani,
year 2, Issue 6 (3-2019)
Abstract

Abstract
Proto-Elamite writing system known as phase 2 in proto-writing system in the Iranian plateau. Unfortunately, in decipherment and interpretation of the Proto-Elamite texts, they are always Under the influence of their contemporaneous writing system, proto-cuneiform. With further study at this system, albeit they have a common ancestor, but we have to consider to its specific and unique properties like Ecological geography, subsistence system, social hierarchy and etc., that make this culture. 
Keywords: Proto-Elamite, Susa, Proto-Cuneiform, Tablet.

Introduction
During the early French excavations of Susa, more than 1600 texts and fragments were found and were recognized to be a very early writing system (Dyson, 1968), and called the Proto-Elamite writing system (Scheil, 1900). After a while, Proto-Elamite texts have been found at sites across Iran. Due to the nature of the available radiocarbon data, the Proto-Elamite tablets can only to be dated with confidence to around 3300-3000 BC (Dahl, 2014:24). Current archaeological research suggests that many important sites across Iran were abandoned around 2800 BC. However, there is no consensus of how we understand the data, and we can here only note that there exist no samples of writing from Iran between the disappearance of Proto-Elamite writing system around 2900 BC and the introduction of cuneiform around 2300-2200 BC (Ibid:26).
Since Proto-Elamite texts record administrative transactions within a cultural and economic setting which is not entirely unknown to us, and since the scribes who wrote the texts had inherited certain bookkeeping techniques the content-specific numerical system, from their western neighbours in Mesopotamia, we can decipher the content of many texts. In 1978-79, Joran Friberg proposed a partial decipherment of a group of texts based on the number of cereal products found in these texts, the use of specific numerical systems, and the resemblance to text from Mesopotamia. Building on the results of him Peter Damerow and Robert K. Englund, a few years later proposed several sign identifications. Years after them, Jacob Dhal, also proposed a partial decipherment of sheep and goat terminology in Proto-Elamite texts(Ibid).
Though all these decipherments are true for part of these texts, but they consist of the relationship with Mesopotamian writing systems. Following this article, we can find at least two texts that could not verify all their signs and numerical systems match with that decipherment, and they could suggest that we need to review the decipherments manner with more Accuracy and independent from Mesopotamian texts.

MDP31, 33 and MDP31, 27
Both are administrative Proto-Elamite clay tablets and first published by Roland De Mecquenem in 1949 and keep in Louvre Museum.
In the seventh entry of MDP31, 33 texts, there is a string of signs: M024+M004+M218+M263~b+M038~a, that shows the owner(s) name of products M263~a which count with 2 N01. Because of the fading, it also might be two strings of names, but the important thing is the sign M263~b appeared in the string of the names and its very common in other texts that one sign which represents as products or workers, used as a syllable of the names. The other important thing like MDP31, 27 is behind the tablet, where we had an entry that normally should be the total account, but the entry contains sign M243~g which does not appear in the rest of the text and counting with numerical signs: N39b+1N24+1N30C and this number is not equal with this tablet’s front text. So, we can offer that, this tablet is not about the accounting of few products and their final total, but it represented several products that they had been donated to the warehouse (maybe the elite warehouse) and the sign M243~g is an introduction for the module and its size which, each product counts with this. The other suggestion for this Inequality can be: the products accounting with another numerical system that could not be recognised for us by now. 
In MDP31,27, also, the above result could be true, but the other impressive difference in this text is the absences of the signs of owner(s) before product signs, which shows that all these products (grain and dairy which usually did not account together) belongs to the household or institute that came at header entry sign and that’s why the scriber didn’t need to separate them.

Conclusion
As a conclusion to sum up, the texts that were reviewed shows that hypothesis based on proto-cuneiform texts contemporary Proto-Elamite period which considered for the decipherment of these texts couldn’t be true and need more investigating.
In addition, the lake of material evidence from Proto-Elamite sites that showing their subsistence system and management system, hasty look and compare this period with its neighbors in Mesopotamia, Leads to more problems to its decipherment.
So, it’s worthy to consider in additional of Semantic structure, notice to the subsistence system, the economic and social hierarchy of the Proto-Elamite period.
So far, the assumption in the interpretation of Proto-Elamite texts has been revealed that everything on the tablet count should be accounted as their final total on the reverse the tablet exactly. But these two tablets presented that this rule might be a break and we might search on the new numerical system or consider them as text that contains products that offer to a warehouse, and this entrance wasn’t important as export from the warehouse or to have final total.

Mossayeb Amiri, Majid Badiei Gavarti,
year 5, Issue 16 (9-2021)
Abstract

Abstract
In the repository of Persepolis Museum, there are about 700 pieces of inscribed stones related to the cinctures of Persepolis Palaces, almost all of which are broken and incomplete. It us noteworthy that all the pieces are incomplete and broken in one place and only one cincture in the museum hall is complete and the rest of the pieces are all incomplete. Even the healthy piece was broken at the same point where the other cincture were broken and later repaired. All these fractures and defects have been done intentionally and from two specific places. About 40 of these pieces belonged to Thatcher Palace, and after their arrangement and reconstruction, 12 cinctures were obtained equal to the number of Thatcher Palace columns. In all this number, the name of Xerxes is seen as the builder and there is no other name of the Achaemenid kings. The sculptors have followed a certain pattern for their work. Apparently, all the pieces have inscriptions and these inscriptions were in three living languages of that time, namely ancient Persian, Elamite and Babylonian, and all the inscriptions were carved with cuneiform. These three civilizations were the most important civilizations of their time and they certainly had interactions with each other. In this article, we will try to study the cincture inscriptions of Thatcher Palace columns by descriptive-analytical method. How many paragraphs dose the writing contain and what does it contain? The three languages are compared and analyzed, their differences are identified and finally the cause of their breakdown is investigated. 
Keywords: Cuneiform, Cincture, Persepolis, Thatcher Palace.

Introduction
The common script in Achaemenid times is cuneiform, which some scholars attribute to the previous kings of Darius and even the period of historical beginning (Young, 2007: 38). Elamite was the official language and Aramic language common is most areas under Achaemenid rule. But it should be considered in mind that with the vastness of the Achaemenid territory, there were certainly many linguistic differences in this land, which according to recent linguistic research, probably more than 10 languages were common in this territory, (Anthony, 2013,37). The number of inscriptions from the Achaemenid period that have been discovered so-far is over 40 inscriptions, the most famous of which is the great Bistoon, which is written in three languages: ancient Persian Elamite and Babylonian. With the coming to power of Darius, this line was completed so that the types of verbs and their tenses, as well as pronouns and objects and the construction of verbs in it were well observed, and because it was based on grammar, it was possible to decipher it. It is noteworthy that the cuneiform is the only line that there is slash sign between words, and this feature led Rawlison to decipher it for the first time, and then the starting point for deciphering other lines, such as the Babylonian, Elamute and Assyrians...... The main goal of any linguistic research based on a silent language is to go through the veils of historical and cultural language and to achieve a correct understanding of the inscriptions and a report that is as enlightening as possible, in addition, providing an opportunity to teach a silent language has been a sub-goal of this research. In this research, apart from the ancient Persian language, the Elamite language of the Achaemenid period, which was strange in its birthplace, Iran, has been studied. Unfortunately, less of this research has been by domestic researchers in the field of ancient Iranian languages in the field of Elamite language. Thatcher Palace, column and its cinctures.

Discussion
Thatcher’s stone cinctures in Persepolis are divided into three categories in terms of material, shape, color, and size. 
1. Cinctures made of limestone which has a light gray color and in terms of shape and form has a simple cut and no geometric tools and on it inscriptions in three languages of ancient Persian, Elamite and Babylonian in a very beautiful, technical way carved without the slightest fracture. All letters and symbols have a dimension in the sculpture and have elongated symbols and are neither short nor long due to the small space. For this reason, this type of current is called cuneiform by Nasta’liq writers. (picture7). This cincture sample has not been found more than two samples so-far, for this resin, this specimen must belong to the columns inside Thatcher Palace Hall. The stones with which the sculptors used to build these types of columns were extracted from the mines of the same area. (picture, 1,4,5). 
2. The cincture is made of decorative stone or hematite, which is glossy black, this type cincture is smaller in diameter and height than the other two, similar in shape to the first sample, which is made of limestone. The reason for the simplicity of this sample is probably the high degree of hardness of the lathe. On this cincture unlike the first sample, trilingual inscriptions with cuneiform lines are carved in a row and in the same order, a few centimeters apart. In this way, the last sign of the Babylonian cuneiform, which is the end of the inscription, is located a few centimeters behind the beginning  of the ancient Persian inscription, the carving of the symbols and letters on it were simple and had no dimension, and perhaps due to the hardness of the stone, they used narrow and simple symbols and letters, and had no small, crushed pieces and also there are two samples of this cincture, one almost complete, which attracted the inside the Persepolis Museum, and the other was half of cincture that was placed in the tank of the same museum. (Picture 2 and 8). 
3. Cincture made of decorative stone and light blue color with a gutter tool around its upper edge, also this cincture is larger in diameter and height than the other two types, and triple cuneiform are carved in a row on it. This type of cuneiform has beautiful but it does not have concave dimension and beauty of the first type. (Picture 3and 6). The size of the cinctures starts at 5 Cm and covers up to one third of a cincture. Its inscriptions were masterfully sculpted in ancient Persian, Elamite and Babylonian languages. After arrangement, the pieces reached 12 cincture, which were the number of columns in the Palace. After translating each word, it replaced them and finally a text was obtained that was repeated 12 times in 3 languages. The important point with our discussion was that a common part this text disappeared in the sentence and then continued the sentence to the end.

Conclusion
When Alexander entered Persepolis, more than two centuries had passed since the Achaemenid Kings ruled the world, and more than one hundred and seventy years had passed since the construction of Persepolis. Conqueror historians have written that after Alexander’s conquest of Persepolis, he ordered it Tobe burned while intoxicated at the request of his mistress, and they know this commandment against his inner desire and try to remove this shameful act from his face on the other hand, if Xerxes or his father Darius, he immediately rebuilt it, although such an action, ie the burning of Athens by the Achaemenids, was never reported. With these details, the authors of this article found that the fire and destruction of Persepolis had nothing to do with the above story, Greek soldier, consciously and under Alexander’s direct order, destroyed the inscriptions, symbols and looted the architecture and its treasures. When they translated these inscriptions for Alexander, he saw himself defeating the Achaemenids without a rival to the emperor of the world. As a result, he ordered the destruction of all inscriptions that had such meanings, especially titles such as king of the world etc., for this reason, broken pieces were not found when translating the cincture. There is also a broken statue of Darius in the treasury of Persepolis, which is clearly visible due to the strong blow, especially the left eye of the statue, which is split on both sides and the place of the blow corresponds to the arrow of Alexander’s soldiers, and as you fill the gap with the sculpting paste, it becomes an arrow, the same shapes can be found at the fracture site of the cincture.

Rouhollah Yousefi Zoshk, Khalil-Ollah Beik-Mohammad, Saeed Baghizadeh, Hassan Afshari Salaki,
year 9, Issue 33 (12-2025)
Abstract

The earliest evidence of human exploitation of the wild date palm in the Middle East dates back to the sixth and fifth millennia BCE. Despite the scarcity of archaeological data, it is commonly assumed that by the end of the Late Uruk period (ca. 3300–3100 BCE), the Sumerians founded the earliest date palm orchards. However, this hypothesis has thus far not been substantiated by scientifically verified and documented evidence, rendering the matter a subject of scholarly controversy. To date, since the Proto-Elamite script has not yet been fully deciphered, our knowledge of agricultural activities within Proto-Elamite society remains considerably limited. What has been learned so far regarding the structure of this society’s economic system is derived mainly from comparisons between signs found on Proto-Elamite clay tablets and comparable examples in Late Uruk Mesopotamian Proto-cuneiform tablets from the late fourth millennium BCE; signs that primarily pertain to labor activities, animal husbandry, and livestock products. This study outlines the phenotypic characteristics of the date palm that can be identified, and examines their similarities to known Proto-Elamite examples. The authors suggest signs representing date palms in the Proto-Elamite script and consider them as key resources for a better understanding of the subsistence economy of the Proto-Elamite period, an issue previously absent from the scholarly literature on this era. Employing a comparative approach, the article correlates the signs for palms in Proto-Elamite texts with contemporaneous and later Iranian, as well as Mesopotamian, visual motifs. By introducing these signs into the archaeological discourse of the Proto-Elamite period, the research enables a more accurate reconstruction of the economic system and assessment of the level of date-palm horticultural knowledge in southwestern Iran during the late fourth millennium BCE.


Page 1 from 1