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.

Abstract
The invention of writing is considered one of the hallmarks in the human eveloution. Writing has not been invented all at once. Indeed, it had a gradual process from the Neolithic period to the end of the fourth millennium BC. In its early stages, it was similar among the Middle Eastern cultures, but at the end of the fourth millennium BC and the formation of the states in Uruk, Khuzestan, and Fars, two writing systems (Proto-Elamite and cuneiform) were invented at a same time. Both scribes are rooted in a common communication system. Some words with exactly the same iconography are obtained in the scribes of two lands which have been translated with different semantic uses thank to the progress of decipherment. The purpose of this study is to investigate the phonetic structure between the common early scribes in the second half of the fourth millennium BC in West Asia, which paves the way for the emergence of literature in the coming centuries. By using a descriptive-analytical methodology, the authors try to deduce that the reason for the similarities in the writing systems of the both areas is becuause of their identical roots by finding the roots of writing in two lands and examining the reasons for the formation of the first differences arising from understanding the environment and archaeological data. Also, the reason for the semantic differences of the words with the same iconography is due to the diversity of social and subsistance changes between the Iranian plateau and southern Mesopotamia, as well as the linguistic differences between the two regions. 
Keywords: Proto-Writing, Cuneform, Proto-Elamite, Susa, Phonetic Value.

Introduction
There are various theories about the origin of writing in Iran and the Middle East. Some argue that with the advancement of agriculture, rapid economic growth and lack of confidence in memory, the loss of many business and accounting information, and over-complexity of computing and business communications, the need to preserve information had increased. It was necessary to invent a way to maintain them. The invention of writing was not revolutionary nor suddenly is taken by an individual at a certain time; rather, it has evolved over several thousand years, and the period of Susa II and the emergence of complex societies and the specialization have greatly contributed to its growth. In the second half of the fourth millennium and early third millennium BC, tokens became more advanced, and were made in various forms with economic themes and were used in trade, then, the clay envelopes, also called bullae, became frequent. This clay envelopes date back to the mid-fourth millennium BC. Following the develepomental procees of the administrative system, the numerical tablets were invented.  

Disscussion 
The stages of writing up to the Susa II (Uruk) period were exactly the same, and from this period onwards the difference between the two scribes becomes apparent. The only major change of this period is the formation of a dense community in southern Mesopotamia. Since many ideograms were taken from the symbols around the environemnt, to better understand the roots of these differences, we need to fully understand the climate, environment and archaeological data of the two regions to comprehend these differences by taking the the environmental variety into account.
A) Mesopotamian climate in the fourth millennium BC: Mesopotamian communities due to alluvial soil and rich in minerals and nutrients that river water was washed from the surrounding mountains, in the field of agriculture and grain collection had access to surplus. On the other hand, the existence of large gardens near the permanent and water-rich rivers of the Tigris and Euphrates, vast pastures for sheep, goats and cattle, as well as abundant fish, poultry and wild animals for hunting, etc., led to extensive progress compared to other areas. In the fourth millennium BC, the population in these areas increased enormously, while the city of Uruk reached an area of about 2.5 square kilometers. Of course, there is no direct evidence of the exact number of inhabitants of Uruk, but with the help of anthropological data from the pre-modern Middle East, 100 to 200 inhabitants per hectare has been accepted for the residential sector. Apart from the the central monumental area of Uruk, It has reached approximately 230 hectares in the residential sector, which refers to the population of 25,000 to 50,000 people in Uruk in the late fourth millennium BC. Over 90 percent of the tablets were found in the garbages of the Temple of Eanna (the largest religious monuments of Uruk) presenting that this scribe was only used by a gropu of elites of the Mesopotamian society.
B) Climate of Iran in the fourth millennium BC: Iran is a clear example of the impact of natural structures on the cultural development. Iran is one of the arid lands of the ancient world and this determines the climatic relations of this land and the climate of its different regions. The summer heat in the lowlands forces people to migrate to the highlands with their herds. Due to the climatic conditions in these areas, a large part of the inhabitants of valleys and foothills are forced to live in their tents. Among the most important nomadic areas, we can mention Dar Khazineh, Tal-e Bakun and some settlements of Ramhormoz in the fifth to third millennium BC.

Conslusion
Management system has been one of the needs of human social development since the Neolithic period onwards which in the fourth millennium BC this need was felt quite clearly and at a high level, which led to a significant development of management in West Asia. At this time, the formation of different systems of government between the Iranian plateau and Mesopotamia probably led to the formation of different management systems, but since for more than four thousand years, both regions had used a completely identical writing system, it is not far-fetched that the two different types of scribes are affected by common roots and have evolved according to the management needs of their environment.
As was said before, In Mesopotamia the scribe was only used by a group of elites. Hence, the ideogram and pictogram were enough to respond the needs of conveying a message. But in Iran, due to the special climate in the past, it was devoid of the centralized populations; instead the main populations were scattered in different parts of the Iranian plateau and the use of this scribe was over an area of one million square kilometers from the Shahr-e Sokhte in Sistan, Tepe Yahya in Kerman, Tepe Ozbaki in Qazvin plain and Tepe Sofalin in Tehran to Tal-e Malyan and Susa in southwestern Iran which probably there were different ethnicities and dialects in these areas. Due to the scatterness of proto-writing caly tablets in different part of Susa, one can conclude that this scribe became common in the society to respond to the needs of such a large society. Consequently, a scribe with the use of pictograms and ideograms was invented. We believe, according to the percentage of repetitions, the phonetic use of this scribe is probably high, and since this scribe was common among the different tribes of the Iranian plateau, perhaps with the phonetic use, it was effecient to convey meaning from different languages on the Iranian plateau in the second half of the fourth millennium BC.

Abstract
In recent years the Achaemenid sites in the Borazjan area have attracted a great deal of attention and their identification with Elamite Tamukkan/Greek Taocê has been widely accepted. Aside from the architectural interest of these sites, however, their location along what later became an important route linking the Persian Gulf and the Iranian plateau is significant. Whether travelling between the Persian Gulf coast and Shiraz, or the earlier Achaemenid capitals (Pasargadae and Persepolis), Borazjan represents the first stage for travellers moving along this route. This study examines some of the logistical aspects of travel between Borazjan and the highlands, as well as the climatic extremes experienced by travellers during much of the year. The difficulties of traversing the route are illustrated with selections from 19th and early 20th century travellers accounts. The advantages of commencing or ending the journey at Shif, as opposed to Bushehr, are discussed with reference to numerous examples. The importance of mules as pack animals along the route is emphasized. Finally, the implications of the evidence marshaled for the burgeoning field of sensory studies are underscored.

Introduction
R.T. Hallock’s identification of El. Tamukkan with Gr. Taocê1 predated the excavation and initial publication of the monumental architectural complexes near Borazjan (Sang-e Siah, Bardak-e Siah and Charkhab).2 Although Rawlinson suggested that, ‘The Achæmenian Palace of Taoce, mentioned by Strabo, was probably at the modern village of Dalaki, where there is a fine mound of great apparent antiquity,’3 most scholars would today agree that Taocê/Tamukkan should be identified with the Borazjan sites. Due to limited exploration and excavation, the function(s) and chronology of these important sites are still imperfectly understood,4 but iconographic, architectonic and epigraphic data5 suggest building activity and regular use from the reign of Cyrus to that of Darius or Xerxes, and possibly beyond.
Borazjan lies on the principal route linking Bushehr and Shiraz (Fig. 1). As Maclean noted in 1904, ‘The only important route is viâ Borasjun and Kazeroon to Shiraz.’6  For most travellers, Borazjan was either the last stop on the way from the highlands to the Persian Gulf coast, or the first stop heading in the opposite direction. Hence the Borazjan complex would have received visitors during the Achaemenid period who, after sailing either down or up the Persian Gulf by ship and landing on the coast,7 had just completed the first overland stage of their journey to the north; or, moving in the opposite direction, the Borazjan complex would have been where visitors spent their last night before traversing the remaining distance to the coast and boarding a vessel bound for southern Babylonia or points south.
The fact that Bushehr’s Elamite predecessor, Liyan, probably acted as a maritime gateway to the highlands of Anšan8 makes it tempting to think that the Liyan-to-Anšan or Tamukkan-to-Parsa route was always the main thoroughfare from the Persian Gulf to the Iranian plateau. Yet, in some periods, this was demonstrably not the case. During the Safavid period, for example, Bandar ‘Abbas was the principal port of entry on the Persian Gulf for goods destined for the markets of the Iranian Plateau.9 Indeed, when Carsten Niebuhr visited Bushehr in 1765 he remarked that (Fig. 2), until 1735 when Nader Shah decided to make it the headquarters of his much vaunted but never realized navy,10 Bushehr had been an unimportant village.11 Strictly speaking, however, this is not quite correct. Nader Shah’s naval yard was at Reshahr, c. 6 kms. to the south of Bushehr.12 Earlier, Shah ‘Abbas I had kept a squadron of 100 vessels at Reshahr with which to attack vessels bound for Basra.13 
Nevertheless, despite fluctuations in the importance of the Bushehr region and its immediate hinterland through time, scholars appear to be unanimous in recognizing the importance of the Borazjan complex. It is not my intention here to challenge this contention, yet it is interesting to consider what the hydrography, climate and environment of the Borazjan region, and the topographic exigencies of travel between the Iranian plateau and the coast, meant to the region’s transient population, whether bureaucrats and royal visitors passing through, or corvée laborers brought to work on the building projects attested in cuneiform sources, during the Achaemenid period. What follows is intended to initiate a conversation about some often overlooked, critical factors that would have impacted all who frequented Bushehr and its hinterland in antiquity, and followed the route linking this part of the coast with the Iranian plateau.
Keywords: Persian Gulf, Borazjan, Elamite, Achaemenid, Tamukkan, Travellers.

Conclusion
This study has sketched out some of the difficulties of travel between Bushehr, Borazjan and the Achaemenid capitals; some of the logistical requirements of travel along that route; and some of the climatic considerations that made travel during much of the year an unpleasant experience, to say the least. These considerations naturally make one consider the Borazjan complex in a new light, not merely as impressive examples of Achaemenid monumental architecture, but as sites that could be difficult of access, uncomfortable and potential graveyards for those not in the upper echelons of society.
In that sense, some of the data presented here may contribute to the growing field of sensory studies in both the recent historical past and more remote antiquity that have become increasingly common in recent years as a means to gaining a deeper understanding of our subjects’ life experiences. Many sensory studies focus on sight — viewsheds, natural illumination and darkness within buildings — and sound — from the noise of battle to the sound of silence on the steppe.103 Others focus on smells, whether pleasant ones produced by frankincense and other aromatics in palaces and sanctuaries,104 or the stench of war, death and the battlefield.105 Sensory discomfort due to extremes of weather and environmental conditions, as well as the influence of these factors on the utilization of a specific ancient site and on its inhabitants, are less commonly treated. Govert van Driel’s study of references to weather in Neo-Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian sources, for example, made much of the cold and the importance of seasonality as a consideration in the timing of Assyrian military campaigns, but was curiously silent on the topic of heat.106 In fact, comments on extreme heat tend to be regarded as a literary trope, and the ability to withstand it a form of boasting by those who, despite scorching temperatures, managed to prevail over adverse conditions and defeat an adversary. A vivid illustration of this is provided by the literary account of Nebuchadnezzar I’s (1125-1104 BC) Elamite campaign, launched in July from the eastern Babylonian outpost of Der. ‘With the heat glare scorching like fire, the very roadways were burning like open flame….The finest of the great horses gave out, the legs of the strong man faltered.’107 Yet the unseasonable nature of the campaign also conferred a tactical advantage on Nebuchadnezzar who felt his campaign had been ‘divinely ordained, in the unexpected summer month of Tammuz (June-July). His timing made for a miserable forced march for his army because of the unbearable heat and the dried-up water sources. But this unorthodox timing also afforded Nebuchadnezzar the element of surprise when confronting the Elamite forces.’108 
Another, much later example of almost unbearable heat from the same general area appears in Strabo’s description of Susiana which, he noted, had ‘a hot and scorching atmosphere.’ So intense was the heat at Susa that, ‘when the sun is hottest, at noon, the lizards and the snakes could not cross the streets in the city quickly enough to prevent their being burnt to death in the middle of the streets.’109  Such language may sound hyperbolic, but only to someone who has never visited Khuzestan in the summer. Indeed, with a modern average maximum of 46.4˚ C (115.52˚ F) and average minimum of 32˚ C (89.6˚ F) in July,110 the descriptions of Khuzestan’s summer heat in the accounts of Nebuchadnezzar I and Strabo are no exaggeration.
In the introduction to her classic study of Athens and Persia in the fifth century B.C., Margaret Miller wrote that ‘experience shows that even the wildest imagination cannot step beyond the familiar world of sensory experience.’111 Implying as it does that nothing we have not ourselves experienced in the flesh can be imagined, this assertion, I suggest, needs to be modified. On the contrary, we can and must step outside of our own compendium of sensory experiences if we are ever to have an inkling of what life was like in the past. And while we may not be able to travel on a mule from Shif to Shiraz, or sail in a small craft up and down the Persian Gulf, we can get closer to the experience of those who did these things by scrutinizing the literature of pre-modern, pre-motorized travel for experiential descriptions of places that interest us in antiquity. The many descriptions that survive from the 19th and early 20th century of travel between the Persian Gulf coast and Shiraz, via Borazjan, offer a rich body of data that helps us to better understand the exigencies of life there in the Achaemenid period, whether for corvée laborers or élite Achaemenid travellers. They afford us a fresh perspective, one that looks at the Borazjan complex not as decontextualized monuments or free-floating units of Achaemenid architecture and iconography but as buildings tethered to an environment that could be brutally harsh for most of the year, one in which travellers, whether arriving from Babylon by sea or from Pasargadae and Persepolis by land, sought refuge from an unforgiving climate of scorching sun, suffocating winds or freezing cold.

Abstract
One of the most important and controversial prehistoric cultural periods is Proto Elamite period, which can be considered as a revolution in the development, growth and development of communication and interaction of the people of that period, in the period of 3300 to 3000 B.C Many changes took place in this golden age, which itself is due to the existence of political and social complexities. During this period, livestock unions were formed, which had an Proto Elamite  writting on the inscriptions of this period. The union’s livelihood was based on animal husbandry. The economies of monogamous and farming communities are fully integrated with the livestock nomadic economy, and farmers are therefore the direct economic dependents of nomadic unions. Of course, it goes without saying that nomadic ranchers also need farmers, but this was not always the case. Farmers provided some of the farmers’ grains, but the farmers continued to cultivate. They usually had rainfed agriculture. But in general, the most important livestock economy is herding, and farmers needed to migrate to find forage, and on the other hand, the very hot weather in the area of Susa was not tolerable for livestock, and farmers had to migrate to colder areas. The inscriptions are very important in this cultural period. Inscriptions changed from counting mode to scrolls for managing office and animal documents that were thought-provoking. One of the most significant areas of the fourth millennium BC is the area of Susa, which in this period has a lot of livestock inscriptions. In this article, the authors try to analyze the type and number of livestock inscriptions, the existence of a nomadic union, and subsequently the bipolarity of the Susa community in the early Elamite period.
Keywords: Fourth Millennium BC, Proto Elamite, Susa, Animal Husbandry, Inscription.

Introduction
Proto Elamaite refers to a period in history that chronologically shows 14 carbon samples obtained from millions of times between 3300 and 3000 BC.( Dahl et al, 2013: 358). But the end of this cultural period is not very clear yet (Pats, 1396: 99). Today, there are various sites from this period in Iran, some of which have been excavated, but according to the excavated sites, it covers a large part of the Iranian plateau, and so far 8 of its sites have been identified with an integrated writing standard.some of them like 1. Susa (Vallat, 1971) 2. Sialk (Ghrishman, 1938: XXXI) 3. Tal Geser (Alizadeh, 2014). Proto Elamite writing has an integrated structure in terms of form, writing and in terms of illustrating the ideas of the drawings. For example, in the field of animal texts, all of them have used a series of common or close signs, and in most cases, all of them have shown the difference between male and female goats, male and female sheep, and lambs with a single sign .Also, the same collection counting system is used.
Objective: To study the duality of the population of Susa (monogamous and nomadic) in the fourth millennium BC is based on the inscriptions of Proto Elamaite period, based on which it can be seen that Susa in Proto Elamate period is a bipolar society. Indigenous and probably in the same language, the Mesopotamian family is in the south of the Acropolis hill of Susa and a farming and pastoral community in the north of the Acropolis hill. Each nation provided the economic market for the other.
Research Questions: Has a union of animal husbandry communities been formed in Iran during Proto Elamaite period? Was Susa a community, farmer and cattle breeder in the Proto Elamite period?? What cultural connections have there been between livestock and monogamous communities?
Hypothesis: Considering the similarity of the structure and texts of Proto Elamite in the Iranian plateau, it can be seen that there was a connection between these areas and since the most consistency in the signs as well as the areas found in the herd. Early Elamite writings are related to animal texts, it can be seen that the livestock community may have played a role in this collection. These livestock communities in southwestern Iran were in close contact with Susa to meet their material needs, and probably half of Susa communities were forced to migrate to the highlands due to the large number of livestock in the warmer months of the year.
Research Method: In this research, the aim is to reconstruct the herdsman community living in the Susa area in the second half of the 4th millennium BC, which according to the statistical analysis of the number of livestock tablets compared to other Proto Elamite texts, shows that the most Note that these tablets have livestock provisions. In fact, it is possible to understand the type of livelihood of the Sush community in the Proto Elamite period from reading the tables, which is that the people of Sush were cattle breeders in the north of the hill and farmers in the south of the hill. The tablets obtained, which are mentioned in the research proposal, how to discover and decipher them, are very effective in achieving the goal of this research.

Proto Elamite inscriptions obtained from Susa
Proto Elamite inscriptions were first found in the excavations of Susa in 1900. (De Morgan, 1900: 130) Inscriptions are flattened clay fragments made by hand. They have formed. And are cooked at low heat or not cooked at all. In their study, the authors divided the Elamite inscriptions from Susa into two categories. One is the texts obtained from MDP.17, most of which were found from the north of Susa hill, and the other is the rest of the Susa inscriptions, which are generally obtained from the south of Susa hill. Demorgan’s large trench in MDP.6 had less than 10 percent of the animal texts But MDP.17 has the highest percentage of livestock statistics

Animal Texts of Susa
The content of all Elamite texts is administrative and related to the production, storage and distribution of the product (Dahl, 2015). In Proto Elamite texts, various signs are used for animals and livestock, but among them, only the sign of sheep and goat can be recognized with complete certainty due to the similarity with the example of the beginning of cuneiform can be distinguished from other animal signs. All livestock and domestic animal signs used in the herd are shown with abstract signs. Also, one of the most important factors related to livestock communities is the use of signs of livestock products.

Conclusion
Today, in the southwest of Iran, there are nomadic communities that have land in summer and winter, and apart from animal husbandry, whose main occupation is seasonal and rainfed agriculture, which does not meet the consumption of the whole year. And trade in livestock products and grains with the surrounding farming communities, and since the life of nomads depends on climate and environment, and since the end of the fourth millennium BC, major changes in water conditions and the weather in southwestern Iran has not happened. It is possible that the life of the nomads in Proto Elamite period was the same as now. By examining Proto Elamite tablets of Susa, it can be found that a significant part of them (nearly one third of the texts) are concepts related to wages, payment and in the field of livestock activity or collection and audit of livestock, and Attention is also regular with agricultural activity or payment of wages. By classifying the tablets and also according to the statistical concepts and percentages, it is determined that more than 32% of Proto Elamite texts obtained from Trench I of Domkenam in the north of the Acropolis hill are directly related to the counting and trading of livestock and may be part of the payment inscriptions whose goods Not specified, also related to livestock. According to Domkanem’s explanation, part of the inscriptions of the Great Trench of Damurgan is probably related to the texts of grain, storage and payment of labor wages, and at the time of publication, it was merged with a part of the tablets of the Great Trench in other Sush collections such as the book MDP.17 It has been reported that if they are separated, the number of livestock in the north of Shush Hill will probably reach a much higher number than %32. which in general can be understood the livelihood and life of the people of Susa in Proto Elamite period.

The correct position and the determining role of the second and first millennium BC cultures in the Fars region (Marvdasht plain) which we know as the Shoqa/Timuran cultures and the importance of this culture in the transition from the prehistoric to the historical period (Achaemenid) are still not well known. Despite of extensive archaeological research that has been done in the Marvdasht plain and the presence of significant sites of this period, due to the limited and generally very old excavations in these sites, it is still difficult to understand these developments. During that time, huge developments were taking place in Khuzestan and Fars regions; Changes usually created many conflicts between native cultures and southwestern cultures origin (Elamite).Some archaological findings, such as weapons, are signs of the height of such conflicts in the past. This paper will study and introduce the collection of weapons of Toll-e Shoqa, which were obtained from the excavations of Mahmoud Rad in 1942 and Vandenberg in 1950 in that site, those are now kept in the National Museum of Iran. These collections have been studied recently in the inventory project in the National Museum of Iran archives. So far, few cultural materials from Toll-e Shoqa have been published and more emphasis has been placed on its pottery; the pottery is the basis of the relative chronology of this period in the Fars region. Unfortunately, the results of the archaeological excavations in Shoqa were never fully published and all its cultural materials were not introduced. In the organizing project of the National Museum of Iran which will be described and analyzed in this paper.

Abstract
Seals are one of the most important archaeological data, being always considered in archeological and ancient art studies. As one of the most important archeological sites in Iran in different historical-cultural periods, especially the Elamite period, the ancient city of Susa has provided a lot of cultural-artistic data to archaeologists and art history experts, including seals. Findings from this ancient city, including the seals, indicate various artistic styles in the past, various styles of engraved seals, and iconography have a special place among this data that can express information in various fields such as symbols, myths, or narrative stories. In the Elamite period and especially the ancient Elam that is discussed in this article, we are faced with different artistic styles in the engraved seals. Styles that can express both the special Elamite art and in some cases have not been without the influence of the engraving styles of the neighboring land, i.e., Mesopotamia. Here is a selection of seals of the Early Elamite period of Susa (11 pieces) in this regard, which belongs to the National Museum of Iran, which are considered to study their images in terms of a specific cultural-artistic style to respond to the question indicating “whether the engravings of these seals of Early Elamite express a special narrative style!” The study, which is a library-museum method and is accompanied by a comparative analysis of images, can be a narrator of the power of “master of the animals” / or perhaps the best person in the society of that day in protecting the animals under his support against wild animals such as lions, somehow narrating its power with these illustrations.
Keywords: Susa, Seal, Early Elamite, Images, Symbols.

Introduction
The seal or sealing has always had an important meaning for archaeologists and art historians. The researcher can use them in indicating dates, subject analysis, determining customs, and sometimes even in understanding myths, and thus reconstructing a forgotten world in parts. In addition, by studying seals, complex administrative processes, business relationships, and cultural relationships may be somewhat understood (Neuman, 2013: 83). The use of a seal was a guarantee of authenticity, ownership, documentary participation in a legal exchange, or protection of goods against encroachment on individuals (Collon, 1990: 11).
No seals have been found in the 7-12 layers of the metropolitan area dedicated to the Susa IV period, but in any case, Le Breton’s tabulation of seals without exact origin indicates the superiority of the Mesopotamian style of seals during the first half of the third millennium (Carter, 1980: 25; Carter, 1979: 453). The influence of Akkadian art on the seals of Iran / Elam - almost simultaneously with the Awan period - can be seen on a group of cylindrical seals of unknown origin, at least one of which is purchased in the Foroughi collection from Iran (Porada, 1964: 88 -93). 

Discussion 
The form of wide shoulders and narrow waist and proportion of people in these seals is comparable to the examples of the Akkadian period. However, the equal distribution of people in the scenes of Iranian seals distinguishes them from the form of narrative distribution of people in the Akkadian seals, in which there were wide empty spaces in front of people (Porada, 1993: 486). The domination of the rulers of the third dynasty of Ur/ Ur III over Susa (from the last years of Shulgi rule on 2094-2097 BC) is reflected in the influence of the Mesopotamian sealing style on the seals of the rulers of Shimashki dynasty and the first kings of Sukkalmah (Porada, 1993: 486).
Based on the studies by researchers and comparative studies on several selected seals in the repository of the National Museum of Iran, this article will try to answer the question regarding whether the engravings of these seals of Early Elamite could express a special narrative style. The study was conducted by the library-museum method and was accompanied by the comparative analysis of images.
The seals selected from the National Museum of Iran, which are 11, can be divided into the following categories in terms of visual style and iconography:
- Susa style (Susa IV), which includes the seals No.: 592.1 (Susa), 597 (Susa), 599 (Susa), 602 (Susa), and 601 (Susa) of this collection.
In the period of Early Elamite, we   also see different styles, which we will discuss as follows:
- Akkadian Related style, which includes the seals No. 607 (Susa), and 605.1 in this collection.
- Popular Elamite style (Akkadian / Awan Related), which includes the seals No.: 619.1 (Susa), 619.2 (Susa), and 595 (Susa) in this collection.
- Ur III Related / Susa V, which includes the only seal: 606 (Susa) in this style collection.

Conclusion
What can be seen in all the designs and images of the seals is the depiction of things that existed in the life and climate of the people of that period, which were influenced their thoughts and type of look, somewhat being the engraved designs affected by the customs, beliefs, and traditions of those people. Except for the scorpion motifs on the seals, which symbolized the insidious creatures and suffering or even indicated rebirth, they were often found in arid lands and could be related to the climate that had influenced the beliefs of the people of those lands. What most of the pictures in this collection tell us, is about the fight between humans and animals; a powerful human being against strong animals, perhaps to defend a weaker animal. The fight of man and lion, with the presence of animals such as goats and cows; an ideal narrative of superior personal power. These fighting scenes are often seen in the motifs of ancient Iran (and of course Mesopotamia) from the period before Elamite and Elamite to later periods, indicating the power of a superior person in most interpretations - in older periods, perhaps the of “master of the animals” or ruler and referring to the king in more recent periods.
On the one hand, the distinct and prominent presence of animals such as lions (or cats) being the symbol of power in the land of Elam - especially the Susa plain as a habitat of this animal - e and also the goats as a constant companion of humans from The agricultural period onwards, and also in this period. On the other hand, the need to protect the owned animals accompanied by man against hostile animals does not take the creation of such scenes out of the mind. Inspired by the issues and landscapes around him, the engraving artist used to create images, which ultimately led to a particular style. In these special cases, the battle scene is a kind of narrative of a superior person to show his superiority and power. Now, this person should be considered the ruler of animals to be sought in myths, or a powerful king that is present in the historical scenes.

Abstract
Belief in life after death leads to the creation of tombs and cemeteries. The remains of ancient societies are mostly limited to their tomb and graves where the investigation reveals parts of their religion, ritual, and customs related to religious beliefs. The Elimais are semi-independent and autonomous rulers at the same time as the Seleucids and the Parthians in the southwest of Iran. Architectural types of their tomb have been unearthed based on archaeological excavations in Xouzestan areas such as Susa, Dastwa, Golalak, and Saleh Dawood, Kal e chandar e Shami, Cheshme Chelvar, Qaleh Shias, Cafeh Babak and Hashtlik. In the study of the architecture of the Elamites tombs in addition to their description and typology, there are comparable similarities with the burial methods of previous civilizations and Simultaneous governments which the authors of this research are trying to achieve by using historical-comparative studies and based on the results of Elamites excavations. This research shows that according to the environmental differences between mountains and plains, the architecture of Elymais tombs is classified into two types: mountain and plain. According to their location relative to the surface of the earth. Mountain tombs are divided into underground tombs, semi-underground tombs, and tombs created on the surface. Typology and comparison Elamites tombs with tombs left from previous and native civilizations (Mesopotamia and Elam) and Seleucid and Parthian governments show that these tombs are still influenced by local traditions such as Mesopotamia and Elam.
Keywords: Elamites tombs, Kal-e Chendar Shami, Golalak, Susa, Saleh Davoud.

Introduction
Mortuary traditions vary from society to society depending on their unique cultures and values. Apart from stressing and helping preserve the identity of the deceased after death, these traditions furnish information about the prevailing burial traditions, grave architecture, deposition conditions, social structures and ethnic-cultural identity in a given society. The semi-autonomous rulers of Elymais, who had control of southwest Iran during the Seleucid-Parthian times, among other monuments, have bequeathed their tomb-houses, ruins of which have been excavated at such sites as Susa, Dastowa, Gelalak, Saleh Davoud, Kal-e Chendar, Cheshmeh Chelvar, Qaleh-ye Shias, Kafe Babak, and Hashtlik. The present paper aims to propose a proper classification and typology so as to give a better picture of the Elamites tomb architecture (tomb structures), and to compare these structures with the known relevant constructions from the preceding cultures and concomitant empires. In terms of construction technique, Elamites tombs splint into the two general types: “structural” and “rock-cut” tombs. This paper is focused on the typology of the former type, i.e. structural tombs (Table 1).

Typology
Based on the discrete architectural styles in evidence in the two physiographic regions forming their territory, i.e. uplands and low plains, Elamitess’ tomb architecture can be classified into the two groups of mountain and plain tomb-houses.
The most distinctive characteristic of the mountain group, recovered in the highland Elymais, is the use of masonry materials in the structure of the tombs. On the basis of their location relative to the ground surface, such tomb-houses are divided into the three types of underground, semi-underground, and above ground. The mountain underground tomb-houses further split into the crypt and stone-lined subclasses. Examples of the crypt subclass are known from Tomb 23 at Kal-e Chendar, Shami, and the stone-lined instances occur at Qaleh-ye Shias, Hashtlik, Kafe Babak, Kal-e Chendar. The semi-underground and above ground tombs are represented at Kal-e Chendar. 
The plain tomb-houses are found over the Khuzestan plain, and are defined by their masonry structure. Based on relative location from the ground, they fall into the underground and semi-underground groups. These structures tend to be covered with vaults. The underground instances are attested at Dastowa, Gelalak, Saleh Davoud, Susa, while the semi-underground variety was found at Gelalak.

Stylistics of Elamites Tomb Architecture
Subterranean catacombs in Mesopotamia trace their history back to as early as the third millennium BC, testifying to the societal development and complex thinking of the coeval communities (Murgat 1998, 117). In the low-lying plains of Mesopotamia and Elam, brick is the most popular building material of the tomb-houses, while in the uplands one finds their Bronze Age counterparts built of stone (Fig. 8)(Ökse 2005, 21‒25). The vaulted roofs of the Elamites tombs echoes the Elamite vaulting techniques recorded the plain sites of Susa, Haft Tepe, Chogha Zanbil, Balenjan, etc. (Fig. 7)( Besenval 2000, 148‒149). As with the Elamite tombs, the stairs were embedded into the shorter side in most of the Elamites tombs. The unique attestation at Saleh Davoud, where the staircase was built into the longer wall of the building, finds parallel in Tomb 4 of the funerary palace at Chogha Zanbil related to the Middle Elamite period (Ghirshman 1996, 141). The coverings of the Elamites mountain crypt tombs display resemblances, inspired by the nomadic life that typified the region in the Iron Age. Stone-built chambers with flat and gable coverings and stone-paved floors are known from the Iron III sites of Posht-e Kuh (vanden Berghe et al. 2001, 58). The Arjan tomb (Fig. 7) with a rectangular stone-built room capped with a flat roof  (Álvarez-Mon 2010, 15‒24), the tomb at Jubaji (Fig. 7) with a similar burial chamber (Shishegar 2014, 59‒63), the Parthian period tomb of Cheram in Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad with a flat roof (Roustaei and Azadi 2011, 196), and finally, the related Elamites examples in Tombs 7 and 20 at Kal-e Chendar reflect the continuation and dynamism of this style in the uplands (Mehrkian 2016, 201‒216; Mehrkian and Messina 2019, 280). The burial of the dead on a platform also reflects an Early and Middle Elamite convention. Notable examples are Tomb 4 at Chogha Zanbil (Ghirshman 1996, 141), the southwest tomb at Haft Tepe (Mofidi 2012, 266), and the three underground tombs recovered between the outer court and the Temenos at Chogha Zanbil (Fig. 7) (Ghirshman 1968, 101‒106). Structure of the entrances to the Elamites tombs and the way they were blocked reveal affinities with Elam and Mesopotamia. The Mesopotamian tombs have frequently their entrances sealed by massive stone blocks, such as the entrance of Tomb 6 at Tell Kilik Mishik, Erbil from the Middle Assyrian period (Othman 2018, 209‒213). At Haft Tepe, the entrance to the tomb was blocked with bricks and gypsum and was sealed through placing a large stone slab (Negahban 1991, 66), which is similar to the walled up entrance of Tomb 28 at Kal-e Chendar. Cutting niches into the walls of the burial chamber is a characteristic trait of the Elamites crypt tombs, the Mesopotamian examples of which from the Middle Assyrian (Tomb 45 in Assur) and the Middle Elamite periods (Haft Tepe and Susa VIII) testify to its long tradition (Pedde, 2012: 95; Hosseini, 2016: 112; Negahban 1991, 8). 
The persistence of the same practice in the Parthian-Elamites tombs at Susa (Tomb 6), Saleh Davoud and Gelalak (Tombs 1, 2, 3), and Kal-e Chendar (Tombs 23 and 28) reflect its dynamism up until the first and second centuries AD. The stairs in the Elamites tombs are narrow and steep. Related examples occur in the Elamite tombs of Chogha Zanbial from the Middle Elamite period.The association of some Elamites tombs with architectural structures (buildings in Trench 10 linked with Graves 24 and 25, the complex of Tombs 26 and 28 associated with an entrance room, the remains of a wall aligned with Grave 23 at Kal-e Chendar, and the architectural remains related to the tomb at Saleh Davoud) indicate that a funerary complex probably existed next to these structures to host the mourning ceremonies. The cited examples are somehow reminiscent of the Haft Tepe mortuary complex (Mofidi, 2012: 221‒262)

Conclusions
Following the topographical dichotomy characterizing the territory ruled by the Elymais kings, the Elamites tomb architecture splits into the two types of mountain and plain tombs. The former type fall into the three sub-types of underground, semi-underground, and above ground varieties. Mountain underground tombs divide between the two crypt and stone-lined subcategories. These tombs find parallels at the Iron Age sites of the Zagros foothills, e.g. Posht-e Kuh, in terms of appearance and roof type, which includes gable, flat, and the combination of the two. Also, the form of stone chambers share affinities with the Elamite tombs at Arjan, Jubaji and Kalanter 4. The tombs of the plain type, with brick as the main construction material, are classified into underground and semi-underground sub-types based on their location relative to the ground. The roof covering in these tombs is generally of gable type. This tomb type compares with the Mesopotamian and Elamite examples such as the subterranean tombs of Nimrud, Chogha Zanbil and Haft Tepe in such aspects as the location of the staircase, the roof type, the form of the burial chamber, offering niches, burial platforms.

Abstract
Monumental sculptures are considered significant artistic artifacts, primarily associated with ritualistic and religious contexts, and possess a long historical tradition. The creation of such commemorative and symbolic sculptures often aimed to represent the divine or transcendent status of their subjects. Within the cultural history of Iran, the tradition of sculpting with this approach dates back to the Neolithic period as exemplified by the “Venus of Sarab” and witnessed a substantial increase from the third millennium BCE onwards. This practice reached its height during the Elamite civilization, coinciding with the emergence of multiple deities and rulers. These sculptures were frequently used as votive offerings in temples or as grave goods in the burials of high-status individuals. The commemorative stone statue housed in the Nahavand Museum is one such artifact, yet its origin and precise nature remain unclear due to its non-archaeological discovery. Consequently, numerous ambiguities surround its contextualization. The main objective of this study is to examine the nature of this stone sculpture through an iconographic and chronological analysis. It seeks to address key questions regarding its material essence, function, artistic style, and usage, assuming it belongs to the Elamite period within the cultural domain of Simashki. To achieve more accurate contextualization and dating, the research employs comparative analysis with similar contemporaneous examples, aiming to enhance the understanding of Elamite art particularly during the Sukkalmah period in the Central Zagros region. This study adopts a qualitative methodology, utilizing a historical-analytical approach supported by library-based sources. To evaluate the research propositions, references are made to the sculptural styles of the Elamite civilization and comparative Mesopotamian examples. The findings suggest that the Nahavand stone statue, based on its formal and visual characteristics, can be classified as a monumental sculpture dating to the Sukkalmah period (second millennium BCE), and most likely originates from the greater Simashki region.
Keywords: Monumental Sculpture, Nahavand, Elamite, Sukkalmah, Iconography.

Introduction
What emerges more prominently in the archaeological data from western Iran during the Elamite period is not so much the material culture uncovered through excavations, but rather the names recorded in Babylonian and Assyrian inscriptions. Just as western Iran particularly Ecbatana served as a political center during the rise of the Medes and Persians, the discovery of this sculpture in Nahavand, alongside the limited number of Early Elamite finds from sites such as Giyan, may indicate the existence of cultural complexity even prior to these later civilizations. Alternatively, it could reflect a syncretic cultural expression influenced by Elamite traditions during the period of Kassite domination, especially considering the stylistic affinities of the sculpture under study. These possibilities warrant deeper examination and reflection. This discussion is situated within that very context: sculpture, as an integral component of cultural heritage, provides a valuable lens through which to understand the shifting cultural and political boundaries between Elam and Mesopotamia. The identification of Elamite-period artifacts particularly from the early Elamite era (Sukkalmah period) in western Iran, such as those associated with the early historical levels of Giyan V and Susa III, offer clues to the southern cultural sphere’s influence in this geography. Given that the sculpture analyzed in this study conforms stylistically to the early Elamite artistic tradition, it may represent a cultural artifact of that historical period and geographical reach within the Central Zagros. Accordingly, this paper aims to present further evidence of cultural contact or homogeneity between the northern parts of the Central Zagros and southern Elamite regions. Such a discovery might suggest the presence of one of the two models of Elamite governance autonomous or centrally controlled in western Iran from the late third millennium B.C. onward. Just as the cemetery seals of Susa reflect religious and ritual activities, this commemorative sculpture may also reveal similar ideological functions (cf. Hole, 1985: 21–24). To date, various artifacts seals, ceramics, figurative art, and paintings have contributed to our understanding of cultural convergence across different regions of Iran. Among these, sculptural objects offer a unique window into such interpretations. Place names such as Karin-Dash (modern Kermanshah), Shushur (in Iraqi Kurdistan), Elipi (Lorestan), Huni-Hur (Bakhtiari Mountains), and Simash (Khorramabad) (Majidzadeh, 1992), reflect the wide territorial reach of the Elamite state in western Iran. Therefore, the identification of this statue in Nahavand invites a reconsideration and deeper exploration of the Elamite presence in the region. To validate and further analyze these claims, the following sections of the study will provide a brief historical overview of Elamite sculpture and its stylistic characteristics, along with comparative examples. Ultimately, the goal is to determine the ritual and religious function of such an object, and to define its precise nature within this historical-cultural framework.

The Nahavand Commemorative Statue
The Nahavand stone idol, carved from limestone, stands approximately 37 centimeters in height and 11 centimeters in width at its base, where two back-to-back seated bulls support the sculpture. The figurine is composed of several components, each potentially bearing symbolic significance. The figure of the goddess, from the tip of her conical, woven headdress to her feet (which rest upon the backs of the two bulls), measures 24 centimeters in height. The statue is carved from a single block of stone but has suffered visible damage, including fractures at the goddess’s neck and feet. The goddess wears a tiered, pleated robe, intricately carved to cover the full length of her body, and a conical headdress woven in relief. The structured, layered nature of the clothing, along with the serene and formal depiction of the face, indicates the symbolic and sacred function of the figure. Her hands are positioned near the abdomen, possibly holding a vessel or an object though due to surface erosion, this remains uncertain. As noted, the goddess is depicted standing frontally atop two bulls, which are positioned in profile but rendered in full-face from the side view. This double-faced sculptural technique is strikingly similar to the posture and composition of the bull capitals used in the Apadana Palace at Susa during the late first millennium B.C. (see: Fig. 20). A hole located behind the bulls’ heads suggests that the statue may have been mounted on a base, suspended, or used in conjunction with a ritual element. A significant aspect of this sculpture is the rendering of the hands, which align with long-standing traditions in Mesopotamian and Elamite sculpture. These gestures are often associated with religious or ritual symbolism, as seen in various comparable examples (see: Figs. 7 and 8). This tradition derives from Sumerian representations of goddesses and priests shown in acts of reverence during religious ceremonies often bearing symbols of fertility and divine favor. Comparable Elamite statues depict deities holding vessels or sacred plants at the level of the torso or chest (see: Figs. 21 and 22). However, due to wear and erosion, it is unclear whether the hands in this statue are simply clasped over the stomach or if they originally held an object, as is evident in other Elamite figures, such as the well-known limestone statue from Susa believed to represent the goddess Napirisha, divine protector of Ontash-Napirisha. The Nahavand figure also closely resembles motifs seen in Elamite Middle Period representations, particularly in warrior or deity helmets. These helmets often portray divinities wearing tiered garments. The gesture of worship is replicated in smaller attendant figures, while the central deity holds a vessel from which two streams symbols of the waters of life flow (see: Fig. 22), (Naeimi Taraei, et al., 2017: 152–153).

Conclusion
Commemorative stone statues are among the artistic artifacts primarily associated with ritual and religious themes. As discussed throughout this study and supported by comparable examples, such representations have a long-standing tradition dating back to the third millennium B.C. and the early Sumerian dynasties. The creators of these monumental works often aimed to confer divine or transcendent status upon the figures depicted. From the third millennium onward, the production of such statues experienced notable growth, culminating during the Elamite civilization with the proliferation of divine and royal figures. These statues were often used as votive offerings in temples or placed in elite burials as funerary objects. The motif of deities overpowering or standing atop powerful beasts such as bulls or lions is a common iconographic tradition in the art of the ancient Near East, especially in Mesopotamia and Elam. Given its frequency and variety, this theme likely originated in Mesopotamia and subsequently permeated into Elamite cultural and artistic expressions throughout the third and second millennia B.C. Among the most significant examples are statues and iconographies from early Babylon and Middle Elamite, to which the Nahavand stone statue also belongs. The primary objective of this research was to analyze the Nahavand stone sculpture through an iconographic lens and to determine its temporal and geographical context. However, the precise origin and nature of this statue remain uncertain due to the lack of a well-documented archaeological context. Thus, this study approached the object cautiously, focusing primarily on its stylistic and iconographic features rather than its exact provenance. Across various mythological traditions from India to Mesopotamia and Iran gods and goddesses are frequently depicted riding or standing upon animals, not merely as mounts but as symbolic extensions of their divine attributes. For instance, Vishnu rides the mythical eagle Garuda; Shiva mounts the sacred bull, Nandi; and Durga stands or rides upon a tiger or lion, symbolizing triumph over evil. Similarly, Mesopotamian deities such as Inanna (Ishtar) and Marduk are shown riding or standing on powerful animals like bulls and lions Inanna, for instance, is sometimes shown standing atop a lion, signifying dominance over nature and primal force. In this context, the Elamite goddess depicted in the Nahavand statue, standing upon two bulls, appears to draw upon similar iconographic conventions shared among neighboring eastern and western civilizations. The findings of this study suggest that, based on its visual and stylistic attributes, the Nahavand stone statue should be classified as a commemorative sculpture dating to the Sukkalmah period (second millennium B.C.). Geographically, it is likely associated with the broader territory of Simashki. Given the presence of major Elamite sites such as Tepe Giyan in the region, it is plausible to trace the northern extent of Elamite cultural influence into the area of Nahavand.

The archaeological site of Tell-e Geser has long suffered from the absence of a comprehensive final excavation report and the fragmented publication of its materials. This problem is particularly evident in the interpretation of five burials discovered in the Fort Mound, which have been inconsistently dated and stratigraphically positioned in successive publications. Previous studies have attributed these burials broadly to the Neo-Elamite period, often assigning a single burial assemblage to multiple and widely separated chronological phases. This paper presents a critical reassessment of the burial data from the Fort Mound through a systematic re-examination of published excavation plans, stratigraphic sections, elevation records, and associated grave goods. Using a historical-archaeological methodology that combines stratigraphic reasoning with comparative typological analysis, each burial is evaluated independently rather than as part of a presumed homogeneous group. The results demonstrate that several inconsistencies in earlier interpretations stem from errors in plan orientation, misreading of elevation data, and the cumulative misinterpretation of archival materials. When these issues are corrected, the burials can be placed within a coherent stratigraphic sequence, revealing that they do not belong to a single chronological horizon. Instead, the evidence indicates multiple phases of burial activity spanning from the Middle Elamite to the late Neo-Elamite period, allowing the identification of six separate burials in a relatively regular chronological sequence that were previously conflated and misidentified as five. This reassessment not only clarifies the burial sequence at Tell-e Geser but also highlights the broader methodological risks of relying uncritically on legacy excavation data.

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.

The city of Sahneh, located 54 kilometers northeast of Kermanshah in the central Zagros passage, plays a crucial role as a strategic crossroads, linking the Iranian central plateau to Mesopotamia and connecting the internal plains of Kermanshah to Hamadan. Archaeological surveys in Sahneh County, conducted in 2003, employed the site survey method, whereby all ancient sites were studied in terms of their geographical location and settlement sequence. This approach provides the necessary data for interpreting the settlement history of the region. As a result of this field research, for the first time, two archaeological sites containing cultural materials from the Middle Elamite period were identified in this area. This discovery significantly extends the cultural domain of the Middle Elamite period in the Zagros toward the east and northeast, indicating that the influence of this civilization extended beyond its known centers in the southwestern provinces of Iran (such as Khuzestan, Kohgiluyeh and Boyer-Ahmad, Fars, and Bushehr) as far as Kermanshah Province. Given the importance of these findings, further surveys were carried out in 2024 and 2025 to identify Middle Elamite sites in Sahneh. Following this research, two additional sites with Middle Elamite cultural materials were discovered. These findings not only confirm the existence of an active cultural-commercial corridor in this region but also highlight the necessity of revising cultural-geographical maps and historical developments of the Middle Elamite period in the central Zagros. Continued studies and targeted excavations at these sites can clarify the role of this region in the network of cultural interactions between the Iranian Plateau and Mesopotamia and are expected to lead to a fundamental reassessment of current perspectives on the history of this era.