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.