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
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.

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.

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.