The Proto-Elamite period is the time of ca.
3200 BCto 2700 BCwhen Susa, the later capital of the Elamitesbegan to receive influence from the cultures of the Iranian plateau. In archaeological terms this corresponds to the late Baneshperiod. This civilization is recognized as the oldest in Iran and was largely contemporary with its neighbour, Sumerian civilization, the oldest in the world, which began around 5200 BC.
The Proto-Elamite script is an
Early Bronze Agewriting system briefly in use for the ancient Elamite languagebefore the introduction of Elamite Cuneiform.
Besides Susa, one important Proto-Elamite site is
Teppe Sialk, where the only remaining Proto-Elamite zigguratis still seen. Texts in the undeciphered Proto-Elamite script found in Susaare dated to this period. It is thought that the Proto-Elamites were in fact Elamites (Elamite speakers), because of the many cultural similarities (for example, the building of ziggurats), and because no large-scale migration to this area seems to have occurred between the Proto-Elamite period and the later Elamites. But because their script is yet to be deciphered, this theory remains uncertain.
Some anthropologists, such as John Alden, maintain that Proto-Elamite influence grew rapidly at the end of the 4th millennium BC and declined equally rapidly with the establishment of maritime trade in the
Persian Gulfseveral centuries later.
Proto-Elamite pottery dating back to the last half of the 5th millennium BC has been found in
Sialk, where Proto-Elamite writing, the first form of writing in Iran, has been found on tablets of this date. The first cylinder seals come from the Proto-Elamite period, as well. [http://www.anaviangallery.com/ancient_iranian_preface.html]
It is uncertain whether the Proto-Elamite script may be considered the direct predecessor of
Linear Elamite. Both scripts remains largely undeciphered an it is mere speculation to postulate a relationship between the two.
A few Proto-Elamite signs seem either to be loans from the slightly older proto-cuneiform (Late Uruk) tablets of Mesopotamia, or perhaps more likely, to share a common origin. Whereas proto-cuneiform is written in visual hierarchies, proto-Elamite is written in an in-line style: numerical signs follow the objects they count; some non-numerical signs are images of the objects they represent, although the majority are entirely abstract.
Proto-Elamite was used for a brief period around 3000 BC (presumably contemporary with Uruk III or
Jemdet Nasrin Mesopotamia), whereas Linear Elamite is attested for a similarly brief period sometime during the last quarter of the 3rd millennium BC.
Proponents of an
Elamo-Dravidianrelationship have looked for similarities between the Proto-Elamite and the Indus script. [David McAlpin: "Linguistic prehistory: the Dravidian situation", in Madhav M. Deshpande and Peter Edwin Hook: "Aryan and Non-Aryan in India", p.175-189]
Proto-Elamite writing system was used over a very large geographical area, stretching from
Susain the west, to Tepe Yahyain the east, and perhaps beyond. The known corpus of inscriptions consists of some 1600 tablets, the vast majority unearthed at Susa.
Proto-Elamite tablets have been found at the following sites (in order of number of tablets recovered):
*Susa (more than 1500 tablets)
*Malyan (more than 30 tablets)
*Tepe Yahya (27 tablets)
*Ozbaki (one tablet)
*Shahr-i-Shokhta (one tablet)
*Jiroft (two tablets)
None of the inscribed objects from Ghazir, Chogha Mish or Hissar can be verified as Proto-Elamite; the tablets from Ghazir and Choga Mish are Uruk IV style or numerical tablets, whereas the Hissar object cannot be classified at present. The majority of the
Sialktablets are also not proto-Elamite, strictly speaking, but belong to the period of close contact between Mesopotamia and Iran, presumably corresponding to Uruk V - IV.
Although Proto-Elamite remains undeciphered, the content of many texts is known. This is possible because certain signs, and in particular a majority of the numerical signs, are direct loans from the neighboring Mesopotamian writing system, proto-cuneiform. In addition, a number of the proto-Elamite signs are actual images of the objects they represent. However, the majority of the proto-Elamite signs are entirely abstract, and their meanings can only be deciphered through careful
Elamite languagehas been suggested as a likely candidate underlying the Proto-Elamite inscriptions, there is no positive evidence of this. The earliest Proto-Elamite inscriptions, being purely ideographical, do not in fact contain any linguistic information, and following Friberg's 1978/79 study of Ancient Near Eastern metrology, decipherment attempts have moved away from linguistic methods.
* Jacob L. Dahl, "Complex Graphemes in Proto-Elamite," in "Cuneiform Digital Library Journal" ("CDLJ") [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2005/cdlj2005_003.html 2005:3] . Download a [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2005/cdlj2005_003.pdf PDF copy]
* Peter Damerow, “The Origins of Writing as a Problem of Historical Epistemology,” in "Cuneiform Digital Library Journal" ("CDLJ") [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2006/cdlj2006_001.html 2006:1] . Download a [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2006/cdlj2006_001.pdf PDF copy]
* Peter Damerow and Robert K. Englund, "The Proto-Elamite Texts from Tepe Yahya" (= The American School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 39; Cambridge, MA, 1989).
* Robert H. Dyson, “Early Work on the Acropolis at Susa. The Beginning of Prehistory in Iraq and Iran,” "Expedition" 10/4 (1968) 21-34.
* Robert K. Englund, “The State of Decipherment of Proto-Elamite,” in: Stephen Houston, ed. "The First Writing: Script Invention as History and Process" (2004). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 100-149. Download a [http://cdli.ucla.edu/staff/englund/englund2004c.pdf PDF copy]
* Jöran Friberg, "The Third Millennium Roots of Babylonian Mathematics I-II" (Göteborg, 1978/79).
* A. Le Brun, “Recherches stratigraphiques a l’acropole de Suse, 1969-1971,” in " Cahiers de la Délégation archaéologique Française en Iran 1 " (= CahDAFI 1; Paris, 1971) 163 – 216.
* Piero Meriggi, "La scritura proto-elamica. Parte Ia: La scritura e il contenuto dei testi" (Rome, 1971).
* Piero Meriggi, "La scritura proto-elamica. Parte IIa: Catalogo dei segni" (Rome, 1974).
* Piero Meriggi, "La scritura proto-elamica. Parte IIIa: Testi" (Rome, 1974).
* Daniel T. Potts, "The Archaeology of Elam" (Cambridge, UK, 1999).
* [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu:16080/wiki/index.php/Proto-Elamite Proto-Elamite] ( [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu CDLI project] , by J. L. Dahl)
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.