294

Elam: Archaeology and History

Behzad Mofidi Nasrabadi

Fig. 1: Map of South-western Iran.

Besides Mesopotamia, the plains of Khuzestan in the Southwest of

what is Iran today played a major role with the origin of urban
societies in the Middle East (Fig. 1). The climatic and geographic
features of this region with its three main rivers Karkhe, Dez, and
Karun offered favourable conditions for building and developing
channels and irrigation systems which led to intensive agricultural
activities during the 4
th
millennium BC. By building channels it was
possible to use wide areas of the lowlands for agriculture and to
achieve an enormous increase of harvest. Naturally, such a de-
velopment was related to a polarisation of wealth. Some members
of the community succeeded with controlling the riches or rather
the related factors like landed property, distribution of work, and
trade. By the end of the 4
th
millennium BC, some settlement
centres in Southern Mesopotamia and Khuzestan, like Uruk and
Susa, developed into towns with centralised administration (McC
Adams & Nissen 1972; Pollock 1989). Writing was invented in
both centres for administrative purposes. These were pictographs
or logograms which were mostly used for reporting the amount of
cattle and other agricultural goods (Friberg 1978; Damerow &
Englund 1989). In Mesopotamia the pictographs gradually changed
into cuneiform writing in the course of the 3
rd
millennium BC. Now
it was also used for reporting historic matters. Though at first the-
re was an independent writing at Susa, the so called proto-Elami-
te writing, later the Mesopotamian cuneiform writing was taken
over.
The earliest evidence mentioning the country of Elam is from
Mesopotamia and belongs to the 3
rd
millennium BC. In Sumerian
sources the sumerogram NIM, meaning high and the determina-
tive KI (i.e. country) are used to describe the neighbour region
Susiana, which is the northern part of todays Khuzestan as well
as the more eastern situated highland. The Akkadian equivalence
was KUR elammatum which is the country of Elam. Within re-
search it is often suggested that the inhabitants of the Mesopota-
mian plains called the neighbouring region to their East NIM
(high), due to its high mountains. Thus, the Akkadian term
elammatum was related to the verb elm (to be high) (Hinz
1964, 18; Damerow & Englund 1989, 1; Quintana 1996, 50). But
the Elamites themselves called their country Hal Hatamti or
Haltamti which according to W. Hinz means Country of the Lord
or Gods Country (Hinz 1964, 18). Contemporary scholars rat-
her conclude that the Akkadion term elammatum is the same word
as Elamite Haltamti, only the pronunciation being Akkadian (Valat
1996, 89).
The Elamite territory was not restricted to the plains of what is
Khuzestan today but included wide parts of the Zagros Mountains
to the North and East, as well as the region of Fars. Besides Susa,
also the city of Anzan or Anshan (todays Tal-i Malyan) in the
region of Fars was one of the more important centres of the Elamite
kingdom. Further Elamite regions are also mentioned by written
sources. Most of all, the regions of Awan and Simash are said to
have played an important role in the early history of Elam.
Our present knowledge of the Elamite culture is mainly based on
the excavations which were done by the French for long years.
Their systematic work started in 1897, when France was granted
a privilege for excavations by the Iranian king. Besides Susa, only
a few Elamite centres like Chogha Zanbil, about 45 km East of
Susa, and Tal-i Malyan, the ancient Anshan (in the region of Fars)
were investigated. As the goal of the early excavations was to find
ancient monuments for the Muse de Louvre, in those days no
scientific method was employed. The result was that the sequence
of the different layers was not defined and the constructions of the
buildings were not documented. Thus, up to these days there is no
exact information about the architectural structures of wide exca-
vated areas at Susa. This is particularly true for the area which is
called Acropolis (Fig. 2). Only in the course of the last decades
excavations were done for which stratigraphic methods were
employed and which thus offer information concerning some of the
building structures at Susa from the different periods. Thus, it was
possible to recognise e.g. a terrace from the end of the 4
th
millen-
nium where the remnants of temples were found (Fig. 3). This
complex is said to have been one of the early forms of temple-
towers (Ziqqurrat) which are known from Uruk and Eridu in Meso-
potamia. That such high temples, which were built on terraces, did
exist in the early period of Elamite history is known from depic-
tions on the numerous seal impressions. A good example is the
impression of a cylinder seal from the beginning of the 3
rd
millen-
nium BC (Fig. 4) (Amiet 1972, No. 695) which was found on the
Acropolis. A temple can be recognised provided with horns at
both sides and built on a terrace. The high temples in Elam were
probably decorated by horns, as from the Neo-Assyrian period in
the 1
st
millennium BC we know another depiction showing horns
at an Elamite Ziqqurrat. The inscriptions by the Assyrian king
Assurbanipal also offer indications for the fact that the Ziqqurrat at
Susa was decorated by horns, as it is reported that the Assyrian
troops carried away these horns.
Besides the insights from archaeological finds, also written sources
offer important information about the history of Elam. The inscrip-
tions mostly come from Mesopotamia. According to the Sumerian
list of kings, at about the middle of the 3
rd
millennium BC the town
of Ur was defeated and its kingdom was taken to Awan (Jacobsen
1939, Col. Inv. Iv., 5-6). It seems as if from then on the kingdom
of Awan was controlling wide parts of Mesopotamia for a longer
period until a king of Kish succeeded with putting an end to the
Elamite rule over Mesopotamia (Jacobsen 1939, Col. Iv., 17-19).
According to an Oldbabylonian list of kings, the dynasty of Awan
began at the beginning of the 3
rd
millennium BC and included
twelve kings (Glassner 1996). We do not know very much about
this period. But there must have been several struggles between
Elam and Mesopotamia in the middle of the 3
rd
millennium (Potts
1999, 88-90).
With Sargon of Akkad seizing power in Mesopotamia in the year
2334 BC, a new era in the history of the Middle East began. After
having secured his kingdom in Mesopotamia he led a campaign
towards the East. According to his inscriptions, Luhishan, son of
Hishibrashini, is said to have ruled Elam at this time (Gelb & Kie-
nast 1990, 188). Sargon succeeded with conquering Elam and
taking rich booty to Mesopotamia (Gelb & Kienast 1990, 178-
181). Probably, Sargon accepted the rule of the Elamite king Luhi-
shan over Elam, but as his vassal. After Luhishans death Hishe-
pratep, ninth king of the Awan dynasty, seized the throne of Elam.
When Sargon died, Hishepratep together with Abalgamash, the
295
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
296
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 2: Air photography of Susa.

king of the region of Warahshi North of Susa, took the opportunity

of rebelling against Mesopotamian rule. But in the end his efforts
were without success as Rimush, Sargons son and successor,
conquered Elam again and brought numerous pieces of booty to
Mesopotamia. Several items, like stone vessels, which Rimush had
taken from Elam and dedicated to the Mesopotamian gods, were
discovered by excavations at Ur and Nippur (Gelb & Kienast 1990,
66-70).
Sargon and Rimush had only conquered the Western parts of the
Elamite kingdom. Up to then, the Eastern provinces and Anshan
had escaped the campaigns of the Akkadian rulers. This changed
when Manishtusu murdered his brother Rimush and seized power.
By a large-scale campaign he intruded deep into the Eastern part
of the Elamite kingdom. While a part of his army was marching
over land towards Anshan in what is the region of Fars today via
Susa, he himself with the rest of his troops crossed the Persian Gulf
by ship to get far into the interior of the country of Elam. The rea-
son for this campaign is explained by an inscription:
Manishtu, King of the world, after having conquered Anshan and
Sherihum had ships cross the Lower Sea The cities across the
sea, 32 (in number), had been allied for fighting but he defeated
(them) and captured their cities, slaughtered their rulers. And from
the river to the mines of precious metals he seized (the country).
The mountains across the Lower Sea: their black rocks he broke
and loaded onto ships and had (them) anchor at the quay of
Akkad. His statue he fashioned and dedicated it to the god Enlil.
By the gods Shamash and Aba I swear: (these are) no lies, truly!
As for the one who destroys this inscription, may the gods
Shamash and Ishtar tear out his roots and destroy his progeny.
(Gelb & Kienast 1990, 75-77).
297
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 3: Temple complex at Susa from the end of the 4
th
millen-
nium BC, erected on a terrace; following Harper et al. 1992, fig.
23.

Fig. 4: Seal from Susa, depicting a high temple; following Harper et al. 1992, fig. 28.

Manishtusu had his vassals rule over various parts of Elam. Esh-
pum was the governor of Susa and Ilshu-rabi ruled over the region
of Pashime at the Persian Gulf (Potts 1999, tabl. 4,7). The Akka-
dian language and writing was introduced into administration and
for official purpose in Elam.
The Mesopotamian rule over Elam continued during the long reign
of Manishtusus son Naram-sin. But due to the troubled situation
in the regions of the Zagros Mountains, Naram-sin preferred to
make an alliance with Elam (Hinz 1967). The struggles between
the Akkadians and the mountain peoples, particularly the Guteans,
had weakened the Akkadian kingdom. When Naram-sins son
Sharkalisharri came to the throne, the situation changed so that
now the Akkadians had to defend themselves against attacks by
the Guteans and the Elamites (Gelb & Kienast 1990, 54).
At the end of the Akkadian period, Elam had won back its inde-
pendence under Kutik-inshushinak (Akkadian: Puzur-inshushinak).
Kutik-inshushinak succeeded with gaining control of various parts
of the country and even with extending his influence as far as to
the region of Diyala and to the Eastern areas of Mesopotamia
(Potts 1999, 124). One of his inscriptions gives the names of about
80 places which he had conquered. It is even reported that the
King of Simashki had come to him to surrender (Gelb & Kienast
1990, 321-324). Under Kutik-inshushinak Elam gained renewed
self-confidence. Many official inscriptions by the king were written
in the Linear Elamite writing. How exactly this writing was de-
veloped is not known. All evidence comes from Kulik-inshushina-
ks reign (Hinz 1969; Vallat 1986). Similar signs were also found
on sherds in the East of Iran, like at Shahdad in the province of
Kerman, but they are partly different from the Elamite writing.
The inscriptions by Kutik-inshushinak mention building activities
and many donations which he had given to the main god of Susa,
Inshushinak. At Susa a stone made foundation document with
relief depictions was found (Gelb & Kienast 1990, 328-329; Harper
et al. 1992, 88, fig. 54). The depiction shows a male person on
his knees, wearing a crown of horns and holding a so called foun-
dation-nail in his hands. A praying goddess is standing behind
him. On the backside a lion was depicted. The upper part of the
foundation monument is heavily damaged. But in the relief the
remnants of a snake can be recognised. In the religion of the
Elamites the snake played an important role. Religious scenes from
various periods show snakes which are depicted together with the
Elamite gods. Often the snake was even depicted as the throne of
certain gods (Fig. 5) (see De Miroschedji 1981).
After Kutik-inshushinaks time Elam again seems to have got under
control of the Mesopotamian rulers. With the foundation of the
third dynasty of Ur in the year 2112 BC by Urnamma, Mesopota-
mia rose again to be a world power. Particularly during the long
reign of Urnammas son Shulgi, wide regions of the Middle East
were conquered. Elam was conquered, too. The region of Susiana
counted among the 40 districts of the empire and for some time it
was governed by Sumerian governors. Shulgi tried to gain the Susi-
anians goodwill by respecting their religion and their gods. He had
the temple of Inshushinak at Susa rebuilt and sacrificed several
offerings to the Elamite gods. His inscripted bricks, which had been
298
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 5: The rock relief at Kurangan, showing the god sitting on a snake; following Vanden Berghe 1986, fig. 2.

used for building the temple, were found during the French exca-
vations at Susa (Malbran-Labat 1995, 22). A bronze statue, which
Shulgi had dedicated to the Elamite god Inshushinak at Susa, also
bears an inscription (Potts 1999, pl. 5.1). The statue shows Meso-
potamian features but is supposed to have been made at Susa.
Subjugating the peoples of the Zagros Mountains was not an easy
task for the Mesopotamian ruler. To keep the different regions of
Elam under control, Shulgi tried to bind the Elamite ruling families
to himself by political marriages. Thus, he married his daughters to
the rulers of Marhashi, Anshan, and Pashime. But this policy does
not seem to have been always successful. Thus, e.g. Anshan was
conquered and destroyed four years after Shulgis daughter had
married the governor of Anshan.
Despite several risings of the Elamite towns, Shulgi and his
successors were able to keep up their rule over the Elamite territo-
ries. Only during Ibbi-sins reign, Shusins son, the Elamites under
the Kings of Simashki succeeded not only with liberating Elam
after some tries but they even conquered Mesopotamia and the
town of Ur in the year 2004 BC. Ibbi-sin is taken to Elam as a pri-
soner, together with the statue of Nanna, the main god of Ur (Potts
1999, tab. 5, 2).
The struggles between Elam and Mesopotamia also mark the
beginning of the 2
nd
millennium BC. After the dynasty of the Kings
of Simashki a period began which in literature is called the Suk-
kalmakh period. The title of Sukkalmakh is a Sumerian word and
means something like Grand Vizier. During the time of the third
dynasty of Ur, in every region of the empire a Sukkalmakh was
appointed. Under the influence of the Mesopotamian tradition, the
Elamite rulers at Susa took over this title at the beginning of the
2
nd
millennium BC and called themselves Sukkalmakh of Elam.
Several centuries of Mesopotamian rule in the Susiana had led to
the fact that several Mesopotamian cultural aspects like writing and
language had become traditional at Susa. Even the architecture
shows typical features of Babylonian planning and floor plan. The
big residential buildings from this period at Susa, which were exca-
vated by Ghirshman, follow the concept of the so called Babyloni-
an court house, according to which at one side of the central court
there was the big entrance room. It was accessible through a
door on the central axis of the excessive front of the court.
Together with the side rooms, the entrance room is the main part
of the house (Fig. 6) (Miglus 1999, 98, tab. 49, fig. 240).
Numerous texts and inscribed bricks from different parts of Elam
give evidence to building activities in the Sukkalmakh period. At
Susa, several rulers had rebuilt the temple complex of the god
Inshushinak. Kukkirmash even claims to have built a new temple
for Inshushinak by the name of Ekikuanna (Malbran-Labat 1995,
18). Also at Tal-i Malyan, the ancient Anshan, an inscribed brick
of another ruler from this period, named Siwepalarhuppak, was
found which reports the building of a temple (Stolper 1982, 60).
In the course of the 2
nd
millennium BC Elam developed to be one
of the most important political centres in the Middle East. Elams
political and economic independence was mirrored by a kind of cul-
tural self-confidence. In the 16
th
century BC the Elamite rulers did
not call themselves Sukkalmakh any more but King of Susa and
Anshan. Specialist literature speaks of a new era of the Elamite
history which is called the Middle Elamite period. The first king of
this period is said to have been Kidinu of whom only a seal impres-
sion was found (Amiet 1980, 139, No. 11). About the other kings
during this early phase of the Middle Elamite period we also do not
know very much. But about the reign of Tepti-ahar, who had
monumental buildings erected at Haft Tappeh, about 20 km south
of Susa, we have more information.
The excavations at Haft Tappeh were done from 1965 to 1978 and
brought interesting information about the Middle Elamite period
(Negahban 1991). The excavations recovered a building consisting
of two tombs made of bricks and wings of two complexes. They
were called Terrace Complex I and II by the excavators.
Remnants of wall paintings were found on the clay plaster of some
of the rooms. At some places the walls were still preserved up to
a height of 9 m. In a side room, several clay tablets were found
which seem to have come from an archive. Southwest to the first
terrace there were three small rooms belonging to a craft work-
shop, where raw materials but also ivory and metal products were
found. In one of the rooms the skeleton of an elephant was dis-
covered. Obviously, the bones and ivory of the elephant were used
as raw materials. A huge kiln consisting of two parts, which was
used for processing metal, was in the court in front of the craft
shop.
299
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 6: House at Susa from the Sukkalmakh period, following the
Babylonian pattern; following Miglus 1999, fig. 240.

Recent geo-physical investigations at Haft Tappeh produced a com-

plete picture of the structure of the building complexes. After com-
pleting the excavation plan by the results of the geo-magnetic sur-
vey, a monumental complex consisting of several units, each of
which was provided with a wide court, can be recognised south of
the excavated tombs (Figs. 8 & 9). The two excavated mud brick
terraces were in the Northern and in the Southern corners of a
wide, rhombus-shaped court (court D). In the northern and
western corners there seem to have been two smaller mud brick
terraces. Court D was connected to court A and to the excavated
area (Terrace Complex I) by a narrow corridor. Another wide
court (C) was northwest of court D. In the Northern part of this
court, a complex of several parallel rooms can be recognized. In
this area, more tombs are suspected, southeast of which there
were two small courts. Due to the strong, positive anomalies on the
magnetogram, these two small courts are probably paved with
bricks (Mofidi Nasrabadi 2003-2004a).
East of the described building complex there was court B which
must have belonged to another complex. The excavated rooms of
the already described craft workshop were at the South-western
side of this court. Also, documents concerning the delivery of
precious metals and other materials were found in this area.
Farther to the south there was a monumental, square building with
a very wide court (E). The court was surrounded by long rooms.
Southeast to court E there seems to have been some more,
rectangular courts. The structure of this complex is similar to the
palaces from the Middle Elamite period as we know them from
Chogha Zanbil (Dur Untash) (Fig. 10). Like the palaces at Chogha
Zanbil, this complex must have consisted of several rectangular
courts which were surrounded by long rooms. But their dimensions
and the thickness of their walls are much more gigantic than those
of the palaces at Chogha Zanbil.
The mud brick massifs, which flanked the building complexes,
might have been terraces on which there were temples of the
various gods. As far as they have been published, the inscriptions
from Haft Tappeh mention two temples being surrounded by a mud
brick wall. One of them was that of a previously unknown Elami-
te god Padi (Reiner 1973, 90, l. 39-40, 50, 53; Negahban 1991,
123-124). The other one was called Great Temple and had the
name .KUR (Herrero 1976, 108-111). Besides the temples, also a
palace (.GAL) is mentioned by a stone inscription. Thus, con-
cluding from the inscriptions we may say that there were several
temple complexes and a palace at Haft Tappeh. The different,
monumental building complexes which were identified by the geo-
magnetic survey are appropriate to the buildings mentioned by the
inscriptions.
The building complex at Haft Tappeh is said to have been erected
by Tepti-ahar but it has not yet been possible to date his reign
exactly. On a clay tablet the year is mentioned when the king drove
away a person by the name of Kadashman-
d
KUR.GAL (Herrero
1976, 102). This indicates a war between Tepti-ahar and one of
the Babylonian kings. As the second part of the person mentioned
is written in sumerogram it is not possible to be sure about which
king is meant. At first it was thought that it had been Kadashman-
enlil I (c. 1374-1360 BC). More recent research rather says that
d
KUR.GAL here means the god Kharbe and that thus the person
had been the Babylonian king Kadashman-kharbe I (c. end of 15th
century BC) who was driven away (Cole & De Meyer 1999).
After Tepti-ahar, another king is said to have ruled over Susa who
is called Inshushinak-shar-ilani, King of Susa, by the inscriptions
(Glassner 1991, 111; Malbran-Labat 1995, 56; Amiet 1996, 140).
300
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 7: Map of excavation at Haft Tappeh; following Negahban
1991, pl. 2. The northern direction was corrected by the author.
Also, the numbers of the rooms were changed.

Due to lacking written and archaeological sources, the end of the

first phase of the Middle Elamite period stays shrouded in mystery.
The burned timbers, which were found in the excavated rooms of
the buildings at Haft Tappeh, suggest that the building complexes
were destroyed in the course of wars. Pottery finds, which also indi-
cate the time of occupation, are mainly from the first phase of the
Middle Elamite period (c. 1500-1300 BC)
1
. Remnants of pottery
from the second phase of this period were not found. Thus, Haft
Tappeh was probably destroyed in the 14
th
century BC and after
that lost its importance.
It did not take long until a new dynasty established in Elam who-
se political power reached its peak under King Untash-napirisha.
Untash-napirisha, son of Humban-numena, ruled at about the end
of the 14
th
century BC. From the time of his reign thousands of
inscribed bricks are left which indicate his systematic building acti-
301
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 8: Magnetogram of Haft Tappeh; following Mofidi Nasraba-
di 2003-2004a, fig. 7.

Fig. 9: Reconstruction of the building complexes at Haft Tappeh

according to the geo-magnetic survey.

vity in Elam. He had even a new residency erected at a place about

45 km southeast of Susa, which today is Chogha Zanbil, and
which was called Dur Untash (Untashs Castle) or rather Al
Untash (Untashs Town) after his name. Due to its monumental
temple-tower (Ziqqurrat) and the numerous temple complexes, this
town is well known in literature (Fig. 10).
The French excavations during the 50s of the 20
th
century directed
by Roman Ghirshman recovered wide areas of the town (Ghirsh-
man 1966; 1968; Steve 1967; Porada 1970). The Ziqqurrat or tem-
ple-tower of the Elamite main gods Inshushinak and Napirisha was
located in the centre of the town and measured 105 x 105 m (Fig.
11 & 12). It was surrounded by a wall. Outside this wall at the
north-western and north-eastern sides of the Ziqqurrat there were
the temple complexes of other gods which themselves were
surrounded by a second wall and formed a kind of holy district (Ela-
mite: siyan kuk). A third wall of about 4 km length was erected
around the entire area of the town. Usually, mud bricks were the
material for building. The mud brick massif of the ziqqurrat was
supported by a baked brick package to protect it from rain. The
302
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 10: Map of the ancient city of Dur Untash at modern Chogha Zanbil (every square is 100 m wide).

fronts of the ziqqurrat were decorated by numerous enamelled

bricks. Additionally, between every ten rows of bricks there was one
row of inscribed bricks (Fig. 13). The huge wooden doors of the
temple complexes were decorated by glass tubes showing spiral-like
ornaments (Cat. no. 477). At all four sides of the ziqqurrat there
were stairways to reach the first floor. Only at the south-western
side there were stairways leading up to the second floor (Fig. 14).
It was not possible to find out exactly where the stairways up to the
high temple had been. The entrances of the stairways at the foot of
the ziqqurrat were flanked by bulls or griffins made of terracotta.
Inside the middle wall broad paths paved with fragments of bricks
had been built which connected the gates of the middle wall to the
main gates of the inner wall. About 500 m east of the ziqqurrat
and near the eastern gate there were three building complexes
which were called palaces. One of these palaces was provided with
five subterranean, vaulted tombs which maybe were supposed to
be used for the burials of the members of the royal family. But indi-
cations of royal funerals were not found.
To get further information concerning the structure of the town and
the various functional units like residential area, streets, sewerage
system, market squares aso., further investigations and excava-
tions at Chogha Zanbil and around have been done since 1999
303
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 11: Reconstruction of the ziqqurrat at Chogha Zanbil;
following R. Ghirshman 1966, fig. 40.

Fig. 12: Computer based reconstruction of the ziqqurrat at Chog-

ha Zanbil by B. Mofidi Nasrabadi.

Fig. 13: Inscribed brick from Chogha Zanbil.

Fig. 14: The stairways at the south-western side of the ziqqurrat

at Chogha Zanbil.

under the authors direction (Mofidi Nasrabadi 2003-2004b). Be-

sides the excavations, the area of the town was investigated by
help of the geo-magnetic method. It was possible to recognise
numerous buildings whose structures are similar to those of
residential buildings (Fig. 15). Particularly within the middle wall
there was a dense development. Mainly, the houses are in the
northern, north-western, and southern areas. Outside the middle
wall the buildings are concentrated in the south-eastern part of the
area of the city
2
. According to the pottery assemblage, Dur Untash
must have been occupied from about the 13
th
century to the 7
th
century though the houses inside the middle wall were not built
when the town was founded but probably some time later.
Untash-napirisha had thousands of inscribed bricks made which
tell about the building of various complexes. Besides at Chogha
Zanbil, also at other places of the Elamite kingdom like at Susa,
Tappeh Gotvand, Tappeh Deylam, and at Chogha Pahan his inscribed
bricks were found which belonged to different temple complexes
(Steve et al. 1980, 81-82; Stolper & Wright 1990). Fragments of
steles and life-sized stone and bronze statues from the time of his
304
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 15: Magnetogram of Chogha Zanbil (every square is 100 m wide).

reign were found at Susa which indicate progressive working

methods in stone and metal during this period (Fig. 16 & 17).
After the time of Untash-napirisha the written sources are silent
again. We have very little knowledge about the period of his suc-
cessors. Only with a new dynasty seizing power, which in litera-
ture is called the dynasty of the Shutrukides after the name of its
first king Shutruk-nahhunte I, the situation changes. The new ruler
called himself King of Susa and Anshan. He is known by nume-
rous inscribed bricks which he used for building different temples.
Such inscriptions were not only found at Susa but also at Deh-e
No, Chogha Pahan West, and at Lihan near the modern place of
Busheir (Malbran-Labat 1995, 79-83; Steve 1987, 29). Under Shu-
truk-nahhunte I Elam developed to be one of the most important
political centres of the Middle East. About 1158 BC he conquered
Babylonia and brought rich booty from the Babylonian towns to
Elam. Particularly, several statues and steles like the stele of
Naram-sin and the statue of Manishtusu as well as Hammurabis
codex were brought to Susa. Shutruk-nahhunte seems to have
been especially fond of antiques as in his capital of Susa he was
collecting not only Mesopotamian monuments in the form of booty
but also monuments from other Elamite places. Shutruk-nahhunte
left the rule over Babylonia to his son Kutir-nahhunte who on his
side placed Enlil-nadin-akhkhi, a Babylonian, on the throne as his
vassal. Only a short time after, Enlil-nadin-akhkhi rebelled against
Elamite rule. Kutir-nahhunte conquered Babylonia a second time
and destroyed several towns. He took the statue of Marduk, the
Babylonian main god, to Elam and appointed a new governor in
Babylonia. After Shutruk-nahhuntes death, Kutir-nahhunte came
on the throne of the Elamite kingdom. Of Kutir-nahhunte there
were also found several inscribed bricks which give evidence to his
building activities at Susa and at other Elamite towns (Malbran-
Labat 1995, 83.87).
More than Kutir-nahhunte, his brother and successor Shilhak-ins-
hushinak left monuments with inscriptions to posterity. He had
numerous temple complexes rebuilt in different parts of the
country. For the front of the Inshushinak temple at Susa bricks
were used which depict reliefs of hybrids of bull and man and
female, praying figures (Fig. 18) (De Mequenem 1947, 14, fig. 18
and pl. I, 2). A very interesting and unique bronze model showing
the practise of a religious ritual also comes from his period (Har-
per et al. 1992, 137-141). It shows two bald-headed, male persons
cowering in front of a rostrum with several steps. While one of
them is holding a small vessel in his hand, the palms of the other
persons hands reach out to the vessel. It was suggested that the
rostrum might be a ziqqurrat, especially as beside the rostrum two
rows of small cone-shaped rostrums are depicted which show simi-
larities to two rows of small rostrums at the entrance of the south-
eastern stairway of the ziqqurrat at Chogha Zanbil. The inscription
305
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 16: Stele of Untash-napirisha; following Harper et al. 1992,
fig. 42.

calls the ritual a sit shamshi (sunrise) (Knig 1965, 56). Thus
it is suggested to interpret the scene as a ritual happening at the
time of sunrise.
In the course of the Middle Elamite period, the political power of
Elam was rising in region. In the third phase of this period, i.e. in
the time of the Shutrukide dynasty, even Babylonia was under the
political influence of the Elamite rulers. This resulted in increasing
Elamite self-confidence. Thus, the Elamite language was used more
often for writing down historic events. E.g. the inscriptions by Shu-
truk-nahhunte and his successors were mainly written in the Ela-
mite language which due to todays lack of knowledge is not
always easy to understand.
Hutelutush-inshushinak, Kutir-nahhuntes son, is known as the
last king of the Shutrukide dynasty. The Mespotamian sources
offer more detailed information about the time of his reign. In his
inscriptions, Nebukadnezzar I (1125-1104 BC) describes how by
order of Marduk he liberated the Marduk statue, which had been
taken to Elam by Kutir-nahhunte, from Elamite imprisonment.
While his first try was not successful, at a second try he succee-
ded with conquering Elam and he took the statue of Marduk back
to Babylon (Foster 1993/I, 298). Probably, Hutelutush-inshushinak
fled to the eastern mountains to Anshan but his fate stays
unknown.
After the Shutrukide dynasty the sources are silent for several
centuries until the texts from the New Assyrian period again tell
about Elamite history. Particularly, the inscriptions by Assurbanipal
(668-627 BC) report more exact details of the political situation at
this time. In the course of the Assyrian policy of expansion Elam
was conquered and looted by Assurbanipals troops. The kingdom
of Elam did not recover from this strike and was integrated into the
Persian Empire in the 6th century BC. Though Elam was not a poli-
tical power in the region, Elamite cultural features still existed. E.g.
the centralised administration of the Persian Empire was run by
Elamite writers. Thus, the Elamite language was used next to
Babylonian and ancient Persian both for administrative documents
and for royal inscriptions.
306
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
Fig. 17: Fragment of a statue of Untash-napirisha; following
Spycket 1981, fig. 75.

Fig. 18: Part of a relief from Susa, depicting Shilhak-inshushi-

nak; following De Mequenem 1947, 14 fig. 8.

Notes
1 For the different phases of the Middle Elamite period see Potts 1999, 188-
258.
2 The reports on the excavations and surveys are being prepared.
3 For the abbreviations see Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiati-
schen Archologie.
Bibliography
3
AMIET, P.:
1972 Glyptique Susienne, des origines lpoque des Perses
Achmnides. Mmoires de la Dlgation Archologique en
Iran 43, Paris.
1980 La glyptique du second millnaire en provenance des chan-
tiers A et B de la Ville Royale de Suse. Iranica Antiqua 15,
133-147.
1996 Observations sur les sceaux de Haft Tp (Kabnak). RA 90,
135-143.
COLE, A. W. & DE MEYER, L.:
1999 Tepti-ahar, King of Susa, and Kada_man- dKUR.GAL.
Akkadica 112, March-April 1999, 44-45.
DAMEROW, P. & ENGLUND, R. K.:
1989 The Proto-Elamite Texts from Tepe Yahya, Cambridge. Ame-
rican School of Prehistoric Research Bulletin 39
FOSTER, B. R.:
1993 Before the muses. An anthology of Akkadian literature, 2
vols., Bethesda.
FRIBERG, J.:
1978 The Third Millennium Roots of Babylonian Mathematics I.
A Method for the Decipherment, through Mathematical and
Metrological Analysis, of Proto-Sumerian and Proto-Elamite
Semi-pictographic Inscriptions, Gothenburg.
GELB, I. J. & KIENAST, B.:
1990 Die altakkadischen Knigsinschriften des dritten Jahrtau-
sends v. Chr., FAOS 7, Stuttgart.
GHIRSHMAN, R.:
1966 Tchoga Zanbil (Dur Untash) Vol. I. La Ziggurat. Mmoires
de la Mission Archologique en Iran 39, Paris.
1968 Tchoga Zanbil (Dur Untash) Vol. II. Temenos, Temples,
Palais, Tombes. Mmoires de la Mission Archologique en
Iran 40, Paris.
GLASSNER, J.-J.:
1991 Les textes de Haft Tp, la Susiane et lElam au 2me mil-
lnaire. In: L. de Meyer & H. Gasche (eds.), Msopotamie
et Elam, Ghent, 109-126.
1996 Les dynasties dAwan et de _ima_ki. NABU 34.
HARPER, P. O., ARUZ, J. & TALLON, F.:
1992 The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in
the Louvre, New York.
HERRERO, P.:
1976 Tablettes administratives de Haft Tp. DAFI 6, 93-116.
HINZ, W.:
1964 Das Reich Elam, Stuttgart.
1967 Elams Vertrag mit Narm-Sn von Akkade, ZA 24, 66-96.
1969 Altiranische Funde und Forschungen, Berlin.
JACOBSEN, T.:
1939 The Sumerian King List, Chicago.
KNIG, F. W.:
1965 Die elamischen Knigsinschriften, AfO Beiheft 16, Graz.
MALBRAN-LABAT, F.:
1995 Les inscriptions royales de Suse: Briques de lpoque palo-
lamite lEmpire no-lamite, Paris.
MCC ADAMS, R. & NISSEN, H. J.:
1972 The Uruk Countryside, Chicago.
MECQUENEM, R. DE:
1947 Contribution a ltude du palais achmnide de Suse.
Mmoires de la Mission Archologique en Iran 30, Paris, 1-
119.
MIGLUS, P.:
1999 Stdtische Wohnarchitektur in Babylonien und Assyrien,
BaF 22, Mainz.
MIROSCHEDJI, P. DE:
1981 Le dieu lamite au serpent et aux eaux jaillissantes. Iranica
Antiqua 16, 1-25.
MOFIDI NASRABADI, B.:
2003-2004a Archologische Untersuchungen in Haft Tappeh (Iran),
Arch. Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 35-36 (im Druck).
2003-2004b Untersuchungen zu Siedlungsstrukturen in der Peripherie
von _ho__ Zanbil (Dur Unta_), Arch. Mitteilungen aus Iran
und Turan 35-36 (in press).
NEGAHBAN, E. O.:
1991 Excavations at Haft Tappeh, Iran, Philadelphia.
POLLOCK, S.:
1989 Power politics in the Susa A period. In: E. F. Henrickson &
I. Thuesen (eds.), Upon this Foundation the Ubaid
Reconsidered, Copenhagen, CNIP 10, 281-292.
POTTS, D. T.:
1999 The Archaeology of Elam. Formation and Transformation of
an Ancient Iranian State, Cambridge.
PORADA, E.:
1970 Tchoga Zanbil (Dur Untash) Vol. IV. La Glyptique. Mmoires
de la Mission Archologique en Iran 42, Paris.
QUINTANA, E.:
1996 ELAM = halhatamti = high land. NABU 50.
REINER, E.:
1973 Inscription from a Royal Elamite Tomb. AfO 24, 87-102.
SPYCKET, A.:
1981 La statuaire du Proche-Orient ancient, Handbuch der Orien-
talistik 7/I/2/B/2.
STEVE, M.-J.:
1967 Tchoga Zanbil (Dur Untash) Vol. III. Textes lamites et acca-
diens de Tchoga Zanbil. Mmoires de la Mission Archolo-
gique en Iran 41, Paris.
1987 Nouveaux mlanges pigraphiques, Inscriptions royales de
Suse et de la Susiane. Mmoires de la Mission Archologi-
que en Iran 53, Nice.
307
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY

STEVE, M.-J., GASCHE, H. & DE MEYER, L.:

1980 La Susiane du deuxime millnaire: propos dune inter-
prtation des fouilles de Suse. Iranica Antiqua 15, 49-154.
STOLPER, M. W.:
1982 On the Dynasty of S

imaski and the Early Sukkalmahs. ZA

72, 42-67.
STOLPER, M. W. & WRIGHT, H. T.:
1990 Elamite brick fragments from Choga Pahn East and related
fragments. In: F. Vallat (ed.), Mlanges Jean Perrot, Paris,
151-163.
VALLAT, F.:
1986 The most ancient scripts of Iran: the current situation.
World Archaeology 17, 335-347.
1996 Elam: haltamti/Elamtu. NABU 89.
VANDEN BERGHE, L.:
1986 Donnes nouvelles concernant le relief rupestre lamite de
Kurangun. In: L. De Meyer, H. Gasche & F. Vallat (eds.),
Fragmenta Historiae Elamicae: Mlanges offerts M. J. Ste-
ve, Paris, 157-173.
308
ELAM: ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORY
The holy city of Inshushinak near Chogha Zanbil in Khuzestan;
in the centre the 90 m high Ziggurat; Photo: G. Gerster.

309