Rahppoye, Hekmat-e Honar

Rahppoye, Hekmat-e Honar

Representing Anthropomorphic Animals as Scribes: An Iconographic Analysis of Classical Seal Impressions From the Early Elamite Period

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Rouhollah Yousefi 1
Khalil-Ollah Beik-Mohammad 2
1 Associated Professor, Department of Archeology, Faculty of Literature and Human Science, Varamin-Pishva Branch, Islamic Azad University, Varamin, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Archaeology, Faculty of Cultural Heritage, Handicrafts and Tourism, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.
10.22034/rph.2025.2069910.1175
Abstract
This study, focusing on six selected examples of classical seal impressions from the Early Elamite Period in two prominent centers of Shush and Malyan, seeks to uncover the interrelations between visual language, institutional structures, and ritual worldviews of the period. Despite their small size and simple physical nature, these seals function as multilayered visual documents, containing highly detailed representations of administrative processes, bureaucratic order, and the legitimating ideology of governance. We applied a three-tier Panofskian analytical framework comprising (1) a pre-iconographic description of the scene’s details and compositional arrangements, (2) an iconographic analysis of conventional and culturally encoded meanings, and (3) an iconological interpretation of the historical, social, and economic contexts. We combined this framework with Barthes’ semiotics and Peirce’s triadic model to identify and decode the sign system embedded in these works. Seal impressions from the Early Elamite Period (late 4th–early 3rd millennium BCE) are essential to understanding the social, economic, and ideological systems of the first Iranian states. Beyond identifying ownership or sealing goods, the seals conveyed multilayered visual messages shaped by local traditions and Mesopotamian influences. One notable motif is anthropomorphic animals in human or ritual roles, which served as part of a symbolic language of power that bridged myth and administration. Viewed through visual semiotics and Panofsky’s three-level framework, these images operated as “social agents” linking aesthetic form to political and economic networks, stabilizing bureaucratic order, and legitimizing authority. Despite their significance, these seals have rarely been analyzed for both semiotic content and functional role. Prior studies emphasize classification and style, with limited attention to ideological meanings in anthropomorphic animal imagery. This study addresses that gap, showing how such depictions conveyed institutional and political messages, reinforcing social and power structures. The research integrates three complementary analytical lenses to enable a multilayered, interdisciplinary reading of classical seal impressions from the Early Elamite Period. First, a semiotic approach grounded in Peirce’s typology of signs (icon, index, symbol) and triadic relations (sign, object, interpretant) is used to decode meaning and analyze processes of symbolic encoding, supplemented by Barthes’ concepts of intertextuality and cultural codes to uncover hidden ideological narratives. Second, Panofsky’s classical iconographic method comprises three steps: pre-iconographic description, iconographic analysis, and iconological interpretation. This method identifies recurring motifs and thematic patterns. The third step is to interpret these patterns within the framework of the interactions between art, bureaucracy, and ideology. Together, these approaches guide the investigation of two core research questions. First, why did the motif of anthropomorphic animals serving as scribes emerge in the Early Elamite period? How are these depictions related to the administrative, social, and ideological structures of that era? The study employs a three-stage process: Pre-iconographic: direct description of scenes without interpretation, recording elements such as storage facilities, containers, anthropomorphic figures, tools, and composition. Iconographic: linking recorded elements to recognized subjects or historical motifs, comparing anthropomorphic scribes to known administrative roles, and associating repeated forms with surplus management, supported by archaeological, textual, and visual evidence. Iconological: interpreting more profound meanings and ideological frameworks, showing how images relate to political legitimacy, social hierarchy, and resource control. Anthropomorphic scribes are read as symbols merging executive authority with mythic power. These stages are complemented by both textual reading, focusing on the image itself as a “visual text,” and contextual reading, which situates the image within its broader cultural and comparative framework. Each operates at a surface level (recording explicit meaning) and a deep level (revealing hidden symbolic, mythological, and power structures). Integrating these procedures with Barthes’ and Peirce’s semiotic models enables the transition from simple description to rich interpretive analysis, elucidating the cultural and ideological significance of Early Elamite administrative imagery.
Seal No. 1: This Early Elamite seal depicts a complex scene of storage management, record keeping, and organization. Two anthropomorphic wild cattle sit facing each other, separated by elongated counting rods, surrounded by symbolic elements such as storage jars, a framed rectangle (archive), a goat scribe, a circle between horns (central authority), and abstract granary forms. Iconographically, wild cattle symbolize fertility and economic stability, while the goat suggests oversight and agility. Iconologically, the scene fuses administrative and mythic power: animals perform bureaucratic roles, legitimizing order through natural symbols. Peircean analysis reveals icons (stylized animals), indices (storage symbols, counting rods), and culturally embedded symbols.
Seal No. 2: Engraved on a tablet from Shush, this seal shows two anthropomorphic wild cattle seated in ritual posture, holding counting tools, with a jar of liquid between them and a goat observer in the background. Iconographically, cattle represent power and resource abundance; their opposed, formal posture signals administrative cooperation. The goat bridges mythic and administrative spheres. Iconologically, the scene reinforces bureaucratic authority through animal symbolism, with icons, indices, and symbols interlinked in a coherent network.
Seal No. 3: Two anthropomorphic lionesses, one holding a tablet and the other observing, face a wild cattle scribe. Above the smaller lioness is a basket-like dome, symbolizing stored goods; around the cattle are counting marks and abstract granaries. Lions convey legitimacy, dominance, and protection; the cattle represent productive authority. Together they depict integrated administrative control over resources. The scene is both an iconographic record of bureaucratic activity and a symbolic statement of cosmic economic order.
Seal No. 4: Depicts a lion and wild cattle facing each other, each anthropomorphic. The lion holds a rectangular tablet, symbolizing authority and record keeping; the cattle hold three writing tools, marking its role as scribe. The face-to-face composition conveys formal interaction between political and bureaucratic authority. Iconologically, the unity of royal and administrative power is expressed, with clear Peircean icon–index–symbol mapping.
Seal No. 5: From Malyan’s Building ABC, this seal uses strict framing to divide the scene into two square compartments. One shows a goat scribe with stylus and tablet; the other, powerful wild cattle and a smaller grazing animal near a plant symbol. A Maltese crosFs separates the frames. The composition reflects livestock accounting and pastoral resource management. Iconologically, the partitioned design mirrors bureaucratic classification practices, combining animal symbols with spatial organization as visual indices of control.
Seal No. 6: Unique for its anthropomorphic hare, the seal shows the hare reaching toward a tablet, flanked by a stepped motif (classification) and a radiating circular form (storeroom). The hare symbolizes trust and administrative diligence. Iconologically, the trio of elements compresses the process of receiving, recording, and safeguarding resources. Under Peirce’s model, all major elements operate as icons; the tablet and container as indices; and the hare’s cultural connotation as a symbol of legitimacy and order. The study of six classical seal impressions from the Early Elamite Period in Shush and Malyan shows that these small artifacts embed a complex system of signs and narratives spanning three interconnected realms: myth ritual, administrative economic, and power legitimation. Through carefully composed scenes, anthropomorphic animals—wild ox, lioness, goat, and hare—retain natural attributes while performing human tasks such as writing, auditing, and supervising resources. Their integration with key visual markers (styluses, tablets, counting rods, storage vessels, and plants) created a visual language that directly reflected economic functions while symbolically expressing order, authority, and legitimacy. Each animal type played a distinct communicative role within this system. From a semiotic perspective, the imagery operates on multiple levels: as icons of natural power, indices of administrative functions, and symbols of cultural and ideological values. Stylistic simplification and geometric framing were deliberate strategies for clarity and durability of message. In essence, Early Elamite seals were multilayered visual documents, functional tools, and symbolic carriers that united bureaucratic practice with mythic and ideological narratives, preserving cultural memory and expressing the intertwined networks of power, belief, and economic necessity in the primitive states of Iran.
Keywords
Early Elamite Period
Seal Impression
Semiotics
Panofsky
Iconography

Subjects

احمدی، ب (1402)، از نشانه‎های تصویری تا متن: به سوی نشانه‎شناسی ارتباط دیداری. تهران: نشر مرکز.
الیاده، م (1374)، اسطوره بازگشت جاودانه (ترجمه بهمن سرکاراتی). تهران: انتشارات طهوری.
لوی-استروس، ک. (1378)، اسطوره و تفکر مدرن [Myth and Meaning]، ترجمه فاضل لاریجانی. تهران: انتشارات فرزان روز.
یوسفی‎زشک، ر. (1389)، پیدایش نهادهای پیش‎حکومتی در فلات مرکزی ایران: خانسالارهای آغاز ایلامی در تپه سفالین پیشوا، رساله دکتری، منتشرنشده، دانشگاه تهران.
 
 
فهرست منابع لاتین
Alden, J. R. (1982). Trade and politics in Proto-Elamite Iran. Current Anthropology, 23, 613–640.
Álvarez-Mon, J. (2020). The Art of Elam CA. 4200–525 BC (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003018254
Amiet, P. (1961). La glyptique mésopotamienne archaïque (1ère éd.). Paris: CNRS Éditions.
Amiet, P. (1966). Elam. Auvers-sur-Oise: Archée.
Amiet, P. (1971). La glyptique de l’Acropole (1969–1971). Tablettes lenticulaires de Suse. Cahier de la Délégation Archéologique Française en Iran, 1, 217–233.
Amiet, P. (1972). Glyptique Susienne. Des origines à l’époque des perses achéménides. Cachets, sceaux-cylindres et empreintes antiques découverts à Suse de 1913 à 1967 (Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique en Iran, Tome XLIII). Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner.
Amiet, P. (1980). La glyptique mésopotamienne archaïque (2e éd.). Paris: CNRS Éditions.
Amiet P. (1997) La glyptique transélamite, in : A. Caubet (éd), De Chypre à la Bactriane, les sceaux du Proche-Orient ancien : acte du colloque international organisé au Musée du Louvre par le Service culturel le 18 mars 1995, Paris, La Documentation Française, 121-129.
Barthes, R. (1968). Elements of semiology. New York: Hill and Wang
Dahl, J. (2009). Early writing in Iran: A reappraisal. Iran, 47, 23–31.
Dahl, J., Petrie, C., & Potts, D. T. (2013). Chronological parameters of the earliest writing system in Iran. In C. Petrie (Ed.), Ancient Iran & its Neighbours. Local Development and Long-Range Interactions in the Fourth Millennium BC (pp. 353–378). Oxford: Oxbow Books.
Delaporte, L. (1920). Catalogue des cylindres, cachets et pierres gravées de style oriental, Musée du Louvre, I – Fouilles et Missions. Paris: Librairie Hachette.
Desset, F. (2016). Proto-Elamite writing in Iran. Archéo-Nil, 26, 67–104.
Englund, R. K. (1998). Texts from the Late Uruk Period. In J. Bauer, R. K. Englund, & M. Krebernik (Eds.), Späturuk-Zeit und frühdynastische Zeit (Orbis Biblicus Orientalis 160/1, pp. 15–233). Fribourg: Universitätsverlag.
Gell, A. (1998). Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Goodman, N. (1976). Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. Hackett Publishing.
Helwing, B. (2004). Tracking the Proto-Elamite on the Central Iranian plateau. In S. Malek Shahmirzadeh (Ed.), The Potters of Sialk: Sialk Reconsideration Project Report 3 (Archaeological Reports Monograph Serie 5, pp. 46–58). Tehran: Iranian Center for Archaeological Research.
Hessari, M. (2011). New evidence of the emergence of complex societies discovered on the Central Iranian Plateau. Iranian Journal of Archaeological Studies, 1, 35–48.
Hessari, M., & Yousefi Zoshk, R. (2013). New evidences of the emergence of complex societies in the Central Iranian Plateau. In K. de Graef & J. Tavernier (Eds.), Susa and Elam. Archaeological, Philological, Historical and Geographical Perspectives. Proceedings of the International Congress held at Ghent University, December 14–17, 2009 (Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse Tome LVIII, pp. 27–42). Leiden: Brill.
Jéquier, G. (1905b). Cachets et cylindres archaïques. In J. de Morgan (Ed.), Recherches Archéologiques, Troisième Série. Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse Tome VIII (pp. 1–27). Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Kelley, K. (2024). Images hidden in script: The invention of writing in ancient Iran. In Talking images (1st ed., pp. 25). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032712970
Kubler, G. (1962). The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things. Yale University Press.
Le Breton, L. (1957). The early period at Susa, Mesopotamian relations. Iraq, 19, 79–124.
Legrain, L. (1921). Empreintes de cachets élamites. Mémoires de la Mission Archéologique de Perse Tome XVI. Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Miller, M. (2010). The Grammar of Ornament and Visual Identity in Early Administrative Systems. Cambridge University Press.
Mitchell, W.J.T. (1994). Picture Theory: Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation. University of Chicago Press.
Paladre, C. (2022). Les sceaux-cylindres proto-élamites: Productions d’un phénomène revisité (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Université Paris 1 – Panthéon-Sorbonne.
Panofsky, E. (1967). Studies In Iconology: Humanistic Themes In The Art Of The Renaissance (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429497063
Peirce, C.S. (1958) Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vols. 1-6, C. Hartshorne, & P. Weiss (Eds.), Vols. 7-8, A.W. Burks (Ed.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 1931-1935.
Pézard, M. (1911). Étude sur les intailles susiennes et complément à l‘étude sur les intailles susiennes. In J. de Morgan (Ed.), Recherches Archéologiques, Quatrième Série. Mémoires de Délégation en Perse Tome XII (pp. 79–141). Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Pittman, H. (1992). The Proto-Elamite period. In P. O. Harper, J. Aruz, & F. Tallon (Eds.), The royal city of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern treasures in the Louvre (pp. 68–77). New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Pittman, H. (1993). Pictures of an administration: The Late Uruk scribe at work. In M. Frangipane, H. Hauptmann, M. Liverani, P. Matthiae, & M. Mellink (Eds.), Between the Rivers and Over the Mountains, Archaeologica Anatolica et Mesopotamica Alba Palmieri Dedicata (pp. 235–245). Rome: La Sapienza.
Pittman, H. (1994). The glazed steatite glyptic style: The structure and function of an image system. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer Verlag.
Pittman, H. (1997). The administrative function of glyptic art in Proto-Elamite Iran: A survey of the evidence. In R. Gyselen (Ed.), Res Orientales X. Les sceaux d’Orient et leur emploi (pp. 133–162). Bures-sur-Yvette: Groupe pour l’Etude de la Civilisation du Moyen-Orient.
Pittman, H. (2003a). Proto-Elamite glyptic art from Operation ABC. In W. Sumner (Ed.), Early Urban Life in the Land of Anshan: Excavations at Tal-e Malyan in the Highlands of Iran (pp. 107–108). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.
Pittman, H. (2003b). The Proto-Elamite period. In J. Aruz & R. Wallenfels (Eds.), Art of the First Cities: The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus (pp. 42–48). New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Pittman H. (2006) Proto-Elamische Kunstperiode (Proto-Elamite Art), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie Band 11, 26-34.
Renger, J. (1977). Legal aspects of sealing in ancient Mesopotamia. In M. Gibson & R. Biggs (Eds.), Seals and Sealings in the Ancient Near East (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica Vol. 6, pp. 75–88). Malibu: Undena Publications.
Scheil, V. (1905). Documents archaïques en écriture proto-élamite. In V. Scheil (Ed.), Textes Élamites-Sémitiques (Mémoires de Délégation en Perse Tome VI, pp. 57–129). Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Steinkeller, P. (1977). Seal practice in the Ur III period. In M. Gibson & R. Biggs (Eds.), Seals and Sealings in the Ancient Near East (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica Vol. 6, pp. 41–53). Malibu: Undena Publications.
Whiting, R. M. (1977). Sealing practices on house and land sale documents at Eshnunna in the Isin-Larsa period. In M. Gibson & R. Biggs (Eds.), Seals and Sealings in the Ancient Near East (Bibliotheca Mesopotamica Vol. 6, pp. 67–74). Malibu: Undena Publications.
Yousefi, R., Afshari Salaki, H., & Etemadifar, D. (2025). Bridging the gap: Godin Tepe and the origins of Proto-Elamite communities. Journal of Archaeological Studies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.22059/jarcs.2025.392835.143343
Zettler, R. (2007). Clay sealings from the Early Dynastic I levels of the Inanna Temple at Nippur: A preliminary analysis. In M. T. Roth, M. Stolper, & P. von Bechtolsheim (Eds.), Studies Presented to Robert D. Biggs (Assyriological Studies 27, pp. 343–362). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 

  • Receive Date 26 August 2025
  • Revise Date 27 September 2025
  • Accept Date 08 October 2025