ABSTRACT
The collapse of the Middle Elamite state appears to mark a major hiatus in glyptic production and use in Elam. Neo-Elamite glyptic is traditionally delineated into two chronological groups, an early one, ca. 1000–800/700 BC, and a late one, ca. 800/700–late 6th century BC. Van Loon considered Surkh Dum-i Luri as potentially lying within an Elamite cultural orbit. Late Neo-Elamite glyptic became a topic of some importance with a seminal publication by Amiet. Amiet defined the corpus of late Neo-Elamite glyptic. The relative chronological relationship of the two corpora to each other, and their absolute dates, are often debated. Although Amiet suggested, based on the glyptic evidence, that the Apadana tablets were slightly later in date than the Acropole tablets, see no evidence to separate the two corpora in any chronologically meaningful manner. The basic modeled approach to the rendering of human and animal forms is, as Amiet noted, a direct inheritance from Assyro-Babylonian glyptic.
