Position in chronology
Nisaba 25, 42
About this tablet
A tiny Early Dynastic tablet from Ur, roughly 2600–2500 BCE, recording small quantities of some commodity — probably rations, workers, or livestock — assigned to or associated with several named individuals or institutions, one of which may involve the goddess Inanna. The tablet is palm-sized and heavily worn, making precise reading very difficult. It belongs to the administrative paperwork of ancient Ur, the kind of everyday accounting that kept temples and households running. Its inclusion of what may be a divine name (Inanna) suggests a temple context, though the text is too fragmentary for certainty.
Plain-language summary by the engine — meant as a doorway into the literal translation below.
Written in modern English
A set of equal allocations — each recorded as one large unit plus three smaller ones — distributed among several parties: one apparently connected to Inanna (or her temple), two associated with individuals whose names begin with NUN-, one whose name begins with UR-, and a final single smaller unit for someone called UR-IG-A. The last line adds a brief note that may record an action or official category (AK, PA, A). Most entries are too damaged to read in full; the rest is lost.
A modern paraphrase of the literal translation — same content, contemporary voice.
Translation — our engine
Our engine[1(N22)] 3(N01) — of Inanna(?) [1(N22)] 3(N01) — NUN-[...] 1(N22) 3(N01) — NUN-da [...] 1(N22) 3(N01) — UR-[...] 1(N01) — UR-IG-A AK(?) PA A
Our translation engine — Sonnet 4.6. Reads the photo, translates the cuneiform, and writes a plain-language interpretation. See methodology for limits.
Engine notes
read from photo5 uncertain terms ↓
- inanna#? — The # and ? in the transliteration signal that the reading is uncertain. The sign could be the divine name Inanna (written with the INANNA sign), but erosion prevents certainty. The star-like impression visible in the photo is consistent with this reading but not conclusive.
- N22@f / N01@f — These are proto-cuneiform numerical signs. N22 represents a larger capacity/count unit and N01 the basic unit. The '@f' flag indicates a specific form variant. Without a surviving commodity header or total line, what precisely is being counted (grain, oil, persons, animals, etc.) cannot be determined.
- nun-[...] / nun-da-[...] — Personal or institutional names beginning with 'Nun-' (perhaps referencing the city of Eridu or a title). The second element is broken away; restoration is impossible without parallels.
- ur-ig!-A — A personal name. The '!' indicates an emendation or correction in the transliteration; the sign read as 'ig' may be damaged or atypical. 'Ur-' names (lit. 'servant/dog of [deity]') are common in ED onomastics.
- AK# PA A — Final line; signs are uncertain (#). Could represent a verb phrase, a summary notation, or signs whose function is unclear. 'AK' can mean 'to do/make'; 'PA' is a branch/official sign; 'A' may be a water determinative, a ration sign, or a phonetic complement. The combination resists confident interpretation.
Reasoning ↓
Visual examination: The tablet is a small, rounded clay lump photographed from multiple angles. The surface is noticeably eroded and the clay a warm reddish-brown. On the obverse (centre-top and bottom views) I can make out rows of impressed wedge-clusters and what appear to be N01-type circular impressions alongside more complex sign groups; the uppermost register on the obverse shows a star-like or cross-shaped sign that could be DINGIR or AN, consistent with a divine name determinative (pointing toward 'Inanna'). A horizontal ruling is visible dividing the face into sections, matching the line-by-line structure of the transliteration. The reverse and edges (centre-left and right panels) show fewer clear signs; the third view from the top appears nearly blank, consistent with the edge or a lightly inscribed reverse. I cannot independently verify the individual N22 impressions with confidence at this resolution, nor clearly read the final line 'AK PA A'. The transliteration supplied by the project matches the general sign density and layout I observe, but specific sign identifications beyond the broad numerical clusters and the possible divine-name sign cannot be confirmed from the photo. The very early ED date and proto-cuneiform numeral system place this firmly in the archaic administrative corpus known from Ur and Jemdet Nasr; N22 and N01 are standard capacity numerals whose exact commodity referent is lost without a surviving total or header sign.
Generated by claude-sonnet-4-6 · prompt 2026-05-12/v4-interpretation · May 16, 2026 · 1925 in / 1112 out tokens
Transliteration
[1(N22@f)] 3(N01@f)# inanna#?-ak [1(N22@f)] 3(N01@f) , nun-[...] 1(N22@f) 3(N01@f) , nun-da# [...] 1(N22@f)# 3(N01@f)# , ur#-[...] 1(N01@f) , ur-ig!-A AK#? PA A
Scholarly note
Catalogue entry from CDLI (ED I-II (ca. 2900-2700 BC)) — Nisaba 25, 42. No scholarly translation has been published; the transliteration is from the ATF (CDLI's Atf-Friendly format).
Attribution
Image: British Museum, London, UK (P449029) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative. source
Translation excerpted from engine:claude-sonnet-4-6 (2026-05-28/v6-glossary-aware).
Related tablets
Related sources
One of the earliest specimens of human writing. Not literature, not law — accounting. The need to keep track of grain in a temple bureaucracy is what pushed marks-on-clay into a system that could one day carry epics.
Marks the boundary between proto-writing and writing. We can see signs being used systematically — but not yet phonetically. The leap to recording speech itself comes a few centuries later.
The earliest historical document in human history. Before this, we have lists, accounts, and dedications. Here, for the first time, a ruler tells us what happened — with names, places, and consequences.