Tiglath-pileser I 10

• tar-gi-gi — Akkadian plural noun meaning 'enemies' or 'adversaries'; occurs in Neo-Assyrian royal titulary but is relatively rare; reading is standard in RIMA 2 parallels but the sign is not clearly visible in the photo.
• šaḫtu — Means 'one who is reverent/humble' or 'the humble/pious one'; used as a royal epithet. Could alternatively be read as a verb form. Restored in brackets in the transliteration.
• bi-bíl lìb-bi — 'Desire/wish of the heart' — a common Assyrian pious epithet meaning the king is the one whom the god chose or desired. Idiom is well attested but nuance is debated.
• geš-ru la pa-du-ú — Fully restored lacuna: 'strong one who shows no mercy' — a standard royal epithet; restoration follows parallel manuscripts in RIMA 2 A.0.87 but cannot be confirmed from this photo.
• si-qir dUTU — 'The command/utterance of Šamaš (the sun-god)' — *siqru* can mean 'command', 'utterance', or 'nomination'; the formula is standard but the line breaks off here, leaving the syntactic context incomplete.
• NUN-ú na-a-du — 'Attentive/revered prince' — *nā'idu* means 'one who praises/reveres'; the royal epithet is standard in Tiglath-pileser I inscriptions.

Visually examining the photograph: the main inscribed face (upper centre fragment) shows multiple horizontal lines of cuneiform in a relatively compact Neo-Assyrian or late Middle Assyrian hand. Individual wedge clusters are legible in the upper lines — I can make out royal-title formulae consistent with the transliteration, including what appears to be LUGAL signs in lines 1–2 and the characteristic sign groupings of standard Tiglath-pileser I titulary. The lower portions of that fragment show a ruled line dividing columns or sections. The left and right edge fragments (top row) are largely eroded and show only faint wedge impressions; I cannot independently read them. The middle two fragments (reverse and lower edge) are heavily damaged or blank; the bottom label fragment shows the British Museum registration number K.2805 (inverted in the photo). The transliteration provided matches well-known passages from the Tiglath-pileser I annals/inscriptions (RIMA 2 A.0.87), and what I can visually confirm in the upper lines broadly aligns with the transliteration in terms of sign density and line layout. I cannot verify the fully bracketed restorations from the photo alone due to damage and scale. The final line breaks off mid-formula (*qu-ra-di…*), leaving the passage incomplete.