Ashurnasirpal II 061

• GAR-nu-ta-a — Uncertain verb form; possibly šakānu-derived ('they established/set'), but the reading of the signs after GAR is unclear in both photo and transliteration.
• URU.BÀD-lu-lu-ma-a-a — Tentatively read as the city name Dūr-Lullumê ('Fort of the Lullumu'), a settlement in the Zaban region attested in Neo-Assyrian annals; BÀD sign is marked as uncertain with a half-bracket in the transliteration.
• el-la-an KUR.za-ban — 'Above/beyond the land of Zaban' — Zaban is a known geographical designation for territory along the Lower Zab river; 'elān' ('above, beyond') is a common directional marker in Assyrian royal geography.
• mi-ṣir KUR-ia am-nu — 'The border of my land I reckoned/assigned' — miṣiru ('border, boundary') with manû ('to count, assign') is standard annalistic phrasing for demarcating conquered territory.
• an-ḫu-su — Likely anḫu ('toil, exhaustion, corvée-labour') with a 3rd-person singular suffix; could refer to the burden/tax imposed on a population or the hardship of a campaign.
• ú-ša-ak-lil — Tentative Š-stem of kalālu or šuklulu ('to complete, to finish, to make perfect'); restoration in the transliteration is uncertain (marked with ?).
• ma-da-tu — Standard Akkadian for 'tribute' (madattu); well attested in Neo-Assyrian annals but the surrounding context is broken and the sign reading carries a half-bracket.

The photograph shows a clay tablet broken into at least four or five joining and non-joining fragments, with museum accession labels visible on the reverse of one piece (BM 121135, TH 1929 10-12 144, indicating a British Museum acquisition from a 1929 Telul al-Hayyat or similar excavation lot). The obverse face (the large central fragment) displays multiple horizontal lines of cuneiform wedges; the surface is worn and partially eroded, with the upper left corner and right edge missing. Individual wedge-groups are visible but at this resolution I can confirm only the general presence of multi-sign sequences consistent with Neo-Assyrian script — I cannot independently read specific signs to cross-check the transliteration sign by sign. The scholarly transliteration's heavy use of brackets and half-brackets (⸢ ⸣) is consistent with the visible surface damage. The terms KUR (land), MEŠ (plural marker), and what may be a place-name sequence in the fourth line are plausible from the sign clusters visible under magnification, but cannot be verified with certainty from the photo alone. The thematic tags 'law' and 'mythology' in the catalog metadata appear anomalous for what reads as a typical annalistic fragment; this may reflect broad ORACC genre tagging or a cataloging error.