MDP 06, 245

~3000 BCE·Uruk Period·P008042

Translation · reference

Experimental

Source: CDLI raw catalogue, no published translation. P-number P008042.

Translation · AI engine

read from photo

Low confidence

[...] , [...] 1(N45) [...] [...] M288 , 1(N34) [...] [...] |M157+M288|# M125# M388 [...] , [...] [...] , [...] 3(N01) 3(N39B) 1(N30D) 1(N39C) M305# M016# M288 , [...] [...] M157 |M175+M175| M288 , 2(N34) [...] [...] [M288] , [...] 2(N45)

8 uncertain terms ↓

N45 — Largest standard round impressed numeral in the proto-cuneiform sexagesimal system; conventionally read as a very high-order unit (possibly 3600 in sexagesimal counting), but its precise value here is commodity-dependent and cannot be resolved without fuller context.
N34 — High-order impressed numeral; value varies by metrological sub-system. Possibly functions as a sub-total or totalling numeral in the final line, but this is uncertain.
N39B — Elongated impressed numeral found in specific metrological systems, possibly area or capacity measures. Commodity context is unrecoverable from this fragment.
M288 — Repeatedly attested sign in proto-cuneiform Susa tablets; may function as a commodity qualifier or category marker. Semantic value not yet established with certainty.
M157 — Unidentified proto-cuneiform category/heading sign. Institutional or commodity reference unknown for this corpus.
|M157+M288|# — Compound sign, marked '#' by editors indicating uncertain reading. The combination is not well paralleled in current sign lists.
|M175+M175| — Repeated compound of M175; the doubling may indicate intensification or a specific commodity sub-class. Meaning unestablished.
M125, M305, M016, M388 — Proto-cuneiform category signs whose semantic values at Susa in this period are debated or unidentified; listed as transliterations only.

Reasoning ↓

Visually, the tablet survives in several joining and non-joining fragments photographed together (museum number Sb 06389, red ink number '245' visible on the edge). The clay surface is heavily eroded and cracked, with significant lacunae especially at the upper left and lower right. Individual wedge impressions and circular/oval numeral impressions are visible in both the upper and lower fragments: in the upper fragment I can discern clusters of impressed circle-and-line signs consistent with N34/N45-class numerals and what appear to be incised linear signs (the M-series category signs). The lower fragment shows a dense block of incised signs at the upper left which is consistent with the M305/M016/M288 cluster in the transliteration. However, the resolution and erosion make it impossible to confirm individual sign identities or distinguish, e.g., M157 from adjacent signs with confidence. The transliteration is taken from the MDP 06 edition (Scheil) and later CDLI encoding; the photo is broadly consistent with the transliteration's description of a fragmentary multi-entry tablet, but specific sign-by-sign verification from the photo alone is not possible. The '#' diacritics in the transliteration indicate the editors' own uncertainty about those signs. This is transliteration-driven with partial photo confirmation of overall layout only.

Generated by claude-sonnet-4-6 · prompt 2026-05-12/v4-interpretation · May 15, 2026 · 2242 in / 1058 out tokens

Why it matters

Transliteration

[...] , [...] 1(N45) [...]
[...] M288 , 1(N34) [...]
[...] |M157+M288|# M125# M388 [...] , [...]
[...] , [...] 3(N01) 3(N39B) 1(N30D) 1(N39C)
M305# M016# M288 , [...]
[...] M157 |M175+M175| M288 , 2(N34) [...]
[...] [M288] , [...] 2(N45)

Scholarly note

Catalogue entry from CDLI (Proto-Elamite (ca. 3100-2900 BC)) — MDP 06, 245. No scholarly translation has been published; the transliteration is from the ATF (CDLI's Atf-Friendly format).

Attribution

Image: Louvre Museum, Paris, France (P008042) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative. source
Translation excerpted from CDLI raw catalogue, no published translation. P-number P008042..

Related tablets

Related sources

~3200 BCE

Proto-Cuneiform Account Tablet

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.

~3500 BCE

Kish Tablet

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.

~2450 BCE

Stele of the Vultures

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.