CUSAS 01, 025

• EN~a — Archaic sign for a high-status official or lord; exact institutional role in Uruk-period context is debated. The tilde indicates a sign variant distinct from the later canonical EN.
• SZA3~a1 — Read conventionally as 'heart' or 'interior'; in administrative texts may denote an internal storage compartment, a commodity category, or a subdivision of an institution. Variant form adds uncertainty.
• AMA~a — Conventionally 'mother'; in proto-cuneiform administrative context could denote a female overseer category or institution head. The archaic form may not carry the same semantic weight as later Sumerian ama.
• MEN~a — Conventionally interpreted as a crown or diadem sign; its administrative referent in Uruk-period contexts is unclear — could denote a title, an object, or a commodity.
• ZATU788 — An unidentified or rarely attested proto-cuneiform sign catalogued in the ZATU sign list; its reading and semantic value are unknown. Cannot be verified from the photograph.
• NUNUZ~a1 — Conventionally read as 'egg', 'roe', or 'offspring/seed'; in administrative lists may denote a commodity type, female animals, or offspring counts. Variant form adds uncertainty.
• |SILA3~axDUG~a| — A compound sign combining SILA3 (a liquid measure or vessel) with DUG (pot/vessel); the exact commodity or container type denoted is uncertain in this archaic form.
• RU — The reading RU in proto-cuneiform is uncertain; the sign may denote a gift, delivery, or an institutional action term, but its archaic value is debated.
• N14 — The large round impressed numeral in the Uruk sexagesimal system; conventionally equals 10× N01 for most commodities, but the exact value depends on the commodity being counted, which is not always recoverable.
• N50 — A high-order numerical sign in the proto-cuneiform system; its exact value relative to N14 and N01 depends on context and commodity type, introducing ambiguity in the total quantities recorded.

The photograph shows two clay tablet fragments photographed from multiple angles. The upper fragment (shown obverse, reverse, and edges) is heavily eroded and worn; individual wedge impressions are barely discernible under raking light — a few incised lines and what may be a star-like or cross sign near the top are visible, but individual proto-cuneiform signs cannot be reliably identified with confidence. The lower fragment is better preserved and more legible: clearly visible are several large circular impressed numerals (the round deep impressions characteristic of Uruk-period N14/N01 notation), alongside incised sign complexes that include diagonal strokes consistent with GAN2 (field), what appears to be a sign cluster with multiple wedge strokes on the left side, and a horizontal-ruled layout typical of early administrative tablets. The circular impressed dots in clusters of three to four are consistent with the N14 notations in the transliteration. The photo resolution and surface erosion prevent verification of the more complex or damaged signs such as ZATU788, AMA~a, MEN~a, and RU, or the bracketed AN readings. The transliteration-based reading is accepted as the primary guide; the visual evidence neither contradicts nor fully confirms it beyond the broad numerical and layout features. No standard published transliteration comparanda are available to cross-check beyond the CUSAS 01 edition itself.