Position in chronology
SAA 14 107. A Court Decision on Behalf of Aššur-šallim (*638-IV) (ADD 0163)
Translation · reference
High confidence(1) A lawsuit which Aššur-šallim argued with Ṣalmu-ahhe, concerning Šulmu-ereš, the servant of Aššur-šallim. (stamp seal impressions) (6) They approached Šep-šarri, chief judge. (7) The chief judge imposed 1 1/2 mina of silver. (r 1) Ṣalmu-ahhe paid Aššur-šallim 1 mina of silver. (r 3) Peace is between them. (Whoever) breaks the contract, Aššur (and) Šamaš shall be his prosecutor. He shall pay 10 minas of silver. (r 5) Aššur shall be his prosecutor. (r 6) Month Tammuz (IV), eponym year of Aššur-gimilli-tere. (r 7) Witness Lipušu. (r 8) Witness Nabû-ahu-uṣur. (r 9) Witness Ubru-Nabû, La-qepu. (r 10) Witness Il-Qisu, (e. 1) Nabû'a.
Source: Mattila, R. 2002. Legal Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh, Part II: Assurbanipal through Sin-šarru-iškun. SAA 14. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/saa14/P335114/
Translation · AI engine
read from photoThe lawsuit of Aššur-šallim against Ṣalmu-aḫḫē, concerning Šulmu-šarreš, his servant — which Aššur-šallim brought to court — they litigated before Šēp-šarri, the prefect (sartennu). They imposed 1½ minas of silver; the prefect imposed [judgment]: 1 mina of silver — Ṣalmu-aḫḫē paid to Aššur-šallim. Should either party reopen the lawsuit between them, [he shall pay] 10 minas of silver to Aššur [and Šamaš], the lord of his lawsuit. [Aššur], the lord of his lawsuit — Month IV (Du'ūzu), eponym year of Aššur-šumu-kēn (=638 BCE). Witnessed by: Libūsu; Nabû-aḫu-uṣur; Ištarēnu-Nabû (and) Lā-qēpu; Ilqīsu; Nabû-aya.
6 uncertain terms ↓
- LÚ.<sar>-tin / sartennu — A high judicial official; conventionally rendered 'prefect' in SAA 14 translations, but 'chief justice' or 'vizier' appear in older literature. The angled brackets indicate the sar sign is restored or partly damaged in the transliteration.
- mDI-mu—KAM-eš — Personal name read Šulmu-šarreš; DI-mu = šulmu ('well-being'), KAM-eš = šarreš ('the king'). The identification is standard for this corpus but the name element KAM-eš is unusual orthography.
- ⸢DI*-mu* ina* bir*⸣-tú*-šú-nu GIL-u-ni — Heavily damaged line; restoration based on standard Neo-Assyrian legal formulae 'should one reopen the lawsuit between them.' The asterisks and half-brackets indicate uncertain/damaged signs. The verb GIL (turru/šanû, 'to turn back/reopen') is conventional in such penalty clauses.
- mSUḪUŠ—dPA — Personal name; SUḪUŠ = išdu ('foundation/root'); read Ištarēnu or Išdu-Nabû depending on interpretation of SUḪUŠ logogram in this context. Uncertain whether SUḪUŠ should be read as Ištar-ēnu or Išdu-Nabû.
- mdPA-u-a — Final name in witness list; read Nabû-aya (or Nabû-ûa). The name may also be Nabûaya, a scribe's subscription. It is not entirely clear whether this is a final witness or the scribe's colophon.
- TAv* — Uncertain sign; possibly an abbreviated or defective writing of itti ('with/against'), indicating the opposing party. The asterisk flags that the sign form is irregular in the source.
Reasoning ↓
Visual examination of the photograph (British Museum tablet, scale bar confirming small Neo-Assyrian case-tablet ca. 4–5 cm): The image shows a multi-face photograph of a small pillow-shaped clay tablet with an envelope or case visible in the upper portion and a rectangular inner tablet below. The upper face of the case shows dense cuneiform wedges in several lines consistent with a Neo-Assyrian legal caption; large circular seal impressions are visible on the case face, partially obscuring the text. The lower rectangular piece (inner tablet) shows tightly packed Neo-Assyrian cuneiform in approximately 13–15 lines, legible in general structure but too small at this resolution to verify individual signs with certainty. Partial signs consistent with KUG.UD (silver determinatives) and personal name signs can be detected in the middle lines. The reverse and lower edge images confirm witness formulae lines. Photo/transliteration agreement is plausible but most individual signs cannot be verified at this resolution. The text belongs to the well-documented SAA 14 corpus of Neo-Assyrian legal documents from Aššur; ADD 163 (P335114) is a standard lawsuit-resolution record. The term 'sartennu' (LÚ.sartin) has been rendered 'prefect' following standard SAA practice; some scholars prefer 'chief justice'.
Generated by claude-sonnet-4-6 · prompt 2026-05-11/v3-conventions · May 11, 2026 · 3394 in / 1183 out tokens
Why it matters
Transliteration
de-e-nu ša maš-šur—šal-lim / TAv* mṣal-mu—PAB-MEŠ / ina UGU mDI-mu—KAM-eš ARAD-šú / ša maš-šur—šal-lim / id-bu-bu-u-⸢ni⸣ / ina IGI mGÌR.2—MAN LÚ.<sar>-tin / iq-ṭar-bu 01 1/2 MA.NA KUG.UD / LÚ.<sar>-tin e-te-me-di / 01 MA.NA KUG.UD mṣal-mu—PAB-MEŠ / a-na maš-šur—šal-lim id-din / ⸢DI*-mu* ina* bir*⸣-tú*-šú-nu GIL-u-ni / aš-šur ⸢dUTU*⸣ EN de-ni-šú 10 MA.NA KUG.UD SUM-an / ⸢d*aš-šur⸣ EN—de-ni-šú / ITI.ŠU lim-mu maš-šur—ŠU—GUR / IGI mli-bu-su / IGI mdPA*—PAB—PAB / IGI mSUḪUŠ—dPA o* mla—qe-pu / IGI mil—qi-su / mdPA-u-a
Scholarly note
Neo-Assyrian legal transaction at the royal court of Nineveh, edited by Raija Mattila (SAA 14, 2002). ORACC text P335114.
Attribution
Image: BM — (British Museum, London, UK) — from Nineveh (mod. Kuyunjik) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/artifacts, P335114). source
Translation excerpted from Mattila, R. 2002. Legal Transactions of the Royal Court of Nineveh, Part II: Assurbanipal through Sin-šarru-iškun. SAA 14. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. https://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/saao/saa14/P335114/.
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.
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.
The oldest surviving law code in human history. The principle that the state — not the wronged family — defines and enforces justice begins here.