Position in chronology
MDP 17, 275
About this tablet
One of the oldest administrative records in human history, this badly broken clay tablet from Susa (southwestern Iran) dates to the Uruk period, roughly 3200–3000 BCE — within the very first centuries of writing. It records quantities of goods or commodities in an early proto-cuneiform numerical notation, organized in the columnar, tally-like format typical of Uruk-era accounting. The round impressed marks are not yet 'words' in any modern sense but numerical signs: large circles for higher-order units, smaller marks for ones, arranged against pictographic commodity signs we can only partially identify. This is the bureaucratic bedrock of civilization — an accountant's list predating any narrative or literary text.
Plain-language summary by the engine — meant as a doorway into the literal translation below.
Translation · reference
Low confidence[...] , 3(N14) 4(N01) M367[?] , 2(N14) 3(N01) [...] , [...] 5(N14) 8(N01) M346~1 , 1(N23) 3(N14) 9(N01) [...] , 1(N14) 4(N01) M346~1 , 1(N23) 8(N14) [...] , [...] 6(N14) [x] M362 , 1(N51) 2(N23) [...] M346~1 , 4(N23) [...] M006 , [...]
Source: engine:claude-sonnet-4-6 (2026-05-12/v4-interpretation)
Translation · AI engine
read from photo[...] , 3(N14) 4(N01) M367[?] , 2(N14) 3(N01) [...] , [...] 5(N14) 8(N01) M346~1 , 1(N23) 3(N14) 9(N01) [...] , 1(N14) 4(N01) M346~1 , 1(N23) 8(N14) [...] , [...] 6(N14) [x] M362 , 1(N51) 2(N23) [...] M346~1 , 4(N23) [...] M006 , [...]
6 uncertain terms ↓
- M367 — Transliteration marks this with '?' — the commodity sign is uncertain or only partially preserved. Cannot confirm or refute from photo.
- M346~1 — A proto-cuneiform pictogram (variant 1); possibly representing a container, vessel, or specific commodity. Appears multiple times. The cross/diagonal incision visible in the photo is consistent with this sign family but cannot be confirmed with certainty at this resolution.
- M362 — Proto-cuneiform commodity sign; identity of the commodity it represents is not firmly established. Reading uncertain — preceded by an unidentified sign 'x' in the transliteration.
- M006 — Proto-cuneiform sign; its commodity referent is debated. The associated numerical entry is entirely broken away.
- N23, N51 — Higher-order numerical signs in the proto-cuneiform system. N23 and N51 represent still larger units than N14, but exact absolute values depend on which metrological system (grain, area, liquid, etc.) applies here — and that commodity context is only partially recoverable from the fragmentary sign readings.
- Numerical system — The Uruk period used multiple parallel numerical/metrological systems (sexagesimal, bisexagesimal, area, grain-capacity, etc.). Without confident identification of all commodity signs, it is impossible to assign absolute quantities to the numerical entries recorded here.
Reasoning ↓
Visual examination of the photograph confirms several key features. The tablet survives in multiple fragments (shown from obverse, reverse, and edges); the museum number 'Sb 22437' is visible on a label in the image. The obverse (upper central fragment) clearly shows groups of round circular impressions made with a cylindrical or spherical stylus — these are the N01 and N14 numerical signs expected from the transliteration, arranged in regular grids. A large diagonal incised sign is visible near the center of the upper fragment and again on the lower fragment, consistent with a proto-cuneiform commodity sign (possibly M346~1 or M362, which often appear as angular or cross-like incisions). The surface is heavily eroded and broken, with substantial lacunae at all edges, consistent with the many '[...]' gaps in the transliteration. The left-edge fragment appears to be a thin sliver showing mostly edge profile with little legible surface. The right-edge fragment shows some faint incised marks but is too damaged to read individually. The lower large fragment shows incised sign(s) at top and what appear to be further numerical impressions below, matching the lower lines of the transliteration. Overall the photo aligns well with the transliteration structure: columns of numerals facing commodity pictograms. Exact sign-by-sign verification of specific N-values (N23, N51, etc.) is not possible from this photograph resolution — the finer distinctions between different-sized impressed circles require higher magnification.
Generated by claude-sonnet-4-6 · prompt 2026-05-12/v4-interpretation · May 15, 2026 · 2005 in / 1117 out tokens
Why it matters
Transliteration
[...] , 3(N14) 4(N01)# M367#? , 2(N14) 3(N01)# [...] , [...] 5(N14)# 8(N01) M346~1# , 1(N23) 3(N14) 9(N01) [...] , 1(N14)# 4(N01)# M346~1 , 1(N23) 8(N14) [...] , [...] 6(N14)# x M362 , 1(N51) 2(N23)# [...] M346~1 , 4(N23)# [...] M006 , [...]
Scholarly note
Catalogue entry from CDLI (Proto-Elamite (ca. 3100-2900 BC)) — MDP 17, 275. No scholarly translation has been published; the transliteration is from the ATF (CDLI's Atf-Friendly format).
Attribution
Image: Louvre Museum, Paris, France (P008473) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative. source
Translation excerpted from engine:claude-sonnet-4-6 (2026-05-12/v4-interpretation).
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.
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.
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.