MSVO 3, 34

~3100 BCE·Uruk Period·P005345

Translation · reference

Experimental

Source: CDLI raw catalogue, no published translation. P-number P005345.

Translation · AI engine

read from photo

Low confidence

1(N45)# 5(N14)# , DU E2~b GI , [...] 3(N34)# 2(N45)# 1(N14)# [...] , [...] 2(N34)# 2(N45)# 3(N14)# [...] , SZAM2# BA# [...] 1(N34)# 2(N45)# 3(N14)# [...] 1(N01)# , DU# E2~b# [...] 1(N34)# [...] , [...]

5 uncertain terms ↓

N45, N34, N14, N01 — These are proto-cuneiform numerical signs whose precise commodity-specific values remain debated. N45 and N34 are higher-order units; their exact decimal or sexagesimal equivalents depend on which metrological system applies, which in turn depends on the commodity — itself not fully legible here.
DU E2~b — DU is conventionally read as 'to bring / delivery / to go'; E2~b is a building or storehouse type. Together they likely denote 'brought to the storehouse' or 'delivery to building [type b],' but proto-cuneiform cannot be fully phonologically read and these are functional interpretations based on context and later Sumerian usage.
GI — Could denote the commodity 'reed' (Sumerian gi), or function as a verb/notation for 'return' or 'confirmed.' Context is too fragmentary to determine which reading applies here.
SZAM2 — Interpreted as a commodities or transaction notation; possibly related to later Sumerian 'šám' (purchase/price), but this is an extrapolation. The exact proto-cuneiform value is not firmly established.
BA — Extrapolated from later Sumerian ba ('to distribute/allot'). In proto-cuneiform the phonological reading cannot be confirmed; it is treated as a disbursement marker by convention.

Reasoning ↓

The photograph shows multiple views of what appears to be a small, heavily weathered clay tablet — likely a round or pillow-shaped proto-cuneiform tablet characteristic of the Uruk III–IV period. The surface is severely eroded and encrusted with a granular deposit, making individual wedge impressions extremely difficult to distinguish. In the lower central panel (the main obverse view) faint vertical ruling lines and a few impressed marks are just barely discernible, consistent with the presence of numerical notations in columnar layout. The upper central view appears to show the reverse or a damaged face with minimal legible impressions. The two small lateral objects appear to be edge views showing the tablet's thickness. I cannot independently confirm individual sign readings (N45, N34, N14, DU, E2~b, GI, SZAM2, BA) from the photograph — the resolution and surface condition do not permit that level of sign-by-sign verification. The transliteration is taken as provided by the CDLI/MSVO scholarly edition and is consistent with the tablet's general morphology and the known corpus of MSVO 3 tablets from Uruk. The '#' marks in the transliteration indicate the editors' own uncertainty about damaged or partially legible signs, which aligns with the severe surface erosion visible in the photo.

Generated by claude-sonnet-4-6 · prompt 2026-05-12/v4-interpretation · May 14, 2026 · 2068 in / 1033 out tokens

Why it matters

Transliteration

1(N45)# 5(N14)# , DU E2~b GI
, [...]
3(N34)# 2(N45)# 1(N14)# [...] , [...]
2(N34)# 2(N45)# 3(N14)# [...] , SZAM2# BA# [...]
1(N34)# 2(N45)# 3(N14)# [...] 1(N01)# , DU# E2~b# [...]
1(N34)# [...] , [...]

Scholarly note

Catalogue entry from CDLI (Uruk III (ca. 3200-3000 BC)) — MSVO 3, 34. No scholarly translation has been published; the transliteration is from the ATF (CDLI's Atf-Friendly format).

Attribution

Image: Land Berlin, Berlin, Germany (P005345) — Photo via Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative. source
Translation excerpted from CDLI raw catalogue, no published translation. P-number P005345..

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.