Line	Text original	Text translated
o. 1	2.2.4 gur še.giš.i3[glossary=šamaššammū] ki-1	2.2.4 gur (760 l.) of sesame[glossary=šamaššammū] firstly;
o. 2	6.3.0 3 sila3 gur ki-2	6.3.0 3 qa gur (1,983 l.) secondly;
o. 3	6.0.4 2 sila3 gur ki-3	6.0.4 2 qa gur (1,842 l.) thirdly.
o. 4	šu.nigin 16sic!.1.2 5 sila3 gur	Total: 16sic!.1.2 5 qa (4,885 l.).
o. 5	na-am-ḫa-ar-ti	Received by
o. 6	Izi-nu-u2[individual=Zinû]	Zinû[individual=Zinû],
r. 7	gir3 dutu–ga-mil[individual=Šamaš-gāmil]	via Šamaš-gāmil[individual=Šamaš-gāmil]
r. 8	u2 dutu-da-a-⸢a⸣-[a]n[individual=Šamaš-dayyān]	and Šamaš-dayyān[individual=Šamaš-dayyān].
	(Space. Nail print.)
r. 9	(Date)

1. Palaeographical and philological commentary

• Line 4: As Fiette pointed out in his edition(Fiette 2018: 282), the total is incorrect; instead of 15.1.2 5 gur, whoever wrote the document wrote 16.1.2 5 gur, implying an error on the number 15. The photograph posted on the CDLI clearly shows 10+6.
• Fiette also noted an interesting element: before the date, there is a space on the tablet; one would expect a cylinder seal impression. In the middle of it, we can indeed distinguish a nail trace; would it be that of Zinû[individual=Zinû], used to indicate that she has indeed acknowledged receipt of the sesame? Would that mean she didn’t have a cylinder seal? Still, according to Fiette, who has studied in detail Šamaš-ḫāzir[individual=Šamaš-ḫāzir]’s archives and the management by Zinû in his absence, there is nothing to confirm that she may or may not have had a seal. To go further, one can wonder if it was inappropriate for her to have her husband’s seal, who would not have confided to her.

2. Historical commentary

• The fact that Zinû receives the sesame is not surprising: numerous letters attest to the management of crops by Šamaš-ḫāzir’s wife in his absence(Fiette 2018: 317). This accounting document is, therefore, a direct parallel with this correspondence.
• This short text provides, however, several details on the agricultural management of Šamaš-ḫāzir’s estate. Men responsible for delivering sesame[glossary=šamaššammū] to Zinû are Šamaš-dayyān[individual=Šamaš-dayyān] and Šamaš-gāmil[individual=Šamaš-gāmil]. Šamaš-dayyān is recorded as a farmer in the exploitation contract BIN 07 177. Fiette (2018: 282) notices that this farming contract dates from Ḫammurāpi’s reign, which implies that this character is permanently at his service. Šamaš-gāmil is such a common name that two homonyms seem to exist in Šamaš-ḫāzir’s archives; however, the author notes that a Šamaš-gāmil witnessed two other barley field contracts (Fiette 2018: 243-244): TCL 11 152 and OECT 15 019.
• It is interesting to note that this text dates from Month IX/December); that means sesame deliveries were after the harvest.

For more details, see Dossier A.1.1.15.

Parallels: BIN 07 177.