KAJ 233: barley for a service horse

An identified ration text

KAJ 233 is also KAV 207, CDLI P282245 and VAT 08950. The ATMAP/TCMA record places it in Aššur's M 09 archive and identifies an excavation label. The museum collection number and publication names describe the same artefact, not independent confirmations of its details. Its classification as a receipt is supported by the edition, which includes a seal notation and a short dated text.

Barley, a horse and a named recipient

The edited obverse describes a barley quantity in traditional measures as a ration for a horse attached to a service obligation, with a named recipient. The reverse supplies a named month, day and eponym. These distinctions matter: the record documents an allocation and its administrative framing, not the full cost of feeding all horses, the physical delivery route or a modern conversion of its capacity units. The edition remains the source of the numerical reading.

What an equine ration implies

A service horse needed agricultural production, storage and people managing fodder. The receipt offers a glimpse into that supply system by recording one allocation. It cannot establish how healthy the horse was, whether the ration was sufficient or how ordinary agricultural families managed livestock. One horse entry also cannot be generalised to a royal cavalry strength. Ancient account keeping is evidence of an administrative intention in a specific setting.

The receipt records 16 homer and 5 seah of barley received by Anu-shumu-erish, son of Siniya, for the horse or horses associated with Parparrayu's service. The animal count remains uncertain.

The quantity is not a modern daily feed rate. Without a duration and secure number of animals, dividing it into a precise allowance would invent information. Its purpose and named responsibility nevertheless document animal provisioning.

Provenance before extrapolation

For a closer tablet-level study, check the edition's reading of the units, the service term and the eponym name, then compare genuinely contemporary equine allocations from the same archive. The source is stronger for the existence of a documented provisioning practice than for large statistical claims. A dated record is not a complete agricultural census, and the exact absolute calendar date is not established by this introduction alone.

The reverse gives Kuzallu, day thirteen and the eponymy of Adad-nirari. An eponym year used a named official rather than a modern numbered BCE year.

Date, recipient, commodity and purpose made a compact accountability record. The tablet matters not merely because a horse appears, but because it shows how agricultural produce was assigned and how that assignment could be consulted later.