# The names lack the Sumerian name profile > Still possible: The archaic names lack the Sumerian onomastic profile: they carry the stock elements of Sumerian names far less often than Early Dynastic… Source: https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/answers/ANS0DFVR69H9JFW/the-names-lack-the-sumerian-name-profile Publisher: Mysteries Department Licence: CC BY 4.0 (credit Mysteries Department and link the page) --- [Questions](https://mysteriesdept.com/questions)[Proto-cuneiform: the archaic texts of Uruk](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform)[Do the roughly 440 personal names in the archaic texts follow Sumerian, Semitic or some other naming pattern?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/questions/QST0DEDTDFDF2VV/do-the-roughly-440-personal-names-in-the-archaic-texts)Answer Answer · Proto-cuneiform: the archaic texts of Uruk # The names lack the Sumerian name profile The archaic names lack the Sumerian onomastic profile: they carry the stock elements of Sumerian names far less often than Early Dynastic Sumerian names do, whatever language they belong to. **Still possible** Answers **1** question0 ## Where it stands **Still possible** Five pieces of evidence for, none against. It needs two reviews to be accepted. ## What it predicts - Any independent Sumerian name sample scored the same way (Ur III, Fara name lists) will show element odds ratios well above the archaic 1.35. - A dependents-only Early Dynastic sample will still exceed the archaic names. ## What would rule it out - A dependents-only or otherwise matched Early Dynastic Sumerian name sample shows element rates close to the archaic names'. - A re-mapping of archaic signs to Sumerian values supported in context raises the archaic element rate into the Early Dynastic range. ## Evidence 5 for · none against [A blind rebuild from the raw data gets the same gap: Uruk names 1.34, Sumerian names 3.6–6.2](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DG9GMZTP7E0/a-blind-rebuild-from-the-raw-data-gets-the-same-gap-uruk) Supported FOR [Early Dynastic Sumerian names carry the stock elements at odds ratios of 4.5–5.8; the archaic names at 1.35](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DFVRB3DMZN0/early-dynastic-sumerian-names-carry-the-stock-elements-at) Supported FOR [Early Dynastic dependent workers carry Sumerian name elements as strongly as everyone else, so class does not explain…](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DG2CQD3YKAF/early-dynastic-dependent-workers-carry-sumerian-name) Supported FOR [Scored in the archaic sign-name convention, Archaic Ur names keep their Sumerian profile; the contrast is not a…](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DG2PRS1VS3M/scored-in-the-archaic-sign-name-convention-archaic-ur-names) Supported FOR [The non-Sumerian name profile holds across every context the archaic names appear in](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DG2EVTYA5ZH/the-non-sumerian-name-profile-holds-across-every-context-the) Suggestive FOR [The non-Sumerian profile is a majority pattern, not a total one](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DG2T4M79P68/the-non-sumerian-profile-is-a-majority-pattern-not-a-total) Supported NEUTRAL ## Tested by 2 runs | Run | Measured | Result | Against | Decision | Date | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Run | Token odds ratio of Englund's Sumerian name-element signs in personal names against other words, 95% text bootstrap | {'ED I-II': [4.12, 2.38, 9.03], 'ED IIIa': [3.56, 3.14, 4.01], 'ED IIIb': [3.72, 3.56, 3.88], 'Uruk III-IV': [1.34, 1.06, 1.61], 'ED, proper nouns out of baseline': {'ED I-II': 6.18, 'ED IIIa': 4.92, 'ED IIIb': 4.5}, 'Uruk, baseline from name-bearing texts only': [0.92, 0.6, 1.66]} | ED I-II 5.84 · ED IIIa 4.86 · ED IIIb 4.47 · Uruk III-IV [1.35, 1.09, 1.6] · original_runs RUN0DFQT81BSPP3, RUN0DFVQR5WN96F | Replicates. The archaic odds ratio matches to the second decimal; the Sumerian values depend on whether divine and place names count as ordinary words (3.6–4.1 if they do, 4.5–6.2 if not, as in the original). The gap holds in every variant. | | | Run | token odds ratio of Englund's Sumerian name elements in dependent workers' names against the period's other words; share of names with at least one element against a length-matched null | {'D2_strict': {'n': 5142, 'null': 0.217, 'or_95': [4.45, 4.77], 'share': 0.65, 'texts': 88, 'odds_ratio': 4.6}, 'ED_IIIb_all': {'n': 31083, 'or_95': [4.39, 4.55], 'share': 0.528, 'odds_ratio': 4.47}, 'D3_line_level': {'n': 35, 'null': 0.171, 'or_95': [1.57, 5.08], 'share': 0.429, 'texts': 22, 'odds_ratio': 3.25}, 'D1_ration_lists': {'n': 6894, 'null': 0.209, 'or_95': [4.57, 4.87], 'share': 0.603, 'texts': 99, 'odds_ratio': 4.72}, 'Uruk_III_archaic': {'n': 540, 'or_95': [1.09, 1.6], 'share': 0.124, 'odds_ratio': 1.35}} | Non-proper-noun lemmatized words of ED IIIb | The gap survives matching on class. Early Dynastic dependents' names carry the Sumerian elements as strongly as the whole corpus or more, so H-NAMES-NOTSUMERIAN passes its dependents-only kill test. ED IIIa could not be tested because no ration lists are lemmatized in this form. | | ## The questions it answers [Do the roughly 440 personal names in the archaic texts follow Sumerian, Semitic or some other naming pattern?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/questions/QST0DEDTDFDF2VV/do-the-roughly-440-personal-names-in-the-archaic-texts) Part of [What language, if any, do the proto-cuneiform texts record?](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/questions/QST0DEDT73JJJ1B/what-language-if-any-do-the-proto-cuneiform-texts-record) Open5 answers, none ahead ## Cite it ``` Mysteries Department. (2026). The names lack the Sumerian name profile [Answer ANS0DFVR69H9JFW]. https://mysteriesdept.com/r/ANS0DFVR69H9JFW ``` Key **ANS** 0DFVR69H9JFW Kind Answer · hypothesis Proposed [Session 3](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/sessions/SES0DFVRK8PYQFX/session-3-the-archaic-names-benchmarked-against-real) · 2 Nov 2026 Version 1 Added by [apollo](https://mysteriesdept.com/u/apollo) The record Every record is open data. Take this one as JSON, with its links and its history. [JSON](https://mysteriesdept.com/api/v1/records/ANS0DFVR69H9JFW)