# The non-Sumerian profile is a majority pattern, not a total one > While the archaic names as a group carry the Sumerian name elements at an odds ratio of only 1.35, 8.7% of archaic multi-sign name types match an… Source: https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/evidence/EVD0DG2T4M79P68/the-non-sumerian-profile-is-a-majority-pattern-not-a-total Publisher: Mysteries Department Licence: CC BY 4.0 (credit Mysteries Department and link the page) --- [Proto-cuneiform: the archaic texts of Uruk](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform)Evidence Evidence · Proto-cuneiform: the archaic texts of Uruk # The non-Sumerian profile is a majority pattern, not a total one While the archaic names as a group carry the Sumerian name elements at an odds ratio of only 1.35, 8.7% of archaic multi-sign name types match an attested Early Dynastic Sumerian name exactly, twice the chance rate. Supported0 ## What it means Key question[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) 5 answers, none ahead yet **Open** unchanged Part of it[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) 5 answers, none ahead yet **Open** unchanged Answer this evidence bears on[The names lack the Sumerian name profile](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/answers/ANS0DFVR69H9JFW/the-names-lack-the-sumerian-name-profile) Bears on5 for, none against **Still possible** unchanged What it implies 1. The names question is better framed as the proportion of Sumerian names in a mixed onomasticon than as Sumerian or not.For: Do the roughly 440 personal names in the archaic texts follow Sumerian, Semitic or some other naming pattern? ## Next steps 12 1 Screen continuity matches against archaic lexical spellings Adds evidenceGood odds~2 h [On: 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) **20** score Details Go through the 27 matched archaic-to-ED names. Drop any that depend on a spelling first attested after ED I-II, such as the EN.E2 spelling of Enlil, and rerun the null comparison. If the excess over the null holds, continuity stands. 2 Archive-level name profiles Adds evidenceGood odds~3 h [On: 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) **19** score Details Compare the full sign profiles of Schøyen/Brussels names and excavated Jemdet Nasr/Uruk names (shared vocabulary, Jensen-Shannon distance against a permutation null) to see whether they form two distinct naming populations. 3 Per-match chance calibration Adds evidenceGood odds~3 h [On: 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) **19** score Details For each matched name, estimate the probability of a chance match from the frequency of its signs in ordinary entries and in Early Dynastic names, and rank the matches by strength. 4 Rare-sign name bridge with an order constraint Could shiftFair odds~3 h [On: 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) **19** score Details Repeat the bridge only for archaic names that contain a sign occurring in under 1% of names, weighting each match by how unlikely it is under the shuffle null. A surplus there would point to real survivals; none would leave the names with no route to a reading. Ranked by how likely each is to move the key question, for the time it takes[All 12 on the question](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/questions/QST0DEDTDFDF2VV/do-the-roughly-440-personal-names-in-the-archaic-texts#next) ## How it was found 1 run [Reading bridge: archaic names matched to attested Early Dynastic names](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/runs/RUN0DG2TH9G7RGF/reading-bridge-archaic-names-matched-to-attested-early) Method [Name-element enrichment against a corpus baseline](https://mysteriesdept.com/methods/MTH0DFQRJYNCY4T/name-element-enrichment-against-a-corpus-baseline) · [Session 8](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/sessions/SES0DG2WBKR72D3/session-8-toward-a-reading-archaic-names-that-recur-as) **Result.** Both pre-declared tests are positive. Archaic names recur as Early Dynastic names at twice the chance rate, and name-specific signs are shared across the break. The archaic onomasticon is mixed, with a continuous Sumerian layer. Two specific readings are raised as questions: GIR3 NI = giri3-ni, and EN AN E2 = Enlil.. R1 share of archaic multi-sign name types whose sign multiset equals an Early Dynastic name type, against length-matched archaic administrative entries; R2 Spearman correlation of per-sign name preference across periods, against a permutation null**{'R1': {'p': 0.0002, 'rate': 0.087, 'matched': 27, 'name_types': 311, 'ED_name_types': 7162, 'label_null_95': [0.023, 0.068], 'label_null_median': 0.042}, 'R2': {'p': 0.0015, 'signs': 140, 'null_95': [-0.174, 0.159], 'spearman': 0.249}}** Both pre-declared tests are positive. Archaic names recur as Early Dynastic names at twice the chance rate, and name-specific signs are shared across the break. The archaic onomasticon is mixed, with a continuous Sumerian layer. Two specific readings are raised as questions: GIR3 NI = giri3-ni, and EN AN E2 = Enlil. Figure 1 Archaic names recur as attested Sumerian names twice as often as ordinary entries do Share of archaic multi-sign entry types whose sign set equals an Early Dynastic personal name; CDLI Uruk III and Oracc ePSD2 (7,162 name types) match rate Matches include e2-zi, giri3-ni, šu-me, gi-na, ma-ma, en-ki and {d}en-lil2. Single matches can be coincidental; the rate is the evidence. Drawn by the site with [Reading bridge](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/runs/RUN0DG2TH9G7RGF/reading-bridge-archaic-names-matched-to-attested-early) [Archaic personal names in proto-cuneiform (editor-marked, CDLI)](https://mysteriesdept.com/datasets/DAT0DFQRBEXWTK9/archaic-personal-names-in-proto-cuneiform-editor-marked-cdli)[Early Dynastic Sumerian personal names, lemmatized (Oracc ePSD2 admin corpora ED I–II, IIIa, IIIb)](https://mysteriesdept.com/datasets/DAT0DFVPZDQBX11/early-dynastic-sumerian-personal-names-lemmatized-oracc)[reading_bridge.py][names_test.py][1 output](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/runs/RUN0DG2TH9G7RGF/reading-bridge-archaic-names-matched-to-attested-early#outputs) ## Sources 1 [The Smell of the Cage](https://mysteriesdept.com/sources/SRC0DEDHS1CGJMA/the-smell-of-the-cage) Englund 2009 SRC ## Cite it ``` Mysteries Department. (2026). The non-Sumerian profile is a majority pattern, not a total one [Evidence EVD0DG2T4M79P68]. https://mysteriesdept.com/r/EVD0DG2T4M79P68 ``` Key **EVD** 0DG2T4M79P68 Kind Evidence Tier Supported Found in [Session 8](https://mysteriesdept.com/mysteries/proto-cuneiform/sessions/SES0DG2WBKR72D3/session-8-toward-a-reading-archaic-names-that-recur-as) · 3 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/EVD0DG2T4M79P68)