Mysteries Department
Sign inRequest access
Evidence · Proto-cuneiform: the archaic texts of Uruk

Archaic Enlil is EN.KID, not EN.E2

Uruk III writes Enlil/Nippur as EN.KIDₐ (or EN.NUN), not EN.E2. In the archaic lexical lists EN KID appears in the Cities list and EN NUN in Officials, and no archaic list has EN E2. The {d}en-lil2 spelling the session 8 match relied on is from ED IIIa.

Supported0

What it means

Openunchanged
Answer this evidence bears onYes, it is Enlil
Counts againstnone for, 1 against
Still possiblewas No evidence yet
What it implies
  1. EN AN E2 should not be read as a theophoric Enlil name, so it drops out as a 'readable' archaic name.For: Does the name entry EN AN E2 on MS 3035 (P006268, obv. i 1.b09) contain the divine name Enlil, written as in Early Dynastic {d}en-lil2?
  2. Matches of sign multisets against Early Dynastic spellings need to be screened for spellings that changed later; part of the 8.7% continuity rate could be like this, or the real rate could be undercounted.For: Do the roughly 440 personal names in the archaic texts follow Sumerian, Semitic or some other naming pattern?

Next steps 1

1
23score
Details

Compare EN AN E2 on MS 3035 with archaic EN.E2 attestations (lexical lists, Cities list) and Early Dynastic {d}en-lil2 spellings to judge whether it writes Enlil.

Ranked by how likely each is to move the key question, for the time it takes

Sources 2

Notes on KIDₐ
Englund 2011
SRC

Cite it

Mysteries Department. (2026). Archaic Enlil is EN.KID, not EN.E2 [Evidence EVD0DG2Z3JVSSR4]. https://mysteriesdept.com/r/EVD0DG2Z3JVSSR4
Private beta Downloads are for beta members

We're in a private beta while we get things right. Everything here is free to read; downloading datasets, sources and code is open to members for now.

It takes a couple of minutes. We'll reply by email.