proto-cuneiform

File:Proto-cuneiform lexical list of places - BM 116625.jpg

Possibly as early as the 9th millennium BC, a token-based system came into use in various parts of the ancient Near East. These evolved into marked tokens, and then into marked envelopes now known as clay bullae.Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, "The Envelopes That Bear the First Writing", Technology and Culture, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 357–85, 1980Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, "Decipherment of the Earliest Tablets", Science, vol. 211, no. 4479, pp. 283–85, 1981Overmann, Karenleigh A., The Material Origin of Numbers: Insights from the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Piscataway, NJ, USA: Gorgias Press, 2019[https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/articles/cdlj/2023-2] McLaughlin, Peter, and Oliver Schlaudt, "The Creation of Numbers from Clay: Understanding Damerow’s Theory of Material Abstraction", Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2023 (2), 2023 It is usually assumed that these were the basis for the development of proto-cuneiform, as well as of the contemporaneous Proto-Elamite writing system: as many as two-thirds of the tokens discovered have been excavated in Susa, the most important city in what would become Elam. These tokens continued to be used, even after the development of proto-cuneiform and Proto-Elamite.Denise Schmandt-Besserat, "An Archaic Recording System and the Origin of Writing", Syro-Mesopotamian Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–32, 1977Denise Schmandt-Besserat, "An Archaic Recording System in the Uruk-Jemdet Nasr Period", American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 19–48, (Jan. 1979)Lieberman, Stephen J., "Of Clay Pebbles, Hollow Clay Balls, and Writing: A Sumerian View", American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 339–58, 1980Schmandt-Besserat, D., "Tokens at Susa", Oriens Antiquus 25(1–2), pp. 93–125, 1986Bennison-Chapman, Lucy Ebony, "Tools of the Trade: Accounting Tokens as an Alternative to Text in the Cuneiform World", Bulletin of the American Society of Overseas Research 390.1, 2023

The earliest tablets found, in the Uruk V period (c. 3500 BC), are of a 'numerical' character. They consist only of lists of numbers associated with 18 known signs (circles, triangles etc), sometimes sealed. It has been suggested that they appeared as early as the Uruk IV period and remained in use until the Uruk IVa period.Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, "Three The Uruk Vase: Sequential Narrative". When Writing Met Art: From Symbol to Story, New York, USA: University of Texas Press, pp. 41-46, 2007 Generally they are called "numerical tablets" or "impressed tablets". They have been mostly found in Susa (75) and Uruk (190) (small numbers in Jemdat Nasr (2), Chogha Mish (1), Tepe Sialk (10), Tutub (1), Khafajah (1), and Mari (1)) including some that lack later Proto-Elamite and proto-cuneiform tablets, like Tell Brak (1), Habuba Kabira (3), Tepe Hissar, Godin Tepe (38), Nineveh (1), and Jebel Aruda (13). A few unprovenanced tablets are held in private collections.Overmann, Karenleigh A., "Appendix: Data Tables", The Material Origin of Numbers: Insights from the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Piscataway, NJ, USA: Gorgias Press, pp. 245-256, 2019Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, "The Earliest Precursor of Writing", Scientific American, vol. 238, no. 6, pp. 50–59, 1978Strommenger, Eva, "The Chronological Division of the Archaic Levels of Uruk-Eanna VI to III/II: Past and Present", American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 479–87, 1980[https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/27127/1/hallo%20report.pdf] Hallo, William W., "Godin Tepe: The Inscriptions", Yale University, 2011Oates, Joan and Oates, David, "The Reattribution of Middle Uruk Materials at Brak". Leaving No Stones Unturned: Essays on the Ancient Near East and Egypt in Honor of Donald P. Hansen, edited by Erica Ehrenberg, University Park, USA: Penn State University Press, pp. 145–154, 2002R. Dyson, "The relative and absolute chronology of Hissar H and the proto-Elamite of Northern Iran", In: Chronologie du Prochce Orient/Relative chronologies and absolute chronology 16,000–4,000 BC. CNRS International Symposium, Lyon France, 24–28 November, 1986, 13AR Internat. Scr. 379, Oxford, pp. 647–677, 1987 A single fragmentary slab at the Uruk site of Hacınebi Tepe has been proposed as a numerical tablet.[http://sarweb.org/media/files/sar_press_uruk_mesopotamia_chapter8.pdf]Stein, Gil J., "Indigenous social complexity at Hacınebi (Turkey) and the organization of Uruk colonial contact", Uruk Mesopotamia & Its Neighbors: Cross-Cultural Interactions in the Era of State Formation, 265-305, 2001

Proto-cuneiform emerged in what is now labeled the Uruk IV period (c. 3300 BC), and its use continued through the later Uruk III period (c. 3200-2900 BC), also called the Jemdat Nasr period. The script slowly evolved over time, with signs changing and merging.Green, M. W., "Archaic Uruk Cuneiform", American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 90, no. 4, pp. 464–66, 1986 It was used for the first time in Uruk, later spreading to additional locations in what is now modern day Iraq, such as Jemdet Nasr, and to Susa in modern day Iran.Glassner, Jean-Jacques, "Writing in Sumer: The Invention of Cuneiform", Translated by Zainab Bahrani and Marc Van de Mieroop. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003

With the advent of the Early Dynastic period {{circa|2900 BC}}, the standard cuneiform script used to write the Sumerian language emerged, though only about 400 tablets have been recovered from this period; these are mainly from Ur, with a few from Uruk.Lecompte, Camille, "Observations on Diplomatics, Tablet Layout and Cultural Evolution of the Early Third Millennium: The Archaic Texts from Ur", in Materiality of Writing in Early Mesopotamia, edited by Thomas E. Balke and Christina Tsouparopoulou, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 133–164, 2016

It has been suggested that the development of Proto-cuneiform signs was influenced

by symbols (motifs) found on earlier cylinder seals. Stamp seals were not considered.[https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/B3C2D400F3F80A7A0162D9035C9C2804/S0003598X24001650a.pdf/seals-and-signs-tracing-the-origins-of-writing-in-ancient-south-west-asia.pdf]Kelley K, Cartolano M, Ferrara S., "Seals and signs: tracing the origins of writing in ancient South-west Asia", Antiquity, pp. 1-19, 2024 doi:10.15184/aqy.2024.165

File:Pictographs Recording the Allocation of Beer (London, England).jpg

There is a longstanding debate in the academic community regarding when the Sumerian people arrived in Mesopotamia. Partly spurred by linguistic arguments and evidence, overall it is generally clear that a number of fundamental changes occurred in Mesopotamia—such as the use of the plano-convex brick—at the same time the first definitive evidence of the Sumerian language appeared during the Early Dynastic I period. Proto-cuneiform offers no clear clues as to what spoken language it encoded, leading to much speculation, though Sumerian is often assumed.Monaco, Salvatore F., "Proto-cuneiform And Sumerians", Rivista Degli Studi Orientali, vol. 87, no. 1/4, pp. 277–82, 2014Monaco, Salvatore F., "Loan and Interest in the Archaic Texts", Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie, vol. 102, no. 2, pp. 165–178, 2013

File:Cuneiform tablet- administrative account with entries concerning malt and barley groats MET DP293245.jpg

About 170 similar tablets from Uruk V ({{circa|3500 BC}}), Susa, and other Iranian sites like Tepe Sialk, are considered to be pre-Proto-Elamite, though bearing similarities to proto-cuneiform.Dittman, R., "Seals, Sealings and Tablets. Thoughts on the changing pattern of administrative control from the Late-Uruk to the Proto-Elamite period at Susa", pp. 332–66 in Gamdat Nasr. Period or Regional Style? ed. U. Finkbeiner and R. Röllig. TAVO B/62. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1986 Sign lists and transliterations are less clear for this category.Overmann, Karenleigh A., "Numerical Notations And Writing", in The Material Origin of Numbers: Insights from the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East, Piscataway, NJ, USA: Gorgias Press, pp. 179–206, 2019

Like Proto-Elamite, the system's propagation was relatively limited. The vast majority of the proto-cuneiform texts found, about 5000, have been located in archaic Uruk (190 Uruk V, 1776 Uruk IV, 3094 Uruk III), though also in secondary contexts within the Eanna district. The tablets fall primarily into two styles: the earlier (building level IV) set featuring more naturalistic figures, written with a pointed stylus, and the later set (building level III) with a more abstract style, made using a blunt stylus. These correspond to the Late Uruk {{circa|3100 BC}} and Jemdet Nasr {{circa|3000 BC}} periods respectively.Nissen, Hans J., "The Archaic Texts from Uruk", World Archaeology, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 317–34, 1986H.J. Nissen, "The Development of Writing and of Glyptic Art", in: U. Finkbeiner – W. Röllig (edd.): Gamdat Nasr — Period or Regional Style? Papers given at a symposium held in Tübingen, November 1983, Wiesbaden, pp. 316–331, 1986 Many of the tablets were themselves later used as foundation fill during the construction of the Uruk III Eanna temple complex.[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00438243.2019.1592018] Matthews, Roger, and Amy Richardson, "Cultic resilience and inter-city engagement at the dawn of urban history: protohistoric Mesopotamia and the ‘city seals’, 3200–2750 BC", World Archaeology 50.5, pp. 723-747, 2018 It appears that the records were considered to be of transient utility or interest, and were quickly disposed of. The difficult stratigraphy has brought about a change from referring to tablets based on excavation layer to one of calling them script phase IV and III. Similarly to the tablets, clay seals previously used to secure vessels and doors ended up in the fill after being removed.Stratford, Edward, "Archives and the Deformation of Time", Volume 1 A Year of Vengeance, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 316–332, 2017 The sites and analysis of sealing has led to suggestions that the tablets originated elsewhere and ended up at Uruk, where they were discarded.Charvát, Petr., "Early Texts and Sealings: 'Divine Journeys' in the Uruk IV Period?", Altorientalische Forschungen, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 30–33, 1995

A smaller number of tablets were found in Jemdet Nasr (2 Uruk V, 236 Uruk III), Umma (398 Uruk III), Eshnunna (2 Uruk III), Larsa (23 Uruk III), Kish (5 Uruk III), and Tell Uqair (39 Uruk III).Matthews, Roger J., "Jemdet Nasr: The Site and the Period", The Biblical Archaeologist, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 196–203, 1992R. J. Matthews, "Defining the Style of the Period: Jemdet Nasr 1926–28", Iraq, vol. 54, pp. 1–34, 1992Lloyd, Seton, et al., "Tell Uqair: Excavations by the Iraq Government Directorate of Antiquities in 1940 and 1941", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 131–58, 1943 They tend to be less fragmentary and are sometimes found in stratified contexts. Some have made their way into various private and public collections: the provenance for some can be determined from internal clues, but for some the origin city is unknown.[https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/files-up/publications/englund1991b.pdf] Robert K. Englund, "Archaic Dairy Metrology", Iraq 53, pp. 101–104, 1991Falkenstein, Adam, "Archaische texte des Iraq-Museums in Baghdad", Orientalistische Literaturzeitung 40/7, pp. 401–410, 1937 For example, in 1988 ninety complete well-preserved tablets from the Swiss Erlenmeyer Collection in Basel were auctioned off with most ending up in public collections. The majority, fifty eight, were purchased by the State of Berlin and transferred to the Vorderasiatisches Museum as a permanent loan. A few others ended up at the British Museum and Louvre Museum.[https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/files-up/publications/englund2001b.pdf] Robert K. Englund, "Grain Accounting Practices in Archaic Mesopotamia", in: J. Høyrup and Peter Damerow, eds., Changing Views on Ancient Near Eastern Mathematics, BBVO 19; Berlin, 1–35, 2001[https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlj/2005/cdlj2005_001.html?iframe=true&width=95%&height=95%]Monaco, Salvatore F., "Unusual accounting practices in archaic Mesopotamian tablets", Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2005.1, 2005

A notable exemplar was found by Langdon during his excavation in the 1920s, often called the "Kish tablet". A plaster-cast of the artifact is presently held in the collection of the Ashmolean Museum, with the original at the Baghdad Museum. Its date of origin is unclear.S. Langdon, "Excavations at Kish Volume 1 Expedition to Mesopotamia", Paul Geuthner, Paris, 1924

Some tablets were sealed using a cylindrical seal.Goff, Beatrice L., and Briggs Buchanan, "A Tablet of the Uruk Period in the Goucher College Collection", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 231–35, 1956 Two Uruk period clay sealings found at Ur had a single proto-cuneiform sign, ŠAM₂.Charvát, Petr, "Signs from Silence: Ur of the First Sumerians (Late Uruk Through ED I)", Ur in the Twenty-First Century CE: Proceedings of the 62nd Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Philadelphia, July 11–15, 2016, pp. 195-204, 2021

File:Cuneiform tablet- administrative account of barley distribution with cylinder seal impression of a male figure, hunting dogs, and boars MET DT847.jpg

File:Archaic cuneiform tablet E.A. Hoffman.jpg

To decipher an unknown, fully functional writing system, scholars usually need some knowledge of the underlying spoken language, some bilingual texts, and a large corpus. Proto-cuneiform was not accessible in any of these ways, but decipherment was possible because it was not a full writing system, but a specialized notation for economic administration. Its texts were stereotyped and concrete, such as lists of items.[https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/study_writng.pdf] I. J. Gelb, "A Study of Writing", Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963[https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/articles/cdlj/2006-1.pdf] Damerow, Peter, "The origins of writing as a problem of historical epistemology", Cuneiform Digital Library Journal, CDLJ 2006:1, 2006

Already in 1928 with the first publication of texts, a numerical sign list had been developed, based on similarity to the signs of Fara, the earliest cuneiform texts which were the immediate successors of Proto-cuneiform. The sexagesimal numerals and area numbers were also essentially the same.Langdon, Stephen Herbert, "Pictographic Inscriptions from Jemdet Nasr excavated by the Oxford and Field Museum Expedition", Oxford editions of cuneiform texts 7, Oxford University Press, 1928 The mathematical system of proto-cuneiform and Proto-Elamite was largely deciphered over a few decades beginning in the 1970s.Friberg, Jöran, "The Third Millennium Roots of Babylonian Mathematics.1. A Method for the Decipherment, through Mathematical and Metrological Analysis of Proto-Sumerian and Proto-Elamite Semi-pictographic Inscriptions", Göteborg: Chalmers University of Technology and the University of Göteborg, 1978–1979Friberg, Jöran, "The Early Roots of Mathematics: II. Metrological Relations in a Group of Semi-Pictographic Tablets of the Jemdet Nasr Type, Probably from Uruk Warka, Göteborg, Sweden:Chalmers University of Technology and the University of Götebor, 1979Friberg, Jöran, "Counting and Accounting in the Proto-Literate Middle East: Examples from Two New Volumes of Proto-cuneiform Texts", Journal of Cuneiform Studies, vol. 51, pp. 107–37, 1999Friberg, Jöran, "Round and Almost Round Numbers in Proto-Literate Metro-Mathematical Field Texts", Archiv Für Orientforschung, vol. 44/45, pp. 1–58, 1997 Some details remain obscure, and several generally agreed-upon details remain contested. For example, the (ŠE system E) is thought to be a capacity measure, but this has been challenged because it is only found in the Uruk IV layers, not the later Uruk III, and it lacks the markers of a capacity measure.Bartash, Vitali, "Approaching the topic", in Establishing Value: Weight Measures in Early Mesopotamia, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 1–15, 2019Vaiman, Aizik A., "Protosumerische Mass- und Zählsysteme", Baghdader Mitteilungen 20, pp. 114–120, 1989

As an example of the current partial state of decipherment, a small tablet found at Uruk (The Kushim referenced may be an individual or title):[https://cdli.ucla.edu/P005340]"MSVO 3, 29 Artifact Entry", (2002) 2024. Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative (CDLI). July 22, 2024

{{Text and translation

| 3(N48) 1(N34) 6(N14) 1(N01) 1(N39_a) , U4x(3(N14).7(N01)) SZE_a DUB_a LAGAB_bxLAGAB_b (KU_b1 SZIM_a)a SZA_m2 - Transliteration

| 5617 1/5 N1’s, exchange barley, 37 months, Kushim’s final account. ca. 135,000 liters - Translation

}}

Currently there are about 2000 known proto-cuneiform signs: about 350 numerical, 1100 individual ideographic, and 600 complex (combinations of individual signs).[https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20193-proto-cuneiform.pdf] Anshuman Pandey, "Preliminary proposal to encode ProtoCuneiform in Unicode", L2/20193, September 21, 2020 The non-numerical signs are attested in about 40,000 occurrences. There was a high degree of heterogeneity in sign usage: about 530 signs are only attested once, about 610 two to ten times, 370 attested 11 to 100 times, and about 104 signs attested more than 100 times. Many signs have been identified including those for barley and emmer wheat.Woods, Christopher, "Contingency Tables and Economic Forecasting in the Earliest Texts from Mesopotamia", Texts and Contexts: The Circulation and Transmission of Cuneiform Texts in Social Space, edited by Paul Delnero and Jacob Lauinger, Berlin, München, Boston: De Gruyter, pp. 121–142, 2015 The most common signs are EN_a, GAL_a, and ŠE_a.[https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlb/2021/cdlb2021_006.html]Born, Logan, and Kathryn Kelley, "A Quantitative Analysis of proto-cuneiform Sign Use in Archaic Tribute", Cuneiform Digital Library Bulletin, 2021

The underlying numeric base of the Proto-cuneiform, like later cuneiform, is sexagesimal (base 60).Friberg, Jöran, "The Early Roots of Babylonian Mathematics: II. Metrological Relations in a Group of Semi-Pictographic Tablets of the Jemdet Nasr Type, Probably from Uruk-Warka", Research Report, 1979-15; University of Göteborg, Department of Mathematics, Chalmers, 1978–79Friberg, Jöran, "Three Thousand Years of Sexagesimal Numbers in Mesopotamian Mathematical Texts", Archive for History of Exact Sciences, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 183–216, 2019 Earlier researchers believed that this system rose out of an earlier decimal (base 10) substratum but that idea has now lost currency.Powell, Marvin A. Jr., "Sumerian Area Measures and the Alleged Decimal Substratum", vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 165–221, 1972

Proto-cuneiform sexagesimal type Sa with Cuneiform equivalents

Different products used different measurement systems, which could change with the context. In a single tablet the (Bisexagesimal System B) could be used for grain rations, (ŠE system Š) for barley, and (ŠE system Š") for emmer wheat. Another was (ŠE system C) for capacity, typically of grain.[https://cdli.ucla.edu/pubs/cdlb/2003/cdlb2003_004.html] Nathan, David L., "A 'New' Proto-Cuneiform Tablet", Cuneiform Digital Library Bulletin 4, 2003 There were thirteen numerical systems in total (Sexagesimal, Sexagesimal S', Bisexagesimal, Bisexagesimal B*, GAN₂, EN, U₄, ŠE, ŠE', ŠE", ŠE*, DUG_b, DUG_c) of which the contemporary Proto-Elamite writing system used only seven, and only half of the sixty proto-cuneiform numerical signs.[https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/files-up/publications/englund2004a.pdf] Englund, Robert K., "Proto-cuneiform account-books and journals." Creating Economic Order: Recordkeeping, Standardization and the Development of Accounting in the Ancient Near East, Michael Hudson and Cornelia Wunsch [eds.], Bethesda, Maryland: CDL Press, pp. 23–46, 2004Dahl, Jacob L., "The Proto-Elamite writing system", in The Elamite World, pp. 383–396, 2018

File:Proto-cuneiform Cities list.svg

The largest group of Proto-cuneiform texts (about 2000 from the Uruk IV period and 3600 from Uruk III) are accounts (economic records).Wagensonner, Klaus, "Early Lexical Lists and Their Impact on Economic Records: An Attempt of Correlation Between Two Seemingly Different Kinds of Data-Sets", Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Würzburg 20–25 Jul, edited by Gernot Wilhelm, University Park, USA: Penn State University Press, pp. 805–818, 2022 They involve a variety of items including people, livestock, and grain. Confusingly, there are often multiple ways to write things. For example, people can be listed by gender and age (adult, minor, baby); or without gender by a number of age groups (0–1, 3–10 etc.).Bartash, Vitali, "Children in Institutional Households of Late Uruk Period Mesopotamia", Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und vorderasiatische Archäologie, vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 131–138, 2015

Another large category (with around a dozen examples in Uruk IV, and approximately 750 in Uruk III)) are called "lexical lists", which appeared during Uruk IV but proliferated in Uruk III.[https://hal.science/hal-04264785/document]Camille Lecompte, "The Archaic Lists of Professions and Their Relevance for the Late Uruk Period: Observations on Some Officials in Their Administrative Context", Agnès Garcia-Ventura. What’s in a Name? Terminology Related to the Work Force and Job Categories in the Ancient Near East, 440, Ugarit Verlag, Alter Orient und Altes Testament, pp. 81-131, 2018 {{ISBN|978-3-86835-212-2}} These are lists of items in a given physical category: metals, cities, tools.Civil, Miguel, "Remarks on AD-GI₄ (a.k.a. "Archaic Word List C" or "Tribute")", Journal of Cuneiform Studies 65, pp. 13–67, 2013Krispijn, Theo J.H., "The Early Mesopotamian Lexical Lists and the Dawn of Linguistics", Jaarbericht Ex Oriente Lux 32, pp. 12–22, 1992Englund, Robert K., "Texts from the Late Uruk period", In Pascal Attinger and Markus Wäfler, eds. Mesopotamien. Späturuk-Zeit und Frühdynastische Zeit. Annäherungen 1. Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/1, Pp. 15–233. Fribourg: Universitätsverlag, 1998Veldhuis, Niek C., "How did they Learn Cuneiform? 'Tribute/Word List C' as an Elementary Exercise", in Piotr Michalowski and Niek Veldhuis, eds. Approaches to Sumerian Literature. Studies in Homour of Stip (H.L.J. Vanstiphout). Cuneiform Monographs 35. Pp. 181–200. Leiden: Brill/STYX, 2006 Examples persisted into Early Dynastic and Old Babylonian times.Ross, Jennifer C., "Lost: The Missing Lexical Lists of the Archaic Period", Strings and Threads: A Celebration of the Work of Anne Draffkorn Kilmer, edited by Wolfgang Heimpel and Gabriella Szabo, University Park, USA: Penn State University Press, pp. 231–242, 2022Green, M. W., "A Note on an Archaic Period Geographical List from Warka", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 293–94, 1977Camille Lecompte, and Giacomo Benati, "Nonadministrative Documents from Archaic Ur and from Early Dynastic I–II Mesopotamia: A New Textual and Archaeological Analysis", Journal of Cuneiform Studies, vol. 69, pp. 3–31, 2017

The proto-cuneiform texts from Uruk were published in a series of books (ATU)

• ATU 1. [http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/ATU1.pdf] Adam Falkenstein, "Archaische Texte aus Uruk", Berlin und Leipzig: Deutsche Forschungsgemein-schaft, Kommissionsverlag Otto Harrassowitz, 1936
• ATU 2. [https://cdli.ucla.edu/staff/englund/publications/englund1987a.pdf] M. W. Green und Hans J. Nissen, unter Mitarbeit von Peter Damerow und Robert K. Englund, "Zeichenliste der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk", Berlin, 1987 {{ISBN|978-3786114390}}
• ATU 3. Robert K. Englund und Hans J. Nissen unter Mitarbeit von Peter Damerow, "Die Lexikalischen Listen der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk", Berlin, 1993 {{ISBN|978-3786116875}}
• ATU 4. Robert K. Englund und Hans J. Nissen, "Katalog der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk"
• ATU 5. Robert K. Englund unter Mitarbeit von R. M. Boehmer, "Archaic Administrative Texts from Uruk: The Early Campaigns", Berlin: Gebr. Mann Verlag, 1994 {{ISBN|978-3786117452}}
• ATU 6. Robert K. Englund und Hans J. Nissen unter Mitarbeit von R. M. Boehmer, "Archaische Verwaltungstexte aus Uruk: Vorderasiatisches Museum II", Berlin, 2005 {{ISBN|978-3786125211}}
• ATU 7. Robert K. Englund und Hans J. Nissen unter Mitarbeit von R. M. Boehmer, "Archaische Verwaltungstexte aus Uruk: Die Heidelberger Sammlung", Berlin, 2001 {{ISBN|978-3786124023}}

And from other sites (MSVO)

• MSVO 1. Robert K. Englund, Jean-Pierre Grégoire, and Roger J. Matthews, "The proto-cuneiform Texts from Jemdet Nasr I: Copies, Transliterations and Glossary", Materialien zu den frühen Schriftzeugnissen des Vorderen Orients Bd. 1. Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1991 {{ISBN|9783786116462}}
• MSVO 2. Matthews, R. J, "Cities, Seals and Writing: Archaic Seal Impressions from Jemdet Nasr and Ur", Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1993 {{ISBN|978-3786116868}}
• MSVO 3. Damerow, P. & Englund, R. K., "The Proto-Cuneiform Texts from the Erlenmeyer Collection" Berlin.
• MSVO 4. Robert K. Englund and Roger J. Matthews, "Proto-Cuneiform Texts from Diverse Collections", Materialien zu den frühen Schriftzeugnissen des Vorderen Orients Bd. 4. Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1996 {{ISBN|978-3786118756}}
• CUSAS 1. Salvatore F. Monaco, "The Cornell University Archaic Tablets (Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology)", Eisenbrauns, 2007 {{ISBN|978-1934309001}}
• CUSAS 21. Salvatore Monaco, "Archaic Bullae and Tablets in the Cornell University Collections (Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology)", 2014 {{ISBN|978-1-934309-55-1}}
• CUSAS 31. Salvatore F. Monaco, "Archaic Cuneiform Tablets from Private Collections (Cornell University Studies in Assyriology and Sumerology)", 2016 {{ISBN|978-1-934309-65-0}}

A Unicode block encoding proto-cuneiform (Uruk III and Uruk IV) was initially proposed in 2020. but has not yet been formally accepted by the consortium, though character encoding for later forms of cuneiform have been formalized.[https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2021/21184-proto-cuneiform.pdf] Anshuman Pandey, "proto-cuneiform: Comparison of Sign Images and Glyphs", L2/21-184, August 31, 2021[https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2022/22239-proto-cuneiform.pdf] Anshuman Pandey, "Revised proposal to encode proto-cuneiform in Unicode", L2/22‐239, October 10, 2022[https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2023/23190-proto-cuneiform.pdf] Anshuman Pandey, "Revised proposal to encode proto-cuneiform in Unicode", L2/23-190, July 11, 2023[https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2024/24211-proto-cuneiform-comments.pdf]Steve Tinney, "Comments on L2/23-190 Revised proposal to encode Proto-Cuneiform in Unicode", L2/24-211, 2024-04-14[https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2024/24210r-archaic-numerals.pdf]Robin Leroy, Anshuman Pandey, and Steve Tinney, "Archaic cuneiform numerals", L2/24-210R, 2024-10-23

File:Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.583.jpg|Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.583

File:Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.602.jpg|Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.602

File:Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.606.jpg|Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.606

File:Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.564.jpg|Jemdet Nasr tablet AN1926.564

File:P1150884 Louvre Uruk III tablette écriture précunéiforme AO19936 rwk.jpg|Louvre Uruk III tablette écriture précunéiforme AO19936

File:Precuneiforme tablet-AO 8856-IMG 9155-gradient.jpg|Precuneiforme tablet-AO 8856-IMG 9155-gradient

File:Tablette precuneiforme AO 2753.jpg|Tablette precuneiforme AO 2753

File:Clay Tablet - Louvre - AO29562.jpg|Clay Tablet - Louvre - AO29562

File:Clay Tablet - Louvre - AO29560.jpg|Clay Tablet - Louvre - AO29560

File:Five day ration list - Jemdet Nasr.jpg|Five day ration list - Jemdet Nasr

File:Numerical and proto cuneiforms tablets - Oriental Institute.jpg|Numerical and proto cuneiforms tablets - Oriental Institute

File:Clay tablet, lexical text, listing 58 different terms for pig. From Uruk, Iraq. 3200 BCE. Pergamon Museum.jpg|Clay tablet, lexical text, listing 58 different terms for pig. From Uruk, Iraq. 3200 BCE. Pergamon Museum

File:Uruk period administrative tablet.jpg|Uruk period administrative tablet

File:Tontäfelchen Mesopotamien 3200vChr 2.jpg|Tontäfelchen Mesopotamien 3200vChr 2

File:Tablette numerale Sialk IV, SB 15068.jpg|Tablette numerale Sialk IV

File:Proto-cuneiform Vessels list.svg|Proto-cuneiform Vessels list

File:Lexical list vessels 1928.445b.jpg|Vessels exical list tablet

• Proto-Elamite
• Blau Monuments
• Liste der archaischen Keilschriftzeichen
• Kushim (Uruk period)
• Babylonian cuneiform numerals

{{Reflist}}

• Bolle, Maja, "Conservation of an Archaic Cuneiform Tablet from Babylonia", Studies in Archaeological Conservation, Routledge, pp. 94–103, 2020
• Charvát, Petr, "On People, Signs and States – Spotlights on Sumerian Society, c. 3500–2500 B.C.", Prague: The Oriental Institute, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 1998
• Charvát, Petr, "Lambs of the Gods. The Beginnings of the Wool Economy in Proto-Cuneiform Texts", Wool Economy in the Ancient Near East and the Aegean, Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 79–91, 2014
• Charvát, Petr, "Cherchez la femme: The SAL Sign in Proto-cuneiform Writing", La famille dans le Proche-Orient ancien: réalités, symbolismes et images: Proceedings of the 55e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Paris, edited by Lionel Marti, University Park, USA: Penn State University Press, pp. 169–182, 2021
• [https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:51adb1c2-61de-438c-9b29-125addf3d2a1/files/r6w924c626] Dahl, J., "Proto-Elamite and linear Elamite, a misunderstood relationship?", Akkadica, 2023
• [https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_3377273/component/file_3377274/content] Damerow, Peter, and Robert K. Englund, "Die Zahlzeichensysteme der Archaischen Texte aus Uruk", 1985
• Damerow, Peter, "Food production and social status as documented in proto cuneiform texts", Food and the status quest: An interdisciplinary perspective 1, pp. 149–170, 1996
• Diaco, Maddalena, "The Signs For Buildings in the proto-cuneiform." Rivista di Preistoria e Protostoria delle Civiltà Antiche Review of prehistory and protohistory of ancient civilizations 43, pp. 35–52, 2020
• [https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/files-up/publications/englund1995b.pdf] Englund, Robert K., "Late Uruk period cattle and dairy products: Evidence from proto-cuneiform sources." Bulletin of Sumerian Agriculture 8.2, pp. 33–48, 1995
• [https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/files-up/publications/englund2010b.pdf] Englund, Robert K., "The Smell of the Cage", in Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2009:4, 2009
• Englund, Robert K, "Late Uruk Pigs and Other Herded Animals", in: U. Finkbeiner, R. Dittmann and H. Hauptmann, eds., Festschrift Boehmer Mainz, pp. 121–133, 1995
• Friberg, J, "Numbers and Measures in the Earliest Written Records", Scientific American, vol. 250, no. 2, pp. 110–118, 1984
• Gabriel, Gösta Ingvar, "Die archaischen Listen aus Uruk und die proto-keilschriftliche frontier. Überlegungen zu Funktion und Genese des ältesten lexikalischen Corpus", Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–24, 2022
• Glassner, J-J. "Proto-cuneiform Texts from Diverse Collections." The Journal of the American Oriental Society 119.3, pp. 547–547, 1999
• Green, M. W., "Animal Husbandry at Uruk in the Archaic Period", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 1–35, 1980
• Kelley, Kathryn, "Gender, age, and labour organization in the earliest texts from Mesopotamia and Iran (c. 3300–2900 BC)", Dissertation, University of Oxford, 2018
• Klein, Jacob, "Six New Archaic Tablets From Uruk", vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 161–174, 2004
• Mattessich, R., "Prehistoric Accounting and the Problem of Representation: On Recent Archaeological Evidence of the Middle-East from 8000 BC to 3000 BC", The Accounting Historians Journal 14 (2), pp. 71–91, 1987
• [https://www.persee.fr/doc/arnil_1161-0492_2016_num_26_1_1102] Nissen, Hans-Jörg. "Uruk: Early Administration Practices and the Development of Proto-Cuneiform Writing" Archéo-Nil 26.1, pp. 33–48, 2016
• Nissen, HansJörg; Damerow, Peter; Englund, Robert K., "Archaic Bookkeeping: Early Writing and Techniques of Economic Administration in the Ancient Near East", Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993
• [https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/articles/cdlj/2024-1]Nissen, Hans J., "Uruk and I", Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2024 (1), 2024
• Nissen, Hans J., Peter Damerow, and Robert K. Englund, "Frühe Schrift Und Techniken Der Wirtschaftsverwaltung Im Alten Vorderen Orient. Informationsspeicherung Und -Verarbeitung Vor 5000 Jahren, Franzbecker, 1991
• [https://cdli.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/articles/cdlj/2018-1] Overmann, Karenleigh A., "Updating the Abstract-Concrete Distinction in Ancient Near Eastern Numbers", Cuneiform Digital Library Journal 2018 (1), 2018
• Robson, Eleanor, "Mathematics in Ancient Iraq: A Social History", Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009
• Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, "Before Writing: From Counting to Cuneiform", Volume 1, Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1992 {{ISBN|9780292707832}}
• Schmandt-Besserat, Denise, "Before Writing: A catalog of Near Eastern tokens", Volume 2, Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1992 {{ISBN|978-0292707849}}
• Szarzyñska, Krystyna, "Records of Garments and Cloths in Archaic Uruk/Warka", Altorientalische Forschungen, vol. 15, no. 1–2, pp. 220–230, 1988
• Vaiman, Aizik A., "Protosumerische Maß-und Zählsysteme", Baghdader Mitteilungen 20, pp. 114–120, 1989
• Wagensonner, Klaus, "Early Lexical Lists and Their Impact on Economic Records: An Attempt of Correlation Between Two Seemingly Different Kinds of Data-Sets". Organization, Representation, and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East: Proceedings of the 54th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale at Würzburg 20–25 Jul, edited by Gernot Wilhelm, University Park, USA: Penn State University Press, pp. 805–818, 2022
• [https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/oimp32.pdf] Christopher Woods, "The earliest Mesopotamian writing", in Visible language. Inventions of writing in the ancient Middle East and beyond, Oriental Institute Museum Publications 32, University of Chicago, Chicago, pp. 33–50, 2010 {{ISBN|978-1-885923-76-9}}

• [https://web.archive.org/web/20140317224759/http://www.cdli.ucla.edu/tools/SignLists/ATU1.pdf Full list of proto-cuneiform Signs from CDLI (archived)]
• [https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/327384 Proto-cuneiform administrative account concerning the distribution of barley and emmer - Metropolitan museum]
• [https://cdli.ox.ac.uk/wiki/doku.php?id=proto-cuneiform proto-cuneiform article at CDLI]
• [https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/W_1989-0130-4 Tablet from the Erlenmeyer Collection purchased by the British Museum]
• [http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/dcclt/lexicallistsperiods/archaic/index.html Discussion of proto-cuneiform Lexical Lists at UPenn Museum]
• [https://cdli.ucla.edu/search/search_results.php?SearchMode=Text&PrimaryPublication=&MuseumNumber=&Provenience=&Period=Uruk+IV&TextSearch=&ObjectID=&requestFrom=Submit+Query Uruk IV tablet – photos and transliterations – CDLI]
• [https://cdli.ucla.edu/search/search_results.php?SearchMode=Text&PrimaryPublication=&MuseumNumber=&Provenience=&Period=Uruk+III&TextSearch=&ObjectID=&requestFrom=Submit+Query Uruk III tablets – pictures and transliterations – CDLI]

Category:Obsolete writing systems

Category:Cuneiform

Category:Uruk period