Changes

The main other alphabet that developed was based on cuneiform (Figure 1). During the early and middle 2nd millennium BCE, the two most common scripts in the ancient Near East were Egyptian hieroglyphs and cuneiform, which derived from ancient Mesopotamia (modern Iraq and Syria). The cuneiform-based alphabet that developed took hold in the ancient city of Ugarit, which was an important Late Bronze Age city (1600-1200 BCE) located on the Mediterranean coast in modern day Syria. The city of Ugarit was a kingdom that often was a vassal state to larger powers such as the Hittites and Egyptians that were powerful in the Late Bronze Age. However, Ugarit was a wealthy merchant town that had extensive trade networks across the Mediterranean and likely inland regions in the Near East. <ref>For more on Ugarit, see: Yon, Marguerite. 2006. <i>The City of Ugarit at Tell Ras Shamra.</i> Winona Lake, Ind: Eisenbrauns.</ref>

Neither the hieroglyphs-based alphabet , which became the Canaanite alphabet, nor the cuneiform one were widespread in the 2nd millennium BCE. In fact, the more complicated hieroglyphs and cuneiform scripts that were non-alphabetical were still dominant in the region and were utilized. In particular, cuneiform and Akkadian specifically were the common script and language used in communication between states and likely merchants. Overall, although two alphabet scripts came into existence, there presence was limited due to the key political powers and trade networks established at the timethat promoted the more ancient scripts.<ref>For more on the history of the Late Bronze Age, see: Steel, Louise. 2013. <i>Materiality and Consumption in the Bronze Age Mediterranean.</i> Routledge Studies in Archaeology v.8. New York: Routledge.</ref>

The Ugaritic alphabet contained 30 letters and was written from left to right. In addition to people within Ugarit, surrounding Hurrian populations, who are linguistically related to modern Armenian, also used the language. The script was also a more simplified version of cuneiform, making it far easier to read and replicate. In fact, some scholars suggest that cuneiform only influenced it based on the writing system, that is pressing wedges into wet clay, while the actual shape of the letters may be less related to cuneiform. In effect, there is debate as to how much cuneiform influenced this alphabet, but at the very least the design of individual wedges and the use of clay and a stylus like that in cuneiform clearly influenced the script for Ugaritic.<ref>For more on the Ugaritic alphabet, see: Watson, Wilfred G. E., and N. Wyatt, eds. 2015. <i>Handbook of Ugaritic Studies.</i> Handbuch Der Orientalistik. Atlanta: SBL Press.</ref>