^{page 187 note 1} The weak point in Cuneiform decipherment, and that which, from its prominence, has especially tended to discredit the science, is the difficulty of reading proper names. Now, I have never attempted to conceal this defect; on the contrary, I have repeatedly explained that as Assyrian proper names are usually composed of the name of a god, represented by an arbitrary monogram, and of one or two other elements, expressed by the primitive Turanian roots, it requires a very large induction, and if possible, collateral illustration, to ascertain how such compounds were pronounced in vernacular Assyrian. I should have been quite content, for my own part, in all such doubtful cases, to have indicated the names by mere signs (x, y, z, and so forth), but this was generally declared inadmissable, and I was obliged, therefore, to propose some reading, guarding myself, however, against the charge of empiricism by a query (?) Of course, as my studies advanced, other readings occurred to me as preferable, and were accordingly substituted, and it thus happens that in my published papers the same name will be sometimes found to exhibit successively three or four different forms; but this is rather an evidence of good faith than of imposture. I candidly confess that I am still in doubt as to the ordinary and vernacular pronunciation of the names of many of the chief divinities of Assyria (such as Cronos or “Belus,” “the Water God,” “the God of the Air,” the Assyrian Hercules, or and “the Great Goddess,” and that my Proposed readings of the names of kings in which these elements occur, are therefore in no way to be depended on; but this uncertainty does not in the least affect the authenticity of the translation of historical inscriptions, which are written for the most part phonetically, and the grammar of which can be analyzed with as much confidence as any portion of the Hebrew Scriptures. It can hardly, indeed, be necessary for me to vindicate at any length the preliminary stages of Cuneiform inquiry, now that “the Institute of France” (as I stated in my letter to the “Athenæum,” of August 22, 1863), “the first critical body in “the world, has conferred its biennial prize, of 20,000 francs, on Monsieur “Oppert, for his Assyrian decipherments, thereby guaranteeing in the face of “Europe the authenticity and value of our labours, and putting to shame the “continued scepticism of England.”

^{page 189 note 2} The contents of the legal tablets of Assyria and Babylonia will form the subject of a second paper, which I propose to publish in the next volume of the Society's Journal. I have succeeded in copying and deciphering about 100 of these documents, and have thus obtained materials for a very extensive comparison and analysis.

^{page 189 note 3} After completing my examination of these bilingual legends, I obtained access to DrLevy's, “Phönizisehe Studien,”Google Scholar; and found that a certain number of the Museum tablets upon which I had been engaged had already passed through his hands. As my readings, however, of the Phœnician legends, in every instance but one, differed from his, and as he had left almost untouched the comparative branch of the inquiry, I did not find it necessary to disturb the text of my paper. I shall, however, append a few notes, where his proposed readings seem to require them.

^{page 190 note 4} The particular word used is Tadáni, which is usually written or and of which I consider the grammatical condition to be exceedingly obscure. Primâ facie, I should take Tadáni to be the 3rd pers. sing. fem. of the aorist of Kal (like tasatthiri, “she writes;” tagabbí, “she says,” &c.; but in the phrases where the word occurs there is no possible feminine nominative. It is not less difficult to explain Tadáni as the 2nd pers. sing. of a verb, and I am led, therefore,—notwithstanding its strange appearance, and the somewhat forced construction that such an explanation involves,—to suggest that it may be a verbal noun, thus corresponding with danat, both in der-i vation and in condition. The regular formula, as observed in this contract (and in all others of the same class), commences as follows, “The seal of “Bel-akhisu, son of Merodach-abua, ownership of a woman surrenders” (or “thou dost surrender” tadáni).

(Impression of his seal, three times repeated):—

“(Namely) the woman Arba-il-Khirat, the female slave of Bel-akhisu, “and becomes (the owner) Kizir-Asshur, chamberlain of the king's son. For “1⅔ mans of silver from Bel-akhisu he takes her, &c., &c, &c.“

The peculiarities both of orthography and construction in these declarations of contract will be fully analyzed in the second part of this paper, and I hope, also, to be able to publish the original inscriptions, or at any rate selected specimens of each class, in a future volume of the British Museum Cuneiform texts.

^{page 191 note 5} In the Cuneiform for the answers to but in the last element of the name of Tiglath Pileser, where is the name of the famous Temple of Hercules at Nimrud, the Hebrew correspondent is

^{page 191 note 6} The name of Ararat is given in the inscriptions as Urarthu in the nominative, Urartha in the accusative, and Urarthi in the oblique case; the Cuneiform dentals being or (which are used almost indifferently), for the first; (which represents tha as well as da), for the second, and or for the third, thus conclusively proving that is sometimes used for thi, the Hebrew orthography being

^{page 191 note 7} That is, supposing the to answer to as in the name of Rezin, zirat might be included among that large class of Assyrian terms, written indifferently with the and which are connected with the root or “to be high,” and which have throughout an honorary signification; though perhaps that sense is hardly in unison with the Eastern estimate of woman. Thirat, also, as a name for a young woman, might be compared with the Hebrew “fresh, new.”

^{page 191 note 8} I observe that Dr. Levy, who seems to have inspected the tablet I am now considering, reads the doubtful Phœnician letter answering to , as (See Phönizische Studien, part ii. p. 23); but he has certainly noṭ at all reproduced the form of the character as seen upon the tablet. I also remark that he gives the first word of the legend as rakat, instead of danat; the latter reading, however, is undoubted. I know not from what source he obtained his reading of rak arrabil Assar for the corresponding Assyrian but no Cuneiform scholar will, I venture to say, support that reading—although the letters certainly have the powers assigned to them—against my explanation determinative of woman, and unpronounced, name of the town of Arbil, and part of “Khirat,” “a wife or woman.”

^{page 192 note 9} Compare the two last variants given for the in Gesenius's Mon. Phœn. vol. ii. pl. 1, which resemble, at any rate, if they are not identical with, the form upon the tablet.

^{page 192 note 10} may bo supposed to come from the root “to be naked,” whence the Hebrew has “pudenda,” but it is not used in the sense of “a woman” either in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or Arabic.

^{page 193 note 11} Compare Heb. Arabic When the word is written phonetically the Cuneiform usually employs an aspirate, to represent the final

^{page 193 note 12} Il or Ilu is the Semitic value of “a god” (compare of Sanchoniathon), for which, however, Yahu is sometimes substituted, as in Hebrew. In the other dialects which prevailed in Babylonia, and which thus gave secondary powers to the Assyrian characters, a god was named anap (whence the ordinary power of an for the letter or Thingir, identical with the Turkish tengri, and the primitive Accadian term, though subsequently corrupted to thimir, also khilip, the affinities of which I cannot trace, and perhaps nin, and some others.

^{page 193 note 13} Mons. Oppert gives the meaning of “the four gods” as if it were certain, but does not attempt to explain such an etymology (See “Expedition en Mesopotamic,” p. 226,Google Scholar) and his authority, therefore, cannot have much weight.

^{page 194 note 14} Dr. Hincks has stated (Journal of Sacred Literature, No. xxviii. p. 406Google Scholar) that the mother of the gods, or Rhea, was especially “known as the goddess “of Arbela, being thus distinguished from Istar, who was emphatically ‘the “goddess,’ ‘the lady,’ who presided over Nineveh;” but he has brought forward no authority to confirm his statement, and my own reading leads to a very different conclusion. In fact, if Dr. Hincks will refer to the invocation passage at the commencement of the long inscription of Esar-Haddon (Rawlinson Insc. pl. 45, col. 1, Is. 5 and 6), he will find the goddess named in connexion both with Nineveh and Arbil, while in the last division of the same inscription, the king's tutelary deity, associated with Asshur, is named both and The inscription, too, pl. 8, No. 2, which especially commemorates the repairing of the building at Arbela, refers to the presiding goddess under her two names of and while the Nineveh goddess, in Layard's Inscriptions, pl. 82, is named and (and in other copies of the same inscription in exact opposition to Dr. Hincks's theory.

Again, in the annals of Asshur-bani-pal, and especially in the legal tablets which I am now considering, the four names of and appear to be used indiscriminately, and to apply to a goddess who was the presiding deity equally of Nineveh and of Arbela. At the same time, in a list which I possess of the gods and goddesses as worshipped in the different cities of Babylonia and Assyria, I find Beltis, or Rhea, under her ordinary form of alone given to Nineveh and Arbela, and I am rather inclined, therefore, to think, that where the name Ishtar, under whatever form, is used in reference to the presiding Assyrian goddess, it does not indicate Venus or Nanaia, as in other passages, but simply means “the goddess” par excellence, Ishtar, like in Scripture, having sometimes a generic, as well as a special application. The difficulty of identifying the goddesses worshipped at Nineveh and Arbela—or rather of distinguishing between the names of Beltis and Ishtar, in reference to this deity—was stated by me at some length in my “Essay on the Assyrian and Babylonian Mythology,” written in 1857 (see Rawlinson's, Herodotus, vol. i. pp. 605 and 636Google Scholar;) and in the same paper I also drew attention to the similarity of the Assyrian Ri to the ‘PÉa of the Greeks, an identification which Dr. Hincks has nevertheless attributed to Mr. Fox Talbot, though that gentleman's first notice of it must have appeared several years later. I may here add that the Babylonian Ri,, whether it be or be not connected with Rhea, is shown by the bilingual vocabularies to be absolutely the same as and to signify the number 15, belonging probably to the same system of notation which employed Ré for 20, Rag for 30, Raz for 100, &c. (see Zend Avesta, tom. ii. p. 523;)Google Scholar though why “the great goddess,” who had no apparent connexion with the full moon, should have been thus typefied, I cannot venture to conjecture.

^{page 195 note 15} Arbelus is twice mentioned in the mythic genealogy of Ninus, preserved by Abydenus, as if there was both an older and a later city of Arbil. The other names occurring in this list, which probably comes originally from Berosus, are also suggestive. Anebus must be, I think, the Median Anab, “a god,” and the name of Babius, who was the immediate descendant of Belus, would seem to allude to the same myth of “the gate (of life),” which originated the name of Derceto, or Atargatis ( from “a gate”), and which was perpetuated in the name of that goddess's dwelling place, Din-tir (“Life's gate?”), or Bab-il, “the gate of god,” or Babylon. For the extract from Abydenus, see Auclier's Eusebius, vol. i. p. 78,Google Scholar and Mos. Chor. lib. i. cap. 4.

^{page 195 note 16} I gather this from Schindler's Pentaglot, col. 144; but I have not found the passage in any Talmudic tract. At present the tomb of Seth is to be seen in the town of Mosul, and the veneration with which the spot is regarded is due, no doubt, to the influence of the Sabæan school of northern Messopotamia, which adopted from the early Christians so many of the Hebrew patriarchs, and paid a special respect to Seth, as the inventor of astrology and letters (see Renan's, Nabathæan Agriculture, Eng. edit. p. 53)Google Scholar; but it is possible that the name, or one nearly similar, may have been known in the country from the very remotest antiquity, for the earliest form under which the god Asshur is named in the inscriptions (see Rawlinson's Ins. pl. 6, No. 1) is which we are authorized by the Syllabary, No. 145, to read as Ashit being equal to a very close approximation to the Ishíthá, of the Sabæans; and as the same orthography is also given in the vocabularies as a variant for the country of Assyria, we may thus perhaps arrive at the origin of Astun, which is substituted for in the Samaritan version of the Pentateuch (see Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i. p. 588).Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 17} The first mention of an execution at Arbela occurs in the annals of Asshur-izzir-pal (Rawlinson's Ins. pl. 18, 1. 68), where, however, in the translation furnished to Layard by Dr. Hincks, the name of Babel is strangely enough substituted (Nineveh and Babylon, p. 353). In the annals of Asshurbani- pal there are several similar notices, and finally, in the fourteenth paragraph of the second column of the great inscription of Bihestun, Darius relates how he crucified the rebel Sitratachmes at Arbela, after defeating him in the distant province of Sagartia.

^{page 196 note 18} Dion Cassius, at the commencement of his 78th Book, describes how Caracallus, in his Eastern war, destroyed the tombs of the Parthian kings at Arbela, and scattered their bones abroad. Several royal tombs of the same period were opened by me in the centre of the Koyunjik mound, but the occupants—from the necklaces, ear-rings, bracelets, and other gold ornaments, which were found with the remains, and which are now in the British Museum—appeared to have been exclusively female. Could it have been possible that the Parthian kings were buried in one place and their queens in another?

^{page 196 note 19} “And all thy fortresses shall be spoiled, as Shalman spoiled Beth Arbel in the day of battle; the mother was dashed in pieces upon her children.” The prophet here evidently alludes to some well known contemporaneous exploit; and the reign of Shalmaneser, which is determined by the canon to have lasted from B.C. 726 to 721, will thus exactly suit. It has been customary to compare with the ”Aρβηλα of Galilee, mentioned in 1 Mace. ix. 2; but if there, had been any great slaughter in the north of Palestine during either of the expeditions of Shalmaneser against Hoshea, this would hardly have been the only allusion in Scripture to such an event.

I may here add that a powerful corroboration of the truth of the historical scheme which assigns to the Biblical Shalmaneser the five years intervening in the canon between the reigns of Tiglath Pileser and Sargon, is to be found on the lion weights from Nineveh (now in the British Museum), which are marked respectively with the names of Tiglath Pileser, Shalmaneser Sargon, and Sennacherib, evidently in a continuous chronological series; and that a similar inference is to be drawn from a clay tablet in the British Museum, which is dated from some year of the king, and which to all appearance is of the same age as the tablets dated from the Eponyms under Tiglath Pileser and Sargon.

^{page 196 note 20} In actual distance Arbela was hardly nearer to the scene of battle than was Nineveh itself, or Caleh; but it was probably the only one of the great Assyrian cities which was inhabited in the time of Alexander, its sacred character having preserred it amid the revolutions which had desolated its sister capitals. The nearest city to the field of battle must have been that of which the site is now marked by the ruins of Karamlis; the Assyrian name of this city being and the Mahommedan title Belábádh, as if the group (of very rare occurrence) represented the god Bel.

^{page 197 note 21} The Mount Nicatorium is joined with Arbela by Strabo (p. 738), as if they were the same place; and indeed, there is nothing in the vicinity deserving of the name of a hill, except the old Assyrian mound. Strabo further calls Arbelus, who founded the city, in which name we may perhaps recognize Esmun or Æscalapius, who was also adopted, lite Seth, into the religious system of the Sabæans, and therein plays a most conspicuous part (see Renan's, Nabathæan Agriculture, p. 41).Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 22} Theophyl. Sim. lib. v. cap. 7, ad finem.

^{page 197 note 23} Rich estimated the height of the mound at 150 feet, and its diameter at 300 or 400 yards (Rich's, Kurdistan, vol. ii. p. 17).Google Scholar He also learnt that an ancient sepulchre had been opened in the mound shortly before his visit, which contained a body evidently from the description similar to those since discovered at Koyunjik. On several occasions I have searched for bricks and objects of antiquity, on the slope of the mound, but have been unsuccessful in finding anything, as the place is densely inhabited, and anything, therefore, which is exposed to view is instantly carried off.

^{page 198 note 24} The initial character is not given in any of the alphabets of Gesenius as an equivalent of the letter He, but the form is nevertheless well known to Phœnician scholars, and no doubt exists of its power. Another example of it will be given in the sequel in the name of Hur-Tagil. I have recently met with another Phœnician legend on a scarabæus in the British Museum, in which we also find the name of Husi'a, or Hoshea. The entire legend seems to read Li KhaKad-Husi'a, or perhaps Li Khud-Husi'a, for the second letter of the first element of the name is of a very doubtful form.

^{page 198 note 25} It will be found, as we proceed, that the Cuneiform letters of the class and are constantly represented in Phœnician by the and the same confusion has been long since remarked between the Hebrew and Assyrian sibilants, as evidenced by the Cuneiform orthography of such foreign names as Samaria, Jerusalem, &c, whilst, however, in regard to native names, such as Sennacherib, Sippara, Borsippa, &c., the Cuneiform Samech is correctly reproduced in the Hebrew and Arabic orthography. Now, it is quite certain, I think—whatever may have been the primitive sound of the Phœnician Samech—that its Cuneiform correspondent was a sharp dental sibilant—in fact ts, since it constantly includes a dental etymologically, and wherever, therefore, we find a Hebrew or Phœnician answering to this Samech, we must suppose it to be a Sin rather than a Shin. In regard, indeed, to this very word signifying “deliverance” or “safety,” we read it with a Sin in the name of Hosea, the prophet, as well as with a Shin in the name of Hoshea, the king. In order to distinguish between the Cuneiform sibilants, I now represent the Shin series by sh, and the Samech series by simple s; but I still think that ts would more nearly give the true pronunciation of the latter class.

^{page 199 note 26} See Gesen. Mon. Phœn. vol. i. p. 88.Google Scholar Another instance will be found in No. 16 of this series, of the employment, apparently, of a Phœnician for the numeral 5, though no doubt the ordinary method of expressing that number was by five perpendicular strokes.

^{page 199 note 27} although not recognized by Gesenius, is of very common occurrence in early Phœnician legends, such as those on the lion weights, upon cylinders and seals of the Assyrian period, and upon these clay tablets; and there is every reason to believe, from its employment, that the pronoun, which was originally demonstrative, must have been identical with the noun of attribution. In the Proto-Babylonian the sign is thus used both as a determinative of quality, and for the relative pronoun; and in Arabic (and especially in the old Himyaric) there is the same connection between “a lord;” “this;” and the relative

^{page 200 note 28} That signified “a slave,” and was pronounced ardu (or in composition arad), there is no doubt whatever; but the employment of the monogram in the compound epithet which was a title frequently assumed by the Assyrian kings, and especially in reference to Babylonia, is not quite so easily explained. I believe, however, that it means “reducing to slavery,” or “putting on the yoke of slavery,” though I cannot give with any certainty its phonetic equivalent. (Compare the Khursabad passages, pl. 152, 3, 12, with 95, 6, and also 145, 3, 12; 151, 10, 9, and 123, 16).

I would also suggest that the biblical name of applied to a son of Sennacherib's, which has positively no meaning in Assyrian, is an error of the copyist for Ardu-malik (equivalent to the Hebrew Ebed-Melek, “servant of the ting”); but it is singular that we have not more examples from the Greek and Hebrew of the employment of the word ardu in Assyrian names.

^{page 200 note 29} The Assyrian phonetic term for “a woman,” is not, however, as far as I have observed, ever applied as a name to the goddess in question, nor is its Proto-Chaldæan equivalent, (pronounced dam; compare dame, &c.) ever used in connection with the great goddess, except to express her relationship to

^{page 201 note 30} Hesych. in Vore.

^{page 201 note 31} Dr. Hincks, in one of his recent papers (Journal of Sac. Lit. No. xxviii. p. 405Google Scholar), has hazarded the bold hypothesis that is to be pronounced Binhlit-ghiti, and that it signifies “the lady of blood (or slaughter).” Now, a very slight acquaintance with the Proto-Chaldæan language, to which all these divine names belong, is sufficient to show that (pronounced gé, see Syllabary, No. 366) is a mere grammatical suffix, used apparently like the terminal guttural of the Basque, and that and therefore, however they may hare been pronounced in Assyrian, signify probably “the Lord,” and “the Lady” Dr. Hincks has also suggested in the same place that the god Bil-zirbu is ídentical with but there is not the least authority for this. On the contrary, Bil-zirbu is a God very little known, and only worshipped, as far as I have seen, in the Arabian district of Buz.

^{page 202 note 32} That is, the sign in its signification of “a lord,” interchanges frequently with which again appears to be the same title as a term that is often used to indicate royalty in the Proto-Chaldæan inscriptions (compare Rawlinson's Ins. pl. 3, No. 9,1.7; No. 10,1.12; pl. 5, No. 16,1.5; and No. 20,1.3, &c). One of the possible values of might thus be hu; and is well known to be either ras or kas, the former power being the Turanian equivalent of kharan, “a road,” and thus standing sometimes for the city of Harran. Ras itself would seem to be connected with the Persian rah, “a road;” ras-ídan, “to arrive,” &c, &c.

It is doubtful, however, if the title of which is generally accompanied in the bilingual lists with the gloss of apply properly to the god Anu, or to Hercules It occurs in the lists of epithets applying to each of these gods, and even in reference to the city of —which was the special seat of the god (see Rawlinson's Ins. pl. 65, col. 2,1.46), and which would appear to be the Dubana of Behistun (col. 3, 1.78), as its temple is named in the geographical çatalogues—although Hercules, or is given as the tutelar divinity of the place, the temple which it contained, and which was repaired by Nebuchadnezzar (in loc. cit.), has the title of where we recognize the name of Anu. (This is a mistake. Hercules was the god of Niffer, or but is alone mentioned as the god of

^{page 202 note 33} is used with a great variety both of powers and meanings. One of its most common employments, however, is to represent the root “to count or appoint” (see Syllabary, No. 371, for the noun “counting”), and this appears to me to be the meaning which it conveys, in connection with “a stone,” as applied to a signet seal. Mr. Fox Talbot explains as “the talking stone,” but I know not on what authority.

^{page 203 note 34} One of the most perplexing features in Cuneiform writing is the admixture of ideographic and phonetic expression, of which we see an example in this word. The group as applied to a seal, is purely ideographic, being “a stone;” in Assyrian, abnu, for and as I have already explained, representing perhaps the root “to count;” but both of these characters have, of course, phonetic powers in Turanian, the former being tak or tag (allied, as I think, to the Turkish tash and tagh), and the latter sometimes—but very rarely—standing for gil. It is therefore possible that a signet seal in Turanian may have been named tag-gil (with which I would compare “sigillum,” the t and s interchanging, as is usual in Chaldee and Hebrew), and may thus very properly have been used for the Assyrian root taqal or tagal, “to serve,” although there was another ideograph, especially assigned to that root, because in some primitive dialect ku had the same signification. At any rate, from the variant readings in different copies of the Assyrian canon, there can be no doubt that in proper names does not indicate “a seal,” as Mons. Oppert supposes, giving it the power of “kounouk,” but that it is used phonetically for the root taqal or tagal.

I may give another instance of the manner in which the old Turanian powers were sometimes utilized in Assyrian, in the compound ideograph for “a palace.” In ordinary Assyrian this would be read Bit rabu, “the great house,” but in Turanian, “a house,” was hé See Syllabary, No. 364), and “great,” was “gal,” or “kal;” and from these two foreign powers the Assyrians formed the compound which was adopted as the name for “a palace” by all the Semitic nations, and which was the “actual pronunciation, as can be shown by a multitude of examples, given to the compound ideograph

^{page 203 note 35} If these names of Sigabá and Anu-taggil could be made out, then, of course, it would be necessary to read the concluding Phœnician words as zi-aradan, “who were slaves,” answering to and the whole argument in favour of the name of Asha, for would fall to the ground. I do not, however, think it possible that the last Phœnician letter can be a Nun,

^{page 204 note 36} I shall consider in another place whether the Assyrian year commenced with the vernal or autumnal equinox. Mons. Oppert adopts the former calculation, in opposition to the later Syrian calender, and he thus without hesitation reads the name of as Illoulai. This may be correct, but requires confirmation. At any rate, the Ilulæus of Tyre can hardly be connected with the month of Elul, since the name is written as in the Sennacherib annals; and it is very doubtful if the of the canon of Ptolemy be a genuine orthography.

^{page 205 note 37} The Hebrew word which is used for “idols (Lev. xix. 4, and xxvi. 1), may very well be cognate with and for neither one nor the other has any satisfactory etymology been yet found. Among the many names for the Assyrian god Anu, however, I find one in the mythological lists which seems to belong to the same stock as Elil and Elul. It is written Alala; and the female divinity associated with Anu, under this form (for the gods are usually arranged in pairs) is named Tillili. I also observe in Rawlinson's, Ins. pl. xxix. 1. 8,Google Scholar that Hercules is named Allalli Ilin, which, from the analogy of the Syriac, I conceive to mean “the leader of the gods.” The term Alulah, in Samaritan, signifies “first-born,” or “eldest,” and this epithet is particularly applicable to Anu.

^{page 206 note 38} Dr. Levy, I observe, in his vocabulary (Phönizisches Wörterbuch, p. 8), under the head of “a woman,” gives an example from Gesenius of the variant Phœnician reading of which is exactly applicable to the present passage.

^{page 206 note 39} Mons. Oppert, I believe, to the present day, reads as Hisir, and Mr. Fox Talbot adheres to the old reading of Kara, which Dr. Hincks first suggested when he fancied that the sign answered to the phonetic word in the great Nebuchadnezzar Ins. col. 5, ls. 2, 5, &c. I have, however, at least twenty examples of the reading of Dur for the sign in question, and have thus phonetically rendered the character in all my translations for the last ten years. The only doubt I have is whether is not sometimes used as a verb as well as a noun, answering, in fact, to the root as well as to the term in which case it might be optionally sounded as iddur, vadur, &c.

^{page 206 note [39*} The identification of the sinab, equivalent to two-thirds of the manah, is a new discovery. The Assyrian signs indicating this weight are and both of which are given on the Lion in the Museum Collection, No. 9, where we have also the Phœnician reading of The Assyrian equivalent of is given in the Syllabary as sínabu].

^{page 207 note 40} There are three very innocent lines in the great Khursabad inscription of Sargon, relating to the means by which the king obtained the lands required for the building of the city, which lines the lively imaginations of Mons. Oppert and Mr. Fox Talbot have converted into the most important historical data, the French savant drawing from them an explanation of the name of Sargina (Sargon), while Mr. Talbot thinks they prove the antiquity of coined money.

The translations of these gentlemen are as follows:—

“Car les grands dieux m'ont nommé ainsi (Sarkin), parce que j'ai observé “les traités et la foi jurée, parce que j'ai gouverné sans injustice et sans opprimer “les faibles. J'ai présenté aux chefs de la ville les constitutions écrites de la “cité, d'après les tables de la vérité, gravées sur argent et sur airain. Je leur “ai donné ensuite les explications indispensables sur la loi, sans arbitraire, la “loi de la justice, la loi qui les dirige dans leurs actions.” (Les Inscriptions Assyriennes des Sargonides, p. 38).

The English rendering is:—

“As the great gods have given renown to my name, which is triumphant “and victorious, so also have they given to me the government of affairs “unconnected with battle and victory. The money of the inhabitants of this “city (as with unanimous voice they desired) I renewed, both in silver and “copper, in accordance with their prayers. I made coins, but not of gold “(which money the people did not wish for), and gave them to the inha. “bitants, both present and future, to be their own property.” (Trans. of Royal Soc. of Lit. vol. vii. part i. page 171.Google Scholar)

Now, there are several words of which I still consider the meaning to be doubtful, but the general sense, commencing from the thirty-ninth line, I take to be as follows:—

(39) Ana susub alu sásu, zakkur parakki makhi (or ziri) adman In founding this city, a building glorious and exalted, temples ilî rabî va hekalî subat bilutiya, varzi va musakbud, of the great gods, and palaces for my royalty, graciously and honourably, azkir-va episu ikbi (40) kima zigar sumiya, I constructed and I made it to be called like the saying of my own name, sha ana nazir gitti va misharisu, sutesur la which to the dominion of the world (?) and its government (ruling without lihí la khabal, innimbu-inni Ilî rabî. (41) Kaship violence or oppression), the great gods have blazoned forth for me. The price eqilî alu sasu, kí pí duppaté sha aimanusu, of the lands of this city, according to the tablets which secured it (or its title kaspa va zipar, ana bilîsun vatir-va; (42) assu riggati deeds), (in) silver and copper, to the proprietors of them I returned, and la rusí sha kaship eqil la zibú, eqil in solid bullion (?) whoever the price of their lands did not wish for, lands mikhar, eqil akhir panusun addin sunuti. in front or lands in rear, in exchange to them I gave them.

A few notes may perhaps be required. In the first line susub is Shaphel of zakkur is evidently connected with the verb azkir, which follows, and probably comes from the same root as vazakkir in the Birs Nimrud inscription. These terms are also, I think, allied to ziggur, the special name of the towers attached to the Assyrian temples, but there is no cognate root with the signification of “building” in any other Semitic language. The honorary epithets formed perhaps the proper name of the tower of Dur- Sargina, of which the remains are now to be seen on the mound at Khursabad. The allusion in the first and second line is to the city of Dur-Sargina being named after the king; not to any explanation of the king's own name, as Mons. Oppert supposes. The idiom of the gods “blazoning forth” the name of the king to supreme power is common. The parenthetical phrase sutésur la lihi, la khabal, seems to have particular allusion to the justice of the king in purchasing the lands, instead of taking violent possession of them. In the third line (line 41) I am not sure whether the words “silver and copper” refer to the weight of metal given to the proprietors for their lands, or to the material of the tablets on which the title deeds were written, these title deeds being of the same class as the clay tablets and inscribed stones, which we are now discussing. Probably, however, the latter is the true application, as I have never in one single instance found copper given, as a representative of value, although gold, silver, and iron are mentioned in almost every transaction of sale or barter.

It is from line 42 that Mr. Talbot draws his inference of the use of coined money, translating raggatí la rusí as “coins, not of gold,” whereas I compare not with but with the Chaldee which was probably in its origin an ingot of metal used instead of money, but which we translate in Prov. xvi. 11 by “a just weight;” and with regard to rusí (which in the Nebuchadnezzar inscription is always written with a double s), I do not at all admit its signification of gold, but think, on the contrary, that it is a mere epithet of gold, “beaten out,” so as to be laid on the walls and pillars of temples and palaces, in laminæ or plates. I compare, therefore, the Syriac which the dictionaries give as “contusus, percussus malleo,” and suppose, in this instance, la rusí means merely “solid bullion;” however, I admit that the phrase is a difficult one, and have only noticed the passage to show on what slender foundations scholars like Oppert and Fox Talbot are sometimes tempted to build up important theories.

^{page 209 note 41} On one of the bilingual tablets, for instance, we have the following equivalent phrases, which are interesting in many ways:—

^{page 210 note 42} The reading of this word as applied to “a female slave,” is very doubtful. It is always used as the feminine to ardu, but I doubt if it ends in t, as the suffix attached to it is instead of The word Shallat is used, I believe, both for “plunder” and for “women,” and there is some difficulty in distinguishing between the two meanings in some passages, but for “a female slave,” is quite a different noun, and is in all probability a Turanian compound.

^{page 210 note 43} See Rawlinson's Ins., pl. 48,1. 11. It is impossible to say whether the epithet khadasat, which is joined with amat in this name is to be compared with “new, young,” or “holy,” or with the name originally borne by Queen Esther, and supposed to be the same as for “the myrtle;” probably, however, the latter explanation is to be preferred, as the myrtle was especially sacred to the Cyprian Venus.

^{page 212 note 44} See Journal of Boyal Asiat. Soc, vol. vii. p. 344, pl. 6.Google Scholar Mr. Shakespeare furnished a reading of the Arabic signatures to this document, but no one has, I believe, attempted to decipher the Pehlevi and Hebrew names, which are nevertheless exceedingly curious. The Parsee witnesses must have been the near, if not the immediate, descendants of the first exiles from Persia, as the Pehlevi character which they employ is nearly that of the early Mohammedan coins. The names are preceded by two words, which seem to be Mahuru li,“sealed by,” or “the seal of.” (Compare Pers. muhr.) The corresponding expression before the Hebrew names is doubtfully read as

The sign which precedes the names of the witnesses on the Assyrian tablets, seems to be simply the preposition pan, “from,” or “of.” On the Babylonian tablets the list of witnesses is usually headed by the expression which probably means, “the persons putting their names.”

^{page 213 note 45} The most ordinary use of is to represent the root nakas, “to cut off;“ but it also answers to shámu, súqu, and half-a-dozen other roots, besides being immediately cognate with in so much so, that in one list and are bracketed together, the former being explained by dínu, and the latter by dánu; and in the epithets of the gods, the two signs seem to be used indifferently.

^{page 214 note 46} In continuation of note 41, on the reading and signification of I may also draw attention to the errors which Mons. Oppert and Mr. Fox Talbot have committed in their translation of the inscription on Michaux's stone, owing to their ignorance of this term. Mons. Oppert translates the word uniformly by “table,” and supposes it to refer to the engraved stone which he is discussing. Mr. Talbot writes hatzib and atsib, and compares the roots and translating sometimes by “figure” and sometimes by “sculpture.” (In the Sargon Inscription he read asib “inhabiting.”) The word however, throughout the inscription in question refers to the “land” settled upon the devisor's daughter, according to the terms of the deed; and it must be read eqil (for as already explained.

^{page 215 note 47} The root however, is represented by an independent Accadian sign, and the connexion of this term with in the conditions of lease, on the clay tablets, seems to be merely accidental, alluding to the enjoyment or possession of the land for a term of years.

^{page 192 note 48} Cuneiform scholars hare been usually content to name this god Bel, or Belus, not only because the sign has that phonetic power, but from his position as “the father of the gods,” at the head of the Pantheon; but I have myself always expressed doubt on the subject, and indeed, in my original Mythological Essay (Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i. p. 594Google Scholar) I adduced strong arguments to show that the god in question could not, at any rate, represent the Belus of later Babylonian history, as that deity was proved to correspond with the Merodach of the inscriptions. I had not, however, at that time, access to the evidence which now inclines me to identify with Saturn, and to read his name as Il or Ilin. This evidence is briefly as follows, lstly, the sign simply means “old,” being explained in the vocabularies by labir, and therefore “the old god” Now, “the old god” is exactly the of the Sabæans of Harran, as individualized by the famous En-Nedím, in the Fihrist (see Chwolsohn's Ssabier und der Ssabismus, vol. ii. p. 39Google Scholar); and this deity is directly identified with or “Saturn,” in Abu Rihan's chapter on the Sabæans—a document, by-the-bye, of great value, and which ought certainly to have been incorporated in Chwolsohn's exhaustive work. 2ndly. The name which Damascius (see Cory's Fragments, p. 318Google Scholar) gives to the second member of the Babylonian triad, is and as his other names, ‘Aυος and ’Aος, exactly answer to and so this title of Illin should represent the god or 3rdly. In a trilingual list of mythological synonyms, the phonetic reading of Elim, is actually given for so that it seems highly probable the vernacular name of the god was El or Il, with an optional plural termination in im or in, “honoris causâ,” as in Elohim.

However, it is also possible that Bel may have been used equally with Il, as the name of the god. It is certain, at any rate, that the group which simply means “the lord,” as means “the lady,” stands constantly for the generic noun Bilu, “a lord,” in the great inscription of Nebuchadnezzar; and we further see that Bil, not Il, is the name in the Fihrist, to which the epithet “the grave old man,” applies. Indeed, we have the authority of Damascius for using the two names indifferently— Phot. Bib. Edit. Hœschel. col. 1050, where Bολáθηυ is perhaps for with the usual change of the Hebrew Shin to the Aramaic Tau); and if the generality of authors identify Belus and Saturn (see Selden de Diis Syris., p. 155Google Scholar), Sanchoniathon, on the other hand, says distinctly (Cory's Fragments, p. 13Google Scholar).

The identification which I formerly proposed of Il and Ra originated in a mistake. It is true that the Proto-Chaldæan (or Accadian) is constantly replaced in the vocabularies and bilingual exercises by Il or Ilu, (written either simply as or phonetically as amongst other examples compare the different orthographies of the name of Babylon); but in that case is to be sounded T'hingira or T'himira, the sign being the mere phonetic complement; and it represents not any particular deity, but the generic Turanian name for “god,” connected on the one side with the Turkish Tengri, and on the other, perhaps, with the of Sanchoniathon, and the of Mesopotamian tradition (see Chwolsohn's Ssabier, vol. ii. p. 291Google Scholar). The title of lord— in Assyrian, i.e., bilu—was represented in some of the Proto-Chaldæan dialects by Mul and in this form we see the origin of the Mόόλις of Nicolaus (see Müller's Fragments, Hist. Græc., vol. iii. p. 361Google Scholar). Another name for Saturn, in what I suspect to have been a Scytho-Arian dialect of Chaldæa, was Hubishega, but I do not recognize the etymology. For numerous examples of the application to Saturn of the epithet “old,” see Chwolsohn's Ssabier, vol. ii. p. 276.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 49} It is impossible to say whether the termination in ani, which is so very common in Assyrian names, be the Turanian suffix of the 3rd person singular, or the Semitic suffix of the 1st person. Either explanation is sufficiently applicable, though perhaps the evidence is rather in favour of the latter; for whilst I have never in one single instance found ani to interchange with su, I have, on the other hand, observed substitutions of the suffix which seem to point to the first person, as, for instance, in the common name of Nebo, which, as is well known, is usually written Nabi-um, but for which I have also met with the reading of as if the signification were “my prophet” or “instructor,” the termination in being the Turanian suffix of the 1st person (cognate with and as in and for “with us” and “with me”). Observe, also, with regard to idlu, that the meaning seems to be “great” rather than “just,” and that we may suppose, therefore, the Assyrian root edal to have corresponded with rather than

^{page 218 note 50} Les Inscriptions des Sargonides, p. 20. It is possible, however, that the use of the Phœnician ma be a mere vulgarism, owing to the double power of the Cuneiform which was qi as well as ki, and that the etymology of mannuki, or manmugi, may be thus, after all, what Mons. Oppert has suggested. At any rate, neither the sense of “illuminating,” from nor of “sacrificing,” from will at all suit the many compound names of which the first element is This term is prefixed, 1stly, to the names of the gods; 2ndly, to the names of cities; and 3rdly, to the names of relatives, and perhaps classes of men. There are, indeed, some twenty Assyrian names thus formed, and I can find no meaning more generally applicable than “who as?” or “what as?” (in the sense of “who, or what, is equal to?”), though such an explanation is not altogether satisfactory.

^{page 218 note 51} See Gesenius Mon. Phœn., vol. i. p. 88. A further argument against reading these two letters as XX, is, that we see on the Lion Weights in the British Museum (No. 1) the ordinary horizontal line — employed for the numeral 10. Altogether it must be admitted that my proposed reading of this Phœnician line is most questionable.

^{page 219 note 52} The phrase on this tablet relating to the standard is “of the goddess XV of Nineveh.” I shall reserve a full examination of the different standards of weight which were current in Assyria for the continuation of this paper on the legal tablets; but I may here note that there seem to have been three distinct minœ in common use—the manah of the king, or “royal maund;” the manah of the great goddess of Nineveh and Arbela, or “the maund of the sanctuary;” both of these being native Assyrian weights; and the manah of Carchemish, which is the most constantly quoted of all. I believe that each of these maunds contained sixty shekels, but that there was a slight difference in their relation to each other. As for “the country maund,” which has been assumed from the Phœnician legends on the Museum weights, I cannot think myself that there is any foundation for such a distinction. The expression which is added to the declaration of the number of maunds, does not refer, as I believe, to a standard at all (in fact, the phrase is found in Nos. 2, 3, and 4, in addition to the definition of the royal standard), but is merely a geographical indication, intended to distinguish the weights of Syria and of Assyria. See further, under Note 63.

^{page 219 note 53} I have sometimes thought that the whole legend might be read Li-Manugi-Arbel zi kadas bit … ká, “of Manugi-Arbel, priest of the temple of … ka;” but there is nothing in the Cuneiform text to indicate that the borrower of the ten shekels, Mannuki-Arbil, had any connexion either with the great goddess or her temple.

^{page 219 note 54} Búkha may very well stand for the change of vowels being perfectly regular, and the guttural, kh, being a common substitute for the Ain, but I am not so sure that it is allowable to suppose the lapse of this radical letter in order to obtain the Phœnician form of In favour of the assimilation I can only refer to No. 10, and point out that in that legend, at any rate, the word beiat, preceding a proper name, is apparently of the same class as danat and shakhat; and that Beth or Beit, “a house,” offers, therefore, a very insufficient explanation.

^{page 220 note 55} Dr. Levy, I find, has already recognized this reading in his Phönizische Studien, part ii. p. 24.

^{page 220 note 56} The penultimate letter in this name would seem, however, to be a Vau, rather than a yod, according to the numismatic Hebrew alphabet given by Gesenius (Mon. Phœn. vol. ii. pl. 3), and in that case we must suppose the name to hare been pronounced Arba-ul, the same change of vowels taking place as in Ursalima for Jerusalem, and Shemrun for Samirin (Samaria). Another instance of the substitution of the for the may be observed in the orthography of the Phœnician dual form for (“two maunds”), in the legend on the Lion Weight, No. 4, where, moreover, in the reading on the base, the exact form is used for the Vau, which we have in this transcript of the name of Arba-il.

^{page 222 note 57} Since writing this, I have lighted on a fragment of vocabulary amid the debris in the British Museum, which has suggested an explanation for the employment of as equivalent to The Turanian root seeems to have signified originally “to swell,” and to have been thus equivalent to the Semitic roots (Cun. ) and (Cun. ) I have long been aware of the employment of the root in the first-named capacity, in representing the name of which I always maintained to be identical with Nabu-nahid, or Nabonidus, in opposition to Dr. Hincks and Mons. Oppert (see my paper on the Orthography of some of the later Royal Names of Assyrian and Babylonian History, in the Royal Asiatic Society's Journal for 1855); but this reading of for is the first example that I have observed of the use of in a proper name for the alternative root The Hebrew it must be remembered, is cognate both with and so that the employment of the Phœnician need not surprise us. With regard to the pronunciation of the Accadian root it would seem to have its normal power of im in the name which is given by Abydenus as for Nabu-imduk; but in the vocabulary, where it is explained by the Accadian column seems to have the reading of Mir (and so the God of the air, i.e., “the glorious god,” is named in Accadian Mir-mir). I should propose now to read the name of as Saru-Asha, and to translate it “glory of Asha," as Nabu-nahid, or Nabu-imduk, is “Nebo the glorious.” Cuneiform scholars are familiar with this employment of one Arcadian sign to represent two or more Semitic roots, corresponding in sense, but entirely different in sound, as, for instance, for ebas and bani, “to do or make;” for elad and bani, “to beget;” for sakan and sarak, &c., &c.

^{page 223 note 58} It is perfectly in accordance with Eastern usage to issue assignments of grain in lieu of assessment upon the farmers and landed proprietors, these assignments being made payable to princes of the blood, or officers of the court, or other claimants on the government. The Tablets 11 and 16 are probably assignments of this nature, though it is possible they may be mere acknowledgments of a private liability.

^{page 223 note 59} The derivation of Khaziran has never been at all satisfactorily explained; but the Phœnician orthography which is here employed suggests at once a connexion with the root or “to be green,” precisely as the preceding month was named Ziv and Ayar, from the “brightness” and “beauty” of the spring flowers. See Gesenius, in vore,

^{page 224 note 60} Compare line 56 of the Babylonian text of the Behistun Ins. with col. 2, ls. 61 and 62, of the Persian text. Mons. Oppert, however, translates Thuravahar simply “le printemps” (Exped. en Mesopot. p. 225), and takes no notice of its connexion witli the Assyrian

^{page 224 note 61} It is quite possible, however, that given as an equivalent of may not answer to “to begin,” but may rather correspond with “to swell or exult,” which I have elsewhere shown to be also represented by for the general use of is as a title of honour (“the noble,” or “the glorious”), and it is thus equally applicable to a “noble” building or “tower,” as in the name of Borsippa (“the tower of the ruler”), or to a “noble” king (Parakku, the Semitic equivalent of being synonymous with sarru), or to a class of divine beings ( being also a special name for the “spirits” of the earth).

^{page 225 note 62} For a full discussion of the name and character of the Assyrian god, Ner-gal, or Mars, see my Essay on the Babylonian Mythology, Sect. xi. (Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i. p. 631).

^{page 226 note 63} Dr. Levy has transcribed these words as (Phœn. Stud. part ii. p. 22); but the second letter of the last word seems to me, on a further examination of the tablet, to be unmistakably a yod, and I adhere, therefore, to the reading of mana iran, though unable to explain the expression with any certainty. If I could be satisfied with Dr. Levy's explanation of the phrase Be zi arqá, which occurs on so many of the Lion weights in the British Museum, after the specification of the number of minæ, as relating to a standard “of the country,” comparing arqá with the Chaldee (for ), then the expression here employed of mana iran for the city weight, as opposed to the country weight, would be quite intelligible; but there is no trace upon the tablets, where we have some hundred examples of a specification of weight, of any distinction between a city and a country standard; nor do I think that the corrupted form was ever substituted for until long after the age of these inscriptions. I suspect myself that the Phœnician Arqá means Assyria—indeed, on one Lion weight, No. 9, is actually rendered in Cuneiform by the usual contraction for Asshur, but whether the term in question was a recognized Aramaic title, the original of the modern (in which case the received Arab etymology must be rejected: see Journ. Asiatique for April, 1839, p. 298), or whether it was a mere local designation preserved in the (for ) of Strabo (lib. xvi. ineunte), I will not hazard a conjecture.

There seem to have been three standards of weight commonly employed in Assyria—two domestic, and one of foreign origin. The domestic standards were based on the “royal” Maund and the “sacred” Maund. The foreign standard is indicated in the Cuneiform text by “the manah of Carchemish;“ and this I conjecture to be the of the present Phœnician legend, which may possibly have been in general use throughout the cities of Syria, and have thus been known to the Phœnicians by the collective term “the cities,” and to the Assyrians by the name of that particular Syrian city with which they were more immediately connected. I observe, moreover, that there was a specific weight known to the Talmudists as the (which was the eighth part of the Bava kama, fol. 90, col. 2), so that we have sufficient authority for the idiom of the “city maund,” though it is not likely that the older and later weight were the same.

^{page 227 note 64} Upon the legal tablets land and grain are equally measured by the and this measure appears to have been of 3 standards, which contained respectively 10, 9, and 8 subdivisions, denominated There are no means of ascertaining the exact relation of these measures to our own, but it seems highly probable that the was identical with the Homer or Cor of the Hebrews, and the with the Ephah or Bath. It would also seem that with the Phœnicians the bore the same relation to the as with the Assyrians, the bore to the I have no clue to the phonetic reading of the former, but and which in Syllabary No. 158, are identical, are both sometimes explained by Lagit, which I suppose to mean “a measure of capacity,” being a cognate term with as a derivative from a root or “to measure.”

I will only add that may be here used as a compound word in the plural, the construction being literally “city maunds,” instead of “maund of the cities;” for on the weights, wherever the noun is used singly, it is written manah.

^{page 228 note 1} The great difficulty in this word is to explain the final guttural. If Semitic, it may be the suffix of the 2nd person singular; or possibly it may be an Accadian post-position, of which other examples occur. In illustration of the meaning “for sale,” we may also remember that the word eme, “buy,” has been found on many objects dug up at Pompeii.

^{page 228 note 2} So at the present day, in most parts of the East builders keep up a low monotonous chaunt, interspersed with prayers, whilst at their work, which is supposed to have the effect of scaring away the evil spirits, who would otherwise render the edifice unlucky. There is indeed a very large admixture of superstition and “diablerie” in the daily observances of life in Persia and Turkey, which is quite unconnected with Mohamedanism, and must have descended, I think, as a heritage from the old Magian and Chaldæan creeds.

^{page 230 note 3} For a full account of the “Moon God,” the Hurki of the primitive Babylonians, and the Sin of the Assyrians, see Sect. 8 of my Mythological Essay, in Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i. p. 614. As this essay was written seven years ago, it may be understood to require emendation in some particulars, both of nomenclature and description, the result of a continued investigation of the old mythology; but in reference to “the Moon God,” there is really very little to add to my former explanations.

^{page 230 note 4} The name of Huras, which, as I have already explained, is in many of the mythological lists, attached to the god Anu, when represented under the form of may possibly be a corruption of the primitive title which the god also bears in another list, of and this latter form of Susru would seem to be identical with the Vedic Susravas, and the Zend Husrava (“the good hearer”), a curious parallelism being thus afforded to the connexion which has often been remarked between the name of Cyrus or and the Khusrú, of Persian romance (see Bournouf's, Mem. sur les Ins. Cun. de Hamadan, p. 173Google Scholar).

The proofs of a Yedic, or at any rate an Arian, influence on the early mythology of Babylonia, which these comparative lists of the names of the gods supply, appear to me to be of the very highest interest, and in many cases to be of undoubted authenticity. For instance, in a list of the names of “the Sun,” we have a Turanian group which is thus represented, and which is explained by the gloss of Mitra, for or Another compound monogram in the same list, which it is difficult to represent typographically, is explained by Bisheba; and this name I would compare with the Sanscrit who in Vedic mythology was actually “the Sun,” though in Persian romance his solar character was transferred, as it is well known, to his son Yama, under the name of Yimo-khshaeto (or Jemshid), son of Vivenghan. That this latter title, also, was well known to the Semites, is shown by Ibn Wahshiya's famous book on Nabathæan agriculture, where Yamu-shaed, or Jemshid, appears under the form of Yanbu-shádh as the name of one of the chief founders of the Babylonian religion, in allusion, no doubt, to the ante-Zoroastrian Monotheism of the Arians, which must have penetrated to the Tigris and Euphrates at a very early date, and was perhaps blended with the native Polytheism.

A further very curious illustration of the extent to which Arian etymologies governed the phonetic system of the Assyrians, is afforded by an examination of the name of the god Hercules. The name of this deity is usually expressed by the signs which signify, as I now think, “the great or noble God,” having the double power of bar and mas, the former of which in this case must represent the Sans. Kurdish farra, Hind, barra, and the latter the Sans. Zend maz, Pers. It is probable that both of these phonetic names were applied to the god by different tribes or nations in Babylonia. He was certainly called Mas, as we have in one list given as an equivalent for or (whence perhaps the son of Aram, Gen. x. 23), and therefore his title, was used for one of the metals (iron?), in the same way perhaps as is used in modern Persian for “copper;” and so the sign which was probably at first the picture of “a fish,” must also, I think, have had originally the phonetic power of mas, as it is only by that value that we can explain its representing, lstly, or Heb. “a fish;” in old Pers. from (as in the Gá-más-áb river, so called from the figure of “a bull” and “fish,” sculptured on the rock at its source); 2ndly, H b. in old Pers from and 3rdly, “copper;” Proto-Chaldæan tamkabar (perhaps the original of ; Assyr. siparru; Accad. zabar: Arab. (but in Persian, as before observed, now pronounced mis).

Whether the other Proto-Chaldæan names of the gods, such as “Gingir,” for Ishtar, or Venus; Mir-mir, for the God of the Air () Guthibir, for Merodach; Hubishaga, for Cronos &c., &c., are to be traced to Arian sources, I have not been able to discover with any certainty. The names for the Moon, however, Dumu-gu and Lam-gu, seem to admit of such comparison; the former, Dumu, being cognate with the Zend Homa, for (h passing into d, as in dast, “a hand,” for hada, “with,” for &c., &c.); and the latter, Lam, or Lum (for the terminal gutturals are probably mere articles), being allied to “Lunus” and “Luna,” so that the whole series may be connected together. The Armenian name for “the Moon,” I may add, Khaldi, belongs evidently to another family, and must be compared with the Hungarian Hold.

^{page 232 note 5} I have since found that Dr. Levy divides the words of this legend somewhat differently (Phön. Stud. ii. 24). He reads “Of Akedban, the son of Gebrud, the eunuch who was priest of Merod;” but I have never met with any names at all resembling Akedban or Gebrud, nor do 1 think that such forms would be in accordanc with Assyrian construction. With regard to the latter part of the legend, if the letter which is third in line four, and second in line five, could be proved to be a , I would gratefully accept the amended reading of muqrib li Merod for haqarib li Hadad; but I have never seen the Mem so represented in any other legend, and I hesitate, therefore, to follow Dr. Levy's reading.

^{page 232 note 5*} The monogram signifying “Accad,” which is usually employed in this name, is so difficult to represent typographically, that I am obliged to substitute the phonetic rendering.

^{page 232 note 6} The same use of instead of will be observed in Nos. viii., ix., and xvi., to be subsequently examined. The form of Bin was not entirely unknown to the Assyrian, as we have in one of the Bilingual lists of terms of relationship bin-bini, given as the equivalent of “a grandson.” The ordinary Assyrian terms for “son,” however, were ablu (or bal, in composition), and maru, from which may have come the Aramæan bar.

^{page 233 note 7} It is quite possible that the last element of this name may be instead of the second character, indeed, resembles a fully as much as a and the Daleth and Resh are undistinguishable. The name Burugbekur might then mean “the splendour of the morning” (conip. Chaldee and Heb. , but this is a mere conjecture.

^{page 233 note 8} is also used for Birek “a knee,” as well as for the root “to bless.” Compare the Bilingual phrases:—

Where the Assyrian reads allaka birkai; la anikha shepai; “I have made my knees to move;” “I have not rested my feet;” answering to birkai, “knees,” and to shepai, “feet.”

^{page 234 note 9} See Selden de Diis Syris, p. 102 sqq., for a full dissertation upon Adad, which, according to Macrobius, signified “one,” and was a title of the sun's. Dr. Levy, as I have before observed, reads instead of comparing the Hebrew (Jer. 1. 2), but the first letter of the name seems to me to be a rather than a , and the other two characters are to all appearance the same letter, whether that letter be a Daleth or Resh.

^{page 234 note 10} Dr. Levy can hardly be right, I think, in supposing that a cunuch was “Priest” of Merodach. Except in connexion with the rites of the “Mother of the Gods,” I doubt, indeed, if cunuchs were ever admitted into the temples of Assyria and Babylonia. Whether the title derived from be muqrib or haqarib, it merely indicates “proximity,” I think, in the sense of devotion; but there is no immediate correspondent in Assyrian with which the word can be compared. The Cuneiform sign for a priest (of Proto-Chaldæan origin) was which was pronounced Patesi in Babylonian, and had probably another phonetic equivalent in Assyria.

^{page 235 note 11} The name of Birket-Baal, is quoted by DrLevy, from a Numidian inscription (Phön. Stud. iii. 64).Google Scholar I should prefer, however, to read this name as Birket-Baz, if I could find any trace of the worship of a god named Baz by the Aramæans or Arabs.

^{page 236 note 12} Dr. Levy reads this name and translates it “son of the morning,” supposing Pal to be the Assyrian and comparing with the Hebrew (Phön. Stud. ii. 33Google Scholar). I know of no Assyrian names, however, formed like the Hebrew &c.; nor, I think, would the word for “a son” be pronounced Pal at the commencement of a name, but rather ablu (Cun. ) whilst the substitution of for seems exceedingly far-fetched. Pilat is, I have little doubt, the name of some deity, but whether it may really stand for Bilat, as suggested in the text, or whether it may refer to the “Goddess of life” Bilat-Tila, where Tila answers to the Assyrian term Balath or Palath (comp. Hebrew root or “to escape,” or “survive”), or whether there may not be some other divine title pronounced Pilat or Polat, the Cuneiform correspondent of which has not yet been recognized, I cannot undertake to say.

^{page 236 note 13} DrLevy, (Phon. Stud. ii. 31)Google Scholar reads this name as Themek-el, “God supports,” from the Hebrew root and perhaps this is a better derivation than from damak, “to bless,” which, if it existed in Hebrew, would be expressed by I am not sure, however, that any such root as tamak, “to hold,” or “support,” is in use in Assyrian.

^{page 237 note 14} In the Sennacherib Annals (col. 2,1. 58), Zidqá, ia mentioned as Governor of Ascalon; and the name again occurs under the form of among the witnesses (for the most part Syrians and Egyptians, as we may judge from the names or Sesonchis, or Hormasis, &c.) to a deed of sale which was executed in Nineveh, in the fourteenth year of the reign of Sennacherib, by Sharu-tib-dairi (afterwards G-overnor of Zoan), Afar-suru and his wife Amat-Suhala, conveying their property in a certain house and its appurtenances to Zil- Asshur, the Egyptian law officer or judge. It is quite possible, and oven probable, that those two Zidqás were the same person, for we find in the Annals that Zidqá, the refractory Governor of Ascalon, was removed early in the reign of Sennacherib to Nineveh, and was replaced in his government by the very man, Sharu-tib-dairi, who sold his town house to the Egyptian judge, as he no longer probably required such a residence after his appointment to Syria. It is not, of course, in our power to determine if the Zidqá of the Sennacherib Annals can be identified with the man whose name occurs on this seal; but there is some colour lent to the hypothesis by the association of the names of Mitinta and Zidqá in the account of Sennacherib's Phœnician campaign, the former being Governor of Ashdod, while the latter ruled in Ascalon, and the two very possibly, therefore, standing in the relation of father and son, though the fact is nowhere stated.

^{page 238 note 15} The subject of Bar-Sam, or Bαρσαήμιος, is fully discussed in Sect. 9 of my Mythological Essay. See Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i. p. 623.Google Scholar Chwolson (Die Ssabier, vol. i. p. 373,Google Scholar &c.), connects Bar-shamin with Baál-shamin, but perhaps the Bar-shamin of Mos. Chor. ii. 14,Google Scholar may be different from the deified hero, Par-sham, or Bar-sham, mentioned by the same author in lib. i. c. 14.

^{page 238 note 16} The use of the participle dátá, in these names, is proof positive that the seal cannot be of an earlier date than the Persian conquest of Babylon; and I may here note that the name of Bildad, in Job, a kindred compound, and signifying “Given to Bel,” is equally decisive as to the age of that book. All the geographical and etymological evidence, indeed, which can be drawn from the book of Job, tends to assign it to the Achæmenian period, the land of being the of the inscriptions (as is ), between the Jebel-Shamar and the valley of the Euphrates, and thus extending from the Sabæans of Idumæa on the one side, to the Chaldæans of Southern Babylonia on the other; and the Shuhites and Temanites being the Babylonian tribes of Sukhi, and Damunu, who at the close of the Assyrian Empire were settled along the outskirts of the desert.

^{page 239 note 17} DrLevy, (Phb'n. Stud. ii. 40)Google Scholar gives these names as and Artadati and Gadshirt, but there is nothing in his remarks which seems to me to lend much weight to his proposed readings. I prefer, at any rate, regarding the first letter of the first name as a Phe rather than a Gimel, and the letter which is fourth in that name, and last in the second name, certainly resembles a Nun more than a Jod.

^{page 239 note 18} It must be evident to any one who is familiar with the Assyrian inscriptions, and especially with the bilingual tablets, which treat to a great extent of demonology, that the celebrated verse in Isaiah (lxv. 11) where the authorized version renders “for that troop,” and “unto that number,” refers in reality to the “good and evil spirits” who were propitiated and deprecated by the Babylonians. Spirits or genii in general are indicated by the ideographic signs or or or by the phonetic terms sh'edu (comp. ), or vadukku, or lamassi, or perhaps Nukhsu (comp. , &c.);. but the distinguishing marts for “good” and “evil,” or for “blessing” and “cursing,” are for the former, to be read as damiq or damqu, and for the latter, to be read as livnu or limnu or Comp. E. I. H. Ins. co1. 9, L 38; Bellino Ins. of Neb. col. 2,1. 2, &c, &c, &c. It follows, then, that the Hebrew will answer to the Bab. and the Hebrew to the Bab. and it is thus not a little curious that the latter Hebrew word, for which it is very difficult to find a suitable etymology, gives us the exact phonetic reading of or Limni (in oblique of case). I hardly think this can be a mere coincidence, and yet, if the Assyrian word were used in Isaiah for the “evil” spirits, it is difficult to understand why it should not be used for the “good” spirits as well; and there is certainly no word that I am aware of, connected with the Assyrian demonology, which at all resembles Gad or Ligad.

^{page 241 note 19} Dr. Levy, I see, gives this same reading of Hod-rakia (Phön. Stud. ii. 30), but doubtfully; while he reads Hod-bad instead of Hur-bad, deriving the last element from the Heb. and translating the name by “Pracht ringsum,” whatever that may mean.

Dr. Levy, also (Phön. Stud. ii. 38), gives another Phoenician legend from a plate of Lajard's (Culto de Mithra 36, No. 3), which furnishes us with a name, analogous to that of Hod-rdkia. I have been unable to find in the British Museum collection the Scarabæus figured by Lajard, but the legend would seem to read , Li Hud-kaspar, and I should conjecture the name to mean “the glory of Caspar.” It is true that we have no evidence in the inscriptions of such a phonetic name attaching to any of the gods, but in the Nedim's list there is a certain which seems to be as he is called “the omniscient,” or “of complete intelligence,” and this may possibly be the origin of the name of Caspar or Gaspur, which has been prevalent in the East from the earliest times. Dr. Levy reads the name “Hudu, the Scribe,” supposing the stroke after the fifth letter to mark a division between the words, and regarding as a title. The root “to write,” however, was certainly unknown in Assyrian, and I should prefer, therefore, if Dr. Levy's division of the words were correct, to translate “the glory of Sippara,” comparing with the Cuneiform

^{page 242 note 20} It would seem, however, that sakh, and sukh, are not Semitic, but Turanian roots, answering to the Assyrian damik, “to be fortunate,” and allied, therefore, in all probability, with the old Persian word sukh, “auspicious,” rather than with the Arabic safchá.

^{page 242 note 20*} or the may be the charaeteristic of the Shaphel conjugation, shalbash being constantly used in the inscriptions for “clothing”

^{page 243 note 21} This is the same word which occurs in the Babylonian transcript at Behistun, line 8, as equivalent to the Persian antara, “within.” Mons. Oppert is wrong (Exp. en Mesopotamie, liv. ii. p. 203Google Scholar) in identifying the letter which occurs in the word in question, with either the Assyrian or The true equivalent in the Assyrian alphabet is which, again, as has been often shown, interchanges with and that letter, amongst its various powers, has the value of rit.

^{page 244 note 22} The bilingual inscriptions on the Lion Weights, which were originally deciphered by Mr. Norris, and which have been more recently brought before the notice of the public in Mr. Madden's work on the History of the Jewish Coinage, have lately undergone a very strict scrutiny at my hands, the results of which, especially in reference to the system of weights in use amongst the Assyrians, will be given in the continuation of this paper on the legal tablets of Nineveh.

^{page 244 note 23} It is very important to note the fact of so many of these weights being dated from the reign of Shalmaneser, because this is the only direct evidence that we possess in the whole range of the Cuneiform inscriptions, of the existence of the king of that name, who is so celebrated in the Biblical record. I say direct evidence, because, although there were other kings of the name of Shalmaneser, mentioned in documents of a much earlier date, it is quite certain that the Lion Weights are connected in a continuous chronological series, and that the Shalmaneser, therefore, whose name they bear, must be the king who intervened between Tiglath Pileser II. and Sargon.

^{page 244 note 24} I have already noticed the purchase of a house at Nineveh by an Egyptian law officer, and I may here add, that in a certain Assyrian “table of precedence,” which contains a list of all the offices and dignities of the empire from the Tartan downwards, two legal functionaries are entered, one Assyrian and the other Aramsæan and thereby, as it would seem, proving that there must have been a considerable Aramæan population residing in the Assyrian capital.