text:
American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man

American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, O.A.S. Res. XXX, adopted by the Ninth International Conference of American States (1948), reprinted in Basic Documents Pertaining to Human Rights in the Inter-American System, OEA/Ser.L.V/II.82 doc.6 rev.1 at 17 (1992).

WHEREAS:

The American peoples have acknowledged the dignity of the individual, and their national constitutions recognize that juridical and political institutions, which regulate life in human society, have as their principal aim the protection of the essential rights of man and the creation of circumstances that will permit him to achieve spiritual and material progress and attain happiness;

The American States have on repeated occasions recognized that the essential rights of man are not derived from the fact that he is a national of a certain state, but are based upon attributes of his human personality;

The international protection of the rights of man should be the principal guide of an evolving American law;

The affirmation of essential human rights by the American States together with the guarantees given by the internal regimes of the states establish the initial system of protection considered by the American States as being suited to the present social and juridical conditions, not without a recognition on their part that they should increasingly strengthen that system in the international field as conditions become more favorable,

The Ninth International Conference of American States

AGREES:

To adopt the following

Preamble

All men are born free and equal, in dignity and in rights, and, being endowed by nature with reason and conscience, they should conduct themselves as brothers one to another.

The fulfillment of duty by each individual is a prerequisite to the rights of all. Rights and duties are interrelated in every social and political activity of man. While rights exalt individual liberty, duties express the dignity of that liberty.

Duties of a juridical nature presuppose others of a moral nature which support them in principle and constitute their basis.

Inasmuch as spiritual development is the supreme end of human existence and the highest expression thereof, it is the duty of man to serve that end with all his strength and resources.

Since culture is the highest social and historical expression of that spiritual development, it is the duty of man to preserve, practice and foster culture by every means within his power.

And, since moral conduct constitutes the noblest flowering of culture, it is the duty of every man always to hold it in high respect.

CHAPTER ONE

Rights

Article I.

Every human being has the right to life, liberty and the security of his person.

Right to life, liberty and personal security.

Article II.

All persons are equal before the law and have the rights and duties established in this Declaration, without distinction as to race, sex, language, creed or any other factor.

Right to equality before law.

Article III.

Every person has the right freely to profess a religious faith, and to manifest and practice it both in public and in private.

Right to religious freedom and worship.

Article IV.

Every person has the right to freedom of investigation, of opinion, and of the expression and dissemination of ideas, by any medium whatsoever.

Right to freedom of investigation, opinion, expression and dissemination.

Article V.

Every person has the right to the protection of the law against abusive attacks upon his honor, his reputation, and his private and family life.

Right to protection of honor, personal reputation, and private and family life.

Article VI.

Every person has the right to establish a family, the basic element of society, and to receive protection therefor.

Right to a family and to protection thereof.

Article VII.

All women, during pregnancy and the nursing period, and all children have the right to special protection, care and aid.

Right to protection for mothers and children.

Article VIII.

Every person has the right to fix his residence within the territory of the state of which he is a national, to move about freely within such territory, and not to leave it except by his own will.

Right to residence and movement.

Article IX.

Every person has the right to the inviolability of his home.

Right to inviolability of the home.

Article X.

Every person has the right to the inviolability and transmission of his correspondence.

Right to the inviolability and transmission of correspondence

Article XI.

Every person has the right to the preservation of his health through sanitary and social measures relating to food, clothing, housing and medical care, to the extent permitted by public and community resources.

Right to the preservation of health and to well-being.

Article XII.

Every person has the right to an education, which should be based on the principles of liberty, morality and human solidarity.

Likewise every person has the right to an education that will prepare him to attain a decent life, to raise his standard of living, and to be a useful member of society. The right to an education includes the right to equality of opportunity in every case, in accordance with natural talents, merit and the desire to utilize the resources that the state or the community is in a position to provide. Every person has the right to receive, free, at least a primary education.

Right to education.

Article XIII.

Every person has the right to take part in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts, and to participate in the benefits that result from intellectual progress, especially scientific discoveries.

He likewise has the right to the protection of his moral and material interests as regards his inventions or any literary, scientific or artistic works of which he is the author.

Right to the benefits of culture.

Article XIV.

Every person has the right to work, under proper conditions, and to follow his vocation freely, insofar as existing conditions of employment permit.

Every person who works has the right to receive such remuneration as will, in proportion to his capacity and skill, assure him a standard of living suitable for himself and for his family.

Right to work and to fair remuneration.

Article XV.

Every person has the right to leisure time, to wholesome recreation, and to the opportunity for advantageous use of his free time to his spiritual, cultural and physical benefit.

Right to leisure time and to the use thereof.

Article XVI.

Every person has the right to social security which will protect him from the consequences of unemployment, old age, and any disabilities arising from causes beyond his control that make it physically or mentally impossible for him to earn a living.

Right to social security.

Article XVII.

Every person has the right to be recognized everywhere as a person having rights and obligations, and to enjoy the basic civil rights.

Right to recognition of juridical personality and civil rights.

Article XVIII.

Every person may resort to the courts to ensure respect for his legal rights. There should likewise be available to him a simple, brief procedure whereby the courts will protect him from acts of authority that, to his prejudice, violate any fundamental constitutional rights.

Right to a fair trial.

Article XIX.

Every person has the right to the nationality to which he is entitled by law and to change it, if he so wishes, for the nationality of any other country that is willing to grant it to him.

Right to nationality.

Article XX.

Every person having legal capacity is entitled to participate in the government of his country, directly or through his representatives, and to take part in popular elections, which shall be by secret ballot, and shall be honest, periodic and free.

Right to vote and to participate in government.

Article XXI.

Every person has the right to assemble peaceably with others in a formal public meeting or an informal gathering, in connection with matters of common interest of any nature.

Right of assembly.

Article XXII.

Every person has the right to associate with others to promote, exercise and protect his legitimate interests of a political, economic, religious, social, cultural, professional, labor union or other nature.

Right of association.

Article XXIII.

Every person has a right to own such private property as meets the essential needs of decent living and helps to maintain the dignity of the individual and of the home.

Right to property.

Article XXIV.

Every person has the right to submit respectful petitions to any competent authority, for reasons of either general or private interest, and the right to obtain a prompt decision thereon.

Right of petition.

Article XXV.

No person may be deprived of his liberty except in the cases and according to the procedures established by pre-existing law.

No person may be deprived of liberty for nonfulfillment of obligations of a purely civil character.

Every individual who has been deprived of his liberty has the right to have the legality of his detention ascertained without delay by a court, and the right to be tried without undue delay or, otherwise, to be released. He also has the right to humane treatment during the time he is in custody.

Right of protection from arbitrary arrest.

Article XXVI.

Every accused person is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty.

Every person accused of an offense has the right to be given an impartial and public hearing, and to be tried by courts previously established in accordance with pre- existing laws, and not to receive cruel, infamous or unusual punishment.

Right to due process of law.

Article XXVII.

Every person has the right, in case of pursuit not resulting from ordinary crimes, to seek and receive asylum in foreign territory, in accordance with the laws of each country and with international agreements.

Right of asylum.

Article XXVIII.

The rights of man are limited by the rights of others, by the security of all, and by the just demands of the general welfare and the advancement of democracy.

Scope of the rights of man.

CHAPTER TWO

Duties

Article XXIX.

It is the duty of the individual so to conduct himself in relation to others that each and every one may fully form and develop his personality.

Duties to society.

Article XXX.

It is the duty of every person to aid, support, educate and protect his minor children, and it is the duty of children to honor their parents always and to aid, support and protect them when they need it.

Duties toward children and parents.

Article XXXI.

It is the duty of every person to acquire at least an elementary education.

Duty to receive instruction.

Article XXXII.

It is the duty of every person to vote in the popular elections of the country of which he is a national, when he is legally capable of doing so.

Duty to vote.

Article XXXIII.

It is the duty of every person to obey the law and other legitimate commands of the authorities of his country and those of the country in which he may be.

Duty to obey the law

Article XXXIV.

It is the duty of every able-bodied person to render whatever civil and military service his country may require for its defense and preservation, and, in case of public disaster, to render such services as may be in his power.

It is likewise his duty to hold any public office to which he may be elected by popular vote in the state of which he is a national.

Duty to serve the community and the nation.

Article XXXV.

It is the duty of every person to cooperate with the state and the community with respect to social security and welfare, in accordance with his ability and with existing circumstances.

Duties with respect to social security and welfare.

Article XXXVI.

It is the duty of every person to pay the taxes established by law for the support of public services.

Duty to pay taxes.

Article XXXVII.

It is the duty of every person to work, as far as his capacity and possibilities permit, in order to obtain the means of livelihood or to benefit his community.

Duty to work.

Article XXXVIII.

It is the duty of every person to refrain from taking part in political activities that, according to law, are reserved exclusively to the citizens of the state in which he is an alien.

Duty to refrain from political activities in a foreign country.


text:
Page:Great Expectations.djvu/383

Rh Having thus cleared the way for my expedition to Miss Havisham's, I set off by the early morning coach before it was yet light, and was out in the open country-road when the day came creeping on, halting and whimpering and shivering, and wrapped in patches of cloud and rags of mist, like a beggar. When we drove up to the Blue Boar after a drizzly ride, whom should I see come out under the gateway, toothpick in hand, to look at the coach, but Bentley Drummle!

As he pretended not to see me, I pretended not to see him. It was a very lame pretence on both sides; the lamer, because we both went into the coffee-room, where he had just finished his breakfast, and where I had ordered mine. It was poisonous to me to see him in the town, for I very well knew why he had come there.

Pretending to read a smeary newspaper long out of date, which had nothing half so legible in its local news, as the foreign matter of coffee, pickles, fish-sauces, gravy, melted butter, and wine, with which it was sprinkled all over, as if it had taken the measles in a highly irregular form, I sat at my table while he stood before the fire. By degrees it became an enormous injury to me that he stood before the fire. And I got up, determined to have my share of it. I had to put my hands behind his legs for the poker when I went to the fireplace to stir the fire, but still pretended not to know him.

"Is this a cut?" said Mr. Drummle.

"Oh?" said I, poker in hand; "it's you, is it? How do you do? I was wondering who it was, who kept the fire off."

With that I poked tremendously, and having done so, planted myself side by side with Mr. Drummle, my shoulders squared, and my back to the fire.

"You have just come down?" said Mr. Drummle, edging me a little away with his shoulder.

"Yes," said I, edging him a little away with my shoulder.

"Beastly place," said Drummle—"Your part of the country, I think?"

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Page:Great Expectations.djvu/383


text: File:Extinctbirds1907 P41 Megalapteryx huttoni.png


text:
Executive Order 7012

Amendment of Instructions to Diplomatic Officers and of Consular Regulations

Section 25 of chapter XX of the Instructions to Diplomatic Officers and section 572 of the Consular Regulations are hereby amended to read as follows:

“On whom drafts are to be drawn.   Drafts on the Secretary of State are to be drawn at 5 days after sight, acceptance waived and endorsements by procuration excepted; Provided, however, That the number of days may be changed by the Secretary of State, in his discretion, to not more than 10.”

Section 328 of the Consular Regulations is hereby amended to read as follows:

“328.   When consul may reward rescuing crew.   If, after investigating the facts and circumstances of the rescue, in the judgment of the consular officer, the master and the rescuing boat's crew, or any of them, are deserving of reward, he is authorized to pay to such master and boat's crew, or to any of them, without previous reference of the matter to the Department of State, a sum of money ranging from $5 to $25, according to the rank and merit of the recipient. In making these payments the consular officer is authorized to draw on the Secretary of State for a sufficient amount. A separate account of the expenditure, supported by vouchers, must be sent to the Department immediately on payment of the money. (Form No. 170.)

In making these awards it is expected that consular officers will exercise due diligence and sound discretion. Humane as well as heroic action is deemed deserving of recognition, though in a less degree; and sacrifice of business interests as well as disregard of personal peril. Volunteer efforts should also be rated higher than compulsory action under the orders of a superior.

Accompanying the accounts should be sent a full statement of the facts of each case, in conformity with the provisions of the foregoing paragraph, in order that the Department may determine what further action, if any, should be taken to do justice to all the parties to the rescue.

When the action of the master or any member of the crew is deemed deserving of a more liberal acknowledgment, or one different from that herein authorized to be made, the report should fully demonstrate his title to other or additional recognition.”

This order supersedes Executive Order No. 6810-A, of August 4, 1934. Franklin D. Roosevelt The White House, April 15, 1935. [Filed 4–??–35; 8:45 am]

title: Executive Order 7012


text:
Page:Great Expectations.djvu/384

370 "Yes," I assented. "I am told it's very like your Shropshire."

"Not in the least like it," said Drummle.

Here Mr. Drummle looked at his boots and I looked at mine, and then Mr. Drummle looked at my boots and I looked at his.

"Have you been here long?" I asked, determined not to yield an inch of the fire.

"Long enough to be tired of it," returned Drummle, pretending to yawn, but equally determined.

"Do you stay here long?"

"Can't say," answered Mr. Drummle. "Do you?"

"Can't say," said I.

I felt here, through a tingling in my blood, that if Mr. Drummle's shoulder had claimed another hair's breadth of room, I should have jerked him into the window; equally, that if my shoulder had urged a similar claim, Mr. Drummle would have jerked me into the nearest box. He whistled a little. So did I.

"Large tract of marshes about here, I believe?" said Drummle.

"Yes. What of that?" said I.

Mr. Drummle looked at me, and then at my boots, and then said, "Oh!" and laughed.

"Are you amused, Mr. Drummle?"

"No," said he, "not particularly. I am going out for a ride in the saddle. I mean to explore those marshes for amusement. Out-of-the-way villages there, they tell me. Curious little public-houses—and smithies—and that. Waiter!"

"Yes, sir."

"Is that horse of mine ready?"

"Brought round to the door, sir"

"I say. Look here, you sir. The lady won't ride today; the weather won't do"

"Very good, sir."

"And I don't dine, because I am going to dine at the lady's."

"Very good, sir."

title: Page:Great Expectations.djvu/384


text: File:Extinctbirds1907 P27 Nesolimnas dieffenbachi0345.png


text:
Page:Great Expectations.djvu/385

Rh Then, Drummle glanced at me, with an insolent triumph on his great-jowled face that cut me to the heart, dull as he was, and so exasperated me, that I felt inclined to take him in my arms (as the robber in the story-book is said to have taken the old lady) and seat him on the fire.

One thing was manifest to both of us, and that was, that until relief came, neither of us could relinquish the fire. There we stood, well squared up before it, shoulder to shoulder and foot to foot, with our hands behind us, not budging an inch. The horse was visible outside in the drizzle at the door, my breakfast was put on table, Drummle' s was cleared away, the waiter invited me to begin, I nodded, we both stood our ground.

"Have you been to the Grove since?" said Drummle.

"No," said I, "I had quite enough of the Finches the last time I was there."

"Was that when we had the difference of opinion?"

"Yes," I replied, very shortly.

"Come, come! they let you off easily enough," sneered Drummle. "You shouldn't have lost your temper."

"Mr. Drummle," said I, "you are not competent to give advice on that subject. When I lose my temper (not that I admit having done so on that occasion), I don't throw glasses."

"I do," said Drummle.

After glancing at him once or twice, in an increased state of smouldering ferocity, I said:

"Mr. Drummle, I did not seek this conversation, and I don't think it's an agreeable one."

"I am sure it's not," said he, superciliously over his shoulder, "I don't think anything about it."

"And therefore," I went on, "with your leave, I will suggest that we hold no kind of communication in future."

"Quite my opinion," said Drummle, "and what I should have suggested myself, or done—more likely—without suggesting. But don't lose your temper. Haven't you lost enough without that?"

"What do you mean, sir?"

"Waiter," said Drummle, by way of answering me.

title: Page:Great Expectations.djvu/385


text:
Page:Great Expectations.djvu/386

372 The waiter reappeared.

"Look here, you sir. You quite understand that the young lady don't ride to-day, and that I dine at the young lady's?"

"Quite so, sir!"

When the waiter had felt my fast cooling tea-pot with the palm of his hand, and looked imploringly at me, and had gone out, Drummle, careful not to move the shoulder next me, took a cigar from his pocket and bit the end off, but showed no sign of stirring. Choking and boiling as I was, I felt that we could not go a word further, without introducing Estella's name, which I could not endure to hear him utter; and therefore I looked stonily at the opposite wall, as if there were no one present, and forced myself to silence. How long we might have remained in this ridiculous position it is impossible to say, but for the incursion of three thriving farmers—laid on by the waiter, I think—who came into the coffee-room unbuttoning their great-coats and rubbing their hands, and before whom, as they charged at the fire, we were obliged to give way.

I saw him through the window, seizing his horse's mane, and mounting in his blundering brutal manner, and sidling and backing away. I thought he was gone, when he came back, calling for a light for the cigar in his mouth, which he had forgotten. A man in a dust-coloured dress appeared with what was wanted—I could not have said from where: whether from the inn yard, or the street, or where not—and as Drummle leaned down from his saddle and lighted his cigar and laughed, with a jerk of his head towards the coffee-room windows, the slouching shoulders, and ragged hair, of this man, whose back was towards me, reminded me of Orlick.

Too heavily out of sorts to care much at the time whether it were he or no, or after all to touch the breakfast, I washed the weather and the journey from my face and hands, and went out to the memorable old house that it would have been so much the better for me never to have entered, never to have seen.

title: Page:Great Expectations.djvu/386


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brown, Gilbert Wilson


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brown, Henry Yorke Lyell


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brown, Professor John McMillan


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brown, Hon. Nicholas John


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brown, Sir William


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Browne, Thomas Alexander


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Browne, Sir Thomas Gore


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brownless, Anthony Colling


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brownrigg, Major Henry Studholme


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Bruce, Lieut.-Col. John


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Brunker, Hon. James Nixon


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Bryce, Hon. John


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Buchanan, Hon. David


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Buckley, William


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Buckland, Rev. John Richard


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Buckley, Hon. Sir Patrick Alphonsus


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Budge, Alexander Campbell


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Bull, John Wrattall


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Buller, Sir Walter Lawry


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Bundey, Hon. William Henry


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Bunny, Brice Frederick


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burgess, William Henry


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burgoyne, Thomas


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burke, Robert O'Hara


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burnett, Commodore William Farquharson


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burns, Hon. John Fitzgerald


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burns, Rev. Thomas


text: The Dictionary of Australasian Biography/Burrowes, Hon. Robert


text:
Page:Spanish Constitution of 1978 English translation.pdf/33

 d) Magistrates, Judges and Public Prosecutors when in office.

e) Professional soldiers and members of the Security and Police Forces and Corps in active service.

f) Members of the Electoral Commissions.

2. The validity of the certificates of election and credentials of members of each House shall be subject to judicial control, under the terms to be laid down in the Electoral Act.

Section 71

1. Members of Congress and Senators shall enjoy freedom of speech for opinions expressed in the exercise of their functions.

2. During their term of office, Members of Congress and Senators shall likewise enjoy freedom from arrest and may be arrested only in the event of flagrante delicto. They may be neither indicted nor tried without prior authorization of their respective House.

3. In criminal proceedings brought against Members of Congress and Senators, the competent court shall be the Criminal Section of the Supreme Court.

4. Members of Congress and Senators shall receive a salary to be determined by the respective House.

Section 72

1. The Houses lay down their own Standing Orders, adopt their budgets autonomously and, by common agreement, regulate the Personnel Statute of the Cortes Generales. The Standing Orders and their reform shall be subject to a final vote over the whole text, which shall require the overall majority.

2. The Houses elect their respective Speakers and the other members of their Bureaus. Joint sittings shall be presided over by the Speaker of the Congress and shall be 37


text:
Page:Spanish Constitution of 1978 English translation.pdf/34

 by the Standing Orders of the Cortes Generales approved by the overall majority of members of each House.

3. The Speakers of the Houses shall exercise on their behalf all administrative powers and disciplinary functions within its premises.

Section 73

1. The Houses shall meet annually for two ordinary periods of sessions: the first from September to December, and the second from February to June.

2. The Houses may meet in extraordinary sessions at the request of the Government, of the Permanent Deputation or of the overall majority of members of either of the two Houses. Extraordinary sittings must be convened with a specific agenda and shall be adjourned once this has been dealt with.

Section 74

1. The Houses shall meet in joint sittings in order to exercise the non-legislative powers expressly conferred upon the Cortes Generales by Part II.

2. The decisions of the Cortes Generales specified in sections 94(1), 145(2) and 158(2) shall be taken by a majority vote of each of the Houses. In the first case, the procedure shall be initiated by the Congress, and in the remaining two by the Senate. In any case, if an agreement is not reached between the Senate and the Congress, an attempt to reach agreement shall be made by a Mixed Committee consisting of an equal number of Members of Congress and Senators. The Committee shall submit a text which shall be voted on by both Houses. If this is not approved in the established manner, the Congress shall decide by overall majority.

38


text:
Page:Spanish Constitution of 1978 English translation.pdf/35

 Section 75

1. The Houses shall convene in Plenary sittings and in Committees.

2. The Houses may delegate to Standing Legislative Committees the approval of Government or non-governmental bills. However, the Plenary sitting may at any time demand that any Government or non-governmental bill that has been so delegated be debated and voted upon by the Plenary itself.

3. Excluded from the provisions of the foregoing paragraph are constitutional reform, international affairs, organic acts, acts of basic principles and the Budget.

Section 76

1. The Congress and the Senate and, when appropriate, both Houses jointly, may appoint enquiry committees on any matter of public interest. Their conclusions shall not be binding on the Courts, nor shall they affect judicial decisions, but the results of investigations may be referred to the Public Prosecutor for the exercise of appropriate action whenever necessary.

2. It shall be compulsory to appear when summoned by the Houses. The law shall regulate penalties to be imposed for failure to comply with this obligation.

Section 77

1. The Houses may receive individual and collective petitions, always in writing; direct submission by citizens' demonstrations is prohibited.

2. The Houses may refer such petitions to the Government. The Government shall provide an explanation regarding their content, when required to do so by the Houses.

39


text:
Page:Spanish Constitution of 1978 English translation.pdf/36

 Section 78

1. In each House there shall be a Permanent Deputation (Diputación Permanente) consisting of a minimum of twenty-one members who shall represent the parliamentary groups in proportion to their numerical importance.

2. The Permanent Deputations shall be presided over by the Speaker of the respective House and their functions shall be that provided in section 73, that of assuming the powers of the Houses in accordance with sections 86 and 116 in case that the latter have been dissolved or their terms have expired, and that of safeguarding the powers of the Houses when they are not in session.

3. On the expiration of the term or in case of dissolution, the Permanent Deputations shall continue to exercise their functions until the constitution of the new Cortes Generales.

4. When the House concerned meets, the Permanent Deputation shall report on the matters dealt with and on its decisions.

Section 79

1. In order to adopt agreements, the Houses must meet in statutory manner, with the majority of their members present.

2. In order to be valid, such agreements must be approved by the majority of the members present, without prejudice to the special majorities that may be required by the Constitution or the organic acts and those which are provided for by the Standing Orders of the Houses for the election of persons.

3. The vote of Senators and Members of Congress shall be personal and may not be delegated.

40


text:
Page:Spanish Constitution of 1978 English translation.pdf/37

 Section 80

Plenary meetings of the Houses shall be public, except when otherwise decided by each House by overall majority, or in accordance with the Standing Orders.

Section 81

1. Organic acts are those relating to the implementation of fundamental rights and public liberties, those approving the Statutes of Autonomy and the general electoral system and other laws provided for in the Constitution.

2. The approval, amendment or repeal of organic acts shall require the overall majority of the Members of Congress in a final vote on the bill as a whole.

Section 82

1. The Cortes Generales may delegate to the Government the power to issue rules with the force of an act of the Parliament on specific matters not included in the foregoing section.

2. Legislative delegation must be granted by means of act of basic principles when its purpose is to draw up texts in sections, or by an ordinary act when it is a matter of consolidating several legal statutes into one.

3. Legislative delegation must be expressly granted to the Government for a concrete matter and with a fixed time limit for its exercise. The delegation shall expire when the Government has made use of it through the publication of the corresponding regulation. It may not be construed as having been granted 41


text:
Page:Memoir and correspondence of Caroline Herschel (1876).djvu/325

 We have got a most excellent president for the Royal Society in the Marquis of Northampton. He presided at the anniversary dinner on the 30th, and did the honours with great credit.

A Copley Medal was awarded to Gauss for his researches, theoretical and practical, on the subject of terrestrial magnetism.

MISS HERSCHEL TO SIR J. F. W. HERSCHEL , Dec. 17, 1838.

, —

First and foremost let me dispatch what may he called business. In the first place, I thank you for your kind letter and communication of having so great an honour conferred on me as to be admitted an honorary member of the Royal Irish Academy. I cannot help crying out aloud to myself, every now and then, What is for? Next I must beg you to return my thanks in what words you think proper I should express them, and if you will only send me a copy of the diploma, and keep the original along with my other trophies, allowing them perhaps a corner in some such box as that your dear mother had for suchlike things, for I have no other desire but to be remembered by you and Lady H., and your children, for yet awhile. …

… It is a long while since you asked me if I wanted any of my Indexes to Flamsteed's Catalogue of omitted stars. If there should yet be any left, I could wish to have one or two; for you hinted to me I might leave Baily's work to the "Archives" here, which I intend to do, and then I should like to give an Index along with it.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/369

340 Assyrian style were collected by Mr. Rich in 1820, during his visit to Xineyeli, and these were sul)sequently acquired by the liritish Museum.^ In 1827, Schulz found about forty inscriptions at Van, written in a very similar character, and these were published in the 'Journal Asiatique ' of 1840.'^ A prism with a long inscription was discovered at Xineveh in 1830. but it does not seem to haye become accessible till purchased by Colonel Taylor in 1840.^ In 1840, Mr. Layard copied an in- scription at Malamir that presented another striking variety. But the first period of great discoveries in Assj'ria had now approached. In 1843, M. Botta, the French Consul at Mosul, beuan his excavations in the mound at Khorsabad, and he soon uncovered the remains of a palace, lie found the doors adorned with monu- mental bulls, and the walls decorated with bas-reliefs and inscriptions, lie described the result in a series of letters to iM. Mold, which appeared in the ' Journal Asiatique' between May 1843 and June 184-5. M. riandin was hastily commissioned to take sketches; but fortunately the task of copying the inscriptions was left entirely to IJotta. He faithfully trans('ri])ed upwards of two hundred, many of them beinu', however, exact or slightly varied reproductions of each other. A large collection of smilptures found its way to the Louvre, and the drawings and inscriptions made their appearance in IS4!) in the great work ' Aloiniment de Xhiive.' Like many similar })roductions in France, it was executed upon such a splendid scale as to place it practically beyond the reach of ordinary students. The inscriptions were, however, afterwards published separately; and M. liotta

' In KimnliMaUy ii. K50, he gives a facsimile of writing from Nimrud. See also Babylon and Peraepoiisj PI. IX. No. 5. Rawlinson, J. li. A. S. X. '27.

' Journal A,iiati(/ife, i.\. 2o7. ^ Menant, Ecntures^ p. 170.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/370

Rh contributed a valuable essay on the newly found ' Ecri- ture Assyrienne ' (1848).^

Meanwhile Mr. Layard was rapidly accumulating treasures upon even a greater scale for the British Museum. He beiran to excavate at Nimrud — the ancient Caleh — in November 1845, and speedily brought to light the remains of three buildings, known as the North-West, Central and South- West Palaces. In the following year he extended his labours to Kouyunjik,a mound on the site of Nineveh, where he unearthed a palace of unusual size, which he found had been erected by the son of the Khor- sabad king. He was rewarded by the discovery of the vast treasures now preserved in the British Museum — colossal bulls and lions, winged human figures, and many other symbolical objects ; long rows of bas-reliefs depicting battles, sieges and hunting scenes, and large numbers of inscriptions. One of the most important of these was found in the autumn of 1846 on a black obelisk in the central palace of Nimrud. It consists of two hundred and ten lines, and enjoys the distinction of being the first purely Assyrian inscription that was ever deci})hered.- Of scarcely less importance was the dis- covery of an inscription upon the pavement where the names and titles of five kincfs were clearlv recorded. Their names could not indeed be read as vet, but suf- ficient was already known from a comparison with the Persian inscriptions to indicate the genealogical relation- 8liip of the unknown sovereign. The Assyrian signs for which left no doubt as to the meaning of the document. It began with the father of the founder of the North- West
 * king,' 'son of and a few others had been made out,

^ In July 1H49, SS plates were out, but not the (lescri])tive text. The work was finally in five Aolumes folio, and contained :?:?0 inscriptions. The inscriptions were sold separately for (30 francs.

^ See the drawin«r of it in M»*nant, Ei'ritnrea^ p. 108. It is published by Layard, PI. 53-6, and translated by llawlinson, 1850, and by Ilincks, 18'>4.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/371

342 Palace, and ended with the grandson of the builder of the Central Palace. On his return to England, hi 1847, Layard wrote an account of 'Nineveh and its Remains,' but the work did not appear till 1849. It was followed hi the same year by the 'Monuments of Xhieveh,' which contained drawings of the bas-reliefs and copies of the inscriptions.

Two great collections of Assyrian inscriptions were now in the hands of sc-holars, who found themselves face to face with the dilKcult prol)lems they suggested. In England the task was divided between Ilincks and RawHnson; but Mr. Norris, Dr. Birch, and Mr. Layard gave valualjle assistance in the publication of docu- ments. Mr. Xorris was farther en<^ai>'ed in the study of the Susian texts. In France the work was taken up by Botta, Lowenstern and De Saulcy. M. Oppert does not seem to have turned his attention to this branch of the sulgect till 1857, when for the first time France was worthily represented. Germany was silent, except for a few contril)Ution8 made by Grotefend in his de- clining years that added little to the general progress.

Nothing could at first be more l)ewildering than the immense number of si<z'ns. Grotefend counted only a hundred and tliirtv different characters in the third Persepolitan column. Mr. Fisher, in 1807, found that the East India House inscription contained two hundred and eighty-seven; ^ and Grotefend, in 1837, estimated that the whole of the liabvlonian inscriptions known to him contained about three liundred different signs.- But Botta encountered no less than six hundred and forty- two at Khorsaljad alone.*^ The unskilled eye will he disposed to agree with Lowenstern that at first sight

' Ilincks, Trans, li. I. Acad, \xi. 25.'5. - Xeue Ik'xtrinjc (IS^^T), p. 41. Menant, Les Lamjues perdues: Assyrie (Paris, 1880), p. 135.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/372

Rh the Ninevite character presented no analogy with the PersepoHtan, or even with the characters on the Babylonian bricks. In his ' Essai de Dechiffrement ' (1845) he was, however, the first to point out that a large number of them do really correspond to the third Persepolitan ; and he based his attempted interpreta- tion partly upon the analogy he had discovered.^ In his first Essay, of 184C), Ilincks also stated his belief that ' the third Persepolitan agrees in character with the Babylonian and with the Assyrian writing in Schulz s inscriptions.'^' Lowenstern afterwards admitted that lie would scarcely have recognised the similarity from Schulz's plates ; but it bec^ame clearly apparent in the more perfect drawing of Texier.^ Indeed he was eventually so much struck l)y the resemblance that he hesitated to classify the Persepolitan with the Baby- lonian in preference to the Assyrian ; in fact, he ultimately persuaded himself that it was nearer the Assyrian. Meanwhile Botta had begun the minute study of the Assyrian character to which later investi- gators owe more than they are always willing to acknowledge.'* Those whose fortune it is to occupy the higher pinnacles of knowledge are only too prone to despise the humbler artificers who constructed the scaflblding that enabled tliem to achieve the ascent. Botta arranged the signs with great care into fifteen classes, according to the numl)er of wedges they con- tain. The first class included all those with one wedge only ; and so on up to the fifteenth class, where we find signs composed of fifteen wedges and upwards : though none appear to exceed eighteen. The result of

tutifs {\6A7), \y. 11.
 * EsMti de lUchiffmnent (1845), ]>. 11. C'f. Kvpose des Elements consti^

 * Trayii^. IL I. Acad. 1840, xxi. V6\. ' KvposCf p. 14, 7iote.

fl'Jcntnre Assyria nnej Paris, 1848.
 * Journal Asiatif/uf (4" st'ne, 1847-8), vols, ix-xi, M^mmrc »ur


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/373

344 his classification was to persuade him that the graphic system of Assyria was sul)stantially the same as that found at PersepoHs and Babylon. He accepted Eich and Westergaard as the most faitliful copyists of the former, and lie compared ninety-six of their signs with those at Khorsabad. He found that seventy-two were so similar that their identity could not fail to be recomised at first sioht. Fourteen others exhibit a greater difference, but their identity is capable of demonstration. There are therefore eighty-six signs out of ninety-six concerning which no doubt can exist. He thought the difference was not so great as between Gothic and Latin characters. With respect to the writinur at Van, he counted a hundred and twelve to a hundred and fifteen characters, and he found that ninety- eight or a hundred were reproduced identically at Khorsabad.^ When he began to write upon this subject he had only just received a copy of the East India House insc'ription, and it was some time before he could hazard an opinion as to the relationship of the New Assyrian to the Old Babylonian.- The result of a first study of the two hundred and eight3?'-seyen signs in the East India House inscription was the identification of a hundred and seven of the siu'us with the Assyrian, and a more careful investigation ultimately raised the number to one hundred and seventy-nine.^ The remainin^f one hundred and eioht have not, he saA'S, any proper equivalent at Khorsabad. He was inclined to attril)ute a uood deal of the diversity to the material and the histrument used. Where, for example, the stone was brittle, as at Van, the engraver sliowed a disinclination to make the wedges cross, and the chisel would naturally produce a different effect from the

' Jofmial Asiatiqne, 184S, xi. 248 ff. - lb. 1847, ix. 376.

^ lb. xi. L>49.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/374

Rh impress of a wedge upon soft clay. Much also was, no doubt, due to the individuality of the scribes, who seemed to think they mi^ifht increase or diminish the nmnber of the wedges according to fancy. Others were simple errors on the part of the original scribe or his copyist, and some ma}^ have been intended for abbreviations. He did not believe it possible to estab- lish any fundamental distinctions between any of these .styles. Tlius he thought the Taylor prism combined the differences peculiar to Nineveh and Babylon so equally that it would be impossible to decide to which class it really belongs. He concluded, therefore, that, notwithstanding considerable apparent variety, there was sul)stantial identity ; and that one and the same mode of writhig prevailed in Assyria and Babylon, at Van and Persepolis. Indeed he went so far as to sup})ose that wlioever could read a Khorsabad inscrip- tion would be able also to read all the others. It is true he could not himself read or pronounce a single word with any degree of (certainty ; ^ and Rawlinson declared that his special studies afforded him no facility. He could, he says, read the Ba])ylonian of the third cohnnn, but he has not 'yet succeeded in identifvinu* a sinuie name in the tablets of Van or Khorsabad.' -

At iirst indeed Rawlinson was muc^h more impressed bv the diversitv than by the simihiritv of the sians, and he described them as ' constituting varieties of alpha- betical formation.' He divided J^abylonian into the writing of the third Persepolitan and that of the bricks and cylinders ; the latter he considered was the primi- tive form ' which must liave embodied the vernacular dialect of Shinar, when the earth was of one laniruai^e and one si)eecli.' Assyrian he also divided into two

' Hommel, Geschuhte, p. J)5, note. - J. It, A. S. 1847, x. 28.


text:
Executive Order 9153-A

Withdrawing Public Lands for Use of the War Department for Military Purposes Alaska

By virtue of the authority vested in me as President of the United States, it is ordered that, subject to valid existing rights and to Executive Orders No. 5364 of June 5, 1930 withdrawing certain lands for the use of the Navy Department, No. 7622 of May 29, 1937 withdrawing certain lands near the town of Unalaska for use by the United States Indian Service Hospital, No. 8573 of October 21, 1940 withdrawing certain lands near the town of Unalaska for town site purposes, and to the Executive Order of March 4, 1891 reserving certain lands near the town of Unalaska as a coal storage and supply depot, the public lands in the following-described areas be, and they are hereby, withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the public-land laws, including the mining laws, and reserved for the use of the War Department for military purposes: Tract No. 1 Beginning at a point on line of mean high tide on north shore of Makushin Bay, Unalaska Island, 53°45'31" N. latitude, 166°55' W. longitude, as shown on U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart No. 8802.

Thence from said initial point, by metes and bounds,

North across Unalaska Island to line of mean high tide on Bering Sea;

Easterly and southwesterly around Cape Cheerful, Cape Kaletka, Erskine Point and Brundage Head along line of mean high tide with meanders of Bering Sea, Unalaska Bay, Kaletka Bay, Unalga Pass, Beaver Inlet, and Erskine Bay to the head of Erskine Bay;

Southwesterly on straight line across Unalaska Island to the head of Portage Bay at mean high tide;

Westerly and northwesterly along shore of Portage Bay and Makushin Bay at mean high tide around Cathedral Point to the point of beginning.

The area described, including both public and non-public lands, aggregates 200,000 acres.

Tract No. 2 All of Hog Island, in Unalaska Bay, near Unalaska Island, as shown on U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart No. 9007.

The area described aggregates 110 acres.

Tract No. 3 All of those portions of Unalaska Island, Umnak Island, and the small islands and rocks adjacent thereto, lying between 53°13'00" and 53°35'00" N. latitudes and 167°28'30" and 168°5'00" W. longitudes, as shown on U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey Chart No. 8802.

The areas described aggregate 148,000 acres.

Executive Order No. 8789 of June 14, 1941, reserving for the use of the War Department portions of the lands described herein as Tract No. 1 is hereby revoked.

This order is confidential and shall not be published in the, and shall not be made public in any other manner except upon prior authorization by the Secretary of War.

Franklin D. Roosevelt The White House, April 30, 1942. [NOTE: This Executive order was declassified and released for publication by a letter of the Secretary of War dated June 27, 1946.]

title: Executive Order 9153-A


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/375

346 classes, Assyrian proper and Medo-Assyrian or Vaniiic ; but he also distinguished Assyrian proper into two sub- divisions, representing the lapidary and the ruiniing hand — a specimen of the latter being the Taylor prism. The Elymaean inscriptions he placed in a class apart, ' as entitled to an independent rank.' He pointed out that even the third Persepolitan writing is not identical with the cursive Babylonian, and that the variation is sufficient to constitute a serious impediment to study. The writhig on the Assyrian cylinders is ' quite distinct from any variety of character which occurs on similar relics at Baljylon ' ; and he found ' characters at Van that never occur at Khorsabad and vice versa.' He cannot, therefore, agree with liotta that they all ' belong to one single alphabetical system,' and that the differ- ences are merely ' varieties of hand.' ^ Farther study, however, led liim to alter his opinion, and in 1850 he admits that ' there is no doubt but that the alphabets of Assyria, of Anneiiia, of Babylonia, of Susiana and of Elymais are, so far as essentials are concerned, one and the same. There are peculiarities of form, a limitation of usage — but unquestionably the alphabets are " au fond" identical.' Mr. Lavard had also arrived at the

' ./. i2. yL. S. X. '2'2 tf. Uawliiuson's classification of the writing is as

followi* (1847):

/ Bricks and cylinders (Lapidary) / Babylonian 1 East India House Inscription proi)er "j

1 T> V 1 • J Cursive

1. Baby Ionian -( oii • i ,, v

.. Practicallv the same as the Cur-

sei)ohtan - • tj i i •

t^ ^ sn e Babvlonian Column ^

o

/ . . ( Lapidarv

I Assyrian | *-

2. Assyrum - * ' ( Cursive

[ \'an

o. IClymutan (found by Layard at .Malamir)


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/376

Rh same conclusion. In his opinion, the varieties appear to be mere 'caligraphical distinctions.'

The same important discovery was soon afterwards extended, as we have already related, to include the writing in the second or Susian column of the Persepolitan inscriptions. In 1846, Hincks called attention to the similarity that existed between them. Both the Babylonian and Assyrian modes of writing, he says, 'agree in principle with the second Persepolitan,' and he farther observed that where the characters are the same, they have generally the same, or nearly the same, value in all three. It is curious that Botta was quite unable to trace the existence of this resemblance. Writing of the three columns, he says: 'The elements of the groups are in each quite different, and even when the form agrees the sound is quite different'; and this opinion was shared by Westergaard, who, as we have said, mantained that the various species of cuneiform writing 'differed from one another in the shape of nearly every letter or group.'

A good deal has been said from the time of Botta downwards as to the similarity of the various styles. There is no doubt that they are sufficiently formidable to require a special training in reading each kind, and the Assyrians themselves found it necessary to make transcriptions from the Babylonian in order to make the writing intelligible. There was a greater diversity in the writing of Babylonian than of Assyrian, in consequence of there being no standard official type in the former as there was in the Assyrian, and


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/377

348 consequently a copyist sometimes altogether mistook a sign, and occasionally he was actually unable even to divine its meaning; indeed, so great was the diversity in the manner of writing that the Assyrian scribes made use of Tables of Variants, and in one of these no less than twenty different ways of writing the same sign have been found. On the whole, most students will be inclined to agree with Mr. Budge, who dwells more on the differences than the similarity of the styles.^ The demonstration of the similarity of the cunei-

ft/

form writing of Babylon and Assyria was followed by the more important discovery that the languages expressed by both were the same as that of the third Persepolitan column. The Persian, now deciphered and translated, was thus found to afford a key, not only to the language of the third column, but also to the large collection of inscriptions from Nineveh. Hincks, in a Postscript of June 1840, to which reference will be frequently made, announces that he believes the third Persepolitan agrees, to a great extent at least, in language with the Babylonian inscriptions.'- In 1848, Botta endeavoured to estab- lish beyond the possibility of doubt that the Assyrian

ft^ X ft ft/

of Khorsabad likewise agreed with the language of Babylon and Persepolis. He showed that the same grammatical inflexions, the same personal pronouns, the same particles, and very many words agreed in all three languages. With regard to the inscriptions at Van, Botta was at first in doubt, but farther study led him to believe that here the inflexions were not the same.*^ This was subsequently fully recognised by Hincks"* and by most other scholars. It did not, how-

' Athenaum, Se])t. 20, \>^A. - Tram. li. I. Acad. xxi. 131.

•' Jot/iual Aaiatit/nc, ix. ^C7, xi. '2^'A} 71. » ./. It. A. S. 184s, ix.4l4.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/378

Rh ever, prevent De Saulcy from hazarding a translation of one of them on the supposition that it was written in Semitic. In 1800, Rawlinson agreed that both the Babylonian and Assyrian languages are to be included in a common categrory ; but he added that 'they can hardly be called identical, inasmuch as each dialect affects the employment of specific verbal roots and certain particular nouns and adjectives.' They are, in fact, distinguished by certain dialectical differences which have been compared in degree to that existing between the dialects of the West and North of England; but other authorities think the differences scarcely amount to provincialism.

The suggestion that the newly-discovered language would turn out to he Semitic was made at an early period of the inquiry. It had not, however, occurred to Grotefend, who described it, in 1837, as Parsi, and in 1840 he had apparently returned to his original opinion that it was Pehlevi, and he expressly rejected a suggestion of Lepsius that the writing might be compared to Phoenician. Before the decipherment of the cuneiform every conceivable hypothesis had been started as to the probable affinities of the Ancient Assyrian language."' At length, in 1845, Löwenstern recollected that the Jewish Scriptures place Assur in the same ethnological division as Heber, and he con- cluded that Assyrian must therefore have been a

 * r5 See these stated by Löwenstern, Essai de Dechiffrement, 1845, p. 12.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/379

350 Semitic speech. In June 1846, Hincks also announced that both Assyrian and Babylonian appear to have much in common with the Semitic languages'; and in the following January lie stated emphatically that they 'exhibit a much greater similarity to the other Semitic languages than I had at first supposed.' In consequence of this similarity, lie now for the first time sets the fashion, afterwards generally adopted, of classifying the signs according to the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. and he endeavoured for a brief time to assimilate the vowel system to the Semitic method. In a tract written in 1847 Löwenstern dwelt with increasing force upon the Semitic affinities of the language: and he considered that Rawlinson is fundamentally wrong in applying the laws of an Aryan speech 'to a writing and a language that are Semitic.' It cannot be said that he contributed much towards the proof of his assertion .He was entirely mistaken in the fundamental principle of his comparison, the supposed similarity of the vowel systems of the two languages; but he pointed out the analogy of a few words, such as 'rabu,' great,' to its Hebrew equivalent, and this was the only word which, according to Menant, was then correctly read. In the December previous, Hincks pointed out that the personal pronoun in Assyrian reads 'a-na-ku,' But he left it to the learning of his readers to recognise the identity of this word with the Hebrew. This was afterwards done by Botta. who, however, continued on the whole to be doubtful of the Semitic affinities of Assyrian.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/380

Rh In 1849, De Saulcy contributed two memoirs on cuneiform, which seem to have added considerably to the proof. In the first lie is said to have shown that the two languages agreed in the feminine termination t and in the relative pronoun 'sha'; and in the second he identified the particles for 'and' and 'with.' - In the following-year, Hincks added other forms and words that could be best explained by reference to the Hebrew; and Rawlinson definitely settled the question by an eLborate comparison of its grammatical forms and vocabularv with those of other Semitic languages. Since that time its affinity to the Semitic family has been fully accepted. Rawlinson showed that Babylonian is found in a more primitive state than any other of the Semitic dialects of Asia open to our research. It is held to be the oldest representative of that family yet known, 'the Ethiopic ranking next in point of antiquity.'

Hincks declared that it bears the same relationship to Semitic as Sanscrit to Aryan, an opinion shared by Mr. Sayce and Professor Haupt. It properly belongs to the northern group, which includes Hebrew, Phoenician, Syriac and Chaldee; but there is some disagreement as to the degree of relationship. Mr. King describes it as 'closely akin' to the northern group, while Mr. Pinches considers the differences are often very great, especially in the verbs. Mr. Boscawen finds striking affinities in grammar to Arabic, one of the southern group. It was some time, however,


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/381

352 before these ophiions prevailed. M. Luzzato, in 1850, still maintained that Assyrian was an Indo-European language; and Holtzmann that it was a Persian dialect mingled with Semitic elements. Botta long remained in doubt, and Hitziu did not hesitate to deny that it is Semitic. So late as 1858 Ewald, the German Hebraist, entirely refused to accept the gram- matical forms of Assyrian as Semitic. M. Eenan wrote to the same effect in 1859, and lie even retained his doubts in the fourth edition of his 'Langues Semitiques,' published in 1803. The recent dis- coveries were indeed peculiarly unacceptable to M. Renan. Not long before, he had laid down that mono- theism was the special 'note' of the Semitic races, and he was naturally extremely disconcerted by the unexpected apparition hi the Louvre of a profusion of Assyrian gods, according as they were dug up by M. Botta. In 1865 we are still assured that Assyrian 'though of the Semitic type, is only distantly connected with known forms of that language.'

It is much easier to determine the grammatical affinity of a language than to read it, and the place of Babylonian in the family of languages was definitely fixed before much progress was made in the work of translation. From the time that Grotefend's attention was first directed to cuneiform research, he endeavoured to include the second and third columns, no less than the first, within his sphere of inquiry. But he achieved very little success. In his Essay published by Heeren (1824) we find that he had already singled out the groups in the third column that


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/382

Rh corresponded to Cyrus, Hystaspes, Darius and Xerxes. The Babylonian, unlike the Persian, has no sign to mark the division of the words, and the difficulty attending their sej)aration was at first very great. The process was facilitated when it was recognised that each line begins and ends with a word : that is to say, a word is never divided and carried over from one line to another. In 1837, Grotefend successfully divided eight lines of the Elvend inscription, with only a slight mis- take. He also divided the B inscription of Darius nearly correctly : the exception being that at the end of his first line he seems to treat three words as one.* Nor was the difficulty confined to the separation of the words only. Some of the signs are so long that they were at first mistaken for two or more letters. Thus the siiifn for ar in the word for Xerxes was treated by Grotefend as th and r ; - and Lowenstern divided the sign for <ji into r and 5, which continued for a long time to be a source of trouble.

In 1840 Grotefend gives a Table to show the transliteration of his four royal names. He reads Cyrus ' Kho. re. s ' for ' Ku. ra. as ' ; Hystaspes ' Wi. scht. as. p ' for ' Us. ta. as. pa ' ; Darius ' Da. r. ha. a. wesch ' for ' Da. ri. ya. a. vus ' ; Xerxes ' Kh. sell. ah. th. r. sch ' for ' Hi. si'ar. si.' ^

We have here sixteen different signs with their values attached ; and of these only three [as^ da^ a) are absolutely correct ; though the others give the con- sonantal values. These values appeared substantially in his tract of 1837, with the addition of 'wo-hu' for the signs that read * rabu.' ** Hincks, writing in December 1846, makes the very liberal admission that

1880, 1). 28l>. lieilruf/e, PL IIL ; Menant, p. 1^78.
 * lieitriiyey 1837, PI. I. ; cf. Menant, Mamiel de la Languc Assynenne^

2 Beitriige, 1840, Plate, p. 05. ^ lb. p. 65. * lb. 1837, Pl.R-.

A A


text: Talk:Executive Order 9153-A

title: Talk:Executive Order 9153-A


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/383

354 perhaps Grotefend knew the values of ten cursive characters correctly and of ten others approximately.^ It will be seen from the transliteration that he reco<?nised some of the siiriis as svllaljic^ and some as alphabetical. He also knew there was a sinj^le sign for ' son,' which, he points out, occurred as a in Darius; and he had found tliree of the equivalent si<rns for ' king/ It is not improbal)le that if he had persevered in analysing a larger numl)er of proper names, he might eventually have reached other solid results. Unfortun- ately, these were not readily accessiljle. The I inscription, that yielded so much assistance to Burnouf and Lassen, had no Bal)y Ionian equivalent; and Westergaard had not yet copied the one at Xaksh-i-Kustam. FaiUng the onlv true method, he had recourse to another that once more carried liim far awav to another ' constellation of Moro.'

There was nuich speculation as to what could be the signification of a certain insci'iption found on cylinder seals and 'holy' vases, and reproduced with amplification on the bricks collected l)y ^Ir. Eich at Babylon. Ila^er had lont^ ai>o tlirown out the useful suggestion that the brick insc^riptions most probably recorded the name of the maker or the builder; but this opinion did not ultimately find favour. It was contended that the inscriptions on the seals and ' holy' vases must have a religious import, and were no doubt used as talismans, in accordance with Oriental custom; and nothing could be more natural than that the same mystical formulae should be impressed upon the bricks, in order to l)anish the evil demons from the precincts of the buildinn'. Grotefend a(!Cordhi2flv looked about for guidance, and at length found some- thing to suit his purpose in the Zend-Avesta. He

^ Tram. It. /. Acad. xxi. '2A'l.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/384

Rh collected a number of brick inscriptions together, and placed under them such portions of the inscriptions on seals and ' holy ' vases as he found to correspond. They are not, however, exactly alike, for in the latter two or more words are omitted from the middle of the sentence. The first legend contahis sixteen words and, according to Grotefend, it runs thus : ' (1) Icli erhebe (2) demUthigst (3) den grossen (4) Kcinig (o) Mithras (6) immerdar (7) mit Grosse (S) und mit Stiirke (9) an diesem (10) iiffentHchen Orte (11) Ja (12) ich erhe])e (13) diesen (14) grossen (15) Konig (10) Mithras.' The legend taken from the brick of Xebuchadnezzar (line 13) differs slightly from this. The name of the king or god is not the same (words 5 and 10); and the two words Mjflentlichen Orte,' 'j a,' aie also diflferent. At the end, a seventeenth word is added, signifying, as is supposed, 'sei gnadig.' Such was the last attempt at translation before the breaking of the new light. The meaning of this inscription is now known to be : '(words 1, 2, 3) Nabu-kudur-usur, (4) King (•")) of Babylon, (0-10) Kestorer of Bit-Saggatu and of Bit-Zida, (11) eldest son (12, 13, 14) of Xabu- pal-usur, (15) King (10) of Baljylon, (17) I.' ^

Lowenstern, in his ' 7&sai de D(V»hiffrement,' pub- lished in 1845, contributed little to the progress of the study. lie, however, boldly attempted to pass beyond the guidance of the Persepolitan inscriptions, and to deci])her two proper names in an inscription recently found at Khorsabad. The one he selected is engraved over a bas-relief and appears hi Botta (Plate 25). The subject evidently referred to the capture of a city, and Lowenstern learned from the Hebrew Scriptures that the Assyrians had only captured four important places. One of these was Asdod, w^hich was taken by Esar-

' JJeitnif/ej 1840, pi>. 5-7, and Plate. Of. Memint, Manuel^ p. 305.

A A "2


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/385

356 haddon, and the appearance of sea in the bas-relief left no doubt that this was the place referred to. He had thus ingeniously conjectured the names of the city and the conqueror by independent means ; and there was little difficulty hi fixing the cuneiform groups in which they were to be found. We have already said that Lowenstern observed the close resemblance between the Assyrian and Persepolitan characters ; and he at first thought that the similarity extended to the square writing of the Hebrews. It was by comparison with these that he sought to achieve his decipherment. The name of the town consisted of five characters. The first he did not know, but assumed to Ue a ; the second corresponded exactly to the Hebrew ' shin,' the third to the Old Persian d\ and, pursuing this method, he satisfied himself that he had deciphered ' Asdoh ' or ' Asdod.' Botta afterwards pointed out that the word had been improperly transcribed, and that the first sign, translated a, was simply the determinative of ' QAty} As regards the group that should contain the name of Esarhaddon, Lowenstern thought it consisted of three signs. The first, he erroneously stated, had been ascertained by Grotefend to be r;- the second was already known as5 in ' Asdod ' ; the third bore a remote resemblance to the Hebrew ' koph' turned over on its side. It remained to adapt the result, r s k^ to the name of Esarhaddon. The matter was simplified by Isaiah, who calls the kin<>' in whose reis^n Asdod was captured Sargou. Another reading of this name is 'Sarak,' which is evidently the word in the inscription, the transposition of the r and s being obviously unimportant. It happened, curiously enough, that

^ Jouimal AsiatiquCy ix. ^77.

- 6/. Grotefend, Beitrafje^ 1840, p. 65. LiiwensttTii's r is only the first portion of (irotefend's sign.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/386

Rh Lowenstern guessed the name of the Kliorsabad king correctly, but his transliteration was entirely at fault. Two years later, Longperier pointed out that he had omitted the first sign of the name altogether ; and Kotta protested against the separation of the second si<n\ into two, in order to evolve r and s.^

In June 1846 Hincks began the series of contri- butions to the subject which he continued down to the time of his death, twenty years later. In his first paper he tells us he had just begun to apply himself to the third Persepo]itan, which, he says, he found to agree in ' character and, to a great extent at least, in language with the Babylonian inscriptions, and to the Assyrian writing hi Schulz's hiscriptions.' 'In both,' he says, ' some of the characters represent elementary sounds and some [represent] combinations. In both, two or more characters are used to represent the same sounds. In both, no vowel is omitted ; but vowels and consonants are repeated in two consecutive characters.' He also ' found it to be a general rule, though it admits of some exceptions, that when a cliaracter occurred in two or moi*e alphabets, it had the same value, or nearly so, in all of them. Thus the pa of the second Perse- politan is pa in Assyrian, and ha in Babylonian. He claimed to be al)le to read the names of 'Babylon' and 'Nineveh' on certain bricks that had been brought from those places. -

A few months later he was able to aimounce that he had 'made considerable piogress in deciphering the Babylonian cursive and also the lapidary character of the East India House inscrij)tioii.' He found that the writing

^ * Lettre de Longperier,' Stpt. 1847, in Rtvue ArcJieolotjiquet 1848, p. 50.3.

- Postscript, written June lS46, to pa])er * On the First and Second Kinds of Persepolitan Writing,' Trann. li. I. Acad. xxi. 131.


text:
Category:Extinct Birds images still in UK Copyright

This category contains 13 plates from Extinct birds : an attempt to unite in one volume a short account of those birds which have become extinct in historical times : that is, within the last six or seven hundred years : to which are added a few which still exist, but are on the verge of extinction, London, 1907. By Walter Rothschild, 2nd Baron Rothschild (1868–1937). Although the text of the book and most of the plates are out of UK copyright, these 13 are not, because the artists died less than 70 years ago. See further discussion at Wikimedia Commons Deletion requests.

Works by George Edward Lodge (1860–1954). Not eligible for Wikimedia Commons until 1 Jan 2025.
 * File:Extinctbirds1907 P2 Necropsar rodericanus.png
 * File:Extinctbirds1907 P5A Siphonorhis americana.png
 * File:Extinctbirds1907 P27 Nesolimnas dieffenbachi0345.png
 * File:Extinctbirds1907 P35 Aechmorhynchus cancellatus0361.png
 * File:Extinctbirds1907 P41 Megalapteryx huttoni.png


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/387

358 in the third Persepolitan column was identical with the former, or cursive, style, and that its title to be called the ' Babylonian column ' was therefore incontestable.

The only predecessor he will allow to have had in

this inquiry is Gi-otefend, who has discovered, he says,

that the Babylonian cliaracters are partly syllabic and

partly literal; and that 'certain lapidary characters

correspond to certain cursive ones.' Grotefend, he

adds, may also have discovered the values of about ten

cursive (characters correctly, and possibly of ten others

approximately. But he was not aware that ' several

equivalent cliaracters might be in use to represent the

same letter or syllable.' ^ Hincks was, however, more

adequately supplied with materials to work with.

Besides the Persepolitan inscriptions which he had the

advantajre to study in the more perfect copies of

Westergaard, he had also access to the list of provinc^es

at Naksh-i-Eustam lately copied by the same traveller.

The discovery that a clay cylinder published by Porter

reproduced in cursive characters a portion of the East

India House inscription written in the lapidary style

had, as we have alieady seen, enabled him to compare

tof]fether seventy-six simis in the two diflerent modes of

writing. These lie now attempted to classify accorduig

to what he considered to l)e their values. The Table is

the first of the kind that appeared, and is consequently

of very exceptional interest. His decipherment was

based in the usual manner upon a c(miparison between

the proper names in the Ikbylonian and those in the

Persian column. ' Jiut,' he says, ' even more [values]

were determined by comparing different modes of

writing the same word.' His success, so ftir as it goes,

is certainly remarkal)le. He recognises correctly the

' M)ii the Tlirt'e Kinds of Persepolitan ^y^iting/ read Nov. and Dec- 1846: Tmn^. It. 1, Acad. xxi. 24i>.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/388

Rh signs for the three principal vowels, a, i and u (Nos. 1, 4 and 7); a second siofn for w, used in the late Ba])ylonian, is also ('orreetly identified. The breathing sign is rendered with approximate correctness by ya (Xo 2; cj\ King 220), and the two diphthongs ai and ia figure as;/;/, and ya (9 and 3). The list of consonantal sounds is, of course, far from complete; but it is remarkable that in the great majority of cases the signs are presented to us as syllabic^ They even include two cimipound syllables, 'bar' and ' sar.' They are distri- buted among twenty-one different sounds: r or er^ ra^ ru; n^ na^ iiu^ ana; />a, bu^ bar; ak^ ka^ kii; ta^ da; 5, a^, 7is; 5a, w«, saf\ and the signs for the plural. It will be seen that this affords a remarkable anticipation of a later discovery. A careful examination will show that, so far as the consonantal sounds are concerned, there are extremely few errors. Indeed, out of fifty-five signs, we have only found twelve radical mistakes in this respect. On the other hand, he was able to give to many signs their al)Solutely correct syllabic value. At the time of writing he was of opinion that the distinction between i and ii was not observed; and he a(!(*ordingly classifies together the syllabic ending in either of these vowels. He thought that the same confusion existed among the (consonants. He con- sidered that the language did not admit of distinction between r and /, or ])etween b and />, or w and m; nor between the gutturals k, tj and kh; nor between the siljilants; and that ch is expressed by 5, and j by k. lie identified the personal pronoun I — a-na-ku; and he read the name and titles of Nebuchadnezzar in various inscriptions which Grotefend had mistaken for forms of prayer. He saw (clearly the ideographic and determinative value of some of the signs, and fixed cor- rectly upon those for ' and,' ' son,' ' great,' ' earth,' ' one,'


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/389

360 'house,' 'god,' 'man' (two), and anotlier sign for ' king ' not previously recognised Ijv Grotefend. He also pointed out two signs foi* the plural. (December 18403.)

In his paper of January 1847 he increases his list of primary signs to ninety-live, and he analyses the remain- ing characters found in the East India House inscription pubhshed by Mr. Fisher in 1807. He thinks he has been able to assign values to a hundred and ninety-nine of these, and to attach them to some one or other of the ninety-five primary values to which, in his opinion, they corresponded. If this attem])t had been successful, he would have arrived at the values of the whole of the two hundred and eighty-seven siii^ns in Mr. Fisher's list, and a few others in addition. But the paper in other respects indicates a retrograde tendency. 'The language,' he says, ' has been brought to exhibit a much s^reater similarity to the Semitic ones than I had at first supposed.' He accordingly abandons the ' transcription of Babylonian words intoEoman characters' and assimi- lates them to the letters hi the Hebrew alphabet.^ He distributes the signs into classes according as he supposes them to be labials, gutturals, dentals, nasals. Unguals and sibilants. He does not attempt to subdivide the classes into surds and sonants, but he separates each class into two divisions, according as he considers that the consonant is followed by e (: skeva) or by a {-pathac). ' Values different from these are annexed to the characters which admit them.' In so far as each sio-n is insepar- ably attached to one or other vowel the system remains syllabic; but his new table exhibits a stronof desire to revert, if possible^ to an alphabetical system in cor- respondence with the Hebrew. His study of the in- scriptions at Van enabled him, even at this early date,

' Tranmctions, ib. p. 249.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/390

Rh to give 'the mode of expressing numbers in cuneatic characters from 1 to 100,000 ': a system he farther ex- empUfied in his later paper on the Van inscriptions.

His manipulation of the two hundred and eighty- seven signs induced him to take a nuich too favourable opinion of his own achievement, for we find him, in the course of the following year (May 1848), announcing that 'the values of the great majority of the [Babylonian] characters are, in my judgment, already settled beyond the reach of criticism,' a statement which we now know is, in fact 'beyond the range of criticism.' By that time he had, however, made the important discovery that Sennacherib and Esarhaddon were the builders of the two palaces at Nineveh. He would not, however, admit that Sargon was the Khorsabad king, a fact that had just been demonstrated with remarkable ingenuity by Longpérier. Hincks suggested that the proper reading was Ni-Sliar.

It is worthy of remark that the writings we have just reviewed of Hincks, in 1846-7, were brought to the notice of Continental students by Mold, in his 'Rapport' to the Société Asiatique of 1848.

It is, in fact, in these essays that the first real progress in the decipherment of Babylonian was made. In them Hincks laid the foundation upon which all subsequent work was raised, a work to which he himself contributed no small share.

The year 1847 was especially rich in contributions to the study. It opened with the remarkable paper we have just reviewed; and during its course Rawlinson expounded his views in the 'Journal of the Asiatic Society,' Botta in the 'Journal Asiatique,' Longpérier in the 'Revue Archéologique.' Löwenstern added another


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/391

362 Memoir of greater value than the first, and De Saulcy made his appearance in this field of inquiry by a paper communicated to the A(*ademie des Inscriptions, and by two essays that have exposed him to much criticism.

Hincks, as we have seen, had worked exclusively upon the Persei)olitan and Babylonian texts ; but the great discoveries of Botta and Layard soon diverted attention to the moiv ample materials that were begin- nhig to pour in from Khorsabad and Ninn-ud. We have alieadv alluded to the enormous inimber of different signs that were found to be employed in the Assyrian inscriptions — no less than six hundred and forty-two, according to liotta's (computation. It seemed hicredil)le that they could all convev diffei-ent shades of sound. Grotefend noticed that even in the third Persepolitian souk* signs appeared to l)e interchange- able, and therefore* presumably of similar value; and this peculiarity l)ecanie even more noticeable in Baby- lonian.^ Ilhicks, as we have seen, noticed ' the equivalence to each other of different lapidary charac- ters, which are constantlv transcribed by one and the same cursive character.' In a paper read before the Academic des Inscriptions in 184o, Botta explained that manv Assvrian characters of verv different form were frequently substituted for one another, and the inference* was that there are several signs to express the same, or nearlv the* same, scmnd. Eawlhison's atten- tion, up to the present, had been almost entirely fixed upon the Persian colunui of the Behistun inscription, and his version of it appeared early hi 1847. He saw that it afforded the 'only key to the decipherment of the Babylonian alphal)et.' - We have observed that Grotefend found himself practically limited to four proper names; Lihvenstern had only twenty to work

' Journal Asi'atifjue, 1?<4^, xi. l>47. ' ./. K. A. S, 1847, x. 24.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/392

Rh upon; ^ while lliiicks and I)e Saulcy, with the addition of the Naksh-i-Kustani inscription, had fort}'. From the Behistun and other sources now available to Kawlinson, the number OTadually rose to ninety-four:- and with these before him, he l)egan to apply himself to ' the determination of the phonetic powers of the characters/ Amonji: the new names was that of Nebuchadnezzar, which he at once recognised was the same as occurred so frequently on the bricks at Hillah. Tliis discovery was made quite independently of Dr. Ilincks; and Layard is hiclined to think that, in ac^tual date, the precedence is due to llawlinson.^ He was al)le already (1847) to announce that he had 'obtained a tolerably extensive alphabet from the orthography of the* proper names'; but he adds: 'I have left the grammar and construction of the language hitherto untouched.' lie had, however, been greatly struck by the number of signs with apparently equivalent sounds.** He found it difficult to admit the existence of variants in the same inscription, except such as were caused l)y slight changes ui the writing of the same character. He saw, however, that no such explanation would cover all the difficulties of the case, for some of the substitutes were obviouslv totally distinct in form. In this case he did not believe that they were ' lemtimatelv inter- changeable/ He thought the 'phonetic organisation of the lanouaiiv was so minute and elaborate that althout^^h each form was designed to represent a disthict and specific sound, yet the artist was perpetually liable to confound the characters.' He sucfiiested also that each consonant had a different sign to express the surd and sonant; and in some cases one mii>'ht be substituted for

• E.rposr^ p. 10, note. '• Ilonimcl, GfMc/tic/itCf \). 1)8. •' Layard, yincL-r/i and iftt RemainXj ii. 17' J.

 * J. Ii'. A. S. X. 29.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/393

364 the other. The 'vowel-sounds,' he declared, 'were inherent' ; but it was allowable also to represent them by separate signs; and farther redundant consonants were frequently introduced for the sake of euphony. These opinions were immediately traversed by Lowen- stern, in his 'Expose des Elements ' (1847). This tract followed the sudden, though happily transient, con- version of Hhicks to the appli(\ation of the Semitic vowel system to the Babylonian writinir. Lowenstern embraced this view with characteristic energy ; and it was adopted also by De Saulcy, hi whose case it became one of the chief causes of the ultimate failure of his Assyrian studies.

Lowenstern, as w(^ liave said, considered that Hawlinson was fundamentally wrong in applyhig the laws derived from Indo-Eurojjean languages 'to a wi'itinuand a lani^^uaae that aie Semitic.' He al)Slutely denied that the vowel is inherent.* The signs are simple consonants, and they may Ix^ used in c(mnection with any vowel sound. The vowels mav or may not be

» «/ ft

expressed, and the signs for them are to a large extent expressive of any vowel sound. One sign he mentions may convey the sound of hon^ a, and ya ; another of a or ha. ir and //.- The vowels art% lu* savs, by no means limited to the a, i and ii of the Sanscrit, but include also the e and o and the diphthong ao. He entirely disagrees with the opinion of EawHnson that the equivalent signs have any modilied value. He com- l)ares Assyiian with Egyptian, and regards the signs that ai'e aj)parently intercliang(*able as simple Miomo- phones.' He shows the differiMit ways in which the names of the Achaemeiiian kinas are written ; and di'aws the api)arently inevitable inference that the different simis have one and the same sound. 'The

o ' E.rposf'j p. 44. '^ lb, p. 73.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/394

Rh variants,' he says, 'may he used indifferently without violating the phonetic laws of the language.' He was apparently the first to observe that some signs 'express different sounds'; and these he calls 'homotypes.' As was natural, he does not appear to have had any idea of the importance of this discovery. His homotypes seem limited to the signs for vowels, any one of which may express almost any vowel sound, and also aspirates and liquids; and he observed that m and w, and y and i, are each expressed by the same signs.

His present pamphlet indicates how rapidly the study was progressing. He now relies entirely upon the analysis of proper names, in accordance with the suggestion of Longpérier; and he abandons his attempted comparison with the form of the Hebrew letters. He surrenders his reading of 'Ashdod,' and suggests 'No Kaschzar ' in place of it; and he even doubts the identity of Aisak and Sargon. He thinks he has discovered from the Naksh-i-Rustam inscription that the sign he mistook for r is really s, and that his k is certainly n. Accordingly he reads the word s ch(kh) n which somewhat revives his confidence in Sargon.

It is not clear to what extent, if to any, he was indebted to Hincks. His exaggerated Semitism was probably of native growth. He was not yet aware of the age of the Babylonian bricks, as explained by Hincks in 1846: yet he knew the determinative sign for proper names, which apparently was not known to Hincks. Hincks, on the other hand, recognised a sign prefixed non-phonetically to the name Ormuzd, and also used by abbreviation for the word "god." Löwensten says there is 'no special sign accompanying the


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/395

366 names of the gods.' He, however, recognised a sign as the monogram for 'god'; l)ut wlien lie fonnd it in conjunction with the name of ' Aurmuzd ' he treated it as the initial letter, and gave it the definite plionetic value of a.^ Such were the diffic-uUies to be overcome l^efore the determinative for 'irod ' was re<*o£niised. He observed that a word may he expressed by it^ first and hist signs, an early indication of the plionetic cmj)le- ment.^* Meanwhile Hincks and Kawlinson announced the discovery already mentioned that the apparent equivalent signs in Persian dei)ended in reality uj)on the vowel that was associated with the consonantal value. It at once occurred to Longperiei- that the gi'eat diffi- culty of the Assyrian h(mioi)hnes might be solved by the aj)plication of the same princi])le. If, he says, thei'e is a separate sign for the consonant m according as it is followed by a, i or w, 'one can understand how a similar pi-actice, if extended to many consonants, would augment the number of alphabetical signs. He warned scholars not to be too ready to ac<*ept the existence of homophones, because he observed that ' according as the work proceeds the numbei* of homo- ])hones decreases.'^

While these discussions were proceeding, Hotta con- tinued his contributions to the 'Journal Asiatique' (1847-8), and afterwai'ds pul)lished them in a separate 'Memoire sur TPIcriture cuneiforme ' (Paris, 1848). He endeavoured to introduce some deo-ree of order amontr the profusion of Assyrian signs. He divw up a Table, consisting of a hundred and twenty-five siiius that seemed to be most ccmimonlv used: and under each of these he arranged the signs which he found were some-

• lie iustanctvs the word for • earth,' p. S. ^ * Lett re a LoweiisttTii,' hccit. p. oOH.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/396

Rh times apparently interchanged for them.' In this List of Variants we constantly find six or seven signs — sometimes many more — grouped togethei* as of equi- valent value. In view of later discoveries, it will be seen how extremelv useful this classification mirfit be(*(mie, for the signs thus brought together were no doubt usually those that contained the same consonantal values. In the meantime, however, Botta was at a loss to find any reasonable explanation. Like llawlinson, however, he could not believe that any of them were, as Lowenstern maintained, real homoj)hones, or signs having identical values. They nmst, he tliought, be distiuijuished from each other by some slioht shades of so\nid that were sufficiently near to ])e easily con- founded." He explained, in antici])ation of the dis- coverv so soon afterwards made by Hincks, that 'it is l)ossible that the language is syHabic — so fai", at least, as that each consonant is represented by a different sign, according to the vowel to which it is joined. Thus, for example, there would be one sign for U ; others for ha^ hi. et(*. In Semitic lan^jfuai^es the short vowels have little importance, and therefore the syllal)le //a might be expressed by the sigii for h only ; by the two signs b and a ; and also in certain cases, by the simis that represent b in ('onnection with tin* other vowels.' It will be seen that Botta was verv far indeed frcmi being the mere painstaking classifier which it was oncte the fashion to describe him. He and Longperier were, in fact, the oidy two Continental scholars, at ])resent

' liawlin.son thus dL'scribt'S Botta's labours. Il»* has b»»en t*mplo\vd in same word with orthopTajiliical variations funii»»hinp him with a kev to the ♦'(juivalent signs: and by these means he has sucrt-eded, he informs m*^, in reducing the Assyrian alphabet to some maiuigeulilf comj)ass.'— ,/. /»'. A. .V. 1S46, X. '29.
 * constructing a Cin])let»' tablf of variants, the tivijuent rt']>ftition of the

' Journal Asiatique, 1S4H, March, xi. :24").


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/397

368 occupied with this subject, wlu) were gifted with any real penetration into its difficulties.

Botta succeeded in dividing nearly the whole of the Bull inscription correctly into its words, but the diffi- culty of this task was still so mxmt that even he oc- casionally fell into error. He also first pointed out that the sign Luwenstern mistook for two signs was one and indivisible. He detected the determinative sign for ' country ' that is used in the Khorsabad inscription, and he made the important suggestion that the phonetic value of the sign for ' king ' is ' sar.' ^ Longperier at once connected this word with its Hebrew equivalent, and showed that it is used to express the first syllable in the name of the Khorsabad kiu^ * Sar-^in.' He made an attempt to decipher an inscription on the leg of the Khoi-sabad bull, and he was the first to recognise ' Assur.' His translation runs thus: 'Glorious [is] Sargon, King, great King, King of Kings, King of the country of Assur.' - He also showed that ' great ' might be exi)ressed by one sign only,*'^ which added another stej) to the dis(*oyery of the phonetic* complement be^un by Lowenstern. This sliort contribution to the ^Kevue Archcologique' shows that Longperier possessed to a high degree a true ai)titude for these studies; and if he had Ix^en able to pursue them, he might have vindicated for France a more favourable position than it was lier fortune to ol)tain. The difficulty in these matters of re(H)gnising truth from error was nowhere more clearly illustrated than in the case of the identi- fication of ' Sargon ' by Longperier. So far was the correctness of this inoenious suggestion from e^aining

^ Journal Asiati^/ue, ix. 378; * JjCttrt' a I^etronno/ Eevue Avchcologiquey 1848, p. 466.

- Cf, Rev, Archvol. 1S48, p. 504.

^ Rev. ArcheoL ib. p. 50;^. See Oppert, Erpi'ditioUy p. 123.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/398

Rh immediate acceptance, that we find Hincks subsequently conjectures that the name of the faither of Sennacherib should be read 'Ni-Shar.' A later attempt, in 1849, which resulted in 'Kin-nil-li-n'a' showed little improvement. Even in 1850 Rawlhison is still so far afield that he translates it 'Arko-tsin'; and it is not till August 1851 that he accepts 'Sargina,' the reading given four years previously by Longpérier. Yet the question was of no little interest, for it really settled the controversy between Hincks and Rawlinson as to the date of the Lower Assyrian dynasty in favour of the former. It was not till Eawlinson read 'Senna-cherib ' in a tablet found by Layard at Kouyunjik that he would acknowledge his error, and admit that there was at last found 'a tangible startnig place for chronology.' Hincks was satisfied, two years earlier, that he had identified the names of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon.

In June 1849 Hincks read a paper on the Khorsabad inscriptions which shows a great advance upon any contribution yet made to the decipherment of the language. There is evidence in his essay on the Van inscriptions that so early as December 1847 he had practically given up the attempt he made in the previous January to assimilate the Assyrian writing as far as possible to the Hebrew—at least as regards the vowel system. He is now satisfied that the Assyrian maintains a clear distinction between the vowels, and also between the surd and sonant consonants at the beginning of a word, though at the end the two sounds were confounded. He points out that no distinction is made between the sounds of w and m, and, he adds, between l and r; but he afterwards correctly admits the independent existence of these sounds in his


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/399

370 Syllabarium.^ He has also definitely arrived at the (*onviction that the Assyrian (characters are whoUv syUabic or ideo<»Taphi(* — in a large number of oases they are both. He will not now admit that any of them represents a simple consonant. He has still no doubt that there are many homoplumes. Many (characters appear to have precisely the same values, ' though much fewer than mi^ht be inferred from a mechanical com- ])arison of inscriptions and observance of interchanges." He recognises the existence of poly])liones, already described l)v Lowenstern in 1847 as Miomotvpes.'

kindred values, the distinction between which would appear not to have been considered so great as to require different modes of re])resenting them.' This discovery was so i)erplexing that he doubted how best to present it to the readei*: ' Whether it is more desirable to give different values to the sjmie character, or to o;ive it one value ou\y, with a warninof to the reader that he may, under certain restrictions, substitute another for it at his ])leasure.'
 * Many characters ' he savs, ' admit of two or more

But the chief im])ortance of his present essay con- sists in the light it throws for the first time on the nature of the ideograms. The earliest inquirers leant to the opinion that the language was at least partly monogrammatic, though Grotefend was indined to regard these signs more in the light of al)breviations. He, however, distinctly ])inte(l out the existeiute of ideograj)hic diaracters in the sliorter insci-iptions at Persepolis. In 184f) (Deceml)er) Hincks i-ecognised a siirn that was used 'by al)breviatin for the word "uod"'; and he noticed that ' l^esides having a phonetic value, it is used as a non-phonetic* initial before the name of Ormuzd.' In the same essay he <raye numerous other

^ *0n the Khorsabad Inscription/ Trans. R. I, Acad, xxi'i, 12.


text:
Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/400

Rh instances of the existence of ideograpliic and non- phonetic determinative signs. ^ In 1849 lie added for the first time the true i)lionetic vahie (an) for the sign for ' god '; ^' and in the present essay he shows the various uses to which ideograi)hi(* signs may be applied. He ex])Uiins that many phonetic characters also express words; these may be considered as abbreviations, though ])ossibly some 'originally denoted ideas and thence, in process of time, the initial sounds in the words which express tliem/ A sec*ond class resemble the mixed signs of the Egy})tians: they may re])resent words l)y tliemselves, but they sometimes i-equire the addition of complements. Another class never have complements, nor any phonetic value except in com- pcmnd nouns, of which the word they represent forms an integral part. The ideograms, however, that give rise to the most interesting speculation are those that have phonetic values, but where the words that denote the ideas they expi'ess have no phonetic relationship to the phonetic value of the ideogram. For example, we now know that the phonetic value of the ideogram for Assyrian word foi* ' nod,' which is il-ii. A ixlance over any table giving the syllabic values of ideograms will show how extensively this peculiarity prevails: and its recognition soon led llincks to the important deduction that the writing was boi'rowed from some other people where the phonetic* value of the ideograms was in some sort of agreement with the initial sound of the word they represei»ted.'^ Hincks dwelt on the great difficulty
 * god ' is (tn; but this syllable forms no portion of the

' TransactioiiSy xxi. 241, 247.

2 lb. xxii. 828; AthentBum, Sept. 21, 1850, p. 1000.

^ * It will appear/ lie says later on, * that I consider the syllabarv to be of Indo-European origin.* In 1852 he adds: * The characters all repres<'nt syllables, and were originally intended to represent a non-Semitic language/ Transactions y xxii. 57; ib. p. 295.

B K 2