^{page 5 note 1} The initial letters which I use in quoting refer to the following authorities:

B. I. Behistun Inscription.

B. M. British Museum Series of Assyrian Inscriptions, published in 1851.

Kh. Khursabad Inscriptions, published by the French Government.

N. R. Nakhsh-i-Rustam Inscription attached to the present Memoir.

E. I. East India House Inscription of Nebuchadnezzar.

C. C. Bellino's (or the Nebuchadnezzar) Cylinder, published by Grotefend.

W. Westergaard's Plates.

M. Michaux's stone, (cast of it in the British Museum.)

C. C. Cullimore's Cylinders, published by Syro-Egyptian Society.

^{page 6 note 1} Observe, that although in the printed text of Behistun Inscription, I give to the sign its normal power of sar, I now suppose it in this name to represent as a secondary value the syllable vas.

^{page 7 note 1} and represent the proper name of the country, however, rather than the ethnic title, the nouns being apparently in the oblique case. That these two forms, moreover, denote the same place, notwithstanding the discrepant orthography, is proved by the name of the king of Hamath, who was one of the chief antagonists of the Assyrian monarch that founded Khursabad.

^{page 7 note 2} It would be hazardous to give the pronunciation of this name, as the character represents two distinct powers, and there are no means of ascertaining which of the two sounds it may be here intended to convey. I should propose, however, to read the name Likuśaha.

^{page 7 note 3} It would be more precise to say, that the Cuneiform answers to the Hebrew preformative of the 1st person singular, wherever the consonant which follows it opens on a vowel. In all conjugational forms where the 1st radical is jemated, the personal characteristic is of course included in the sign which represents the initial syllable.

It is further to be observed, that although, in quoting verbal examples, I rarely make a distinction of tense, the forms employed do in reality belong to the Aorist of the Arabic and Hebrew. The Præterite tense was not, of course, altogether unknown to the Assyrian and Babylonian languages, but it was seldom used.

^{page 8 note 1} There may, perhaps, however, be a grammatical distinction between annát and anniti, the former being the nominative and the latter the oblique case, and the vowel a being thus changed to i, in the form anniti, to harmonize with the inflexional ending.

^{page 8 note 2} On further examination, I prefer considering the in these names to be everywhere a single letter with the power of ai, the effect of its junction with the preceding sign being to develope a long vowel sound; and I no longer therefore, insist on any phonetic confusion between the vowels i and a.

^{page 9 note 1} This is the ordinary method of expressing filiation in the cursive Babylonian documents. There are, indeed, many hundred examples of the group on the clay cakes in the British Museum.

^{page 9 note 2} The alphabetical machinery which is used to express these names, will be given in detail hereafter. For the title of Nabochodrossor three ideographic elements will be found to be employed. 1. The god Nabo, denoted by the letters or preceded by the determinative : 2. a compound ideograph sometimes phonetically rendered by kuduri, but of which I know not the meaning: and 3, a sign , which is also used as an ideograph for “brother,” and which, being sometimes replaced by must be pronounced ṣυτ The name of Nabunit in the same manner is expressed by two ideographs; firstly, or with the determin. for Nabu, and secondly, the letter of which I know not the meaning, but which must apply to some object named in Babylonian nit. It further appears probable that the group which occurs on so many of the clay cakes in the British Museum, is merely another way of expressing the name of Nabunit, the character in the second element being used as a determinative, and the letter ni standing as an abbreviation for nit. I have also found nit in this name expressed phonetically by

^{page 10 note 1} This name is found on all the documents, both cursive and hieratic, of the time of Nabochodrossor, and is also usually expressed by ideographs. The elements are; 1, the god Nabu, represented by the letters or preceded by the determinative for “god” ; 2, the word for “son,” denoted by the letter or the mixed sign and 3, the term ṣυτ, which is either ideographically expressed by the sign for “a brother,” or is phonetically written

^{page 11 note 1} See Westergaard's H., line 2, and Niebnhr's copy of the same Inscription.

^{page 11 note 2} In the first of these names the middle element is often replaced by , thus slowing that the phonetic power is the word signifying “a son.” The same interchange takes place in the orthography of the third name; (comp. B. M. 86, Is. 2 and 16); and it may be inferred even that in the second name (B. M., 17- 1), the represents the sound for “son,” from comparing the nearly similar title of upon Michaux's stone, where is stituted for . [Since the above was written, I have ascertained that the king whose name is written is the Merodach Baladan of Scripture; the name of the god Merodach (Mars) being represented by the monogram , preceded by the det. of “a god;” or having the power of pal or pala, and the last element being sounded dana or adana. I am still in doubt, however, as to the reading of the other two names: the former belongs to an ancestor of Sardanapalus, and the latter to the grandson of Sennacherib. I now suppose the Bign independently of its normal value of a or ha, to represent the distinct sounds bu and pal, or pala; and this latter term may, perhaps, have signified “a son,” though there is no evidence, at present, to establish such an identification; and I have accordingly preferred to render the word “son” by bar, after the analogy of the Chaldee.

^{page 12 note 1} For the true Cuneiform orthography of the name altered by the Hebrews and Greeks to Elam and Elymais, see B. I., 1. 41; B. M., 22. Is. 31 and 35; Khurs. 66. 2. 4. &c., &c.

^{page 13 note 1} This is the orthography used in the detached Insc. of Behistun, No. 4. In the great Inse., the name is written Khasatritti.

^{page 13 note 2} In the same way the is often used for the oblique, case of nouns, answering to the i in Arabic; comp. the royal titles in the Standard Inscription at Nimrud, which are either written in the nom. or in the oblique Compare also the orthography of hganeta, for feminine oblique plural of haga, “this.” (B. I., Is. 8 and 9.)

^{page 14 note 1} I am not quite satisfied, however, that these two forms come from the same root.

^{page 14 note 2} As for instance in the orthography of akre or akre, “I worshipped,” or “made Adoration,” from in the phrase—

“The god Assar, the great lord, and the gods inhabiting Assyria, to them I made adoration,” the last word being very often written with the suppressed. Compare Khur. 8. 2. 20, and corresponding phrases in the Standard Inscription, with B. M., 28. 27; 34. 9, and many other passages, where although different gods may be named, the construction is precisely similar.

^{page 15 note 1} See B. M., 88. 32 and 63. 21. There are many difficulties, however, connected with the Assyrian system of yearly notation which I am not yet able to explain. “Year” is expressed by or or and the number is sometimes indicated by figures, and sometimes by words or signs. Thus, for “in my first year,” we have in the Obelisk (B.M., 88. 26); but on Col. Taylor's Cyl. and , on the B. M., Cylinder, 63. 1. 18. “Second,” is always expressed by ; but for “third,” Colonel Taylor's Cylinder gives or instead of , which is found on all the other documents; while for “fourth,” we have not only the regular , but, on Colonel Taylor's Cylinder, the same sign with the addition of ; and upon the Obelisk, “in the fourth year” is rendered by (B. M., 89. 45.)

page 15 note 2 As the god was the chief divinity of the Babylonians, and was in particular the special object of the worship of the great Nebuchadnezzar, the name, I think, must needs indicate the same deity, who was called Jupiter Bel us by the Greeks. I suspect, also, to be the Suceoth Benoth of Scripture. In the Insc. of Khursabad the title is applied as an epithet to the Babylonian Bel, (see Khur., 66, three from end; 87. 8; 152. 11, &c.), and the same relation is observed in the Insc. of (B. M., 17. 15,) where the second got to whom altars were erected, is named ; but in the Inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar (E. I., Col. 4. 16), the name is applied to a distinct deity. The gods mentioned in the second example are, Nabo and Nona, (or Venus,) and the third pair, where the epithet Bel, “a lord,” is expressed phonetically, are “the sun and the moon.”

^{page 16 note 1} I am inclined, indeed, to read the dual forms quoted in these examples, as Belima, “my gods.” At any rate, the dual characteristic must end in a consonant, or otherwise the suffix of the 1st person, which is attached to the noun, would be represented by or ; compare abua, “my father;” Beliya, “my gods,” in the plural. In the variant orthography, also, of the Babylonian term, which in the plural. In the variant orthography, also, of the Babylonian term, which in the trilingual Inscriptíons, answers to the Persian framatára, “a law giver,” and which is almost certainly a Piel participle cognate with the Chaldee “judgment of the king,” the letter must needs, I think, have the power of im. Compare the following forms:—

In the first of these forms, all of which it must be remembered are in the Plural number, the final m would seem to be superfluous (it coalesced, perhaps, in pro-