Page:Discovery and Decipherment of the Trilingual Cuneiform Inscriptions.djvu/442

Rh the 'Ecritures cuneiformes,' an 'Expose des Travaux qui out prepare la Lecture des Inscriptions,' which is still a useful apology for the science. For, notwith- standing all the magnificent results already obtained, the science was still in need of an apologist. In 1852, Professor Wilson, the President of the Royal Asiatic Society, went so far as to regard the Assyrian Inscriptions as still 'merely dumb memorials of antiquity' Very great discrepancies were indeed yet to be found in translations of the same passages by different scholars, and the true meaning of a large number of words continued to be warmly disputed. It was found, in fact, that M. Stern of Götingen still maintained that the language was entirely alphabetical; that there were no ideographs; and he read every syllable of one inscription differently from De Saulcy, except the proper names. Mr. Fox Talbot attributed the prevailing incredulity 'to the fact that each cuneiform group represents not always the same syllables, but sometimes one and sometimes another': in other words, to the existence of polyphones. Hence it was inferred that the system adopted 'cannot be true, and the interpretations based upon it must be fallacious.' He proposed, therefore, to submit the whole matter to a practical test. lie accordingly translated the inscription of Tiglath Peleser, recently found at Kaleh Sherghat, and forwarded it in a sealed envelope to the President of the Asiatic Society. Three other scholars — Rawlinson, Hincks, and Oppert — were then invited to make independent versions of the same inscription, and to comnumicate them under cover to