We must now turn back to the second transcript of the Persian
inscriptions, which, thanks to its greater simplicity, had been
deciphered before the Assyro-Babylonian. The way was opened in 1844 by
the Danish scholar Westergaard.[26] With the help of the proper names
he fixed the values of many of the characters and made a tentative
endeavour to read the texts. But the language he brought to light was
of so strange a nature as to throw doubt on the correctness of his
method. Turkish, Arabic, Indian and even Keltic elements seemed alike
to be mingled in it. It was not, therefore, till his readings had been
subjected to revision by Hincks in 1846[27] and de Saulcy in 1850[28]
that any confidence was reposed in it, and the results made available
for the decipherment of the Babylonian transcripts, the characters of
which frequently had the same forms. It must be remembered, however,
that Westergaard worked from defective materials. Rawlinson had not yet
published his copy of the Behistun inscription, which he eventually
placed in the hands of Edwin Norris, who, in 1853, edited the text
along with a syllabary, grammar and vocabulary, as well as translations
and commentary.[29] This edition was a splendid piece of work, and
with it the decipherment of the second transcript of the Persian
inscriptions may be said to have been accomplished. Oppert’s _Peuple
et Langage des Médes_, which appeared in 1870, did but revise,
supplement and systematize the work of Norris.
The new language which had thus been brought to light was
agglutinative. Westergaard had seen in it the language of the Medes,
and, like Rawlinson, had connected it with a hypothetical “Scythian”
family of speech. The term “Scythian” was retained by Norris, who,
however, attempted to show that it was really related to the Finnish
dialects. But the excavations made at Susa by Loftus in 1851 put
another face on the matter. In 1874, and again more fully in 1883,[30]
I pointed out that the inscriptions found at Susa and other ancient
Elamite sites were in an older form of the same language as that
of the second Achæmenian transcripts, and furthermore that certain
inscriptions discovered by Layard in the plain of Mal-Amîr eastward
of Susa were in practically the same script and dialect. At the same
time I fixed the values of the characters in the Mal-Amîr texts
and gave provisional translations of them, with a vocabulary and
commentary. Oppert and myself had already been working at the reading
of the older Susian inscriptions, a task in which we were followed by
Weissbach with a greater measure of success. But the same cause which
had retarded the decipherment of the second transcript of the Persian
inscriptions--a want of materials--militated against any great advance
being made in the decipherment of the older Susian, and it is only
since 1897, when the excavations of M. de Morgan at Susa were begun,
that the student has been at last provided with the necessary means.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account