So matters remained until 1882, when Stanislas Guyard pointed out the
parallelism between a formula which occurs at the end of many Vannic
inscriptions and the imprecatory formula of the Assyrian texts. I had
already been struck by the same fact, and was at the time preparing a
Memoir on the decipherment and translation of the inscriptions, which
shortly afterwards appeared in the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic
Society_. In this I had made use of Layard’s copies, which had never
been published; other copies also, including photographs, squeezes
and casts, had been placed at my disposal, and in 1882 I was able to
lay before cuneiform scholars a grammar and vocabulary of the Vannic
language, together with translations and analyses of all the known
texts.[133] These have been subsequently corrected and extended by
other Assyriologists--Guyard, D. H. Müller, Nikolsky, Scheil, Belck
and Lehmann, as well as by myself. An ordinary Vannic text can now
be translated with nearly as much completeness and certainty as an
Assyrian text, and the number of them known to us has been greatly
enlarged by the archæological explorations of Belck and Lehmann.
In the decipherment of the Vannic inscriptions the ideographs and
determinatives which are scattered through them took the place for me
of a bilingual text. The determinatives told me what was the nature of
the words which followed or preceded them, and so explained the general
sense of the passages in which they occurred, while from time to time a
phonetically-written word would be replaced in a parallel passage by an
ideograph the signification of which was known. I soon found, moreover,
that the cuneiform syllabary must have been brought from Nineveh to Van
in the age of Assur-natsir-pal II. (B.C. 884–859), and that
the actual phrases met with in the inscriptions of that monarch are
sometimes reproduced in a Vannic dress. The Vannic language, however,
still remains isolated, though the majority of those who have studied
it incline to Lenormant’s view that its nearest living representative
is Georgian. Not being a Georgian scholar myself, this is a point upon
which I can express no opinion.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account