The discovery and decipherment of the trilingual cuneiform inscriptionsBooth, Arthur John
History
The discovery and decipherment of the trilingual cuneiform inscriptions
Booth, Arthur John
Achaemenian inscriptions; Cuneiform inscriptions
It is scarcely surprising that out of the
nine, one turned out to be correct, No. 21 (𐎠); and of the four signs he
allotted to _s_, one was correct, No. 38 (𐏁). He was also successful in
detecting the signs for _d_ and _u_: but as his system was based upon
no intelligible principle, these results were purely accidental, and
could not afford a guide to future inquirers.[248] Having succeeded to
his satisfaction in finding known equivalents for the unknown signs,
and being thereby enabled to transliterate the cuneiform text, the
next step was to endeavour to make some sense of it. This he sought to
do by comparing the singular words that resulted from his system with
those of languages he thought must be the most nearly allied, such as
Zend, Pehlevi, Chaldee, Arabic, Syriac and Armenian.[249] He failed to
recognise fully the intention of the diagonal wedge, so that upon some
occasions he rendered it by the conjunction ‘and.’ He had, however, the
merit of pointing out that a particular group of seven cuneiform letters
were continually recurring, often followed by the same group with three
or four other letters added to the termination. These are enclosed by
diagonal wedges, and we now know they are single words, the simplest
form being the nominative singular of ‘King,’ and the two longer the
same word with the addition of the genitive singular and the genitive
plural terminations. But Tychsen had no suspicion, at this time at least,
that the letters occurring between the diagonals must be treated as one
word,[250] nor that the terminal variation was a grammatical inflexion.
Accordingly he makes the simple form of seven letters represent two
words, which he transliterates and translates Osch Aksak, ‘is Aksak’; and
the two longer groups he treats as three words—Osch Aksak yka, ‘is Aksak
divus,’ for the first; and Osch Aksak acha, ‘is Aksak perfectus,’ for the
second.[251] The personage named Aksak, whom he had thus evolved, he took
to be Arsaces, the founder of the Parthian dynasty; and he accordingly
found himself compelled to attribute the inscriptions and monuments to
that comparatively late date.[252] Tychsen’s efforts at translation were
exhausted by his rendering of the B and G Inscriptions of Niebuhr both
of which he found to belong to Aksak; but he has transliterated the
Inscriptions A, H, I, and L, for the benefit of other scholars who may
wish to read some meaning into them. The curious feature of his system
is that some of his letters actually turned out to be correct, such as
his _a_, _u_, _s_, or _sch_. But as these results are purely accidental
he cannot be allowed to have made any real contribution to cuneiform
decipherment.
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