and _kh_; and before it was known that the first letter had the sound of ‘Ha’ it was a comparatively slight error to drop the aspirate and set it down as _a_. We have therefore added this letter to the number of Grotefend’s correct discoveries. He also observed that the word for ‘king’ is often represented by an ideogram (𐏋) which, like the word, is subject to inflexions. This discovery he, however, generously attributes to Tychsen;[311] but we have not found it in the ‘Lucubratio.’ De Sacy was not aware of the origin attributed to it, and he has given the credit entirely to Grotefend himself.[312] Soon after the completion of the alphabet, but still before the appearance of the Appendix in 1815, he was induced to change the value of two of the signs.[313] One of these he now fixed correctly, _k_ (25), and the other approximately _sr_ (40). It will be recollected that Sir William Ouseley visited Murgab in 1811 and made a copy of the inscription that is found repeated there several times. His book did not appear till 1821; but Grotefend had the advantage of seeing a copy of the inscription in time to include it in his Memoir. According to the alphabet as it then stood, the transliteration would render _z_ _u_ _sch_ _u_ _d_ _sh_;[314] but if we follow his own account, he saw reasons, which he does not explain, to change the first letter from _z_ to _k_ and the third from _sch_ to _sr_; with the result that he produced _k_ _u_ _sr_ _u_ _e_ _sch_, which he read ‘Kurus.’ He does not mention the change of the _d_ into _e_, but a more correct copy of the same inscription showed that that sign did not exist in the original, which consists of five signs only. After he had arrived at this result, he tells us, he came across the French translation of Morier’s first Memoir, published in 1813, where, it will be recollected, that acute traveller suggested that Murgab was Pasargadae, the city of Cyrus.[315] This confirmation of his own studies was certainly satisfactory, though the sequence of events as he describes them is remarkable. Grotefend had now contributed eight correct values from the inscriptions B and G, two from the Murgab inscriptions, and two from other sources—that is, twelve in all (if we admit the _sr_, really _r_ before _u_, and the _a_ which is _h_ before _a_, _i_, _u_). In addition to these the _a_ and _b_ of Münter were known, though Grotefend erroneously changed the _b_ into _v_; and hence in 1815 fourteen correct values had been reached.