It thus appears that Rawlinson had a real aptitude for unravelling this kind of puzzle. Only four letters were left to him by his predecessors; and of these he determined two correctly and one nearly correctly. The fourth, 28 (𐎩) the _z_ of Jacquet, he improves to an approximate correct value _j’h_ in his first alphabet; and in his second he gives it correctly as _j_ before _a_: a correction made simultaneously by Hincks. He may also claim the merit of having restored the sound of _k_ (he writes _kh_) to 25 (𐎤). The value of this letter had long before been fixed by Grotefend, but since then it had passed through many vicissitudes. St. Martin thought it was _h_; Burnouf made it _q_; and Lassen thought, in 1836, it stood for the _a_ in the diphthong _au_, _ô_, till at length, in 1844, he reluctantly adopted Burnouf’s _q_. Tn addition to these services, Rawlinson contributed two new letters, one of which, No. 43 (𐎵), _n_ before _u_, has taken a permanent place in the alphabet. The other (𐎾), _ñ_, is really a Susian letter with a nasal sound, and is found in the Persian column in only two proper names. Oppert suggests that it may be the missing _l_; and Spiegel is disposed to agree.[565] If we consult Rawlinson’s alphabet as it stood early in 1846, it will be seen that he was in possession of correct values for the thirty-three signs in Niebuhr’s list, with the exception of two, 10 (𐎺) _w_ for _v_, and 19 (𐎮) _t_ for _d_, and both of these may be almost allowed to him as approximately correct. In the case of the first, indeed, we have already conceded it to Lassen, in consequence of the practical exclusion of _w_ from the German language; and we have only denied it to Rawlinson because he distinguishes it from his 15 (𐎻) _v_.