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
On August 17, 1821, he enjoyed the first view of the ruins from his
resting place, a mile distant, and with unusual philosophy he repressed
his curiosity and continued his march to Murgab. ‘I took,’ he writes,
‘a capricious kind of pleasure in not going to them, and forcing myself
to be contented with this general survey.’ He passed the little nook of
Naksh-i-Rejeb and the ruins of Istakhr, and at length encamped before
the ‘Meshed i Mader i Suliman.’ It will be recollected that the learning
of Ouseley had decisively negatived the sagacious intuition of the more
brilliant Morier, and the subsequent discovery of the name of Cyrus on
the inscriptions at Murgab was as yet far from being accepted as decisive
of the matter. The true site of the tomb of Cyrus was therefore still in
dispute, and Rich could only venture to write that he ‘began to think
that this in reality must be the tomb.’[135] He hoped, however, to be
able to contribute something to the settlement of the question, but when
he left he confessed, after all, that he was still unconvinced.[136]
He, however, made another copy of the now celebrated inscription. After
a stay of only one day, Rich retraced his steps towards Persepolis, and
pitched his tent on the top of the great staircase, beneath the shadow of
the Entrance Porch.
His resolution to abstain from antiquarian labour entirely broke down
in presence of the inscriptions. He employed workmen to clear away the
rubbish which in some places concealed them, and he disclosed for the
first time the inscription on the south stairs leading to the Palace of
Darius,[137] and the one opposite on the façade of the stairs of the
Palace of Ochus. ‘I was actually diligent enough,’ he writes, ‘to fall to
work at copying the inscriptions; and during the six days we remained at
Persepolis I copied all the inscriptions except one. I have found much to
corroborate Grotefend’s system, and have admired his sagacity. The labour
I have gone through will greatly assist him.’[138] Indeed the result of
his industry, combined with that of his predecessors, was to leave little
more to be done by the copyist at Persepolis. The inscriptions over the
animals on the Porch, and the long inscription at Naksh-i-Rustam seem
indeed to be the only ones that remained.
1. He copied the three tablets of inscriptions of Xerxes on the Anta of
the Palace of Darius, which had been imperfectly done by Le Bruyn (Table
131).[139]
2. The three tablets of inscriptions of Xerxes on the Anta in his
palace—now first taken.[140]
3. The three tables of inscriptions of Xerxes, consisting of four lines
over the king’s head on the east portal of his palace.[141] This is the
same inscription as Niebuhr had copied from the north portal (his E, F,
G).
4. Fragmentary inscriptions of Xerxes found in his palace.[142]
5. The three inscriptions of Xerxes on the south stairs of the Palace of
Darius[143]—now first taken.
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