TALBOT5291

Oppert/ Apr. 6/57. Lacock

I thk y. vy mch for ye informn contd in yr lr of the 2d inst.

In translatg <cuneiform> <by?> ‘lapis lazuli’ I follow’d Rawln who states positivly that it has that meang

For my own part I have no opinn about it, not havg met wth any evidce

You say it means ‘copper’, and you adduce <ill. del> what apprs strong evidce, but a difficty occurs to me. We have another word for copper, viz. takabar a word wch occurs continlly – Besides the word za <cuneiform> has the sign <cuneiform> or ‘stone’ prefix’d. Would the Assyrns have rank’d Copper among ‘stones’?

In the interestg lithographs wch y sent me I observe the fo names of Tig. Pil & Sardanop. Thus written – <cuneiform> – Will you permit me to ask y. from what monumts you have copied these names, for I have never seen either of them so written, and I consider the variatn to be highly importt

Please cite as “TALBOT5291,” in Ɛpsilon: accessed on 5 June 2025, https://epsilon.ac.uk/view/epsilon-testbed/talbot/letters/TALBOT5291