TALBOT8027

Royal Asiatic Society,
5, New Burlington Street,
London,
18 Jan^y 1860.

Dear Sir

I think your opinion on all points, respecting the Hamitic of Assyria is correct, except perhaps your making it wholly distinct from the Susian. I have forgotten the little I had learned of the latter, but I have a vague notion that the Grammatical Hamitic tablets in the British Museum shew some remote analogy of structure; still more so with those of the second class Achæmenian, which I believe to be Persic, meaning the provincial Persian of Persis, and having nothing to do with the Persian Empire I wish to distinguish Persic from Persian, as I would Frankish from French, the conquerors having carried their name far beyond their own national territory.

I do not know what the trustees will do about the publication of the transcriptions. ¹ They will be decided by Rawlinson I suppose, from whom nothing has yet been received. I should think it not unlikely that the syllabarium will form the commencement of a new volume. We have always two forms of explanation in <these?> of which the first seems Hamitic, the second Assyrian. As Ki, irtstis irtsit, for "earth". Ka and [bah?] "gate". &^c &^c. Often we find a crude form in one side, and a nomination on the other, as bar, báru, kal, kallu, &^c. Once we have curiously Alep on the Hamitic side for a "bull" and buedu’ on the Semitic.

I am glad you are about to transliterate; and if I gain the assent of the Council, I will put it into the printer’s hands immediately.

Yours faithfully
Edwin Norris

[envelope:]
H. Fox Talbot Esq
Lacock Abbey
Chippenham