Killyleagh Co Down
16th Jany 1857
Dear Sir,
I duly received you letter of the 13th. To begin with answering your enquiries. I read the name of the king whose slabs were found displaced at Nimroud Tiglath Pil Eser almost entirely on chronological points. I think he can be no other than the Tiglath Pil Esar of the Bible from his relative position with respect to those kings. He was the contemporary of Rezin i.e. [cuneiform] Ra.chin.nu [Hebrew] & Menahem [cuneiform] Mi.ni.khi, [illegible deletion] im.mi [Hebrew] B.M. 50.10 both which names agree better in the Hebrew than in the English. Rezin was killed by T.P.E; & tho’ Menahem began to reign under Pul, he may very well have continued to reign till the time of his successor. Besides [cuneiform] is a known pre Semitic equivalent of the root [Hebrew], & with [cuneiform] is entirely to be read tukulti or in construction tuk lat. The [cuneiform] determination of wood gives the special meaning “arrows”; as in the common expression “with arrows I caused to be pierced” (u. sanqid fm ø÷ð). This gives tuklat for the first part of the name; the second is pal “a son” & the third is I presume the preSemitic equivelant of øñà; whatever that may mean. Bic.bhira is entirely wrong, being made up of a semitic noun & a presemitic adjective. So too is Bit-jida & for the same reason. The preSemitic word for “house” is uncertain. Jida signifies “left”; and “the house on the left hand” was a well understood name at Babylon & elsewhere, though obscure to us. I have fancied that it meant a court of justice; & that this and the name preceding it represented institutions & not buildings; the title of Hebre-Chaldaean & others beginning Janin- signifying “defender of religion & of justice” or the like.
I quite agree with you as to the merit of Grotefend’s publications of Bellino’s transcript & of the circumstances of about all that he has given of his own since his great discovery 55 years ago, which he somehow seems to have been incapable of following [illegible deletion] out & improving upon.
The Bellino Inscriptions are in number three, containing the same text with slight variations, but all very defective. By comparing the three a complete text cannot be formed throughout; but it can to a great extent. I saw copies with Mr Layard when he was here (which copies are I believe now in the British Museum) but Rawlinson got better copies, I understand, fm an impression made with cloth. Your invention would produce what could be much more valuable: as in taking of inscriptions it is very important to take the precise interval where the rock is defaced, which a copy made by the eye never gives. Copies taken by paper or cloth are too large & the impressions they give often uncertain.
On account of the chronological date which is found in these inscriptions it would be desirable to know whether they contain an enlarged account of the campaign of the first year of Sennacherib, or an account of a campaign at a later period of his reign, of which there is no other record. I took the former view; Rawlinson took the latter, but perhaps he has amended his views, as in so many other instances.
As to the Trustees of the Museum, they have of late expressed themselves so positively against thinking themselves as a public body to any translation (; though by the arrangement which they have made with Sir H R & which he announced at the meeting of the RAS on the 20th Decr they have virtually done what they proposed not to do;) that I should consider it perfectly useless to make any attempt to induce them to publish mine. If, however, you think there is a chance of their doing anything in that way, you would oblige me more than I can express by making the attempt. If publication is not to be obtained in the book form, the MSS might at least be transferred to the Muniments Room so that any one may see them, & that extracts may be taken by such as wished it. Some magazine would I dare say print extracts.
Believe me to remain Yours vy truly
Edw. Hincks
H. Fox Talbot Esqre