Oppert/ Apr. 6/57. Lacock

I th^k y. v^y m^ch for y^e informⁿ cont^d in y^r l^r of the 2^d inst.

In translat^g <cuneiform> <by?> ‘lapis lazuli’ I follow’d Rawlⁿ who states positiv^ly that it has that mean^g

For my own part I have no opinⁿ about it, not hav^g met w^th any evid^ce

You say it means ‘copper’, and you adduce <ill. del> what app^rs strong evid^ce, but a diffic^ty occurs to me. We have another word for copper, viz. takabar a word w^ch occurs contin^lly – Besides the word za <cuneiform> has the sign <cuneiform> or ‘stone’ prefix’d. Would the Assyr^ns have rank’d Copper among ‘stones’?

In the interes^tg lithographs w^ch y sent me I observe the fo names of Tig. Pil & Sardanop. Thus written – <cuneiform> – Will you permit me to ask y. from what monum^ts you have copied these names, for I have never seen either of them so written, and I consider the variatⁿ to be highly import^t