Foreign Office,
8 Dec^r 1863

Dear Sir,

I think you will find that in general the termination of a noun is omitted in static constructs: therefore nuhus nisi. Lee [sud]esur nisi. I.I.H.i.44. nabarrat galliup, fear of my servant. Obel.152.165. nahrat assur, fear of Assur Shan. Phil iv.12. we have the termination as Son. iii.62. See also musal tasilti in Tig. viii 9. musat bilutiga Esar v.30. I know we have musabu in st.[?] and in Neriglisser ii.16. but this is late, and we find other irregularities in nimih[?] inscriptions. You are right about amnu’s, and we have ramanu’s &c. sun also for runu. The final u was probably very short, which may account for musabu above. – when can I find inukhu? I have no reference to it: – I think you must be nearly right in rendering eri by “herish” or something like it. I call it “watch over” from Heb. . Sinasim may be an adverb, the m being occasionally adverbial , according to Oppert. May it not mean “again and again,” “constantly,” from to repeat? “Constantly in prosperity and (kanik) I watched over them.” I suggest this with great hesitation, because of the form: had it been sinasin I should have been satisfied. – In la uttassu, I have little to offer, possibly the t. conjugation may imply completion. la uttassu “did not completely raise it,” but I should hardly venture without corroboration. Zaran certainly appears in Grotefend’s plate, ^<1> but I do not think that Rawlinson would have put in the hook if he had not seen it in the original, these trifles were not attended to always, in spite of the very extraordinary accuracy generally reached. See in iii.16 e.g. where you find for in kanik. may not zarati likewise be “its great images?” [Hebrew] great. [Hebrew] rather means “cover over,” “hide away” &c than “roof.” Now rain-cover would be an inadmissible compound in Lemitu I think.

You will find an allusion to the Synchronous Tablet in Rawlinson [sic] letter to the Athenæum, ^<2> relates to the Canon: whether in May or July I forget.

I should be glad to send you a copy of the Synchronous Tablet myself, but do not like to encroach on Rawlinson’s peculium. I think that when a man has made a discovery (which this is, considering the labour and skill of picking out such a tablet among the thousands in the Museum,) he has a sort of copy right in it for a limited time. My own idea would be to publish it to the scientific world immediately, and it may be also his wish, but I will not assume it, without consulting him, which I will do soon. He is at present in the West of England.

I must again plead haste for this scrawl, having much to do. – You may be interested to hear that D^r Hincks has compiled a dictionary like mine, ^<3> and has proposed to me to unite the two and print a sheet by way of specimen. This I gladly assent to, and am copying some pages to send to him, that he may see how far our different systems of arrangement and translation may be conciliated; if that is feasible we may have a sheet for the printer in a few weeks. Perhaps we may get Rawlinson’s aid in revising it.

I was much interested in hearing of your photoglyphic discovery, ^<4> and think it may be available for cuneiform.

I remain Dear Sir Yours faithfully
Edwin Norris

H. Fox Talbot Esq
&c &c &c

[envelope:]
H. Fox Talbot, Esq
8 Rutland Square
Edinburgh.

---

Notes:

1. Georg Friedrich Grotefend, Erläuterung zweier Ausschreiben des Königes Nebukadnezar in einfacher babylonischer Keilschrift mit einigen Zugabenp (Göttingen, 1856).

2. Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson, 1^st Baronet (1810–1895), orientalist; The Athenaeum (London)

3. Rev Edward Hincks (1792–1866), Irish Egyptologist & Orientalist

4. WHFT had invented photoglyphic engraving in 1856, a photogravure process that promised to make it possible to photographically reproduce characters such as cuneiform in printer's ink.