6 Michaels Grove Brompton
9 May, 1867
My dear Sir,
Thanks for your Glossary no 4, which I received yesterday. We have been making some domestic arrangements, which has deranged my work, and prevented my replying to your former letter, and even now I do not know where to look for my papers. The passage containing musi is in the decagon of Assurbanipal. It reads <illegible deletion> after a broken bit Tarqú (fragt) innaptu (fracture) puluhti Assur bilya izkup-su ma <cuneiform> = Tarqu – fled, the … reverence of Assur my lord swept him and he went his night-path,” or to his place of night, or any thing you like. izkup is made <cuneiform> in one fragment and by the less common <cuneiform> in another.
I have no confidence whatever in the accuracy of pl. 36, having found errors every where and if ever I find myself strong enough I will make a fresh copy of it. There are two originals I think in the British Museum. Oppert <1> translates line 17 “juste et terrible, je ne montrai dans les plaines de Kalon avec Khoumbanigus roi d’Elam, et je le mis en faite.” <2> jumping over sar namru in his usual way. The strictly grammatical version of the line as it stands would be, “the strong, the hero, who in “the prevalence? (ribit) of Dur-an-ki with Kh. king of Elam “the Namru king, and (who) effected his defeat.” of course <demonsense>. I take iskunu to be the relative mood singular, affected by sa, but it may be a plural, and something then is omitted.
There is very little trouble in putting in all the proper names, and I have in many cases found them very useful, in guiding me to papers relating to any subject where I may be seeking information
I feel very much the annoyance you speak of with the printers, and am now at feud with them, but I find the auto-lithography very difficult to read; a constantly recurring annoyance. I do not think any semitic language the assyrians used a verb for the simple copula I am, &c contenting themselves with the personal pronoun; see anku sar, Bit. 4. but I am speaking somewhat at random. I began to work at this very subject some months ago, and will look up my notes. I remember that I thought the athu and tu of Behistun 1 and 3, and <cuneiform> of l 3 were verbs substantive, but am now doubtful.
Now to your Glossary, I have read <cuneiform> qaqqadu, <cuneiform> qaqqar: doubtfully, but influenced by <cuneiform> <illegible mark> Syl. 566.l 614 – I read isazzu No 110 as you do but I find no analogous form. Death of Dikki No 120. dahutu<b?> 123, with ki. I think must be “as gifts.” Dimu N. 139. In think I think I agree with you I have been working at this, my dictionary having reached this word, but cannot get at my papers. So I will defer the consideration for the present and return to it as soon I get all right a gain
Yours faithfully
Edwin Norris
H Fox Talbot Esq&c &c
Notes:
1. Prof Julius Oppert (1825–1905), German Assyriologist, active in Paris.
2. just and terrible, I