[draft]

Millburn tower
Nov. 2 27 / 61

Oppert

D^r Sir/

I have rec^d y^r oblig^g l^r of the 18 Nov, but not the brochures w^h you sent with it – I am now residing in Scotl^d and but I will write to L. Abb. to desire that the brochures may be forwarded to me.

I look upon Dr Hincks as the true first discoverer of the Assyrⁿ language altho’ I admit that R^ns researches were quite independ^t & only publ^d a month or two later – thus serv^g to corrob^te D^r Hincks in an import^t manner. D^r H. publ^d in 1852 a list of 252 cuneif^m signs w^th their values, almost all of w^ch are correct: thus he laid a firm basis for all future enquiries: and tho’ some values have bⁿ added since yet the great mass of them were first publ^d by D^r H. All his other Assyrⁿ labours are likewise highly valuable, tho’ of course mixed w^th occas^l mistakes.

I am not surprised at the continued incredulity of the continental savans respect^g the cuneif^m discov^ries. So it was, when Champollⁿ first explained the hieroglyphics, – Most of the savans of that day avowd their disbelief – and yet nothing can be more certain than the truth of his discoveries. They h^ve bⁿ confirmed since in a thousand ways & by many diff^t learned men Egyptologists. _^^{No doubt} Some obstinate academicians persons still deny them, but they only show their own inability to appreciate evidence. And so it will be with the cuneif^m discov^ries – Ten or 20 y^rs hence their truth will be univs^lly acknowledged – The science will Therefore y sh^d not be discouraged if y^r val^ble labours are not properly appreciated now – You are labouring for the future, and posterity will do justice to them.

I have to thank you for the remarks you have sent me on var^s Assⁿ words – Pray receive my assurance that if I do not agree with you, I do not the less nevertheless do justice to appreciate the ingenuity of all your researches. But I am like Horace, Nullius addictus & _^^(K)

You say that hu cannot be the same as ammat ³ in the great insⁿ of Neb^r 4000 hu are named (in col. VI. 25) and those are call’d whereas in col 8 45 they are calld 480 ammat

But I reply that in the latter passage, Neb^r is speaking of an improvm^t or embellishm^t w^ch he made in another locality. C In fact can it be supposed that he w^d boast of the same improvement twice over? (L)

(K) Y hv mad some critic^sms on my paper in the J. of the RAS vol 18 p. 35 But y will find y^t I h ano^r paper at page 362 of the same vol. in w^ch I hv mad sev^l amelior^ns & correct^ns

(L) I think not: & I believe that I c^d demonstrate t you, that these imp^vemts public works were not only different, but were works of a diff^t nature. Therefore there is no reason why 4000 hu sh^d not be t mean 4000 ammat.

Oppert cont^d Nov. /61 You mentⁿ th^t y hve tr^d the annals of S^b – I presume that by this you mean what is calld the Taylor cylindr, of w^ch the cunf^m text is given in the B. M. vol. plates 37 to 42 –

Is y^r trⁿ publ^d? –

I presented a translⁿ of these Annals to the RAS two y^rs ago (Oct 59) and they have recently printed it The impressⁿ is now finish^d, & I shall h^ve the honor to send you a copy _^^{in a} very short time.

I only possess of yr writ^gs, the Chronologie des A. et des B. w^ch y gave me 4 y^rs ago and some lithographed sheets.

Your larger works I have am not possess^d of, but I have no doubt they are v^y imp^tt

Mon^r Menant appears to be be an Ass^st of v^y great promise, & I expect he will event^lly make some import^t discov^s in this branch of Archæology. –

The first line of the Michaux insⁿ is unintellg to me – I am neither satisfied w^h y^r explanⁿ, nor with my own – I almost think an Œdipus is required, to explain this, & some other passages, in these insc^ns

line 2. No doubt you are right in reading Kar-Nabo & not abna-Nabo – That was an oversight of mine.

line 15. The explanatⁿ _^^{of this word} w^ch you have found in a syllabary [cuneiform text] a hide, is valuable. For this field was given _^^{by a father} as a marr^ge portⁿ to his d^r (W)

col II. 9 itzatzu I derived from [cuneiform text] You ask, where is the [cuneiform text] in the Ass word? I reply, it is dropped (as frequently) – Thus [cuneiform text] a sword is in Greek [Greek text] the [Greek text] being dropp^d.

Hoping that these few obs^ns may be of interest to you, Wishing you all success in your valuable labours

I remain D^r Sir Yours v^y truly
H F T

PS. I have sent by post today copies of 2 short papers w^ch I have recently printed in the Trans^ns of the R Soc^y of Lit. wh I request you to accept

(W) These syllabaries app^r t be v^y import^t.

abcdefghklm

[expanded version:]

Millburn tower ^<1>
November 22 27, 1861

Oppert

Dear Sir/

I have received your obliging letter of the 18 November, ^<2> but not the brochures which you sent with it – I am now residing in Scotland and but I will write to Lacock Abbey to desire that the brochures may be forwarded to me.

I look upon D^r Hincks ^<3> as the true first discoverer of the Assyrian language although I admit that Rawlinson’s ^<4> researches were quite independent and only published a month or two later – thus serving to corroborate D^r Hincks in an important manner. D^r Hincks published in 1852 a list of 252 cuneiform signs with their values, almost all of which are correct: thus he laid a firm basis for all future enquiries: and though some values have been added since yet the great mass of them were first published by D^r Hincks. All his other Assyrian labours are likewise highly valuable, though of course mixed with occaisional mistakes.

I am not surprised at the continued incredulity of the continental savans respecting the cuneiform discoveries. So it was, when Champollion ^<5> first explained the hieroglyphics, – Most of the savans of that day avowed their disbelief – and yet nothing can be more certain than the truth of his discoveries. They have been confirmed since in a thousand ways and by many different learned men Egyptologists. No doubt some obstinate academicians persons still deny them, but they only show their own inability to appreciate evidence. And so it will be with the cuneiform discoveries – Ten or twenty years hence their truth will be universally acknowledged – The science will Therefore you should not be discouraged if your valuable labours are not properly appreciated now – You are labouring for the future, and posterity will do justice to them.

I have to thank you for the remarks you have sent me on various Assyrian words – Pray receive my assurance that if I do not agree with you, I do not the less nevertheless do justice to appreciate the ingenuity of all your researches. But I am like Horace, Nullius addictus ^<6> and you have made some criticisms on my paper in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, volume 18, page 35. But you will find that I have another paper at page 362 of the same volume in which I have made several amelioriations and corrections.

You say that hu cannot be the same as ammat because in the great inscription of Nebuchadnezzar 4000 hu are named (in column six number 25) and those are called whereas in column eight number 45 they are called 4800 ammat. But I reply that in the latter passage, Nebuchadnezzar is speaking of an improvement or embellishment which he made in another locality. C In fact can it be supposed that he would boast of the same improvement twice over? I think not: and I believe that I could demonstrate to you, that these improvements public works were not only different, but were works of a different nature. Therefore there is no reason why 4000 hu should not be taken mean 4000 ammat.

You mention that you have tried the annals of Sennecherib – I presume that by this you mean what is called the Taylor cylinder?, of which the cuneiform text is given in the British Museum volume plates 37 to 42 – Is your translation published? –

I presented a translation of these Annals to the Royal Asiatic Society two years ago (October 1859) and they have recently printed it. The impression is now finished, and I shall have the honor to send you a copy in a very short time.

I only possess of your writings, the Chronologie des Assyriens et des Babylonians ^<7> which you gave me four years ago and some lithographed sheets. Your larger works I have am not possessed of, but I have no doubt they are very important.

Mon^r Menant ^<8> appears to be be an Assistant of very great promise, and I expect he will eventually make some important discoveries in this branch of Archæology. –

The first line of the Michaux inscription is unintelligible to me – I am neither satisfied with your explanation, nor with my own – I almost think an Œdipus ^<9> is required, to explain this, and some other passages, in these inscriptions.

line 2. No doubt you are right in reading Kar-Nabo & not abna-Nabo – That was an oversight of mine.

line 15. The explanation of this word which you have found in a syllabary a hide, is valuable. For this field was given by a father as a marriage portion to his daughter. These syllabaries appear to be very important.

col II. 9 itzatzu I derived from You ask, where is the in the Assyrian word? I reply, it is dropped (as frequently) – Thus a sword is in Greek ασπι the π being dropped.

Hoping that these few observations may be of interest to you, Wishing you all success in your valuable labours

I remain Dear Sir Yours very truly
HFT

PS. I have sent by post today copies of two short papers which I have recently printed in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature which I request you to accept

abcdefghklm ^<10>

---

Notes:

1. Millburn Tower, Gogar, just west of Edinburgh; the Talbot family made it their northern home from June 1861 to November 1863. It is particularly important because WHFT conducted many of his photoglyphic engraving experiments there. The house had a rich history. Built for Sir Robert Liston (1742-1836), an 1805 design by Benjamin Latrobe for a round building was contemplated but in 1806 a small house was built to the design of William Atkinson (1773-1839), best known for Sir Walter Scott’s Abbotsford. The distinctive Gothic exterior was raised in 1815 and an additional extension built in 1821. Liston had been ambassador to the United States and maintained a warm Anglo-American relationship in the years 1796-1800. His wife, the botanist Henrietta Liston, née Marchant (1751-1828) designed a lavish American garden, sadly largely gone by the time the Talbots rented the house .

2. See Doc. No: 06022.

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

4. Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson, 1^st Baronet (1810–1895), orientalist.

5. Jean-François Champollion (1790–1832), French Orientalist and Egyptologist.

6. ‘Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri’, Horace, Epistle I. ‘No one is/I am not compelled to echo the sentiments of the magistrate’.

7. Jules Oppert, Chronologie des Assyriens et des Babylonians (Paris, 1857). Note that this publication appears to have been available before 1857, perhaps as an offprint.

8. Joachim Menant (1820–1899), French Assyriologist & magistrate.

9. Œdipus solved the riddle of the Sphinx, freeing the people of Greece from its terrors.

10. Pen test at the bottom of the page.