It was then observed that in the text published by Mr. Smith, none of the names appeared to be dialectic, and that they were, in many cases, written in Semitic, pointing to a later date. There are two points of contact, however, between the kings given in the first column of the new tablet, and the Babylonian duplicate of Mr. Smith's list :

This, however, is so vague, that the author thought that these likenesses in the two lists must be taken as remarkable coincidences, and nothing more, though it was possible that we have the same list of kings from two entirely different points of view, consequent upon the existence of two dynasties always in conflict, in which sometimes the one and sometimes the other was uppermost.

It was shown that, by observing the dialectic variations of the names, they may be divided into six sections, representing as many dynasties. The first, which ends, perhaps, with the line mentioning the kings after the Flood, may be identified with the first dynasty of 86 kings of Berosus; but if so, either the number must be greatly reduced, or the new tablet must be the second of a series. The second dynasty, consisting of seven or more so-called Kassite kings, may be identified with Berosus' second dynasty of eight Median kings.

The third and fourth dynasties, consisting of Sumerian and Akkadian kings respectively (the latter beginning evidently with the eighteenth line of Col. II.), may be identified with the third of eleven kings, and the fourth of forty-nine Chaldean kings of Berosus. The fifth dynasty was of Sumerian kings, and the sixth, with which the list ends, consisted of twelve or more Kassite kings. After this came, evidently, the division of the land into petty kingdoms, followed by the third Kassite dynasty (Agu-kak-rimê, &c.), and then Nabu-nasir and his successors, who were, perhaps, the seventh or Assyrian dynasty of Berosus.

The author pointed out the uncertainty of the readings of many Akkadian names, in consequence of the signs having more than one value. The sign, which enters into the composition of so many names of gods, has the values of nin, ni, and e (shortened from eg, another form of en, "lord," Sumerian un), and the question was, which of these was the proper value to use in any given case? Again, one of the names of the god Bel was (), which he had in the two cases where it occurred, transcribed Kur, but glosses are given showing that it would be better to write Râzu or Zizanu, the former being probably the more correct.

Taking into consideration, therefore, the uncertainty of the readings in some cases, the author did not consider himself justified in making any comparisons with a view to the identification of the names with any given by the ancient authors, except in the case of the later rulers. He made some remarks, however, upon some of the conclusions already arrived at by scholars, but it was his opinion that, until we have more perfect lists, all identifications must be regarded as tentative.

The appendices to this paper will be a complete list of Babylonian kings, as far as they are now known, and an analysis of all the names, with special reference to the Akkadian and Sumerian.

Remarks on the name Šišku. By Prof. Dr. Lauth, of

Munich.

Having received to-day the Proceedings of the Society, Eleventh Session, 1880-81, Second Meeting, 7th December, 1880, I was struck with finding, at first sight, that the new tablet* of unbaked

* Cf. Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch., III., pp. 361-379, where a duplicate of part of this important tablet is published by the late Geo. Smith, under the title, "Fragments of an Inscription, giving part of the Chronology from which the Canon of Berosus was copied."

clay, treated of by Mr. Theo. G. Pinches, does really correspond to the two Median dynasties of Berosus. According to Alexander Polyhistor (Eusebius Chron. I., 4) the Chaldean historiographer had related: "Post hos, (86 reges a diluvio) qui successione inconcussa regnum obtinuerant, derepente Medos collectis copiis Babylonem cepisse ait ibique de suis tyrannos constituisse. Hinc nomina quoque tyrannorum edisserit octo annosque eorum viginti quatuor supra ducentos (marg. CCXXXIV.), ac rursus undecim reges et annos octo supra quadraginta."

The obverse of the above-mentioned tablet presents indeed eleven kings of the Dintir dynasty, and the number of the regnal years amounts to 304. We may, with good reason, presume that in the original work of Berosus the same numbers occurred, because he continues: "Rursus undecim reges." As to the years, 224 or 234, a trace of the real summation, 304, is therein preserved. If we compare a further dynasty, that of the Arabs, we meet with a similar discrepancy, Berosus relating, "Postea et Arabes novem reges, annosque ducentos quadraginta quinque," whereas Syncellus, p. 90, D.* reads, “ Διελέξαντο τὴν Χαλδαίων βασιλείαν "Αραβες ἐπὶ ἔτη σιὲ (215), βασιλεῖς s (6).”

The reverse of the tablet itself shows an analogous discrepancy: it enumerates eleven kings also; but the summation of the twelfth line has only ten kings. On the other hand, it is obvious that the 48 years now standing in Berosus is a mutilated number, the hundredths being omitted. But I will not enter into the chronological question. The names of both sides are evidently Accadian (Median), in six cases the Assyrian translation being added. But the chief points which I lay a certain stress upon, consists in the fact that the Sisku dynasty of the reverse reigned at Babylon likewise as the Dintir dynasty of the obverse. As Mr. Pinches designates his transcription Sisku as a "provisional" one, and terms the name itself an unknown "district," I may be allowed to prove (1) that Sisku is the right reading; (2) that this name is one of the known words denoting Babylon. In order to facilitate the comparison, I give the summation of the

The first syllable sis and the final ki (the latter as a determinative of places and cities) being assured beyond doubt, there remains only ku to be justified. Now the Syllabary* A 109 has the equations:

whence follows immediately, that the sign in question reads Ku in Accadian, with the meaning "brilliant, resplendent." "The sense of the whole group Sisku-ki" may therefore be: "The place of the brilliant protector (brother)."

The place intended we learn from Jeremiah xxv. 26; li. 41: "All the Kings of the North, the nigh ones and the remote ones, every one of them together with his brother (I filled with drink), and all the kingdoms of the earth, which are on the surface of the land, and the king of Sesak was filled with drink after them." (The underlined phrases are omitted by the LXX. interpreters). "How was captured Sesak and was taken the glory of the whole earth ?" Here the LXX. translate only : πῶς ἑάλω.. καὶ ἐθηρεύθη τὸ καύχημα πάσης τῆς γῆς; πῶς ἐγένετο βαβυλὼν εἰς ἀφανισμόν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ; once more Sesak, the parallelism to Babylon, is omitted, because the translators could not make it out. Apparently Sesak and Babel of the prophet form the same parallelism as Dintir (ki) and Sisku (ki) of the tablet. Then we have Sisku =

I submit these short remarks with due reserve.

Mr. Pinches said he did not think that the eleven kings of Tintir could be the second Median dynasty of Berosus, but were considerably later. As he had already stated, he thought that the kings of the new tablet, after the line mentioning the Flood, must be identified with this dynasty; and that the Babylonian tablet was not a duplicate of the Assyrian one, he had endeavoured to show (p. 45) by comparing the two lists. With regard to the name Šišku, of course it was just possible that this was the right reading, but it might also be read Šiš-azag, Uru-azag, or Uru-ku. It was still more likely that none of these readings were right, but that these twa signs were regarded as a compound character having a special and quite different pronunciation, as was usual in Akkadian and Sumerian.

Cf. Transactions Soc. Bib. Arch., Vol. VI., part 2, p. 365, in the article of M. Lenormant.

Sir H. C. Rawlinson was inclined to regard it as another compound for the city of Erech.

Hieroglyphics attached to the statue of Cybele near Magnesia ad Sipylum.

[Extract of a letter sent to Mr. C. T. Newton, C.B., from Mr. Consul George Dennis, Smyrna.]

"Of the hieroglyphics which I have discovered carved on the cliffs by the side of the Niobe, or rather Cybele, at Magnesia, and which no one, strange to say, appears to have observed before, I send you a copy, made by myself, when at the top of a long ladder, which I had carried from Smyrna, for the express purpose of distinguishing the characters which, when viewed from behind, were not very distinct, owing to the discoloration of the rock, and to the want of a strong light upon the cartouche. If you can decipher the anaglyph, or if you have any friend who can do it, pray be so kind as to let me know the result.

"The hieroglyphics are in low relief, the ground of the niche being sunk only an inch or two into the surface of the cliff. The cartouche is on a level with the head of the Cybele or Niobe, and about 25 feet above the head of anyone standing on the rocks in front of the statue. Something has originally been carved where the cross lines are shown in the cut, on the left hand side of the cartouche, but it is now quite unintelligible."

The following communication has been received by the President from Professor W. Wright:

MY DEAR DR, BIRCH,

ST. ANDREW's, STATION ROAD, CAMBRIDGE,
December 25th, 1880.

Though I understand that Dr. Schröder, of Constantinople, is to furnish the Journal of the German Oriental Society with a translation of the Phoenician Inscription discovered by Mr. Cobham, along with