as in Greek before quotations, and on Michaux's stone and elsewhere irin, "he gave," for idin (iddin). In Assur-banipal's inscriptions umma is generally preceded by ciham. The contract tablets also offer us examples of the change of u to i, as iddini for iddinu (31). In the Persian period the Assyrian experienced considerable changes. New words were introduced, such as birid "among," uku ("people," Accadian originally), haga, hagāta, haganet "this," "these" (which, prefixed to the personal pronouns, and the demonstrative, passes into an article-compare too aganet mati "these lands"); ul is used with nouns and pronouns instead of la; and an Aryan order of words even is followed, as in Kam-bu-zi-ya mi-tu-tu ra-manni-su mi-i-ti, "Cambyses by the death of himself dead." The same cause seems to have produced such ungrammatical sentences as istin in itehme madu'utu, or even istin itehme madūtu and madutu in itahime (!), one among many lawgivers" (32).

1. Assur was originally the name of the primitive capital of the country, now called Kileh-Shergat. It was of Turanian origin, and the name is explained in the bilingual tablets as compounded of a (=mie, DD) and usar (= siddu, ¡). Two or three brick-legends belonging to its early Turanian princes, called pates'is, are in our possession. They are placed in the nineteenth century B.C., by a chronological reference in the inscription of Tiglath-Pileser I.

2. Had scholars not been prejudiced, this might have been concluded from the few Assyrian words preserved in the Bible or classical writers, viz., Rab-shakeh, Rab-saris, yn, Belus, Zab (=λúкos), Zabate ("caprea"), and Pliny's Narraga or (N)ar-malcha (=“ flumen regium") mentioned above. And see Is. xxxiii. 19.

3. The Assyrian would take this rank as furnishing us with some of the earliest examples of Semitic literature. The simplicity of its vowel-system evidences its antiquity, as well as its so-called case-terminations, which are identical with those of the aorist. The Semitic languages have marked their decay by modifications of the three primitive vowels, which alone

appear in Assyrian and classical Arabic. The large number of conjugations preserved in Assyrian, as well as the form of the third personal pronoun and the first person singular of the Permansive, are archaic. So also is the mimmation and the use of shaphel. Lastly, the vocabulary is extremely large, and it is unfortunate that we have to explain Assyrian from Hebrew and not Hebrew from Assyrian. Obscure points in Hebrew lexicography have already been cleared up (e.g. ny has been explained by Dr. Oppert as Assyrian istin, "one," masculine). Even in the Persian period we get u-ta-h-ma or i-te-h-e-me, "lawgiver," from D, formed by the prefix u or i, traces of which are to be found in such Hebrew proper

. يربوع

or the Arabic ,יעקב יצחק names as

Thus Assyrian Sal-si, Arabic, Aramaic nn, Ethiopic s'alastu; Assyrian irtsituv=N, Aramaic N; Assyrian tsalulu= by, Arabic, Aramaic, Æthiopic tsalala; Assyrian zicaru= 731, Arabic, Aramaic 77, Æthiopic zacara.

The Assyrians, however, frequently replaces s both in Hebrew and in Assyrian itself, especially where Hebrew has ; e.g. śiba' and siba', 66 'seven," s'arru, s'i'amu=Dn.

5. E.g. Catim, Aramaic k’bal.

6. Thus we have nadinu () instead of Aramaic y’hab, bâu (N2) instead of 'atah, radu (77) for n'khat, etc. So, as in Hebrew, = "to establish :" it has not passed, as in Arabic, Ethiopic, and Phonician, into the general idea of "existence." The inserted is absent, as in Hebrew; e.g. cussu= =ND, in Phoenician 'D, Aramaic corsai, Syriac curs'ya, Arabic curs'ya.

Assyrian differs from Hebrew chiefly in its rare use of the perfect and waw conversivum, its want of an article (except perhaps in the Achamenian period), its plural, its extended use of the secondary conjugations, its substitution of pael for piel, and its want of the inseparable preposi

The

tions, and (except in the later inscriptions) of the accusative prefix. feminine always ends in t (like classical Arabic, Æthiopic, and Phoenician) both in noun and verb. With Hebrew must be classed Phoenician and Moabite (as found in the inscriptions of Mesha). Phoenician agrees with Assyrian in the scanty use of an article and of waw conversivum, in the use of the participle for tenses, in the substitution of the relative for (as in the northern dialect of Judges and Canticles), and in the older form of the feminine suffix ♬ for. In most cases, however, where Phoenician and Hebrew differ, Assyrian agrees with the latter; e.g., raglu “foot,” not Dyn, dhabu “good,” not DV), sani “years,” not Лi, nadinu, not. In many instances the Assyrian employs words common in Phonician, but poetical in Hebrew, e.g., pilu=5y5 (Hebrew usually my), alpu= (Hebrew usually iv), arkhun (Hebrew usually

).

It often happens that the Assyrian agrees only with the poetical (archaic) words and forms of the Hebrew, e.g., nin (Assyrian khazzu), the plural in ¡, the sparing use of the article and the accusative prefix П, and the lengthened form of the pronoun-suffixes in, etc., which preserve the final -u of the Assyrian (sunu).

7. The syllabaries carefully give the typical form in u or um, but we find in the inscriptions numberless instances of a wrong use, more especially of the oblique cases. Thus, Assur-bani-pal has pu-lukh-tu for pu-lukh-ti, di-e-ni for di-e-nu, libba for libbu; while in Babylonian inscriptions we even meet with such instances as ana da-ai-nuv tsi-i-ri, "to the supreme judge," for ana da-ai-na tsi-i-ra; and the astrological tablets have khibi essu, "recent lacuna."

8. These also are liable to be interchanged in the later inscriptions: e.g. in Assur-bani-pal we have indifferently as-lu-lu and as-lu-la, “I carried away;" is-ta-nap-pa-ra and is-ta-nap-pa-ru, "I wished to be sent forth; though perhaps a stands here for u-a (wa), as in aslula, "They carried away."

9. More properly, verbal adjectives, as in Arabic, one denoting the agent (e.g., málicu, "ruling;" asibut, "habitantes ;" dūcu, "slaying;" limattu, for limantu, “she who injures;" limuttu, for limuntu, “she who is injured;" dicu, "slain"). The participles of the conjugations (Kal excepted) are formed by the prefix mu.

10. The Assyrian possessed a passive for every conjugation (except Kal, which used Niphal instead), formed as in Arabic; e.g., in the Pael, sar-ra-ap, "to burn," sur-ru-up, "to be burnt."

Every conjugation, again, had a secondary one (intensive), formed by

the insertion of t, as in the Arabic eighth conjugation. So also the nasal Assyrian conjugation (e.g. istanappar) may be compared with the Arabic fourteenth and fifteenth. In Moabite we find an ifta'ala (for Niphal)

11. The precative formed by the prefix is compared by Dr. Oppert with the Arabic precative prefix J, the of the Talmud, and with the

But it is better to regard these last as .לֶהֶוְיָן לֶהֶוָא Aramaic forms

equivalent to the usual preformative of the imperfect, with the intensive particle lu prefixed. This has been united with the verb, causing the elision of the person-determinative, and in Syriac has been corrupted into n.

12. Broken plurals are a later formation in the Semitic languages, and were originally merely singular nouns of multitude. In Himyaritic the Arabic plural actab occurs by the side of the ordinary plural (e.g., sheb, "tribe," plural asháb). Broken plurals, common in Æthiopic, have become the rule in Arabic. As in Hebrew and Aramaic, there are no certain traces of them in Assyrian. Dr. Hincks believed he had detected two or three: balu, plural of ablu, “son” (but this word means “power”), rid, plural of ardu, "servant" (but rid is singular referring to Assur-izir-pal, explained as equivalent to mil-cu (7) and admu (DN) ii., 30.3; like li-du by the side of a-lit-tuv, ii. 36.2.), ri-i-mu, plural of ar-mi, “bull” (but this explanation of ar-mi is doubtful), and ni-si from anis (but the latter word is not found). Assyrian differs from the Arabic chiefly in its consonantal system (besides agreeing with Hebrew in the sibilants, it does not possess the modern Arabic modifications ,); in its want of

an article (p is alu Kus or Kis, "the town of Kis" in Babylonia); in its want of auxiliary tenses; and in its vocabulary (e.g., mā in Arabic, as in Syriac, is negative, in Assyrian only interrogative).

13. This will be proved further on. The Assyrian present igabbir or igabir answers exactly to what Ludolf calls the present in Æthiopic yěgaběr, and the aorist igbur (or igbar) to his subjunctive yěgbar.

14. Assyrian gabracu or gabrac stands side by side with the Ethiopic gabarcu. So in Mahri (zegidek, “I strike”) and Amharic (zagadhu). In the second person, however, the Assyrian has the t of the other dialects (gabirta, gabirti), herein departing from the Ethiopic and Mahri, as well as the Samaritan. The seems more original than when we compare the substantive suffixes throughout the Semitic dialects, and the absolute form of the first personal pronoun (Assyrian anacu, where ana is explained by the root ). For the change of and 7, conf. ņ and

p. It appears to belong to the oldest period of the languages. The inhabitants of Raïma near Zebîd still say kunk for kunt.1 Assyrian agrees also with Ethiopic and Himyaritic in one of the forms for the plural—ânu (ân); as well as in forming many adverbs by means of the accusative affix a (as also Arabic), e.g., bazza, "as rubbish," be-'e-la, "much." So, too, we find such forms as manzazu, "fixed," like Ethiopic maf'rey, "fruitful," where Arabic has u, and Hebrew and Aramaic shewa. Himyaritic, again, possesses the mimmation, as in the genitive Marthadim; and Amharic and Hararic have a nunnated accusative, en, in. The Ethiopic shemalem is an old mimmated accusative.

15. Few, if any, are derived from an Aryan source. This is the more strange, as Aryan nations (Medes, Armenians, Tibareni, Comagenians) surrounded them on the north, the people of Van even adopting their mode of writing. Perhaps urdhu, given in a tablet as a synonyme of tilla, “high,” is the Zend eredhwa, etc., but I have never met with the word in inscriptions. Alicani-wood, again, one of the trees introduced into Assyria by Tiglath-Pileser I., is possibly D, Sanskrit Valgu (ka), “sandal.” On the other hand, a large number of Accadian vocables were borrowed by the Assyrians, after being Semitized. Thus muq becomes muk-ku, gal or gula gal-lu, naga nangu'u. Though words of more than one syllable have been thus taken, the roots are more commonly monosyllabic; and the proximity of the remote ancestors of the Semitic family to the Turanians of Chaldæa seems to make it probable that a considerable proportion of the monosyllabic radicals common to the Semitic tongues were originally foreign. A curious example of this may be found in khirat, khirtu, "woman," a Semitic feminine formation from the Accadian kharra, "man" (?, Syriac khira). Some roots, lost in the other dialects, are found in Ethiopic and Assyrian alone: e.g. basu, "to exist," has been well compared by Dr. Oppert with Ethiopic bisi, "man." There are no traces of Egyptian influence unless it be pirkhu given as a synonyme of "king," on a tablet (II. 30., 3). More probably, however, this merely means a young man" (D). Ammat (ip), "cubits," is Semitic. Mana is of Accadian origin, as is shown by the famous law-tablet.

66

16. Ana, ina, assu, are not less Semitic than diba and sôba. The other Assyrian prepositions are common to the surrounding dialects. Ana and ina are merely accusative cases used adverbially: ana I would derive from MON,, "to be suitable,” and assu from the common root asasu,

1 V. Maltzan (Zeitschrift d. D. M. G. 1871, p. 197).