{"id":2551,"date":"2015-11-20T15:17:11","date_gmt":"2015-11-20T15:17:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/?page_id=2551"},"modified":"2025-03-21T11:29:36","modified_gmt":"2025-03-21T11:29:36","slug":"list-of-the-ras-collections-of-sir-henry-creswicke-rawlinson-bart-1810-1895","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/list-of-the-ras-collections-of-sir-henry-creswicke-rawlinson-bart-1810-1895\/","title":{"rendered":"List of the RAS Collections of Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson Bart. (1810-1895)"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row full_width=”stretch_row”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1605789733308{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][vc_single_image image=”20316″ img_size=”full” css=”.vc_custom_1713525773572{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1605789733308{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n

List of the RAS Collections of Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810-1895)<\/h1>\n

BOX I
\n<\/strong>Documents primarily relating to the Seymour family.<\/em><\/p>\n

I\/01:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Bill of sale of the Seymour estate at East Knoyle 15-11-1876 with two pictures. One is a watercolour of an elderly gentleman asleep in an armchair, unsigned but dated \u201cFeb. 49\u201d. The other is of \u201cKelston church\u201d clearly described on the outside as being by \u201cdear little Cecilia Hawkins\u201d probably June 1826.<\/p>\n

I\/02: \u00a0 \u00a0<\/strong>Letters between members of the Seymour and Hopkinson families roughly up to 1840. 80 items.<\/p>\n

I\/03:<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 Letters between members of the Seymour family roughly 1840 to 1859.
\n124 items, subdivided by the author as follows:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Henry Seymour (Louisa\u2019s father) 21 items.<\/li>\n
  2. Henry Danby Seymour (Louisa\u2019s elder brother) 32 items.<\/li>\n
  3. Alfred Seymour (Louisa\u2019s younger brother) 31 items.<\/li>\n
  4. Jane Seymour Pleydell-Bouverie (Louisa\u2019s elder sister) and her husband Philip 8 items.<\/li>\n
  5. Sarah Ellen Seymour Sanford (Louisa\u2019s younger sister) and her husband Ayshford 3 items.<\/li>\n
  6. Jane Hopkinson (Louisa\u2019s grandmother) 17 items.<\/li>\n
  7. Jane Seymour (Louisa\u2019s mother) 7 items.<\/li>\n
  8. Other correspondents 4 items.<\/li>\n
  9. Unidentified 1 item.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    I\/04:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters concerning the death of Henry Seymour, Louisa\u2019s father, in 1849.
    \n19 letters plus 5 envelopes.<\/p>\n

    I\/05: \u00a0 \u00a0<\/strong>Items concerning members of the Seymour family from before 1850. 6 items as follows:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Two small packets containing locks of hair, inscribed \u201cSarah Hopkinson, Jany 10th<\/sup> 1803\u201d<\/li>\n
    2. A folded sheet containing a eulogy of a lady who has reached the age of 75 but has as yet not felt the afflictions of age. The document is unsigned and undated.<\/li>\n
    3. Almanac and diary for 1822 with spasmodic entries to August 25th<\/sup>. The entry for March 8th<\/sup> records the birth of \u201clittle Jane\u201d. [The writer is presumably Jane Seymour, Louisa\u2019s mother<\/em>.]<\/li>\n
    4. Notebook containing Louisa Seymour\u2019s journal of a continental tour with her family in the summer of 1842, when she was 13. The flyleaf is dated June 22nd<\/sup>, but the first entry is dated \u201cZurich 3 Aout 1842\u201d. The first eight and a half pages are in French; the diary then continues in English as far as September 14th<\/sup> when it breaks off as the family were entering France from Belgium.<\/li>\n
    5. Notebook containing \u201cDiary of a Cock Robin & two Tomtits by L.C.H.S 1842 & 1843\u201d (the last entry is dated 1844). There are some small paintings.<\/li>\n
    6. Notebook containing an anecdote showing Marshal Ney\u2019s inveterate hatred of the British, observed during the Peace of Amiens 1803. Ends with the note \u201cWritten from my father\u2019s word of mouth, Oct 24. 1849.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      I\/06:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters exchanged between Louisa Seymour and her first governess, Miss Heath, after the latter\u2019s retirement. 8 letters dated 1838-1843 plus 6 undated letters and 2 envelopes. One of these establishes Louisa\u2019s birth to have been in 1829.<\/p>\n

      I\/07:<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 Letters between members of the Seymour family roughly from 1860 onwards. About 150 letters, some 2 incomplete plus 7 empty envelopes.
      \nIncludes some comments on current politics plus eyewitness accounts from Louisa\u2019s brother Alfred of scenes following the Italian war of reunification in 1860-1 and the Franco-Prussian War 1870 and some other material which may be of historical interest.<\/p>\n

      I\/08:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters concerning HCR\u2019s marriage to Louisa Seymour in 1862, including letters to HCR himself, but excluding letters between the couple, which will be found in Box V. 129 letters. There are clear indications that an attachment between the couple had been recognised for a long time and that some of Louisa\u2019s friends and family felt that HCR was to blame for keeping her in suspense for so long. There are also hints that HCR\u2019s financial situation was at the root of the difficulty.<\/p>\n

      I\/09:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Undated newspaper cuttings relating to members of the Seymour family. 4 items.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Two announcing the arrival, among many others, of Henry D Seymour at Southampton from Le Havre.<\/li>\n
      2. One announcing the marriage of Louisa\u2019s elder sister Jane to Philip Pleydell Bouverie.<\/li>\n
      3. One describing a lecture given at East Knoyle by Henry D Seymour on the recent archaeological discoveries at Nineveh.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        I\/10:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Newspaper cuttings relating to Alfred Seymour. 9 items.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Four items concerning Alfred Seymour\u2019s death on March 15th<\/sup> 1888, these also include some account of the history of Knoyle House.<\/li>\n
        2. Item concerning the reception given to Mr Seymour and his new wife on their first visit to Mrs Seymour\u2019s property at Norton nr Daventry, Northamptonshire (1866?).<\/li>\n
        3. Four items concerning his unsuccessful attempt to secure election as MP for Exeter in 1860.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          I\/11:<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 Documents concerning Seymour family history. 5 items.<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. Rough notes on the back of a bill made out to \u201cLady Rawlinson\u201d concerning members of the Hopkinson family. In Louisa Rawlinson\u2019s hand?<\/li>\n
          2. Scrap of paper headed \u201cInscription on tablet in Blagdon Church, Somersetshire.\u201d Gives names and dates of members of the Hopkinson family.<\/li>\n
          3. Folded sheet written in pencil. Very faint, almost unreadable.<\/li>\n
          4. Scrap of paper dated \u201c1865-1868. 1865 Alfred Seymour M.P. for Totnes\u201d Notes on his political activities during this period.<\/li>\n
          5. Two double sheets folded together containing notes on various members of the Seymour family. Note at end:\u201cCopied from Sir Rich. Colt Hoare\u2019s Modern Wilts<\/em> 1847.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            I\/12:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Poetic effusions by members of the Seymour family. 6 items.<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Two copies of a poem of 80 lines called The Return<\/em> describing the arrival home in the middle of the night of Henry D Seymour after a prolonged absence abroad. One copy is signed AMS and both are dated Feby 8th<\/sup><\/li>\n
            2. Scrap of paper torn from a letter containing a verse of four lines admonishing Louisa for making excuses about a blot she had made in a previous letter.<\/li>\n
            3. Scrap of paper headed \u201cCharade\u201d containing a verse of six lines. Unsigned but dated Nov. 12.<\/li>\n
            4. Foolscap double sheet headed \u201cLady Rawlinson\u2019s Epitaph on her favorite dog Skye, buried at Knoyle\u201d followed by a poem of five stanzas of eight lines each. Unsigned and undated but in HCR\u2019s handwriting.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              I\/13:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Personal letters from Lord Roberts to H S Rawlinson (HCR\u2019s elder son). 4 letters.<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Dated \u201cMuballa, 11 Feby 1890\u201d. Sympathises with HSR\u2019s decision to resign his post as ADC to Roberts in India in order to remain with his father after his mother\u2019s death the previous autumn.<\/li>\n
              2. Dated \u201cSnowdon, Simla 30th<\/sup> September 1890\u201d. Congratulates HSR on his forthcoming marriage.<\/li>\n
              3. Dated \u201cHeadqrs of the Army in India 16th<\/sup> October 1891\u201d. Congratulates HSR on having gained a place at the Staff College.<\/li>\n
              4. Dated \u201cEnglemere Ascot, Berks. 21st<\/sup> July 1907.\u201d About a portrait of Roberts by [John Singer] Sargent [now in the National Portrait Gallery] which had been commissioned by members of Roberts\u2019s staff during the South African War. As a mark of gratitude, Roberts has had a print made and is sending a copy, signed by the artist, to Rawlinson.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                I\/14:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters and documents from various people. 18 items in all.<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. Appeal for funds to rebuild Chadlington Parish Church, (the Rawlinson family\u2019s parish church). Dated March 1869. [It may have been passed to HCR by his elder brother Abram who continued to live at Chadlington until his death later that year.<\/em>]<\/li>\n
                2. Letter from \u201cA M Martin, Beechmound, Queenstown, Co Cork Ireland March 4th<\/sup> 1866 My dear Cousin Abram\u201d Excuses the intrusion on the ground of being \u201cyour departed Mother\u2019s Old and attached friend\u201d and asks for Abram\u2019s assistance in securing a Naval pension for her husband.<\/li>\n
                3. Formal petition for the pension referred to in 2 above, addressed to \u201cHis Grace the Duke of Somerset.\u201d<\/li>\n
                4. Letter from \u201cTiddy\u201d to \u201cMy lovely Loo\u201d (her sister) dated \u201cStoke Bishop, February 28th<\/sup> \/95\u201d Thanks her for a birthday present. [The writer is the daughter of HCR\u2019s sister Maria Brooke Smith. HCR\u2019s wife was addressed as \u201cLou\u201d and died in 1889<\/em>.]<\/li>\n
                5. Letter from \u201cCha. Camron (?)\u201d Dated \u201cBM 20 March 1858. Dear Sir\u201d. Apologises for having failed to carry out some copying work the night before as he had been commissioned to do because he had been too sleepy.<\/li>\n
                6. Slip of paper pasted into a folded scrap, with the note: \u201cLady Noel Byron had desired Mr Craig to say that a Quarter\u2019s Payment would be remitted, in consequence of a Quarter\u2019s Notice not having been given.\u201d In pencil below: \u201cJany 1835\u201d<\/li>\n
                7. Undated note from \u201cAmboulli (?)\u201d to \u201cMonsignore Narducci-Boccaccio\u201d. Thanks him for the part which he and \u201cthe Bl. Virgin\u201d played in \u201cpreserving the precious days of the Holy Father and all those who were with him in the catastrophe which occurred in St Agnes last Thursday\u201d [This must date from before 1870 as the Popes voluntarily confined themselves to the Vatican after the city of Rome was occupied by Italian forces in that year.]<\/li>\n
                8. Note from \u201cM Lander (?)\u201d to J Murray Esq. Dated \u201cMonday May 26th<\/sup>\u201d accepting an invitation to dinner.<\/li>\n
                9. Carte de visite showing \u201cMaltese country people\u201d.<\/li>\n
                10. Empty envelope addressed to \u201cRevd A W Heyde, Herrnhut, Saxony, Germany\u201d Postmarked \u201cAu 26 1886\u201d The back of the envelope is embossed \u201cMoravian Church Mission Agency 32 Fetter Lane, London E C.\u201d<\/li>\n
                11. Letter dated \u201c14 King Street, Boro. SE May 15th<\/sup> 1874\u201d from \u201cJn Thos. Wilkinson\u201d to \u201cMy Lord Duke\u201d Expresses his suspicions of the motives behind a proposed public subscription in aid of the family of the late Dr Livingstone on the grounds that Livingstone had been killed some years previously and eaten(!) and that the body buried in Westminster Abbey was not really him at all<\/li>\n
                12. Letter, no date or address but the writer is clearly at school, .from illegible<\/em> to \u201cDear Papa\u201d. In a child\u2019s hand, but not that of either of HCR\u2019s sons. Various items of news, but principally asking for money so that he can join a fife and drum band.<\/li>\n
                13. Scrap of paper also apparently in a schoolboy\u2019s hand (the same ?) bearing the handwritten text of a short poem \u201cIn Memoriam G P C\u201d by R[ichard] C[hevenix] Trench [then Archbishop of Dublin] [The published poem bears at its head the date \u201c27 February 1881\u201d<\/em>.]<\/li>\n
                14. Broadsheet printed by \u201cDisley, Printer, 57 High Street, St. Giles\u201d headed LORD PALMERSTON He is a Clever Man, And they won\u2019t get over him\u201d <\/em>Verses celebrating the fact that Palmerston has been cited as co-respondent in a divorce case at the age of 80 and that the husband is claiming \u00a330,000 in damages which, the author says, he won\u2019t get. [This divorce case occurred in 1863 and was, according to Wikipedia, an attempt at blackmail.<\/em>]<\/li>\n
                15. Letter dated \u201cBath, 24th<\/sup> 1840\u201d Letter from \u201cGeo. W Frere? Rest<\/sup>. Engineer G W Railway\u201d \u201cTo the Trustees of the Turnpike Roads meeting at Deptford Inn\u201d A testimonial on behalf of Mr Henry Creswicke, who has applied for a post under the trustees, having previously served under the writer as a surveyor to Xmas 1837.<\/li>\n
                16. Three double sheets of an incomplete letter dated \u201cMay 4th<\/sup> off quitta\u201d From ??? [the end of the letter is missing] to \u201cMy dearest mother\u201d Describes a naval engagement in which the writer was involved. The letter includes the names of several vessels as well as mentioning the King of Dahomey and the King of Porto-Novo. [I have not been able to trace any reference to this incident but it may have involved the anti-slavery patrols which the Royal Navy mounted along the west African coast about 1849-1853. The letter would interest anyone making a detailed study of the naval or anti-slavery history of that period. RBP<\/em>]<\/li>\n
                17. Letter dated \u201cBritish Museum (Natural History) \u2026 11th<\/sup> March \u201986\u201d from \u201cJ E Harting [e. James Edmund Harting 1841-1928 at this time employed in organizing the library of the newly-established Natural History Museum<\/em>]\u201d to \u201cDear Sanford [possibly Ayshford Sandford, husband of HCR\u2019s sister-in-law Ellen<\/em>]\u201d Enclosing a prospectus for some new scheme, apparently involving an expedition of some kind, and inviting the recipient to a meeting to discuss it.<\/li>\n
                18. Note dated \u201cMay 16\/81\u201d from \u201cM[ichael] E[dward] Hicks Beach [Bart. At this date Conservative MP<\/em>] to \u201cMy dear Susan\u201d inviting himself to dinner the following day.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  I\/15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters relating to the final illness and death in 1879 of Evelyn, first wife of Paul Sanford Methuen, 3rd<\/sup> Baron Methuen. 146 complete letters plus 2 incomplete. [Baron Methuen seems from the name and also from the fact that they both lived at Nynehead, to be a relative of Ayshford Sanford, the husband of HCR\u2019s sister-in-law Ellen, but I haven\u2019t managed to trace the relationship. RBP.<\/em>]<\/p>\n

                  I\/16\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Ten carte-de-visite portraits, eight of which appear to be of the same man and carry the names of photographers in Berlin. Found with II\/09(01) but clearly, from the dates (1876 & 1877) on the reverse of some of these pictures unconnected with and not referred to in that letter. Collecting photographs of this type was a popular hobby in the later 19th<\/sup> century and there is evidence from letters in Box II that HCR\u2019s wife made such a collection in the 1870\u2019s. One of these pictures is of an adolescent boy wearing an Eton collar and is very likely to be HCR\u2019s eldest son Harry, who would have started at Eton in 1877.<\/p>\n

                  \u00a0BOX II
                  \n<\/strong>Mainly relating to HCR\u2019s career (items relating to his archaeological and linguistic studies are in Box III, biographical and autobiographical material in Box IV)<\/em><\/p>\n

                  II\/01\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Map of route between Kandahar and Heraat. Unsigned and undated. (Other papers dating from HCR\u2019s service in Afghanistan are in Box IV.)<\/p>\n

                  II\/02\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters from and to HCR dating from before his arrival in Baghdad in 1843. They are not quite in chronological order so as to avoid repeated renumbering. 14 items :<\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. Letter from Treach<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][or Reach ?][\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text] to \u201cLieut. Rawlinson\u201d. The RH corner of the first page has been torn away including the date and place of writing but it seems from the contents to have been written in Persia. About military and political affairs in that country. The back of the letter is covered in pencilled notes of dates in ancient history, apparently in HCR\u2019s handwriting. [II\/02(01)].<\/p>\n

                      \n
                    • Letter from MM Anderson dated Ishapoor [now Ishapore, outside Calcutta, the site of an ordnance factory since 1801] June 14 [at the beginning] and June 13 [at the end] to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d. Probably written in the 1830\u2019s. Retails gossip about various mutual acquaintances and looks forward to their meeting soon.<\/li>\n
                    • \u201cStatement of the claims of Major H C Rawlinson \u2026 against the Persian Government Teheran July 31st<\/sup> 1838 [?]\u201d [II\/02(03)].<\/li>\n
                    • Copies of 9 letters by HCR regarding the destruction by fire of his papers relating to the Candahar Political Agency (mostly requesting substitute documentation). [II\/02(04) \u2013 (09) Some of the letters are written on opposite sides of the same sheet. RBP.]<\/li>\n
                    • Scrap of paper with the message \u201cDear Bell [?] Please sign and return. Yours sincerely H Rawlinson.\u201d [II\/02(10)].<\/li>\n
                    • Four leaves from an octavo notebook, plus one folio sheet folded in four headed \u201cMajor Rawlinson\u2019s accounts for September 1838\u201d. Mostly not in HCR\u2019s handwriting, but signed by him at the end and dated \u201cDec. 31st<\/sup>.\u201d [II\/02(11)].<\/li>\n
                    • Dated 24th<\/sup> April 1843. Official demand for repayment of 8 \u201cCompany Rupees\u201d which had been paid to a member of HCR\u2019s staff while he had been Political Agent in Kandahar. [II\/02(12)].<\/li>\n
                    • Dated 10th<\/sup> June 1843. Bill to HCR for the carriage of goods from Agra to Lucknow via Cawnpore. [II\/02(13)].<\/li>\n
                    • Dated \u201cSukkur. 18th<\/sup> June 1843. My dear Rawlinson.\u201d Congratulates HCR on having \u201cgot through your Accounts so satisfactorily\u201d [Refers to HCR\u2019s difficulty in rendering an account of his expenditure as Political Agent in Kandahar after most of his papers were destroyed in a fire on board a river boat on the river Sutlej.RBP.] Gives details of a sum of 200 \u2013 220 rupees which he has now succeeded in remembering. Also discusses the military situation. [II\/02\/14)].<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                       <\/p>\n

                      II\/03\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Documents in Arabic script. 7 items. Translations by Alexander Morton 24.2.2010.<\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. On the back in pencil \u201cFrom Khiva to Bokhara\u201d. On the front a list of Turcoman tribes in the region between Iran and Khiva. [II\/03(01)].<\/li>\n
                      2. Blue. On the back a sum in a European hand. On the front a note (unsigned and undated) mentioning Zamindavar (in Southern Afghanistan) and one Hajji Shir Ahmad. [II\/03(02)].<\/li>\n
                      3. Folded slip bearing a note addressed to \u201cSahib\u201d. The writer has been left for 18 months and requests financial assistance. [II\/03(03)].<\/li>\n
                      4. Double sheet written on all four sides. A letter in Persian, signed Iqbal on the first page, dated 3rd<\/sup> Evidently an Indian living in what is now Iraq or Syria. Thanks the recipient for kindness in Arabia, Iran and England. Mentions having entrusted his own writings to Edward Eastwick. [II\/03(04)].<\/li>\n
                      5. Letter in Persian with the seal of N\u00e0ww\u0101b Afsar al-Dawla Ghulam Muhammad \u0386li dated 1256 AH
                        \n[AD 1841] [II\/03(05)].<\/li>\n
                      6. Letter in Turkish, written in fine official calligraphy, the addressee not named. Dated \u201c12(59)?\u201d [This would correspond to 1843]. Concerns the wife of the refugee Persian prince Hulagu Mirza and the stipend allotted to her by Ali Pasha, Governor of Syria. [There may be a reference to this lady and her son in HCR\u2019s correspondence with Edwin Norris, Box III. RBP.] [II\/03(06)].<\/li>\n
                      7. Slip bearing two lines of Kufic script in pencil. An exercise or perhaps a copy. Date? at end 889 [AH] or 1889. [II\/03(07)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        II\/04\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Remains of a notebook. Not possible to say what sort of binding it originally had, if any. Blank except for 8 pages (not consecutive) headed \u201cNotes from Brome\u2019s Report.\u201d Apparently referring to Punjab and Afghanistan. 10 scraps of paper inserted, some bearing rough notes, others blank. There is a slip inserted into the book bearing the legend, perhaps not in HCR\u2019s hand \u201cd. 1839 Odds & Ends\u201d [The handwriting of the pages of the book is comparable to HCR\u2019s handwriting of the early 1840\u2019s, but that of the scraps of paper appears to be somewhat earlier. Some of these scraps record astronomical observations, perhaps related to determining latitude and longitude, at \u201cGolpaegoon\u201d (Golpayegan in Western Iran ?) and are dated, or bear dates compatible with, the year 1836. There is also a note from \u201cBurgess\u201d to \u201cFarrant\u201d inviting him and \u201cRawlinson\u201d to a \u201cPersian party\u201d.<\/p>\n

                        II\/05\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Two account books. One unbound \u201cTreasury Waste book of the Pol Agency of Turkish Arabia. Commencing from April 1 \u2013 1848. Baghdad April 1 H Rawlinson.\u201d There is a gap from October 13th<\/sup> 1849 to December 1st<\/sup> 1851 when HCR was absent on leave. His deputy \u201cCapt. Kemball\u201d has countersigned the final balance before HCR\u2019s departure. The account continues to June 1st<\/sup> 1853. The second has board covers and covers the period January 1 1853 to \u201cFebruary 1855\u201d when HCR finally left Baghdad. In this book there appears to be a distinction between private and public expenses, but the arrangement is not clear. The accounts in both books are in \u201ckerans\u201d [presumably the kran<\/em> a silver coin introduced in 1826 by Fath Ali Shah] but I have not been able to establish the value of this unit of currency at the time of Rawlinson\u2019s service.<\/p>\n

                        II\/06<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Letters and papers to and by HCR dating from before his return from the East in 1855. 5 pieces:<\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. Draft in HCR\u2019s handwriting, addressed \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 20th<\/sup> Messrs Stephen Lynch & Co<\/sup>, Baghdad. Gentlemen.\u201d The firm had apparently written to HCR asking for his aid in collecting certain sums which were owing to them. HCR promises to use his best endeavours, although he finds the details which they have given of the debts rather vague. He then proceeds to discuss an accusation which they claim has been made against them of having had undue influence in Baghdad, which he says is none of his business. [II\/06(01)].<\/li>\n
                        2. Note of sums spent on postage on behalf of(?) \u201cBaron de Veimars\u201d. [II\/06(02)].<\/li>\n
                        3. Bill from \u201cJoseph Otter, Sadler and Harness Maker, No. 19, Air Street, Piccadilly.\u201d for \u201c2 Best full suits of horse cloth\u201d. Addressed to Major Rawlinson, May 29 1850.\u201d [HCR was in Britain on leave at that date.] [II\/06(03)].<\/li>\n
                        4. Dated \u201cDamascus 19th<\/sup> December \/52 My dear Sir.\u201d First page of a letter from a British diplomat at Damascus discussing, firstly, difficulties which HCR has been having in getting his mails sent to and from Britain, and, secondly, his involvement in an insurrection which was going on in Syria at that time.[II\/06(04)].<\/li>\n
                        5. Letter dated \u201cC. Norton 13 Feby. 1853\u201d from \u201cA L Rawlinson\u201d [HCR\u2019s elder brother Abram] to \u201cMy dear Henry.\u201d Political gossip and family news. Interesting as showing the terms the brothers were on: friendly, but not close. [II\/06(05)].<\/li>\n
                        6. Dictated letter from \u201c[Lord] Stratford de R[edcliffe.]\u201d Dated \u201cTherapia [Town on the Bosphorus, near Istanbul, at this date the site of the summer palace of the British Ambassador to Turkey. RBP.] August 9th<\/sup> My dear Sir.\u201d Marked \u201cPrivate\u201d. [HCR mentions this letter in III\/10(16). He had apparently consulted Lord Stratford about whether he could leave his post at Baghdad in the current uncertain state of foreign affairs without having to endure another summer in Baghdad where the heat was beginning seriously to undermine his health. RBP.] The writer discourses urbanely on all aspects of the matter for 9 pages without saying anything very definite, but the upshot seems to be that, while he would prefer HCR to remain at his post until the Crimean war is over, if he chooses to leave the writer will acquiesce in his going. [II\/06(06)].<\/li>\n
                        7. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Novbr<\/sup> 15th<\/sup> My Lord. [There is no clear indication to whom this letter is addressed but there is a pencil note at the head of the letter (in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand ?) \u2018Sent to Lady Strangford June \/69.\u2019 RBP.]\u201d Discusses the current state of affairs in the region and the risk of a conflict of interest arising between the British and French at a time when they are supposed to be allies in the Crimean War. Asks for instructions on how to deal with French agents. [II\/06(07)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          II\/07<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Letters connected with Rawlinson\u2019s official duties. 5 items:<\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. Letter dated \u201cBaghdad 5 March 1855\u201d from Felix Jones to Edwin Norris [in his capacity as an official at the Foreign Office] announcing that HCR has finally left Baghdad and that he has taken over, at least for the time being, with other news and gossip. [II\/07(01)].<\/li>\n
                          2. Letter dated \u201cBagdad. March 19 [1855].\u201d From Felix Jones to Edwin Norris as above. Further details of HCR\u2019s progress homeward with other gossip. [II\/07(02)].<\/li>\n
                          3. Two long letters dated \u201c42 Marine Parade\u201d 14th<\/sup> and 16th<\/sup> January 1857. From \u201cV Farrant [? See II\/04 above. There are references in the Times in 1839 to a \u2018Major Farrant\u2019 accompanying the British Ambassador to Persia but I cannot identify him with certainty. RBP.]\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson.\u201d Congratulates HCR on being \u201cat last engaged on a work that may do me some good & I hope you will give me a lift if you can.\u201d [Not clear what this can refer to: at this date HCR\u2019s only official position was as Director of the East India Company, which he had held since the February 1856. RBP.] The writer had held a diplomatic post in Persia during the period 21 October 1847 to 21 October 1849 and promises to hand over papers in his possession relating to his service during this period which may be of service to HCR. [The writer is mainly concerned to express his grievances but the letters contain much detailed information about events in Persia during this period, which covered a change of regime.<\/em>] [II\/07(03)].<\/li>\n
                          4. Letter dated \u201c21 Langham Place, March 30 1858\u201d From HCR to \u201cDear Lord Ellenborough\u201d [Then President of the India Board]. Declines the offer of appointment to the proposed new Council for India, on the grounds that he will be more usefully employed as an MP. [Rawlinson ceased to be an MP in September 1858 and was then appointed to the Council for India, but resigned when he was appointed Ambassador to Persia in the following year. In his Annuary<\/em> (see Box IV) HCR says he declined this earlier offer because of the conditions attached to it. RBP.] [II\/07(04)].<\/li>\n
                          5. A long letter dated \u201c[Illegible] March 15. 68\u201d to \u201c[at end] the Right Honble The Lord Stanley MP [i.e. Stanley (2) at this time Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.] from [in pencil] \u201cLd Strangford\u201d. Asserts that a certain ms in the possession of the Foreign Office purporting to be the record of a survey of Central Asia between the Russian empire and India undertaken in 1801-2 is a forgery, related to two equally spurious documents published by the Russians a few years earlier, which he attributes to the scholar Klaproth from whom it was allegedly purchased for a large sum and asks to be allowed to publicise this fact. [See <\/em>\u201cObservations on Two Memoirs recently published by M. Veniukof on the Pamir Region and the Bolor Country in Central Asia.\u201d C. Rawlinson. Proceedings of the Royal Geographical Society of London Vol. 10 No. 4 1865-6. (Read March 26th<\/sup> 1866.) which deals with the authenticity of a manuscript in Russia purporting to give information on a similar subject. There is no indication how this letter came to be among the Rawlinson papers, although the writer does refer Lord Stanley to HCR if he requires further information. Strangford, died the following year and Lord Stanley ceased to be Foreign Secretary, which would explain why no further action was taken. The ms is still in the Foreign Office archives and its authenticity does not appear to be currently in question. RBP.] [II\/07(05)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            II\/08\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Official correspondence concerning HCR\u2019s appointment as Ambassador to Teheran 1859. 14 items:<\/p>\n

                              \n
                            1. From Lord Stanley [i.e. Stanley (2) at this time Secretary of State for India.] to HCR 10 Jan 1859. Inviting him to serve on a new (secret) Persian committee to deal with \u201cthe Persian business\u201d. [II\/08(01)].<\/li>\n
                            2. From Sir George Clarke to Lord Stanley 5 April 1859. On HCR\u2019s behalf, raising three points for consideration before he accepts the offer of the Teheran appointment: a) military rank; b) pension arrangements and compensation for giving up his seat on the India Council; c) a free hand in the selection of subordinates. [II\/08(02)].<\/li>\n
                            3. Lord Stanley to Sir George Clarke 6th<\/sup> April 1859. In reply to 2 above, expressing guarded agreement. Notes the difficulty of compensating him for giving up his seat on the Council for India or of giving any promise of reinstatement to that position on the termination of his term of office in Teheran, but \u201cPersia might even lead to Constantinople.\u201d Clearly expects HCR to remain in Teheran for several years. [II\/08(03)].<\/li>\n
                            4. Lord Stanley to HCR 8th<\/sup> April 1859 asking if HCR definitely accepts the Persian mission. [II\/08(04)].<\/li>\n
                            5. Lord Stanley to HCR 9th<\/sup> April 1859 expressing satisfaction at HCR\u2019s acceptance. [II\/08(05)].<\/li>\n
                            6. Lord Ellenborough to HCR 19th<\/sup> April 1859. Congratulates HCR on his appointment. Suggestions for the staffing of the Mission. A suitable Escort required \u201cwith two light guns\u201d. It should be like Sir John Malcolm\u2019s, \u201cexcept for the expense\u201d. Possible recruitment of learned Persians for a \u201cMahometan College\u201d at Delhi. [II\/08(06)].<\/li>\n
                            7. Lord Stanley to HCR 2 May 1859. Asking HCR to communicate his formal resignation from the Council of India on his acceptance of the new appointment. [II\/08(07)].<\/li>\n
                            8. Lord Stanley to HCR 9 May 1859. Warning him of a forthcoming audience with the Queen. [II\/08(08)].<\/li>\n
                            9. Lord Stanley to HCR 18 May 1859. Making an appointment at India House. [II\/08(09)].<\/li>\n
                            10. Lord Stanley to HCR 1 June 1859. Enclosing No.11 below, i.e. Lord Malmesbury\u2019s [at this time Foreign Secretary] answers to questions Lord S. had put to him following a conversation with HCR. [II\/08(10)].<\/li>\n
                            11. Copy of letter from Lord Malmesbury to Lord Stanley 27 May 1859. Answering points raised by Lord Stanley. Dissatisfaction among members of the Diplomatic Corps at the transfer of the Teheran Mission to the I.D. (India Department?) References to \u201cDoria\u201d \u201cMr Stevens\u201d and \u201cPisani\u201d. [II\/08(11)].<\/li>\n
                            12. [Duke of] Somerset to HCR 2 Nov. 1859. Acknowledging a letter from HCR and his recommendation of Lieutenant Buckle for promotion. [II\/08(12)].<\/li>\n
                            13. [Sir] Charles Wood to HCR. 28th<\/sup> 1859. Acknowledging a letter from HCR written from Tabreez. Shares HCR\u2019s views on Russian intentions although there has been a disquieting report from \u201cDoria\u201d about Russian moves on the SE corner of the Caspian. \u201cI am by no means an alarmist myself.\u201d \u201cWho will answer for Russia being what it is now 50 years hence?\u201d [II\/08(13)].<\/li>\n
                            14. British passport issued to HCR dated 29th<\/sup> August 1859 describing him as \u201cHer Majesty\u2019s Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the Court of Persia, and suite, going to Persia.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                              II\/09\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Unofficial letters and documents concerning HCR\u2019s term as Ambassador in Teheran 1859-60. 4 items.<\/p>\n

                                \n
                              1. Letter [with envelope] from HCR to \u201cMrs Seymour\u201d [HCR\u2019s future mother-in-law] dated \u201cPavilion Hotel, Folkestone Sept 1 1859.\u201d Written as HCR was about to embark for Teheran [The preferred route to the East from Britain at this time was across the Channel, by rail to Marseilles and thence by steamer through the Mediterranean. HCR\u2019s route to Teheran is given at III\/15(06)].] The letter makes clear his lack of enthusiasm for the posting, that he is only going out of a sense of duty and that he does not intend to remain more than a year. Sends his best regards to \u201cMiss Seymour\u201d. [II\/09(01)].<\/li>\n
                              2. Letter from \u201cA.H.\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201ccrossed out<\/em> March 12 1860.\u201d \u201cWe are all very glad to hear of you though sorry to find that you do not meditate an immediate return\u201d The rest of the letter is political and society gossip. [II\/09(02)].<\/li>\n
                              3. Letter from \u201cA L Rawlinson [HCR\u2019s elder brother] to \u201cMy dear Henry\u201d dated \u201cChipping Norton 2 May 1860\u201d Acknowledges receipt of HCR\u2019s letter dated 4 February and says \u201cYou must have very soon decided to send in your resignation after you wrote to me as your successor has been gazetted. How was this? Did not Lord John run kindly? \u2013 but I suppose the weather will not let you be off till the end of September.\u201d The rest of the letter consists of political and family news. [II\/09(03)].<\/li>\n
                              4. Letter from HCR\u2019s mother dated \u201cHillside May 3rd<\/sup> 1860\u201d to \u201cMy dearest Henry\u201d. Expresses her pleasure at the news by his letter of April 7th<\/sup> that he has actually sent in his resignation but fears that he may have incurred the Government\u2019s displeasure, also that many people assume that he has been superseded in his post. The rest of the letter consists of personal and family news. [II\/09(04)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                II\/10\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters concerning HCR\u2019s unsuccessful application to re-join the Council of India 1863. 4 items.<\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                1. Letter from HCR to Sir Charles Wood dated December 1 1863, setting out his claim to \u201cthe present vacancy on the Council of India\u201d [II\/10(01)].<\/li>\n
                                2. Letter from HCR to Lord Stanley of the same date enclosing a copy of 1 above and soliciting Stanley\u2019s support. [II\/10(02)].<\/li>\n
                                3. Letter from \u201cStanley\u201d to \u201cDear Sir Henry\u201d dated \u201cSt James\u2019s Square Dec.1 1863\u201d assuring HCR of his support. [II\/10(03)].<\/li>\n
                                4. Letter from \u201cC Wood\u201d to Dear Sir Henry\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office Dec. 1 1863\u201d acknowledging receipt of 1 above and saying noncommittally that replacing Sir John Lawrence\u2019s expertise on the Council of India will require very careful consideration. [II\/10(04)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                  II\/11\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters concerning HCR\u2019s unsuccessful application to re-join the Council of India 1866. 5 items.<\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                  1. From Lord Stanley to \u201cMy dear Sir Henry\u201d dated \u201cF.O. Sept. 19\/66\u201d \u201cI cannot interfere with Lord Cranborne\u2019s choice of a councillor to replace poor Willoughby: but you may rely on my readiness to bear testimony if necessary to your fitness for that post.\u201d [II\/11(01)].<\/li>\n
                                  2. From HCR to \u201cMy Lord [Cranborne]\u201d dated \u201cAthenaeum Sep. 20 1866 Copy\u201d. Apologizes for approaching Lord Cranborne directly, upon whom he has no personal or political claim, but hopes that the circumstances which had led to his resigning his seat on the Council of India on a previous occasion, and which are set out in an enclosed note [not in the Rawlinson papers] will carry some weight. Also refers Lord Cranborne to Lord Stanley for testimony as to his [HCR\u2019s] suitability for the post. [II\/11(02)].<\/li>\n
                                  3. From \u201cE Perry\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cEaton Pl. 21st<\/sup> [September 1866] Private\u201d. Says that the writer believes that \u201cLd C.\u201d will offer the post to \u201cMontgomery\u201d despite the recommendation of the majority of members of the Council. Suggests that HCR write to Lord Stanley in strong terms or go up and see him. [II\/11(03)].<\/li>\n
                                  4. From HCR to \u201cMy Lord [Stanley]\u201d dated \u201cBrockham Sept. 22 1866\u201d. Urges Stanley to use his influence on HCR\u2019s behalf before a decision on the appointment to the Council of India is finally made. States his claim for special consideration on account of his having given up his seat on the Council in 1859 in order to take up the post in Teheran in the public interest, that his qualifications for the post are superior to those of Sir Robert Montgomery [Lord Cranborne\u2019s preferred candidate] and that, despite his long and arduous service with the Indian Army, including diplomatic posts in Kandahar and Baghdad, he has only his Army pension of \u00a3365 per annum as a reward. His sense of grievance is made very clear. [II\/11(04)].<\/li>\n
                                  5. From \u201cStanley\u201d to \u201cDear Sir Henry\u201d dated \u201cF.O. Sept. 24 1866 Private\u201d. Acknowledges the justice of HCR\u2019s case and says that he has mentioned this to Lord Cranborne, but that the decision now rests with him. Ends by saying that he is \u201csincerely sorry that so active and energetic a public servant as yourself should have been so long on the shelf.\u201d [II\/11(05)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                    II\/12\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters concerning HCR\u2019s ultimately successful attempt to re-join the Council of India 1868. 19 items.<\/p>\n

                                      \n
                                    1. Undated scrap of paper in HCR\u2019s handwriting containing a draft letter of application for a seat on the Council of India, in view of the vacancies which are expected to occur shortly. [II\/12(01)].<\/li>\n
                                    2. From \u201c[Sir] Stafford H Northcote\u201d to \u201cMy dear Sir Henry\u201d dated \u201cHouse of Commons June 27 1868\u201d. Returns various enclosures and promises \u201cto bear your wish in mind\u201d when the time comes for electing new members. Anticipates that three elective and one nominated seat will become vacant. Acknowledges that HCR\u2019s claims are very strong, but will say no more than that. [II\/12(02)].<\/li>\n
                                    3. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office July 3rd<\/sup>\u201d Has shown HCR\u2019s letter to \u201cseveral of our leading men\u201d and encloses one reply which is a \u201cfair representation of most of those I have conferred with.\u201d [II\/12(03)].<\/li>\n
                                    4. From \u201cR D Mangles\u201d to \u201cMy dear Perry\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office 2nd<\/sup> July\/68\u201d. [This is apparently the enclosure referred to in 3 above.] Mainly refers to Rawlinson\u2019s previous service on the Council 1858-9. Apparently there was strong hostility against him [which the writer says he does not share, although he did not vote for HCR in the ensuing election] because of his support for reform of the system of governing India. Also agrees that \u201cwe need men of social and political influence\u201d. [II\/12(04)].<\/li>\n
                                    5. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office July 3rd<\/sup> 1868\u201d. Has had a very satisfactory talk with Northcote and invites HCR to \u201ccall here at 3 on Monday\u201d. [II\/12(05)].<\/li>\n
                                    6. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office July 25th<\/sup>\u201d. Has had another talk with Northcote. Is sure that HCR would be certain to be elected if there were vacancies to be filled now, but that there is no prospect of a vacancy before October 1st<\/sup>. [II\/12(06)].<\/li>\n
                                    7. From E Perry to \u201cDear Lady Rawlinson\u201d [HCR was in Germany at this time for a course of spa treatment.] Dated \u201cThe Pickeridge, Slough\u201d. Wishes her to let her husband know that the anticipated resignations from the Council of India have been postponed and that matters are in abeyance. [II\/12(07)].<\/li>\n
                                    8. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office Aug. 24\u201d. One member of the Council has resigned with effect from \u201c2 Sept.\u201d [II\/12(08)].<\/li>\n
                                    9. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cThe Pickeridge Aug 25\u201d. Has written to Northcote suggesting the best way of managing things so as to secure HCR\u2019s election. [II\/12(09)].<\/li>\n
                                    10. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cThe Pickeridge Sep 27th<\/sup>\u201d. HCR\u2019s name has been withdrawn from the forthcoming election. Discusses HCR\u2019s chances at the next election. [II\/12(10)].<\/li>\n
                                    11. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office 29th<\/sup>\u201d Gives the results of the voting for the vacant seat on the Council. HCR lost on the casting vote of the Vice President. \u201cBut I hope and trust that Northcote will nominate you to the vacancy that falls in tomorrow.\u201d [II\/12(11)].<\/li>\n
                                    12. From \u201cGeorge Clark\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201c5 Marine Parade, Bognor 29th<\/sup>\/68\u201d Has been extolling HCR\u2019s qualifications to advise on Persian affairs to Sir Stafford Northcote. [II\/12(12)].<\/li>\n
                                    13. From \u201cStafford H Northcote\u201d to \u201cMy dear Sir H Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office Sept 29 1868 Private\u201d Inviting HCR to serve on the Council of India as a nominated member, the two elected seats having gone to other people. [II\/12(13)].<\/li>\n
                                    14. From \u201cL Prinsep\u201d to \u201cMy dear Sir Henry\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office, Tuesday 5pm [presumably 29th<\/sup> September 1868]\u201d Expresses his vexation at the outcome of the voting, and assures HCR that he had voted for him. Wishes him better success at the next election. [II\/12(14)].<\/li>\n
                                    15. From \u201cThomson Hankey\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201c45 Portland Place, \u201c 30 Sept. 1868\u201d Congratulations on HCR\u2019s appointment to the Council of India. [II\/12(15)].<\/li>\n
                                    16. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cThe Pickeridge Sep 30\u201d. Further discussion of the voting on September 29th<\/sup> and of HCR\u2019s chances when another elected seat falls vacant. Is unaware that HCR has been offered a seat as a nominated member, although he thinks he should be. [II\/12(16)].<\/li>\n
                                    17. From \u201cSHN [Stafford H Northcote] to \u201cMy dear Perry\u201d dated \u201cIndia Office, Oct. 1 1868\u201d. Advises Perry of HCR\u2019s appointment to the Council of India as a nominated member, and discusses certain possible objections, which he does not think are serious. Also that he has asked HCR to be reticent about sensitive issues before non-Council members. [II\/12(17)].<\/li>\n
                                    18. From E Perry to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cThe Pickeridge, Slough Oct 3rd<\/sup>\u201d. Congratulates HCR on his appointment to the Council. [II\/12(18)].<\/li>\n
                                    19. From George Clark to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d dated \u201cBognor [Oct 4th<\/sup>]\u201d Expresses satisfaction at HCR\u2019s appointment, and adds further not very flattering comments on the debate and voting at the previous election. [II\/12(18)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                      II\/13\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>29 sheets of foolscap, some single and some double. None signed or dated, but where dates can be assigned they all relate to the period after HCR\u2019s return from Baghdad in 1855. Some appear to relate to speeches in Parliament. The most extensive body of material relates to contemporary events in Persia and Afghanistan, but there are also drafts of an article about the geography of that country.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/14-26 \u00a0<\/strong>Letters addressed to HCR and his wife, mainly social but some arising from HCR\u2019s political and scholarly connections. Those considered worth noting are numbered accordingly, the remainder follow on, not separately numbered. Grouped by date as follows:<\/p>\n

                                      II\/14\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters not completely dated (some of these could probably be dated from internal evidence). 18 letters, 4 other documents, 4 empty envelopes. This packet includes notes from (1) [Baron] Hochshild [then Swedish Minister to London]; (2) [Count] Munster [German Ambassador to London]; (3) [Earl] Northbrook; (4) A P Storey [Dean of Westminster]; (5) \u201cthe Managers of the Royal Institution\u201d [inviting HCR to lecture]; (6) \u201cVal Prinsep [artist]\u201d on behalf of his father Henry Thoby Prinsep, a fellow member with HCR of the Council of India, regretting that his father\u2019s eyesight will probably not permit him to \u201cdecipher\u201d a letter in Persian which HCR has sent; (7) John Tyndall [physicist] declining an invitation to dinner on account of being \u201centangled in one of the most complicated investigations I ever undertook\u201d.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dating from before 1870. 6 letters and 1 newspaper cutting. Including: (1) newspaper cutting describing HCR\u2019s unsuccessful attempt to secure the Liberal nomination for Reigate in 1858; (2) note from A Panizzi [Director of the British Museum] 1864; (3) note to Lady Rawlinson from Edwin Norris 1865 declining an invitation to dinner because he has not recovered from an unspecified attack but hoping to call on Sir Henry \u201csome fine morning for a talk on our old subjects\u201d; (4) note from [illegible<\/em>] dated 14 June 1866 about a Parliamentary question which HCR had put down on Bokhara.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/16\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1871. 4 letters. Includes notes from: (1) [Lord] Derby accepting an invitation to dinner at the Royal Geographical Society, of which HCR was then President; (2) T Douglas Forsyth [Indian Civil Servant].<\/p>\n

                                      II\/17<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Letters dated 1872. 3 letters, 1 in envelope.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/18\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1873. 5 letters, 1 in envelope, plus 1 empty envelope. Includes: (1) note dated July 4 1873 from [Earl] Granville [then Foreign Secretary and Secretary of State for the Colonies] on a discussion he has had with Gladstone [then Prime Minister], (2) apparently about accepting some presents; note dated Nov. 10 from the same responding to a query about some treaty rights; (3) note dated 23rd<\/sup> June from Sir Howard Elphinstone [at this time governor to Prince Arthur, Queen Victoria\u2019s third son] to Lady Rawlinson, enquiring on behalf of the Queen about HCR\u2019s health; (4) note dated May 8 from [Viscount] Halifax [at this time Lord Privy Seal] apologising on behalf of himself and his wife for not having replied to an invitation.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/19\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1873. 1 letter. From Admiral Sherard Osborn, declining an invitation to dinner on account of a severe cold.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/20\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1875. 8 letters. Includes: (1) Letter dated \u201cGloucester House, Park Lane W, March 4th<\/sup> \/75\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d from \u201cGeorge [William Frederick Charles\u201a Duke of Cambridge (1819-1904)\u201a the only son of George III\u2019s seventh son\u201a Adolphus Frederick]\u201d thanking him for the loan of his book England and Russia in the East<\/em> remarking that he thinks their views on this subject are much the same. [The signature is very similar to an example of the Duke of Cambridge\u2019s which I have found on the web and he was living at this address in the 1870\u2019s. RBP<\/em>]; (2) three letters, all dated 2 November 1875, concerning HCR\u2019s reaction to a paragraph in the Pall Mall Gazette<\/em> which he considered to be an attack on his integrity \u2013 (i) from HCR to Lord Salisbury [then Secretary of State for India] asking permission to send a letter of refutation to the Editor of the Pall Mall Gazette<\/em>, (ii) a copy of the letter which HCR was proposing to send, (iii) a letter from [Sir] Louis Mallet [then Permanent Under-Secretary of State for India] to \u201cDear Sir Henry\u201d saying that in his view the paragraph in question is not a criticism of HCR and does not require an answer [It is not clear whether this letter is a response to (i) or not.<\/em>]<\/p>\n

                                      II\/21\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1876. 5 letters, including one in its envelope and one in French. Includes: (1) letter dated 17 March 1876 from [Sir] Samuel Baker [army officer, explorer, etc] to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d discussing a letter which he has just received from \u201cColonel [Charles George] Gordon\u201d [at that time in the service of the Khedive of Egypt, Ismail Pasha the Magnificent<\/em>]; (2) letter dated \u201c18 May 1876\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d from \u201cCarnarvon [Henry Howard Molyneux Herbert, 4th Earl of Carnarvon, then Secretary of State for the Colonies<\/em>] doubting whether he will \u201cbe able to be at the meeting [of the Royal Geographical Society of which HCR was then President] on Monday\u201d but that if not \u201cI will send you [James] Lowther [then Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies<\/em>] to receive the gold medal [of the RGS, this is what actually happened.<\/em>]\u201d [The medal was received on behalf of the Australian explorer John Forrest for making the first journey overland between Western Australia and the other colonies.<\/em>]; (3) letter dated \u201c11 Downing Street May 18 1876\u201d to \u201cDear Sir H Rawlinson\u201d from \u201c[Sir] Stafford H Northcote [then Chancellor of the Exchequer] saying that a decision on the \u201cCameron\u00a0 papers\u201d would have to be postponed because of the illness of the Prime Minister [Disraeli] but that he did not doubt that the PM would agree to \u201cthe sum I mentioned to you\u201d [This may refer to Lieutenant Cameron RN who was in London at the time receiving various honours in recognition of his explorations in West Africa, but I cannot trace any mention of his receiving anything from the Government RBP.<\/em>]<\/p>\n

                                      II\/22\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1877. 2 letters. Including (1) one dated \u201cMetropolitan Museum of Art October 17 1877\u201d to \u201cSir Henry Rawlinson KCB etc etc\u201d from L[uigi] P[alma] , di Cesnola [soldier, US diplomat and amateur archaeologist<\/em>] offering HCR a copy of his new book [Cyprus, its ancient Cities, Tombs and Temples<\/em>] and saying he would value HCR\u2019s opinion on it.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/23\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1878. 8 letters all about articles and possible articles by HCR. Includes: (1) 3 letters to HCR from William Smith [then editor of the Quarterly Review<\/em>] and 4 from John Murray [publisher of the same] mostly about a proposed article by HCR on the crisis in Afghanistan and (3) 1 from HCR to Lord Cranbrook about an article on the same subject for a rival periodical.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/24\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1879. 8 letters. Includes: (1) Letter, with envelope, dated \u201cHotel d\u2019Europe, St Petersburg 23rd<\/sup> February [old style]\/8 March 1879 [new style]\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d from \u201cDufferin [presumably Frederick Temple Hamilton-Temple-Blackwood, 1st Marquess of Dufferin and Ava, at this date British ambassador at St Petersburg<\/em>]\u201d expressing regret at having to leave London without saying goodbye; (2) two letters from \u201cA P Stanley [Dean of Westminster<\/em>] dated \u201cDeanery, Westminster Feb.3(?) and Jul 4(?) 79\u201d addressed to \u201cDear Lady Rawlinson\u201d the writing is very difficult to read, but the letters appear to refer to social engagements; (3) letter dated \u201cGerman Embassy, Feb 28 (?) 79\u201d from \u201cMunster [Count M\u00fcnster, the German ambassador<\/em>] to \u201cDear Sir Henry Rawlinson\u201d apologising for being unable to keep an appointment to dine with the Rawlinsons because he will be required to attend on \u201cTheir Imperial Highnesses, [the Crown Prince and Princess of Germany, the latter being Princess Vicky, Queen Victoria\u2019s eldest daughter<\/em>]; (4) letter dated \u201c19 Pall Mall, March 1st<\/sup> 1879\u201d from \u201c[Field Marshal Robert Cornelis Napier 1st<\/sup> Baron<\/em>] Napier of Magdala\u201d [at this date Governor-General of Gibraltar and member of a Royal Commission on the organisation of the Army<\/em>] regretting that he will not be able to discuss \u201cso important a question with you and Lord Salisbury [then Foreign Secretary]\u201d because of a prior engagement; (5) note dated \u201c4 Hamilton Place, Piccadilly March 11\/79\u201d from \u201c[Thomas George Baring, 1st Earl of] Northbrook\u201d to \u201cMy dear Lady Rawlinson\u201d regretting that he will be obliged to break a dinner engagement because his mother-in-law is terminally ill; (6) letter dated \u201cArgyll Lodge, Kensington Ap: 20\/79\u201d from \u201c[George John Douglas Campbell, 1st & 8th Duke of] Argyll [among other things, an amateur scientist<\/em>]\u201d discussing the question of whether birds hibernate; (7) letter dated \u201cGibraltar, Nov 12th<\/sup> 1879\u201d from \u201cNapier of Magdala [as above]\u201d to \u201cMy dear Sir Henry\u201d Promises \u201cto pay any attention in my power to your friends Mr & Mrs Lowther\u201d and regrets that they were not already here, as they have missed \u201ca Ball this evening where they would have seen our two young Princes and all Gibraltar [this refers to the visit of Princes Albert Victor and George \u2013 the sons of the then Prince of Wales \u2013 who were taking a cruise on board HMS Bacchante<\/em>]\u201d the letter concludes with some remarks on political and military affairs in the East.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/25\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1880. 6 items, including: (1) letter dated \u201cStratton, Micheldever Station, Easter Day [i.e. 28th<\/sup> March] 1880\u201d from \u201cNorthbrook [as in II\/24<\/strong> above]\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d inviting HCR to visit him to meet \u201cPr. [Baron (Nils) Adolf Erik] Nordenskiold\u201d [1832 \u2013 1901, a geologist, mineralogist and Arctic explorer<\/em>]; (2) letter dated \u201cBudapest University, April 27 80\u201d from \u201cA[rmin] V\u00e1mb\u00e9ry\u201d to \u201cDear Sir Henry\u201d thanking him for his kindness on a recent visit, and saying that he will continue to strive to defend British interests but without any hope of material reward; (3) 2 letters dated \u201cAdmiralty, May 4th<\/sup> and Aug. 6th<\/sup> 1880\u201d from Northbrook [as above], the first to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d regretting that he cannot continue to serve as President of the Royal Geographical Society and discussing the question of a successor, the second to \u201cMy dear Lady Rawlinson\u201d enclosing an order to his housekeeper for Lady R to view the pictures at his house at Stratton;(4) letter dated \u201cEdgehill, Sydenham, 10th<\/sup> Dec. 1880\u201d from \u201cFred[erick Sleigh] Roberts\u201d regretting that he will not be able to attend \u201cyour meeting \u2026 in Burlington Gardens [presumably of the Royal Geographical Society<\/em>]\u201d;(5) envelope, empty, unstamped and unfranked, on the flap \u201cGovernment Buildings, Calcutta\u201d with a wax seal bearing the imprint \u201cPrivate Secretary to the Viceroy\u201d, on the front \u201cPrivate, General Sir Henry Rawlinson, India Office, Lytton [Lord Lytton was Viceroy and Governor General of India from 12 April 1876 to 8 June 1880. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                      II\/26\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters dated 1881 and later. 11 letters, and one envelope. Includes: (1) letter dated \u201cUnited Service Club, 18th<\/sup> January 1881\u201d from \u201cFred Roberts [as in II\/25 <\/strong>above]\u201d to \u201cMy dear Lady Rawlinson\u201d apologising for being unable to come to dinner as arranged because of being \u201cregularly stormbound\u201d and being unable to get a cab; (2) note dated \u201c19 Warwick Crescent, W Jan 20th<\/sup> 81\u201d from \u201cMr Browning\u201d apologising to Lady Rawlinson for being unable to attend her dinner \u201clast Tuesday evening\u201d because of the weather [this refers to the same dinner party<\/em>]; (3) note dated \u201c1 South Villas, Campden Hill Rd. Kensington, Febry 7th<\/sup> 1881\u201d from \u201cMr R Lehmann\u201d to \u201cLady Rawlinson\u201d with the address of \u201cthe man who can convert an ordinary grate into one of Dr Siemen\u2019s invention\u201d [this refers to a grate using a gas burner to ignite a fire of anthracite or coke<\/em>]; (4) 2 letters dated \u201c30 St James Place March 6th<\/sup> and 26th<\/sup> 1881\u201d from \u201cStafford H Northcote seeking information about the history of Kandahar; (5) letter dated \u201cEdgehill, Sydenham, 17th<\/sup> May 1881\u201d from \u201cFred Roberts [as above] to \u201cDear Lady Rawlinson\u201d arranging a visit to meet \u201cMr Hall\u201d; (6) 2 letters dated \u201c4 Camden Square, N.W. Dec. 1 & 2 1881\u201d from \u201cFrank Holl [RA 1845 \u2013 1888, painter] to \u201cMy dear Lady Rawlinson\u201d the first inviting her to come and see his portrait of Lord Overstone, and the other concerning an engraving of HCR; (7) letter in its envelope dated \u201cKnebworth Park, Stevenage 13th<\/sup> Jany 1881\u201d from \u201c[Edward Robert Lytton Bulwer-Lytton, 1st Earl of] Lytton [statesman and poet, 1831 \u2013 1891]\u201d seeking to authenticate certain quotations about Afghanistan; (8) letter dated \u201cLegation of the United States, London 12th<\/sup> Decr 1881\u201d from \u201cJ[ames] R[ussell] Lowell [US Ambassador to London]\u201d regretting that he will be unable to attend a meeting of the Royal Geographical Society owing to \u201ca matter of urgent business\u201d; (9) letter dated \u201cThe Three Gables, Fitzjohn\u2019s Avenue NW April 23 1887\u201d from \u201cFrank Holl [as above]\u201d to \u201cMy dear Lady Rawlinson\u201d apparently mainly about the availability of a wheelchair at the Royal Academy.<\/p>\n

                                      II\/27\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>(1) Letter dated \u201cOxford, Feb. 1 80\u201d from \u201c[Professor] F Max Muller\u201d to \u201cMy dear Sir Henry\u201d containing news and gossip concerning the state of Oriental scholarship at Oxford and elsewhere, (2) transcript of a note which was found with it among the Rawlinson papers<\/p>\n

                                      BOX III
                                      \n<\/strong>Documents relating to HCR\u2019s intellectual interests, particularly his cuneiform studies. Additional passing references will be found in the biographical and autobiographical material in Box IV.<\/em><\/p>\n

                                      III\/01: [S<\/strong>ee III\/20 below for the history of the correspondence as recollected by Norris in 1865. RBP.] \u201cLetters from Major Rawlinson\u201d. Lists the first 5 letters from HCR to the Royal Asiatic Society dated \u201cA. Tehran 1 January 1838\u201d; \u201cB. Tehran 30th<\/sup> July 1838\u201d; \u201cC. Tabriz October 7 1838\u201d; \u201cD. Baghdad July 25th<\/sup> 1839\u201d; E. 25th<\/sup> August 1839\u201d. The list includes a pr\u00e9cis of their contents, together with comments and criticisms. Marginal notes giving the names of the addressees of the letters appear to be in the handwriting of Edwin Norris and may have been added later.<\/p>\n

                                      III\/02: <\/strong>The letters listed in III\/01 above, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                      1. Addressed to \u201cCapt. H Harkness, Secretary to the Royal Asiatic Society, Tehran Janry 1st<\/sup> 1838\u201d. Explains the origin of his interest in the history, language and literature of ancient Persia and how he has advanced beyond previous interpretations of the cuneiform script. Encloses a transliteration and translation of the opening paragraph of the Behistun inscription in Old Persian. Letter [A in III\/01 above, which comments: \u201cThe transcript is good, but there are several errors in the translation\u2026.\u201d]<\/li>\n
                                      2. Addressed to \u201cGenl. Briggs \u2013 Secretary to the Royal Asiatic Society, Teheran July 30th<\/sup>\u201d Encloses a letter addressed to Professor Burnouf, together with a copy of the latest version of his Persian alphabet which he asks the Society to forward to Burnouf, while retaining a copy. [Copies of the letter to Burnouf and of the alphabet are with the letter. B in III.01 above, which comments: \u201cHis letter to Burnouf shews how vastly he has improved since then.\u201d]<\/li>\n
                                      3. Addressed to \u201cGenl. Briggs [as above], Tabriz, October 7th<\/sup> 1838\u201d. The disturbed state of the country and the continual moving around which this entails has made it \u201cquite impossible to fulfil my promise of forwarding you a copy of the great Bisitoon Inscription\u201d but he hopes to do this soon. The linguistic and grammatical problems are not so straightforward as he had at first thought. Hopes to make copies of other cuneiform inscriptions on his journeys. [C in III\/01 above. It is interesting to note that he uses the word \u201ccuneiform\u201d in this letter, whereas in his first letter and in the note written on it at the RAS, the term \u201carrow-head inscription\u201d is used.]<\/li>\n
                                      4. Addressed to \u201cMajor General Briggs [as above] Baghdad, July 25th<\/sup> 1839\u201d. Excuses the long delay in writing by having been constantly travelling throughout the autumn and winter, by awaiting receipt of Wilson\u2019s Sanskrit Dictionary [presumably the revised edition of Horace Hayman Wilson\u2019s Sanskrit-English Dictionary<\/em>] and by being engaged on writing a paper on the location of the ancient city of Ecbatana [published Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London<\/em>, Vol. 10, (1840), pp. 65-158]. He has made many changes to his alphabet, which are confirmed by Professor Lassen\u2019s letter of August 1838 [RAS office copy attached] so that he thinks his cuneiform alphabet cannot now claim to be original, but his translations of the Bisitun inscriptions are new and \u201cof extraordinary interest\u201d. Is sending a precis of the inscription, [enclosed; D in III\/01 comments on the pr\u00e9cis: \u201cthe sense is on the whole pretty correct though the details are very frequently wrong\u201d.] Hopes to forward a copy and translation of the complete [Persian] translation by the next post.<\/li>\n
                                      5. Addressed to \u201cMajor-General Briggs [as above] Baghdad August 21st<\/sup> 1839\u201d Has not managed to complete his work on the copy and translation of the Bisitun inscription and so cannot send it by this month\u2019s post as promised. However, it is in very nearly finished and he hopes to send it next month. [E in III\/01. I have not been able to establish exactly when HCR was withdrawn from Persia and sent back to India, subsequently to be sent to Afghanistan, but it was before the end of 1839. The papers in the Rawlinson collection at the Royal Geographical Society may shed light on this. Work on the cuneiform inscriptions was suspended during this period. RBP<\/em>]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                        III\/03:<\/strong> Three double foolscap sheets folded together [in Edwin Norris\u2019s hand] with one single foolscap sheet [in a different hand] making a notebook of 14 pages. Untitled but lists 34 letters to the RAS from HCR. Identified by letters (omitting J and U) continuing the sequence in III\/01 above from F Nov 27 1845 to 2P 17th<\/sup> September 1849. The letter listed as \u201cE\u201d in III\/01 is noted at the beginning, indicating that there are no missing letters in between. However, it is not clear whether the list was compiled as the letters were received or retrospectively, but probably the latter. There is a marginal note opposite the first letter, \u201csent to Lady Rawlinson 5th<\/sup> August 1865\u201d and there are marginal notes in her handwriting in pencil throughout.<\/p>\n

                                        III\/04: <\/strong>The letters listed in III\/03 above, with 19 of the wrappers, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                        1. Addressed to \u201cProfessor J H Wilson, Director of the Royal Asiatic Society, Baghdad, Nov 27th<\/sup> My dear Sir\u201d Has dispatched the 3rd<\/sup> chapter on the alphabet to the RAS. These first three chapters could be published by themselves, but he is beginning to doubt whether they can be successfully printed without his personal supervision. He will however, leave that to Wilson\u2019s judgement. He has been forced to discard a long-held belief that the inscription confirms the existence of Perseus as an historical figure, and lists alterations required in the translation of the text, if that is to be published at present. He is hopeful of being able to visit England the following year, when he will make these corrections in his own hand. He still believes, however, that Perseus is the Greek name for the founder of the Achaemenian dynasty. Mentions that Mr Layard has commenced excavations at Nineveh at the expense of Sir Stratford Canning and that \u201cabove 100 long inscriptions have been disinterred\u201d. Anticipates that in a few years \u201cthe histories of the early Assyrians and Babylonians\u201d will be \u201cmore thoroughly explored or at any rate explorable\u201d that that of early Egypt or Rome. [Letter F in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        2. Addressed to \u201cProfessor Wilson [as above] Baghdad, March 27th<\/sup> My dear Sir\u201d Has been unable to complete Chapter 5 because of severe rheumatism. Asks for alterations to the translation of \u201cdaruga\u201d which he considers to be very important. Has become suspicious as to aspirated letters [Norris comments: \u201cthis led to the discovery of secondary forms etc.\u201d] He \u201cfully expects to leave Baghdad in Septr<\/sup> and to be in England by the end of the year\u201d and would prefer to keep the items not already sent until he can bring it all home together. Is making good progress with Babylonian writing \u201cwith the aid of the names contained in the geographical inscription from Nablish-i-Rustum which I have lately received from Teheran.\u201d [Letter G in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        3. Addressed to \u201cProfessor Wilson [as above] June 27th<\/sup> My dear sir\u201d Unaware that his papers had been detained at Constantinople, he had \u201cstruck work\u201d believing that they \u201chad been consigned to the Balaam box of the Society\u201d but has now resumed. However, progress will be slower than formerly owing to his having lost his amanuensis and also to constant interruptions. During the time his work on Persian cuneiform was suspended, he had switched his attention to Babylonian Median. He considers that he can now read, but not understand them unless there is a Persian translation. He considers that Westergaard\u2019s Median alphabet is exceedingly faulty \u2013 his readings differ so much from Westergaard\u2019s that you would hardly recognise them to refer to the same language. He still considers Median to be related to Scythic and that it was the vernacular language of Persia before the Aryan invasion. He finds support for this in legend. Babylonian he considers to be Semitic in grammar, although the roots are very obscure and the phonetic system extraordinarily complex. In a PS he lists people to whom copies of the memoir [on Persian] are to be sent. [Letter H in III.03]<\/li>\n
                                        4. Addressed to \u201cProfessor Wilson [as above] Baghdad July 27th<\/sup> My dear sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of something from E Norris [apparently giving Norris\u2019s interpretations of Babylonian texts] but cannot send anything on the Babylonian script for publication, partly because he has been too busy on other matters but also because there are some important points on which he is not satisfied. Disagrees with Norris on many points but cannot at present show his reasons because that \u201cwould be to give up my Behistun key and for this at present I am hardly prepared.\u201dBut he seems to think that Norris\u2019s approach is fundamentally unsound. He cautions him against relying on Westergaard\u2019s readings because \u201cI can prove fully half his alphabet to be wrong\u201d. His application for leave of absence has been refused because the regulations prevent it, but he is content to entrust the publication of his Memoir on Persian cuneiform to Norris. He intends to remain in the East until he has mastered the intricacies of Babylonian cuneiform because, although he finds it difficult to conduct this research in Baghdad, it would be still more difficult in England. He hopes he will not encounter opposition from \u201ca certain party in England\u201d because his research \u201cmay throw discredit on Scripture chronology\u201d. \u201cI shall not be deterred from proceeding \u2026 [even though] the authenticity of Daniel itself should be endangered by the enquiry.\u201d Wishes to receive the Journal of the RAS as it is published and is prepared to pay an extra subscription for this. [Letter I in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        5. Addressed to \u201cE Norris, [presumably at the Royal Asiatic Society] Baghdad Aug. 27th<\/sup> 1846 My dear sir\u201d Annotated \u201cRawlinson\u2019s first letter to me personally Edwin Norris\u201d. Thanks Norris for the trouble which he is taking in preparing HCR\u2019s ms [on the Persian inscription at Behistun] for the press. Encloses a supplementary note on the alphabet which, if it arrives too late to be used to amend the article itself, should be published as an appendix to Chapter 5. Describes the difficulties which he has been having with the vocabulary. He also describes the progress he has made with Babylonian and the difficulties which remain and asks to be kept informed how Norris is getting on. [Letter K in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        6. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad Octbr<\/sup> My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of the lithographs of the Behistun inscription. Is satisfied with the quality of execution but has not yet had time to examine it thoroughly for accuracy. Is generally satisfied with the corrections which Norris has made, with one exception. Comments on certain inaccuracies in the Latin translation. He then notes some further errata [Norris has written some comments on these in pencil in between the lines of HCR\u2019s letter.] He is concerned to point out that the improved orthography given in the supplementary note sent with his previous letter was conceived before he received a hint on this subject from Dr Hincks. His work has been disrupted for fortnight by a severe outbreak of cholera but the crisis is now over. He has expanded the vocabulary with etymological, grammatical, historical and geographical analyses so that the proposed Chapters 7 & 9 can be dispensed with and he proposes to defer Chapter 8 until he has gained a better knowledge of the contents of the inscriptions in the other languages. Consequently, he proposes to take up the Median & Babylonian inscriptions in earnest. He does not propose to publish the transcripts of the Median and Babylonian inscriptions at the same time as the Persian because he does not wish to allow his competitors to steal a march on him. Thinks that Dr Hincks is on the right track, but is proceeding a little too fast. Is aware that he has a new competitor in Germany, a Mr Holtzmann [This possibly refers to Adolf Holtzmann 1810-1870, described as a German philologist, but I cannot discover which work of\u00a0 his is referred to. RBP]. [Letter L in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        7. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Novr<\/sup> 27th<\/sup> My dear sir\u201d Sends one quire of the vocabulary and hopes to send two more (amounting to two thirds of the whole, as far as the letter d<\/em>) early in December and \u201cI am determined to finish the Chapter by the end of the year\u201d. [Norris adds a note in the entry in III\/03: \u201cnot come yet Nov. 1848\u201d]. Has found it impossible to carry on serious work on Babylonian and Persian simultaneously. The inscriptions from Van appear to be easier than those from elsewhere but appear not to be in the same language. The excavations at Nineveh are proceeding rapidly and a number of interesting inscriptions have been found., including a list of 50 Assyrian historical names. He expects great historical results. [Letter M in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        8. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad, Decr<\/sup> 7th<\/sup> 1846 My dear Sir\u201d Is sending \u201cthe second portion of the vocabulary\u201d. Acknowledges that the notes include \u201ca mass of desultory disquisition, Geographical, Historical, ..\u201d etc which do not strictly belong in a vocabulary as such, so that \u201cI can only entreat you \u2026 to use your Editorial privilege of shearing<\/u> without compunction\u201d where you feel it to be necessary. Will endeavour \u201cto retrench all exuberances in the concluding portion of the vocabulary\u201d which he hopes to have ready by the next post. He thinks that will amount to 200 printed pages, which will be as much as can be included in the next issue of the Journal. Is not making as much progress with Babylonian and Assyrian as expected. Is satisfied that he understands the alphabets but finds the languages puzzling. Perhaps a comparison with old Egyptian and Ethiopic might be helpful. Hopes to visit Behistun in the spring, will get long ladders and \u201ccopy every Babylonian scrap.\u201d Has received a list of 40 Assyrian names from Layard, which has fairly puzzled him. [Letter N in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                        9. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad Decr<\/sup> 27th<\/sup> 1846 My dear Sir\u201d Has received Norris\u2019s transcription of the Babylonian legend on the trilingual cylinder in the British Museum, which was new to him. [Norris remarks in III\/03: \u201ccorrects my false reading of \u2018king\u2019\u201d] Readings and speculation concerning various Babylonian kings, some of which Norris comments are \u201cclearly wrong\u201d. Sends the 3rd<\/sup> portion of the [Persian] vocabulary. The 4th<\/sup> should not occupy him more than a month. Encloses also a list of synonyms for \u201cNebuchadnezzar\u201d & \u201cGreat\u201d {Letter O in III\/04].<\/li>\n
                                        10. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad 27th<\/sup> Jany<\/sup> 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Marked \u201cConfidential\u201d The recent extraordinary discoveries by Layard at Nimrud have caused him to set aside his work on the Persian vocabulary and set about Assyrian in earnest. Description of a black marble obelisk, but asks Norris not to publish this for fear of upsetting Layard and the Trustees of the British Museum. Gives some of the results of his Assyrian researches including the identification of a genealogical series of the four primeval kings of Assyria but concludes that he was wrong in his last letter in stating that there were two king Nebuchadnezzars [Norris adds the note \u201csee letter R\u201d.] Comments on the \u201cextraordinary laxity of the Assyrian character\u201d. He can read much of the script phonetically, but can get no further because the materials for comparison are too scanty. He is not prepared to publish his key yet unless \u201cDr Hincks or the Savans of France & Germany are prepared to come forward\u201d as \u201cI should like to penetrate a little deeper into the primitive Assyrian records before I give up the keys of the enquiry.\u201d He will also need to consult Layard and the Commissioners of the British Museum before publishing any results derived from a study of the inscriptions on the items which are their property. Encloses a letter to the Commissioners for that purpose. [Letter P in III\/04]<\/li>\n
                                        11. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad Feby<\/sup> 25th<\/sup> 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Has received a copy of Dr Hincks\u2019 pamphlet [on Babylonian] and also of the Babylonian alphabet which he has adopted. Thinks Hincks\u2019 alphabet over-simplified and gives reasons why it cannot apply in general. \u201cI despair of being ever able to represent the compound Babylonian vowels between the nasal and dental, the nasal & guttural and perhaps the nasal and labial \u2013 our alphabet is quite incompetent to deal with a phonetic organization such as appears to me to have prevailed on the Tigris \u2013 but for your private examination I will compare my approximate values of the most common Babylonian characters, with those adopted by Dr<\/sup> Hincks and also add a few letters which he has not noticed.\u201d Although his work is not yet in a satisfactory state, he feels that he must publish something soon, since Hincks is in print and the French and Germans will build on his foundations. He will, therefore, immediately complete a Babylonian chapter for publication. He is making very slow progress on Assyrian. Layard\u2019s discoveries connect the Tigris with the Nile and he is inclined to look for African analogies. Comments on the names in certain inscriptions and asks for a copy\/rubbing of the Paris Inscription. Will send the Babylonian chapter by the next post. [Letter Q in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                        12. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] 27th<\/sup> April 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of the rubbings which Norris has sent him. Has been ill all through the spring and unable to go on with the vocabulary. \u201cAs a more amusing study\u201d has been \u201cprobing at all points the Median, Babylonian and Assyrian\u201d. Describes the difficulties which he has encountered in attempting to construct a Median alphabet although he thinks the language is of the Scythic rather than the Indo-Germanic family. He will suspend work on Median and Babylonian until he has made a further visit to Behistun in June or July. Applauds Dr Hincks discovery of \u201cthe numerals\u201d and is certain he is right. Some inscriptions contain very high numbers and he thinks these represent astronomical calculations. Gives a synopsis of the contents of the inscriptions on the black obelisk from Nimrud. Propounds a new theory that the Assyrians originated in Egypt and invented the cuneiform script in Phoenicia. He discusses various points on which he agrees or disagrees with various scholars, including Norris. [Letter R in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        13. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] May 28 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Requests Norris to write at the beginning of the month and to use the Foreign Office mail. Has received the copies of Chapter 3 and finds the typography \u201cmore correct than I had allowed myself to believe possible\u201d for which he thanks Norris. Answers certain queries from Norris about the [Persian] vocabulary and authorises him to rearrange and alter the headings as he sees fit \u201cand wherever you find any of the old barbarisms \u2026 pray correct them, for they are inadvertencies. Fears that his vocabulary \u201cwill be nearly superfluous\u201d if \u201cDr [Theodor] Benfey has actually published a dictionary\u201d [In fact he did not.] but he has gone so far with it that \u201cI must I suppose finish it, though it is heavy work and I am seldom now equal to the drudgery\u201d. He hopes to send \u201csome 50 pages more\u201d in another fortnight \u201cbut I think I shall then be obliged to break off till the Autumn, as the approaching heats warn me to betake myself to the mountains and if I fulfil my purpose of not only recovering every Median and Babylonian letter left at Behistun, but of also going to Pasargada and Persepolis and laying out a few hundred pounds in excavations in the mere hope of finding inscriptions, I shall have little time for scribbling during the summer\u201d. Wishes the article on cuneiforms in the last issue of the Quarterly<\/em> had been written by someone who knew more about it. Thanks Norris for speaking to \u201cMr Forshall\u201d [actually the Rev. Josiah Forshall, then Secretary to the British Museum] about HCR\u2019s using the Nimrud Inscriptions. Forshall has written to Layard on the subject and the latter is very anxious that HCR should \u201cat once lay before your Society a brief abstract of results up to the present time\u201d. HCR has been unable to do this because he cannot reconcile the material with \u201creceived notions of Assyrian history, chronology and ethnography \u2026 There is not one name found on the Assyrian slabs which is mentioned in history except Ninus.\u201d Is inclined to accept Herodotus\u2019 statement that the Assyrian Empire lasted only 520 years against the word of all other historians. Remarks on Assyrian and Babylonian grammar and etymology and the confusion surrounding the \u201cphonetic powers\u201d [this expression appears simply to mean the sounds which different characters represent]. The same character does not appear to represent the same sound in different languages. He thinks that he may have to leave it to \u201cthe bolder genius of Dr Edward Hincks\u201d to make further progress. Further comments on what he hopes to achieve during the summer and what Layard is doing at Nineveh. [Letter S in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        14. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] June 28th<\/sup> 1847 My dear Sir\u201d About to start for Behistun. Wishes to have any works on African philology. Is also arranging to procure works on Egyptian hieroglyphics etc. Will not be able to go to Persepolis as he intended as the country in the north of Persia is much too disturbed. Intends instead to go from Behistun to the Kurdish mountains where he has had certain information of a whole series of Medo-Assyrian inscriptions, and then perhaps to Van. Has been puzzled by Dr Loewe\u2019s [I cannot identify this reference. RBP] rubbing, which he supposes to be of \u201c[Andre] Michaux\u2019s famous stone [a boundary marker with an inscription in Babylonian cuneiform now in the Louvre]\u201d. Had expected to \u201cmake it out easy enough \u2013 but the names puzzle me \u2026 I think the names at the commencement are those of 5 Babylonian cities to whom the edict is addressed \u2013 but I have not made out the historical part at all as yet. [The Michaux stone, if that is what it is, is now known to record the transfer of a plot of land from one individual to another. RBP.] Has some 50 pages of the [Persian] vocabulary here to be copied out and sent to Norris. [Letter T in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        15. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Bisitun [also written Behistun] July 20th<\/sup> 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of Dr Benfey\u2019s pamphlet and Dr Hinck\u2019s article as well as Norris\u2019s copy of the Kapurdigeerhi ? [presumably Kapur-di-giri] Inscriptions. Does not feel that Hincks\u2019s references to HCR\u2019s work are fair and \u201cwill let him flounder on with his Median and Babylonian and keep back the Bisitun materials till I can perfect my own systems.\u201d Has been able to examine nearly every part of the great sculpture but has been very poorly repaid for my trouble and expense. Probably not more than half a dozen letters in the whole of Tablets 6,7,8 and 9 of the published plate can be made out, and all those are Median. The Babylonian tablets 10 and 11 are very difficult to reach. May be able to copy a bit of the RH corner of 10 but no more. Has been busy correcting the transcript of the Persian inscription and filling in lacunae. \u201cI shall have to furnish you with a pretty copious list of Errata\u201d (He gives examples) Has made out the [Persian?] names of all the conspirators with their Greek equivalents. Has made paper casts of all the tablets for the RAS museum. Has made some notable discoveries with the Median script. He gives an example \u201cThere is no occasion, however, to mention this to Dr Hincks as he would probably claim it before the savans of Dublin as his own discovery.\u201d He also disagrees with Hincks on the systematic, if elaborate, nature of the Babylonian writing system \u201cthey wrote with the greatest possible laxity and carelessness like their ancestors the Egyptians.\u201d Discovered a cuneiform inscription of 63 lines in the cylinder character at Holwan [an ancient area of the northeast of Mesopotamia. It is usually associated with the Assyrian Halman] on the way here and will copy it on his return. Gives some errata of typography. Has not received the Coptic vocabulary, although it is doubtless \u201con the road\u201d. \u201cI must now go to my perch on the rock\u201d. [Letter V in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                        16. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Hamadan Aug. 17 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Has to write hurriedly to catch the monthly messenger for Damascus. Hincks cannot be right in reading a certain word as \u201cBabylon\u201d HCR is sure it means \u201cgreat\u201d although a synonym which is found on some bricks might have that meaning. Has not seen the notice of his Assyrian discoveries in the Literary Gazette<\/em> although he has seen Dr Hincks\u2019s letter in refutation. Disagrees with Hincks\u2019s supposition that the dynasties in inscriptions from Van and Nimrud are identical. However, has found it impossible to construct a genealogical series for Van, as the order of the names differs on every tablet. Also disagrees with Hincks on the distribution of Medo-Assyrian, which is found widely distributed. Has come to Hamadan to recover from a fever caught at Behistun, but will return to the rock in September. Also sets out various speculations on Assyrian names. [Letter W in III\/03].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                            \n
                                          1. [Letter X in III\/03 This letter is very fragile and has been enclosed in a Melinex sleeve. I have made a transcript as follows:<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                            Edwin Norris Esq<\/p>\n

                                            Assistnt<\/sup> Sectry<\/sup> to the Royal Asiat. Socy<\/sup><\/p>\n

                                            Royal Asiatic Society\u2019s Rooms<\/p>\n

                                            No<\/sup> 14 Grafton Stet<\/sup> Bond Street<\/p>\n

                                            London<\/p>\n

                                            Bisitun Septr 20th<\/sup> 1847<\/p>\n

                                            [Written on the outside by the recipients<\/em>] 4 Novr<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

                                             <\/p>\n

                                            My dear Sir<\/p>\n

                                            I am delighted to be able to inform you that on my return to this place about ten days back with renovated health and spirits, I discovered a considerable<\/em> portion of the Babylonian translation of the great inscription to be legible.<\/p>\n

                                            I immediately set to work on it, taking in the first place two careful and independent copies with the aid of a powerful telescope from a perch on the opposite precipice and I have finished by also obtaining a decent paper impression. The result is that I have now a list of about 60 Babylonian names and a very tolerable vocabulary. I have not yet set to work methodizing and comparing, but the new lights I have obtained while I have been merely tracing the writing have been considerable and I see no reason now to despair of fully mastering this difficult subject.<\/p>\n

                                            Unfortunately, I have no where an entire paragraph, hardly a sentence; for it is merely the right hand portion of the tablet on which the characters have been preserved. On the left half the writing has been entirely destroyed and thus almost every phrase is broken – however, I believe I shall be able without any great trouble to identify every word I have recovered and I think there are now very few words in my Persian vocabulary of which I have not the Babylonian equivalent. The language seems after all to be very similar to the Assyrian \u2013 at least I have met with numerous words of which the meaning has long puzzled me on the Slabs of Nimrud \u2013 and although it will still be a matter of considerable labor to construct a full comparative table of the two alphabets, I now feel for the first time that I can say with safety \u201cland is in sight\u201d. My former alphabet was tolerably correct, but of course now it will have to be modified and greatly extended. You will be anxious, I know, for results, but I must beg you to wait another month or two until I can return to Baghdad and rewrite my Babylonian chapter. It is extremely remarkable that the Babylonians use their own names for a great number of countries, which names are altogether different from those known to the Greeks, Persians and Scythians. The name of Babylon itself I have never yet seen in this character \u2013 another title is used which you have in Westergaard and which I can read, though not yet explain. There are independent titles also for Susiana, Assyria, Egypt and Armenia and strange to say they give to the Gandari the name of their neighbours the Paropaniscans (?). They have proper titles also for the months, which are very curious. I always suspected a great similarity between the construction of the Babylonian and Scythic (i.e. Median) alphabets but I was hardly prepared to find them almost identical. You would almost always be safe when at a loss for the phonetic power of a Babylonian character, if you took the Median letter which it most nearly resembles.<\/p>\n

                                            I was before a good deal alarmed at Dr Hincks\u2019s progress \u2013 in fact, I thought he was going to appropriate the field, but now I am quite easy. On these points I have as little jealousy as most people, but I certainly do not admire the Cavalier way in which he disposes of my pretensions to Assyrian discovery and I have therefore thought it as well to write a brief note to the Editor of the Literary Gazette answering Dr Hincks\u2019s letter of June 21 and maintaining my right to be considered the discoverer of the genealogical royal series of Assyria. This note I enclose and perhaps you will kindly forward it to it\u2019s [sic<\/em>] address.<\/p>\n

                                            It would save me a good deal of trouble if you would kindly obtain and send out for me through the Foreign Office, Fisher\u2019s printed and numbered catalogue of the characters on the India House Slab. The inscription itself I have, but it is a tedious business making a list of the characters. I only received your note of July 3rd<\/sup> the other day at Humadun just before leaving on my return, as it came through Constantinople. Pray be kind enough in future to address as follows \u2013 \u201cMaj. Rawlinson, Pol. Agent, Baghdad, via Beyrout & Damascus<\/em> & bear in mind that the Foreign Office packet for Syria is generally made up on the 5th<\/sup> or 6th<\/sup> of the month, at least I usually hear from Mr Bidwell (?) on those dates.<\/p>\n

                                            I have said nothing of the difficulty of taking this Babylonian copy, for of course the results obtained are the chief point of interest, but I assure you it was no joke. I could not take the paper impression myself, although a tolerable climber and with good nerve, nor could any of my people \u2013 but at last I obtained two Kurds, who went up the precipice like cats and executed the task under my immediate direction from a swinging scaffold pretty successfully. I find however I can read the characters better through my big telescope from the rock during a couple of hours of the day when the sun strikes obliquely on the rock than from the paper and I thus place my great dependence on my own copies \u2013 the paper cast however is valuable for reference. I have also taken casts of every portion of the Median writing and settled all doubtful points regarding the Persian. My local work therefore being over and period of leave nearly expired I am just starting on my return to Baghdad from where I hope to write to you next month. Yours faithfully H C Rawlinson.<\/p>\n

                                            P.S On second thoughts I have torn up my note to the Editor of the Literary Gazette, for it is absurd at Baghdad to enter into controversy with a gentleman in Ireland \u2013 besides with regard to the real point at issue I suppose Dr Hincks will recall [?] his claim to a priority of Assyrian discovery, when he finds the dynasty of Van [??] and Nimrud to be entirely distinct – he cannot yet have even seen the latter unless Mr Layard has furnished him with materials. The dynasties are as follows: [there follows a table of cuneiform characters<\/em>]. I am still in doubt as to which dynasty is the oldest. As all the inscriptions of Syria & Asia Minor (Beyrout, Antioch, Cyprus, Smyrna, Argeneh,\u00a0 Paloo &c.) belong to the Van\u00a0 family I should have thought them the original Assyrians \u2013 but as the earliest inscription of Van is in the Assyrian of Nimrud, while all the others are in Scythic, it would seem on the contrary as if the first kings were an offshoot from family in the plains [?] and that when their descendants gained almost universal empire they adopted the vernacular Scythic. If I could only find something to connect the [cuneiform<\/em>] of Nimrud with the [cuneiform<\/em>] of Van this point would be decided \u2013 at present, I am in doubt. Justin is, I suspect, the best authority we have, after all. Yours H C R.<\/p>\n

                                              \n
                                            1. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Baghdad Octbr<\/sup> 28th<\/sup> 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Has been too busy catching up with the arrears of his official duties to devote much time to cuneiform studies. However, he now agrees with Hincks that a [cuneiform<\/em>] is \u201cBabylon\u201d although he disagrees with Hincks\u2019s pronunciation. The name came into use during the second [Khorsabad] Assyrian dynasty \u2013 a different name was in use during the first [Nimrud] dynasty. Not sure whether two other cuneiforms are the same, although they appear to be used indifferently on all Babylonian monuments \u2013 possibly one represents the country and the other the inhabitants. Disagrees with Dr Hincks\u2019 identification of the builder of Khorsabad with the Chynaladanus of Ptolemy. \u201cThe name of the Khorsabad king is written in many different ways \u2013 but Nadan<\/em> [this is now read as Sargon<\/em>] may be considered the type.\u201d Comments on \u201cLord Aberdeen\u2019s black stone\u201d [a black basalt monument from Babylon presented to the British Museum by the 4th<\/sup> Earl of Aberdeen in 1860, now recognised as recording the restoration of the city by the Assyrian king Esarhaddon in 670 BC] and on the [East] India House Inscription [now also in the British Museum]. Disagrees with Dr Hincks\u2019s reading of Tas Lada<\/em> says it should be Has also \u201ccursorily gone over\u201d the \u201clong obelisk inscription from Nimrud\u201d but can make little of it because it is in a form of Babylonian remote from that of the Bisitun Inscription. Considers Dr Hincks to be completely astray in his readings of Babylonian. Comments also on the \u201cBilingual Inscription\u201d in the \u201cHujiabad cave\u201d [apparently the Sheikh Ali Cave, Haji Abad, Kazeroon, Iran] and seeks Norris\u2019s assistance in obtaining copies of \u201cBotta\u2019s Inscriptions\u201d without having to pay for the complete work. His elder brother A L Rawlinson will pay any sums due from HCR. [Letter Y in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            2. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Baghdad Novr<\/sup> 27th<\/sup> 1847 My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of \u201cthe 3rd<\/sup> Part of the Journal containing Chapters 4 & 5 of the Memoir\u201d. This seems to be \u201cwonderfully correct\u201d although he has not yet been able to go over it in detail. Points out one general error. Has been unable to make any further progress on the Memoir because his time has been \u201centirely occupied with public business\u201d. This threatens to continue for some time to come \u201cso that I am half in despair with the prospect before me.\u201d Is disturbed by his inability to identify Babylonian roots in the inscriptions on the Assyrian tablets using the Bisitun key. This must be due to a greater difference in the languages than he had hoped to find, although \u201cI beg you also to remember that the Bisitun key is far from complete or satisfactory. \u2026 and in many cases the variant translations I have for the identical Persian phrase form a complete puzzle.\u201d Further disagreement with Dr Hincks. Mr Layard has now left Constantinople for England taking with him a mass of inscriptions which will have to be analyzed and digested. Believes that light will eventually come out of darkness but his own lack of success is very disheartening. \u201cIn fact it will still I think have to be the study of a life before the Assyrian records will be as intelligible as those of Persia.\u201d Agrees with Norris\u2019s conclusion that Vajezatha<\/em> and Vahyazdata <\/em>are the same, but then goes on to discuss various other things which are puzzling him. [Letter Z in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            3. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Baghdad Jany<\/sup> 28 1848 My dear Sir\u201d Excuses his failure to write in December by his being detained at Bussorah on business. Will look \u201cwith great anxiety\u201d for Dr Hincks\u2019s paper by next month\u2019s post. His contention that the Van inscriptions belong to \u201cthe Indian or Arian family\u201d runs entirely counter to HCR\u2019s ideas although he is not qualified at present to give a positive denial to it.\u201d He would be surprised if it proves to be true because of the \u201cgreat number of words\u201d which the Van inscriptions share with the Assyrian and Babylonian texts and which he believes to be titles. \u201cIt would be strange if they should prove to be Arian terms adopted by the Semites.\u201d Criticizes Hincks\u2019s apparent lack of knowledge of the Van alphabet, but will wait to read his paper before venturing a definite opinion. \u201cThe announcement too that Burnouf has made out the Assyrian Inscriptions is very strange for he has no Semitic knowledge and surely the language must be of that family.\u201d Has almost finished a fair copy of the Bisitun Babylonian inscriptions with a reading in Roman characters and a translation and is writing out the paper to accompany it. Is doubtful of several characters in his Achemenian Babylonian Alphabet let alone comparative tables with other alphabets. In several cases he is almost certain that the same character represents different sounds in the different alphabets. Mentions several instances of differences in the use of letters in different languages. \u201cThese are but a few of the many difficulties surrounding this knotty subject, difficulties which have more than once made me close my books in despair and half resolve to have no more to say to so ungrateful an enquiry.\u201d Responds to some remarks of Norris\u2019s on the meanings of certain words. Refers to the use of certain signs as determinatives, although he does not use this word. Has lately obtained \u201ctravellers\u2019 casts\u201d of the \u201clarge Bull at Khorsabad\u201d which he considers \u201cthe most valuable document I have ever seen of the 2nd<\/sup> Assyrian dynasty\u201d. [This was excavated in 1843 by Paul Emile Botta [1802-1870] and is now in the Louvre. The name of the king in the inscription is now read as Sargon II]. HCR recognises that it lists the conquests of the builder of Khorsabad \u201cthough I am altogether unable to identify any of them.\u201d Is looking forward to receiving Botta\u2019s Inscriptions <\/em>and his papers in the Journal Asiatique<\/em>. Is enclosing a note to Botta for Norris to forward, as HCR does not have Botta\u2019s Paris address. Is hopeful that Botta will present him with a copy of the complete Inscriptions<\/em>. Has just received the copy of the East India House Inscription [see 18 above] together with \u201cFisher\u2019s catalogue of signs [I have not been able to identify this. RBP.] \u2013 his assortment is so arbitrary it will be of no use whatever as the cadre of an alphabet \u2013 but it will be valuable for reference, particularly in explaining Dr Hincks\u2019 figures of which I have been unable to make anything hitherto.\u201d Is not progressing with the language as rapidly as he hoped. The \u201cBisitun key\u201d is little help with Babylonian and almost useless with Assyrian. He hopes to complete his preliminary paper in time for next month\u2019s post \u201cand then you will see all that I have done and all that I have left undone.\u201d Records his disagreement with a reading of Dr Hincks and mentions some difficulties with certain letters seeming to represent different sounds. Congratulates Norris on his new appointment at the Foreign Office and is glad that he will be allowed to combine it with his post at the RAS. \u201cI should think indeed now the Society could hardly exist without you \u2026\u201d Also promises to assist Norris\u2019s son in India in any way that he can. [Letter 2A in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                            4. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Baghdad Feby<\/sup> 25th<\/sup> 1848 My dear Sir\u201d Has been ill for a fortnight and is still under Doctor\u2019s orders to \u201ckeep myself as quiet as possible\u201d so does not propose to enter into any arguments. Thanks Norris for sending him Dr Hincks\u2019 latest paper [apparently On the Inscriptions at Van<\/em> JRAS 9<\/u> 1848 pp 387-449. This was read before the Society on 4th<\/sup> December 1847. It is possible that Norris sent HCR a pre-publication copy.] which he denounces as \u201cdownright humbug<\/u>\u201d which he is sorry should appear in the JRAS. [This paper sets out Hincks\u2019s theory that the language of the Van inscriptions is Sanskrit. HCR refers to this theory in 20 above. Here he denounces it in scathing terms.] His work [on the Babylonian inscription from Behistun] is still interrupted by illness, but he has nearly finished making a fair copy after examining the paper cast in different lights, and has in the process made progress in understanding it. Not only is the Babylonian alphabet \u201cextremely lax and difficult\u201d but \u201cthe construction everywhere is on the same loose and diversified footing.\u201d There is also \u201cindependent matter\u201d in the Babylonian translation \u201cover which I have perused and pondered until I am quite tired but without being able to come to any definite conclusion.\u201d He notes in particular that after every account of a battle, there occurs in the Babylonian translation a double group of numerals which he thinks may represent either the strengths of the armies or else the numbers of casualties, but is puzzled as to why this information should be absent from the Persian and Median texts, which he takes to be earlier. He gives various examples, [under one of which Norris has written in pencil \u201cno battle here\u201d] He then notes certain detailed points on which he is confused and then remembers that he must not risk a relapse into fever. He notes two words which he thinks he has identified with Hebrew etc names. Has been over the East India House Inscription carefully and gives his latest ideas about it. \u201cThe orthography however is even more loose than at Bisitun, the same word being rarely written twice in the same manner.\u201d Considers \u201cMr Birch\u2019s Egyptian paper\u201d very interesting [I have not been able to identify the paper referred to. RBP.] and \u201cI believe I recognize all the names he mentions in the inscriptions of Van and Nimrud.\u201d [Letter 2B in III\/03.]<\/li>\n
                                            5. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] March 28th<\/sup> 1848 My dear Sir\u201d The last messenger was robbed of his packets, which may have included a letter from Norris. He mentions this so that Norris can send a duplicate of anything which he considers it necessary that HCR should have. Has just returned from a trip into the desert which he was obliged to take in order to shake off the fever which he mentioned in his last letter. He is in consequence overwhelmed with arrears of work and can write only a few hurried lines. During his trip into the desert he visited \u201cNiffer [Nippur] \u2026 in my opinion \u2026 the finest Chaldean ruin extant\u201d. Failed to find an obelisk which he had heard described, but \u201cI was more fortunate however with regard to bricks, obtaining complete specimens of the two standard types of the place\u201d one religious and the other historical. Speculates on the name of a king and his subject kingdoms found on the latter. \u201cjust look over the variants for the orthography of this name which I enclose and then judge if it will be ever possible to circumscribe Babylonian & Assyrian orthography within our ideal limits of an alphabetical system.\u201d Has failed to find any bricks \u201cin Babylonia proper\u201d bearing the name of any king other than Nebuchadnezzar. Will need to search further south, but this is too far for HCR to travel. \u201cMr Layard tells me that Dr Hincks has recanted many of the errors to which he had given publicity \u2026 of course by dint of guessing he may ultimately arrive at something like truth, but who then will believe him? Will continue with the Babylonian paper as soon as he has cleared the arrears of public correspondence. [Letter 2C in III\/03.]<\/li>\n
                                            6. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] April 28 1848 My dear Sir\u201d Has heard nothing from Norris for two months and finds himself \u201cquite abroad in consequence\u201d. Has been making slow progress in constructing a Babylonian grammar \u201cfrom the Bisitun materials\u201d. \u201cEverything is extremely complicated and doubtful and I never know whether to lean to Chaldee or Egyptian analogies.\u201d Discusses some difficulties. The roots he has extracted are all bilateral and monosyllabic and \u201cmay usually be compared with the Chaldee & Hebrew if we remember the allowable permutation of the letters and discard the supplementary syllable to which we are accustomed. I believe indeed the Babylonian will prove <\/em>the artificial form in which we now have the Hebrew and Arabic roots \u2013 and furnish rules by which we may ascertain almost to a certainty the true & original elements of these vocables. I find also many Babylonian words in the Rabbinical Chaldee of which the Biblical Chaldee preserves but imperfect traces. Can now also read parts of the East India House inscription, making out articles, pronouns, particles and verbs, \u201cbut the nouns are in general so obscure to me that I cannot venture on anything like a connected translation.\u201d However, he is sure that it describes the buildings erected by Nebuchadnezzar and his father in the cities of Babylonia and Assyria, although a small part of it is a historical record of wars but \u201cit is a very labourious work however to go through the whole inscription with anything like analytical detail.\u201d Can still make nothing of \u201cthe Assyrian besides reading the names and these even merely approximately.\u201d Babylonian and Assyrian, although of the same family are different languages. \u201cMy Babylonian paper, when completed will be after all but a mere brick<\/em> in the edifice.\u201d The inscriptions from Van, although they contain many words in common with both Babylonian and Assyrian are in a distinct language. This may, after all, prove to be Indo-Germanic, although he does not consider Dr Hincks has made out a case for this and still does not think his paper ought to be published in the JRAS<\/em>. Despite the pressure of public business, he hopes to write again next week and give details of the real progress he is making. [Letter 2D in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            7. Addressed to \u201cE Norris Assnt<\/sup> Secty<\/sup> to the Royal Asiatic Socty<\/sup> Foreign Office, Downing Street, London 15 July 1848 My dear Sir\u201d Has been unable to do more than attend to current business for two months because of the overpowering heat, which renders any work impossible. Acknowledges receipt of \u201cBirch\u2019s Karnac paper [presumably refers to Samuel Birch as above, but I have not been able to identify the paper in question.] \u201cHincks\u2019s Essay on the Van Inscription [see above]\u201d and \u201cthe sheets of my Vocabulary up to Page 80.\u201d Announces that he had made good progress with deciphering the Assyrian inscription on the Nimrud obelisk so that \u201call the preliminary difficulties of the enquiry are over\u201d He is satisfied that he will be able to send Norris a translation of the historical part of the inscription by the autumn, so that he will be able to publish a digest of the paper in the Athenaeum <\/em>or Literary Gazette<\/em> to secure HCR\u2019s priority if there is any risk of Mr Birch or Dr Hincks arriving at the same results. However, the mythology still puzzles him. Believes now that the language of the Van inscriptions is intrinsically \u201cthe same as that of Assyria and Babylonia though it is a good deal overlaid with Scythicisms\u201d. However, the variations in spelling are so complicated that he doubts if the pronunciation will ever be made out properly. Feels the need of \u201cBotta\u2019s Inscriptions\u201d. Can write no more because of the heat.
                                              \n[Letter 2E in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                            8. Addressed to \u201cE Norris, Oriental Translator, Foreign Office, Downing Strt<\/sup>, London Baghdad Aug 18 1848 My dear Sir\u201d Has been laid up for the past month because of the heat and has hardly been able to look at Cuneiforms since he last wrote. The weather is now beginning to break. Must go away somewhere for a change of air, and may come to London next spring, although he is afraid that if he does so he will be unable to return to Baghdad to resume his work on cuneiforms, \u201cthe Indian regulations \u2026 requiring that a visit to England should involve the unconditional resignation of the appointment held by the Officer at the time.\u201d Acknowledges receipt of \u201cDr Wall\u2019s [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][or Wale\u2019s][\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text] pamphlet\u201d [I have been unable to identify either the man or the pamphlet referred to], \u201cDr Hinck\u2019s complete paper\u201d and \u201cthe Nimrud Inscription\u201d but has had no time to do more than glance at \u201cDr Hincks\u2019s lucubrations in which I find sensible improvement, but which are still far from being as immaculate as the Dr supposes.\u201d Complains that Botta has committed \u201ca gross breach of trust\u201d in publishing \u201cpiratically\u201d one of HCR\u2019s translations which he had communicated \u201cin strict confidence.\u201d Has no time to write more. [Letter 2Fin III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            9. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad Novr<\/sup> 14th<\/sup> 1848 My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges long silence on both sides, but hopes to correspond monthly in future. Has received three trilingual inscriptions \u201cthrough Mr Tasker from Persepolis\u201d which have enabled him to establish the values of some Median and Babylonian letters. Tasker also made a copy of the inscription at Nabhsh-i -Rustum much superior to that relied on by Westergaard from which he has been able to correct several errors. Unfortunately Mr Tasker contracted a fever from his exertions there from which he has died. Has just received from Botta an engraved copy of the complete set of all the Khorsabad Inscriptions, the execution is much superior to the copy of the Nimrud inscriptions. Comments on the frequency of errors in almost all Assyrian inscriptions, no matter how well carved. This \u201cwill require very great trouble indeed to overcome.\u201d The death of the Shah of Persia, just as the weather was cooling down, has interrupted his work on cuneiform, but he hopes that he will be able to \u201ctake to my books again in earnest.\u201d \u201cMy Alphabet paper only requires to be written out.\u201d Explains what it will contain. Notes that the same character often represents different sounds in different alphabets and sometimes more than one sound in the same alphabet. Asks for a \u201cpopular Chaldee [I think HCR here means Biblical Aramaic] and Syriac grammar\u201d as \u201cAssyrian certainly inclines to \u2026 the Semitic family, as Babylonian inclines to the African branches \u2013 the groundwork, however, being the same or nearly the same in both.\u201d Belated thanks for \u201cDr Wall\u2019s paper [presumably the Rev Charles William Wall\u2019s paper on Persian cuneiform in the Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy Vol. 21 1846] and the No. of the Journal with Dr Hinck\u2019s Essay, not unworthy of Bryant and Wilford [I am not sure which paper of Hincks\u2019s is referred to here. If the Journal<\/em> is the JRAS, <\/em>then the paper must be that on the Van inscriptions referred to above. Bryant<\/em> presumably refers to Jacob Bryant (1715 \u2013 1804) and Wilford <\/em>to Francis Wilford d. 1822. It would appear that HCR did not intend the comparison to be complimentary.] Has heard that \u201ca certain Dr Opperts in Germany has put the finishing stroke to the system of Persian Cuneiform\u201d but has not seen any of his work. Closes with a promise to write monthly hereafter. [Letter 2G in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            10. [This letter is enclosed in a Melinex sleeve bearing the label \u201cmissing a page\u201d but it appears now to be complete.] Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad Janry<\/sup> 15th<\/sup> 1849 My dear Sir\u201d Has been going through \u201call Botta\u2019s voluminous papers\u201d and finds that \u201cmany of the results [in Babylonian and Assyrian] which I thought best established have been shivered to atoms\u201d so that he has \u201cno heart to bear up against such repeated disappointments\u201d and has been \u201ca hundred times tempted to throw the whole of my papers into the fire.\u201d Apart from the complexity of the problem, he also feels defeated by the sheer volume of material to be dealt with, but he is fully convinced that Nimrud is quite as ancient as anything found in Egypt, whose civilization, language and writing may be derived from Assyria. Is as far off a determinate alphabet as ever because of the constant interchange of one character with another, and until that has been attained he considers it useless to attempt any analysis of the language. Is still hopeful of being granted leave to come to England this year, where he is confident of being able, \u201cwith the assistance of Mr Birch and yourself\u201d of being able to publish \u201cthe approximate meaning of all the historical writing at Nimrud (?) and Khorsabad\u201d having already \u201calready drawn up for my own guidance a rough translation of the obelisk inscription and the detailed standard triumphal tablet of the Khorsabad king \u2026 but as for reading the Inscriptions word for word as they do in Egyptian and expressing the terms in Roman characters I find the thing quite impossible. Has recently discovered that one of the titles of the second dynasty Kings of Assyria was King of Armenia .<\/em>Discusses the readings of three words which are used interchangeably and which he reads Shassa, Kurdi and Ararat. <\/em>Is also puzzled by the identity of one of the Babylonian peoples whose name is written in five different ways. The only name he can find in Egyptian which will fit the orthography is Tahennu <\/em>or Discusses some further identifications he has made. Would \u201clike to see Grotefend(?)\u2019s new Inscription of Nebuchadnezzar\u201d which may help him to identify a name on the East India House slab which puzzles him. Proposes to take a trip into the desert next month to collect bricks and \u201cto look for the site of Atel [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][or Atet, I have not been able to identify this][\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text].\u201d[Letter 2H in III\/03.]<\/li>\n
                                            11. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad March 16 1849 My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of Norris\u2019s note of Jan 26 \u201cwith Birch\u2019s paper on the Nimrud Cartouches [I have not been able to identify this.] but fears that the Chaldee and Syriac grammars may have been lost in the desert. Norris\u2019s account for all the books purchased for HCR to be sent to his brother Abram Rawlinson at Chipping Norton for payment. Has made good progress with Assyrian and Babylonian so that he has hopes \u201cnow of reading the Inscriptions almost as satisfactorily as I read the Persian text at Bisitun. In fact, there now but a very few characters in any of the alphabets regarding which I am in doubt.\u201d Moreover, \u201cby extensive collation of passages from all quarters the sense of a word generally comes out even when all Semitic etymologies fail in giving a clue.\u201d Considers that Birch is wasting his talents on a \u201cmere scrap\u201d like the Nimrud Cartouches. Has assembled \u201ca huge Pantheon now both for Assyria and Babylonia\u201d overshadowing that in Egyptian mythology and rivalling \u201cthe Sabaean Catalogue given in Norburg\u2019s Onomasticon <\/em>[Presumably Onomasticon codicis nasaraei<\/em> Matthias Norberg 1816.]\u201d Has been able to identify all the rivers in the Assyrian records and consequently the locality of all the countries subject to that Empire \u201cfor the geographical distribution in all the standard inscriptions both of Nimrud and Khorsabad follows the course of the rivers.\u201d Gives further details for Norris\u2019s \u201cprivate edification\u201d \u201cThe principle which must be adopted in classing the Alphabet and accordingly in reading the Inscriptions is to remember that the signs represent phonetic powers gliding from one sound into another \u2013 for instance one set represents t, h, k<\/em> being used for anyone of these indifferently, another set t <\/em>(or d<\/em>) l, r<\/em> \u2013 another set t, ts, s, k <\/em>\u2013 another n, l, r<\/em> . As a general principle we may say that t <\/em>& k <\/em>and also s <\/em>& k <\/em>& g <\/em>& z<\/em> are indistinguishable.\u201d However, he still cannot account for \u201cthe lapse of i, s, n <\/em>and in the grammar there are a thousand difficulties \u2026 The pronouns and verbs are thoroughly Chaldee and easy enough to make out, although I think I have about 30 different forms for the demonstrative pronoun that<\/em> which I mention to show you the labor of making out a vocabulary\u2026. It is a tedious business dealing with such a hydra headed Pantheon\u201d. Asks Norris to obtain copies of Layard\u2019s inscriptions via Birch. [Letter 2I in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            12. Addressed to \u201cE Norris [as above] Baghdad April 16th<\/sup> 1849 My dear Sir\u201d Has but a moment to write. Getting on tolerably well with Assyrian and Babylonian but has nothing ready for publication. Has been surprised to find that \u201cmany of Dr Hincks\u2019s guesses in his paper on the Van inscriptions are correct as to meaning although he does not read a single word rightly and is certainly in error in supposing the language to be Arian (?).\u201d Mentions some of Hincks\u2019s other identifications with which he agrees, although he considers the readings to be completely wrong. Is confident that he can now give the approximate meaning of any inscription although there are still many difficulties as to particular characters. Repeats his claim that the \u201cbig India House slab of which Bellino\u2019s Cylinder is but a merely an epitome\u201d is \u201cmostly taken up with a description of the different cities founded by Nebuchadnezzar and his father \u2026\u201d [Both these objects are now in the British Museum, but it is not clear how far current scholarship supports HCR\u2019s readings.] Considers it \u201ccareless\u201d at present to make guesses as to the historical contents of these inscriptions \u201cwith only a few isolated names and no chronological data\u201d. \u201cAssyria and Babylonia must be fairly turned inside out to enable us to get complete lists of the kings and calculate at about what age they reigned. Egyptian synchronicities are but fallacious guides after all. Has almost made up his mind to resign his post in Baghdad in the autumn and to return to England \u201cwith all his treasures\u201d. In the meantime, he is \u201carranging and digesting\u201d so that there will be little to do on his arrival there except \u201cto determine the order of publication.\u201d Has heard of the new grant of \u00a33000 [by Parliament] for the continuation of the excavations [at Nineveh] and hopes that Layard will be persuaded to superintend the work in person. Thanks Norris for the Chaldee and Syriac grammars \u201cChampollion, however, & Bunsen & Birch are my chief authorities.\u201d [Letter 2K in III\/03 ].<\/li>\n
                                            13. Addressed to \u201c\u201dE Norris [as above] Baghdad May 16th<\/sup> 1849 My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of Norris\u2019s letter of March 26th<\/sup>. Has decided to suspend work on Persian and Median in favour of his Babylonian and Assyrian studies, which he considers to be more important and in which he is making good progress. Has established \u201cto my satisfaction that many signs are used to represent indifferently two phonetic powers\u201d. Discusses examples. He used to think that the sounds might have been indistinguishable in pronunciation, but now thinks that this was not the case. \u201cThe only portion of the enquiry that I have as yet succeeded in analyzing in much detail is the mythology. I did hope to have sent you by this post a complete list of the Gods and Goddesses worshipped on the Tigris and Euphrates from the time of the building of Nimrud to the age of Nebuchadnezzar, but there are still a few points requiring verification.\u201d He hopes, however, to make \u201cas complete a catalogue of the Semitic Pantheon \u2026 as Bunsen has made of the Egyptian Pantheon in the 6th<\/sup> (?) section of his 1st<\/sup> (?) book\u201d. [Presumably Aegyptens Stelle in der Weltgeshichte (Egypt\u2019s place in world history) <\/em>the first parts of which appeared in 1845.] Is puzzled by the fact that the local gods of Babylon, Merodach, Neshah, etc are never named on the cylinders, although they frequently occur in larger documents. \u201cIn these legends [i.e. the cylinders ?] we have almost always the divinities of the 1st<\/sup> order, which were common objects of worship to all the Semitic nations.\u201d Has also noticed that the names of gods commonly, although not invariably, occur in triads. \u201cI should probably derive some valuable hints on this subject from Mr Layard\u2019s great work on the worship of Venus \u2013 but I cannot wait for it. [I think this refers to Felix Layard rather than A H Layard. RBP.]\u201d Is drawing up a table on the basis of the information which he has to hand. Informs Norris of the location of certain dates \u201cin the Obelisk Inscription [referred to above]\u201d which Norris had said he could not locate. Would send Norris his rough translation of this inscription, but he wishes to compare it \u201cwith the more detailed duplicate on one of the Nimrud Bulls.\u201d Reminds Norris to ask Birch to let him have copies of such of the inscription as have been printed \u201cas the sheets come out of the printer\u2019s hands\u201d. Is glad that Layard will be returning to continue the excavations and that these will be more extensive than previously. Fears that \u201cthe Court of Directors [of the East India Company]\u201d will not agree to grant HCR a year\u2019s special leave to return to England to publish his work and then return to Baghdad \u201c& I fear then that nothing will be left to me but a formal resignation.\u201d [Letter 2L in III\/03]<\/li>\n
                                            14. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Baghdad June 16th<\/sup> 1849 My dear Sir\u201d Has received a favourable reply from India to his application for leave and proposes to leave Baghdad as soon as the weather permits. This will probably not be before October, but still hopes to be in London by the end of November or early in December. Discusses arrangements for bringing all his materials to London. Is nervous that Dr Hincks may pre-empt his publication of his results for \u201cI have learnt much more from a continued study and analysis of the inscriptions of Khorsabad and Nimrud than I have from the Bisitun translations and the former \u2026 is open to any studious enquirer\u201d. Proposes to remain in England for 9 months and to make his headquarters in London \u201cso that I hope to be able to clear off all arrears in Persian, Median and Babylonian.\u201d In the meantime, is arranging his material \u201cin some manageable shape for publication\u201d so that he will \u201cbe able to go to press immediately on my arrival.\u201d Points out that there are defects in the cuneiform types available in London. Although he was very puzzled when he first came to study Layard\u2019s comparative copy, but \u201cthere now remain very few phonetic difficulties, although the languages appear inexhaustible and will never, I fear be properly understood.\u201d Has been going through the Khorsabad inscriptions in the last month, but has found very little new material. Will continue to write until he is actually en route. [Letter 2M in III\/03.]<\/li>\n
                                            15. Addressed to \u201cE. Norris [as above] Baghdad July 16 1849. My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of Norris\u2019s letter of May 26th<\/sup> and also Layard\u2019s printed inscriptions, many of which were new to him and some very interesting. The Standard Inscription of Nimrud is the most difficult legend from that site and must be set aside for the present. The historical records, \u201cwhich are singularly clear and simple\u201d are to be tackled first, followed by \u201cthe geographical detail\u201d and then \u201cthe Pantheon\u201d. \u201cIn all these three branches I am pretty well at home but I do not pretend that I can take up any inscription that you please and render it word for word. \u2026 It appears to me that it can never be possible to identify those objects which had particular names in Assyrian, now altogether lost.\u201d Scores of such objects occur in the lists of offerings or tribute. Discusses some uncertain points in the historical inscriptions. Has been kept very busy dealing with sickness and death among his staff and has not been able to make as much progress as he had hoped in preparing materials for publication but he will \u201ccertainly be able to give you a preliminary paper for publication very shortly after my arrival in town.\u201d [Letter 2N in III\/03].<\/li>\n
                                            16. Addressed to Norris as above \u201cBaghdad Aug 16th<\/sup> My dear Sir\u201d Acknowledges receipt of Norris\u2019s letters of 27th<\/sup> and 28th<\/sup> June, containing formal confirmation, as anticipated, that his application for leave of absence had been formally approved. Continues to prepare for his departure. Has already despatched his various materials and hopes to follow early in October. Proposes to spend a few days among the Assyrian ruins verifying various points by personal examination, but hopes to catch the November boat from Constantinople and arrive in London at the beginning of December. Has now fixed the date of Nimrud to BC 1400 or 1380 and Khorsabad about 150 years later. All the monuments belong to a single dynasty, the Chaldean line of [Lucius Cornelius Alexander] Polyhistor or the Assyrian Empire of Herodotus, lasting from about 1400 to about 850. Doubts if we have a single relic of the kings mentioned in Scripture, whom he thinks were merely satraps under the control of Media, although they may have at times achieved temporary independence. To this blank period in Assyrian history he assigns the rise of the Van kingdom. He believes he has found repeated mentions of the Children of Israel, called \u201cthe 12 tribes of the upper & lower country, subject to the Hittites and in alliance with the king of Hamath.\u201d May have discovered the name of Jerusalem but \u201cthere are ample notices of all the other great cities of Palestine & Syria.\u201d Is surprised the discoveries in Syrian geography have not been pushed much further. Believes that the inscriptions give \u201ca complete tableau of Western & Central Persia in the time of the Judges of Israel.\u201d Concedes that much of this is conjectural \u201cfor I confess that I understand very little of the Assyrian language\u201d but is confident that it will be confirmed on being tested. Is sceptical of Dr Hincks\u2019s claim to have identified the name of Tiglath-Pileser at Khorsabad. Layard does not accept HCR\u2019s claim that the Nimrud and Khorsabad dynasties are identical. HCR defends his assertion. \u201cDe Saulcy, although a good Phoenician scholar appears as wild in Cuneiforms as Hincks himself.\u201d Asks Norris not to mention any of HCR\u2019s discoveries as he wants to read his first paper to the Society himself. [Letter 2O in III\/03 but the resume there appears not to be in Norris\u2019s hand or possibly he was trying to write more legibly.]<\/li>\n
                                            17. Addressed to Norris as above \u201cBaghdad Septbr<\/sup> 17th<\/sup> My dear Sir\u201d The last posting for England before he leaves Baghdad, so forces himself to write to acknowledge Norris\u2019s last. Has been too ill with dyspepsia to do any work on cuneiforms but hopes that the exercise of travelling, the interest of seeing the ruins of Nimrud etc and the mountain air of Asia Minor will restore his health and zest for work. Is to meet Layard at Nimrud on October 15th<\/sup> and spend 3 or 4 days with him looking over the ruins in the vicinity of Mosul and discussing where best to excavate next. Discusses some of the texts which he particularly hopes will be found. Also discusses the difficulties caused by the fact that the alphabetic signs in Assyrian are also used as \u201cmonograms\u201d [I think he means what are now called ideograms<\/em>] and as such will have a completely different pronunciation. All his readings are, as a result, to some extent conjectural, although not as wild, he believes as those of De Saulcy or Hincks. Will consult Norris when he sees him as to what to do next. Discusses the bi-lingual Pahlavi inscription from Hajiabad [Haji Abad] which he had studied carefully at one time, but of which he could make nothing. A man has written to him from Constantinople saying that he has proved that the language used at least in the latter half of the Sassanian dynasty was very similar to modern Persian, and claiming this as a great discovery, which HCR does not accept. Expects to be in Constantinople from November 10th<\/sup> to 19th<\/sup> and asks Norris to send anything new and important relating to cuneiform to him there. Will have a great deal of reading up to do before he is up to date with all the developments on cuneiform studies in Europe. [Letter 2P in III\/03. The writing of the resume there is intermediate between that for 33 above and the earlier ones.]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                              III\/05: <\/strong>Two double foolscap sheets folded over, with five single foolscap sheets some smaller sheets inserted into it to make a kind of notebook. The recto pages are numbered 1 to 6 [I have supplemented this numbering in pencil.] On the outside \u201cLetters, from 1851.\u201d. Headed on page 1 \u201cRawlinson\u2019s Letters 1851 &c.\u201d Comprises a listing in Norris\u2019s handwriting of letters\u00a0 received from October 10th<\/sup> \u00a01851 to January 24th<\/sup> 1853. These letters are in packets III\/06 and III\/07 but unlike the earlier letters were not individually labelled by Norris [I have added labels in pencil.] There are actually two lists: one with detailed summaries on the inside pages and a summary list at the back.<\/p>\n

                                              III\/06: <\/strong>Contains 5 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris from 10th<\/sup> October\u00a0 to 17th<\/sup> December 1851 plus two other documents: a note from Abram L Rawlinson to Edwin Norris promising to pay any expenses incurred by his brother in Baghdad [III\/\/06(04)] and a receipted invoice dated \u201cDecember 31st<\/sup> 1851\u201d from \u201cBrown & Standfast\u201d to \u201cLieut. Col. Rawlinson\u201d for the supply of periodicals [III\/06(05)]. The letters listed by Norris are as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                \n
                                              1. Addressed \u201cParis. Octr<\/sup> 10 1851 My dear Norris.\u201d Has spent two days copying out the account of Sennacherib\u2019s proceedings during his third year, from which he will at least obtain a list of all the Syrian and Phoenician princes of that time, information which is not to be found anywhere else. Complains of inaccuracies in the latest sections of his Memoir to be published by the RAS. Considers it likely that it will not be possible to complete the Memoir without HCR\u2019s personal supervision unless Norris masters the Babylonian language himself. Otherwise the RAS and the Trustees of the British Museum will have to petition the Government for HCR to be released during 1853. Expresses misgivings about reported French encroachment on the British sites in Assyria. [III\/03(01)]<\/li>\n
                                              2. Addressed \u201cParis. Octr<\/sup> 17 1851 My dear Norris\u201d Has had a series of adventures since he last wrote \u201cso queer\u201d that he encloses a letter to send to the Times about them for publication, charging the postage to HCR\u2019s account if necessary. [I cannot trace any such letter having been published. RBP] Leaves for Marseilles the following day. Is sure he has identified the Phoenician cities listed on the Sennacherib Cylinder correctly, but cannot understand how Tyre comes to be called Husuva<\/em>. Asks Norris to insert a note in the Memoir correcting his reading of ana tar\u015fi<\/em> \u201cbefore\u201d to ana kha\u015f\u015fi <\/em>\u201cto fight\u201d. Has heard all about the French Commission referred to in III\/06(1) above and all the places they have been instructed to take possession of and excavate. \u201cI shall have their throats cut by the Arabs, however, if they really have the assurance thus to come poaching on my preserve.\u201d \u201cRegards to Stanley\u201d [Probably Henry Stanley Baron of Alderley.]. Asks for the [proof] sheets [of the Memoir] to be sent to him at Constantinople as they are printed. [III\/06(02)]<\/li>\n
                                              3. Addressed \u201cBritish Embassy, Constantinople Novr<\/sup> 5 1851 My dear Norris.\u201d Has nothing to send by this post because of being so unwell on the voyage from Marseilles that he could not work. Will send \u201cthe second half of the Analysis and continuation of the Alphabet\u201d as soon as he has returned to Baghdad and has been able to settle down to a few weeks\u2019 work. Would like, if possible, to publish \u201cHistorical and Geographical Resum\u00e9s\u201d in the Journal along with \u201cthe separate Babylonian volume\u201d. If the RAS is to publish \u201cLayard\u2019s new Inscriptions\u201d he asks to be sent the proofs as they are printed, as they will be more convenient for reference than the paper casts he proposes to take when at Mosul. Wants to look into the Median history contemporary with Shalmaneser and Sennacherib in the hopes of finding the names of [Herodotus\u2019s] Dejoces and Phraortes. Feels \u201cpretty sure\u201d that the Babylonian king named on the Warka clay tablets as reigning between \u201cNebuchodrossor\u201d and \u201cNabonedus\u201d is \u201cthe Naboandelus of Josephus\u201d whose name must be read \u201cNabu-im-\u015bal. <\/em>[In his note on this letter, Norris comments \u201cI doubt.\u201d] HCR expands on this theory and concludes \u201cThe Canon of Ptolemy is undoubtedly a complete humbug.\u201d [Norris comments \u201cNo\u201d.] Asks to be kept informed of anything new appearing on cuneiforms, expects attacks on his work from Hincks and must finish and publish his work before the Germans forestall him. Gives the latest news on the French Commission referred to above. Greetings to various friends, \u201cMr Clarke, Prinsep, Sykes, \u2026 not forgetting Henry Stanley.\u201d [III\/06(03)].<\/li>\n
                                              4. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Decr<\/sup> 16 1851 My dear Norris.\u201d Arrived at Baghdad just the mail was leaving and so writes in a great hurry. Discusses certain additions and corrections to his [Babylonian ?] alphabet which is now being printed and re-iterates that it is to be regarded as highly provisional, there being, he estimates \u201cat least 50 signs not given\u201d. [He gives details of new discoveries concerning the phonetic and ideographic values of some other signs, but it is not possible to give details of these without cuneiform symbols.] As a result of these discoveries, he has correctly read several Assyrian names, including Sardanapalus and Esarhaddon. \u201cI shall draw up a r\u00e9sum\u00e9 of Assyrian history from the monuments immediately and send it home to you to be printed in the Journal independently of the analysis &c for the results are too important to be kept back.\u201d Repeats his request for proofs of Layard\u2019s new inscriptions to be sent if the Society is to print them. [III\/07(06)].<\/li>\n
                                              5. Addressed at end \u201cBaghdad Decr 17 1851 My dear Norris\u201d Brief note enclosing the texts of two footnotes for inclusion in the forthcoming Memoir, to \u201clines 12 and 22\u201d. \u201cIf they can be inserted, well and good, if not it can\u2019t be helped.\u201d [I cannot trace them in the article published as JRAS<\/em> 14 <\/strong>1851].
                                                \n[NB <\/strong>There is also a note in HCR\u2019s hand headed Translation <\/em>[into Latin] of Artaxerxes legend.<\/em> This is unsigned and undated; generally, Norris has added to such pages a note of the date of the letter with which they were enclosed; nor does he mention it in his note on this letter. It is therefore not clear where in the correspondence this note should be placed. I have left it at this place since this where I found it. RBP]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                III\/07\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>26 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris, dating from January 16 1852 to January 24 1853, being the remainder of those listed in III\/05, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                  \n
                                                1. Addressed at end \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 16 1852 My dear Norris.\u201d Has only now partially recovered from a bilious attack which he attributes to the abrupt transition to a sedentary existence after being on horseback for days on end, so he has nothing ready to send. However, thanks to the new materials from Koyunjik [Kuyunjik] and Nineveh, he has greatly improved his understanding of \u201cthe language\u201d [presumably Assyrian] \u201cand I shall soon have it as pat at my finger\u2019s ends as I once had the Persian\u201d. Now that he has recognised the importance of n<\/em> as a preformative as in Syrian, he understands the meaning of many words which had been previously obscure. Is now satisfied that the black obelisk dates from about 860BC. The tribute \u201cdeputed in the second compartment\u201d comes from Israel and is that paid by Jehu, known to the Assyrians as \u201cson of Omri\u201d the founder of the kingdom of Samaria, the kingdom of Israel being always called \u201cthe country of Beth Omri.\u201d Has also identified on the obelisk the names of two other contemporaries of Jehu known to Scripture. These identifications are reinforced by the fact that the other nations named as tributaries on the obelisk are all from the same geographical region. The gifts from Egypt and Israel were in the nature of peace-offerings since there had not been an Assyrian campaign against either country. Authorises Norris to communicate these findings to Fergusson. He may also announce them at a meeting of the Society if he thinks fit, so as to secure HCR\u2019s prior claim to the discovery, although he does intend to send a letter to the Athenaeum <\/em>during the next week. Has also established from the inscriptions on the Bull from Nineveh and the Paris cylinder that Sennacherib went to Jerusalem as a friend of Hezekiah, who had given refuge to the Assyrian satrap when he was turned out of Samaria. Sennacherib quelled the revolt of some tribes around Jerusalem against Hezekiah and presented to him the cities of Ekron and Gazah which he had recovered from the Philistines. HCR is now trying to complete a restored transcript of these events together with a literal translation for publication in the Discusses how far he has got with the names of later kings of the Assyrian dynasty. Has not had time to annotate the proof sheet of the Alphabet, but in any case, fears it would come too late. However, he realises he has made a mistake with one word which he hopes Norris has spotted and corrected. Encloses a box of gutta percha casts of coins for \u201cVaux\u201d. Comments briefly on progress in excavations. First mention of [W K] Loftus, with whom HCR later had an acrimonious dispute. [III\/07(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                2. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 28th<\/sup> 1852 My dear Norris\u201d. Announces his success in reading the Assyrian words for the god of fire as Adar<\/em> and for \u201c\u00c6thiopia\u201d \u201cGreek Meroe\u201d as Mirukha<\/em> and discusses at some length his reasons for the first of these decipherments, which he considers to be of great importance. [This passage is possibly of interest as illustrating the way in which HCR approached the decipherment of Assyrian words.] He also discusses progress with reading other names, both personal and geographical, and the light which is being shed on Assyrian history and geography. \u201cThe labor I have had in working all this out from the miserable fragments alone available has interfered somewhat with the completion of the Behistun analysis, but I shall send you a batch of letterpress certainly by our monthly Damascus post. . . . Loftus has started for Susa and will commence work immediately. Depend upon it in the course of the next 10 years we shall have complete Assyrian and Babylonian annals from the time of David to that of Cyrus.\u201d [III\/07\/02].<\/li>\n
                                                3. Addressed at end \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 2nd<\/sup> 1852 My dear Norris.\u201d Has nothing much to write in view of his last long letter, but is enclosing letters for onward transmission. Is \u201cstill marvelling at the strange mixture of fact and fiction to be found in the Historical Books of Scripture.\u201d \u201cBy the bye touching the 3rd<\/sup> Column of the Median [presumably the Median section of the Inscription at Behistun] I believe that the left hand bit of the upper portion of the Tablet is entirely gone and was never papered\u201d as he has a transcript of the remainder of it in his papers, but not that part. Announces the discovery of a Royal cemetery at Koyunjik (Nineveh) \u201cbut I think the relics are only of the early Sassanian period, as I have written to the Trustees.\u201d Is anxious to hear that Loftus has reached Susa and started excavating. [III\/07(03).]<\/li>\n
                                                4. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 16th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Is concerned that Hincks has made some of HCR\u2019s discoveries independently and has been able to publish first and that he may take credit for some others. Gives his reasons for believing that Sargon, the builder of Khorsabad, should be identified with Shalmaneser rather than Tiglath Pileser as Hincks maintains, and asks Norris to communicate these to the RAS. He believes that all Assyrian kings had a double appellation – which he calls the name and the epithet \u2013 and the Pul<\/em> of the inscriptions is identical with Tiglath Pileser, as Sargon is with Shalmaneser. \u201cIf this identity \u2026 could be established, all difficulties would disappear.\u201d Hopes in the spring to excavate at the central palace of Nimrud to obtain more fragments of the annals of Pul in the hopes of putting the matter beyond doubt. Discusses also the problem of which year of Sargon\u2019s reign saw the conquest and deportation of the inhabitants of Samaria. Discusses also the identity of the god Tartak, said in the Old Testament to be worshipped by \u201cthe men of Ava\u201d asserting the name to be a corruption of the name of the goddess Tarkat (Atargates) and thence deduces the location of Ava. Also explains his reasons for identifying the Assyrian Husuva <\/em>with Tyre. Considers that Norris would do better to devote his energies to Assyrian rather than Median which \u201cis of the least possible consequence\u201d. Gives the phonetic values of several letters not included in the published alphabet which he asks Norris to mark in his copy of the published alphabet. \u201cLoftus is hard at work at Susa. I cannot visit that site as our steamer won\u2019t move and the Bombay people are still putting off the despatch of her relief. So I shall return to Mosul early in March and commence digging on a pretty extensive scale both at Koyunjik and Nineveh. The French have recommenced work at Khorsabad but I have not yet heard of any result.\u201d Will send by the next post copies of Phoenician legends and Assyrian cylinders to the Royal Society of Literature. Is also trying to track down another Assyrian king named Deleboras<\/em> or Delebois<\/em> in Macrobius Thinks the name must mean \u201cbeloved of the Devas<\/em>\u201d Thinks the same element occurs in the name Dido. Is arranging for future copies of the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> to be sent directly to him by mail rather than through the Foreign Office, so that they will arrive sooner. Gives his views on possible forthcoming developments in foreign affairs. [III\/07(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                5. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 29th<\/sup> 1852 My dear Norris.\u201d Cannot continue with \u201cthe Behistun analysis\u201d satisfactorily for the time being because his notebooks have not yet arrived from England, so he is continuing work on the materials which are to hand i.e. Assyrian. Lists some of his recent discoveries of the multiple phonetic values which almost every character has been found to possess \u201call of which must be identified before the fundamental task of constructing an alphabet can be considered to be satisfactorily accomplished.\u201d Thinks he has identified the name of Deleboras<\/em> on the obelisk. [Some of what he wrote about him in the previous letter is repeated here.] On several grounds he dates his reign to about 850BC. Returns to his disagreement with Hincks as to the identity of \u201cSargon\u201d. Has modified his position to the extent that, while he still maintains that there was no king between Sargina<\/em> and Sanakhiriba<\/em>, he allows that the former name may refer to both \u201cthe Shalmaneser of Scripture\u201d and [his apparent predecessor] Tiglath Pileser as well [i.e. that the names Shalmaneser and Tiglath Pileser refer to the same king]. Has in consequence abandoned the identification of Tiglath Pileser with Pul. He now considers that Pul reigned until 748BC [Norris comments \u201csic<\/em> Brandis\u201d]when his line was destroyed by a revolt of the Babylonians and Lydians, who thus became independent. He thus identifies him with \u201cthe Sardanapalus of Ctesias\u201d. His reign would\u00a0 have been followed by interregnum until the accession of \u201cSargon\u201d in, say 745, who would have conquered Syria very early in his reign by 738, subsequently attacking King Hosea in 730 and conquering Samaria in 721. He would have been succeeded by Sennacherib in 716, who attacked Hezekiah in 713. Discusses some \u201cvery important arguments\u201d in favour of this hypothesis and also \u201ca great difficulty\u201d. Concludes that a final decision must be deferred until all his materials are to hand. Further speculations about the names of Assyrian deities, but \u201cthe more I dive into the Greeks and try to apply their names to the Inscriptions, the more puzzled I become.\u201d Has heard from Loftus at Susa, but he had not yet started work. He has deferred his departure for Mosul to pursue excavations at Koyunjik and Nimrud until he has got hold of \u201ca complete copy of the annals of Pul and of Sennacherib. \u201cWe shall then have a very fair idea of Assyrian history from about 950BC to 600.\u201d Although the histories of earlier periods, particularly those of David and Solomon, would be valuable \u201cI have no great hopes of finding documents.\u201d Has learned \u201cby the papers\u201d that \u201cHenry Stanley has been appointed to Constantinople\u201d and hopes that he will visit Mosul. Asks Norris to tell Vaux about some new coins which have been found. \u201cMy Sennacherib and Hezekiah extract is now complete \u2013 restored, translated & analyzed \u2013 but it is hardly worth while publishing alone. The French however have now taken a cast of the Inscription and I must not delay therefore very long or they will be in the field before me with this grand Scriptural illustration.\u201d [III\/07(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                6. Addressed \u201cNineveh March 14 1852. My dear Norris\u201d. Has been encamped \u201cfor the last week at the foot of the great mound at Koyunjik, revelling in inscriptions almost \u2018ad nauseam\u2019\u201d. Has been studying the original inscription on the bull recounting Sennacherib\u2019s Palestinian campaign and \u201cby dint of fingers as well as eyes, recovered, I believe every word (almost every letter)\u201d. The paper cast from which he had been working at Baghdad had proved very faulty. Will send a copy of the restored inscription with a translation for publication in the Journal so as to forestall the French. Oppert \u201cis a young laborious German and will be great Orientalist.\u201d They are now \u201cas thick as thieves.\u201d [Mentions some new linguistic ideas, but it is not clear to which language he is referring.] No new historical discoveries but has at last been able to start excavation of the mound at \u201cNebi Yunis\u201d [Nabi Yunus about 1km south of Koyunjik] and is awaiting the results eagerly. Will be travelling to Nimrud the following week and hopes while there to clarify the identity of Pul. Is encouraging \u201cFresnel and Oppert\u201d to go and dig at Ecbatana [in Persia] if only to keep them away from Babylonia. \u201cPlace too is hard at work at Khorsabad but is only gleaning Botta\u2019s leavings.\u201d Comments on \u201cLayard\u2019s Plates\u201d but considers that the reading of \u201cLachish\u201d in the captions to some of the plates will prove to be incorrect. Offers an alternative explanation. \u201cHarry of Exeter [i.e. Henry Philpotts, 1777-1869 Bishop of Exeter] deserves his castigation [I have been unable to establish what incident is referred to here. RBP.]. Will send a sketch of the progress in cuneiform research for inclusion in the President\u2019s Anniversary address as he promised to do the year before. Is not satisfied with his current reading of Shalmaneser but cannot think of another. [III\/07(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                7. Addressed \u201cCamp Nimrud March 30th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has been too busy with various fieldwork tasks to write the promised \u201cSennacherib paper\u201d for publication but he hopes to finish it before returning to Baghdad. Has made many discoveries, but none of \u201cvery great importance\u201d. Says that the earliest inscription which has been found is \u201cBM series 17 &18\u201d which he dates to 1000BC [Norris comments \u201cnow Tiglath Pileser 770BC\u201d.] Gives his latest view of the line of Assyrian kings. A number of previously recorded inscriptions are not now to be found having been \u201ccarried off \u2026 by Layard or other riflers\u201d. Gives his current historical interpretations of various fragments he has found. Will not be able to remain at Nimrud more than another week or ten days and will discontinue the excavations during the summer \u201cunless I can get Loftus to superintend them personally as soon as he has finished Susa\u201d. Thinks that only a lucky find will enable him to establish with the certainty the list of kings of Assyria. Cannot write more \u201cbeing over head and ears in work of all sorts.\u201d \u201cI hear a rumor that Layard has been appointed to succeed Ld<\/sup> Stanley at the For. Office, [presumably Stanley (2), who was parliamentary under-secretary at the Foreign Office February-December 1852] but can hardly credit it, if true it is indeed preferment with a vengeance.\u201d [III\/07(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                8. Addressed \u201cBaghdad April 21. My dear Norris.\u201d Gives the text of a footnote about the Syrian campaign of Tiglath Pileser to be inserted in some article concerning the Khorsabad inscriptions \u201cif there is time\u201d so as to prevent \u201chiggling on the part of Hincks or others.\u201d [I have not been able to identify this article with certainty. RBP.] Can now read the Khorsabad annals pretty fluently thanks to the progress he has made at Nimrud and Nineveh and he thinks he will write out a brief literal translation at once. Mentions briefly some further discoveries which he will write about more fully in his next letter. [III\/07(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                9. Addressed \u201cBaghdad May 1st<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Thanks Norris for his letters and for \u201cwhat you have done to set me right with Hincks.\u201d The only outstanding point is that, after criticising HCR\u2019s identification of a certain name with the biblical \u201cOmri\u201d in August 1851, he has adopted it without acknowledgement in December. Encloses some footnotes to be appended to his \u201cNineveh notes\u201d if Norris considers them worth publishing. [This note is with the letter. At the end of the note, HCR adds \u201cPlease remember that it would only be throwing money away if the Society were to publish Layard\u2019s fragmentary inscriptions, as I have the same inscriptions complete and continuous and if the Society took up the matter it would thus certainly be best to publish text and translation together.\u201d] Mentions some new readings of which he is now convinced. \u201cEver since my return from Nineveh, I have been hard at work putting together and copying out the great Inscription of Sardanapalus \u2026 difficulties are now vanishing at every step as I become acquainted with the secondary values of the characters, and the Pantheon is the only branch which preserves its dusty outline. Mentions some new phonetic values which he has determined. Complains of the \u201cflippant, offensive [and]\u2026 untrue\u201d paper written by Offert [see above] in Journal Asiatique<\/em> and has abandoned the good opinion he had of him. Considers that he is animated by anti-English feeling. \u201cHe and Fresnel are vegetating here in inglorious idleness quite unable to work owing to the state of the country and afraid that the Govt will accordingly stop the supplies.\u201d No news from [Loftus at] Susa but is sending a copy of the Artaxerxes legend with translation from the Persian and Babylonian to assist Norris in his Median work. His books are still held up in an Arab blockade \u201cand really without them it is impossible to go on with the [Persian ?] analysis or the alphabet.\u201d But he hopes they will be released soon. Expects to be able to publish his \u201cgeneral Assyrian history\u201d next year but suggests writing an abstract of the annals of the different Assyrian kings for publication in the JRAS first. [Norris comments \u201cYes\u201d]. [III\/07(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                10. Addressed \u201cBaghdad, May 22nd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d The scheme of Assyrian chronology which he had sent to Norris from Nineveh [see III\/07(07) above] is not satisfactory and must be modified, if it is not yet in print. Gives details of the changes he believes are necessary [it all seems rather speculative.] Asks that his article should not be published in its present form but the proofs should either be returned to him for correction and expansion or else destroyed. Is becoming convinced that the oldest city in Mesopotamia is Susa and that \u201call civilization came from thence\u201d. Further \u201cthat the Jewish traditions contained in Genesis are substantially the same as prevailed in Assyria and Babylonia in the time of Sardanapalus.\u201d Gives reasons for this. Further states that \u201cI really believe Susa to be Paradise\u201d<\/u> or rather that \u201cthe old tradition preserved in the second chapter of Genesis refers to the primitive settlement of men in Susiana.\u201d Goes into this in great detail. Is working at the inscriptions for five or six hours a day and \u201cincreasing both my syllabarium and vocabulary past all belief\u201d but the boat containing most of his cuneiform books is still blockaded so that \u201cas far as the Behistun paper is concerned, my hands are completely tied.\u201d PS deals with problems with the post. \u201cWhat is this Nineveh affair of Bonomi\u2019s?\u201d [presumably refers to Nineveh and Its Palaces <\/em>by Joseph Bonomi, London 1852. The work apparently seeks to apply Layard\u2019s and Botta\u2019s archaeological discoveries to elucidate Scripture.] Is beginning to feel unwell with the onset of the hot weather. [III\/07(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                11. Addressed \u201cBaghdad June 1 1852. My dear Norris.\u201d Apologizes to Norris for the embarrassment he feels at not being able to complete HCR\u2019s memoir on the Behistun inscription, but he cannot make progress without his books to refer to and these have still not arrived and it is now quite likely that they will not arrive at all, owing to the disturbed state of the country. He faces the prospect of losing all his work to date and \u201cnearly 3000\u00a3 of property.” In addition, there are the problems of the climate, \u201cwar at our very gates, cholera abroad in the province &c. &c. \u2026 moreover \u2026 I have no longer the energy of youth nor the stimulus of having to earn<\/u> a reputation.\u201d He is, however, \u201cworking hard at the Sardanapalus Inscription and by dint of analysis and comparison with the Sennacherib annals and such scraps as I have of the Khorsabad plates\u201d is making progress. Encloses a few corrections and additions to \u201cmy own indiscriminate table\u201d but \u201cthe list is not nearly complete\u201d and will need to be completely re-arranged. Discusses the similes which are a prominent feature of the Sardanapalus inscription. Thinks he may have found the name of Noah and a reference to the Tower of Babel and considers that he may find \u201cthe Mosaical traditions current in the time of Sardanapalus\u201d. Kings frequently refer to their deified ancestors. Asks Norris to ask \u201cVaux\u201d to check references which he has found to works which he does not have to hand but which he assumes will be available in the British Museum. Former uncertainties concerning the readings of the names of Sargon, Tiglath-pileser and Shalmaneser have recurred. Can write no more owing to pressure of [official] business. PS asks Norris to forward a letter which is waiting for HCR in London and confirms reports which have appeared of precious items being found in the Koyunjik\u00a0 [III\/07(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                12. Addressed \u201cBaghdad June 22nd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d His books have arrived at last and he has been immersed in Layard\u2019s Inscriptions<\/em> for the past week. This has led to many discoveries thanks to the progress he has made in his understanding of the Assyrian alphabet and language since he last saw them. Is now positive<\/u> that he has identified the name of Tiglath Pileser and has got \u201calmost a complete set of his annals\u201d. He gives an etymology of the name. The complete series in BM series 17 & 18 belong to this king and contain a summary of his early conquests before he went to Syria. He thinks he will be able \u201cto reconstruct a complete set of his annals\u201d by collating \u201cthose anonymous fragments from the SW and Centre Palaces at Nimrud\u201d which he has identified as belonging to the same king. This confirms his suspicion that \u201cPul\u201d and Tiglath Pileser are the same person. Discusses some consequences of this discovery as well as some difficulties which remain. Has also identified the biblical name Esarhaddon and also his annals. He alludes to a tablet in the collection of Claudius James Rich already deposited at the British Museum. Discussing some remaining queries and uncertainties connected with this. Has had further thoughts about the identity of Sargon and Shalmaneser, but has no time to go into it in full now. Gives some further phonetic and semantic values of letters which he has discovered. His original resume must not be published now as it stands, he will either have to rewrite it or Norris must return the proofs to him for correction, in time to appear in the autumn number of the JRAS<\/em>. There are only two Elymaean inscriptions known, \u201cthey appear in Layard\u2019s series 31,32 and 36,37. If you can make anything of them, however you must be a perfect Odipus (sic)<\/em> [apparently referring to Oedipus\u2019s success in solving the riddle of the Sphinx in Greek mythology]\u201d.Gossip about what Loftus and other of his contemporaries are or may be doing. Thinks his discovery of the name of Tiglath Pileser ought to be announced in the JRAS<\/em> before Hincks anticipates him, \u201cIf he should however have again anticipated me he will I have no doubt swallow all his former positive assertions about Tiglath Pileser being the same as Sargon &c &c with as much complacency as if he had never made them.\u201d PS \u201cThe Koyunjik diggins (sic<\/em>) continue to yield tablets in profusion but the sculptures seem to be exhausted.\u201d Is continuing to work on the Analysis but is in difficulties with the Alphabet as some of the corrected proof sheets seem to have gone astray and he has no copies. Asks Norris to send him the uncorrected \u201cslips\u201d [i.e. galleys ?] and he will continue the alphabet \u201cin a much less rambling form\u201d.[I think this refers to the Persian inscription from Behistun.] [III\/07(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                13. Addressed \u201cBaghdad July 2nd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has been bilious for ten days and unable to work, but is better now and work has resumed. Continues to maintain his identification of Tiglath Pileser, although the orthography puzzles him. Hopes that Norris has published an announcement of the discovery, so as to forestall Hincks. Is still uncertain about the question of a change of dynasty at Nineveh. Has had no success in reading the other names. Is pretty sure that the Sun was worshipped under two names: as Haman<\/em> (the source of light) and as Adar<\/em> (the source of heat or fire). Finds corroboration for this in a statement in the Old Testament that the Sepharvaites [Sepharvites] burnt their children with fire to Adrammelech and Annamalech [2 Kings 17.31] which he takes to embody these two names of the Sun god. Gives further corroboration from other sources. Various speculations concerning Susa: its legendary founder, Memnon <\/em>\u2013 possibly connected with Adonis<\/em> \u2013 and the source of the Assyrian and Babylonian civilizations. \u201cMy great puzzle is the connexion between Babylonia and Armenia.\u201d He is also puzzled by the use of the names Akkadiya, Chaldaea, <\/em>etc. He feels he is being forced to conclude that various names all refer to same people, although it will oblige him to abandon some of\u00a0 his cherished readings. \u201cif we only had Babylonian annals to one tenth the extent of the Assyrian, the whole thing would be plain, but with mere broken bricks and hieratic dedications it becomes very difficult to work out the later history.\u201d Expands a good deal on this. \u201cBy the bye, Layard tells me I am to be anatomized by De Saulcy in the Revue des deux mondes <\/em>and shown to be a mere pirate, having never yet made a discovery or broached an original idea.\u201d Has not had time to compile a list of new powers [phonetic values] from his note books but notes two. Is waiting to receive new paper casts which Loftus has made of the Elymaean inscriptions at \u201cKal Far\u00e1un (?)\u201d which he hopes will be more useful than Layard\u2019s unreadable ones. He has not, however, succeeded in finding any more inscriptions of this kind. \u201cAt Mosul, the workmen have at length lighted on a new Palace and a new Temple, but I have not yet got the Inscriptions, every scrap of new historical matter, however, is now of consequence\u2026.\u201d Has been working on \u201cthe annals of the son of Esarhaddon (Asser-adan-pal ?) but I doubt if I shall be able to make a connected narrative out of the fragments.\u201d Henry Stanley [see III\/07(05) above] has sent him \u201ca very interesting philological letter from Percy Smythe [possibly Percy Ellen Algernon Frederick William Sydney Smythe, 8th Viscount Strangford (1826\u20131869)] who seems to have ranged himself under your wing and to be drinking inspiration at the feet of Gamaliel [apparently used in the sense of a respected teacher, Gamaliel was the teacher of St Paul.]\u201d Is looking forward to hearing the results of Norris\u2019s Median researches, speculates that the language will be found to have analogies \u201cwith the Finno-Lappish group\u201d. Will be interested to have Norris\u2019s comments on his resume [of his researches on Assyrian ?] but it must not be published in its present form. Asks after various friends, in particular how Vaux is getting on with his copies of the [Assyrian ?] tablets. \u201cIt could take me many years to copy out the 6 large chests full which I now have in the room where I am writing.\u201d Is puzzled by one tablet with Assyrian cuneiform on one side and a seal with Estranghelo [the classical form of the Syriac alphabet] characters on the other as they are \u201cundoubtedly of the same age.\u201d Is annoyed with Layard for keeping back some of his inscriptions, which would be invaluable to HCR. [III\/07(13)].<\/li>\n
                                                14. Addressed \u201cBaghdad July 13th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Is continuing to work despite the heat. Is puzzled by an inscription on \u201cPage 19, line 5\u201d of \u201cLayard\u2019s book of Inscriptions\u201d where Esarhaddon is described as \u201cKing of Egypt\u201d and \u201csubduer of Aethiopia\u201d. Concludes that Esarhaddon must have invaded Egypt \u201cabout B.C. 680\u201d and wonders why \u201cfor so interesting a fact we are exclusively indebted to this casual notice.\u201d Discusses the relationship of this with the accounts of the Dodecarchy in Herodotus and the Old Testament. It also accounts for the fact that the palace of Esarhaddon, where this inscription is found, is decorated with Egyptian sphinxes. Mentions various obscure points in Jewish history. Finds he can now read the whole of the inscription on Lord Aberdeen\u2019s black stone [see letter 13 in III\/03 above] although \u201cat home I could make nothing of it.\u201d Has had further thoughts about the reading of the name of the god commemorated at the \u201cMemnonium\u201d at Susa \u201cand I must now make further researches into the true reading of the name of this God.\u201d Has returned to his original ideas about the reading of the names of the gods associated with the \u201csun\u201d and \u201cfire\u201d. Discusses the consequences of this. Fresnel and Oppert have rushed off to Babylon because of reports that \u201cthe great golden image of Nebuchadnezzar had been discovered\u201d which proved to be untrue. Is glad to hear that \u201cBotta has been appointed my colleague\u201d though \u201cI believe he is now quite fuddled with opium.\u201d \u201cI am now chiefly taken up with Chronology and Geography for my brother\u2019s Herodotus <\/em>[i.e. The history of Herodotus : a new English version, edited with copious notes and appendices … \/ by George Rawlinson ; assisted by Sir Henry Rawlinson. <\/em>London : John Murray, 1858-1860.] but still work a little at the papers for the journal.\u201d Norris is to ask Birch\u2019s opinion of HCR\u2019s discoveries concerning Esarhaddon, Egypt and Ethiopia. Some further speculation concerning conditions in Egypt immediately before the time of Psammetichus [Psamtik\u00a0I] [III\/07(14)].<\/li>\n
                                                15. Addressed \u201cBaghdad July 22 1852. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been alarmed by Norris\u2019s proposal to publish HCR\u2019s notes \u201cas a supplement to the Report\u201d [presumably the Report of the Council to the Anniversary General Meeting] despite HCR\u2019s repeated warnings that they will not be suitable for publication without extensive alteration and correction. Is still less pleased at the idea of some comments of Layard\u2019s being \u201ctacked on without my knowledge or consent\u201d having \u201ca very mean opinion of his learning and a still meaner opinion of his fair dealing.\u201d Repeats and expands the discoveries which he announced in his previous letter, in anticipation that this one will arrive sooner. Sets out more clearly his ideas concerning the succession of Assyrian kings. Has come round to the view that Ptolemy is \u201cwonderfully correct\u201d although \u201cvery difficult to be understood\u201d. Has \u201clately got several fragments of the son of EsarHaddon and .. find his name written indifferently \u2026 Assar adan pal <\/em>and Assar ki <\/em>e. Sardanapalus and Saracus. Repeats his interpretation of Lord Aberdeen\u2019s Black Stone. Has established \u201cbeyond doubt\u201d that \u201cthe Nimrud NW Palace King\u201d is Assar akh pal<\/em> and not Assar adan pal<\/em>. Has re-examined the Cyprus Inscription and finds that the name Yatnan<\/em> [Norris writes Yetnan] <\/em>must apply to that island. Gives reasons. \u201cHaving pretty well finished with Assar akh pal, Deleboras, <\/em>Sennacherib & Esarhaddon\u201d has been trying to write out the annals of Tiglath Pileser and Sargon but find that the Inscription 17, 18 of Layard\u2019s series is missing a slice off the side of the slab so that several words are missing in every line. However he believes it will be possible to recover the sense with the aid of other fragments which belong to two distinct series of the annals. The Sargon annals are much easier, but he is puzzled as to when the city of Samaria was captured, unless it during the king\u2019s first year. But in that case, there is an unexplained interval of at least 18 years between the capture of Samaria and Sennacherib\u2019s expedition against king Hezekiah, unless the Scriptural dates are all wrong. However, he has heard that \u201cMonsr<\/sup> Place [see III\/07(06) above]\u201d has found at Khorsabad a large terra cotta cylinder with the inscription quite perfect throughout. If this contains, as he believes it must, a complete set of Sargon\u2019s annals and if he can only get sight of it, he will see at once in what year Samaria was taken. Fresnel and Oppert [see previous letter] are at Hillah have been unable to commence excavation owing to the disturbed state of the country and the heat. Repeats the story of how they were lured there. They are in danger of being \u201cstripped by the Arabs, who are just now complete masters of the open country.\u201d Doubts if he will be able to go to Babylon in the autumn as he had intended. A new palace has come to light at Koyunjik but he has not received copies of any inscriptions so can say nothing about it. Is apprehensive about the reaction of \u201cthe Egyptologers\u201d to his discovery of the Assyrian conquest. Is looking forward to seeing Norris\u2019s \u201cMedian paper\u201d and hopes he will lose no opportunity of \u201cgiving Oppert a slap when he deserves it\u201d as he is insufferably vain and anti-English. Regrets his mistake in calling \u201cthe Susa king\u201d Artaxerxes Ochas<\/em> rather than Memnon<\/em> the father. What he had sent Norris was merely Loftus\u2019s rough copy, is expecting to receive the paper casts any day. Is continuing to make good progress despite the insufferable heat and \u201ca rebellious liver.\u201d [III\/07(15).]<\/li>\n
                                                16. Addressed \u201cBaghdad July 28th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Ptolemy\u2019s Canon is \u201crigidly exact throughout\u201d and can be reconciled with the Scriptural chronology. Demonstrates this. Is so satisfied with this that he intends to write a letter to the Athenaeum<\/em> about it. \u201cI cannot however as yet fill up the interval between Esarhaddon and the capture of Nineveh.\u201d [III\/07(16).]<\/li>\n
                                                17. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Aug. 2nd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has received the published version of his Outlines<\/em> [HCR\u2019s Outlines of Assyrian History<\/em> with the comments by Layard was attached to the Anniversary Report for 1852. This was not published in the JRAS<\/em> but a copy exists in the RAS library as part of a volume Prospectus, Proceedings Royal Asiatic Society 1823-1867.<\/em>] which he had not wanted to be published in its present state. Expects a good deal of \u201cbadgering\u201d on account of its imperfections. \u201cMy only chance now is to write a fresh paper recanting errors, and entering on the discussion of particular points in considerably greater detail.\u201d Is puzzled by Layard\u2019s claim to have found inscriptions by Esarhaddon\u2019s great grandson; he has found nothing of the kind. Will be \u201cvery glad indeed\u201d if Norris can prove Median to be of the Ugrian (Sarmatian?) family, although he cannot identify any Median words in Klaproth\u2019s Asia Polyglotta<\/em>. Has not yet seen the Sargon Cylinder referred to in 15 above, although they have promised to send him paper casts from Mosul. \u201cI am making desperate efforts to work out the Babylonian and Chaldaean Geography but it is excessively difficult with our present materials. The French have found nothing at all at Babylon.\u201d Hopes to be feeling better by the time the next post leaves. [III\/07(17)].<\/li>\n
                                                18. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Aug. 22nd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Is anxious to know whether \u201cmy Tiglath Pileser correction\u201d has been published, either appended to the Outlines<\/em> or subsequently \u201cit was of much importance.\u201d Has begun to rewrite the Outlines<\/em> on a more extended scale in three divisions, Mythology, History and Geography with copious extracts from the Inscriptions. \u201cA very rebellious liver however and a most detestable climate are such drawbacks and I cannot therefore promise you a very early transmission.\u201d \u201cIt ought to take up almost a number of the Journal.\u201d Has identified the goddess Salam <\/em>(i.e. Salambo, <\/em>the equivalent of Venus\/Aphrodite) and a title of Sargon can consequently be read as Salamanu Assur <\/em>(Shalmaneser) and a district of Babylon as the Salma <\/em>of Ptolemy. Discusses further consequences of this reading and asks Norris\u2019s opinion. Suspects the name Semiramis<\/em> to have been unknown in Assyria and Babylonia, although cannot account for the Armenian name Shemiramagerd<\/em> for their capital Van. Reasserts his previous readings for the names of the sun and water gods. Presumes that \u201cHincks will come out strong at the British Association meeting at Belfast \u2026 where I may expect to be pounded.\u201d Complains that Layard is unfairly supporting Hinck\u2019s claim to priority in identifying the name of the Israelitish king Menahem<\/em> which priority HCR disputes. Has \u201cbeen going through Raoul Rochette\u2019s Nineveh papers in the Journal des Savans<\/em>\u201d. This has made him anxious to read \u201cFelix Layard\u2019s Researches on the worship of Venus and Mithra<\/em>\u201d There are excellent dedicatory inscriptions in the Temples at Nineveh which are of great use for the epithets of the Gods. Is still awaiting the casts of the Sargon Cylinders which he is still sure will confirm his view on the date of Sargon\u2019s expedition against Samaria and increases his respect for Ptolemy\u2019s Canon, which he is sure gives the name of Merodach Baladan\u2019s father correctly, which he now reads in cuneiform Yagina.<\/em> Has received Loftus\u2019s casts of the inscriptions at Kal-Faraun and Shikaft-i-Salman and has been able to correct Layard\u2019s published copies. The characters are Babylonian with only slight modification but the language is almost certainly not Semitic. Recognizes several Median words but cannot make out a single connected sentence. There was a Scythic [Median] population all over Persia between the Semites and the Arians, the latter he suspects to have been very recent immigrants. Will send Norris a facsimile of the Median legend of Artaxerxes as soon as the casts from Susa arrive. Discusses the Median name Afarti<\/em> for Susiana <\/em>and some related words. Points out that there is in the British Museum a royal cylinder of one of the Niffer kings, a good engraving of which appears in \u201cPorter\u2019s Travels<\/em> and also Kitto\u2019s Bible Cyclopedia.<\/em> [Presumably A Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature. Edited by J. K. Illustrated by numerous engravings. <\/em>John KITTO Edinburgh, 1845.<\/em>]\u201d Will go into possible connections between Niffer and Afara and other such matters in the geography paper he is now writing, having collected \u201ca multitude of notices\u201d from various sources to illustrate the old Babylonian names. The French Commission [see above] have discovered nothing at Babylon nor so far at Nineveh, \u201cbut Loftus is coming down there early in the autumn to superintend the work and I shall make a great effort during the winter. Wants to persuade \u201cHenry Stanley\u201d to visit him in the autumn, as he would get a much better idea of Turkey \u201cthan he would by stopping in Stambool\u201d. [III\/07(18).]<\/li>\n
                                                19. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Septr<\/sup> 4th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Complains that the mail service is to become even more irregular in future, owing to changes in the steamer schedules. Disapproves of Norris\u2019s locating the Mardi <\/em>[Amardians?] in the Urals and gives his own views on where they lived and that they were almost certainly \u201cArian\u201d. Sees no connection between the Medians and the Afarti<\/em> [see III\/07(18)]. The names found at Susiana are all Semitic and the character is \u201cultra Assyrian\u201d. The Elymaeans, on the other hand, seem to be closely related to the Medians. Gives his current views on the relation between the various peoples inhabiting that region. Is puzzled by the Babylonian name for Susiana. \u201cI would rather account for the Ugrian analogies by supposing a Pan-Sarmatian family of nations all round the Caspian. \u2026 At the same time I shall be very glad to see your introduction and the etymological affinities cannot fail to be of interest.\u201d Discusses his difficulties with the Assyrian pantheon and investigating parallels with Syrian and Armenian mythologies. [He mentions \u201cVaux\u2019s mem.\u201d This is presumably the WSW Vaux mentioned above, but it is not clear which work of his is referred to. He also mentions the early Christian authors \u201cEphraim Syrus\u201d and \u201cMoses of Chorene\u201d but I cannot establish which works are being referred to. RBP] He adds \u201cglimmerings of light are pouring at all points.\u201d His most important historical discovery has been establishing synchronisms between the Van kings and those of Assyria, thus also confirming the correctness of HCR\u2019s Assyrian list. \u201cIt is further curious to remark that the art of writing was introduced at the same period into Assyria and Armenia.\u201d Consequent on this verification of the Assyrian lists \u201cand with the fear of Exeter Hall before my eyes [This is somewhat obscure, but apparently an allusion to Exeter Hall in the Strand, which was the venue for religious meetings and provided a home for the offices of religious societies. RBP.]\u201d he has abandoned the identification of Pul with Tiglath Pileser. However, this does involves further complications. \u201cThe only demand which I shall have, I think, to make of the Bishops is to cut 20 years off Manasseh\u2019s reign and for this I can produce chapter and verse. I also want the 24th<\/sup> instead of the 14th<\/sup> of Hezekiah for the Sennacherib campaign.\u201d Is finding new \u201cpowers [i.e. phonetic values]\u201d daily, but determining which power applies in any case can only be done from the context \u201cbut I am now so familiar with all the words in common use that I rarely find myself at fault.\u201d As far as history goes \u201cI have pretty well exhausted all my materials, but the geography is a sad puzzle & the mythology still worse, for the gods represented by the same monograms appear to have had different names in Syria, Armenia, Nineveh & Babylon and no doubt also in Susiana and Elymais. Has lost interest for the present in \u201cthe Paradise theory. It will keep.\u201d From their description, the Khorsabad Cylinders appear to be merely religious. It will be impossible to dig at Niffer, or Warka or even at Babylon and he does not feel well enough to undertake another 300 mile ride to Mosul. \u201c(How indeed is it possible to be \u2026 [well] in such a climate?) and desultory work is all I can manage.\u201d PS The \u201cSusa case of casts has come in\u201d and he can send Norris another copy of the Artaxerxes Inscription. Describes some peculiarities of the inscription. Suggests it would be worth publishing a note in the Journal about the complete Artaxerxes inscription and related matters. [A single sheet (damaged) was enclosed with this letter bearing a cuneiform text headed in HCR\u2019s hand: \u201cScythic Inscription from Susa.\u201d The first part is headed, also in HCR\u2019s hand: \u201cround the base of a column.\u201d and the second: \u201cInscribed pedestal.\u201d There are some interlineal notes in Norris\u2019s hand. In his summary of this letter in III\/05 Norris identifies this as \u201cthe Artaxerxes Inscription from Susa. RBP] [III\/07(20).]<\/li>\n
                                                20. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Septr<\/sup> 25th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has been able to do almost nothing for a fortnight because of the continued heat, but the weather is now getting cooler and he is feeling better. The only thing he has accomplished is to establish that the name of the king of Damascus who preceded Hazad<\/em> corresponds with the scriptural Ben Hadad<\/em> . This depends on the identification of the god Aben<\/em>. Further reflections have led him to return to the conclusion that Pul<\/em> and Tiglath Pileser<\/em> are the same. Further discussion of this. \u201cI wish I could put all this in writing, but really what with the worry of an office, indifferent health and an abominable climate I am half in despair.\u201d Mentions problems with the Susa Inscriptions: neither the Persian nor the Babylonian versions are complete and both lack the final part of the Median version. Has been studying one of the Khorsabad cylinders for the past week and finds that it contains a list of the titles and conquests of Sargon and the building of Khorsabad. It nearly follows the Bull Inscriptions but with some important variations. Thinks that the names of tribes which the king talks of carrying off ought to be found among the 10 tribes of Israel. The capture of Tyre is also mentioned, which he has never seen in any other document of Sargon\u2019s. It confirms, however, that the capture of Samaria took place in the first year of Sargon\u2019s reign, i.e. in 721BC. He hopes to have the whole inscription when he sees the second cylinder, which is said to be more legible. Has given up all hope of returning to Babylon, \u201cfor, in the first place the Arabs are at present more outrageous than ever and in the second place the artist of the French Commission has just shot the Arab Chief who now lords it over the ruined palaces of Nebuchadnezzar\u201d and he fears that the man will die. Has noticed all sorts of topographical detail in Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s inscriptions. Thinks that the original name of Babylonia proper was Sumir<\/em> from which he derives the name Semiramis<\/em>. The two great territorial divisions between Baghdad and the sea are Sumir<\/em> and Akkad<\/em> or the Sumiram<\/em> and Akkadim<\/em> \u201cand these Akkadim<\/em> are positively the same race as the Kurds of Ararat.\u201d There was a mixture of Scythian and Semitic populations in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys from the earliest times. [The non-Semitic population of Mesopotamia is now known as Sumerian <\/em>but this name was not proposed until 1869. RBP.] Agrees with \u201cStuart Poole\u201d that the Hittites were Scythians [I cannot trace the source referred to here. RBP].\u201d Speculates on the name and location of the Hittite capital. Has also identified the god Sin, <\/em>or Khun <\/em>\u00a0with the Egyptian god Chons <\/em>[Khonsu, Khensu] \u201cand I have brought all the notices, Egyptian, Hebrew, Syrian, Sabaean, Armenian, Arabic, Greek, & Cuneiform into exact conformity.\u201d \u201cPlease tell Birch if you see him that I have found his Bakleten<\/em>(?) to whom the ear [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][or car][\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text] of Chons<\/em> was sent in Northern Syria. I want, however, to see his paper on that subject.\u201d [III\/07(20)]<\/li>\n
                                                21. Addressed \u201cCamp at Ctesiphon Octbr<\/sup> 15th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has been forced to leave Baghdad by an attack of \u201cmy inveterate enemy Dyspepsia\u201d. Has been forbidden by the doctors to undertake any mental exertion, although physical exercise is encouraged. Norris must hope that HCR\u2019s health will be restored and that he will be able to work \u201cdouble tides\u201d during the winter. His article on the [Behistun?] inscriptions is proving to be so long that he is considering publishing it as a book rather than as an article in the JRAS<\/em>. Has now got \u201call the sheets and slips of the alphabet\u201d and go on with that paper, although he sees that he must curtail the scale on which he began it, particularly by giving only a few illustrations for the \u201cnormal powers\u201d of the letters, which are certain, reserving most of the space for the abnormal & ideographic values. Some bricks of Nabonit<\/em> have been found at Babylon which give the name of his father. However, he cannot at present make anything of this. The Arab Sheikh whose shooting he reported in the previous letter is recovering after all, but \u201cFresnel and Oppert are fighting like cat & dog and the excavations make little progress in consequence.\u201d Has begun excavations at Seleucia and intends to try his hand at Opis also before returning to Baghdad. Has had some further thoughts on the ethnology of the ancient peoples. Thinks he can trace the development by the Assyrians of primitive Babylonian pictograms into alphabetic signs. Hopes that that [Lieutenant-Colonel Sir Justin] Sheil, [1803 \u2013 1871]\u2019s retirement will not result in his being sent to Persia \u201cotherwise farewell cuneiforms\u201d. Is very anxious to see Norris\u2019s \u201cMedian paper\u201d. [III\/07(21)].<\/li>\n
                                                22. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Novr<\/sup> 5th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Comments on Norris\u2019s \u201cMedian introduction\u201d [Presumably refers to the preliminary version of E Norris <\/strong>Memoir on Scythic Version of the Behistun Inscription<\/em> JRAS<\/em> 15 <\/strong>pp.\u00a01-213 (1855) which was read before the Society July 3rd<\/sup> 1852.] Is still struggling to work out the ethnology of the peoples of this region, but hopes to solve it with the aid of \u201cthe real Susian Inscriptions of which I have now a fine collection\u2026\u201d The Semites, he now thinks, were gradually driven up the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates by the pressure of the Scythians, \u201cthe colonization of Phoenicia and the emigration of Abraham were from this cause\u201d. The Assyrians were pushed out afterwards. Now makes \u201c\u2026 a very important ethnological announcement: all the ante-Nebuchadnezzar Inscriptions from Niffer to Elymais are in bona fide Scythic dialects\u2026.\u201d Then briefly expounds his view of the relative chronology of the Babylonians, Assyrians etc and the age of Babylonian writing. [It is not clear how far these theories accord with modern ideas. RBP.] Is still puzzled by various names e.g. Numi, <\/em>and the duplication of the names Cush, Aethiopia<\/em>. Often not clear which territory is being referred to in any particular case. Notes that \u201cHincks at the British Association has appropriated much of my Chronology\u2026\u201d [ See III\/07(15) and (16) above.] Hincks, however, \u201ctakes the Assur-nadin <\/em>of Sennacherib\u2019s annals and the Assur-akh-adan<\/em> who succeeded him to be different persons, but I can prove their identity.\u201d Asks Norris to assert HCR\u2019s prior claim to these discoveries at the next meeting of the RAS, using the dates of HCR\u2019s earlier letters to prove this. \u201cI am hunting everywhere for Saosduchinus and Chynaladinus [mentioned by Ptolemy] but I have not yet found the names, nor even that of Evil-merodach.[mentioned in the Bible].\u201d Speculates that Sargon\u2019s family did not come from Babylonia but from Northern Mesopotamia. \u201cThe connection, however, of Pul, Tiglath Pileser and Sargon is still very obscure.\u201d Has found on the \u201cKhorsabad Cylinder\u201d sent to him by \u201cMonsr<\/sup> Place\u201d a version of Sargon\u2019s second title which he relates to an otherwise baffling name in the book of Ezra. Repeats his previous reading of Sargon\u2019s first title [See III\/07(18) above.]. \u201cYou may understand the difficulty one has in dissecting the Pantheon \u2026 when you remember that 1700 years ago Lucian, a Syrian by birth and a good scholar was unable \u2026 [to identify the Goddess worshipped] at the temple of Hieropolis \u2026 [with any of several Graeco-Roman goddesses.]\u201d Gives his current idea of the etymology of the Syrian name for Karkemis (Biblical Carchemish) Mabog. <\/em>Is not installed at Baghdad for the winter. The \u201cdiggins\u201d at Seleucia and Opis were \u201caltogether unsuccessful \u2026 nothing but sepulchral urns, fragments of pottery and a few jimcracks\u201d.<\/em> Since his return, however, he has been rewarded \u201cby the discovery of a fine and very old Egyptian Lion close [see III\/07(01)] to my own door. God only knows how such a relic could have found its way here.\u201d It bears a royal cartouche \u2013 has sent a copy to Birch to read the name. Cannot send Norris a correct copy of the Median inscription at \u201cNabhsh-i-Rustum\u201d [Naqsh-i-Rustam] as \u201cTasker never copied it.\u201d Has had to rely on the copy made by Westergaard, which he has amended by reference to \u201cthe Bisitun materials.\u201d Asks why Norris did not publish the Babylonian inscription from \u201cN.R.\u201d \u201cwith my first memoir. I certainly left a copy with you ready for press.\u201d \u00a0Hopes to finish \u201cthe alphabet\u201d and \u201cthe analysis\u201d during the winter. Loftus\u00a0 is currently in Baghdad \u201cbut starts for England tomorrow and will give you all the information you can wish for about Susa, Elymais, Chaldaea, Armenia & Persia. He is no Orientalist and not deep in any branch of antiquities, but an intelligent and observant traveller, a good geologist and naturalist and altogether a very nice gentlemanly fellow. It is a matter of much regret to me that Hormuzd Rassam has superseded him at Nineveh and that the state of the country and paucity of funds prevent my employing him among the Southern Ruins.\u201d Supposes that \u201cLayard\u2019s new book\u201d is now out\u201d and will either attack HCR or \u201cpuff Hincks, De Saulcy etc at my expense.\u201d But, if so, HCR will retaliate \u201cit requires a little private pique now to stir my half stagnant blood into exertion.\u201d Expects to return to England next autumn and settle down quietly to \u201cwork at Antiquities.\u201d Would have no objection to taking over \u201cthe Hony<\/sup> Secty<\/sup>ship of the Socty<\/sup> when Clarke retires. [i.e. Richard Clarke, who retired in 1857.]\u201d [III\/07(22)].<\/li>\n
                                                23. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Novbr<\/sup> 25th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has received \u201cthe 4th<\/sup> fascicle of \u201cYakut\u2019s Epitome <\/em>and Chodzko\u2019s Grammar<\/em>\u201d [The first of these\u00a0 probably refers to the Mar\u0101<\/em>\u1e63<\/em>id al-i\u0163\u0163il\u0101\u2019 \u2018al\u0101 asm\u0101\u2019 al-amkinah wa al\u2011biq\u0101<\/em> an abridgement, composed about AD 1300 of a geographical dictionary by Yaqut ibn-‘Abdullah al-Rumi al-Hamawi. An edition of this by T. G. J. Juynboll et J. J. B. Gaal was published in Leiden 1852-1864. HCR cited this work in two articles published in 1840, where he appears to have been consulting an Arabic MS. The second must refer to Alexandre Chodzko 1804-1891 Grammaire persane, ou, Principes de l’Iranien modern<\/em> Paris 1852. RBP] Expands on his previous remarks about the wide spread of Scythian peoples in Western Asia [in his summary of this letter, Norris comments \u201chis theory\u201d]. Is drafting a note on the subject for publication in the JRAS<\/em>. He now wants to apply the name to almost all the early non-Semitic peoples of Western Asia. The first wave of Scythian expansion westwards brought in the Egyptians and \u201cCushites\u201d. There was a second great wave \u201cin the time of Abraham\u201d which brought in the Elamites and the \u201cHyc-sos\u201d into Egypt. He gives various speculations on the etymology of the names Numi, Susa <\/em>and Afar<\/em>. These Elamites \u201ccontinued to form the great mass of the population of Syria until gradually annihilated\u201d by various Semitic peoples. \u201cStuart Poole\u2019s guesses about the \u2026 Hittites being Scyths exactly agree with my own system.\u201d [at this point, Norris has pencilled above the line \u201cAmorites = Afarti\u201d. \u201cIt will perhaps never be possible to probe this question to the quick\u201d because by the beginning of written history \u201cthe Scyths and Semites were so mixed up in Syria that one cannot distinguish between them.\u201d However, the point that \u201cthe Scyths were the first settlers and \u2026 the Semites followed them after a long interval \u2026 clears up most of the difficulties in the Patriarchal (?) genealogies and accounts for much of the confusion of Greek tradition.\u201d One remaining difficulty is the Semitic origin ascribed to the Elamites in Genesis. However, he suspects that when the Toldeth Beni Noah<\/em> [Genesis 10, which enumerates the descendants of Noah and the countries in which they settled] was written the country of Elam may have been temporarily occupied by Semites, and this led to the confusion. The original inhabitants of Babylonia, the Nimrud<\/em> were also \u201ccertainly\u201d Scyths. They were later pushed up into the mountains by Semitic invaders. He discusses etymological indications of this. Discusses what he means by the term \u201cScythic\u201d and also the possibility that \u201cin the earliest times Celts and Slavonians of the Arian family\u201d may have been mixed up with them. Invites Norris\u2019s opinion on the theory that \u201cthe basic element of Egyptian and all the African dialects is Scythic and that Semitic analogies are secondary.\u201d Notes that \u201cLayard has been fraternizing with Hincks at Killyleagh\u201d and remarks that \u201cthe Irishman is no doubt competent to give him a general translation of all his Inscriptions\u201d. Is disappointed by the lack of new historical inscriptions coming from the excavations at Nineveh. Still hesitating over the connections between Pul, Tiglath Pileser, <\/em>and Sargon.<\/em> His most important recent discovery is to identify the Biblical Sepharvaim<\/em> with Borsippa <\/em>(Birs Nimrud<\/em>) [This identification is not generally accepted nowadays. RBP.] [III\/07(23)]<\/li>\n
                                                24. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Decbr<\/sup> 15 1852. My dear Norris.\u201d Has noted a difference between Norris\u2019s reading of the first letter of the name of the Saca <\/em>at a certain point in [presumably the Median portion of] the Behistun Inscriptions and what he has in his notes at other points, although it would suit his Scythic theories if Norris\u2019s reading is correct. \u201cIt is a point, in fact, which I should almost be tempted to make another trip to Behistun to verify.\u201d [HCR here alludes to the use of the \u201cpentagraph\u201d (pantograph) apparently for the purpose of magnifying the outlines of characters in paper casts of cuneiform inscriptions. This is the first mention which I have found of this practice. RBP] The hypothesis that the Semites originated in Africa [Norris appears to have mentioned this in his previous letter] is quite new to HCR and he asks what is the basis for it. HCR believes that the original inhabitants of Africa were Scythic and that the old Egyptians were the first Semitic peoples to appear there [this appears to contradict what he said in his previous letter. RBP.] He is satisfied that he has identified in the inscriptions the name of the Casluhim<\/em> (Gr. Khasmuneim<\/em>) the Biblical ancestors of the Philistines, who are described as subjects of the Egyptians joining with the people of Gaza in a revolt against Sargon. He reads their name as Khasdanu<\/em> or Khasmunu<\/em>. Norris has never commented on HCR\u2019s discovery of Esarhaddon\u2019s conquest of Egypt and \u00c6thiopia [See III\/07(14) above]. Has been reminded of this by \u201cthe bronze figure of a lion, which the Turks ? have just dug up at Nebi Yunus which is altogether Egyptian in its character\u201d and bears the epithet usually associated with Esarhaddon \u201cKing (or conqueror) of \u2026 Egypt and \u00c6thiopia\u201d \u2026 [I have not been able to find out anything more about this bronze lion. There is a pencilled note by Norris at the beginning of the letter \u201cTook out lion and gave to Rawlinson 20 July 1857.\u201d RBP.] \u201cThis Nebi Yunus lion is an almost exact representation of the figure in Black marble which was found here a short time back and which has the [royal cartouche] Sheshonk<\/em> apparently on its breast. Repeats some of what he had said earlier on this point. Also refers again to Layard\u2019s visit to Hincks, which he is convinced will be for the purpose of conspiring against him, and to his confusion over the names of the Assyrian gods [i.e their pronunciation.] Suggests he should forestall Layard by writing a letter for publication in the JRAS<\/em> setting out his present understanding of the Pantheon, so as to establish his prior claims. \u201cI am quite frightened however \u2026 [by] the multitude of [unfinished?] papers now lying about my Study. His most recent task has been to make a literal translation of the great Inscription of Assur-akh-pal<\/em> \u2026 which is only valuable for its geographical information. Proposes to construct a map from it \u201cshowing the lines of route and laying down the approximate position of all the countries, mountains, rivers tribes and cities. Is satisfied that a word which has for long puzzled him is the original name of Babylonia, corresponding to the Biblical Shinar or the Greek Cephenia, but he has as yet no idea how to pronounce it. Repeats his identification of the ancient Sippara\/Sepharvaim<\/em> with Borsippa [see III\/07(23) above] and \u201chaving been lately groping in the Talmud I have found abundant confirmation of the Scythic empire of Nimrud and ascertained that the prim\u00e6val cities were as I always suspected to the South, Erech being certainly Warka, Acad, Akar the capital of Cascar (near Wasit) and Calmen, Nipper where the tower was built. Gives further, more speculative, identifications. Gives arguments in favour of identifying an Assyrian god, whose name he thinks was probably pronounced Barsum<\/em> with Hercules. Notes further uncertainties about the names of other deities. \u201cI quite appreciate all that you say about the necessity of gaining ground step by step, but when one has a positive, unscrupulous and really shrewd antagonist like Hincks, it is difficult to know what to do.\u201d Repeats that he hopes \u201cto be among you\u201d next year. [III\/07(24)].<\/li>\n
                                                25. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 4 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d Has now finished translating the annals of Assur-akh-pal but without \u201ccopious annotation\u201d it would hardly be worth publishing \u201ca mere detail of wars, expeditions, barbarous punishments \u2026. dull reading enough.\u201d The most valuable result has been the identification of some hundred new words \u201call good Hebrew or Chaldee vocables.\u201d \u201cThe tortures \u2026 [are] something horrible.\u201d \u201cThe mythological portions of the annals are still however often very obscure. There are references to feasts and prayers and sacrifices of which I can make little or nothing and I await with some anxiety Hincks\u2019s \u00e9claircissements<\/em> which will I suppose form the valuable morceau <\/em>(sic<\/em>) in Layard\u2019s new book.\u201d [See III\/07(06) above.] Has written to Birch enclosing \u201canother Cartouche?\u201d which has been found at Nimrud. Gives his interpretation of it. Gives his latest reading of the name of the Water God as Aben <\/em>or Abnil<\/em> in Assyrian and Evil<\/em> or Hivil<\/em> in Babylonian. Is sceptical of Layard\u2019s claim to have found a phonetic list of all the names [of the Assyrian gods] since he has never found anything like it and believes that the Assyrians would have regarded it as sacrilege to write the names of their Gods in that way. Further discussion of the identities of Sargon and Shalmaneser. Hincks considers them to be distinct kings, whereas HCR has held them to be different names for the same king. There are difficulties in the way of either hypothesis. In the postscript writes that he has offered to send \u201cthe Crystal Palace people\u201d some \u201creal slabs instead of casts if they will pay the expense of freight, about 1000\u00a3.\u201d Has just seen in the Athenaeum<\/em> that he is to be given the Prussian Order of Merit. Supposes that it is a compliment \u201cbut in real truth, I know little and care less about these matters.\u201d Intends to start for Babylon towards the end of the month and to spend March and April at Mosul, where many new inscriptions have turned up. \u201cYou may reckon on seeing me by the end of the year.\u201d [III\/07(25)].<\/li>\n
                                                26. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 24 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d Is pleased to note that Norris has been reading some of HCR\u2019s letters to the RAS as it will prevent \u201cHincks and Layard from claiming everything as their own.\u201d Discusses briefly various obscure points in the Median [inscription from Behistun?]. Has written out a fair portion of his \u201cScythic ethnography paper\u201d and discusses various further ideas he has had. \u201cI only hope I shall not be run away with in pushing affiliation too far\u201d. Asks Norris to look into the structure of the Belooch [Baloch] language as HCR considers them to be the purest descendants of the \u201cprimitive Scythic Cush\u201d Expands on this idea considerably, finding Scyths as far afield as Spain, north Africa and India. This will give Norris an idea of what to expect in HCR\u2019s Scythic paper. Asks what has become of his Outlines of Assyrian History<\/em> [see III\/07(17) above.] Is anxious to see Hincks\u2019s phonetic readings of the Gods\u2019 names \u201cfor the more I plunge into the Labyrinth, the more am I bewildered.\u201d Is pretty sure that a geographical name which had long puzzled his is the Biblical Shinar <\/em>[he wrote about this in III\/07(24) above.] \u201cI believe I am at last going to Babylon and shall try and break ground at Birs (Borsippa or Sippara) but I cannot wait to superintend the excavations in person and have no competent assistant. In the Spring too I shall revisit Mosul and let you have the cream of all the recent discoveries.\u201d Unless he is posted to Persia to replace Sheil [see III\/07(21) above] he is determined to return to England at the end of the year and to spend at least 3 years arranging and publishing the \u201cenormous mass of Cuneiform materials I now have on hand\u201d. Encloses some \u201cmeagre notes of a Mr Lynch on the Babylonian marshes\u201d and will add an explanatory note of his own if they are considered worth publishing. Has identified the names of the Egyptian cities of Sin<\/em> and Zoan<\/em> in the annals of Pul & Sargon as well as \u201csomething which looks very like the Queen of Sheba in an earlier inscription.\u201d [III\/07(26).]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                  III\/08\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Double sheet of foolscap enclosing two double sheets and one single sheet. On the outside: \u201cFrom Rawlinson\u2019s letters.\u201d Contains summaries of 8 letters in written by HCR to Norris during 1853. All but one of these letters is included in III\/09. Various marginal notes. The whole appears to be in Norris\u2019s handwriting.<\/p>\n

                                                  III\/09\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>18 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris, dated between Feb. 15th<\/sup> and Dec. 16th<\/sup> 1853, some with the original wrappers and envelopes, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                    \n
                                                  1. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 15 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d Has not received any letters from Norris dated after November, but is relieved as he is unwell and has much official work on hand. Is making progress with the \u201cScythic paper\u201d but fears it may prove to be too discursive and full of speculation for the JRAS<\/em>. Has to announce a \u201ccurious\u201d discovery, that the \u201cNorthern Arabs\u201d i.e. those living around the head of the Red Sea were governed by Queens<\/em> and Solomon\u2019s Queen of Sheba was one of these. Gives evidence for this statement and discusses various implications. Gives a list of 18 tributaries of Pul<\/em> which he has reconstructed from the fragments found by Layard. No fresh inscriptions have come in from Nimroud, only repetitions of texts found earlier, but he hopes they will find something at \u201cKilu Shergat\u201d[presumably he means the ancient city of Assur, near modern Qalat Sharqat. RBP.] The French have been luckier at Khorsabad. HCR expects to see all their finds when he visits Mosul and will let Norris know if there is anything fresh. Gossip about Layard and other mutual acquaintances. [III\/09(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                  2. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 23rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Begins to fear that his December packet of letters has either gone astray or been detained in France or Alexandria, although he has received magazines etc up to January 20th<\/sup>. Encloses a \u201cmap of the canals about Babylon drawn up by Mr Lynch\u201d which he is sending to the Royal Geographical Society although it is \u201chardly worth the expense of forwarding and certainly not worth publishing.\u201d Has suspended work on \u201cthe Scythian paper\u201d in order \u201cto get up my annual historical Budget for you\u201d [presumably he means an account of his work during the year for the RAS Anniversary General Meeting. RBP.] Is making good progress with this, but has mislaid his only copy of his Outlines<\/em> [see III\/07(17) above] and is having to rely on his memory. The major historical problem is the period immediately preceding the reign of Sargon, for which the only documents are the fragmentary and \u201cjumbled\u201d inscriptions from the S.E palace at Nimrud. These belong to at least 2 and maybe 3 different kings. Discusses some of the difficulties. Is still not absolutely sure of the Assyrian names of Pul, Tiglath Pileser <\/em>and Shalmaneser<\/em>, although he believes he has correctly identified the first two and Shalmaneser is completely missing. Has at last obtained a complete Assyrian calendar. Gives a list of the cuneiform signs, but adds that he still has no idea how they were pronounced. Is expecting the cast of a pavement inscription which is said to be quite new from Nimrud and an almost perfect historical cylinder from \u201cKileh Shergat\u201d which he anticipates will be a duplicate of the annals of Deleboras. Will be unable to go to Nineveh, as he has to protect the \u201clittle Persian prince whom I have under my wing.\u201d The French have repaid his generosity in allowing \u201cMons Place to carry off a set of marbles from Nimrud for the Louvre\u201d [see III\/07(06) above] by trying to raise the Arabs against us, but we are too strong for that.\u201d [III\/09(02)]<\/li>\n
                                                  3. Addressed \u201cBaghdad March 4 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d Has still not received any personal letters since those posted in November, although other items of mail have arrived. \u201cI wrote you last week \u2026 giving you a complete series of the Babylonian [sic<\/em>] months \u2026 [see III\/09(02) above, although he says there that they are the Assyrian<\/em> RBP]\u201d but not much has been gained since there is no reason for thinking that the names correspond to the Hebrew ones. Has spent the last week going through \u201cthe Pantheon\u201d and can identify the characters for the principal gods \u201cthere is nothing certain but Assur, Bel, Merodach, Nebo, Sin and Yastara.\u201d Believes the Gods had different names in the different countries. Owing to characters having multiple phonetic values, as well as \u201ccompound ideograms\u201d it will require a great deal of work to reduce it to order and there will not be many collaborateurs<\/em>. The Pavement Inscription from Nimrud [see previous letter] has turned out to be a duplicate of part of the annals of Sardanapalus, valuable only for its variant readings. Asks after \u201cLayard\u2019s book and Hincks\u2019s Pantheon\u201d [see III\/07(06) and III\/07(26) respectively]. \u201chow is it that Grotefend continues to emit such puerilities as I see Renouard has been taking the trouble to translate and communicate to the Syro Egyptian? [George Cecil Renouard (1780\u20131867) was a distinguished linguist and oriental scholar. The Syro-Egyptian Society of London was founded in 1844 and survived until 1872 when it was merged into the Society of Biblical Archaeology. I have not been able to identify the \u201cpuerilities\u201d which HCR complains of. Grotefend died a few months after the date of this letter. RBP.] An exploratory party which he sent to Southern Babylonia has found, at a site called Abu Shudhr,<\/em> burial urns containing \u201csmall rolls of sheet lead inscribed with Chald\u00e6an legends\u201d Encloses a \u201cspecimen roughly copied\u201d. \u201cYou will see that the alphabet is half way between the Chald\u00e6an of the Patera? [HCR appears to be referring to a recognised class of objects with inscriptions on them, but I have not been able to clarify this. RBP.] and the Old Syriac but with numerous Sab\u00e6an & Pehlevi analogies.\u201d It appears from a quick inspection of some of the other rolls that there is a gradual transition from \u201cthe Syriac forms\u201d to the \u201ccursive Sab\u00e6an.\u201d Is inclined to assign a date of \u201cthe 2nd<\/sup> or 3rd<\/sup> Century. [presumably AD. RBP.]\u201d Has a patera in his possession \u201con which the writing is as near the square Hebrew (cursive) as possible \u2013 and yet it must be old, for I read on it \u2018the palace of the great king of Babylon\u201d. Is puzzled by \u201cStuart Poole\u2019s last letter in the Literary Gazette\u201d making \u201cthe Shepherds Assyrians [presumably the Hyksos<\/em> or \u2018Shepherd Kings\u2019 of Egypt. RBP.]\u201d on the basis of what he had read in the \u201cTurin Papyrus [presumably the Turin King List. RBP.] Repeats part of his Scythic theories. Feels that the only hope of \u201cgetting at the names of the Gods\u201d is from \u201cthe famous [Kitab al-] Fihrist [Index List of (Arabic) works, of Mohammed bin Is\u2019h\u00e1k al-Nad\u00edm, 987 AD. RBP.]\u201d Comments about sources of information on \u201cSab\u00e6an mythology\u201d. Gives reasons for thinking that the story of the Book of Job is set in \u201cSouthern Chald\u00e6a\u201d Discusses some further difficulties he is having with names, but that he thinks he can read the name of country of which Warka and Nipper were the capitals as Ak\u2019k\u2019adima.<\/em> [III\/09(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                  4. Addressed \u201cBaghdad March 8 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d His letters for December and January have arrived at last. Has been more put out by Hincks than he should have been. Objects to Hincks\u2019s appropriating \u201cso much of my lawful spoil\u201d while at the same time accusing HCR of \u201cwholesale robbery\u201d. Intends to reply with \u201ca sketch of the alphabet after his fashion, comparing his manifold contradictions and showing in how far I really am indebted to him.\u201d Looks to Norris to endorse his claims. Thinks that Hincks\u2019s main error is oversimplification, but he is prepared to accept some of his readings, but rejects many more, discusses some of these. Is still working at the summary of his work for the RAS Anniversary Meeting and proposes to include ethnographical as well as historical results in it. Is looking forward to obtaining valuable information from a new obelisk which has come to light at Nimrud as well as the cylinder from Kila Shergat. Further complaints about Hincks. \u201cPS Please send the accomp.g<\/sup> answer to Bunsen \u2013 it is all about Chronology[?], just what I wrote to you in the summer and what Hincks has now published.\u201d [III\/09(04).]<\/li>\n
                                                  5. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. April 15 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d The last mail was plundered by \u201can outlying band of Anezeh [an Arab people of the Syrian desert. RBP.] and the Foreign[?] correspondence distributed among the tribesman, who now I understand, wear the strange characters as amulets.\u201d A long letter to Norris was among this. Is so busy writing replacements for the other letters lost at the same time that he can write to Norris only briefly and in haste. He had intended his previous letter to be read to the RAS, but he leaves it to Norris\u2019s judgement as to how much of the present letter can be communicated. Has managed to reconstruct the Kileh Shirgat Cylinder, barring \u201cnot more than about a dozen lines\u201d and finds it to bear \u201cabout 800 lines of beautiful writing\u201d and to be \u201cat least 100 years older than the oldest monument before discovered, the subject being the bulletins of Tiglath Pileser I\u201d. He is mentioned by Assur-akh-pal as a remote ancestor. Since there is no mention on the cylinder of Calah or Nineveh, HCR thinks he must predate the builders of those cities, the capital being Kileh Shirgat itself, which is named Assur<\/em> on the cylinder, as in other inscriptions in the BM. His principal campaigns were \u201cin Armenia, Cappadocia, Pontus and on the shores of the Euxine.\u201d In addition, he crossed the Kurdish mountains to the East and the Euphrates to the West, taking Carchemish of the Hittites and overrunning northern Syria and Cilicia. This is text has clarified the location of the country referred to as Masr<\/em>, mentioned as a source of horses, elephants, two-humped camels, monkeys etc. This country is not Egypt, which is always referred to as Mu\u015buri<\/em> but far to the north, probably Pontus [north-eastern Anatolia] or possibly Colchis [modern Georgia]. The name is always coupled with Kum\u00e1nia<\/em> which HCR idenfities with \u201cthe Turkish Cemani[?]\u201d. Considers that the similarity of the names explains the connection which Herodotus makes between Colchis and Egypt. \u201cIt will be a relief to the Egyptologers to find that the Obelisk horses did not come from the Nile, but what are we to think of tropical animals, Elephants, monkeys etc being found on the Euxine.\u201d Tiglath Pileser gives the names of 50 countries which he overran in Asia Minor, but very few of these names survived even to the time of Assur-akh-pal so cannot be identified in Classical Geography. \u201cThese glimpses of the political and ethnical state of Western Asia very little after the time of Solomon are however full of interest and as we have at length broken ground in the times anterior to the Assyrian Augustan Age, that I mean of the glories of Nineveh and Calah I do not despair of ascending up to the institution of the monarchy.\u201d Gives a detailed analysis of the name Tiglath Pileser.<\/em> Alludes to his previous criticisms of Hincks\u2019s alphabet. Has noticed that \u201cin the Tiglath Pileser inscription \u2026 the writing is better, the language more polished, and the grammatical distinctions more nicely marked that (sic<\/em>) in the later inscriptions\u201d. This \u201cannihilates all my theories about comparative modernity of the Assyrian civilization. I shall now be prepared for any antiquity Layard and Ferguson, may be pleased to assign to the nation.\u201d Is convinced that he has now definitely located the cities of Nineveh, Calah and Resen mentioned in Genesis at Nebi Yunus, Nimrud and Kileh Shirgat respectively. A \u201cslab of Sennacherib\u2019s\u201d found by the Turks[? Or Tucks. RBP.] at Nebbi Yunus gives an account of two campaigns \u201clater apparently than those chronicled in the Annals \u2026 there are interesting Geographical Notices.\u201d Is awaiting the arrival of a new obelisk from Nimrud which he hopes will contain the annals of Divanuras[? I cannot trace this name. RBP.], the builder of Calah. Has been stimulated by Hincks\u2019s published syllabarium to go through his tablets and has found a wealth of materials: \u201cfragments of alphabets, syllabaria and explanations of ideographic signs \u2013 in one place a table of notation, giving the phonetic readings of all the signs, and showing that the Assyrians counted by sixties as well as by hundreds in exact agreement with the soss, sar <\/em>and ner<\/em> of Berossus. The numbers are completely Semitic and of great interest.\u201d Has also found detailed explanations of the Pantheon, information about countries, cities, rivers and mountains, weights and measures, divisions of time, points of the compass &c. &c. Has also discovered that all the annals are numbered in accordance with a 12-year cycle. \u201cAgain, we have lists of stones, metals & trees \u2026 elementary treat[ise?]s on geology, metallurgy and botany \u2013 also astronomical & astrological formulae without end. I suspect, likewise, there are veritable grammars<\/em> and dictionaries<\/em>; the whole collection is in fragments, but it gives us a most curious insight into the state of Assyrian science \u2026 \u201cWhat I regard as most important is the series of dynasties or rather of the kings and their households or Cabinets.\u201d The fragments which he has at his disposal are from the lower stratum of the Royal Library. Layard\u2019s collection forms the upper layer and is in a much better state of preservation. Has found ideographs for \u201cWarka or Erech, Accad or Kaskar, Calach or Nipper &c. and I have thus at length got a secure footing in the slippery field of Babylonian Geography. The most difficult portion of the subject is still the Pantheon, the explanations being usually as obscure as the text.\u201d Is now optimistic of finding even a list of the phonetic readings of the names of the Gods. Has also identified the determinatives for ideographic and phonetic signs \u201ca whole host of difficulties being thus at once cleared up. Altogether I am delighted with the splendid field now opening out \u2013 the labor of carrying through a complete analysis will be immense, but the results will be splendid.\u201d A \u201csplendid ruin\u201d has been discovered at [Tell] Aboo Shahrein [now known to be the ancient Sumerian city of Edridu. RBP.] \u201cfull of marbles and sculptures\u201d which he hopes to visit in the autumn. Asks Norris to mention his discovery of Tiglath Pileser I at the Anniversary General meeting of the RAS and to take care to make clear the distinction between Tiglath Pileser I and II. [Much of this letter is quoted verbatim in the proceedings of the Anniversary General Meeting for 1853. See III\/07(17) above. RBP.] [III\/09(05)]<\/li>\n
                                                  6. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. April 20th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has found a genealogy at the end of the Tiglath Pileser [I] cylinder and numerous allusions to his ancestors. On the basis of this he has compiled a tentative list of the [Assyrian] royal line [enclosed] with an approximate chronology based on an assumed average 30 years per reign. Has shown that the city [i.e. Shirgat] was dedicated to the god Anu<\/em> and he thus applies to it the names Assur, Ellasar, Tel Assur, Tel Ani and Resen, indifferently. \u201cHincks\u2019s establishment at the Museum is a serious business for me personally, but no doubt for the benefit of science, so I cannot complain. My own tablets will give me more occupation than I shall require for the rest of my life. Can make nothing of the \u201clion weight inscription\u201d which Vaux has sent him. \u201cThe Bab. Greek MSS are certainly very curious \u2026 [but] do not take Hincks\u2019s dictum for gospel \u2013 he pooh-poohs everything not his own.\u201d Speculates on Layard\u2019s motives in coming out to Constantinople \u201cto settle the Eastern question.\u201d \u201cThe determinate identification of the Namri (or Nimrud) with Sana(?) is satisfactory.\u201d Will try to finish his \u201cScythic memoir\u201d. Some comment about \u201cBaron de Bode\u201d and \u201cHivil Zivo\u201d [which I cannot make sense of. RBP.]. Norris is not to publish the list of [Assyrian] Royal names \u201cfor I have no faith in many of the readings\u201d only the number of kings and the approximate chronology. Is bewildered by the new geographical names in the Tiglath Pileser inscription. \u201cOut of 100 names belonging to \u2026[the north of Asia Minor] there are not more than a dozen which I can trace in later geography.\u201d Discusses implications for his pan-Scythic theories. Norris is to hand HCR\u2019s Order of Merit \u201cto my brother when you see him.\u201d [III\/09(06)]<\/li>\n
                                                  7. Addressed \u201cBaghdad May 5th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Had hoped to send a serious letter, but cannot write anything more than \u201cgossip\u201d owing to a severe attack of lumbago. Had entertained for some time the hypothesis that Tiglath Pileser I had conquered Egypt, but has had to give up that idea, as his conquests did not extend so far. Discusses various linguistic discoveries which he has made from the analysis of the Tiglath Pileser I cylinder. Has gained the impression from what various correspondents have told him about \u201cLayard\u2019s book that Hincks has been designedly puffed at my expense. I have accordingly written to Layard declaring war against him and his prot\u00e9g\u00e9 and in good time shall make some damaging disclosures.\u201d Disagrees with Hincks\u2019s reading of a royal name which he claims to have found in Sennacherib\u2019s \u201cBavian Inscription [This inscription is carved on the rock face of a gorge alongside the irrigation canal which Sennacherib dug to serve Nineveh RBP.]\u201d but cannot put forward a reading of his own until he has seen the original inscription. Comments on some points in the Median readings in Norris\u2019s last letter. There follows an extended discussion of the vagaries of the mail. Thinks his Assyrian vocabulary now contains \u201c5 or 6000 words, how can it ever be printed.\u201d [III\/09(07)]<\/li>\n
                                                  8. Addressed \u201cBaghdad May 24 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been disgusted by the bias and unfairness of \u201cLayard\u2019s book\u201d. \u201cLayard, however, may now look out for squalls for I will most assuredly retaliate.\u201d Comments on Norris\u2019s \u201cScythic [i.e. Median] paper\u201d [This presumably refers to Memoir on the Scythic Version of the Behistun Inscription<\/em> which was read to the RAS on 3rd<\/sup> July 1852 and appeared in JRAS<\/em> 15<\/strong> (1855) pp1-214.]. \u201cYour Scythic paper is very clear and unpretending but I have really now forgotten so much of the subject that I find it difficult to follow you without reference.\u201d Gives corrections to the list of Assyrian kings which he sent previously [See III\/09(06) above. Note that here, as elsewhere, HCR confuses the words \u201cAssyrian\u201d and \u201cBabylonian\u201d. In his summary of this letter in III\/08 Norris objects to one of these amendments. RBP.] Has also clarified the use of various words for \u201cdaughter\u201d, \u201cson\u201d \u201cgrandson\u201d and remoter degrees of descent. This has reconfirmed him in his belief that the names Sargon and Shalmaneser refer to the same individual. Hopes this is right as both Hincks and Layard have \u201ctwitted\u201d him for it. Discusses in detail the reasoning behind his identification of the cuneiform equivalent of the Biblical god Nargal<\/em>. Has discovered a clay tablet of Nabunit (or Nabonidus) on which his father is named Nabu dibu<\/em> which he identified with the Naboandelos<\/em> of Josephus. However, Nabu dibu appears not to be king, but rather a rab-mag <\/em>as in Jeremiah. Mentions some errors which he has detected in the list of royal names in Layard\u2019s book. Is inclined to accept Hincks\u2019s dating of the Bavian Inscription even though it means that his tentative chronology for the Assyrian kings is too short. Discusses the implications of his identification of an \u201cArban\u201d king listed in Layard\u2019s book with one whose signet ring HCR had found at Sherif Khem, who was the grandson of Divamukha <\/em>\u201cking of Sidikan<\/em> on the Khabur \u201d although he has no idea how the name should be read. Norris is to inform Bunsen [See Letter 2L in\u00a0III\/03] of HCR\u2019s discoveries of the names of Neriglissar and Naboandelos and \u201cas there is such a race now for priority, if you can make anything intelligible out of all this farrago for the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> I shall be much obliged.\u201d [III\/09(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                  9. Addressed \u201cBaghdad June 1st<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Is convinced that he has \u201cfound Noah and his whole history in the inscriptions.\u201d Consequently he has read the name of the god of the sea etc, the equivalent of the Greek Poseidon as Nuha<\/em> or also Sisirsu <\/em>which he compares to the Greek \u03a3\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03b8\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2 or Kisuthros in Berossus. [This seems to be connected with the epic of Gilgamesh. RBP.] This god Nuha is second of three in the Assyrian pantheon \u201cindependently of Assur\u201d and the third \u201c should be Pluto\u201d. He reads the name of the third god as Anu<\/em> \u201cbut I cannot determine his attributes sufficiently to identify him with the god of the lower world.\u201d However, he has discovered some hints in that direction. Now strongly suspects that the phonetic reading of the name of another god which has puzzled him for a long time should be Nimrud<\/em> as in the Bible, although he has no space to go into the arguments, but his attributes, as catalogued at Nimrud \u201cexactly coincide.\u201d There were temples dedicated to this god at Calah and Birs, and both places bear the name Nimrud to this day. Asks Norris to substitute nimrud <\/em>for barsum<\/em> wherever it occurs in the list of phonetic readings of royal names enclosed with III\/09(06). [The amendments to this list requested by HCR will be seen on the document itself in Norris\u2019s hand. RBP.] Is making progress with the Assyrian Pantheon and hopes to provide Norris with a paper on the subject during the summer. Speculates on the existence of a connection in Assyrian between the seven planets and seven metals such as obtained in \u201cChaldee\u201d and on the root meaning of various signs. \u201cYou will see from all this the symbolical structure of a large portion of the Cuneiform system.\u201d Has become interested in execration formulae which are widespread, invoking the wrath of the Gods on, among others, anyone who destroys the inscription. On \u201cMichaux\u2019s stone [See Letter T in III\/03 above. RBP.]\u201d each of the gods is invoked in turn, and the symbols of the gods are shown as well. Thinks that the name of the God Nergal is given phonetically on this stone, viz. nir-ig-e-lu<\/em>. Has concluded that the sign which he has been reading nu<\/em> can also be pronounced as ela<\/em> which leads to improved readings of some other words. Reads some words which occur very frequently in the titles of kings as \u201c[king of the] four great cities\u201d and that this refers to the \u201cBabylonian Tetrapolis\u201d [i.e. Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh as in Genesis 10:10. RBP.] Is convinced that both Greek mythology and \u201cthe Mosaic cosmogony\u201d can be amply illustrated from the inscriptions, although \u201cthe subject will require careful handling.\u201d Is \u201cgetting more reconciled to Layard\u2019s book\u201d despite its continual attempts \u201cto snub me and puff Hincks\u201d and its \u201cmany gross errors and absurdities\u201d. [III\/09(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                  10. [This letter is represented only by the envelope and by Norris\u2019s summary in III\/08. At the head of the summary Norris has written in pencil \u201cGiven to Rawlinson 28 Jan. 1856.\u201d RBP.] Dated \u201cJune 14 1853.\u201d [Norris\u2019s style in these summaries is rather disjointed and it is not always clear when he is summarising HCR and when commenting on what he says. RBP.] Since Sargon penetrated only to the frontiers of Egypt and yet received tribute from Sheba, it cannot be Ethiopia. Does not see how the name of Esarhaddon\u2019s concubine, who was made Queen of the Arabs can be read as Thinks he has found a notice of the building of Tarsus and the capture of Sidon, from which he concludes that Esarhaddon was the man who founded Anchiah [sic <\/em>I cannot identify this name. RBP.] and Tarsus \u201cin a day.\u201d [Norris comments: \u201cfirst letter doubtful, but if T the name is Tsarsu. Berossus & Abydenus refer the city to Sen[n]acherib.\u201d \u201cArgument about Sardanapalus [I cannot follow Norris\u2019s summary here, but he comments \u201cvery ingenious\u201d. RBP.]\u201d The next part of Norris\u2019s summary is obscure, but HCR seems to be having second thoughts about various previous readings including Nimrud, Barsum etc. New Babylonian names are being found daily. One is called Naram-sin \u201cking of the four countries, sar k\u00eaprat arbat <\/em>like the Assyrian kings of a later period.\u201d \u201cNew obelisk found. Style and language that of Tiglath Pileser I whose capital was at Alassar, <\/em>or Kileh Shergat\u201d.<\/em>[ Norris adds \u201cBC 1130\u201d.] [III\/09(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                  11. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. July 5th<\/sup> 1853\u201d Has seen a report of the RAS Anniversary General Meeting [I cannot follow the next part of the letter, but I think HCR is satisfied with the account of his work given in that report. RBP.] Has also had the \u201cMedian Inscriptions\u201d but not \u201cLoftus\u2019s Inscriptions or the Blackwood, which you say were put up in the same packet.\u201d Considers it \u201cnow pretty well established that the Assyrian empire was instituted about 1250BC\u201d having previously been subject to Babylon. Has found three new royal names on \u201cbricks from Kileh Shergat\u201d which must be inserted between Tiglath Pileser I [7 on the old list, see III\/09(06) above] and \u201cthe founder of Caleh\u201d [8 on the old list, where his name is given as \u201cDivanuras\u201d]. Gives a revised list. [This contains the cuneiform signs only. In comparing it with the previous list it is necessary to bear in mind that the first two names on the old list are omitted from this one, that 25 from the old list has been placed between 11 and 12, and that HCR does not repeat nos. 23 and 24 because they correspond exactly with the last two entries on the new list. 13, 19 and 21 do not correspond exactly with their counterparts in the new list: 15, 21 and 22. On the old Norris has written conjectural phonetic readings under two of the three royal names added as 6,7 and 8 of the new list: bu-di-an<\/em> for 6 and di-ma-bar-palam<\/em> for 8.] \u201cAccording to Abydenus Sennacherib was the 25th<\/sup> king of Assyria, whereas in this list he appears at no. 23 [22 in III\/09(06).] implying that there must be two more names. Is not satisfied with the genealogy given in \u201cBM Plate 70\u201d but without more materials, preferably \u201ca complete tablet of dynasties the obscurity cannot be cleared up.\u201d The fragmentary materials which he has had to work with \u201care the most provoking things imaginable. \u2026 it will however take me several months more to examine all the materials & in the mean time I live in hope.\u201d Has now established beyond doubt that before the establishment of the Assyrian empire, the country was ruled by \u201csatraps from Babylon\u201d by the discovery of bricks from Kileh Shergat \u201cfrom the ante-Assyrian period\u201d which are \u201ccompletely Babylonian in style and in the power of the characters\u201d. On these, the rulers style themselves \u201cpatis<\/em> (governor?) of Assur\u201d. Has the names of at least six such rulers from Shirgat. He also has \u201ca host of royal names also of the same period from Babylonia proper and Chald\u00e6a\u201d and patis<\/em> occurs frequently among the titles. He is now obtaining \u201cbricks from the ruins of the original empire\u201d from a site within a few miles of Baghdad. He now regards Assyria as comparatively modern \u201cand for real antiquity one must go back to the ante Assyrian empire.\u201d Believes that these may be the ruins of \u201cthe Sippara of Berosus\u201d and intends to devote the autumn and winter to a \u201csystematic search for these early relics and I expect great results.\u201d Norris is not to say anything about the site \u201cas I am afraid of the French getting wind of \u2026 [it] and forestalling me.\u201d Is currently devoting his energies to compiling lists of \u201cmonograms [HCR uses the terms monogram and ideogram interchangeably] from the fragments of \u201csyllabaria\u201d which he has found among his collection of tablets. The term syllabarium is misleading, for they generally contain lists of ideograms with what he believes to be translations in two other languages, which he takes to be \u201cAssyrian\u201d and \u201cold Arabic\u201d. \u201cIt will be in vain to attempt to express the inscriptions phonetically until all these ideographs have been tabulated and explained.\u201d HCR has accordingly \u201claid aside for the present History, Geography, Astronomy and the sciences to devote myself to the elementary part. \u2026 The work is terribly hard owing to the mere fragments one has to consult, the smallness of the writing, its half obliterated condition &c &c but I gain information daily.\u201d Cannot say when he will be able to complete this work because of all the interruptions. Some further comments about the [Assyrian?\/Babylonian?] calendar based on a twelve-year calendar which he has discovered. The months were of 30 days with an intercalation of 5 days plus further \u201cadjustments which I do not understand\u201d. Gives a table showing a table of the twelve months in cuneiform followed by mathematical calculations which he suggests should be referred to the Board of Longitude \u201cfor they quite surpass my limited mathematical knowledge.\u201d Then gives a table of \u201cthe phonetic reading of the numbers which you will find quite satisfactory\u201d although some difficulties remain. Norris is to ask \u201cVaux or Birch\u201d what Hincks is up to at the Museum \u201cand whether he is to have the editing and translating of all the Museum treasures?\u201d HCR has no wish to molest Hincks, if he would only let HCR alone, as \u201cthere is plenty of work for both us without clashing.\u201d Has confirmed two readings, for Salam<\/em> and Elama<\/em> which he had previously suspected. Has found a tablet giving the names of \u201ca score of gods carried off from Susa by the son of Esar Haddon \u2026 On another tablet I have a regular catalogue of all the Gods of Assyria & Babylonia & of the temples & cities in which they were worshipped. The list embraces nearly 500 names and it is but a fragment after all.\u201d [III\/09(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                  12. Addressed \u201cBaghdad July 25th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Sends \u201ca sheet of syllabarium for your quiet examination during the recess. \u2026 I have only put down those ideographs which have either one or the other of the phonetic readings \u2013 my note book contains at least 100 more of which the phon. powers are wanting or in fragments.\u201d Suspects from \u201cHincks\u2019s description\u201d that most of the fragments on which HCR\u2019s syllabary is based are from the same tablet, the other half of which is now in the British Museum. Hopes that when all the fragments are re-united it will be possible to recover \u201csome 50 more phonetic powers.\u201d The same applies to the \u201cexplanatory vocabularies\u201d. Has spent a whole month in trying to fit pieces together but without completing a single tablet, the remaining fragments being, HCR believes, at the British Museum. As an example of the difficulties posed by the material with which he is now working, he cites the cardinal points, for which he thought he had established the phonetic readings, but now thinks he was completely wrong. Cites a similar uncertainty in the names of the three subdivisions of the quarters of the heavens. [HCR makes it clear that there is a confusion between divisions horizontally from zenith to horizon and vertically. RBP.] Is inclined to the theory that the same divisions were applied to buildings such as palaces, obelisks, cylinders, coins etc also advanced by Raoul Rochette and Layard but cannot yet prove it. \u201cThere is so much nonsense indeed mixed up with science that one is always afraid of being led away by a will of the wisp.\u201d Instances tablets which looked important at first sight which turned out to be lists of unclean animals, monthly fasts, sacrifices etc. Now thinks there is very little \u201creal science\u201d in the tablets and that chiefly astronomical, but the \u201cincidental notices and classification of metals, stones, trees, plants, animals, birds &c are to say the least of it curious.\u201d Mentions two signs appearing at the head of a list of luxury items which he is sure represent \u201cebony\u201d and \u201cmother of pearl\u201d although he has no idea how they were pronounced. \u201cI have indeed now nearly 2000 of these names [of arms, musical instruments, articles of clothing &c. &c.] with phonetic readings or explanations copied out of the vocabularies \u2013 and I have not got more than half [way] through the fragments.\u201d Has found the name of the son of Esar Haddon written out more fully than usual in a form which can be read as Assur bani pal. <\/em>Has found that the title patis<\/em> [see previous letter] was in common use in Babylonia down to the days of Nebuchadnezzar, although never adopted by the Assyrians. Speculates that the Hebrew word which is translated \u201chammer\u201d at Jeremiah 50,<\/strong> 23 is a mistake for this title \u201cpatis<\/em> of the whole world the exact title of the king of Babylon, whereas \u2018hammer\u2019 seems very far fetched.\u201d Goes on to discuss other cases where the inscriptions suggest new interpretations of Biblical passages. PS dated \u201c26 July 1853. Has just received news of the discovery of another obelisk at Nineveh which seems to have a historically very interesting inscription. \u201cWe have now then 3 new obelisks \u2013 and I fear they will soon become a drug in the market.\u201d At the head of this letter HCR has added \u201cI send in my resignation by this post to the Indian Govnt<\/sup> and ask to be relieved at latest in Feby<\/sup> 1854.\u201d [III\/09(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                  13. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Aug. 16th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has been \u201call but floored\u201d by the intense heat of the last week. Believes that Hincks has found the missing fragment of \u201cmy Tiglath Pileser Cylinder\u201d [see III\/09(05) above]. Despite the intense heat, has \u201cmade out a long list of animals and trees, all the names being as near Hebrew as possible, and I have also ascertained most of the architectural objects\u2026. The last Obelisk Inscription is of immense value in this respect and has explained a host of difficulties.\u201d [HCR may be commenting on some article published by Hincks. Possibly List of four discoveries by E Hincks on a visit to the British Museum including a list of \u201cAssyrian Months\u201d in cuneiform \u201cmonograms\u201d and recognition of \u201cfour cardinal points\u201d. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy<\/em> 5<\/strong> (1853) pp.402-405. See Cathcart and Donlon No 69. Note on Letter L in III\/03 above. But see also the letters from Hincks to Edwin Norris in III\/24 below. RBP.] He accepts one of Hincks\u2019s readings but disagrees with several others. Then begins to speculate that only the Persian ruling class, the Pasagadae, were Arian, the rest being \u201cScythians\u201d \u201cAre not these [which? RBP.] then the Nimri of the Inscriptions? \u2026 and are not Pars & Nimri the same name (Tigers or Leopards) one Scythic and the other Semitic? Nimrud \u201cthe Tiger destroyer\u201d was the first Semitic chieftain who drove out the Nimri or Scythians from Babylonia and was subsequently deified as Orion and confounded by the Greeks as Hercules etc. etc. [The speculations go much further linking Syrian and Hebrew names and I\u2019m not sure what. RBP.] Mentions some important new discoveries in the powers of letters. \u201cThe compound ideographs however of which the vocabularies are mainly composed, require an enormous amount of study. I see my way here and there, but am far oftener bewildered. Nothing satisfactory can be done until all the fragments are brought together and some of the tablets at any rate restored.\u201d Is glad \u201cthat Hincks is becoming tamer\u201d but HCR will never work with him or Layard \u201cbut [I] shall be too glad to work with any other fair and honest enquirer.\u201d Fears that \u201cif this war really comes to a head\u201d he will be forced to remain in Baghdad until it is over. There is no longer any doubt about the reading of Tiglath Pileser Tugulti pal tsira<\/em>. Pal tsira \u2261 Nimrud\/Orion. The French have \u201crecently got a brick of Neriglissar\u2019s with a funny Cursive legend\u201d which HCR reads from right to left Negalsa, <\/em>abbreviation for Nergalsharassar and from left to right Rabat <\/em>great. \u201cIf you can make anything better out of it pray let me know.\u201d Having read some more bricks of Nabonidas, begins to doubt that his father\u2019s name\u00a0 was Neboandelus. \u201cThe best copy I have gives the name so, but I am fairly bothered about the reading.\u201d [III\/09(13)].<\/li>\n
                                                  14. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Septr<\/sup> 5th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Apologises for any shortcomings in this letter \u201cyou must lay it on the weather which has this year given me such a grilling as I never before experienced, and which I would not encounter again for any object in life.\u201d Has decided not to dispute Hincks\u2019s claim to have discovered the date 641 on \u201cthe Museum Cylinder\u201d although he does not believe it, essentially, because the inscription which Hincks has seen is complete whereas the HCR\u2019s has a lacuna at the corresponding point. Is inclined to believe that the true reading should be 101, which \u201cwould agree with all the other evidence obtained from the bricks, from Greek Historians &c in fixing the commencement of the Empire at about B.C. 1250.\u201d Hopes that either Norris or Vaux will look at the text [in the Museum] and verify what it really says. Gives further reasons for preferring his reading to the one announced by Hincks. Gives reasons for reading the name of a god [I think this the one which had previously read as Nimrud <\/em>or Barsum<\/em>] as Sanda<\/em>. Is also doubtful of the reading Shamsi Yao<\/em> which Hincks says is certain<\/em> although he does not know what it should be. Gives some results of his examination of the \u201cexplanatory legends\u201d attached to tablets, including the discovery of the word Akkad<\/em> as one of the languages with which equivalents with Assyrian are given, and also the word duppa<\/em> for \u201ctablet\u201d. Has also found definite evidence that Sennacherib reigned for 23 years rather than 18. Has been re-examining the calendar tablets and \u201cI see there is a great deal of real good astronomy in them if I could only make it out. I find nothing however positive about the Epagomenae [i.e. intercalated days. RBP.]\u201d Gives the latest version of his table comparing the Assyrian? months with the signs of the zodiac, the Persian and Hebrew months and those of the modern calendar. Gives justifications for these readings. Points out certain errors in \u201cyour Scythic text [see III\/07(22)]\u201d and asks for corrections. Cannot write more because he is unwell and \u201cover busy as usual\u201d. Intends to visit Mosul next month \u201cif the Russian business is settled.\u201d Could not refuse the post of \u201cEnvoy & Minister\u201d to Persia if offered it, but would prefer to \u201cremain quietly at home and reduce to writing the enormous mass of materials I have now in hand.\u201d \u201cYou may count on seeing me I think in April & if I go back at all \u2019twill be at the end of the year.\u201d [The wrapper for this letter survives with it and bears various scribbled notes in Norris\u2019s hand.] [III\/09(14)].<\/li>\n
                                                  15. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Septbr<\/sup> 26th<\/sup> 1853 My dear Norris.\u201d Cannot write much because, among other things, he has had a fall from his horse. Has established that the Scriptural Gozan is either the same as Nisibis or very near to it and the same as the Greek Mygdonius<\/em>. Has also found Reziph listed as lying between Gozan and Harran in accordance with two passages in the OT. Is satisfied that Sepharvaim, Ivah and Hena are not Babylonian cities but are in Northern Syria. Hence there is no point in looking for Nibhaz and Tartah or Adramelech and Anamelech among the gods of Babylonia. Is continuing to work at the [Assyrian?] Pantheon and occasionally gains a new insight. Thinks that the goddess whose name is almost joined with Bel and is written Zerbanit<\/em> is almost certainly the Pehlevi Zervan<\/em> and possibly the Succoth Benith of Scripture although he does not know why \u201cSuccoth\u201d should have been substituted for Zir<\/em>. Thinks the real meaning of the name is \u201cfounder of fecundity\u201d i.e. the vital principle of nature. Another deity sometimes joined with Asshur<\/em> whose name is Sherukha<\/em> he associates with the Biblical Serug<\/em> or \u03a3\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03c7. Is also pretty sure that the name Arphaxad <\/em>[a grandson of Noah] and those of his brothers are ethnological or geographical and may refer to the Tetrapolis<\/em> of Babylonia, or kiprat arbat<\/em> of \u201cthe Inscriptions from the earliest Ante Assyrian period almost to the time of Nebuchadnezzar.\u201d Has a list of 36 Babylonian cities arranged from north to south \u201cbut they do not threw much light on this very difficult subject as the names are still expressed by monograms [ideograms] and belong to the Assyrian instead of the earlier period.\u201d Has established that \u201cthe epigomenae [sic <\/em>presumably epagomenae as in previous letter. RBP.] were called Shega<\/em> which he connects with the Chald\u00e6an \u201cwanting\u201d and the \u03a3\u03b1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 of Berosus and Ctesias, which commenced on the 15th<\/sup> of the Macedonian month of Lous. Notes that Hincks gives a reading which differs in the final letter. HCR has never seen this latter form and believes that Hincks may have misread it. Has had no success in reconciling the Greek and Macedonian months with the Babylonian. Is perplexed by a letter in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature <\/em>3 <\/strong>1 p.153 from \u201cold Mr Hamilton\u201d which purports to give a copy of \u201ca Greek calendar found at Nineveh<\/em> by a Dr Wilson. [of whom HCR has never heard.]\u201d If genuine, this purports to show that the Assyrian year began in Janry<\/sup> instead of at the equinox and \u201call my former comparisons will be deranged\u201d. Wants to know what Ptolemy says in his \u201cSyntax. Magn.\u201d [generally known in English as the Almagest. RBP.] about the system of intercalation in Babylonian year before Calippus [presumably the Greek astronomer and mathematician 370 BC \u2013 ca. 300 BC. RBP] but he can find nothing about it in his library. \u201cThis ought to be self-evident from the dates used by Ptolemy to record the Chald\u00e6an observations in his Canon of Nabonassar, but I have never seen anything satisfactory on the subject.\u201d Is apprehensive of the advent of the Assyrian [Excavation] Society as an independent competitor of the Museum as \u201cthe Porte will not give too separate firmans so one party or the other will be obliged to strike.\u201d Has sent \u201cMr Taylor\u201d to excavate at \u201c Abu Shahrein\u201d [Tell Abu Shahrain, ancient Eridu. RBP.] \u201cNawaweis\u201d [I have not been able to locate this site. RBP.] and \u201cUm-gheir\u201d [Tell el-Muqayyar, now identified as the site of ancient Ur. RBP.] \u201cthe two former I suspect of being among the earliest Chald\u00e6an sites\u201d. [W K] Loftus I should like to set to work at Nipper [i.e. Nippur], Warka and Senkereh. The ruins near Baghdad which I take to be that of the Sippara of Berosus I have just examined personally and shall open trenches in them forthwith.\u201d Cannot leave Baghdad at present, as he had planned, to supervise excavations at Kileh Shirgat, [see III\/09(05) above] because of the international situation, including the threat of a Persian invasion. These excavations will therefore be entrusted to Hormuzd Rassam. Repeats his statement made in the previous letter that he could not refuse the post of Ambassador to Persia if it is offered but that he would \u201cmuch rather come home and pass three years in London at steady Cuneiform work. My idea is to take a small house somewhere in the suburbs, fill it with books and keep as much as possible out of society and public life.\u201d [Felix] Jones has told HCR that Norris recommends \u201cMuller\u2019s fragments [presumably Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum (Fragments of the Greek Historians),)<\/em> by Carolus M\u00fcller 1840–]\u201d which HCR knows well. One authority which HCR does not have and which might be useful is \u201cthe famous Fihrist<\/em> [see III\/09(03) above] that work which they have complete at Paris, contains an elaborate essay on the old Chald\u00e6an religion \u2026 and \u2026 a list and description of the Gods then worshipped at Harran [HCR seems to be referring to an Arabic MS rather than a printed book. RBP.] Would also like to consult \u201cIbn Wabshee\u2019s Nabath\u00e6an agriculture\u201d [Filah\u00e2t al-Nab\u00e2tiyyah <\/em>by Ibn Wahshiyya (9th<\/sup>\/10th<\/sup> c. AD)] which from \u201cQuatremere\u2019s occasional hints must be full of curious notices.\u201d Is writing out interlineary translations in Latin to the \u201ctwo great Inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser I (Shergat Cylinder) and Assurakhpal (Nimrud Monolith).\u201d Ctesias is to be discarded as an authority. \u201cBerosus, Abydemus and Herodotus are the only authorities worthy of notice.\u201d [III\/09(15)].<\/li>\n
                                                  16. Addressed \u201cCamp Ctesiphon. Octbr<\/sup> 15th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Awaits Norris\u2019s comments on \u201cthe syllabarium\u201d. Is now satisfied that various phonetic readings in the right and left hand columns [of some tablets] do belong to the central character. [On other tablets] they give different powers for the same letter, or different names for the same object. Is completing the interlineary reading and translation of the inscriptions referred to in the previous letter as these are the only papers he has brought with him to camp. Has now decided that Mu\u015fri <\/em>on the Tiglath Pileser inscription must refer to Southern Syria and Philistia, which were under Egyptian rule at that time, rather than the valley of the Nile. The \u201cwarlike tribes inhabiting this country\u201d whose name he used to read as Comani he now takes to be the Casluchim or Casmonim of Scripture, although he is not sure how the name should be read. Has also wondered whether the name Ascalon <\/em>in the Sennacherib annals is merely a corruption of Chasluna<\/em>. However, if Tiglath Pileser\u2019s campaign was really carried out in Southern Syria and Philistia then the date cannot be that given by Hincks from the inscription at Bavian. [See III\/09(07) above.]. Also none of the Ph\u0153nician ports, nor the cities of the Philistines known from other sources is mentioned in the Tiglath Pileser inscription. Is inclined to think this means that this Tiglath Pileser is not the king mentioned in the Bavian inscription and that he reigned before the founding of Tyre and Sidon and the entry of the Jews into Palestine. Hopes that next month\u2019s excavations at Kileh Shergat [under Hormuzd Rassam] will lead to some new discoveries which will settle \u201cthis fundamental question of date.\u201d The threat of a Persian invasion has been lifted by an outbreak of cholera at the Shah\u2019s camp but \u201cthere is still abundant cause for uneasiness at Constple<\/sup>\u201d. Is now \u201coverwhelmed with German diplomas\u201d. Is returning various documents in connection with these which Bunsen is to forward to Germany. [III\/09(16)]<\/li>\n
                                                  17. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Novr<\/sup> 5th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d His work on cuneiform has been impeded more than ever by the disturbed international situation, can \u201cgive only a brief epitome of recent lights\u201d. A new inscription has come to light of the son of Tiglath Pileser I on a mutilated statue at Koyunjik which had been transported there from Kileh Shirgat or Elassar by Sennacherib. Thinks that the name of this king should be read as Assur-bani-pal<\/em> but cannot prove it. The name of the earliest king mentioned on \u201cthe broken obelisk\u201d includes a character which he has not seen before, although it may be only an archaic form of a better known one. Expounds a new theory about Semiramis [which I cannot really understand. RBP.] leading into a discussion of some points about the names of the gods which still puzzle him. Has received from [Julius] Oppert some bricks giving the name of the father of Nabonit which he wants to read as Nabu dilva<\/em> to correspond with the Naboandelus<\/em> of Josephus. He then discusses a title borne by this man as well as many Babylonian kings which he wants to read as Ruba imga<\/em> rejecting the interpretation \u201cchief of the Magi\u201d. Discusses an ideographic ending which is applied to signs for bodily parts which occur in pairs such as \u201ctwo eyes\u201d \u201ctwo hands\u201d etc [this is apparently the vestigial dual number. RBP.] Will send with his next letter a list of about 20 animals which he has positively identified. Repeats his hope of returning to England early the following year and of his plans to settle on the outskirts of London and to \u201cforswear politics and society and settle down into a retired hard working Savant\u201d. However, he notes that \u201cwar has actually broken out\u201d [The Ottoman Empire formally declared war on Russia on October 23rd<\/sup> 1853, starting the Crimean War, although Britain and France did not join in until March 28th<\/sup> 1854. RBP.] and that this may put paid to his plans to come home, especially if Persia is drawn into the conflict \u201cbut if duty calls I must forswear Cuneiforms until the storm is over.\u201d Wonders why Norris has sent him a copy of the \u201cAccra Gospels\u201d when he takes \u201cthe least possible interest in the subject or the language\u201d [The British Library catalogue has The gospels of St. Matthew and St. John in the Accra language \/ translated from the original Greek by the Rev A. W. Hanson.<\/em>[S.l.] : British and foreign bible society, 1843, while The catalogue of the library of Parliament <\/em>[of Canada] (1857)<\/em> has \u201c[Accra Gospels] The Four Gospels in the Ga language. <\/em>London n.d. \u201cAccra, or as it is more properly designated, Ghah, is spoken in a small district of Africa on the Equator.\u201d These may or may not be distinct works. RBP.]. [III\/09(17)]<\/li>\n
                                                  18. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Decbr<\/sup> 16 1853. My dear Norris.\u201d Has received Norris\u2019s letter containing \u201cthe back copy of the Syllabarium tablet\u201d. Has a fragment in Baghdad which can be matched with the Museum fragment on one surface, but he cannot match the other without a photograph of the tablet or an exact outline. However, he may have left Baghdad by the time Norris\u2019s reply reaches there as he is determined to leave as soon as he hears from India that his successor has been appointed \u201cand provided the pacific turn which affairs have lately taken in Persia is maintained.\u201d Has been too busy with official duties to have much time for cuneiform studies. Another copy of the Tiglath Pileser Cylinder [See III\/09(05) above.] has been discovered at Kileh Shergat but it is in a mutilated state. In particular, the paragraph containing \u201cHincks\u2019s date [see III\/09(14) above]\u201d is missing and the clay is so brittle that he is wary of trying to restore it from the fragments. Asks Norris to search among the fragments at the BM to see if he can find a perfect copy of the relevant paragraph. It should be possible to establish a perfect reading from the 3 cylinders, but three independent records would be better. Hormuzd Rassam has found one new Royal name at Kileh Shergat that is perfect. Originally read it as Shallammunissar Puhil <\/em>(Shalmaneser son of Pul?) but now thinks this will not do. Several new inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser II have been found \u201cin the centre of the Nimrud mound\u201d but all mutilated. The only valuable item to date is a list of the Syrian kings and princes subdued by Tiglath Pileser in his 8th<\/sup> year, which he will copy out for Norris. [Included with this letter. RBP.] Is surprised that the name of Ahab is not among them. Cannot find the notes which he made \u201cin the Spring\u201d on Vaux\u2019s copies of \u201cthe Ph\u0153nician & Cuneiform legends on the weights\u201d [This may refer to III\/09(06) above.] but sends some comments based on what he can remember of them. Considers that the language of these inscriptions is just as likely to be Babylonian as Hebrew or Chaldee. Repeats his previous claim that the name of the Babylonian king \u201con the duck\u201d should be read as Evil Merodach and that the resulting chronology agrees exactly with Scripture. Also that the name of Esarhaddon\u2019s son should be read as Asshur-bani-pal, <\/em>but can make nothing of the name of his grandson. Is using photography to make \u201ccapital copies now of all the brick inscriptions\u201d and intends to try photographing paper casts and tablets also. Asks Norris to forward a photographic manual which he has ordered. Loftus [who was employed by the Assyrian Excavation Society (see III\/09(15) above) and not strictly under HCR\u2019s authority RBP] is anxious to leave for the South. HCR thinks he has arranged matters for him with \u201cthe Pasha\u201d without the immediate need to apply for another Firman [license from the Sultan to conduct archaeological excavations RBP] \u201calthough the Committee [of the Excavation Society] should certainly have thought of that matter before he left England.\u201d Thinks Loftus will find \u201conly bricks and tablets and perhaps fragments of vases and statues\u201d which will be sufficient for \u201creal science\u201d but which may not satisfy \u201cyour gluttonous subscribers\u201d. [The dealings between HCR representing the BM Trustees and WK Loftus representing the Assyrian Excavation Society, which led to an acrimonious dispute, are documented in III\/11 below. RBP.] Closes with hope that he will be able \u201cto shake hands with you about the 5th<\/sup> of May\u201d. [III\/09(18)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                    III\/10\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>22 letters with inclusions and some envelopes and wrappers from HCR to Edwin Norris dated 6th<\/sup> January \u2013 23rd<\/sup> December 1854, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                      \n
                                                    1. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 6 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Is sending an amended royal list [i.e. \u201cList of Royal names found in the Assyrian Inscriptions\u201d included with the letter. For the list \u201cNames of primitive Babylonian kings from Bricks, Cylinders &c &c.\u201d which is marked on the back of this list as \u201cby next mail\u201d see III\/10(07) below. RBP.] derived from studying finds from Shergat [see\u00a0III\/09(01) above]. Has managed to recover the chronological paragraph from the Tiglath Pileser Cylinder [see III\/09(14) above] and gives a translation. [Not clear whether he now agrees with Hincks\u2019s reading of this text or not. RBP.] Has established the reading of the name of an early Assyrian king as Phal lukh<\/em> \u201cthis really explains a multitude of Classical notices.\u201d [He seems to be saying that this Phal lukh is the same as Sardanapalus, but perhaps I have misunderstood him. RBP.] However, he considers it proven that Phal lukh was the last king of the \u201cNinus\u201d dynasty and was overthrown by Tiglath Pileser in BC 747. He considers that the first four kings in his list are earlier than the date of the Tiglath Pileser Cylinder because of the \u201ccurious melange of Assyrian and Babylonian writing used in their legends.\u201d Before the time of these four kings the writing is pure Babylonian and from the time of Cylinder it is pure Assyrian. Norris is free to publish any of this in the \u201cAthen\u00e6um\u201d or the \u201cAssyr. Fund Socy\u201d <\/sup>if he sees fit. \u201cMr Stirling [I have not been able to identify this name. RBP.] writes me that he has read Hinck\u2019s article on the Nimrud Obelisk in the Dublin University Mag.\u201d in which he repeats the identification of Musr as Kurdistan which HCR had made \u201clast year\u201d but which he now rejects, being satisfied that it is \u201cthe country of the Pharaohs, including in early times Philistia and Southern Syria.\u201d Gives reasons for this, including readings of words for elephant, ape and crow. Expects to remain at Baghdad until the autumn, \u201ccertainly if the war continues and Persia vacillates and besides I like getting the first pick of the new discoveries\u201d. A new palace has been discovered at Koyunjik, although HCR does not know anything about it, also a \u201cfine circular clay tablet\u201d which he hopes may prove to be a zodiac. Asks Norris to send the proofs of \u201cyour Quarterly article\u201d without waiting for publication [I have not been able to trace this article. RBP.] [III\/10(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                    2. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Jany<\/sup> 26 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Had written a letter for the Athen\u00e6um [announcing the discovery of the name and parentage of Belshazzar with an \u201cepitome of the chronology\u201d the identification of \u201cIsmidahen(?)\u201d as king of Chald\u00e6a as well as Assyria, the assimilation of Phal-lukha and \u03a6\u03b1\u03bb\u03c9\u03c7 and the discovery of the new palace at Nineveh] but it is now too long to be published there as it stands and he is unwilling to shorten it. Is sending it to Norris in the hopes that he will make an abstract of the letter for the Athen\u00e6um and publish the complete text in the next number of the JRAS<\/em>. Is aware that the evidence which he has discovered concerning Belshazzar is not compatible with Scripture, in that it gives his father as Nabonit rather than Nebuchadnezzar. If anything is to be published in the Athen\u00e6um, Norris is to correct the proofs, \u201cor they will make a botch<\/em> of the names\u201d. If, on the other hand, Norris decides to read the letter at a meeting of the RAS, he should invite Bunsen \u201cand any others who are interested about Chronology\u201d. Has only got \u201ctwo of Taylor\u2019s Cylinders as yet [see III\/09(15) above] he has 3 more\u201d. Is also expecting great discoveries from Loftus at Warka. Goes at length into his plans to leave for England, so as to arrive there before the end of April, or \u201cat any rate in time for your Anniversary Meeting in May\u201d. Would have liked to include in his paper \u201ca note about the Birs-i-Nimrud [see II\/07(26) above] full of the most curious and important Geographical identifications\u201d but it would have made it too long, but he will send the note to Norris \u201cto be tacked on to the paper\u201d if it is to be published in the JRAS<\/em>. PS \u201cThe accounts just received of the new Palace at Koyunjik are better than ever but the Inscriptions of no great interest.\u201d [III\/10(02)]<\/li>\n
                                                    3. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 16 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Fergusson will give you some account of the new Palace now being uncovered at Nineveh [It is not clear which palace is being referred to. RBP.] \u2026 a most superb edifice \u2026 [which] quite throws all Layard\u2019s discoveries into the shade.\u201d However, having reserved 60 slabs for the BM, he proposes to leave the remainder of the site to be exploited by Loftus on behalf of the Assyrian Excavation Society \u201chaving neither time, money nor an artist to draw the Slabs\u201d. Asks Norris to deliver a letter containing this proposal to the Secretaries. [This led to an acrimonious dispute between HCR and Loftus which is documented below. RBP.] Has discovered new evidence that the ruler whom Asshur-bani-pal<\/em> appointed over Babylon was actually his brother, son of Esar-haddon and that his name should be read as Shammugina <\/em>[Now read as Shamash-shum-ukin. RBP] (Saosduchinus). He rebelled against \u201cthe king of Nineveh\u201d and was defeated. One of the halls in the new Palace has reliefs giving the story of the war. Gives his (still tentative) reasons for reading the name of a certain god as Sham<\/em> as an example of the difficulties of reading Assyrian compound ideograms. Much historical material from the reign of Asshur-bani-pal<\/em> has come to light and when it can be read, it \u201cought to clear up much of the confusion about the later kings of Nineveh and Babylon.\u201d One striking point is the contrast between the magnificence of the palace of Asshur-bani-pal<\/em> and the primitive structure built by his son Asshur-ebad-ili<\/em>. [Now read as Ashur\u2011etil\u2011ilani. After his father\u2019s death he was involved in a power struggle with several rivals during which the kingdom of Assyria was fatally weakened. RBP.] Mentions some minor discoveries. \u201cWhy don\u2019t you publish your Assyrian article in \u2018the Edinburgh\u2019?\u201d. \u201cPersia is now perfectly quiet\u201d and he still hopes to get away next month. [III\/10(03)]<\/li>\n
                                                    4. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Febry<\/sup> 22nd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Encloses a letter for publication in which he announces the identification of the name of Queen Semiramis, which Norris is to treat as a supplement to the previous one. If that has appeared in the Athen\u00e6um, this should be published there also, but if that is to appear in the JRAS<\/em> then this should be added on at the end. This identification agrees with the date given by Herodotus and also confirms his previous reading of Phal-lukha. Defends \u201cthe Armenian connexion\u201d. Hopes to find annals of Phal-lukha in his palace at the S.E. corner of the Nimrud precinct which is now being excavated. Loftus has send more casts of bricks from Warka on which he finds more royal names. However, some of what he had taken to be royal names prove to be the titles of gods, so that his list of Chald\u00e6an royal names \u201cmust be a good deal reduced.\u201d Suspects that \u201cthis primitive Chald\u00e6an\u201d cannot be the same language as Assyrian or Babylonian. [This language was named Sumerian by Jules Oppert in 1869. RBP.] Speculates on possible affiliations, but thinks that progress may be made when it is possible to study his \u201cfragments of Assyro-Akkadi vocabularies\u201d after his return to England, preparations for which continue. Is sending \u201ca cast of Loftus\u2019s so called Heiroglyphic tablet for Birch\u2019s edification.\u201d Thinks he should visit as many sites as possible, collecting \u201cspecimens of different types of brick\u201d and \u201cas many tablets as possible\u201d rather than wasting \u201chis time & money in digging through mountains of brick.\u201d \u201cI still hope he will fix himself at Nineveh for the summer.\u201d [III\/10(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                    5. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. March 5 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Has decided after all that the first part of the name which he has been reading as Phal-lukha<\/em> should be read as Phul<\/em> rather than Phal<\/em> and hopes that this letter will arrive in time for Norris to amend his previous note on Queen Semiramis before publication. Gives reasons for the change. Encloses two further \u201cmarginal notes\u201d which Norris is to insert if this letter arrives in time and he can find the proper places. Has packed up all his \u201cBricks, Cylinders & Tablets\u201d for transport to England so that the only cuneiform materials he has to work with are the copies in his notebooks. Has been reading Rerum assyriarum tempora emendata. Commentatio<\/em> by [Johannes] Brandis which Norris has sent him and notes that he identifies Sammughes and Saosduchinus [see III\/10(03) above] from chronological considerations alone [but HCR now seems less positive about the reading of the name than he was previously. RBP.] Has received no mail from England later than early January owing, he supposes, to the severe winter all over Europe and Asia, which is annoying when he is \u201con tenter hooks of expectation to know if I am to get away or not and who is to be my successor.\u201d Has given away 1000 volumes from his library at Baghdad, to be replaced in England, and packed up another thousand to transport home. \u201cI have finished also with Assyrian antiquities as far as I can finish them and am now off for Bussorah to overhaul the Chald\u00e6an excavations and results.\u201d By the 21st<\/sup> of March he will \u201conly want the signal to be off home\u201d. Describes some further practical arrangements. Asks if Norris has read \u201c[Joseph Arthur Comte de] Gobineau\u2019s [1816 – 1882] new work Sur l\u2019 in\u00e9galit\u00e9 des races humaines<\/em>. [Paris 1853-1855.] \u2026 it is full of interest and well worth reading.\u201d [III\/10(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                    6. Addressed \u201cBaghdad March 8 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d A covering note for some letters for Norris to forward. Has received Norris\u2019s letters to February 3 but has not had time to read them. [III\/10(06)]<\/li>\n
                                                    7. Addressed \u201cBaghdad March 25 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been very excited by the contents of some crates which arrived by raft from Mosul during the night. Will have Hormuzd Rassam\u2019s accompanying letter copied to send to Norris. One case contains a paper cast marked \u201cfrom the Nimrud obelisk\u201d with \u201ca very perfect Inscription of at least 500 lines in the Hieratic Assyrian (like the writing on Lord Aberdeen\u2019s black stone [see Letter Y in III\/03] )\u201d Cannot read it fluently \u201cbut I see that the Inscription belongs to Shalmanurish <\/em>(the founder of Calah, as per Nimrud Standard [see III\/09(05) above] who was son of Asshur-dan-pal<\/em>; undoubtedly the Greek Sardanapalus.\u201d [This appears to refer to Ashur-nasir-pal II, although he was not the son of Ashur-dan II but the grandson. RBP.] The inscription appears to record 27 of his battles and to date from the period of Babylonian supremacy. It will take him a month to copy, analyze and decipher this Inscription and he will have to make a new Alphabet for the Hieratic Assyrian first as he has hitherto neglected this form of writing because of its rare occurrence. Hopes to be able fully to restore the \u201cNebonit barrel cylinder\u201d as \u201cit names all the old kings [of Chald\u00e6a in succession, who erected buildings [in Ur]\u201d but it will have to wait until he returns to England. Has visited Bassorah \u201cto inspect Taylor\u2019s Chaldee collection and ship off the Museum and Crystal Palace [specimens?] for England.\u201d \u201cTaylor, by laying bare the walls of Umgheir [see III\/09(15) above] has satisfactorily proved the architectural plan of the Babylonian and Chald\u00e6an temples. They were built stage upon stage with a single chamber as the adytum upon the summit\u201d in agreement with the description of Herodotus. Loftus at Warka has reached a different conclusion but, HCR thinks, the building which he has been excavating belongs to the much later Sassanian period. Norris is to make this clear to the [Assyrian Excavation Fund Society] Committee at its next meeting. However, Loftus has provided evidence that, as HCR had conjectured, Senkereh is the \u201cLaracha of Berosus\u201d . Gives reasons for this. Is very doubtful if the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society can continue to operate on the present basis because of Layard\u2019s interference. Is resigned to the probability that he will not be able to leave Baghdad at least until the autumn because of the increasing likelihood of war. He will have plenty to occupy him during the summer with the new materials which are coming in, but would much prefer to be in London. Has sent home all the Museum tablets & Cylinders, as well as the syllabaries, vocabularies, &c &c but is apprehensive that Hincks will get hold of them and publish them before HCR can reach England. Has seen complaints in the press from Hincks [apparently of discouragement from the Government and opposition from HCR] but does not understand them. Has also received from Warka a Himyaric Inscription and is sending a copy with a translation into Arabic. [Included with the letter.] Is inclined to think that it proves the modern date of the Warka tombs, although he has seen a Babylonian cylinder with a Himyaric inscription on it as well. P.S. Norris\u2019s letter of Feb. 18th<\/sup> has just arrived. The leaden rolls [see III\/09(03) above] are now at the British Museum. Is pleased that [Felix] Jones has been named as his successor at Baghdad although he does not know when that will be. [III\/10(07)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                      [Enclosed with III\/10(07) office copies of two letters from Hormuzd Rassam at Nimrud to HCR: (a)<\/em> dated \u201cKouyunjik Feb. 11. 1854. My dear Colonel.\u201d Announces the discovery of a mass of carved ivory fragments, apparently stripped from furniture and other objects in the process of recovering gold and\/or jewels. Some of the pieces appear to be Egyptian, while others display Assyrian decorative motifs such as the bull and lion, but Rassam discerns \u201ca strong Egyptian feeling throughout.\u201d The ivory has been blackened but generally not burnt apparently through lying on hot ashes. The only inscriptions he has found are Ph\u0153nician. Asks for instructions as to what to do with the unornamented fragments. The items which he has managed to piece together are being boiled in gelatine (!) which \u201cMrs Rassam has kindly done \u2026 for me.\u201d Then proceeds to discuss arrangements for transporting sculptures to England. [The copy is incomplete.] (b)<\/em> [Dated \u201cKouynjik March 16th<\/sup> 1854.\u201d Describes the finding of some inscribed cylinders and a \u201ccolumn or obelisk\u201d from which he has taken the paper cast referred to by HCR in the letter itself. [The list \u201cNames of primitive Babylonian kings from Bricks, Cylinders &c &c.\u201d was included with this letter. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                        \n
                                                      1. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. April 5th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has now copied out and read the entire inscription whose paper cast he had just received when he wrote the previous letter. In the process he has had to revise many of his first impressions. He now reads the name of the author of the inscription as Shamas-Phal<\/em> the son of Shalambar<\/em> and grandson of Asshur-akh-pal<\/em>. The inscription records a revolt by \u201cAsshur-dan-pal <\/em>[sic although later in the letter HCR admits that this is a provisional reading only, he appears to favour the reading Ashur-dan-in-pal<\/em> in accordance with the modern reading, but cannot justify it. RBP.] against his father Shalambar<\/em>\u201d [HCR says that this sentence is very doubtful. In fact, it appears that Shamas-Phul had succeeded his father and that the revolt was led by his younger brother. RBP.] and gives the names of 27 cities which joined him. Comments on the names which are included in this list and those which are not. Then summarizes the account of his conquests, which HCR says, include place names which are entirely new and all \u201cScythic-Arian\u201d rather than Semitic. \u201cThe new annals \u2026 fill up another blank in history and are of much interest to me from the light they throw on numerous passages in the other annals which have hitherto defied explanation.\u201d The tablets which Loftus had found at Warka have just arrived and prove to belong to the reigns of Seleucus and Antiochus the Great, the latter he reads as Anti\u2019akuts<\/em> or Anti\u2019yakuts<\/em>. The images on the seals are mostly Greek. The texts record benefactions to temples at Warka and details of offerings, prayers and sacrifices to different gods. HCR is pleased at this confirmation that the use of cuneiform continued much later than had previously been assumed. Is hopeful that in due course Babylonian accounts of all the events of Asian Hellenistic history will be found. Asks Norris to announce the \u201cGreek Babylonian tablets\u201d and to correct the date of the obelisk if he has already publicised HCR\u2019s earlier erroneous dating. [III\/10(08)]<\/li>\n
                                                      2. Addressed \u201cBaghdad April 15th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has not much to report on his own account, because he has been unable to work owing to illness, but is enclosing a copy of a letter from Loftus which he hopes will compensate for this. The new obelisk has arrived from Nimrud and proves to be quite clumsily shaped, but the inscription is beautifully engraved on the purest and hardest white limestone. He will be able to clarify from it a few words which were not clear on the paper cast. Will be curious to see [Loftus\u2019s] \u201cTel Sifr tablets as the dates are sure to be of interest.\u201d \u201cSome of Loftus\u2019s new bricks from the R corner of the base of the red mound at Senkereh are of Khammurabi<\/em> who also built a palace close to Baghdad, which we dug out some years back, obtaining copper weights with Khammurabi\u2019s name, one or two of which I placed in the British Museum.\u201d However, the most puzzling are those from the great mound of Senkereh. They bear two royal names. He reads the name of the son as Nabo-kudur-ussur <\/em>but cannot believe that the father\u2019s name can be Nabo-pul-ussur <\/em>although he cannot think of another reading. The inscriptions could be of the time of the Biblical Nebuchadnezzar, and his father Nabopolassar but there is another name which he cannot read. Clarification must await the discovery of further materials. Is discovering many new Babylonian royal names, but is not sure which ones he has already communicated to Norris because he has not kept a copy of the last list he sent. Is sending Mr Taylor\u2019s report to the Trustees on the excavations at \u201cMugheir or Ur of the Chaldees\u201d [Norris adds the comment in pencil \u201cNot in my packet.\u201d]. It cannot be published without illustrations of the inscriptions but portions of it can be read at a meeting of the RAS, particularly showing \u201cthe architectural type and character of the Babylonian temples which has hitherto been a mere matter of conjecture. \u201cHere is a section of the Birs-i-Nimrud, as the temple really was [HCR here gives a sketch of a ziggurat which he says corrects Layard\u2019s conjecture, but I do not understand the point he is trying to make. RBP.]\u201d and describing the early graves, where the bodies were buried with \u201cfood, water &c &c &c quite after the Egyptian fashion.\u201d Some comments about the unreliability of the mails, and repeats things he has told Norris before but comments \u201cJones is to succeed me in the Residency, so that as far as antiquities are concerned the change will make no difference\u201d. P.S. Further speculations about the royal names which still puzzle him. Appeals to Norris for suggestions. Has read \u201cLoftus\u2019s new barrel cylinder\u201d and finds it to be \u201cNebonit\u2019s account of repairing the temple of Pharra<\/em> dedicated to the sun at Larrak.<\/em>\u201d Enclosure: <\/em>Copy of Loftus\u2019s letter to HCR addressed \u201cJidr Mounds 40 miles N. of Warka April 7 1854. My dear Colonel.\u201d Disputes HCR\u2019s identification of the building which Loftus has been excavating [see III\/10(07) above] as belonging to the late Sassanian period, and insists that it is much older. Has found many tablets bearing the same cuneiform inscription 13 lines long, apparently applied with a stamp, but no copy is distinct enough to be legible. Some further comments about inscriptions which he has found and about the buildings. Expresses his resentment at the treatment he has received from the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society [see III\/10(07) above] and says that he will object strongly if it continues. Describes some of his recent finds but is being impeded by rising water levels, which will soon make it impossible to remain in this area. Expresses doubt about whether the British Museum and the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society can continue to operate over the same territory. [III\/10(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                      3. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. May 13th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has completed the first part of the notes which he promised to write on \u201cPrimitive Babylonian history\u201d covering \u201cthe Ante Semitic Period\u201d and is sending what he has written to Norris so as to avoid its being made \u201cnot only unreadable but unpublishable\u201d with footnotes. He is also sending the footnotes which he has written, although they were written in a great hurry, \u201camid a thousand interruptions and in a barely supportable temperature.\u201d Will trust to Norris to check the proper spelling of the names in various languages, to verify references etc before it is published. [This is possibly Notes on the Early History of Babylonia<\/em> JRAS<\/em> 15 <\/strong>(1855) pp 215-259.] Devotes considerable space to speculating on the likely reception of the paper and on what he will put in the sequel. Loftus has brought \u201chis Senkereh tablets\u201d to Baghdad which prove to be of the reigns of Khammurabu<\/em> and his son Samsu-iluna<\/em> and very valuable. At present the war does not affect the situation at Baghdad, but HCR is worried about the future, particularly if Austria and Prussia come into the war on the side of Russia. [III\/10(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                      4. Addressed \u201cBaghdad, June 3rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Complains that he has heard nothing from Norris for the last 3 mails, nor has he received the magazines that Norris has been sending him. Thinks this may be because Norris has supposed him to be on his way home. Infers from the fact that items which he had sent to Norris for publication have appeared in print that his own letters are arriving in England as usual. Is continuing work on his paper on \u201cthe Semitic period of Babylonian history\u201d as fast as the heat of the Baghdad summer will allow and \u201cmust positively get \u2026[it] off my hands during the summer.\u201d He envisages that there will be 3 more parts: historical to \u201cthe Assyrian period\u201d then \u201cto the time of Cyrus with translations of all the important parts of the Inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar and Nebonit\u201d and geographical. Would also like to add a chapter on Mythology, but his current knowledge is too incomplete. Has discovered that kibir<\/em> simply means \u201criver\u201d hence kiprat arbat <\/em>[see III\/09(15) above] means \u201cthe country of the 4 rivers\u201d i.e. the two arms of the ancient Tigris and the two arms of the ancient Euphrates. HCR again refers this to the traditional four rivers of Paradise. Is puzzled that he has not been able to find anything corresponding to the Hebrew Shinar.<\/em> Reads the name of the earliest \u201cChald\u00e6an king as Kudura-pula<\/em> \u201cking of Martu<\/em>\u201d which HCR takes to mean \u201csea coast\u201d. Speculates that he may be the Chedor-laomer of Genesis, but is unwilling to assert this positively without further evidence. Is constantly discovering new phonetic readings of ideograms and phonetic values of signs. Is beginning to think that he may be compelled to remain in Baghdad for years, particularly if the war spreads and an army is sent from India [Whether he means to support the Ottomans or to invade Persia is not clear. RBP.]. In that case, he will send Norris his vocabulary books because the tablets from which they have been copied are now in the British Museum and he is afraid that other people will publish his discoveries before he is able to. Has been going over \u201cLoftus\u2019s Warka tablets\u201d [see III\/10(08) above] in the hopes of finding references to Greek administration but in vain, they refer only to benefactions to and sacrifices at the temples. \u201cThe Greek dates are their only point of interest in regard to history.\u201d Has also been trying to read \u201cLoftus\u2019s Tel Sifr tablets\u201d [see III\/10(09) above] but without much success, apart from the names of Khammurabu<\/em> and Samsu-iluna<\/em>. \u201cThe higher we go up the more frequent is the use of ideographs, the more fantastic are the letters, just taming down indeed from pictures into signs.\u201d Ends by wishing he could have \u201can hour\u2019s gossip with you but know not when that will be\u201d and asking Norris to write to him every month. [III\/10(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                      5. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. June 23rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has still not heard from Norris, but expects to by the next mail. Work on his \u201cBabylonian paper\u201d has been brought to a standstill both by \u201cthe terrible climate of Baghdad at this season\u201d but also by the realisation that \u201cI was proceeding on a wrong basis\u201d and would have to start again. His speculations that Kuduru-pula<\/em> was the Biblical Chadorlaomer have received a check from the fact that the king\u2019s title apda Martu<\/em> does not mean \u201cdespoiler of Palestine\u201d [This is not the meaning he assigns to this title in the previous letter. RBP.] but refers to the province at the mouth of the Euphrates, so that Apda Martu<\/em> simply means \u201cking of Chald\u00e6a\u201d. Thinks, however, that the title shows \u201cthe locale of the primitive Ph\u0153nician settlements\u201d. Gives reasons for thinking that the name of \u201cthe earliest Chald\u00e6an king in the list\u201d could be read as Amraphel<\/em> [In the previous letter, he seemed to be saying that the earliest king was Kuduru-pula. <\/em>RBP.] but is unwilling to publish this without more evidence. Then discusses his current uncertainties concerning the Chald\u00e6an calendar, which will not be cleared up until he understands the system of intercalation. This could be determined from the relevant materials now at the British Museum, but HCR has not copied out a sufficient number to enable him to do so at Baghdad. Wonders how the Jewish calendar is regulated. Has written a \u201ccritique on Dr Hincks\u2019s notes published in the Literary Gazette [April 22 1854 included with the letter\u201d which is not primarily for publication but to document HCR\u2019s claim to prior discovery of certain points, although Norris may publish certain parts of it in the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> if he thinks fit. Notes that the Museum has allocated him another \u201c1500\u00a3\u201d for another year\u2019s excavations and \u201cordered me to carry on as before.\u201d Foresees that this will lead to disputes with Loftus and the Assyrian Fund Society \u201cwhich I hate.\u201d Cannot say anything about coming home and may he \u201ckept out in the East\u201d for another 3 years. [III\/10(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                      6. Addressed \u201cBaghdad July 13th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Encloses copies of correspondence concerning the dispute between HCR, representing the British Museum, and W K Loftus, representing the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society [see III\/11 below]. Privately, HCR expresses considerable sympathy with Loftus\u2019s position, and considers that he may have contributed to the difficulty through taking it for granted that he would be leaving Baghdad at the beginning of 1854. However, he is not prepared to compromise if it means surrendering complete control of all archaeological excavations in the area. Norris may show the correspondence to Phillips [see III\/11 below] for his private information but it must not be published, nor copied or circulated to the members of the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society Committee. Has read the abstract in the Athen\u00e6um <\/em>of \u201cthe Anniversary Report\u201d [Presumably the Report of Council to the 31st<\/sup> Anniversary General Meeting of the RAS held 20th<\/sup> May 1854. This was not published in the JRAS<\/em> but a copy exists in the RAS library as part of the volume Prospectus, Proceedings Royal Asiatic Society 1823-1867<\/em> referred to above. It includes a resume by Norris of the work undertaken by HCR and Loftus during the previous year. <\/em>RBP.] He then comments \u201cI should just as soon have expected to hear of people questioning whether we know the Greek alphabet and can read Homer as impugning the general accuracy of our Babylonian and Assyrian interpretations.\u201d [It is not clear whether HCR is alluding to a passage in the Report itself, where Norris appeals to the convergence of the readings of several scholars working independently as a guarantee of the general reliability of the results, or to something appearing elsewhere. RBP.] Questions \u201cBosanquet\u2019s\u201d assertion that there was an annular [solar] eclipse in 719 BC. Is determined to finish \u201cthis Babylonian paper\u201d despite its great difficulty. Speculates on the \u201cgreat God of Chald\u00e6a\u201d being the moon (later read as Isiu) and receiving offerings from the Greeks of Cyprus which resulted in some way in the memorial tablet of Sargon being found in Cyprus. [see III\/07(15) above.] Interpretation of the inscription on this stone is made more difficult because a \u201cbig slice must have been sawn off its back\u201d truncating all the lines of the inscription, but HCR rehearses various arguments in favour of his reading. Digresses to discuss possible readings of the ancient name of Mugheir [see III\/10(09)] which he equates with \u201cHerculis Ar\u00e6\u201d mentioned in Ptolemy. Before the quarrel, HCR received from Loftus a cast of a fragment of a tablet found at Koyunjik which shows the step-by-step evolution of a Babylonian cuneiform sign from the original picture. \u201cYou may now therefore take it as established that in the vocabularies one column represents the original name of the object, of which the sign explained is the picture litteralized, while the other column represents the ordinary phonetic power, either used syllabically or denoting some definite idea [a rebus? RBP] the connexion moreover not being arbitrary, but depending on a series of tropes sometimes very obscure, which refer to the qualities or attributes of the primary design. Your knowledge of Chinese degradation will enable you to realize this explanation more easily perhaps than I can describe or even understand it.\u201d If the remaining parts of this tablet are found it will be of great use as a key, but the present is merely a curiosity. Repeats his explanation of what has happened to the leaden scrolls [referred to in III\/09(03) above] and cannot understand what Norris finds contradictory in it. Will have someone sent back to the site (Abu Shadhar or Shudhr) to collect further specimens. If the RAS is to publish \u201cmy preliminary paper\u201d [see III\/10(10) above] asks Norris to send the proofs to his brother George at Oxford \u201cas he is determined to bring out the Herodotus at once [see III\/07(14) above] and wants to have a general idea of my views as to early Median and Persian history.\u201d His brother also wants to use HCR\u2019s notes on primitive Babylonian and Assyrian history, but HCR is reluctant to allow this when there are so many uncertainties. Ends by reasserting his reading Nabopolassar against Hincks\u2019s Nebu-bin-yuchur<\/em>. [III\/10(13)]<\/li>\n
                                                      7. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Aug 3rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Is badly affected by the heat and can only respond to points in other people\u2019s letters etc. Notes that Hincks appears to be more amicably disposed than previously, but it is too late for them to be friends. Is unwilling to see Hincks\u2019s version of the Nimrud Annals until he has finished his own, so that he cannot be accused of borrowing Hincks\u2019s ideas. [It is not clear from the letter which text is being referred to here. RBP.] De Saulcy\u2019s \u201camended reading of the Bihistun Inscription\u201d is full of errors and \u201cdoes not contain a single correction of value.\u201d Is convinced that he is a charlatan. Wonders how he will get on with [Jules] Oppert whom he considers to be a genuine scholar. Is pleased with Norris\u2019s reception of \u201cthe Ante Semitic paper\u201d [see III\/10(10) above]. Promises to complete the next stage by the end of September despite the difficulty of the material and the debilitating effects of the heat, which tempts him to throw up his job in October and leave for England. He will do this if his health does not improve, but otherwise he would like to remain to see the results of next winter\u2019s campaign of excavations \u201camong the Chald\u00e6an ruins\u201d particularly as he feels he needs to visit the sites for himself to understand the topography. The impasse between himself and Loftus continues. Is afraid that so many sculptures have been removed from the sites at Nineveh for various collections that not enough will be left to enable the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society to fulfil its obligations to its sponsors, particularly the King of Prussia, and that it was rash of the Society to have accepted the offer before consulting with the people on the ground \u201cas to the prospect of obtaining a sufficient number of marbles for the Berlin Museum\u201d. Intended to have added some \u201cCuneiform gossip\u201d but has no time. [III\/10(14)].<\/li>\n
                                                      8. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Aug. 24th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has had nothing from Norris since he last wrote, although his elder brother [A L Rawlinson] reports that Norris had told him that the first part of HCR\u2019s Babylonian history paper [see III\/10(10)] will be difficult to get through the press. Has not made much progress with the second part since he last wrote because of the continuing heat, which is affecting him worse than ever this year. Does not think he could stand another summer. His workmen at Nineveh have unearthed another gateway of the city with inscriptions of Sennacherib which are different from any he has seen before \u201cbut they are of no particular interest. Loftus, I believe, is finding almost nothing and is satisfied that the Assyrian Mounds were after all not worth squabbling about.\u201d \u201c[William] Boutcher\u2019s Portfolio however of drawings from the Northern Palace will be a great acquisition to the Society, as I told them it would in the first instance.\u201d Loftus is thinking of \u201cmigrating to Ichaboor [sic<\/em> I have not been able to identify this place. RBP.]\u201d in the autumn. He has not consulted HCR, who would have dissuaded him. HCR has begun work at Birs-i-Nimrud [see III\/07(23) above] in earnest. Is tempted to blow the ruin up with gunpowder to speed things up, but will \u201cgo cautiously to work\u201d instead. His only recent acquisitions of value are the \u201cblack stone\u201d from Niffer [sic<\/em> presumably Nippur. \u00a0I have not been able to identify this stone. RBP.] which he originally heard of 10 years previously and which bears an inscription by a previously unknown king, \u201cwhom I place at the head of my Chald\u00e6an list\u201d and a royal cylinder seal from the same place. Has discovered a new phonetic value for a particular letter gal<\/em> and discusses the importance of this. Asks Norris to send the proofs of \u201cmy Babylonian paper\u201d so that he can revise it \u201csince there can be no hurry\u201d in publishing it. Discusses some changes which he would like to make. Has also done further work on the [Babylonian?] Pantheon but gives no details, as well as the topographical description of \u201cNebuchadnezzar\u2019s Babylon\u201d on the East India House Tablet [see Letter Y in III\/03 above] and believes he now understands all the works described there. In the autumn he will try to identify all the sites referred to. The inscription agrees at many points with the writings of Berosus. Gives some further identifications [which I don\u2019t fully understand. RBP]. [III\/10(15)].<\/li>\n
                                                      9. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Septr<\/sup> 13 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Has very little to tell Norris because the heat has only begun to moderate in the past few days, permitting him to begin work again. Will finish \u201cthe Babylonian paper\u201d despite its being \u201cterribly dry, dreary and difficult and I am getting dead sick of it.\u201d Then he will consider whether to \u201cdraw up for publication a revised and extended syllabary and vocabulary\u201d or to prepare for publication \u201cthe 3 sets of Annals I now have by me\u201d of Tiglath Pileser I, Asshur-akh-pal and Shamas-phul. However, the RAS would require financial support in order to print these. Agrees with Hincks\u2019s general chronology \u201cfrom Sargon downwards\u201d essentially because they are both following Ptolemy\u2019s \u201cCanon\u201d but disagrees with Hincks on details, such the date of Sargon\u2019s conquest of Samaria. \u201cBosanquet seems to make no account whatever [of this].\u201d [HCR seems to be referring to Chronology of the Times of Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah considered with the view of correcting an error of 33 years in the received chronology, between the capture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and the birth of Christ, <\/em> 1. pp. xv. 285. Longmans & Co.: London, 1848. (Details from the British Library online catalogue.) RBP.] Considers that Bosanquet should first verify by calculation the dates of all the eclipses listed by Ptolemy to see whether his calculations are valid. Has had a large body of \u201cnavvies\u201d at work at Birs-i-Nimrud but is disappointed with the results, as no texts have come to light. The dispute between the excavations teams at Koyunjik working for the British Museum and the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society has flared up more fiercely than ever [For details, see III\/11 below.] Has obtained the agreed of \u201cLord Stratford\u201d to his quitting his post at Baghdad the following spring [see II\/06(06)] and \u201call my arrangements will accordingly be now directed to a final \u2018flitting\u2019 by April 1st<\/sup>.\u201d Is worried that \u201cthe two cases of Syllabaries, Vocabularies, Geographical & Historical lists, Almanacks, Calendars &c which I sent home by Mr Hodder and \u2026 which I have been occupied for years in cleaning, arranging & copying\u201d [Hodder is the name of an artist who came out to Mesopotomia with HCR in 1851 and remained until early in 1854, when he fell ill and returned to Britain.] will be \u201chanded over to the tender mercies of Hincks\u201d. Intends to visit Babylon immediately after the departure of the next post. [III\/10(16)].<\/li>\n
                                                      10. Addressed \u201cBaghdad Octbr<\/sup> 3rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Comments on a letter from Hincks published in the Literary Gazette on the Assyrian calendar. He has never seen any evidence of the method of intercalation which Hincks proposes and gives the system which he prefers. However, he is unwilling to pronounce definitely, as all the tablets which he has seen dealing with the subject are more or less fragmentary, and he would need to see those on which Hincks is relying. Comments on some further points on which he disagrees with Hincks, and considers his errors are so serious that he has written a refutation for publication. [This appeared as On the Orthography of some of the later Royal names of Assyrian and Babylonian history<\/em> read before the RAS on 18th<\/sup> November 1854 and published as JRAS <\/em>15<\/strong> (1855). RBP.] This must be published in JRAS<\/em> because cuneiform characters will be indispensible, but he would like some essential points also reported in the Athen\u00e6um<\/em>. Has finished the second chapter of \u201cmy Babylonian paper (Semitic period)\u201d but \u201cit will cost me at least a fortnight\u2019s hard work however to write in the notes\u201d but he presumes there is no hurry to publish it. He is concerned about the quantity of cuneiform type which it will require as there are 35 inscriptions \u201cfrom the bricks\u201d to be included. The 3rd<\/sup> Chapter will consist of two parts, dealing with Mythology and Geography, \u201cthe latter being the only branch of the subject on which I feel myself perfectly at home\u201d. Is resigned to the fact that the first chapter is to be published without HCR having the opportunity to revise it \u201cwhich will be a bore, as I am conscious of many inaccuracies\u201d. Comments on the latest developments on the dispute between the British Museum and the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society [dealt with in III\/11 below]. Intends to visit Babylon with [Felix] Jones. Jones is to make a Survey, while HCR compares what is now visible with descriptions in the annals of Nebuchadnezzar. The excavations at Birs-i-Nimrud have exposed the architecture and the plan of the temple but the results have not equalled HCR\u2019s expectations and \u201care certainly not worth what they cost\u201d. Is surprised at what Norris has said about the names of the days of the week and explains why he had expected them to be Semitic [I do not follow his argument here. RBP.] He gives a further reason for believing the system to be Semitic in origin in that the nycthemeron [a period of time equal to one day. It is sometimes used, especially in technical literature. RBP.] is divided into 24 \u201chours\u201d rather than 30, as in India. Cites also the statement of Dio Cassius that the Romans took the names of the weeks from the Chald\u00e6ans. [III\/10(17)].<\/li>\n
                                                      11. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Octbr<\/sup> 4th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Gives the text of an addition to his article On the Orthography of some of the later Royal names of Assyrian and Babylonian history<\/em> referred to in III\/10(17) above. [III\/10(17)].<\/li>\n
                                                      12. Addressed \u201cRuins of Babylon. Octbr<\/sup> 22 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d The weather has been too hot to do much. However, he is satisfied that he has managed to trace \u201cthe course of the old river through the ruins.\u201d He has also managed to identify most of the old buildings by means \u201cof bricks and slabs found \u2018in situ\u2019.\u201d He also believes he has discovered part of the old city wall, which confirms the ancient Greek calculation of its circumference. [Felix] Jones would have finished surveying the ruins in another week, but for an attack of gout. Has been \u201camusing myself with making a literal translation of the E[ast] I[ndia] H[ouse] Ins[cription]\u201d [see Letter Y in III\/03 above] from which he believes Berosus derived his description of Babylon quoted by Josephus, since the order of repairing the buildings is exactly the same. Refers to a corrupt passage in Josephus which he claims has misled [Fulgence] Fresnel and cites the correct passage in [? Jean Baptiste] Aucher\u2019s Latin translation from the Armenian of Eusebius Ecclesiastical History which I think was published in Venice in 1818, but I cannot trace a copy.\u201d [I cannot identify the work of Fresnel\u2019s referred to. RBP.] Gives various other points of correspondence between the Inscription and the account of Berosus, including the \u201changing gardens, planted with cedars and planes and built of stones like mountains.\u201d \u201cThe Chaldee historian has I confess risen 100 per cent in my estimation since I discovered the identity of the two accounts\u201d. Suggests writing an account of Babylon for the JRAS<\/em> based on this inscription, or else tacking it on to the geographical section of his memoir, on which he is now ready to start work. Has obtained a \u201crelic like Michaux\u2019s stone\u201d [see Letter T in III\/03 above]. No textual materials have been discovered at Birs-i-Nimrud [see III\/10(15) above] while, although the palace at Koyunjik continues to yield fine sculptures, no interesting texts have come to light. [III\/10(19)]<\/li>\n
                                                      13. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Novr<\/sup> 14 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been writing up an account of the excavations at Birs-i-Nimrud, to be sent, initially, to Sir Henry Ellis to be shown to the Trustees, but with a request to forward it to Norris for publication in JRAS<\/em> [This eventually appeared as On the Birs Nimrud, or the Great Temple of Borsippa<\/em> JRAS 18 <\/strong>(1861) pp 1\u201134.] Has also discovered inscribed cylinders bearing Nebuchadnezzar\u2019s account \u201cof the whole affair.\u201d Is \u201cdelighted to have got off going to Persia\u201d [NB This is at variance with the account given in HCR\u2019s Annuary<\/em> in Box IV where he says that his disappointment at not being appointed ambassador at Teheran was his main motive for resigning his post at Baghdad. His letters to his sister Maria written during his stay in England in 1850 [IV\/08] show that at that time he was paying court to Palmerston in the hopes of getting this or an equally prestigious appointment. RBP.] and \u201cshall now certainly be with you in May.\u201d Will endeavour to finish \u201call the various matters I have on hand\u201d during the winter. Loftus is making good discoveries and has sent me many new hunting inscriptions of Asshur-bani-pal<\/em> and he has found a new store house of inscriptions at the S E Palace at Nimrud. [Second letter] also addressed \u201cNovr<\/sup> 14 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Is sending part of the small theodolite belonging to Jones to be repaired. If he thinks fit, Norris may make an abstract of the \u201cBirs paper\u201d for publication in the Athen\u00e6um<\/em>. Although the paper is too long, he has not been able to include any \u201caccount of the works in the adjoining mound of Ibrahim-el-khelil\u201d where he excavated \u201ca part of one of Nebuchadnezzarr\u2019s palaces\u201d. Taylor has returned to Chald\u00e6a \u201cand I hope to get another good harvest of primitive records during this winter\u201d. [III\/10(20)].<\/li>\n
                                                      14. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Decr<\/sup> 4 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Has received [proofs?] of \u201cthe Notes\u201d and points out some necessary corrections. [I have not been able to trace any publication of this article in this form. RBP.] Has finished the Geographical section [It appears from the following letter that this refers to his paper on Birs-i-Nimrud (ancient Borsippa ) RBP.] which turns out to be longer than the preceding 4 sections put together \u201cbut the notes are not added yet\u201d. Is worried about publishing \u201cthe Memoir\u201d because of a discrepancy between his measurements of the height of the ruin and those reported by \u201cRich\u201d [i.e. Claudius James Rich 1787-1821, although I am not sure which of his publications HCR is referring to. The need to make these amendments may account for the paper not being published until 1861. (See III.10(20) above.) RBP.] Then discusses further corrections. Thinks he has found in \u201cNebuchadnezzar\u2019s great Inscription\u201d an allusion to the king\u2019s temporary insanity and the consequent suspension of all his building works. A problem has arisen concerning HCR\u2019s retirement. He had planned to resign his post on the completion of 28 years\u2019 service on October 26th<\/sup> 1855, when he would qualify for a pension of \u00a3365 per year. If, however, he leaves in April, as he has planned, his pension will be reduced to \u00a3292. To avoid this, he would have to return to India to serve the last 6 months [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][or spend another summer at Baghdad, which he has said that his health would not stand][\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]. He has applied to the Secret Committee [of Directors of the East India Company] to be allowed to return to England at once and spend the remainder of his service working on the cuneiform materials, he has asked the Trustees of the British Museum to support this application. Is enclosing a draft letter which he hopes the Council of the RAS will endorse and send to India House in support of the proposal as well. Is surprised to hear of Loftus\u2019s resignation from his post with the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society, since he had assured HCR that he intended to remain, and in the past few months they had been working together reasonably well. [III\/10(21)].<\/li>\n
                                                      15. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Decr<\/sup> 23 1854. My dear Norris.\u201d Has made no progress with writing the notes for the \u201cGeographical paper on Borsippa\u201d because of ill health, but he is determined to recover his health after Christmas and to finish the paper by the time of the next post. Notes from Vaux\u2019s resum\u00e9 of \u201cHincks\u2019s memoir submitted to the Trustees in the Spring\u201d that \u201cthere is now very little difference indeed between Hincks\u2019s readings and my own. We are agreed I think as to all the ordinary powers of the characters, but I have I suspect a much larger ideographic vocabulary.\u201d Is expecting \u201canother case of tablets & cylinders from Mosul which are sure to contain abundance of curious matter.\u201d Is also expecting \u201cimportant news\u201d from Chald\u00e6a. Is still awaiting a reply to his application to be allowed to spend the last 6 months of his service in London. [III\/10(22)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                        III\/11\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>17 letters documenting an at times acrimonious dispute between HCR, primarily as the guardian of the interests of the British Museum and W K Loftus at Mosul and Samuel Phillips in London of the Assyrian Excavation Fund in 1854. Additional information is provided by references in the letters from Rawlinson to Edwin Norris in III\/10 as noted.<\/p>\n

                                                          \n
                                                        1. W[illiam] K[enneth] Loftus to Samuel Phillips Esq, Sydenham: \u201cConstantinople, October 25 1853. My dear Sir\u201d Does not propose to go into details of their journey, since \u201cCaptain [Felix] Jones\u201d has already assured him that it was \u201cvery agreeable\u201d. Regrets, however, that some items of equipment, as well as plans, have been lost on the journey and asks Phillips to send replacement plans. Also urges the Committee to send him letters of introduction to Lord Stratford and Colonel Rawlinson, as he is doubtful of his reception without them. Then follows discussion of practical details concerning their onward journey. Closes with regards from \u201cMr Boutcher\u201d. [III\/11(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                        2. HCR to Viscount Mandeville, Hony<\/sup> Secty<\/sup> to Assyrian Excavation Fund Society, No<\/sup> 5 New Burlington Strt<\/sup>, London. \u201cBaghdad Novbr<\/sup> 5th<\/sup> My Lord\u201d Acknowledges receipt of letter of June 6th<\/sup> introducing the Excavation Fund\u2019s team headed by W K Loftus and says that he will be \u201cmost happy to afford every assistance in my power to Mr Loftus \u2026 in so far as Mr Loftus\u2019s proceedings may not clash with the operations which I am already conducting in these countries on behalf of the British nation and under the immediate auspices of the Trustees of the British Museum.\u201d He goes on to propose that they should divide \u201cAssyria and Babylonia\u201d between them and that \u201cwhile I retain under my own superintendence the works now in progress at Nineveh, Calah and Elassar to the North and among the newly discovered Chaldean ruins beyond the Euphrates to the South, I shall place at his disposal the whole area of Mesopotamia from Sipparis at one extremity to Orchoe at the other.\u201d He further recommends that Loftus should start work without delay as the countryside is quiet at present, but that, in view of the international situation [the Crimean War had broken out the month before] the situation might become dangerous for Europeans. [III\/11(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                        3. HCR to Viscount Mandeville, as above. \u201cBaghdad Feby<\/sup> 16 1854. My Lord\u201d Announces the recent discovery of \u201cmost beautiful palace at Nineveh [Koyunjik], belonging to the son of Esarhaddon\u201d. The palace being \u201cof great extent\u201d and the sculptures \u201cinfinitely superior\u201d in every way \u201cto anything which has been before found\u201d. He has \u201cselected 60 slabs for the British Museum\u201d but that \u201cneither does my time, nor the public funds at my disposal\u201d permit him to do anything further. Because \u201cthe British Museum excavations at Nineveh will be brought to a close at the end of March\u201d he suggests that Loftus and the Assyrian Excavation Fund team should take over the work at Nineveh to prevent the site falling into the hands of \u201cFrench & American explorers\u201d. He intends to recommend to the Trustees of the BM that an application should be made to Parliament for a special grant to enable Mr Loftus to pack up the slabs which HCR has already earmarked for the BM and send them to London. [III\/11(03)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                          [In III\/10]<\/em> Copy of Letter from Loftus to HCR dated \u201cJidr Mounds, 40 miles N. of Warka, April 7 1854.\u201d enclosed with HCR\u2019s letter to Norris dated 15 April 1854 [III\/10(09)] provides testimony to the relations between the men before the dispute arose. Loftus expresses himself in cordial terms but is clearly nettled at HCR\u2019s questioning his interpretation of his finds.<\/p>\n

                                                            \n
                                                          1. HCR to [an unnamed officer of the Assyrian Excavation Fund] \u201cBaghdad June 3rd<\/sup> My dear Sir.\u201d Advises \u201cthat Mr Loftus left Baghdad for Nineveh on the 25th<\/sup> Ultmo<\/sup> and that, although HCR still has had no \u201cadvice from the Trustees of the British Museum concerning their final abandonment of excavations in Assyria \u2026 I have not hesitated on my own responsibility to place Mr Loftus and Mr Boutcher in temporary possession of the ground both at Koyunjik and Nimrud and to authorize their carrying on operations upon those sites, during the summer at the expense of the Assyrian Fund Socty<\/sup>.\u201d However, should the British Museum gain additional resources, \u201cthey will be entitled, of course, to resume the occupation of the ground, which I have temporarily abandoned and Mr Loftus and his companions will have again to migrate to the Southward\u201d. He recommends \u201cthat Mr Loftus should under any circumstances\u201d be directed to concentrate his efforts during the autumn in Southern Chaldea where the Society has already made important discoveries. [III\/11(04)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                            [III\/10(12)]<\/em>.HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad, June 23rd<\/sup> 1854\u201d \u201cThe Museum have just given me a further sum of 1500\u00a3 for another year\u2019s excavations and ordered me to carry on as before \u2013 this will upset all Loftus\u2019s plans and all things considered is rather a bore, as it may bring me into collision with the Assyr. Fund Socy<\/sup>. and lead to all sorts of tracasseries<\/em> [quarrels, annoyances] which I hate.\u201d \u2026 I can say nothing about coming home \u2013 if the war continues and there is to be any cooperation from India, I may be kept out here for another 3 years.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                              \n
                                                            1. Copy of extract of a letter from Loftus to HCR \u201cdated Nimroud June 21st<\/sup> 1854\u201d. [Sent to Norris with III\/10(13).<\/em>] \u201cYou ask me to state unreservedly my views and feelings on learning that the Trustees of the British Museum propose resuming excavations at Nineveh after having abandoned the ruins for two months and a half.\u201d Goes on to express outrage at such conduct, and to assert the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society\u2019s exclusive right to continue the excavations at Nineveh. Agrees, nevertheless, to co-operate with HCR\u2019s wishes for the time being. [III\/11(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                            2. HCR to [an unnamed officer of the Assyrian Excavation Fund] \u201cBaghdad June 23rd<\/sup> My dear Sir.\u201d Advises that, as the Treasury has made a further grant of \u00a31500 to the BM \u201cfor continued excavations in Assyria during the current year\u201d and the Trustees have entrusted HCR with the \u201csuperintendence and control\u201d of the expenditure of this sum, \u201cI shall be obliged according to the stipulation to S Phillips Esqr<\/sup> \u2026 to resume occupation of the ground at Nimrud and Koyunjik at an early date.\u201d He has advised Mr Loftus to this effect but he does not at present know when he will be prepared to surrender the sites nor where he proposes to go next. However, \u201cI can see no objection \u2026 to Mr Boutcher remaining at Koyunjik for the summer employed in sketching the bas-reliefs \u2026 which were discovered \u2026 in the early spring.\u201d He will write again \u201cafter having come to an understanding with Mr Loftus, as to his future proceeding.\u201d [III\/11(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                            3. [Copy sent to Norris with III\/10(13).<\/em>] HCR to Loftus \u201cBaghdad, 27th<\/sup> June 1854 \u201cMy dear Loftus I think that your indignation for once has run away with your judgement.\u201d Re-iterates that the invitation in his letter of February 16th<\/sup> to Loftus to take over the excavations at Nimrud on behalf of the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society was subject to the proviso that if the British Museum acquired funds for further excavations, then it was entitled to resume excavations there at once, especially since HCR\u2019s expected departure had not taken place. He further asserts that the transfer of responsibility had not been finalised since the Museum Trustees had not agreed to it and that the Society has not received formal permission to excavate from the Turkish government and can do so merely on behalf of the Museum. Suggests a working arrangement pro tem<\/em> whereby the Museum\u2019s workforce and the Society\u2019s should divide the ground between them.<\/li>\n
                                                            4. Loftus to HCR. \u201creply to Col Rawlinson\u2019s letter of June 27th<\/sup>. Nimrud July 4 1854. My dear Colonel.\u201d Says that he feels obliged to reply out of courtesy despite \u201cA severe attack of rheumatism in the head [sic<\/em>]\u201d Re-iterates his contention that HCR\u2019s letter [see III\/11(03) above] proves that the BM finally closed its excavations at Nineveh in March and handed over the site to the Assyrian Excavation Fund. The application to Parliament for an additional grant was solely for purpose of transporting the slabs already discovered back to the BM. Refutes HCR\u2019s allegations that the Society had failed to assume the responsibilities thus offered without unreasonable delay. Also remarks that the Museum had offered some rights at Nineveh to the French which they were now seeking to deny to \u201ca Society of Englishmen\u201d. Also says that the Society has nothing to fear from a prospective Parliamentary enquiry. Remarks that it is probably useless for HCR and Loftus to seek to negotiate any further as their respective principals in London are likely to undo any arrangements which they may make, and suggests provisional arrangements for their teams to work together pending the receipt of further instructions from London. Ends by expressing a distaste for such \u201cjangling\u201d and hopes that the \u201cotherwise good understanding which has for several years been established between us\u201d will not be disturbed by \u201csuch a peppery discussion.\u201d [III\/11(08) apparently a copy made by Loftus for his employers in London.]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                              III\/11(08a) Copy by HCR\u2019s staff of extracts from III\/11(08) sent to Norris with III\/10(13).<\/p>\n

                                                                \n
                                                              1. HCR to Loftus at Mosul[?] [Apparently a copy made by Loftus for his employers in London.] \u201cJuly 10 1854. My dear Loftus. As you have not thought fit to adopt either of the alternatives I proposed to you, I have no resource but to withdraw all further connexion with the Assyrian Fund Society, except in my official capacity as H M\u2019s representative in these parts. Your quotations from my former letters are quite irrelevant. Those letters referred to my departure from the country & were cancelled by my compulsory detention. Under no circumstances moreover could my proposals have been binding until they were sanctioned by the Trustees. There is no chance of any arrangement between the Society & the Museum in London, the Trustees having given me carte blanche<\/em> to do anything & employ anyone I like, and having declined to discuss the matter with other parties. \u2026. I shall now consider carefully what I ought to do & Rassam will let you know the result.\u201d He goes on to say that the Museum never intended to make over any of its property or its rights in Assyria to the Society, nor did it say that its funds were exhausted or that it was abandoning its excavations. All these things were assumed by HCR in anticipation of his departure from the country and were cancelled by his remaining. He further adds that Loftus went to Mosul at the end of May because there was nowhere else he could work and that \u201cI consented thereto out of consideration for you & not to lose time. \u2026 I hereby wash my hands of the Assyrian Fund Society & all that concerns them & shall merely consider how I can best carry out the wishes of the Trustees.\u201d HCR adds a postscript saying that, although he does not withdraw anything he has said, he has decided to allow Loftus to continue with the arrangement he has proposed for the time being, effectively allowing the Society and the Museum teams to work alongside each other at Nineveh. [III\/11(09)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                III\/11(09a) \u00a0Copy by HCR\u2019s staff of III\/11(09). Sent to Edwin Norris with III\/10(13).<\/p>\n

                                                                  \n
                                                                1. [Captain James] Felix Jones to Loftus. \u201cWednesday, July 11 [the content of the letter implies the year 1854, although July 11 was not a Wednesday in that year. Letters in III\/10 indicate that Jones was engaged in surveying sites in Southern Mesopotamia for HCR at this time.<\/em>] Expresses sympathy with Loftus\u2019s rheumatism, and also with his sense of grievance at the way in which he has been treated, but urges discretion on the grounds that if news of the dispute between the Excavation Fund and the Museum should become public, it will tend to discourage subscribers. \u201cRawlinson on the other hand scarcely cares a curse for anyone concerned in the diggings beyond their use in their vocations \u2026It is incomprehensible to me how parties can quarrel on a subject which all should support, on the principle of \u2018the more the merrier.\u2019\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                  \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/em>[Photocopy of III\/10(13)] HCR to Norris. \u201cBaghdad July 13th<\/sup> 1854 My dear Norris\u201d\u00a0 Briefly sets out his version of the dispute which has arisen between himself and Loftus. Acknowledges that \u201cNo doubt I have got myself into a mess by reposing with such confidence on leaving Baghdad and proposing arrangements which would have turned out admirably had I quitted the country but which are impracticable while I remain.\u201d Says that he has been too long accustomed to having absolute and unquestioned authority in the country to be willing to share it now. Adds \u201cI daresay you will think this tempest in a slop basin very undignified and I am half ashamed of it myself.\u201d But he is not prepared to back down. Encloses copies of relevant documents (see III\/11(05), III\/11(07), III\/11(08a), and III\/(09a) above.) which Norris is to show to S W Phillips of the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society so that he may be thoroughly acquainted with the details of the dispute, but they must not be shown to anybody else nor is the Society to have copies of them.<\/p>\n

                                                                    \n
                                                                  1. HCR to [an unnamed officer of the Assyrian Excavation Fund] \u201cBaghdad July 13th<\/sup> 1854 My dear Sir I am sorry to have to report that I have had rather a warm discussion with Mr Loftus lately in regard to the right of the Museum to reoccupy the ground at Mosul. Mr Loftus seems to have supposed that by allowing him to proceed to Mosul, I formally abandoned the ground on behalf of the Trustees; in fact as he says \u201cmade a present of the mounds to the Society\u201d whereas if you will refer to my letter of June 3rd<\/sup> you will see that his being permitted to proceed to Mosul before the instructions of the Museum reached me was for his own convenience and in order to prevent a loss of time, and further that I expressly reserved the right of the Trustees to resume occupation of the ground if they pleased at a subsequent period. In my recent correspondence with Mr Loftus I have had no wish whatever to interfere with Mr Boutcher\u2019s work in sketching the Sculptures nor did I impose any very severe conditions on Mr Loftus himself, conceiving that excavations either at Koyunjik or Nimrud were sufficient to occupy one person\u2019s attention I gave him a choice of the two sites, proposing merely to take charge of that which he rejected.\u201d [III\/11(11)]<\/li>\n
                                                                  2. Loftus, Mosul, to Samuel Phillips Esq, Sydenham, July 17 1854. Encloses his reply to HCR\u2019s latest letter \u201cwhich you should have had by the last post\u201d [see III\/11(09)] and expects to receive another letter from the Colonel shortly. Complains that HCR is animated by jealousy of \u201ccertain parties at home\u201d and that he suspects that the Assyrian Excavation Society \u201cwas got up for party purposes\u201d. Accuses him of obstructing Loftus\u2019s work by underhand means and criticizes the character of individuals whom HCR is proposing to employ. Also hints that there are dealings between the Committee [of the Assyrian Excavation Society] and the Trustees [of the British Museum] of which he, Loftus, has been kept in the dark, also that his letters are being tampered with. Argues that the Excavation Society should obtain a separate authorization from the Turkish government or the Shah and move its operations away from the sites being excavated by HCR and the British Museum. In the course of the letter, he mentions that HCR\u2019s latest letter has arrived [Not included among these letters RBP.] [III\/11(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                                  3. Loftus to HCR July 20 1854. [Apparently a copy made by Loftus for his employers in London.] Acknowledges receipt of \u201cyour Official Letter of the 12th<\/sup> defining the right of property [presumably the British Museum\u2019s], & warning me that I am working, so far as the Turkish Government is concerned, merely upon sufference [sic<\/em>]\u201d.\u00a0 Denies any intention of removing the Museum\u2019s property and informs HCR that he has received a Firman<\/em> \u201cfor excavation at Nineveh, Nimrud etc.\u201d Presumes that \u201call further discussion between us on this subject may drop, & we have only to work together pro bono publico<\/em>.\u201d [III\/11(13)].<\/li>\n
                                                                  4. Loftus, Mosul to Samuel Phillips, Sydenham July 31 1854. Expresses satisfaction and gratitude for the Firmans <\/em>which Lord Stratford has obtained for him and is impatient to know how HCR will react. Submits his statement of the Quarter\u2019s Expenses but has not been able \u201cof course\u201d to have his books inspected by \u201cyour two Committeemen in Baghdad\u201d but hopes that the Committee will approve them. The sculptures in the N. palace at Koyunijik are not suitable for photography owing to their damaged state, so Mr Boutcher has had to sketch them all, but there have been problems in getting them done to a suitable scale. Asks for Mr Phillips\u2019s good offices in ensuring that Mr Boutcher\u2019s expenses are reimbursed by Messrs<\/sup> Also complains about the attitude of Rassam, employed by the British Museum, alongside whom he is having to work. [III\/11(14)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                    III\/10(14) HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad, Aug 3rd<\/sup> 1854\u201d \u2026 \u201cMelting under this terrible heat and bereft of all energy, of all power of concentrating thought I threaten constantly that I will make a bolt of it in October, and if my health still continues doubtful I certainly shall do so \u2026 Between Loftus and me there is what is called diplomatically \u2018a suspension of relations\u2019. I am sorry for it, but I had really no alternative but to show my teeth, when I found he insisted on putting me out of the way, merely because I had made a premature will in his favour and he was impatient to enjoy the legacy. The Trustees now tell me that I may give him any duplicate marbles, not required for the Museum, to enable the [Assyrian Excavation Fund] Society to carry out it\u2019s [sic<\/em>] agreement with the King of Prussia. The Socy<\/sup> however is I fear too late in the field to obtain anything worth having \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                    III\/10(15) HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad Aug. 24th<\/sup> 1854\u201d \u201cLoftus I believe is finding almost nothing and is satisfied that the Assyrian Mounds were after all not worth squabbling about \u2026 I now hear indirectly that Loftus thinks of migrating in the Autumn to the Ichaboor and the Upper Euphrates, but has not consulted me on the subject, or I should certainly have dissuaded him \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                      \n
                                                                    1. Loftus, Mosul to Samuel Phillips, Sydenham Sept. 11 1854. Reports the results of the previous fortnight\u2019s digging, which has uncovered an extension to the N. Palace previously discovered by Layard and Rassam, containing fine sculptures. Complains again about the conduct of Rassam in trying to encroach on Loftus\u2019s trenches and says that if this continues he will be anxious to return home. He also comments on a letter from the Society to Sir Henry Ellis a copy of which has just reached him, and objects to the proposal contained therein that he should work under the direction of HCR acting for the Trustees. He considers any such proposal a degradation and an implied criticism of his management of the expedition and that if it is not withdrawn he will submit his resignation. He ends by reporting that they have just found a statue at Nimrud and that he will send Boutcher\u2019s drawing of it by the next post. [III\/11(15)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                      III\/10(16) HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad Sept 13th<\/sup> 1854\u201d \u2026 \u201cAt Mosul, I am sorry to say, the war between the Museum and the Assyr. Socty<\/sup> has broken out more fiercely than ever. You will remember that I retained possession of the Northern Palace at Koyunijik with the consent of Loftus, in order to be able to clear out the interior of the chambers and remove all the marbles still remaining for the Museum. My men have been working there ever since, but now find their territory invaded by the Society\u2019s gangs. It seems Loftus lately lighted on some sculptures, belonging no doubt to the Northern Palace, but beyond the precincts of Hormuzd Rassam\u2019s excavations and also at a lower level. In following these sculptures he comes to the line of our trenches and now wants to tunnel under the place where the Museum gangs are working, but this I cannot permit. It seems most likely now that the chambers excavated by Hormuzd Rassam were merely the first floor of the Palace, and that there is a basement story underneath still untouched, which is most indubitably the property of the Museum. As far as Science is concerned of course it makes little difference by whom the slabs may be uncovered but there is another question involved in this controversy, which is that of property possessing a money value and such being the case I am constrained to look after the Museum\u2019s interests \u2026. [This is presumably HCR\u2019s version of the dispute referred to by Loftus in III\/11(15) and III\/11(16)] \u2026 I must also tell you that I have at length come to an understanding with Ld<\/sup> Stratford about my retirement. I am to remain at Baghdad for the winter but he has promised to withdraw all opposition to my departure in the Spring. All my arrangements will accordingly be directed to a final \u201cflitting\u201d by April 1 1855.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                        \n
                                                                      1. Loftus, Mosul to Samuel Phillips, Sydenham 25 Sept. 1854. Is still waiting to receive a \u201ccommunication\u201d which had been promised in Phillips\u2019s letter of July 31, but \u201cthe Tartar\u201d [the name of a courier service operating in Iraq at this time<\/em>] is so late he fears it may have been plundered. Describes the progress of the excavations and promises to send \u201ca series of beautiful photographs\u201d despite difficulties which they have been having with photography in the heat. Further complaints about interference from Hormuzd Rassam and says that HCR will be of no help in dealing with him. Also reports that \u201cCol. Rawlinson has commenced the removal of the slabs from the N. Palace. He appears to be taking the whole away bodily, tho\u2019 for what purpose I can\u2019t understand.\u201d [III\/11(16)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                        III\/10(16) HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad Oct 3rd<\/sup> 1854\u201d \u2026 \u201cI am expecting the post from Mosul in the course of the day and shall then be able to let you know before the mail closes, whether Loftus consents or no to carry on the excavations now that the Assyrian Fund Socty <\/sup>has merged into a sort of branch establishment in aid of the Antiquity department of the British Museum. As he (Loftus) abominates the Trustees, is quite independent as to his means and extremely jealous of any interference I doubt if he will continue to work under the new arrangement (of which by the bye you do not seem to have been aware on Aug. 19th<\/sup>, though it was definitely settled in London on Aug. 12). I have done all I can to make matters easy for him, and am ready to give him a monopoly of the \u03ba\u03c5\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 of the discoveries (which is I fancy what he principally affects) but I must have a general control to acquit myself of the money responsibility \u2013 and on that head I anticipate difficulty. \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                          \n
                                                                        1. HCR, Baghdad, to [an unnamed officer of the Assyrian Excavation Fund] Octr<\/sup> 3rd<\/sup> \u201cI merely write a line to thank you for your letter of July 31st<\/sup>, with enclosure, and to say that by this day\u2019s post from Mosul I have received Mr Loftus\u2019s adhesion to the new arrangement for the future conduct of the excavations.\u201d Reports that, since Mr Boutcher has resigned from his employment with Messrs<\/sup> Dickinson and also with the Assyrian Excavation Fund Society, HCR, acting on behalf of the BM, has engaged him to continue his work in drawing the finds, but that the drawings will now become the property of the Trustees instead of Messrs<\/sup> Dickinson. The ownership of the drawings which have already been produced and sent back to England he leaves to be settled between the Society and Messrs<\/sup> Dickinson, although he thinks they should not be published without the Trustees consent. Confesses that he does not fully understand the details of the new arrangement, which he says involves the Society transferring its funds to the BM account, although they are still to be responsible for paying half of Loftus\u2019s salary. Intends to report regularly to the Trustees on the progress of excavations \u201cin Assyria, Babylonia and Chald\u00e6a\u201d but has no doubt that they will allow such reports to be read at your meetings \u201cif the Assyr. Fund Socty<\/sup> remains embodied.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                          III\/10(20) HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad Novr<\/sup> 14 1854\u201d \u2026 \u201cLoftus is making good discoveries \u2026 he says too that he has lighted on a new storehouse of inscriptions at the S E Palace at Nimrud.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                          III\/10(21)HCR to Norris dated \u201cBaghdad Decr<\/sup> 4th<\/sup> 1854\u201d \u201c\u2026 I was exceedingly surprised at what you and Fergusson write about Loftus\u2019s resignation \u2013 as he has always told me positively that he intends to remain and since the amalgamation we have been working together, if not as cordially as of yore, at any rate in a proper, business like way \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                          Both Loftus and HCR returned to Britain in 1855 and neither undertook any active work in archaeology afterwards. Loftus went to India with the Geological Survey of India, but his health deteriorated and he died in 1858. RBP.<\/p>\n

                                                                          III\/12\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>8 letters from HCR to Norris 8 Jan \u2013 16 Dec 1855, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                                            \n
                                                                          1. Addressed \u201cBaghdad, Jany<\/sup> 8 1855. My dear Norris\u201d Has still not finished adding the marginal notes to \u201cthe long promised Geographical supplement\u201d owing to the laboriousness of the task, to the pressure of his official duties, added to by the preparations for his impending departure from Baghdad, and to general ill health. \u201cWhat you say about the early Syrian dates is entirely new to me and must be looked into\u201d on his return to Britain, where, however, he is daunted by the amount of material to be worked through. Suggests a division of labour between the different British scholars in the field: Hincks to concentrate on grammar and philology, \u201cwhile I should be content with History, Geography and Mythology; you might then have the Chronology and Astronomy; Vaux the natural history, Geology, Metallurgy &c.\u201d as preferable to each trying to do everything. Has concluded that his interpretation of a passage as referring to the insanity of Nebuchadnezzar [see III\/10(21) above] is incorrect, but cannot say what it means. Has still had no reply from India to his letter of resignation from April 1st<\/sup>, and does not know whether he will be allowed to come straight home, or will be required to stay in India until October. [see III\/10(21) above]. [III\/12(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                          2. [Dictated to a clerk.<\/em>] Addressed \u201cBaghdad January 22nd<\/sup> My dear Mr Norris.\u201d HCR has had a fall from his horse and has broken his collar-bone. He has consequently been unable to do any work at all. [III\/12(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                          3. Addressed \u201cBaghdad. Feby<\/sup> 5 1855 . My dear Norris.\u201d Is still heavily bandaged and has only one hand free, which is frustrating when there is so much to do. \u201cHincks\u2019s letter is all [Referring to a name which is written in two distinct ways in cuneiform. RBP.] I am glad the Irishman is so positive, as it will make his recantation all the more telling when it does come.\u201d Is planning to leave \u201cearly in April\u201d [in fact, HCR had left Baghdad by March 5th<\/sup>, see papers in Box II. RBP.] preferably via Bombay, \u201cif a steamer offers\u201d but has made no plans for transporting his notebooks etc. His general health is so poor, apart from the fracture that he when he does get home \u201cI must take a run at grass for some months\u201d. Norris is to stop sending various periodicals from the time he receives this letter. Complains of the amount of work involved in administering the excavations for the British Museum. [III\/12(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                          4. Addressed \u201cAjdaha [a steamer belonging to the East India Company. RBP.] off Bombay April 1 1855. My dear Norris.\u201d Has arrived ten days later than he anticipated, and must attend to business at Bombay, so he cannot expect to leave before the next steamer on the 17th<\/sup>. However, he may still arrive in London in time for the Anniversary General Meeting of the RAS on May 19th<\/sup>. Has been writing notes \u201cto the Borsippa paper\u201d on the voyage and is now about half way through. It has now expanded into \u201ca very minute and elaborate essay on the comparative Geography of Northern Babylonia from the earliest times to the present day.\u201d Although \u201cit fills up a gap in science\u201d he doubts whether anybody in England will take the trouble to read it or that the RAS will accept it for the Journal. Some discussion of a disagreement with \u201cFergusson\u201d regarding the interpretation of the ruins at Birs-i-Nimrud [which I can\u2019t follow. RBP.] Is bringing \u201cthe Birs and Mugheir Cylinders and Esarhaddon\u2019s dogs with me\u201d to exhibit at the Anniversary General Meeting if he arrives in time, but \u201cPlease avoid all trumpeting however \u2013 for I am dead sick of humbug and would rather take service with Barnum or Wombwell than exhibit any more for the edification of the would-be-savans of London.\u201d [III\/12(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                          5. Addressed \u201cAlexandria. May 5 1855. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been further delayed and is very doubtful of reaching England by May 19th<\/sup>. However, his health has been restored, and he is now feeling as well as he did when he left England in 1851. [III\/12(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                          6. Addressed \u201cMonday May ??\/morning flourish <\/em>[The mention of the London Institution lecture indicates that the year must be 1855 and that the letter was written in late May or early June. If it was written in May, the date must be either 19th<\/sup> or 26th<\/sup>, the latter being more likely. RBP.]. \u201cThe Trustees have sent in the application for 1500\u00a3 for the first year\u2019s expenditure, and we shall therefore soon have to commence work. Proposes a meeting with Norris and Bowler to settle all the details and perhaps commence operations without waiting for the Government\u2019s reply. Is prepared to join \u201cMr [Richard] Clark as joint Hon. Sec. of the RAS if it seemed otherwise desirable. Cannot find the \u201c[paper?] casts of the Persian column of the Hamadun Inscriptions which will be required for \u201cmy lecture on Wednesday next at the London Institution.\u201d [HCR lectured to the London Institution \u2013 now the Royal Institution – On the Results of the Excavations in Assyria and Babylonia.<\/em> On Friday June 15th<\/sup> The Prince Consort was in the chair, and it is possible that the meeting was rescheduled to allow him to do so.][III\/12(06)]<\/li>\n
                                                                          7. Addressed \u201cTemple Newsam, Leeds Octr<\/sup> 23rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Gossip about his plans, but intends to return to London at the beginning of November and \u201csettle down to steady work and hope to get through no end of matter during the winter.\u201d \u201cI think I shall hold on at 21 Savile Row [HCR does not mention this address in his Annuary. <\/em>RBP.] until it is positively settled whether I do or do not return to the East.\u201d Asks Norris to procure him a passport \u201cif such things are required nowadays\u201d. [III\/12(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                          8. Addressed \u201cWoburn Abbey, Decr<\/sup> 16th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d A covering note to a letter for Baghdad which HCR wants Norris to post for him. \u201cWoburn is half full of Cabinet Ministers at present and altogether we are a very agreeable party.\u201d [III\/12(08)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                            III\/13\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>3 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris, 7 May \u2013 30 November ? 1856, as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                                              \n
                                                                            1. Addressed \u201cMay 7 1856. My dear Norris.\u201d Is too busy to \u201creview the progress of Cuneiform discovery for the Anniversary Report\u201d but gives an outline for Norris to fill up. [A report following this outline appeared in the Report of the Anniversary General Meeting 17th<\/sup> May 1858.] Asks Norris to \u201cbring it over to me by 11 tomorrow morning and I will make any alterations or additions that may seem requisite.\u201d \u201cNow I am off to the city to take my seat in Court. [Presumably this refers to the Court of Directors of the East India Company, to which HCR was appointed soon after his return from Baghdad. RBP.]\u201d [III\/13(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                            2. Addressed \u201c21 Langham Place, Septr<\/sup> 17 [\u201c1856\u201d added in pencil. Lady Rawlinson\u2019s hand? RBP.] Is in London for a few hours only [Norris was away at this time. RBP.] but hopes that they will be able to meet up in a fortnight\u2019s time [at the Museum] to \u201cconsult about our future proceedings.\u201d Asks how Norris is \u201csucceeding with the Sennacherib transliteration.\u201d [III\/13(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                            3. Addressed \u201cHillside \u2013 Henbury \u2013 [The home of his sister Maria. RBP.] Sunday. [The same hand as letter 2 above has written \u201cDec 1856\u201d in pencil.] \u201cMy dear Norris.\u201d Has been too busy to write anything for the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> but promises to let Norris have \u201ca sheet or two tomorrow.\u201d However, he also says \u201cTomorrow I leave this and migrate to Lord Broughton\u2019s\u201d [The letter is accompanied by an envelope bearing the postmark \u201cBristol. Dec 2 1856.\u201d This identifies Henbury as being the village in Gloucestershire which has subsequently become a suburb of Bristol. Since December 2nd<\/sup> 1856 was a Tuesday, the letter appears to have been written on November 30th<\/sup>. HCR\u2019s departure on December 1st<\/sup> may account for its not being posted until December 2nd<\/sup>. RBP.] [III\/13(03)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                              NOTE ON DATING.<\/strong> After his return to England, HCR rarely dates his letters in full. Some of the letters bear dates added subsequently in the handwriting of Norris, or HCR\u2019s wife and these have generally been accepted. Where HCR gives the date, month and day of the week, the year can be narrowed down to a few candidates, from which it usually possibly to select one (although this assumes that the date as given is correct and there are cases where it clearly is not). Further dating clues are:<\/p>\n

                                                                              Address<\/em>. All the letters which HCR wrote to Norris from home are addressed from \u201c21 Langham Place\u201d, \u201c1 Hill St.\u201d or \u201c2 Hill Street\u201d. According to the Annuary<\/em> [Box IV] HCR lived at 21 Langham Place from 1856 until his departure for Teheran in 1859. On his return from Teheran in the spring of 1860, he moved into \u201cMr Berkeley\u2019s house No. 1 (then 39) Hill Street\u201d. In the spring of 1862 he bought \u201cNo. 2 (then No. 1) Hill Street\u201d. [He mentions \u201cmy new house No.1 Hill Street\u201d in a letter to Norris dated April 15th<\/sup> 1862, but his proposal to Louisa Seymour is dated July 22nd<\/sup> 1862 (see Box V) so that he did not buy it in anticipation of his marriage. RBP.] This house appears to have been renumbered as No. 2 in 1868. In 1869 he sold it and moved to 21 Charles Street, but no letters to Norris are dated from that address. Accordingly, I have dated all letters addressed \u201c21 Langham Place\u201d to the period 1856-1859, all those addressed \u201cNo. 1 Hill Street\u201d to 1862-1868, \u201c2 Hill Street\u201d to 1868.<\/p>\n

                                                                              Employments. <\/em>According to his Annuary<\/em> HCR was appointed a Crown Director of the East India Company \u201c2 months after\u2026\u201d his resignation from the East India Company\u2019s service on February 29th<\/sup> 1856. It is not clear whether this was a paid appointment and, if so, whether he could have held it while a Member of Parliament. In any case, the East India Company was abolished in 1858. Accordingly, letters referring to attendance at \u201cthe Court\u201d or \u201cLeadenhall Street\u201d can be dated to the period April\/May 1856 to August 1858 at the latest. HCR was twice an MP: for Reigate from February to August 1858; and for Frome in Somerset 11-24 July 1865 to October 1868. References to attendance at \u201cthe House\u201d etc can be dated to one of these two periods. HCR was also twice a member of the Council for India: from September 1858 to September 1859, when he was appointed Ambassador to Teheran, and from October 1868 until his death. HCR\u2019s appointment as Ambassador to Teheran lasted from September 1859 to March? 1860. [Correspondence concerning this will be found in II\/08 and II\/09.]<\/p>\n

                                                                              Publications. <\/em>In 1855, the Government agreed to subsidise the publication by the British Museum of what became Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia<\/em> under the editorship of HCR, the lithographed facsimiles of the inscriptions to be accompanied by HCR\u2019s translations. R E Bowler began work on lithographing the plates in 1855 and Edwin Norris was employed to assist in the editorial and translation work but presumably withdrew in 1866 to concentrate on his Assyrian Dictionary, <\/em>his place being taken by George Smith. Volumes of the compilation appeared in 1861, 1866, 1870, 1875 and 1884 but there are no references to HCR\u2019s personal involvement after 1868.<\/p>\n

                                                                              Clues to dating have also been obtained from:<\/p>\n

                                                                                \n
                                                                              1. The Correspondence of William Henry Fox Talbot<\/em> an online database of transcriptions of letters from and to William Henry Fox Talbot which includes letters from HCR, Edwin Norris and others. These are often more carefully dated than those in this collection and can be found at http:\/\/foxtalbot.dmu.ac.uk\/.<\/li>\n
                                                                              2. The bibliography of Dr Hincks\u2019s publications referred to in the Biographical Notes.<\/li>\n
                                                                              3. The Tentative Bibliography <\/em>of HCR\u2019s publications by W M Arnholt, Johns Hopkins University Circulars No. 12 April 1889. This only came to hand rather late in the work.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                Other clues to dating are noted in individual cases.<\/p>\n

                                                                                III\/14<\/strong> 18 Letters from HCR to E Norris datable from the beginning of 1857 to the eve of HCR\u2019s departure for Teheran in September 1859.<\/p>\n

                                                                                  \n
                                                                                1. Addressed \u201cMay 13th<\/sup> (at the end) 21 Langham Place. [i.e. 1856 to 1859, probably 1857, since their working arrangements had not been established by this date in 1856, HCR wrote to Norris on May 14th<\/sup> 1858 but does not mention having written the day before and by this date in 1859 he had accepted the appointment as ambassador in Teheran. RBP.]\u201d Encloses \u201cfor Bowler the cursive transcript of the Inscription on Lord Aberdeen\u2019s Stone [see letter Y in III\/03.] The printed text cannot be interfered with, as \u201cthe whole impression has been struck off \u2013 but there are I fear departures from the original in every line.\u201d Discusses a cuneiform character which he cannot identify. [III\/14(01).]<\/li>\n
                                                                                2. Addressed \u201c21 Langham Place, Thursday, My dear Norris.\u201d [Datable from the address to the period 1856 to 1859. Norris has scribbled on the back \u201c21 May?? Ann. M.\u201d The RAS Anniversary General Meeting was held on Saturday 23rd<\/sup> May 1857, so I have tentatively dated this letter 21st<\/sup> May 1857. RBP.] Bowler is to meet HCR at the Museum tomorrow bringing \u201cas many sheets as he has prepared.\u201d HCR has \u201ca good many new Chald\u00e6an Inscriptions (among others of a son of Kudur Mabuk\u2019s) which must form a supplementary sheet. [III\/14(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                3. Addressed \u201c21 Langham Place, Tuesday. [In HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1857 My dear Norris.\u201d From the references to the Manchester Exhibition, and \u201cWednesday 23rd<\/sup>\u201d datable to September 1857, probably 15th<\/sup>. Norris is not to return to London on HCR\u2019s account as he has \u201cno particular call for you just now.\u201d Hopes to return to work at the Museum \u201cwith some steadiness\u201d in October and \u201cat any rate write out the Roman text and translations of the Inscriptions & get the first volume out\u201d for which Norris\u2019s assistance will be invaluable. Bowler has plenty of work to go on with and HCR has corrected almost everything which he has done to date. [III\/14(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                4. Addressed \u201cAmpthill Park, Ampthill. Tuesday Nov 17 [Probably 1857, \u2018Tuesday November 17\u2019 could refer to 1863 or 1868 but there is no reference to HCR\u2019s wife travelling with him, nor are there any letters to her addressed from Paris in either year. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Norris is to procure a passport for HCR\u2019s intended departure for Paris on the following evening. HCR will collect it from him at the Foreign Office about 5pm. Bowler is to take any work which he has ready for correction to the Foreign Office for HCR to collect at the same time. HCR will post the corrected copy back to him from Paris. [III\/14(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                5. Addressed \u201cParis Novr <\/sup>20th<\/sup> My dear Norris\u201d. [The references \u201cto attending the Court\u201d and meeting Layard \u201con his way to Constantinople\u201d imply 1857, (Layard went to India in 1857 to investigate the causes of the Indian Mutiny; he was eventually appointed Ambassador to Constantinople but not until 1877, after Norris\u2019s death) but the date of this letter is not compatible with that of the preceding one, since HCR says he \u201chas been away a week\u201d. RBP.] Gossip about the delights of Paris and mutual acquaintances. Hopes to find \u201cthe Sardanapalus Inscription pretty well finished\u201d when he visits the Museum the following Thursday. [III\/14(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                6. Notepaper embossed with what could be the East India Company seal. Addressed \u201cWednesday Feb 10th<\/sup> [1858] My dear Norris.\u201d Is returning the latest progress report to the British Museum for Norris to fill in the dates and deliver to Panizzi and to \u201cgive him any verbal explanations he may require.\u201d [III\/14(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                7. Addressed \u201cHotel Bristol [Paris] Monday March 8 [1858] My dear Norris.\u201d Comments on Norris\u2019s treatment of certain [Scythic?] words thrada, hamay\u00e1y\u00e1<\/em> Palkivas <\/em>but it is not clear in what context. The \u201cAssyrian Gallery\u201d is still under repair, but he hopes to gain admission to the adytum<\/em> Comments on the general hostility to Britain for harbouring \u201cthe refugees\u201d and speculates that the [Anglo-French] alliance will be in danger \u201cif [Simon] Bernard should escape punishment and Lord Derby should give up on the Conspiracy Bill\u201d. [This refers to participants in the Orsini plot to assassinate Napoleon III on 14 January 1858 using a bomb of Orsini\u2019s own design. The French resentment was partly because the bombs had been made and tested in England with the assistance of Bernard, who was living here and had been arrested and put on trial. The Conspiracy Bill, which was originally brought in by the Palmerston government in February 1858 to placate our allies, would have facilitated the extradition of conspirators from other countries. It was very unpopular and was defeated, bringing down the Government, which was succeeded by a Conservative administration under the Earl of Derby, who unsuccessfully attempted to reintroduce the measure. RBP.] Hopes to be in the Museum on Saturday. [III\/14(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                8. Addressed \u201cFriday May 14 [1858] My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cWill give up the Drawing Room tomorrow in order to attend the Anniversary meeting of the Asiatic Society [which took place on Saturday May 15th<\/sup> 1858 RBP]\u201d and will take the chair if necessary [It wasn\u2019t.] Norris is to send Bowler\u2019s account for HCR to sign \u201cif you have verified the dates and added an explanatory note.\u201d Bowler is to assemble as many lithographs of the Inscriptions as possible to be exhibited at the Meeting because \u201csome M.Ps told me they were going to attend the meeting and propose applying to Govt<\/sup> for a pecuniary grant to enable the Socy<\/sup> to publish my translations. [HCR was MP for Reigate at this time.] [III\/14(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                9. Addressed \u201c21 Langham Place Jul. 1 [1858 from the references to \u201cLord Stanley\u201d and \u201cParliament\u201d] My dear Norris.\u201d Returns \u201cLord Stanley\u2019s Certificate duly signed\u201d [Presumably Lord Stanley (2) in the Biographical Notes. <\/em>He was at this time President of the Board of Control of the British East India Company.] Norris is to write out his receipt again and sign it, so that HCR can countersign it in the approved manner. \u201cAs soon as Parliament is up, I intend to work tooth and nail for a month or six weeks to bring this volume out.\u201d Has mislaid \u201cthis infernal Birs Nimrud sheet\u201d and cannot correct it unless he finds it or Norris sends him another copy. Returns the \u201ctwo sheets of the Big Inscription, but must see the whole again before it goes to \u2018Press\u2019\u201d. [III\/14(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                10. Dated (at the end) \u201cSaturday\u201d [from the references to the \u201cReceipt countersigned\u201d and \u201cthe Birs paper\u201d it appears to follow the previous one. July 1 1858 was a Thursday, so this letter may be dated July 3rd<\/sup> RBP.] Returns the countersigned receipt. Even more papers missing. Complains about the long hours spent in Parliament, after which he can only manage to \u201copen & skim over my letters & when I come down to breakfast, find everything cleared away never to be recovered. I have lost hundreds of papers this way and am thoroughly disgusted.\u201d [III\/14(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                11. Dated \u201cThursday morning. My dear Norris.\u201d [I have assigned it to this point in the sequence of letters because: the way in which the reference to the Trustees\u2019 ultimatum is worded implies that it is the first Volume which is being demanded. There are no references to a preface or table of contents in any of the previous letters, although they are referred to regularly hereafter. RBP.] Returns a sheet which he has corrected by scoring out incorrect Assyrian characters. Assumes that there will be many more such errors as Bowler is more used to Assyrian than Babylonian forms. Has been re-reading Bowler\u2019s copy of the inscription on Michaux\u2019s stone [See Letter T in III\/03 the interpretation which HCR gives of it here appears to accord with the present understanding. RBP.] \u201cBye the bye the Trustees have decided that you were to receive Salary up to the end of the year and no later \u2013 and they also required the sheets now ready to be made up into a volume and published immediately. I am therefore making my final corrections and must forthwith prepare a short Preface & table of contents.\u201d [III\/14(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                12. Dated \u201cFriday morning My dear Norris.\u201d [This letter appears, from the reference to \u201cthe red copy\u201d to have been written shortly before the following one, which can be dated to the period before 28th<\/sup> June 1859 and probably the autumn of 1858. RBP.] Queries the mechanics of a new procedure for correcting proofs which Norris has proposed. Further comments about corrections to unidentifiable sheets. Asks Norris to send \u201cwhat there is done of the red<\/em> copy of the Sardanapalus Inscription, together with the two pages on the stone to insert variants and correct.\u201d [III\/14(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                13. Dated \u201cThursday 21 Langham Place My dear Norris.\u201d [The reference to \u201cthe light red writing\u201d implies a date just after the preceding one. The reference to \u201cVernon Smith MP\u201d implies a date before 28th<\/sup> June 1859, when Smith was created 1st<\/sup> Baron Lyveden. It is probable that HCR had been invited to a shooting party, making the autumn of 1858 most likely. RBP.] Has been obliged to give up trying to correct the \u201clight red writing\u201d by candlelight. Is returning the proofs and gives Norris directions how to make the corrections himself. Is proposing to go to the country \u201cfor a week\u201d [although he later says \u201cI shall be back on Tuesday, I hope.\u201d]. Letters to be directed to \u201cRight Honble<\/sup> Vernon Smith M.P. Fanning Woods, Thrapston, Northamptonshire.\u201d [III\/14(13)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                14. Dated \u201cFanning Woods \u2013 Sunday My dear Norris.\u201d [HCR made at least two visits to Fanning Woods, the first, referred to in the previous letter probably in the autumn of 1858 and the second in October 1861 (see III\/16 below). The earlier date would be compatible with the reference to \u201cthe Trustees not having had time to look at the Book\u201d assuming this to be the first volume of Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia <\/em>but not with the reference to his helping to revise his brother George\u2019s translation of the Histories<\/em> of Herodotus since the publication of the first edition was not completed until 1860. The later date would fit in well with the revision of the Herodotus<\/em> – a second edition eventually appeared in 1862 \u2013 but seems rather late for the Trustees\u2019 consideration of the first volume of Cuneiform<\/em> Inscriptions<\/em> which was published in 1861. Neither date fits very well with HCR\u2019s proposed movements as set out in the various letters. RBP.] Is not sorry that the Trustees \u201chad no time to look at the Book, as it will now be possible to include a Preface. Asks Norris to \u201cdraft one according to your idea of what it should be.\u201d \u201cYour translations are enterprising as usual, but not satisfactory in any instance for reasons which I will explain to you viva voce.<\/em>\u201d Confirms that \u201ca Second Edition\u201d of \u201cthe Herodotus<\/em>\u201d[see above] is to be published and \u201cI have engaged to correct, improve and enlarge it . . .My brother indeed and Wilkinson are both to a certain extent penny a liners and rather popular than deep.\u201d Will have \u201csomething about the Egyptian Campaigns of Esar-Haddon & his son ready for the Saturday meeting.\u201d [III\/14(14)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                15. Dated \u201c21 Langham Place, Thursday. 10 A.M. My dear Norris\u201d [The reference to having to go to \u201cthe India House\u201d implies a date between September 1858 and the end of April 1859 when HCR was a member of the Council for India.] Returned to Town yesterday and will be in the Museum between 11 and 1 \u201cto see what has been doing in my absence\u201d. Asks Norris to meet him there, but, if not, on the following day and to \u201cget Bowler to send the corrected Tiglath Pileser proofs.\u201d [III\/14(15)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                16. Dated \u201cMonday, My dear Norris\u201d. [Datable to the reference to the \u201cHimyaric Inscriptions\u201d to the early part of 1859.] Has just returned from the country and must go immediately to \u201cthe India House\u201d so cannot write anything at the moment. Is sending \u201cOppert\u2019s 3 Livraisons (roughly \u2018instalments\u2019) by the bearer. They contain almost as much of error as of truth \u2013 and all announced in the same tone of uncompromising audacity.\u201d [I am not sure what HCR is referring to here: in a letter to Fox Talbot dated 27th<\/sup> August 1858, HCR refers to \u201cOppert\u2019s 1st<\/sup> Livraison\u201d and sends a copy on loan to Fox Talbot, which he appears to have received on loan from Oppert himself. On 10th<\/sup> September 1858 he writes that \u201cA second Livraison is out, but I have not yet had time to run through it.\u201d Oppert\u2019s Exp\u00e9dition scientifique en M\u00e9sopotamie. . . <\/em>appeared in three parts, but Tome 1 did not appear until 1863. Apparently the first to be published, in 1857, was the Atlas, which would hardly be expected to elicit such an acid response. Tome 2 D\u00e9chiffrement des inscriptions cuneiforms <\/em>appeared in 1859. It is possible that what HCR refers to as the first part is actually Chronologie des Assyriens et des Babyloniens<\/em> (Paris, 1857). RBP.] Is sending \u201c8 more Himyaric Inscriptions to be lithographed [This must refer to the collection of inscribed copper plates acquired by Colonel Coghlan in present day Yemen in 1858. At the AGM of the RAS on May 5th<\/sup> 1859 it was reported that HCR had received photographs of all the plates \u201cand they are now in the hands of the lithographer\u201d. RBP.] & have written the whole set out in Arabic and Roman characters.\u201d [III\/14(16)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                17. Dated \u201cSaturday, My dear Norris\u201d [The reference to HCR considering giving up \u201cthe Persian Mission on the score of ill health\u201d and advising Norris not to be \u201cin a hurry to give up your position at the Museum\u201d implies a date in the first half of 1859 sometime after Saturday April 9th<\/sup> when he had accepted it but certainly not long after (see II\/08). There is no indication in the correspondence in II\/08 of any uncertainty about HCR\u2019s health. RBP.] Comments on his health etc as above. \u201cI shall make up my mind about this [i.e. whether to go to Teheran] on Monday and will let you know at once in the mean time \u201cpatience\u201d. \u201cI should like to run my eye over Osiander\u2019s paper though I could gather little from it.\u201d [See list of names. RBP.] [III\/14(17).]<\/li>\n
                                                                                18. Dated \u201cWednesday. My dear Norris.\u201d [Datable from the reference to \u201cHimyaric Inscriptions\u201d to the early part of 1859 although not necessarily at this point in the sequence. The reference to these inscriptions in III\/15(02) below, as well a letter from Norris to Fox Talbot dated 10 September 1859 in the online archive referred to above imply that they had all been lithographed by the time of HCR\u2019s departure for Teheran. Might be datable more precisely from the reference to the \u201ccorrected sheets of the Report\u201d. RBP.] Is sending \u201canother set of Himyaric inscriptions for Bowler to trace\u201d. Has failed to read some of them \u201calthough I have no doubt every letter might be recovered from the [copper] plates themselves [HCR was working from photographs; the plates themselves were deposited at the British Museum in November 1862 and published by the British Museum in 1863 in Inscriptions in the Himyaritic Character discovered chiefly in Southern Arabia, and now in the British Museum. [By S. Birch.]<\/em> with the assistance of a donation from Colonel Coghlan. (See BM Collections Database.) HCR\u2019s work was apparently not published. RBP.]\u201d Gives instructions as to the order in which they should appear when published. Concludes, apparently in reply to a query from Norris, with a comment about two words in cuneiform, apparently with the same meaning, saying that one (published by Oppert) is Assyrian and the other (HCR\u2019s) is Babylonian. [III\/14(18).]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                  III\/15\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>6 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris from August 26th<\/sup> 1859, on the eve of his departure for Teheran to June 30th<\/sup> 1860. Further correspondence concerning HCR\u2019s appointment and service as Ambassador to Teheran will be found at II\/08 and II\/09.<\/p>\n

                                                                                    \n
                                                                                  1. Addressed \u201cFolkestone \u2013 [Friday] Aug. 26. [in Norris\u2019s hand 1859.] My dear Norris.\u201d Apologises for having missed Norris on Wednesday but was extremely rushed. Intends to go up to London \u201ctomorrow\u201d and will leave this note for Norris at the RAS, together with the Catalogue of HCR\u2019s MSS, [The wording here is obscure, but I think this is what he means. RBP.] which will be useful if anyone wants to consult them. Has not been able to do anything with the Table of Contents owing to pressure of other business, but hopes to send a few sheets before leaving. Suggests that for the time being Norris should confine himself to getting the \u201csyllabaries, vocabularies, and the bilingual phrase books\u201d lithographed \u2013 explains where they are to be found in the Museum and says that many of them were assembled by Vaux and Oppert \u2013 so that he can send the proofs out to HCR \u201cto be looked over before the final imprimatur is given\u201d. Hopes to be able to depart for Boulogne on Monday [August 29th<\/sup>. In fact he was detained until September 7th<\/sup>.] and \u201cI shall shake off the dust of my shoes against this sinful land, and wend my way to sunnier, but I fear not more innocent climes. Good bye, I hope to find you still flourishing in a green old age when I return \u2026\u201d [It is not clear whether this is meant as a joke or not: in II\/09 there is a letter to Mrs Seymour in which HCR insists that he does not intend remaining in Teheran for more than a year, and the arrangements which he proposes for Norris to continue the work could not be more than a stop-gap. RBP.] [III\/15(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                  2. Addressed \u201cFolkestone Sept 7 [1859] My dear Norris.\u201d Leaves for Boulogne in an hour. Has been so occupied with official business that \u201cthe Table of Contents still hangs fire\u201d. However, he hopes to be able to \u201csend the 8 sheets of short inscriptions\u201d from Paris and gives instructions on how Norris is to complete it. Hopes to complete \u201cthe Himyaric inscriptions\u201d in time for the Council meeting in November or soon after. Expects \u201cto have much more time and inclination for work\u201d in Persia and to write constantly. Gives the reading nigubu<\/em> for a particular word which, he says, means \u201cthe West.\u201d Recommends Norris to \u201cwork at the vocabularies, they of more importance than all the other documents put together. I hope to find you flourishing on my return. You may expect to see me back in the course of next year.\u201d Asks Norris to \u201csend me anything that comes out in the cuneiform line, as of old.\u201d [III\/15(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                  3. Addressed \u201cTeheran, Febry<\/sup> 4 1860. [In Norris\u2019s hand: Recd<\/sup>. 9 Apr.<\/em>] My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cYou seem to have cut me altogether\u201d but hopes this is not due to ill health but \u201conly from extra work at the For. Office, preparing for the Congress\u201d [Presumably the Congress of Baden Baden, a meeting of [principally German] crowned heads, intended to secure peace in Europe after the Italian wars of reunification. It appears from Norris\u2019s letters in the online Fox Talbot archive referred to above that he was waiting to hear from HCR, in a letter to Fox Talbot dated 19th<\/sup> March 1860 he complains that he has heard nothing from HCR, although he has heard that he is about to return home. RBP.] Asks if Norris has done \u201canything with the Syllabaria or Vocabularies.\u201d Has left behind two notebooks without which \u201cI find myself quite crippled.\u201d Asks Norris to find them if he can. In the meantime is writing out \u201cthe transliterations and translations of the lithographed series of Plates\u201d but has so little spare time that this will take him a year. Would be glad to get some gossip on \u201cCuneiforms or kindred matters.\u201d Asks Norris to obtain a list of historical and geographical works in Arabic which have been published over the past 20 or 30 years in England, France, Russia etc. Believes that \u201cmany of the princes here, who are decent Arabic scholars and very anxious to learn, would place large orders for such works\u201d also HCR is anxious to oblige them and secure their assistance in other matters. \u201cChwolson, [see Names list] I see pretends to have got some wonderful \u201ctrouvaille\u201d in this Babylonian work of Kudama\u2019s\u201d but HCR is sceptical \u2013 gives reasons. \u201cThese infernal Russians in fact leave me no time for anything, except counteracting their intrigues.\u201d Ends by asking Norris to write when he can. \u201cI don\u2019t admire by the bye coming under the F.O.\u201d [III\/15(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                  4. Addressed \u201cTeheran. April 7 [crossed out] 13 1860. [In Norris\u2019s hand 21 May<\/em>.] Has just received Norris\u2019s letter of 7th<\/sup> of March \u201cwith accompaniments\u201d \u201cjust as the French Courier is leaving Teheran, so that I can do [no<\/em> possibly omitted here.] more than acknowledge its contents.\u201d Will return all the sheets duly corrected by the next mail on March 28th<\/sup>. Sympathises with Norris\u2019s disappointment at HCR\u2019s not sending anything new, but excuses himself by the great pressure of official business. If he remains for the summer, he may be able to finish transliterating and translating the \u201cwhole Museum series [Presumably he means the 70 lithographed sheets to be included in the first volume. RBP.] whilst out in Camp.\u201d However, he sent in his formal resignation in February, giving as his reason the transfer of the Mission to the Foreign Office, and has just heard \u201cthat Lord John [Russell, then Foreign Secretary.] was prepared to lay it before the Queen.\u201d If he has to leave his post soon, there will be no chance of any \u201cfurther Cuneiform progress\u201d until he arrives back in England. Wonders \u201cwhat can Hincks\u2019 discovery be about Nabupolessar [sic<\/em>]\u201d as HCR has never seem him mentioned except as the father of Nebuchadnezzar. [I have not been able to trace what HCR is referring to here. RBP.] Goes on to discuss a name which he had found [at some earlier date] on the fragments of the Nabonidus Cylinder which he identifies with the Greek \u03a7\u03b9\u03bd\u03be\u03b9\u03b6\u03bf\u03c2 [This is what HCR has written, although the generally-accepted Greek form seems to be Chinzeros<\/em>. RBP.] and reads the cuneiform as Khamzivra<\/em> or Khamzina<\/em> and says was \u201c3rd<\/sup> from Nabonassar\u201d [This name is now read as Nab\u00fb-mukin-zeri. <\/em>RBP.] and says that his discovery gives \u201can approximate confirmation of the Chald\u00e6an Chronology.\u201d Also discusses the names Z\u00e1b\u00fa<\/em> and Shaga-saltiyas<\/em> which says he found in the same source, the latter of which he says he has not found anywhere else. Laments the lack of new Assyrian and Babylonian materials and would be prepared to subsidize excavations out of his own pocket, if anyone could be found to superintend them. Asks if [Edward] Thomas has spoken to Norris about the word Apza<\/em> [?] \u201con the Sassanian coins\u201d which, he says, is \u201cwonderfully like\u201d a certain cuneiform word. Promises to write more fully by the next mail. [III\/15(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                  5. Addressed \u201cTeheran. April 28 1860. My dear Norris.\u201d Was \u201cvery glad to see the old crabbed handwriting again\u201d but can \u201cmake but an inadequate return at present\u201d as he is harder worked here, especially about post-time than \u201cI was, even in London.\u201d Has corrected \u201call the Syllabaries, and added [transcriptions of ?] four other fragments for incorporation, which I found in my book and of which you should have the originals in the Tablet cupboard.\u201d Has decided that the term \u201csyllabaries\u201d is misleading and suggests instead \u201cbilingual explanations of Cuneiform signs\u201d as a heading. This is in accordance with an explanation of the nature of these tablets which he announced \u201cin my lecture in Oxford in 1855 or 1856\u201d and which Vaux repeated shortly afterwards in an article in the Monthly Review.<\/em> Hincks and Oppert also agree with it, although Hincks initially rejected it and Oppert has never given HCR credit for it. Has not succeeded in sorting out the confused fragments of the Bavian Inscription to his satisfaction and \u201caccordingly I do not send it.\u201d Asks if Norris has done anything more with the Asshur-bani-pal Annals, portions of which were quite intelligible enough for publication \u201cand the matter was full of interest.\u201d Gives his latest views on \u201cthe Bible ethnological scheme\u201d. Goes on to propound a theory [which I don\u2019t really follow RBP] that St John the Baptist, Christ, \u201call the Christian saints and Musselman Peers are mere Buddhs [sic<\/em>]. Tell this to Henry Stanley as my last article of faith.\u201d Is still waiting to see \u201cChwolson\u2019s book\u201d although he remains sceptical about his basic hypothesis. Can make no definite plans until after he has next heard from the Foreign Office, but expects to be on his way home again soon. In the meantime, Norris is to continue preparing for lithography \u201call the bilingual tablets, vocabularies, parallel phrases &c. &c.\u201d [III\/15(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                  6. Addressed \u201cWojun ? [I have not been able identify this place. In his Annuary<\/em> HCR says that he travelled to Teheran by sea from Malta, via Athens, and Constantinople to Poti on the Black Sea coast of Georgia, thence by rail to Tiflis, now Tbilisi, driving from there to the Persian frontier and that he returned by the same route. His estimates of his rate of progress and the distance from Teheran to Tabriz seem to be inconsistent: on the basis of his own estimates at his best rate of progress he could barely have reached the latter place when he wrote this letter. He probably overestimated the distance travelled (the distance from Teheran to Tabriz is actually 329 miles as the crow flies) and perhaps underestimated the rate of progress. RBP.] June 3rd<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Left Teheran on the 18th<\/sup> May but can cover only 20 to 25 miles a day because of the \u201c\u2018impedimenta\u2019 of a Minister, tents, led horses, &c. &c. &c.\u201d Has \u201cnot yet got over the long pull of 400 miles to Tabriz\u201d. However, once on the Russian frontier \u201cwhere I hope to meet [Charles] Alison about the 11th<\/sup> or 12th<\/sup> of June I shall make better way, and may thus be in London by the middle of July but not before.\u201d \u201cThey are very savage with me at the F. O. for having thrown up, but the Govt<\/sup> has only itself to thank for. I am not a mere hack to be driven about as [Edmund] Hammond pleases. I came out with great reluctance and under conditions, and as those conditions have not been kept, am perfectly justified in leaving them, the Govt<\/sup>. in the lurch.\u201d Has washed his hands of \u201cthankless Govt<\/sup>. service\u201d and will concentrate on cuneiforms etc. Expresses renewed scepticism about Chwolson\u2019s hypothesis concerning Kutami [Presumably the same as \u201cKudama\u201d above, I cannot identify the individual referred to on the basis of the information given. RBP.) but will reserve judgement until he sees the Arabic text. Seems only to have seen extracts in \u201cQuatremere\u2019s extracts <\/em>[?]\u201d which do not suggest great antiquity but the work may contain \u201cantique passages.\u201d \u201cAs for Mr Clerk, I should doubt his critical capacities in such a path.\u201d Thanks Norris for the catalogues of books which HCR had requested in his letter of February 4th<\/sup>. Will forward them to Teheran, although he is aware of many omissions. Thinks Norris\u2019s conception of the Table of Contents [for Volume 1 of Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia.<\/em>] is unnecessarily elaborate \u201cA mere reprint of the heading of the Sheets would have done\u201d. Intends to \u201cshut myself up in the country somewhere for at least 3 or 4 months\u201d in the Autumn in order to \u201cfinish my translations and transliterations [The volumes of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em> were eventually published without translations. Although in the Preface to Volume I the Trustees announced that an expanded edition containing HCR\u2019s translations would appear subsequently, they were, apparently not published. RBP.] \u2026 when I have got entirely free of my Persian entanglements\u201d. \u201cThe Bavian Inscription certainly must not be printed off in its present shape \u2013 It requires corrections in every line and some very important.\u201d Asks Norris to make a copy of the Sennacherib Annals \u201cfrom the Slabs in the Museum cellars\u201d. Together with the copies which HCR and Layard made from the slabs in situ \u201cwe ought to accomplish something \u2013 however, the historical part is all contained in more detail on the Cylinder (except the expedition at the mouth of the Euphrates) and the architectural (sic<\/em>) is repeated \u2018ad nauseam\u2019\u201d. \u201cThe vocabularies and bilingual phrase books are what we must now work at.\u201d.Has heard of a \u201cnew and most promising ruin 35 miles S.E of the Birs\u201d from which he has obtained some small finds. Hopes that the excavations there will be pursued \u201cfor the country is not a tenth part exhausted or even examined yet.\u201d \u201cI am very sorry for Wilson [presumably Horace Hayman Wilson (see list of names) who had died the previous month. RBP.] and the sooner you shelve Sykes the better.\u201d [III\/15(06)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                    III\/16\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>13 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris from August 18 1860 to August 16 1862 i.e. from his return from Teheran to the eve of his marriage.<\/p>\n

                                                                                      \n
                                                                                    1. Addressed \u201cFolkestone. Aug. 8 [Added (in his wife\u2019s hand) \u20181860\u2019 There is also an associated envelope postmarked \u201cAug 8 60\u201d] My dear Norris.\u201d Has been studying \u201cthe Ashur-bani-pal fragments\u201d which he finds very interesting. Has begun by studying the Egyptian Campaign and hopes \u201cby comparing some dozen fragments together to get a connected account of the war.\u201d Reads the names of the two leaders of the resistance to the Assyrians as Necho, King of Memphis and Sais Niku sarru ir Mimpi va Tsai <\/em>and Tirhakeh King of \u00c6thiopia Taragu sarru mat Kutsi. <\/em>This may be important historically as he thinks the inscription cannot be before about 660BC and he does not think \u201cthe Egyptologers\u201d would recognise such names as late as that. References \u201cpopulous No<\/em>\u201d and a chief Vardamani<\/em> \u201cwhich name has an Anesic [??] aspect\u201d also to 20 kings and their cities \u201call bona fide Egyptian names, which ought to delight Birch.\u201d Cannot identify the names at once as \u201cI have no books here [It appears from his letter dated September 30th<\/sup> that he is waiting for his books to return from Teheran. RBP.]\u201d but he will communicate them to the Athen\u00e6um <\/em>\u201cas soon as I have made them out \u2026 as the subject is really of interest.\u201d Has found a mention of a Pharaoh (gives only the name in cuneiform) \u201con the Sargon fragments\u201d \u201cdifferent and more detailed than the passage at Khorsabad.\u201d Has been studying Chwolson\u2019s book and doubts if any of the Chald\u00e6an authors named in it are earlier than the Christian era. \u201cThe geographical names are quite modern and not a single Royal name can I recognize \u2013 nor indeed have they a genuine Babylonian aspect.\u201d Promises to write further \u201cabout Egypt\u201d when he has finished his work. [III\/16(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                    2. Addressed \u201cOsborne House, Hesketh Crescent, Torquay Aug. 22 [Added (in his wife\u2019s hand?) \u20181860\u2019] My dear Norris.\u201d Is returning \u201cby book post, all the syllabary proofs to look through before they go to Bowler for final correction. [From this point, Bowler must have been working on sheets for Volume II because all the sheets for Volume I had been printed before HCR went to Teheran. RBP.]\u201d Complains that many of his \u201coriginal corrections and suggestions for reference\u201d appear not to have been incorporated. Asks Norris to go through the whole series again \u201cbefore we give the final imprimatur\u201d and, if necessary, \u201cwe just put off setting the stones till we get back to Town\u201d. [At this point, Norris has written in pencil \u201c<first two words illegible> <\/em>The Tiglath translation\u201d] Proposes to remain at Torquay for a month and will report progress to Norris. \u201cThe Tauchnitz [Tauchnitz<\/em> is the name of a publishing firm in Leipzig. RBP.] came all right and is very useful.\u201d [III\/16(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    3. Addressed \u201cOsborne House, Hesketh Crescent, Torquay Aug 27th<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Has been reading \u201cFox Talbot\u2019s papers in the Journal [i.e. Translation of some Assyrian Inscriptions: No. I The Birs Nimrud Inscription, No. II The Inscription of Michaux, No .III The Inscription of Bellino<\/em> JRAS <\/em>18 <\/strong>(1861) pp 35-107. HCR presumably received preprints. RBP.] \u201cI see he has made good use of the Museum Sheets\u201d Is prepared to accept some of his corrections to the Birs inscription but HCR is still unconvinced by the reading of a particular word (Col. 2 line 13) as kitarri<\/em> on Norris\u2019s suggestion. Gives his own reading kis\u00e9ri<\/em>. However, in other places considers that Fox Talbot is almost as bold as Oppert and \u201calmost as often wrong\u201d. Comments on Oppert\u2019s alleged resentment of HCR\u2019s claim to priority in publishing and translating the Birs Inscription [asserted in a note appended to his paper On the Birs Nimrud or the Great Temple of Borsippa <\/em>which appeared in the same volume of the JRAS<\/em> immediately preceding Fox Talbot\u2019s papers. RBP.] but now that he has read Oppert\u2019s translation [quoted by Fox Talbot] he finds it so bad that \u201cI need not have much minded a comparison \u2013 his egotism however is unsufferable and a little snubbing will do him good.\u201d Advises Norris to tell Lord Wodehouse \u201cpoint blank that I could not and would not work during my holidays.\u201d Expects to remain at Torquay for another week or ten days \u201cas I like the place and really want rest \u2013 the weather too seems to be clearing at last.\u201d Asks Norris to send \u201cthe syllabary sheets again to Bowler after you have gone through them\u201d and HCR will make a final comparison with the originals \u201cbefore the final imprimatur is given.\u201d [III\/16(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    4. Addressed \u201cTemple Newsam, nr<\/sup> Leeds, Sunday Septr<\/sup> [1860] My dear Norris.\u201d [September 30th was a Sunday in 1855, 1860 and 1866. However, HCR wrote to Norris from Temple Newsam on October 23rd<\/sup> 1855 and does not mention having been there the month before, moreover, there are letters in the Fox Talbot archive (see Note on Dating<\/em> before III\/14 above) from Norris to Fox Talbot dated September 20th<\/sup>, October 4th<\/sup> and October 12th<\/sup> 1860 in which he refers to a proposal from Fox Talbot for some form of collaboration on the Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em> project. However, Fox Talbot\u2019s original letter is not in that archive. RBP.] Does not understand exactly what Fox Talbot is proposing in the way of collaboration. Is quite happy for him to have anything he wants resulting from the work at the Museum, but he cannot be a partner in the work, for the accuracy of which Norris and HCR are solely responsible. However, as his books and papers have now reached London, HCR is \u201cready to set to work in earnest\u201d expects to work steadily all winter and is ready \u201cto come to some definite understanding about Fox Talbot\u2019s cooperation\u201d. [The sentence is not clear, but I think this is what HCR means and Norris\u2019s letter to Fox Talbot dated October 12th<\/sup> appears to confirm it. RBP.] However \u201cFox Talbot\u2019s translations are a great deal too adventurous to satisfy me and he evidently has not studied the inscriptions half enough.\u201d \u201cYour Dictionary if fairly carried out will be a far better key to the language than all the Semitic authorities at present extant. [This appears to be the first reference to Norris\u2019s proposed Assyrian Dictionary.<\/em>] \u201cBy the bye, I really must tackle Chwolhson [sic<\/em>] and demolish Kutami. The Saturday Review articles on the book are quite preposterous. I suppose Mr Clerk is the author, the same who wrote the article in the Christian Remembrancer? [III\/16(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    5. Addressed \u201c39 Hill Street, Berkeley Square W Tuesday, March 26 [In HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1861\u201d Has been \u201claid up\u201d for some days and is now going into the country, \u201cso that the Museum Report hangs fire\u201d. Encloses \u201cyour memorandum\u201d and asks Norris to give it to Panizzi \u201cso that it is incorporated into the general return\u201d. Was unable to \u201cgive the imprimatur\u201d for the sheets which he corrected last week because he could not find the original tablets. Asks that they should be set out with the printed sheets ready for his inspection. Disagrees with Fox Talbot\u2019s interpretation of a passage on the Khorsabad Cylinder as indicating the existence of coined money and auguries, although he thinks that his reading of temple worship may be correct, as HCR had already suggested this in an essay which he included in his brother George\u2019s Letters to him during the present week should be addressed to Ampthill Park, Ampthill, Beds. [III\/16(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    6. Addressed \u201cHillside, [The home of his sister Maria Brooke Smith. Their mother seems to have lived there also during her lifetime.] Friday Ap. 5 [in his wife\u2019s hand] 1861 My dear Norris.\u201d Is sorry to hear that Norris is ill \u201cbut considering you have [\u2018not\u2019 omitted here? RBP] had a holiday for 40 years, I really do not think you have much cause to complain.\u201d Is in the country for the Easter holidays [Easter Sunday 1861 fell on March 31st<\/sup>.] but returns to London on Monday to resume work \u201cso I hope Bowler will have some more printed sheets ready for my inspection.\u201d [III\/16(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    7. On Athen\u00e6um notepaper. \u201cTuesday May 14. [May 14th<\/sup> was a Tuesday in 1861 and again in 1867. However, according to letters in the Fox Talbot archive, Norris had ceased to visit the British Museum by 1867 because of failing health and in a letter dated May 20th<\/sup> 1867 he says he has been too unwell even to write. 1861 therefore seems more likely. RBP.] Has been \u201chorrified\u201d at the way Bowler is cramming unrelated fragments on to the same sheet without leaving space for headings. Believes it will be necessary to \u201ccancel 4 or 5 of the printed sheets now at the Museum on account of incongruity of contents.\u201d Bowler should concentrate on whole tablets which will fill a sheet until HCR can instruct him how fragments should be arranged. Asks Norris to meet him at the Museum on the following day when HCR can show him what he means. [III\/16(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    8. Addressed \u201cTemple Newsam, Leeds. Sunday [in Norris\u2019s hand] early October 1861 [i.e. October 5th<\/sup> or 12th<\/sup>] \u201cThanks for your letter \u2018reporting progress\u2019 as to the Cuneiform Dictionary. I have no doubt that your work will be very useful in facilitating an acquisition of the language by future students, but great care must be taken that all derivatives are traced to their true source and that distinct roots are not confounded together, owing to the difficulty of distinguishing servile from radical letters.\u201d Intends to return to London on Wednesday and hopes \u201cto work seriously at the Inscriptions\u201d all winter so as to \u201cprint my transliterations and translations with the text.\u201d \u201cThey have sent me a new Chald\u00e6an Inscription from Baghdad, adding another name to our Royal List, that of the father of Rim-Sin[I, king of the city-state of Larsa until its conquest by Babylon under Hammurabi. RBP.] and they are anxious to set to work excavating on a new site, Zuma <\/em>[I have not been able to identify this site elsewhere. RBP] \u2026 if we give them any encouragement from home. I must see if the Trustees will move in this matter [It is not clear who is meant by \u201cthey\u201d in this context, particularly since HCR complains in III\/15(04) above that there is no-one competent to supervise such excavations. RBP.]\u201d Has found Tingir<\/em> for \u201cGod\u201d in one of the Accadian vocabularies \u201cexactly Tengri and proving the Turanian character of the language. In another Tengir<\/em> becomes Timir<\/em> or Demir<\/em> \u2013 the ng<\/em> in fact is constantly softened to m<\/em> and I am thus enabled to trace numerous Turkish analogies which had previously escaped me.\u201d [III\/16(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    9. On Athenaeum notepaper \u201c[Thursday] Oct. 17 [in Norris\u2019s hand] 1861 My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cI was at the Museum yesterday\u201d correcting proofs but was unable to complete what he was doing because he could not find \u201ca duplicate Inscription\u201d for comparison. Asks Norris to see if he can find it while HCR is away. \u201cI am sorry to hear you are threatened with a return of your malady [gout] but trust you will succeed in boiling yourself out of it.\u201d On his return to London, will set to work seriously both on the [Assyrian] Dictionary and the translations. Envisages the former as a supplement to the \u201cText and Translations, and be so augmented as to contain at any rate<\/em> every Assyrian word in the Volume.\u201d Asks Norris to get \u201cHarrison\u201d to print \u201ca few lines of Tiglath Pileser\u201d with translation \u201c(in Latin ?) as a specimen of types &c.\u201d Is on the point of leaving London for \u201cLd Lyveden, Fanning Woods, Thrapston, Northamptonshire\u201d where he will remain until Monday or Tuesday next when he will return to Temple Newsam and remain there \u201cuntil the end of next week [i.e. 25th<\/sup> or 26th<\/sup>, in fact he stayed away until the 28th<\/sup>. RBP.] [III\/16(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    10. On Athenaeum notepaper \u201cWednesday [in Norris\u2019s hand \u2018end of October 1861\u2019. By reference to the previous letter and the statement \u2018I returned to Town on Monday\u2019 can be dated to 30th<\/sup> October 1861. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Does not like the specimens of typography. \u201cThe two types are not sufficiently distinct\u201d. Thinks that the translations must be in Latin rather than English \u201cotherwise the long sentences will be terribly confused\u201d although the English translations might be added as an appendix. \u201cI am afraid the Calendars are hardly worth the trouble you are expending on them. The matter is quite beyond our present range of knowledge and when found out will I am pretty sure, prove to be all bosh<\/em>.\u201d Has found a fragment of a tablet which promises to clarify the reading of previously obscure names, written as compound ideograms, showing how they are composed and the variant orthographies. \u201cHave you seen the last Zeitschrift? [Probably Zeitschrift der deutschen Morgenl\u00e4ndischen <\/em>RBP.] It has several articles, which as far as I can make out, are of much interest.\u201d Also asks if Norris knows anything about a copper bowl from Aden with an unknown inscription \u201cwhich [William Henry ?] Sykes is telling of?\u201d. [III\/16(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    11. On Athenaeum notepaper \u201cTuesday April 15 [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand \u20181862\u2019] My dear Norris.\u201d Has been sent a letter in Punjabi by the Russian Embassy to translate, but having no special knowledge of that language asks Norris if he knows of a Punjabi expert, so as to save HCR time and labour. \u201cThe writing is so plain that any Punjabi scholar would read the whole thing straight off. I asked the Maharajah Duleep Singh last night if he could assist us; but he says he has no gooroo <\/em>with him and doubts now if his mother is better supplied. [The Maharajah had been deliberately given an English education. RBP.]\u201d Is about to leave London for his sister Maria\u2019s home for the [Easter] holidays [Easter Sunday fell on April 20th<\/sup> in 1862.] but will be \u201cat my new house, No<\/sup>. 1 Hill Strt <\/sup>[see note on addresses above] on Monday afternoon so that Norris can return the photographs if he has not been able to find a translator. [III\/16(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    12. On Athen\u00e6um notepaper. \u201cJuly 1 [1862. Dated by the reference to the letter from Hincks in the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> \u201ccontroverting all my Chronology\u201d.] Has heard from Bowler that Norris is \u201cailing again\u201d and fears that it is due to \u201coverwork at the For. Office.\u201d Has discovered a fragment of a tablet which gives \u201cthe synchronous history of the early Assyrian and Babylonian kings\u201d. If the remainder of the tablet can be found, \u201cthere will be a complete comparative history up to the earliest times.\u201d Complains that there was \u201cneither glue<\/u> nor awl<\/u> [?] in our room [at the Museum] nor in fact any of these appurtenances that we ought to have.\u201d Has heard from the Editor of the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> that a letter from Hincks is to appear in the next issue \u201ccontroverting all my Chronology adopted from the [Eponym] Canon \u2026\u201d which HCR will answer in the following issue. [This must refer to E Hincks, Bible History and the Rawlinson Canon <\/em>Letter dated 28th<\/sup> June 1862, published in The Athen\u00e6um <\/em> 1810 5th<\/sup> July 1862. (See Cathcart and Donlon No 117.) This was a reply to an earlier letter from HCR announcing the reconstruction of four versions of the \u201cCanon\u201d (essentially a list of officials holding office in successive years) and suggesting HCR had misinterpreted it. HCR\u2019s reply appeared in The Athen\u00e6um <\/em>No. 1812 19th<\/sup> July 1862, and there was a second letter from Hincks dated 22nd<\/sup> July 1862, appearing in The Athen\u00e6um <\/em>No. 1813 26th<\/sup> July 1862. See Cathcart and Donlon No 118. This appears to have been the start of a regular exchange of letters in the pages of The Athen\u00e6um <\/em>lasting at least until 1863. There are two letters in the Fox Talbot Archive referred to above commenting on this dispute: from Fox Talbot to Hincks dated 8th<\/sup> July 1862 and Hincks\u2019s reply dated 11th<\/sup> July 1862. RBP.] [III\/16(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                    13. Addressed \u201cKnoyle \u2013 [Saturday] Aug. 16. [1862. Dated by the reference to his forthcoming marriage.] Does not expect to see Norris [presumably until after HCR returns from his honeymoon. RBP.] but Norris may keep \u201cthe Khorsabad papers as long as you please.\u201d Has just heard of the arrival \u201cof the case containing the complete casts of the marbles at Kurkh [excavated the previous year by John George Taylor RBP.]\u201d but will not allow the case to opened \u201cuntil I get back to Town. [HCR was planning to return to London on August 23rd. RBP.]\u201d Has been correcting Bowler\u2019s tracings \u201cand will leave him lots of work to go on with before I take wing. I am to be executed on the 2nd<\/sup> of Septbr<\/sup> and then come back here for a fortnight \u2013 afterwards we pass a month or six weeks in Italy and then return to London for the winter.\u201d Letters to No. 1 Hill Street will always find him. [III\/16(13)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                      III\/17\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>30 \u00a0letters from HCR to Edwin Norris from September 25th<\/sup> 1862 to May 3rd<\/sup> 1865 i.e. from his marriage to his re-entering Parliament.<\/p>\n

                                                                                        \n
                                                                                      1. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W Septr<\/sup> 25 1862. My dear Norris.\u201d Regrets that he must leave London before Norris returns from \u201cyour American? ovation [I have not been able to clarify this. RBP.] but my lady is anxious to be on the wing for Italy.\u201d During his absence, Bowler is to continue lithographing those tracings which HCR has checked and headed. The fragments of the [Assyrian Eponym?] Canon cannot, however, be published as Bowler has copied them but must be arranged as complete tablets with the missing portions indicated. \u201cThis is the only way, it seems to me, that the public can be made to comprehend their chronological value.\u201d Has also \u201clooked over the tracings from the new casts. [From Kurkh? See III\/16(12) above.] The Inscriptions appear to be of Sardanapalus and Shalmaneser and to contain more detail, especially of Syria than those previously known, but Norris can \u201camuse yourself by comparing the different texts. \u201cBowler\u2019s tracings had better not be put on the stone, till I can bring the Inscriptions into some order.\u201d Has made \u201ca number of very curious discoveries this last month\u201d including a cuneiform word occurring in Bit Zida and meaning \u201cright hand or South\u201d which he compares to the \u201cIndian s\u00eddha<\/em>\u201d and another, the Babylonian kappu<\/em> meaning the left hand or west, which he compares to the Persian chap<\/em>. Asks for Norris to forward letters received at HCR\u2019s London house via the diplomatic bag to [Sir James] Hudson at Turin and later to Odo Russell at Rome, who could forward them HCR wherever he might be. He suggests this arrangement because he has been assured that the post restante<\/em> system is not reliable. Expects to be back about November 20th<\/sup>. [III\/17(01)<\/li>\n
                                                                                      2. Addressed \u201cVenice. Octr<\/sup> 11 1862 My dear Norris.\u201d Owing to the limitations of the diplomatic mail service and his expectation of being back in England by November 15th<\/sup>, Norris need only send letters to catch the October 27th<\/sup><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                        delivery to Odo Russell in Rome, but HCR will write again with definite instructions when he is on the way home. This is his first visit to Italy and he is thoroughly enjoying it \u2013 by the time he has seen all the places he plans to visit \u201cI expect to have my head thoroughly bewildered.\u201d Has not visited \u201cByron\u2019s house here as there are too many realities of great interest to admit of one\u2019s indulging in mere sentimentalities.\u201d Has examined \u201cThe Artaxerxes vase [A gray porphyry vase in the Treasury of St Marks with a cuneiform inscription in four languages. RBP.] \u2026 the orthography shows a very degraded period\u201d instances the Babylonian form of the name Artaxerxes. \u201cThe Lions however at the Arsenal brought from Athens seem to me the more [sic<\/em>] curious things here. One is nearly the counterpart of [Charles Thomas] Newton\u2019s big fellow from Cnidus [now in the British Museum] and must be very old Greek work \u2013 the other I suspect to be Ph\u0153nician and think I can trace the remains of Ph\u0153nician letters on the back \u2013 but what is the real explanation of the Runic inscription? Is [Carl Christian] Rafn\u2019s reading to be depended on and were Runes really used as late as A D 1409? Do you know anything of the Psalter & Commentary of St<\/sup> Jerome at Milan with Irish glosses &c &c said to be of the 9th<\/sup> century? [Norris has written over the words \u201c9th<\/sup> century\u201d in pencil \u201cXXIX ????\u201d At the bottom of the page but apparently referring to the same point he has written, also in pencil, \u201cMuratori (presumably Ludovico Antonio Muratori 1672-1750) ???? p.1063 runic pages \u201ccharacter longobardus sen iti pur? Saxonicus ??? ??? 1846.\u201d] In the accounts there seems to be a strange confusion between Lombard, Saxon and Irish characters \u2013 but I suppose it is the earliest undoubted Gaelic we possess, is it not? I have also been to the Armenian Convent and have been poking about both there and in the other Libraries for Arabic M.S.S. but have found nothing of consequence.\u201d In his last letter he made a mistake in identifying a cuneiform word as meaning \u201cleft-hand or west\u201d it should have been \u201cleft hand or north\u201d. Asks Norris to write to him at Rome between October 25th<\/sup> and November 5th<\/sup> and promises to write again from that city. [III\/17(02)].<\/p>\n

                                                                                          \n
                                                                                        1. Addressed \u201cFlorence. Octr<\/sup> 20 [In his wife\u2019s hand] 1862 My dear Norris.\u201d Writes a good deal about the vagaries of the post and of the journey from Venice to Florence. Has been overwhelmed by the wonders of the Uffizi. \u201cTomorrow we hope to take a run through the Pitti \u2013 but I see that a whole week at Florence will hardly suffice to give a notion even of what it contains.\u201d His wife has been frightened by stories of brigands, so that instead of visiting Siena and Viterbo as they had planned, they will visit Pisa and then go by boat \u201cfrom Leghorn to Civita Vecchia.\u201d Wonders about the etymology of the word \u201cvecchia\u201d. They plan to spend a week or ten days at Rome and then \u201crun on to Naples by rail, take a glance merely at Pompeii and then steam to Genoa and home as fast as we can by Turin and over the Mt<\/sup>\u201d Now expects to be in England by November 30th<\/sup> and gives directions as to where to address letters to catch them on the way home. \u201cI have really had no time at all to look at Cuneiforms and Bowler\u2019s tracings are still uncorrected in my writing book. We must work in earnest all the winter.\u201d [III\/17(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        2. Addressed \u201cNaples. Novr<\/sup> 13th<\/sup> 1862 My dear Norris.\u201d Comments briefly on his trip and on his plans to be back in London in time for the first RAS meeting on November 27th<\/sup>. Is puzzled by a request to use his influence with the Duke of Somerset [One of his wife\u2019s relatives \u2013 it is interesting to note how soon after his marriage HCR\u2019s connection with a much more influential family began to be exploited. RBP.] on behalf of \u201cMr. Wiltshire\u201d [who appears to be seeking promotion to \u201c1st<\/sup> Master\u201d]. Has very little cuneiform material on hand to occupy himself with but comments on a cuneiform character meaning \u201cthe left hand or north\u201d [It is not clear how this relates to similar comments in the letter dated September 25th<\/sup> above but Norris has inserted marginal notes apparently agreeing with HCR and citing chapter and verse. Then comments on some other characters in the tracings which he has with him, but whether he is offering corrections or new interpretations is not clear. RBP.] Hopes that Norris will have finished \u201cthe Sardanapalus Inscription as well as the Shalmaneser one before I get home\u201d. [III\/17(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        3. Addressed \u201cHotel de Mirabeau. Paris. Sunday Novr<\/sup> 30 [in his wife\u2019s hand] 1862 My dear Norris.\u201d Has received no letters forwarded from England [since November 5th<\/sup>] and thinks the later ones \u201care never likely to reach me\u201d. His return home was delayed for 4 days by a back injury which he sustained on board the steamer taking him from Naples to Marseilles and which will take some time yet to clear up. However, he expects to be back in London \u201con Tuesday evening\u201d. Asks Norris to call on him at home on Wednesday morning \u201cjust to give me any Cuneiform news you have and let me know what has become of my letters.\u201d [III\/17(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        4. On Athenaeum notepaper. Dated \u201cThursday Decr<\/sup> 4th<\/sup> [in his wife\u2019s hand] 1862. My dear Norris.\u201d Since Norris\u2019s visit the previous day he has received one batch of letters returned from Rome, but they are old ones. Presumes that there is a batch of more recent ones \u201clying in some of the pigeon holes of the Paris Embassy.\u201d Has received \u201ctwo more packets of Inscriptions, from Taylor [in Kurdistan] and Kemball [in Baghdad]. \u201cthe former is copy [sic<\/em>] of a memorial of the 1st<\/sup> Tiglath Pileser on his 3rd<\/sup> expedition against Nairi [now inTurkey], taken from the cave at the source of the Tigris. The cast of a second one from the same spot has not yet reached me, but I presume it will turn out to belong to the great Sardanapalus. Kemball\u2019s packet contains four Inscriptions \u2013 3 Chald\u00e6an and the other Hieratic Babylonian belonging to Ashur bani pal son of Esar Haddon \u2013\u00a0 it seems altogether new and curious, but is very minute and difficult to read.\u201d If Norris calls any morning about 11, he may see them all. Complains that Oppert has somehow managed to get into \u201cour room at the Museum and copied the fragments of the Canon as we put them together\u201d and has now published it as his own original discovery. Disagrees with him about a \u201cblank before Tiglath Pileser II \u2013 the only valuable notice I see is the date of Sargon\u2019s 12th<\/sup> year on the tablet in the Louvre.\u201d Hopes to be about again as usual by next week. [III\/17(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        5. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W (crossed out<\/em>) Knoyle House, Wednesday\u201d. [The reference to the Kurkh Monolith, the casts of which are said in III\/16(12) dated August 8th<\/sup> 1862 to have just been received at the British Museum, having been copied by \u201cCoxe\u201d implies a date towards the end of 1862 or the beginning of 1863. The reference to \u201cTalbot Esarhaddon\u201d (presumably H F Talbot <\/strong>Assyrian Texts Translated (1)<\/em> JRAS 19 <\/strong>1862 pp 124-135) implies a date not much later. In any case the reference to Redhouse sending the \u201cRishire (presumably HCR\u2019s spelling of Reeshehr, to the south of Bushehr in Iran, where there are the remains of an Elamite settlement) bricks\u201d to the Museum indicates that it cannot be later than 1863 when Redhouse ceased to be secretary to the RAS. Assuming that the reference to \u201cbricks and tablets\u201d being refused admission to the British Museum in the following letter refers to those mentioned in this letter, it can be dated December 10th<\/sup> RBP.] Norris is to speak to \u201cCoxe\u201d [apparently the first reference in the letters to this mysterious individual. RBP.] to take charge of \u201cthe things\u201d when Redhouse sends them to the Museum [presumably from the RAS]. The \u201cRishire bricks\u201d are to be put with \u201cthe other Susian relics\u201d and the casts with \u201cthe other paper casts in my room.\u201d The Kurkh Monolith which Coxe has finished copying is \u201cvery curious, with many new names of Kings and countries and variants for the Eponyms\u201d. Norris\u2019s \u201cguesses about Polyphones won\u2019t do.\u201d The name of the Sidonian king is Abdi-Milkut (now Adbi-Milkutti). Another cuneiform character should be read in a particular instance as ku. <\/em>Has looked over \u201cTalbot\u2019s Esarhaddon\u201d [see above] and finds it so full of errors that he would draw up an amended translation if he had the time.[III\/17(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        6. Addressed \u201cKnoyle House Hindon Decr<\/sup> 13 [In his wife\u2019s hand \u2018Before 1862 (crossed out) 1865?\u2019 but datable from the preceding letter to 1862. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Had not expected any difficulty in \u201creceiving the casts and bricks at the Museum\u201d but, rather than bothering Panizzi about them, Norris is to have them sent to HCR\u2019s house, where his housekeeper will be directed to take them in and put them away until HCR returns home. Reasserts, with reasons, that \u201cthe name of the Sidon king must<\/em> be Abdi-Milkut\u201d. \u201cI certainly read the name of the stone as kumina<\/em> rather than durmina<\/em> but I know of no analogies.\u201d Hopes to hear soon that \u201cthe second Monolith is copied, as it seemed to me there was a good deal of new matter \u2013 also in copying Michaux No<\/sup> III, please observe if the curses scattered about the top of the stone apply to the emblems \u2013 as we might be able thereby to identify the Gods.\u201d Agrees with Oppert \u201cabout Fox Talbot\u2019s wild assumptions\u201d but \u201cOppert is often just as bad himself\u201d. Asks to be informed if Norris finds anything new at the Museum. \u201cThe Syllabary fragments I copied long ago.\u201d [III\/17\/(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        7. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Monday. Feb.2. [Datable from the address to the period between 1862 and 1868. 1863 was the only year during that period in which February 2nd<\/sup> was a Monday. RBP.] Will be at Ld<\/sup> Wensleydale\u2019s, Ampthill Park, Beds. for the rest of the week. \u201cThe Ph\u0153nician legends on the Pincushion tablets turn out to be very curious; generally the name denotes the chamber where the deed was deposited, but sometimes the name of the depositor.\u201d Gives example. [Norris alludes to this discovery in a letter to Fox Talbot dated 12th<\/sup> February 1863.] \u201cI have sent a long letter to the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> about Taylor\u2019s discoveries, which will appear I hope in next Saturday\u2019s number.[Actually appeared in No. 1842 14th<\/sup> February 1862 p 228. RBP.]\u201d [See letter dated Dec. 4th<\/sup> 1862 above. W H Fox Talbot alludes in a letter published in The Athen\u00e6um <\/em>published January 24th<\/sup> 1863 to HCR\u2019s announcement of this discovery at a meeting of the RAS Dec. 20th<\/sup> RBP.] [III\/17(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        8. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Wednesday [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] March 1863 [at end] 3 PM. My dear Norris.\u201d Is obliged to be at \u201cthe Persian Minister\u2019s tomorrow morning to settle about the Indian Telegraph [See Christina Phelps Harris The laying of the Persian Gulf Telegraph Cable of 1864<\/em> The Geographical Journal 135 <\/strong>(2) June 1964 pp 169-190. It is not immediately apparent from this article what HCR\u2019s role in the project was nor how long it lasted. RBP.].Bowler, therefore, should be put off to Friday if there is time to communicate with him. \u201cM\u00e9nant is here, more prying and restless, even than Oppert, and Coxe hardly knows how to manage him \u2013 however he has let him loose, for the nonce, on the heterogeneous fragments in the cases below stairs, which we went through last year \u2013 and this it is to be hoped will take the edge off his appetite.\u201d [III\/17(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        9. Dated \u201c1 Hill Street, [Notepaper has HCR\u2019s printed monogram.] March 14 [1863. Not earlier because HCR had not moved to this address by this date in 1862 and not later than 1864 because by this date in 1865 Volume 2 of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em> had been printed except for the Table of Contents. The reference to correcting the Michaux III Inscription, the copying of which is referred to in III\/17(08) above indicates 1863. RBP.]. My dear Norris.\u201d Norris has not had a reply to his previous note because HCR appears to have lost it. Has found \u201cBowler\u2019s [lithograph of the] Michaux III Hieratic & Cursive\u201d so full of errors that he has stopped work on correcting it \u201cpending your preliminary \u2018scouring\u2019.\u201d Has also marked a good number of characters still requiring amendment on \u201cthe [Kurkh?] Monolith\u201d. Gives brief answers to some of Norris\u2019s questions. 1. A certain cuneiform word \u201cin New Dio [?] II.52. must mean \u2018destruction\u2019 but I can\u2019t pronounce on the orthography or etymology.\u201d Has always connected guti<\/em> with the Hebrew goim<\/em>. \u201cIt means possibly merely \u2018nomadic tribes\u2019 but as a distinct geographical title it was first applied to the desert between the Valley of the Euphrates, which has been always peopled by nomads and Syria \u2013 and later to the district immediately round Babylon or even to Babylon itself, through [?] its synonym —- See Ld<\/sup> Aberdeen\u2019s Stone & II. P. 50. Ls 2 & 25 (besides 52 & 62) and also P.48.l.14.\u201d [III\/17(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        10. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Friday March 27. [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1863. My dear Norris.\u201d Hopes that the worst of \u201cyour tic<\/em>\u201d [HCR seems only just to have heard of this. RBP.] is now over. Has been busy most of the week \u201coccupied with other matters\u201d but went to the Museum \u201cyesterday\u201d looking \u201cat another Ph\u0153nician legend\u201d. Asks Norris to contact Bowler for details of the work he has done for the annual Report of Progress and to send the Report to HCR to sign. Leaves London the following day to spend Easter at Knoyle [Easter Sunday 1863 was on April 5th<\/sup>. RBP.] and plans to return in a fortnight. Hopes to have the \u201cnotes on Khammurabi ready by my return\u201d and \u201cto make some progress \u2026 both with the paper on Chronology and with that on Syrian Geography.\u201d [III\/17(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        11. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Saturday March 28th<\/sup>. [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1863. My dear Norris.\u201d Is on the point of leaving London as explained in the previous letter, but had been to the Museum, hoping to \u201ccopy a tablet containing the early Synchronous historical notices of Assyria and Babylonia\u201d. Has just corrected a tracing which Bowler had made of it and asks Norris to tell him to send it to HCR at Knoyle. When HCR has copied it, he will return it to Bowler \u201cto be put on the stone.\u201d [III\/17(13)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        12. Addressed \u201cKnoyle House, Hindon. April 2 [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1863. My dear Norris.\u201d Has received \u201canother dun from Winter Jones\u201d. Norris is to get Bowler to draw up the Progress report referred to above and send it to HCR for signature. \u201cOtherwise I shall be obliged to come up to London expressly on this account.\u201d On second thoughts, Norris can sign it in HCR\u2019s absence. \u201cI am writing my notes on Fox Talbot\u2019s paper\u201d and will show them to Norris when HCR gets back to London. Is embarrassed by not knowing whether \u201cTrubner has got the Cuneiform types from Harrison\u201d. It will be much easier to illustrate his paper with illustrations printed directly in cuneiform type rather having recourse to descriptions of characters. Acknowledges receipt of \u201cthe tracing\u201d. Has abstracted the information \u201cfor my Chronological paper.\u201d [III\/17(14)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        13. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Friday. My dear Norris.\u201d [Datable from the address to the period after 1862 and from the reference to the fact that HCR\u2019s \u201cBilingual Paper\u201d has not yet been published to a date before July 1864. The allusion to the weather improving and to Sayce\u2019s 2nd<\/sup> paper makes a date in the early summer of 1863 most likely. RBP.] Is glad \u201cyou are come back and as the weather is now really getting fine, hope you will improve [In a letter dated 12th<\/sup> February 1863 in the Fox Talbot archive, Norris says that he has been suffering from the tic douloureux<\/em> and has not been to the RAS much recently: in a further letter dated 25th<\/sup> March he says that he is still suffering. RBP]\u201d Wants to talk to Norris about the problems of setting up the type for \u201cmy bilingual paper [Bilingual Readings \u2013 Cuneiform and Ph\u0153nician. Notes on some Tablets in the British Museum, containing Bilingual Legends (Assyrian and Ph\u0153nician) <\/em>JRAS I <\/strong>(N.S.) 1865 pp. 187-247. At the AGM of the RAS held on 30th<\/sup> May 1864 it was reported that the part of the Journal containing this paper was to be published \u2018in the course of July\u2019.]\u201d The paper itself is written and he has approved the printing of the lithographed plates, but HCR still has to write the notes. Has just had \u201ca peep of Sayce\u2019s 2nd<\/sup> paper [According to Cathcart and Donlon, AH Sayce published a paper on \u201cOld Chald\u00e6an\u201d in Atlantis <\/em>4<\/strong> 1863 which elicited a response from Hincks (see below). Sayce was only 18 at this date, although he had already studied cuneiform. RBP.]\u201d Although he has made good use of \u201cmeagre materials\u201d it is a pity he did not wait \u201cfor our 2nd<\/sup> Volume which would have given him sheets and sheets of bilingual grammatical matter\u201d. Will try to visit Norris on Sunday \u201cto have a talk on these matters.\u201d [III\/17(15)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        14. Addressed \u201cKnoyle House. Friday. [In HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] July 1863. My dear Norris.\u201d Will return to London \u201cnext Wednesday\u201d as \u201cI have to see Panizzi about the new Babylonian Excavation grant.\u201d Norris is to ask Bowler to meet him at the Museum between 12 and 1. Is making \u201cgood progress\u201d \u201cat Akkadian\u201d \u201calthough the subject is a very difficult one.\u201d III\/17(16)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        15. Addressed \u201cKnoyle House, Hindon, Wilts Friday [In Norris\u2019s hand.] 2 Oct 1863.\u201d Hopes Norris is \u201cbenefitted by the sea air.\u201d Is surprised to hear \u201cthat Hincks disowns the 42 years of Tiglath Pileser. I am confident I can point to a notice of the tablet which was said to be the authority in several of his printed letters. [In a letter dated October 9th<\/sup> 1863 and published in The Athen\u00e6um<\/em> of October 24th<\/sup>, (see below) Hincks denied having ever stated that Tiglath Pileser reigned for 42 years, but it is not clear what HCR can be referring to on October 2nd<\/sup>, unless it was gossip picked up at the British Association meeting in Newcastle 26th<\/sup> August \u2013 2nd<\/sup> September 1863. RBP.]\u201d Goes into some detail on this point. Asks Norris to get from Bowler a copy of the printed \u201cSynchronous tablet\u201d. \u201cThere is an old copy at the Museum from which we cut the Bilingual Nominal list for Mr. George Smith. [Apparently the earliest reference in the letters to George Smith. It is not clear what HCR is referring to here: at this date George Smith would have just started work at the BM as a repairer helping to piece together fragments of cuneiform tablets. RBP.]\u201d Also wants to know if Coxe has discovered anything of interest, but fears that he has been wasting his time copying \u201cold<\/em> Inscriptions\u201d. Expects to be at the Museum next week \u201con Saturday the 10th<\/sup>.\u201d [III\/17(17)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        16. Addressed \u201c1 Hill St Tuesday [In Norris\u2019s hand] Sep or Oct. 1863. My dear Norris.\u201d Thanks Norris for a copy of an inscription \u201cwhich I have been writing out in ordinary Assyrian\u201d. The inscription is similar to that on Michaux\u2019s stone and records the exchange of a piece of land for various items of property \u2013 chariot and harness etc whose value is given item by item, totalling \u00a3710, but being exchanged for land valued at \u00a3616. Wonders whether a certain cuneiform character representing the unit of land could be translated \u201cploughs\u201d \u201cas it is at present throughout the East.\u201d Encloses a slip (not with the letter) giving the equivalents of some letters which Norris was uncertain of. The original stone arrived at the Museum just after Norris left town \u201cand attracts general admiration from its perfect state of preservation. \u201cThe fellow [?] stone is dated from Merodach-iddin-akhi<\/em> contemporary with Tiglath Pileser I BC 1220 and they are both probably nearly of the same date.\u201d Comments on some other points of interest and difficulties in reading the inscription. Will remain in London until the end of the week and will write again before he leaves. [III\/17(18)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        17. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street Tuesday. [Wednesday October 28th<\/sup> ?] My dear Norris. [Datable from the reference to \u2018Hincks\u2019s letter\u2019 to some date not long after 24th<\/sup> October 1863. According to the weather reports in 19th<\/sup> Century British Library Newspapers<\/em> there were only two days described as foggy in London and two described as misty during the remainder of 1863, none of these being a Tuesday. Of these, Wednesday October 28th<\/sup> is the most likely. RBP.]\u201d Missed Norris at the Museum and at the RAS the previous day and is reluctant to venture out in the fog. Invites Norris to dinner on the following Thursday to meet Strangford who has just arrived in London. \u201cI suppose I must answer Hincks\u2019s letter now that it has appeared [This presumably refers to Assyrian History and Chronology<\/em> a letter dated 9th October 1863 appearing in The Athenaeum<\/em> 1878 (24th October 1863) pp. 533-534 (Cathcart and Donlon No. 123) commenting on HCR\u2019s letter in No. 1869 (22nd August 1863) discussing points of interest from some newly-reassembled cuneiform tablets. RBP.] but it will cost some work in looking up Hincks\u2019s previous writings on Tiglath Pileser. Is confident that Hincks is responsible for the statement that Tiglath Pileser reigned for 42 years and that Bosanquet and Oppert have followed his lead. [III\/17(19)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        18. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Monday April 4. [1864. Datable from the reference to \u2018Rost\u2019 to the period between 1864 and 1869 when Reinhold Rost was secretary to the RAS. April 4 was a Monday in 1864 and 1868. 1868 can be excluded because HCR refers to Easter as already over: Easter Day fell on March 27th<\/sup> in 1864, but on April 12th<\/sup> in 1868. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Missed seeing Norris at \u201cour special [RAS] Council Meeting\u201d today but has heard \u201cfrom Rost\u201d that Norris has been ill, so writes to enquire how he is. Hopes that he will feel better with the advent of milder weather. Has stayed in London over Easter [HCR\u2019s first son was born 20th<\/sup> February 1864 and it seems likely that his wife was not yet considered fit to travel. RBP.] \u201cworking steadily at the legal tablets\u201d and now feels able to \u201cexplain them all\u201d except for a few technical details. Wants to finish \u201cthe bilingual paper [see III\/17(15) above] but cannot do this because \u201cBowler has walked off with all the printed Plates \u2013 and I do not know in what order the legends are printed, so as to arrange my notes accordingly. Asks Norris to write to Bowler to send HCR a proof copy of the plate asap. \u201cI never cast eyes on Bowler now and am quite in despair about our second Volume of Inscriptions.\u201d [III\/17(20)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        19. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W. Tuesday April 26. [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1864. My dear Norris.\u201d Is sorry to hear \u201csuch a poor account\u201d of Norris\u2019s health but hopes that he will able to get about \u201cas the Spring comes.\u201d Has just returned from Folkestone where his wife has been having sea baths \u201cto get up her strength [see previous letter RBP.].\u201d Has been sorely puzzled by some points in the Bilingual Legends but believes he has \u201cmade out the curious Ph\u0153nician Inscription on the Triangular tablet\u201d assisted by comparison with another fragment which has also some cuneiform on it. This has enabled him to deduce a date, as well as the word for barley<\/em> and the word limu<\/em>. Comments on the importance of these. Is still puzzled by technical terms to do with land tenures, assessments etc \u201cand I hardly expect ever to clear up all the difficulties. \u201cYou know, I suppose, that Colebrooke is to be our next President, as Strangford must remain out for a year at least.\u201d [III\/17(21)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        20. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W. July 1 [1864. Datable from the references to Hincks\u2019s letters. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Owing to a misunderstanding, HCR and Norris failed to meet, HCR being at the BM while Norris was waiting for him at the RAS. Bowler has been robbed of a number of sheets which HCR had corrected, so that the work will have to be done again. Has \u201cjust cast my eye over Hincks\u2019s letters in the Journ. of Sac. Lit. [referring to Parker\u2019s Chronology of the Archons. <\/em>5 <\/strong>No. 10 pp. 409-415 and Chaldean Interpretations.<\/em> 5<\/strong> No. 10 pp. 421-425. Both July 1864. (Cathcart and Donlon Nos. 126 and 127.) The latter is a response to A H Sayce\u2019s paper referred to above.] \u2026 that on Sayce\u2019s Chald\u00e6an readings seems to [be ?] good but I suspect I have a vast deal more of the language than they do having had access to so much a larger field of comparison. Only yesterday Coxe hunted out a new Bilingual Tablet; difficult, but very important.\u201d Has corrected \u201canother proof of Harrison\u2019s and asked Rost to send it on to you. Pray make any alterations that occur to you as to improvement of the Cuneiform type or a more precise [?] transliteration. \u2026 I trust you have still 10 years of good work in you. [Norris was 69 in 1864. RBP.] [III\/17(22)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        21. Addressed \u201cHomburg [i.e. Bad Homburg vor der H\u00f6he, a spa town in what was then the independent state of Hesse. It appears from a letter in Box V that they went there for the sake of his wife\u2019s health. RBP.] Aug. 12th<\/sup> Dear Norris.\u201d Some discussion of postal arrangements \u2013 HCR was using the diplomatic bag. Norris is to send one more packet of letters on \u201cWednesday next [17th<\/sup>]\u201d but that should be the last as they expect to be on their way home again via Treves [Trier] and Luxembourg the following week [i.e. by the 26th<\/sup>. RBP.]. Has received no proofs from \u201cHarrison\u201d and nothing from Rost. \u201cThis infernal paper\u201d will never be printed [presumably Bilingual Readings <\/em>referred to above. RBP.] \u201cand the Journal is delayed in consequence\u201d. Is working at \u201cmy Accadian grammar\u201d but finds the Basque very difficult and does not believe it will be of any use in understanding Accadian. Has studied \u201cthe Shalmaneser Monolith\u201d thoroughly and has published most of the material from it additional to \u201cthe Obelisk annals\u201d in the second volume of \u201cmy brother\u2019s \u2018Two Monarchies\u2019\u201d [Presumably HCR is referring to the first two volumes of The five great monarchies of the ancient Eastern world<\/em> \u2026by George Rawlinson 1862-1870. RBP.] Norris, however, is to save his copy for Bowler to work from for \u201ca 3rd<\/sup> Vol. for the remaining Inscriptions \u2026\u201d \u201cThere are portions of the Asshur-bani-pal barrel I could make nothing of. I shall be delighted if you are more successful. Another title-deed land mark with a Warwickshire parson [?] does indeed astonish me! There was one which Kemball sent to Ld<\/sup> Stratford some 5 or 6 years ago, and which has since disappeared. Can it be this? Otherwise where in God\u2019s name did the Parson get the treasure from?\u201d There will have to be a \u201csupplementary sheet\u201d [presumably in Vol. II of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em>] to accommodate the fragments which are still turning up and also \u201ca sheet or two of \u2018errata\u2019 as accuracy in these lists is most important \u2013 and I discover a dozen or so errors in every sheet.\u201d Asks Norris to send him more proofs. [III\/17(23)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        22. Addressed \u201cKnoyle, Hindon. Sept<\/sup> 11 [Apparently added as an afterthought, although it may be in HCR\u2019s hand.] 1864. My dear Norris.\u201d Has not written sooner because he has been \u201cmoving about\u201d and has just returned from the Birmingham Festival [held 6th<\/sup> \u2013 9th<\/sup> September 1864.] \u201csaturated with Handel and Costa.\u201d Coxe has found \u201canother bit of Canon I, [HCR describes the four \u2018Assyrian Canons\u2019 in a letter to the Athen\u00e6um <\/em>for July 19th<\/sup> 1862. <\/em>] the top of Column III\u201d although HCR would have preferred \u201ceither the beginning of the list, or the missing bit of Col. VI.\u201d Is worried by the long delay in printing \u201cthis bilingual paper\u201d and \u201cwe must, I think, give up the use of Cuneiform type and leave the field in exclusive possession of the French.\u201d Has made a mistake in a note which he had added to \u201cthe Proof Sheet\u201d but hopes that it can still be corrected. \u201cFox Talbot\u2019s readings in the number of the Proceedings of the R.S.L. just out, are more wild than ever \u2026\u201d Will not return to London permanently until November but will make a brief visit \u201cas soon as you and Rost return.\u201d Is going to the British Association meeting in Bath \u201cduring this next week.\u201d [III\/17(24)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        23. Addressed \u201cKnoyle, Hindon. Wilts. Octbr<\/sup> [in Norris\u2019s hand] 1864.\u201d Will be pleased if Norris is able to produce a \u201cclean and complete\u201d copy of \u201cthe Shalmaneser legend\u201d as he \u201csaw many valuable novelties\u201d even in \u201cCoxe\u2019s imperfect transcript\u201d. Explains them in general terms, including \u201cone<\/em> entirely new Royal name\u201d. One cuneiform word is commonly used for throne <\/em>\u201cbut selut<\/em> for \u2018stake of iron\u2019 is new \u2013 how is the word written?\u201d Does not see how another cuneiform word can mean wagons.<\/em> Is coming up to London \u201cnext Wednesday [19th<\/sup>] \u201cto meet the old Nawab of Oude Ikbal ed Dowleh [I have not been able to clarify this reference. RBP.] and shall then be able to have a long gossip with you about Cuneiform matters.\u201d \u201cCoxe\u2019s last discovery of another fragment of Canon I [referred to above] \u2026 upsets my assumed Chronology of Esar-Haddon.\u201d HCR will have to look into the matter carefully but will now be able to \u201cwrite my promised paper \u2018on the Assyrian Canon\u2019 for the Journal.\u201d Bowler is not to lithograph \u201cthe list of Gods in the Bab. & Assyrian temples.\u201d HCR had left it for Norris to correct \u201cand have never touched it after you gave it up \u2013 it will take me 2 or 3 days hard work to go through it, as the writing on the tablet is so very bad and many of the names are altogether new.\u201d Is unable to contribute to Henry Stanley\u2019s \u201cConsular Miscellany, now on the eve of publication\u201d because \u201cin country houses \u2026 it is impossible to work.\u201d \u201cA young man also of the name of Hamilton [I have not managed to trace this name either. RBP.] has written to me about copying the syllabaries &c. I have given him encouragement & referred him to you in the mean time for information.\u201d [III\/17(25)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        24. On Athen\u00e6um notepaper. \u201cFriday. Oct. 21 [in Norris\u2019s hand] 1864. My dear Norris.\u201d Has found at the British Museum \u201camong Coxe\u2019s new joinings\u201d a phonetic list of the names of the Assyrian months, which \u201cI have been searching for for years past.\u201d viz. Nisaunu, Airu, Sivanu, Tuvazu, Abu, Ululu, Tasritu, Arakh-vana, Ki(silu), Tha(bi)tu, Shabathu, Addaru. Discusses some implications of these findings. \u201cAltogether I think this discovery important and satisfactory and I am delighted accordingly. The Accadian names also (of which the initials only are ordinarily used \u2026 are given in full, but I can make nothing of them at present.\u201d Has taken away \u201csome mythological sheets to correct\u201d and will bring them back \u201cwhen I come up to see Ikbal ed Dowleh\u201d. Asks for information about the etymology of the Hebrew names of the months \u201cEwald\u2019s Monatsnamen<\/em> seems to be lost in Burlington St. What does Ewald say of Marcheswan?\u201d [III\/17(26)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        25. [At the head of the letter Norris has written: \u201cKeep. phon. months.\u201d] Addressed \u201cKnoyle. Monday [in Norris\u2019s hand] Oct. 24 1864. My dear Norris.\u201d Discusses some correspondences between the Assyrian and Hebrew names of the months which he has discovered in his notebooks. \u201cIt seems that the adjuncts in the Accadian lists are all distinctive epithets, such as are used to the present day in the Arabic.\u201d Also discusses the gods to which various months were sacred. [About half of the second leaf of this letter has been cut away, including the end of the letter, but all that survives is on this subject. The last surviving paragraph reads:] \u201cI hope you will be able to find your Penny Cyclopedia papers; as I should like to compare what Benfey has said, trash though it probably is.\u201d [III\/17(27)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        26. Addressed \u201cNewstead Abbey, Mansfield. Notts. [in Norris\u2019s hand] 5 Nov. 1864.\u201d Will be glad to see \u201cthe complete copy of the Monolith Ins. which ought to be published in Vol. III of the Museum series.\u201d A character on which Norris has consulted HCR seems to be a modification of the ordinary one for \u201ca brother.\u201d [There follows a discussion of the ramifications of this point to which is hard to do justice without being able to reproduce the cuneiforms. RBP.] Coxe has found \u201cthe small missing fragment in the \u2018Month\u2019 tablet so we shall ascertain the exact orthography of Chisleu and Thebet.\u201d HCR has suggested that Coxe collect together all the \u201cCalendar fragments\u201d he can find, as \u201cI think we ought now to be able to make something [of them]\u201d although they are probably mostly astrological or divinatory in character. Is going on to visit \u201cthe Dukeries [an area of Nottinghamshire so called because it used to contain four ducal seats in close proximity] \u2026 which are said to be the most beautiful part of England [until the advent of coal mining in the 1920\u2019s. RBP.] Norris can \u201cset to work at the Asshur-izir-pal<\/em> Monolith, comparing the published Inscription as you go on.\u201d [III\/17(28)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        27. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square W Feby<\/sup> [Datable from the reference to W\u00fcstenfeld to 1865. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cI really can\u2019t send my Yacut to Germany\u201d because he is constantly referring to it and because it is full of his own notes \u201cthroughout the 5 volumes\u201d. [This presumably refers to Y\u0101q\u016bt al-Hamaw\u012b<\/strong> (1179 \u20131229) Syrian biographer and geographer, author of Kitab mu’jam al-buldan<\/em> (Geographical Dictionary) and to the edition of this text published by T G J Juynboll and J J B Gaal under the title Lexicon geographicum . . . <\/em>in 5 volumes 1852-1864. Heinrich Ferdinand W\u00fcstenfeld<\/strong> (1808 \u2013 1899) published his own edition of this work under the title Jacut\u2019s Geographisches W\u00f6rterbuch<\/em> 1866 \u2013 1873. It seems reasonable, therefore to date HCR\u2019s letter to 1865. RBP.] He will, however, assist W\u00fcstenfeld with any doubtful readings. Hopes Norris will be able to attend a meeting at \u201cthe Socy<\/sup>\u2019s rooms\u201d on Wednesday to consider how to provide the RAS with its own independent stock of cuneiform type. Discusses the meaning of a word agarin<\/em> on which Norris has consulted him which, he agrees, appears to mean \u201cmother\u201d in the passages cited although \u201cI never saw the monogram <cuneiform> used with that power.\u201d Does not agree that the word preceding agarini<\/em> \u201cin the Sennacherib Ins.\u201d can be ibba<\/em> \u201cpure\u201d. \u201cThe whole passage however referring to Beltis requires collation.\u201d Has found another \u201cAstronomical fragment\u201d at the Museum \u201cgiving the names of the 7 stars called <cuneiform>\u201d tikphi.<\/em> Wonders if this can be connected with a Hebrew word (above this Norris has written \u201c<part of the Hebrew word cited by HCR> circumire [i.e. to go round in a circle. RBP.] planets?\u201d) and what is the derivation of the Hebrew word \u201cwhich applies does it not to the changing point of the seasons?\u201d [III\/17(29)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                        28. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Wednesday. May 3 [1865. Datable from the address to the period between 1862 and 1868. 1865 was the only year during this period when May 3 was a Wednesday. RBP.] Is glad to see Norris\u2019s handwriting again & hopes to see him in person soon. [There are two letters from Norris in the Fox Talbot archive dated 24th<\/sup> February and 19th<\/sup> July 1865. There is no hint in either of them that Norris has been ill, although in the first he says that he has been copying out his Assyrian Dictionary. RBP.] Has pretty well exhausted \u201cthe astronomical Tablets\u201d at the Museum but does not consider the results very important. Finds the astrological \u201cjargon\u201d almost unintelligible \u201calthough closely repeated in the modern formula\u201d. Asks whether it would be possible from modern astronomical tables to identify the two years (in the period BC 665 \u2013 640) in which the vernal equinox occurred on 6th<\/sup> and 15th<\/sup> day of the moon at Nineveh respectively. \u201cHincks attempted this calculation in his paper on one of the Equinox observations in the R.I.A\u2019s Transactions [On a Tablet in the British Museum, recording, in Cuneatic Characters, an Astronomical Observation; with incidental Remarks on the Assyrian\u00a0 Numerals, Divisions of Time, and Measures of Length <\/em>Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy 23<\/strong> (1856) Part II pp. 31-47. Read 12th<\/sup> November 1855. Cathcart and Donlon No. 91.] but he disagrees with the basis of Hincks\u2019s calculation and, moreover, Hincks did not know of the second observation. Has a list of nearly 100 fixed stars but does not know how to identify them, having failed to work out any kind of mapping of the heavens. \u201cBowler is paging the sheets and I have finished the Index, as far as I can \u2013 so the Volume may be bound up & issued immediately.\u201d [By \u201cthe Index\u201d HCR seems to mean the Table of Contents to Volume II of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em>. (See III\/18(01.)) In the letter to Fox Talbot dated 24th<\/sup> February 1865 referred to above, Norris states that \u201cThe 2d volume is all printed and only wants for a Table of Contents, which is to be description.\u201d \u201cI had before spoken to H Seymour [who was MP for Poole at this date] about Hutslet [sic<\/em>] before and he had promised to make a personal amende <\/em>to him when objecting to the vote for the State Papers in the Estimates.\u201d [I have not been able to clarify this reference. RBP.]. [III\/17(30)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                          III\/18\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>17 letters from HCR to Edwin Norris from July 20th<\/sup> 1865 to August 27th<\/sup> 1868 i.e. from his re-entering Parliament to the end of his correspondence with Norris on cuneiforms.<\/p>\n

                                                                                            \n
                                                                                          1. Addressed\u201d1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W. Thursday, July 20. [in Norris\u2019s hand] 1865. My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cThe Elections being over [HCR was elected Liberal MP for Frome, Somerset in July 1865.] I should have wished to complete the Index at once, so that the 2nd<\/sup> of the Inscriptions might have been bound up, whilst I am away for my summer holyday.\u201d However, he cannot find the sheet on which he had tabulated the first 20 or 30 Plates \u2013 \u201cand I really have hardly courage to go over the whole work again.\u201d Asks Norris to help him by making out a \u201cdecent Index\u201d from the headings of the Plates, to which HCR will add notes. \u201cOtherwise I despair of ever getting the work out of hand, for I am dead tired of it \u2013 and really do not care one straw about having \u2018the grass cut from under my feet\u2019 either by Oppert or any one else.\u201d Intends to spend August at Tunbridge Wells and will try whilst there to complete \u201cmy Astronomical paper for the Journal [This appears to be Notes on the astronomical knowledge of the early Chald\u00e6ans as recorded on the Nineveh tablets<\/em> one of three papers by HCR promised at the Anniversary General Meeting 29 May 1865 for Volume 2 (N.S.) which never actually appeared. RBP. ]\u201d. Asks Norris to \u201clook in here\u201d on Saturday morning to talk about \u201cthe Index &c.\u201d [III\/18(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          2. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Octr<\/sup> 1865. My dear Norris.\u201d Is sorry to hear of Norris\u2019s \u201crecent attack\u201d. Is not surprised at Oppert\u2019s \u201cpooh-poohing the Lithographed Plates of Vol. II [Volume II of Cuneiform Inscriptions <\/em>is generally said to have been published in 1866. It appears that Oppert had not actually seen any part of it at this date but had merely heard reports of its contents. RBP.] as he evidently wishes to make it appear that he is altogether independent of our labors and discovered<\/em> all these bilingual lists himself. I should not wonder if he did the same by the Semitic month list which he seems inclined to appropriate in anticipation, as he says, of Hincks\u2019 publication of the names from your copy. Has finished \u201cthe Index\u201d except for adding \u201cthe Nos of the Photograph list [sic<\/em>] and a few other points which require a reference to the originals \u2013 and the sooner therefore the said Index is printed and the Volume bound up the better.\u201d Asks if it is true that Strangford wants to succeed Panizzi at the British Museum [Panizzi retired as Chief Librarian in 1866.] Spent his time at Tunbridge Wells in writing an article on the Russians in Central Asia \u201cwhich will appear this week in the new Quarterly. [Apparently refers to HC Rawlinson, Central Asia<\/em> Quarterly Review, CXVIII (1865), 529-81.]\u201d Since Birmingham [the British Society for the Advancement of Science held its annual meeting in September 1865 in Birmingham. RBP.] I have been shooting and amusing myself.\u201d Proposes to return for work at the beginning of November. [Norris\u2019s reply to this letter, dated 12 October, 1865 will be found at III\/20(05).] [ III\/18(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          3. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W1. Tuesday Nov. 14 [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand] 1865. My dear Norris.\u201d Will be glad to see \u201cNewman\u2019s notes [Presumably this refers to Francis William Newman (1805-1897) brother of the more famous Cardinal Newman, but I have not been able to clarify the allusion any further. RBP.]\u201d but cannot promise to write anything on the subject as he is \u201cendeavouring to masticate Palgrave\u2019s Arabia for the next Quarterly. [Presumably William Gifford Palgrave Narrative of a year’s journey through central and eastern Arabia (1862-63)<\/em> 1<\/em> (1865).]. Does not consider it worthwhile to \u201canswer Newman\u201d because Gobineau is \u201ca rank impostor\u201d whose work has been thoroughly discredited. If Norris calls at about 11 o\u2019clock any morning, HCR will show him what he has done about \u201cthe Index\u201d. Has heard from Rost that Norris intends to read before the RAS \u201can introduction to \u201cVambery\u2019s Dictionary\u201d which would be \u201cvery interesting\u201d. Is \u201castounded to hear that Coxe is to succeed [Martin] Haug [1827 \u2013 1876 as Professor of Sanskrit] at the Poona College. [I have not been able to clarify this reference (see Biographical Notes) RBP.]\u201d. [III\/18(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          4. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Tuesday [in Norris\u2019s hand ?] 28th<\/sup> 1865.\u201d My dear Norris.\u201d Will be out of London until the end of the week, so cannot see about printing the Index until Monday.\u201d Answers certain queries from Norris about particular cuneiform letters and words, [HCR\u2019s statements in this and subsequent letters are presumably for Norris\u2019s Assyrian Dictionary<\/em> but it is not possible to be specific about them without reproducing the cuneiforms. RBP.] \u201cThe Talbot tablet is evidently a Billingsgate run [?] between the two Goddesses Ishtar and <cuneiform> but I have not been able to make it all out yet.\u201d [III\/18(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          5. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Friday. Jany<\/sup>. 26. [Datable from the address to 1862 \u2013 1868. 1866 was the only year in that period when January 26th<\/sup> was a Friday. RBP.] Asks Norris to call to discuss \u201cour cooperation in the Dictionary\u201d. Will be glad to make his knowledge \u201cavailable for the public good, if it did not entail on me too great an expenditure of time.\u201d Is not satisfied with Norris\u2019s reading of a certain cuneiform word as \u201cwaters\u201d without referring to the originals. Panizzi has asked for \u201cour yearly Progress Report, which I suppose had better be filled in nil<\/em>. Harrison still hangs back with the Index which is most provoking.\u201d Went to the Museum the previous day to see Coxe before his departure for India \u201che is now gone.\u201d [III\/18(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          6. Addressed \u201c1. Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Friday. Feby<\/sup> 2 [Datable as the previous letter to 1866. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Asks for an explanation of a note which he just received from Harrison. Had sent back \u201chis revise [i.e. corrected proof]\u201d by return of post requesting him to set up the whole Index according to this specimen and let HCR have a proof of it. Had passed his rough copy to Bowler \u201c2 months ago\u201d to be copied and sent on to Harrison, which he understood had been done. Has been trying to compile a list of all the material still in hand for the Museum Report, but is not sure if it is complete. Will show it to Norris before he submits it. [III\/18(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          7. Addressed \u201c1. Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. [in Norris\u2019s hand] in March 1866.\u201d Has heard nothing of \u201cHarrison & the Index\u201d and is \u201cquite in despair about this 2nd<\/sup>\u201d Apparently commenting on a query of Norris\u2019s he says that the phrase tabrat\u00e9 la adiru <\/em>does not occur \u201cin Sard. 1. 20.\u201d \u201cnor anywhere that I remember.\u201d Also comments on a cuneiform word which he says \u201canswers to kupukkhu\u201d <\/em>and \u201cprobably means great, noble, powerful or something similar\u201d. Refers to a plate in Volume II. [III\/18(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          8. Addressed \u201c1. Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Saturday [in Norris\u2019s hand] April 1866. My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cI really have not time to write answers in detail to all your questions \u2013 but could explain everything in 10 minutes conversation.\u201d Gives brief answers \u2013 [would require a complete transcription to make it clear. RBP.] \u201cAnything more you want you must apply in person for \u2013 but what with Committees, Geograph. Papers, Debates &c &c &c I really have no time to spare. I still go to the Museum when I have a half hour at my disposal and work up the Astronomy & Astrology \u2013 but they are very difficult subjects and I do not therefore make as much progress as I could wish.\u201d Is not making \u201cpreparing materials [for the third volume of Cuneiform Inscriptions <\/em>? RBP.] as there has been no word yet from Gladstone on the new grant.[III\/18(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          9. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W. Friday. [Datable from the reference to Norris\u2019s (Assyrian) Dictionary and to HCR\u2019s \u201cPetition\u201d to late September 1866. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Had expected to see Norris \u201cat the Asiatic on Monday, where we had a longish discussion on your Dictionary. [Norris\u2019s Specimen of an Assyrian Dictionary<\/em> appeared in JRAS <\/em>2 <\/strong>(New Series) 1 1866. RBP.]\u201d Had intended to raise the question of making corrections in \u201cthe Index\u201d if in time, namely to change the entry for Pl. 43. No.1 from \u201cBilingual List with 3 Col. attached\u201d the heading of the plate to \u201cList of Prognostics and influences (Meteorological &c)\u201d. Worried about the cost of ordering an additional 250 copies of the Index \u201cour funds being, I believe, all but exhausted. I am to see the Trustees tomorrow about resuming work and shall try and get them to sanction your re-employment.\u201d Has a few slips of Norris\u2019s [Assyrian] Dictionary corrected which Norris may call for any morning. Also discusses the meaning of another cuneiform word as meaning \u201c\u2018not having young\u2019, but whether denoting a Eunuch or bachelor I cannot say\u201d. Also discusses another sign which he reads Gid-da<\/em> and translates as \u201clong\u201d. \u201cI am in the doldrums<\/em> as the sailors say, just now about my Petition, neither able to go backwards or forwards, but I hope to see my way a little more clearly in a day or two.\u201d [HCR wrote to Lord Cranborne on September 20th<\/sup> 1866 formally requesting to be reappointed to the Council for India (see II\/11). RBP.] [III\/18(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          10. Addressed \u201c1. Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Thursday Feby<\/sup> 14 [Datable as above to 1867. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Understands that Bowler has sent Norris \u201cthe proof of the 1st<\/sup> sheet of Shalmaneser Monolith\u201d [For Volume III of Cuneiform Inscriptions. <\/em>In a letter in the Fox Talbot archive dated 30th<\/sup> April 1867, Norris says that he is too infirm to visit the Museum any more.] and will await Norris\u2019s \u201ccorrections and restorations\u201d before setting to work himself. Is sorry to see so many \u201cnormal [Babylonian ?] types\u201d used in this sheet \u201cwhich we have long disused for Assyrian Inscriptions. Gives examples which must, he thinks, be altered unless, which he thinks may be the case in some instances, they really do occur on the monument. Suggests that lacunae in the inscription should be restored \u201cin outline\u201d wherever this can be done from \u201cthe Obelisk or Shalmaneser Bulls\u201d. Would like Bowler to proceed next with Michaux II and III, but cannot find Norris\u2019s copy of II, thinks he must have returned it to Norris, and III is \u201cnot by any means determinately arranged\u201d. Asks if Norris has the copy of II and whether he has satisfactorily arranged the \u201cdetached passages\u201d in III. He has \u201ccursive\u201d copies of both in his notebooks but neither is complete. Asks whether Norris ever made a copy of the Inscription on the Asshur-izir-pal Monolith from Kurkh. Coxe\u2019s copy is very unsatisfactory. \u201cSmith is getting on with his restoration of the Asshur-bani-pal annals, but we shall never have a very complete series\u201d. Is writing a letter to The Athen\u00e6um<\/em> \u201ccontradicting Hincks\u2019s Eclipse discovery [This refers to E Hincks On a newly discovered record of ancient lunar Eclipses<\/em> (in English) Monatsberichte der k\u00f6niglich preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Aus dem Jahre 1866. (1867) pp. 647-655. (Cathcart and Donlon 138.)] but will probably not send it \u201cwhile the pension is pending\u201d. [This refers to a Petition organised by Hincks\u2019s brother \u201cGovernor Hincks\u201d for a Civil List pension for Hincks\u2019s daughters. The petition was signed by HCR and other leading orientalists. According to The Times Digital Archive<\/em> a pension of \u00a3100 was eventually announced on December 25th<\/sup>] [III\/18(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          11. Addressed \u201c1. Hill Street Strt<\/sup> March 20. [In his wife\u2019s hand 67?] Thanks Norris for \u201cthe Proofs\u201d which he will look through and hand over to Bowler tomorrow \u201cwhen he comes for his countersigned account\u201d. Wonders whether Bowler\u2019s charges are higher than previously. Thanks Norris for the copy of \u201cthe Hincks Memorial which will I trust be successful [presumably referring to the petition for a Civil List pension for his daughters referred to above] but complains of \u201cthe singularly costive<\/em> testimonial Oppert has appended to the document\u201d. [III\/18(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          12. Addressed \u201c1 Hill St. March 30 [In Norris\u2019s hand: 1867. My dear Norris.\u201d Has had no time to write and \u201cam just now starting for the Rail, so excuse a scrawl.\u201d Gives his answers to certain questions Norris has raised \u2013 it is not clear whether they refer to his Assyrian Dictionary<\/em> or not. \u201cWe have found a new Assyrian king \u2013 or probably Sargon [?] under his first name <cuneiform> Sar \u2013 ukui \u2013 arku <\/em>[? Followed by something I can\u2019t read. RBP.] [III\/18(12)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          13. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Stt<\/sup>. May 2. [in his wife\u2019s hand:] 1867? My dear Norris.\u201d Cannot work at cuneiforms as he has been unwell since returning to London. \u201cDuchni<\/em> [?] I have always supposed to be the same as tenisit<\/em> \u201cmankind\u201d \u2013 but I don\u2019t know the etymology \u2013 it is probably proto-Chald\u00e6an. Bit Ditti<\/em> I have read as \u201ca prison\u201d for some reason or other \u2013 but I don\u2019t know why. I don\u2019t remember vaddakhu<\/em> and can\u2019t refer; it ought to mean \u2018I smote\u2019 or \u2018slew\u2019. This is not very satisfactory, but I can\u2019t help it.\u201d \u201cThe discovery that Pl. 52 [of Volume II of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em>] is an Eponyme [?] Tablet is most important, as it now places all our Chronology on a precise Astronomical basis. I am writing a letter to the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> on the subject and shall give G Smith every credit for his ingenious suggestion. [Appeared as The Assyrian canon verified by the record of a solar eclipse 763 BC<\/em>. The Athen\u00e6um <\/em>18 May 1867. RBP.] There is a fragment with names of the Eponymes which in Coxe\u2019s absence we cannot find, but which I see from my copy fits on to the upper corner of this tablet and thus completes & verifies the discovery.\u201d Thanks Norris for \u201cthe mem. About the Almanac\u201d. Is sorry \u201cto hear such a bad account of you\u201d but hopes the country air may help his recovery. [III\/18(13)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          14. Addressed \u201cKnoyle. Hindon. Wilts. Aug 22 [In his wife\u2019s hand:] 1867. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been obliged to return from \u201cthe German baths [i.e. Bad Homburg von der H\u00f6he as in 1864] because of the death of \u201cmy wife\u2019s sister [According to the Annuary<\/em> this was Ellen Sanford. HCR had gone to Germany with his wife. RBP.]\u201d Is spending the time at Knoyle instead and writing \u201ca Cuneiform article for the next Quarterly [Not traced. RBP.]\u201d. In consequence of \u201cSmith\u2019s having found a few more fragments of Canon No<\/sup>.1\u201d he has been re-examining the Assyrian calendar. According to his new theory the first two Assyrian cycles were of 81 years each beginning in 909 BC ending in the middle of a reign. The king then took a new eponym for the same year. After two such cycles, in 747 BC the calendar was reformed, and the new cycles were of 60 years. His analysis of this takes up almost all the letter. Intends to announce this discovery \u201cin a short letter in the next Athen\u00e6um <\/em>[Published as The Assyrian Canon<\/em> dated 27 Aug. 1867, Athen\u00e6um <\/em>7th<\/sup> 1867. RBP.]\u201d. Asks Norris to \u201clet me know what you are doing with the Dict.\u201d [III\/18(14)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          15. No address, on notepaper bearing HCR\u2019s monogram. Dated \u201c[Thursday] Decr<\/sup>. 26 [In Norris\u2019s hand: 1867]. My dear Norris.\u201d Has been staying at Knoyle but has come up to London for a few days \u201cto keep Christmas\u201d because his wife has been unable to travel \u201cowing to a sick baby [HCR\u2019s second son Alfred was born in January 1867.]\u201d but hopes to be able \u201cto get away [Presumably to Knoyle. RBP.] on Monday [30th<\/sup>]. In the meantime, HCR\u2019s wife will visit Norris bringing with her \u201cthis note\u201d and a brace of pheasants. Then gives some comments on Assyrian words. Norris has added comments of his own between the lines, which are hard to read. \u201cMy wife will give you all the other news.\u201d [III\/18(15)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          16. Addressed \u201c2 Hill Street June 25 [Datable from the address to 1868. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d \u201cWhen the Median casts from Bisitun were turned out of Burlington St and thrown on my hands [This may refer to the incident referred to above in December 1862 see III\/17. RBP.] I had them stowed away in a lumber room, where I really cannot get at them without a great deal more labor than they are worth.\u201d Mons. Menant is welcome to come and retrieve them for himself, but HCR cannot undertake to do it for him. \u201cI never took any Persian casts, except the Epigraphs \u2013 but my last notes were the result of the most careful and conscientious examination.\u201d \u201cMons. Lenormant\u201d is trying to obtain access to the \u201cAsshur-bani-pal\u201d proofs for Oppert\u2019s benefit\u201d but HCR does not want this \u201cin justice to Smith & others\u201d if he asks to borrow Norris\u2019s copy, HCR hopes Norris will say that he is not authorized to lend them. \u201cLenormant is pumping Smith day and night for Oppert\u2019s glorification and ought really I think to be snubbed.\u201d [III\/18(16)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                          17. Addressed \u201c2 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Thursday. Aug. 27 [Datable from the address to 1868. RBP.] Norris is not to allow Oppert access to \u201cour Lithographed Inscriptions [presumably those printed for Vol. III. RBP.] the Asshur-bani-pal Plates in particular\u201d because he will make unfair use of them. HCR found Oppert \u201chard at work today in Birch\u2019s room and claiming to have discovered<\/em> all sorts things that we have known for years. Has only just returned from \u201cthe German baths [see letters in Box V]. Has not seen Smith since his return. Hopes Norris is \u201cpretty well\u201d asks when and where he plans to take \u201cyour autumnal holiday\u201d. [III\/18(17)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                            This is the last letter from HCR to Edwin Norris in the series documenting their co-operation on Cuneiform studies. At the beginning of November 1868, HCR took up his seat on the Council for India, which both he and Norris anticipated would be a full-time job.<\/p>\n

                                                                                            III\/19 \u00a0 <\/strong>12 undated and partially dated letters from HCR to Edwin Norris, some of which could probably be dated by reference to other sources of information. The sequence is arbitrary.<\/p>\n

                                                                                              \n
                                                                                            1. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley W. Thursday My dear Norris.\u201d Recalls \u201cGen. Macintosh\u2019s visit to Persepolis in 1836\u2026as far as I remember he merely uncovered the Artaxerxes inscription which Rich had first opened and which had been again covered up \u2026 I must have seen his copy as he spent some days with me and showed me all he had done.\u201d Is looking for a cast of \u201cMichaux\u2019s stone\u201d to use as an illustration \u201cin tomorrow\u2019s lecture\u201d as he is short of illustrations. Thought there was one at the RAS but \u201cBulford\/Bedford (?) [I have not been able to identify anyone of either name associated with the RAS at this period. RBP.] says they have never had one.\u201d HCR had a cast at one time but has mislaid it. Asks Norris to bring one round tomorrow if he has one. [III\/19(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            2. Dated at end \u201cSaturday. My dear Norris.\u201d Queries a new procedure for correcting the proofs of the lithographed inscriptions as it will involve just as much work and just as great a chance of error as \u201cunder the old system.\u201d \u201cPray see to the corrections of the three first sheets.\u201d [III\/19(02)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                            3. No date or address. HCR\u2019s monogram on the notepaper. \u201cMy dear Norris.\u201d Discusses the meaning of various cuneiform signs. The first he reads as zalmu ? <\/em>and translates as dark<\/em> and hence night<\/em>. Refers to \u201cthe Astrological tablets and also the bilingual lists 26,30 \u2013 27,12 \u2013 64,28.\u201d Then identifies several other signs as colours, white babar<\/em> , black, grey? blue, green &c. Has satisfied himself that a certain passage refers to the eclipse of June 15. B.C 744. Speculates that another phrase, which he reads as atalu<\/em> and translates as \u201cto make the black god\u201d means, when it does not refer to an eclipse, a cloudy sky in which neither sun, nor moon nor stars can be seen. Speculates on the identity of another star whose name he translates as \u201cdoor keeper\u201d. PS \u201cI hope to see you on Monday at the Asiatic & there we will talk further of the Index &c. [I have not seen Volume II of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em> but volumes I, III and V do not have indexes in the usual sense. In letter III\/18(01) HCR clearly uses the term \u201cIndex\u201d when referring to the Table of Contents. RBP.] [III\/19(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            4. Addressed \u201cKnoyle, Hindon Thursday [Could be 1863 or 1864. In his Annuary<\/em> HCR says that he spent the autumn of 1863 at Knoyle (possibly with his wife, who was pregnant with their first child). In a letter to Fox Talbot dated 25th<\/sup> February 1865, Norris says that Volume 2 is all printed apart from the Table of Contents. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Will be returning to London \u201ctomorrow\u201d and wishes to meet Norris and Bowler or at any rate Bowler on Saturday to discuss \u201cfinal arrangements about printing &c.\u201d \u201cIf Coxe has found anything new I hope he will have it ready for me to see on Saturday.\u201d [III\/19(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            5. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street Friday. My dear Norris. Many thanks for the reference about the Almanacs but I am off that scent at present and really don\u2019t know when I shall get on it again. Just now I have been looking over Thomas\u2019s lucubrations [I have not been able to clarify this allusion. RBP.] and don\u2019t believe a word of Shakpoor\u2019s Christianity, though I cannot at present satisfy myself as to the real purport of the Inscription. I shall see you, I hope at the Meeting on Monday and we can then discourse on this and other matters.\u201d [III\/19(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            6. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Nov. 17. My dear Norris.\u201d Discusses the phonetic values of certain cuneiform signs [which cannot be clearly indicated without being able to reproduce the signs themselves. RBP.] Now accepts that a certain name on \u201cthe Monolith\u201d really is Ahab. \u201cThe only difficulty is in regard to dates, which the Biblical critics may settle as best they can.\u201d Then discusses the grammatical consequences of certain signs having the same phonetic value. Has been obliged \u201cto lay up for a day or two and take blue pill\u201d but I hope to be out again by Monday\u201d. [III\/19(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            7. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W Tuesday. [by reference to the letters in III\/18 should be some weeks before April 1866. RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Two different signs for Norris may acknowledge HCR\u2019s corrections or not as he pleases. \u201cThe Trustees have recommended the Treasury to grant another 1500\u00a3 for printing the Tablets, but decline to move Deutch [Deutsch] from the M.S.S Department. Some weeks will elapse before Gladstone decides whether he will accept the recommendation, so you will have plenty of time to escape from the For. Of. before setting to work at the Museum.\u201d Is unwilling to say anything about the Bavian inscription since it is a long time since he looked at it but he knows that the first part describes the aqueducts built to bring water to Nineveh. However, he doubts whether a certain cuneiform sign has anything to do with \u201cwater works\u201d. Cannot write anymore because he is very busy and has \u201cmoreover a touch of incipient gout.\u201d [III\/19(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            8. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Saturday. My dear Norris.\u201d Accepts \u201cthe note to Pl. 11, about the title from initial line.\u201d Objects to the word \u201cOccasional\u201d in the title to Pl. 25. Prefers \u201cSmall fragment, or anything else you like. Pl. 31 iv & 46. v are certainly Trilingual, not Bilingual, so please correct accordingly, and with these corrections \u2018Print\u2019. 250 copies is all I think the Museum requires.\u201d [III\/19(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            9. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. My dear Norris. [Dated at end \u2018Saturday\u2019]\u201d Had hoped to see Norris at the Museum, where he would have explained the differences between two cuneiform characters which Norris had, apparently, thought were equivalent. The first, HCR thinks, has the normal value kim<\/em> and the second nir<\/em> but each has many secondary values. Has found at the Museum an account in minae & shekels \u201cgiven according to the 3 standards \u2013 so I shall be able I hope to determine the relations positively.\u201d [III\/19(09)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            10. Addressed \u201c1 Hill St<\/sup> My dear Norris.\u201d Asks Norris to call in \u201con your way into Town \u2026 as I want to consult with you about applying for a further sum to the Museum \u2013 and about your resuming your Sub-Editorial duties with the former \u2018honorarium\u2019\u201d. [III\/19(10)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            11. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. [crossed out<\/em>] Knoyle, Wilts. Dec. 27 My dear Norris.\u201d Has been examining \u201cthe Asshur-bani-pal rubbings together with the copies made by you & Bowler\u201d. Finds that it commemorates the elevation by Asshur-bani-pal of his younger brother to the throne of Babylon. Believes he has now definitely identified this brother as the Saosduchinus<\/em> of Ptolemy and Sammughina <\/em>and Sammughes<\/em> of other writers. \u201cI must have mentioned the circumstance to you before [see III\/10(03)] though I never had any direct evidence of his being a younger son of Esar haddon\u2019s. This cylinder \u2026 explains the difficult passage about this king in the Arbela tablet which we published in the last volume of the Museum Inscriptions.\u201d Also mentions a tablet which he has found of Asshur-bani-pal\u2019s granddaughter, whose name he \u201cdoubtfully\u201d reads as Nergal-amiral<\/em>. Looks upon the link between Assyrian and Babylonian history established by this cylinder as very important. PS \u201cI don\u2019t know exactly when I shall be back but probably in the circle [?] of next week \u2013 if you answer me address to Earl Ducie\u2019s Tortworth Court, Wotton-under-edge, Gloucestershire.\u201d [III\/19(11)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                            12. Addressed \u201c1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square. W. Thursday [in Norris\u2019s hand] 1865? [by reference to the letters in III\/17, should be before May 3rd<\/sup> RBP.] My dear Norris.\u201d Has been in London all week and visited the Museum as well as \u201cthe shop in Burlington St\u201d. Needs Norris\u2019s assistance at the Museum \u201cto compile an Index for the forthcoming Vol. of Inscriptions [see III\/18(01) above. RBP.]\u201d and at the RAS to discuss \u201cthe best way of furnishing Austen with Cuneiform Type as I cannot afford to pay \u00a325 to Harrison for every paper I write for the Journal.\u201d \u201cI am already well up in Weber\u2019s Nakshatras, the controversy between him & Biot being in fact the text upon which Whitney works. [This seems to be rather complicated, but refers to a dispute between the three men on the relations between Indian and Chinese astronomical systems. RBP.]\u201d Has made some progress with \u201cCuneiform Astronomy\u201d including identifying the 7 planets and \u201csome near guesses at the principal constellations\u201d. Asks Norris to call in next day for a talk. Is going to Knoyle again on Saturday, but hopes to bring his wife up to London \u201cfor good\u201d the following week. [III\/19(12)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                              III\/20\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>6 letters from Edwin Norris to HCR and to his wife, together with one from \u201cE Strangford\u201d mainly dealing collecting HCR\u2019s letters on cuneiform studies [I have transcribed in full the passages giving evidence as to the completeness of the surviving sequence. RBP.] but also touching on other matters.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                \n
                                                                                              1. Addressed \u201c6 Michael\u2019s Grove [Brompton, now Egerton Terrace] 1 August 1865. Dear Madam [at end \u2018Lady Rawlinson\u2019]. I have kept nearly all the letters from Sir Henry, more carefully than I usually keep anything. They form a connected series, a history of the discoveries, and it would be a pity to separate them. I will take the earliest opportunity to look over them and pick out such as do not contain matters of scientific interest, which I will send to you , or else send you all<\/em> for your own selection. The first letters to me are dated in the middle of 1846. There are a few as early as 1838 to Capt. Harkness and General Briggs who were secretaries to the Society at that time. After three or four letters in 1838\/9, Sir Henry was called away, and till Nov. 1845 nothing was received from him. He then wrote to Professor Wilson, till 1846 since which date I am happy to say the correspondence with me has not been interrupted. I believe I have all his letters to me, and some of those to Genl. Briggs and Professor Wilson. This is the history of his correspondence and if you will let me know what you wish, as to date or number of letters, or if you like to look over the whole, I will act accordingly.\u201d Hopes they enjoy their visit to Tunbridge Wells [referred to in III\/18(1 & 2) above]. \u201cAs he proposes to be in Hill Street soon, for a day or two, perhaps it might be best to give him the letters for you. I am unwilling to trust such valuable papers to the post.\u201d [III\/20(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                              2. Addressed \u201c6 Michaels Grove 5 August 1865. Dear Madam. [at end \u2018Lady Rawlinson\u2019] I shall send to Hill Street two packets, addressed under a cover to Sir Henry. The first contains letters folded, from 27 Nov. 1845 to 17 September 1849, marked from F to 2P. Five preceding letters written in 1838 and 1839 I cannot find. I think Lord Strangford has the first. The others were written to Genl<\/sup>. Briggs. I certainly had them, and may find them. The other packet contains the letters written from 16 Decr<\/sup>. 1851 to 8th<\/sup> March, 1853. These are opened out for convenience of reading. I have also many more, but they are all in disorder; I will sort them as soon as I have half an hour to spare. I ought to ask pardon for such a scrawly note. I never could write decently, but my hand grows weak and my eyes are not so good as they were, so that I am now ashamed of what I write.\u201d [III\/20(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                              3. Addressed \u201c[6 Michaels Grove, as above] Brompton. Saturday. [datable from the preceding and following letters to August 5th<\/sup> or 12th<\/sup> 1865. RBP.] My dear Rawlinson. I enclose a packet of your letters for Lady Rawlinson. They are all that I received from you beginning 27 Nov. 1845 and ending 8th<\/sup> of March, 1853. Those written in 1838\/9 to Captain Harkness and General Briggs I cannot find. I thought I had them. I believe Strangford has the first you wrote. I certainly consider all these letters your property as the writer, but I hope you will not keep them. I have more letters written while you were in the East; they are in great disorder, but shall be arranged soon. I understand from Lady Rawlinson that you will be in town on Tuesday. If you want me then, please send a line.\u201d Ends with a query about a certain cuneiform sign which he wants to read as rik<\/em> but has difficulty reconciling this with a reading in \u201cMichaux\u201d. [III\/20(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                              4. Addressed \u201c6 Michaels Grove [as above] 17 August, 1865. My dear Rawlinson. I have arranged all your letters up to the beginning of 1855, when I ceased making a regular collection owing to your return to England. I will leave them for Lady Rawlinson at Hill Street before I leave town for my holiday, which will be about the 25 or 24th<\/sup> [sic<\/em>]\u201d Discusses his holiday plans. \u201cI have been two or three times at the Museum correcting my copies of the Diyarbekir [? i.e. Kurkh] Monolith and the two Michaux. I fancy I must have been blind when I copied the latter or the Museum people must have scoured them well, for I saw several letters that were invisible before. I will give you the corrections when you are inclined to look at them; but I shall not be surprised to find that you have already divined them. My best respects to Lady Rawlinson: I fear she will find some hard bits occasionally in your letters. I cannot find the earlier letters written to Briggs, and suspect I did not keep them, and that they are buried among the Society\u2019s Archives. I have however some abstracts of them, made at the time of receiving them [see III\/01 above]. The first of all, containing your first readings, I gave to Strangford about a year ago.\u201d [III\/20(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                              5. Addressed \u201cMichaels Grove [as above] 12 October, 1865. [This is the reply to III\/18(02), the only exchange of letters between HCR and Norris in the collection. RBP.] My dear Rawlinson. You wrote me a note just before I left home, and I jotted down a memo. for reply, but somehow I forgot it. It referred to a letter from Wilson of 1844 containing a copy of Greek inscriptions from Haroonabad, (also written Harunabad) in western Iran\u00a0where a Greek inscription (on a tomb stone) was found in 1844 by Rawlinson and his travelling companion Commander J. Felix Jones.<\/li>\n
                                                                                              6. \u00a0My memo. says no letters reached here from you between Aug. 1839 (to Briggs) and Novr<\/sup>. 1845 (to Wilson) the letters marked P. G. H. R. came to Wilson; after that you wrote to me.\u201d Is glad to hear that the Index is nearly completed and promises to have it \u201cput in type in your absence\u201d if HCR sends it to him. Has not heard of Strangford\u2019s wish to succeed Panizzi but thinks it sounds \u201cimprobable\u201d. Is looking forward to seeing \u201cthe Quarterly article\u201d soon. \u201cHincks has just printed a paper on the Astronomical Tablet, containing a good deal of Chrono[lo]gical argument, which my head is quite unable to follow . . .\u201d Then quotes some harsh comments by Hincks on statements which HCR had published earlier, in particular, that a passage in \u201cSarg. Cylin. l. 39\u201d which HCR has read as urzi u musakhud <\/em>\u201cgraciously and honourably\u201d should read uzra u musa akbud<\/em> \u201cin morning and evening I laboured.\u201d and that in reading urzi<\/em> for uzri<\/em> HCR must have mistaken one cuneiform sign for another. On checking the inscription at the Museum, Norris finds that Hincks is right. [I suppose that the paper by Hincks must be Cathcart and Donlon 133 On the Assyrio-Babylonian Measures of Time <\/em>Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy 24<\/strong> (1865) Polite Literature, pp. 13-24. Read 10th<\/sup> April 1865. However, I cannot identify the paper by HCR which Hincks is criticizing. HCR does not comment on this point in his later letters to Norris. RBP.] \u201cFrancis Newman is writing and printing an article on the Persian Behistun Inscription taking the Greek as his basis of interpretations. I think it very clever, though he estimates it rather too highly.\u201d Norris finds that he does not know of HCR\u2019s later work in this field and has sent him \u201cyour further notes\u201d \u2026 \u201cwhich will delay him\u201d [This does not appear to be related to the \u201cNewman\u2019s notes\u201d to which HCR refers in III\/18(03). [III\/20(05)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                                                                                  \n
                                                                                                1. On notepaper with black border headed \u201c58, Great Cumberland Place W.\u201d but addressed at the end \u201c22 Upper Berkeley Street. W.\u201d from \u201cE Strangford [presumably Emily Anne n\u00e9e Beaufort (1826-1887) widow of 8th<\/sup> Viscount Strangford (died January 9th<\/sup> 1869)]\u201d \u201cDear Lady Rawlinson. Lord Strangford never lost or burned a paper of any importance therefore I feel sure that if Mr<\/sup>. Norris sent him Sir Henry\u2019s letter he either returned it or buried it at the Asiatic. There is not a single paper or scrap that I have not now examined and I have nothing to send you but this old letter which I feel sure you will like to have. I send back Mr<\/sup>. Norris\u2019s letters to you and wish I had more as the collection of Sir Henry\u2019s letters will by & bye be most valuable. Is about to leave England after the publication of her book [A<\/em> Selection from the Writings of Viscount Strangford on Political, Geographical and Social Subjects<\/em> edited by Viscountess Strangford pub. Richard Bentley] which will be out the following week. Hopes \u201cSir Henry liked the memoir [presumably of her late husband] I sent him. I did not hear if it was read [presumably at the RAS] but I presume it was. Perhaps he would tell Dr Rost to send me a copy when it is printed.\u201d [III\/20(06)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                  III\/21\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Documents written by Edwin Norris.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                    \n
                                                                                                  1. Two scrap sheets of foolscap (apparently picked up in the Foreign Office) written on one side in Norris\u2019s hand (the reverse sides are covered in unrelated material). Headed \u201cScythic Paper.\u201d It consists of brief notes on HCR\u2019s paper Notes on the Early History of Babylonia.<\/em> JRAS <\/em>15<\/strong>215-259. The entries are labeled with the corresponding page numbers from the published journal. The reason for making the notes is not clear. [III\/21(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                  2. Single foolscap sheet, unsigned and undated but in Norris\u2019s hand. One side bears a text beginning \u201cRecently received letters from Col. Rawlinson contain several valuable additions to the Assyrian Syllabarium, and these will be printed by the Society in the sequel preparing by Col. R. to his memoir of which the first part is published. [This presumably refers to Notes on the Inscriptions of Assyria and Babylonia<\/em> JRAS<\/em> 12 <\/strong>1849\/50 pp.401-483.] A number of curious identifications are also gradually shewing themselves, the ultimate results of which will be highly valuable to history & chronology although their interest is for the present rather philological than historical.\u201d Then gives details of some of these. From the references to the gods Nuha <\/em>and Anu<\/em> and other points, the document must date from after Norris\u2019s receipt of III\/09(09) dated June 1st<\/sup> 1853, although probably not long after. [It may have been intended for reading at a meeting of the RAS, although I cannot trace such an occasion, or for publication. At the end of III\/09(08) dated 24th<\/sup> May 1853 HCR writes \u201cas there is such a race now for priority, if you can make anything intelligible out of all this farrago for the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> I shall be much obliged.\u201d RBP.] The reverse is headed \u201cAlphabet\u201d and consists of a list of 37 cuneiform signs with entries alongside. Most of these are syllables, but a few are words. Each is accompanied by a page reference, in some cases preceded by the word \u201cslip\u201d. [III\/21(02)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                    III\/22\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Documents connected with George Smith. The first three documents were found together in an envelope labeled \u201cLetter from George Smith to Sir H C Rawlinson on decipherment of a cuneiform inscription and animadversions of Rawlinson on a decipherment [sic] of George Smith. Removed by Dr Hansman from context amid the papers. SD 23-5-74.\u201d As follows:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                      \n
                                                                                                    1. Three printed foolscap sheets stapled together. The first headed \u201cORDINARY ALPHABET, including all Syllables with not more than one Consonant,\u201d followed by 3 columns of about 35 cuneiform symbols with one or more syllabic values each [not all of which are open syllables.] The second sheet is headed \u201cCOMPOUND SYLLABLES\u201d and the third \u201cCOMPOUND SYLLABLES \u2013 continued.<\/em>\u201d Each of these sheets contains two columns of about 35 cuneiform symbols each with syllabic values alongside each. [Judging by the total number of symbols, this represents the Babylonian syllabary. RBP.] [III\/22(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                    2. Foolscap. Letter, [Possibly a draft. RBP.] from \u201cGeorge Smith\u201d to \u201cDear Sir\u201d preceded by a carefully written-out cuneiform text. \u201chere is the Inscription restored on the basis of the Cylinder with variants from other copies \u2026 After you left the museum today I found a fragment of another copy making the 6th<\/sup> separate inscription, the number in the new fragment is clearly<\/em> 1535 so that of four copies in which the number is preserved 2 are 1535 and 2 other 1635\u201d. The event commemorated by these inscriptions is \u201cthe removal of the idol\u201d. Smith considers that the variation between 1535 and 1635 is an error in copying rather than confusion in reckoning the time and that the original reading was 1535. Discusses parallel instances. Hopes to find further material which will enable him to identify the original reading with more certainty. The date of the inscription \u201cwas probably about 655 BC \u2026 this would make the date of the event referred to about BC 2290 or 2190.\u201d [III\/22(02)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                                                                                        \n
                                                                                                      1. Draft of a letter in HCR\u2019s handwriting headed \u201cAssyrian discovery\u201d \u201cSir. As Mr. George Smith is well known to have been employed by the Trustees of the British Museum during the last two years in assisting me to prepare for publication a third Volume of the Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia<\/em> it may be naturally supposed that he has my authority for the historical discoveries which from time to time he announces in the pages of the Athen\u00e6um<\/em> as the result of his labors on the Nineveh tablets.\u201d HCR then formally disclaims any responsibility for any such pronouncements by Smith and to register his disagreement with one of Smith\u2019s recent ones. \u201cIt is quite true that Mr. Smith in collecting the disjointed fragments of the Annals of Asshur-bani-pal<\/em> (Sardanapalus of the Greeks) first detected the figures referring to the translation of the image of Venus from Babylonia to Susiana, and thus is entitled to the credit of having discovered the earliest historical date which has yet been found among the Cuneiform records [i.e. about B.C. 2290]. However, HCR objects to Smith\u2019s associating this event with King Chedor-laomer and with \u201cthe age of Abraham\u201d. [I have not seen the letter to which HCR is objecting, but it may be the one which appeared in The Athen\u00e6um<\/em> No 2137 October 10th<\/sup> 1868 p.463. (E Norris to Fox Talbot 5th<\/sup> Nov. 1868 \u2013 Norris describes the paper as \u201cmuch hazarded, I think\u201d.) nor the published version of this letter, if it was published. RBP.] [III\/22(03)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                        NB <\/strong>In his Assyrian Discoveries<\/em> 1875 Smith says [p.12] that he discovered this date, which he gives there as 2280 BC, in 1868. He also says [p.11] that he started work at the Museum on Volume III of Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em> \u201cat the beginning of 1867\u201d which would date\u00a0 HCR\u2019s draft to the beginning of 1869. It is not possible to say which of documents 2 and 3 came first.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          \n
                                                                                                        1. Letter. Addressed \u201cLeipzig, December 25th<\/sup> 1876. Sir, [From contents, clearly addressed to HCR.] \u201cBeing about to write a little biography of George Smith [died August 19th<\/sup> 1876] as well as a pamphlet on the Eponym Canon\u201d asks HCR to confirm Smith\u2019s claim to priority of discovery of the nature of the tablet published in Cuneiform Inscriptions<\/em> Vol. II Pl. 52 as well as the nature of \u201cthe Deluge Tablet\u201d [containing the text of the Epic of Gilgamesh. Smith\u2019s priority in this had been denied by Oppert.]. Signed \u201cDr. Friedr. Delitzsch\u201d University of Leipzig.\u201d [III\/22(04)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                          III\/23\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>36 foolscap sheets, some single, some double, containing fragmentary drafts of different texts, all apparently in HCR\u2019s hand (?). None are signed or dated, but all appear to date from after HCR\u2019s return from Baghdad in 1855. At least one appears to be a draft of the beginning of the \u201cAstronomical paper\u201d which HCR promised to write in 1865 (see III\/18(01) above). There is also what appears to be a draft of a review of George Rawlinson\u2019s Herodotus<\/em>. There is also what appear to be parts of a draft history of the discovery of cuneiform decipherment in which HCR is referred to in the third person and which deals with the rival claims to priority of discovery of HCR and Hincks.
                                                                                                          \n[I have not attempted to arrange or analyze the sheets, as it is not clear that the material is of sufficient interest to justify the effort involved. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                          III\/24\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Miscellaneous documents relating to HCR\u2019s early intellectual interests, the order is arbitrary:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                            \n
                                                                                                          1. Letter from \u201cBrigdr<\/sup> Shee ? Baghdad ? 25 June 1839\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawlinson\u201d Gives a brief account of \u201cplaces of interest\u201d on the journey to Samara \u201cby the route of Shauban\u201d. Marginal sketches. [III\/24(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          2. Five double foolscap sheets folded and stitched containing 9 pages of writing in HCR\u2019s hand. \u201cNotes and Memoranda regarding oriental geography.\u201d Undated but the handwriting is comparable with HCR\u2019s letters from the early 1840s. [III\/24(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          3. Six double foolscap sheets folded and [originally] stitched containing 8 pages of writing in HCR\u2019s hand, comparable to III\/24(02) above. Extracts from a book [\u201cBromes\u201d ?] in Central Asia. [III\/24(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          4. Double sheet folded over. Written on first page only \u201cNotes on the Gr\u00e6co Bactrian Dynasty.\u201d [III\/24(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          5. Slip of paper with drawing of coins. [I have included it here because the coins seem to have inscriptions on them in Greek and Brahmi ? RBP.] [III\/24(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          6. Three single foolscap sheets folded double but not stitched containing five pages of writing \u201cStatistical notes relative to Persia collected by H Rawlinson Lt. Bomb. Army.\u201d [III\/24(06)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          7. Double foolscap sheet folded in four (tending to tear along the folds).Unsigned and undated but in HCR\u2019s hand. \u201cRough table of the Statistics of Looristan [Presumably Lorestan\/Luristan in W. Iran RBP.] Estimates of tax revenue. [III\/24(07)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          8. Unfinished letter in HCR\u2019s hand [undated, but the writing is comparable to that in HCR\u2019s first letters to the RAS dated 1838.] \u201cMy dear Pastems.\u201d Thanks him for the loan of the Chudenama ? \u201cwhich is now being copied for me.\u201d Hopes not to be anticipated by \u201cCunningham\u201d in a paper on the antiquities of Sinde but thinks that Cunningham will not be able to complete the project successfully because HCR has access to authorities which Cunningham does not. [III\/24(08)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                          9. 13 sheets of rough notes on various matters, most probably now unintelligible. [III\/24(09)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                            III\/25\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Further documents relating to HCR\u2019s early intellectual interests. It is convenient to separate these from the preceding group, because of the sizes of the sheets. The order is arbitrary.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              \n
                                                                                                            1. Three double sheets [larger than foolscap] folded over but not stitched 8 pages of writing in HCR\u2019s hand. Headed \u201cIII. March of Alexander from Susa to Ecbatana\u201d. [Appears to be a draft of an article related in subject to HCR\u2019s early papers in the Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, although I cannot relate it to any published material. RBP.] The text is interspersed with calculations. The sheets are much dog-eared and need to be handled with care. [III\/25(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                            2. Single sheet written on both sides apparently connected with the above, headed \u201cStrabo\u2019s route of Alexander Lib 15 l.2.S.8 ? \u201d [III\/25(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                            3. Double foolscap sheet folded over written on the outside only, headed \u201cRoute from Persepolis to Ecbatana.\u201d Apparently connected with III\/25(01) above. [III\/25(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                            4. Foolscap sheet ruled into three columns on both sides, headed \u201cE.A. vocabulaire\u201d. The columns are headed \u201cZend\u201d, \u201c Pehlvi\u201d and \u201cFran\u00e7ois\u201d respectively and give, in HCR\u2019s hand the corresponding words in each language. [III\/25(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                            5. Double foolscap sheet folded over, written on the first two pages only in HCR\u2019s hand. The first page is headed \u201cTranslations of Persian poetry.\u201d It consists of translations into English prose of passages from various Persian poets. The second page (reversed) has what appears to be an account of items of household expenditure. [III\/25(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                            6. Four double foolscap sheets folded and stitched. On the outside \u201cNotes on the Taki Bostam ? \u201d. On the ninth page \u201cRemarks on the word Traw ? <Arabic letters>.<\/em> On the the 15th<\/sup> to 17th<\/sup> pages \u201cNotes on the Parthians ? \u201d The other pages are blank. [III\/25(06)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                              III\/26\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Ten pieces of scrap paper with rough notes, maps, lists of places and distances etc. All apparently connected with HCR\u2019s time in Persia, but unclear whether they relate to his intellectual interests or to his military duties.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              III\/27\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>\u201cExtracts relating to the comparative Geography of Persia. H Rawlinson. Tabriz. Sept. 12th<\/sup> 1834.\u201d Six sheets enclosed in separate Melinex sleeves because of their fragility. In Latin, French and English, with isolated words in Greek and Arabic ?. Judging from the variation in handwriting, the entries appear to have been written over a considerable period.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                              III\/28<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0 Three letters from Rev. Dr Edward Hincks to Edwin Norris [presumably included by mistake with the letters from HCR which Norris sent to Lady Rawlinson in 1865. See III\/20 above. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                \n
                                                                                                              1. Addressed \u201c67 Great Russell St. Bloomsbury 20th<\/sup> June 1853 My dear Mr<\/sup>\u201d [See III\/09(11) above dated 5th<\/sup> July 1853 where HCR asks Norris to enquire \u201cwhat Hincks is up to at the Museum\u201d.] Comments on a report \u201cin the Literary Gazette<\/em> of Saturday [i.e. 18th<\/sup> June. RBP.] that the two first names in the line of ancestors of the king whose cylinder Col. R. has with him at Bagdad [sic<\/em>] are not names of kings.<\/em>You showed me the list & I recollect that \u201cTiglath Pileser the first\u201d occurs early in it & also a name which I read \u201cShamshiyar ? \u201d. I do not, however, recollect the first<\/em> name nor am I sure of the order<\/em> of the following ones. I saw, however, on one of the fragment [sic] of the cylinder in the British Museum \u201cShamshiyar\u201d named as the father of the king who constructed it & his<\/em> father named also neither of them being called king of Assyria<\/em>. It occurs to me, then as highly probable that the three names on the Museum cylinder are the first three on Col. R.\u2019s. They are: [There follow three names in cuneiform, under part of the first Hincks has written \u201cDagon\u201d, under part of the second \u201cShamshi\u201d and under the third \u201cTikilti? Pal, itsur?.\u201d They correspond with nos. 1, 2 and 7 in HCR\u2019s first List of Assyrian Kings enclosed with III\/09(06). RBP.] Is this the case? & if it be, how many generations older is this Tiglath Pileser (the first) than T.P. the second, whose cylinder Col. R. has? As this is a matter of extreme interest an early answer would oblige. Yours very truly Edw. Hincks. [PS] Of course you are aware that the law of Namri [?] is mentioned on the Nimrud obelisk; it must have lain near the Tigris below Kaleh Shergat \u2013 perhaps as far as Bagdad.\u201d [III\/28(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                              2. Addressed \u201c67 Great Russell St. 20th<\/sup> June 4 P.M. My dear Mr Norris. I am greatly vexed at having given you a false impression of the antiquity of the B.M. cylinder in my note of this morning. It is true that the king calls Shamshiyar the son of Dagon his father<\/em>; but he must have meant his ancestor \u2013 the word being used with great latitude. In another part of the cylinder, however, which I had not before looked at he calls himself \u2018the son of <cuneiform \u2261 6 in HCR\u2019s list, see previous letter> & grandson of <cuneiform \u2261 5 in HCR\u2019s list> who was son of <cuneiform \u2261 4 in HCR\u2019s list> who was son of <cuneiform \u2261 3>. I presume this cylinder is of the same date as Col R\u2019s. I fear, however, it does not give the years of the kings reign in which his conquests took place. At least, I have not met any date yet. Yours very truly Edw. Hincks.\u201d [III\/28(02)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                              3. Addressed \u201cKillyleigh Co<\/sup> Down 6th<\/sup> August 1853. My dear Mr Norris. You would much oblige me if, when you have leisure, you would look at the 22d<\/sup> line of the Babylonian Behistun inscription & let me know if the first character in the word there read ni.ta<\/em> is really a li<\/em> as printed. Is it not rather <cuneiform> wech<\/em>? I have looked over the book [Presumably the same version of Memoir on the Scythic Version of the Behistun Inscription<\/em> eventually published in JRAS<\/em> 15 <\/strong>pp.\u00a01-213 (1855) on which HCR commented in III\/07(22)] you were kind enough to give me. I wish to leave the matter in your<\/em> hands; but I am quite sure<\/em> that you have mistaken the values of many characters. The question with me is. When all that are wrong are corrected, does your main<\/em> point \u2013 the language being Scythic \u2013 still hold good? I incline to think that it may, just as, when the erroneous values that I gave to some of the Van characters are corrected, its Indo European character is still obvious.\u201d Hincks then gives a list of corrections \u201cwhich I regard as absolutely certain<\/em>\u201d. [Norris has appended comments and cuneiform signs to many of these corrections. RBP.] \u201cI wish you would reconsider<\/em> the whole matter in these lights. Believe me Yours very truly Edw. Hincks.\u201d [III\/28(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                              4. Addressed \u201cNimroud. June 6th<\/sup> 1853. My dear Sir.\u201d [The writer is clearly Hormuzd Rassam, although this appears to be a copy made by one of HCR\u2019s clerks in Baghdad. The only reference to a consignment of sculptures etc arriving by raft from Mosul is in III\/10(07) and is dated 9 months later than this one. Moreover, HCR there mentions only one letter from Rassam which he will have copied for Norris, although it is accompanied by two such copies.] Discusses arrangements for transporting a consignment of sculptures by raft down river to Baghdad. The road-building and other work necessary to transport these sculptures to the river has meant that very little excavation work has been done \u201cin the centre of the mound of Konyunjik\u201d but \u201ca perfect Obelisk in white stone\u201d has been found. Gives a detailed description of the reliefs. The letter breaks off with the remark that \u201cMons. de Place came out to Konyunjik to see this Obelisk the day I left Mossul.\u201d [III\/28(04)].BOX IV
                                                                                                                \n<\/strong>Mainly biographical and autobiographical material<\/em>.IV\/01\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Rawlinson family tree. 2 items rolled up, written in ink along the long axis (in landscape mode), apparently both in the same hand..<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
                                                                                                                  \n
                                                                                                                1. On two foolscap sheets pasted together along the longer edge. Headed Rawlinsons of Graysdale Hall in the County of Lancaster.<\/em> In the top LH corner Ms. Collections relating to the Rawlinson family. Vol. I f.30. <\/em>Shows descendants of \u201cRobert Rawlinson of Hawkeshead, born 1538\u201d through about 8 generations to \u201cThomas R. Born 16 June 1728.\u201d [IV\/01(1)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                2. On four sheets of parchment (?) pasted together along the shorter edge. No heading. Shows the descendants of \u201cJohn Rawlinson of the Greenhed Calton Temp. Henry VII\u201d through about twelve generations to 1851. The children of HCR\u2019s brothers are shown and an attempt has been made to extend the tree in pencil to include HCR\u2019s descendants also but it was abandoned, possibly because of lack of space to do so tidily. [IV\/01(2)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                  IV\/02\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Miscellaneous items relating to Rawlinson family history. 6 items plus one empty envelope.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                    \n
                                                                                                                  1. Clipping from a newspaper (?) containing a notice of the marriage of \u201cT. A. Rawlinson of Grass-yard Hall co. Lancaster [HCR\u2019s father] at St George\u2019s, Hanover Square\u201d on 18th<\/sup> August 1800. [IV\/02(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                  2. Scrap of paper written in pencil in HCR\u2019s hand headed \u201cMemo of honorary distinctions.\u201d At the bottom: \u201c\u2018All is vanity\u2019 saith the Preacher and he sayeth truly. Baghdad February 26 1854 H Rawlinson.\u201d [IV\/02(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                  3. Letter addressed \u201cSt Catharine\u2019s [Ont. Canada Queenston St. No 30] April 29th<\/sup> \/74\u201d to \u201cSir Henry Rawlinson\u201d from \u201cyour old friend Lucy Rawlinson\u201d requesting information about her father\u2019s parentage. [IV\/02(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                  4. Letter in envelope addressed \u201cPlumpton House, Bury St Edmonds 11 Febry<\/sup> 1875\u201d to \u201cDear Lady Rawlinson\u201d from \u201cSarah Bevan (?)\u201d dealing with various points in the Rawlinson family history, apparently in connection with heraldry. On the outside of the envelope, in Lady Rawlinson\u2019s hand \u201cExplanation of the R. Arms.\u201d [IV\/02(04)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                  5. Letter from \u201cHenry Creswicke, C.E. Barrie, Lake Simcoe, Ontario Canada\u201d to HCR dated \u201c17th<\/sup> Novr<\/sup> Honourd. Sir\u201d Claims kinship with HCR on account of sharing the maiden name of HCR\u2019s mother. Hopes that HCR may be willing and able to assist him and his brother to recover property in England out of which he thinks they may have been cheated. He goes into this in considerable detail. [IV\/02(05)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                  6. Letter addressed \u201c2 Iden Villas 13 Janry<\/sup> 91 My dear Harry [presumably HCR\u2019s eldest son H S Rawlinson]\u201d from \u201cyour affate<\/sup> cousin Sarah Bevan ? [the writer is clearly the same as in IV\/02(04) RBP]\u201d gives the answers to various questions in connection with HCR\u2019s coat of arms. She mentions having received queries also from \u201cyour aunt Mrs G[eorge] Rawlinson and Alice Gatty.\u201d Apparently three enclosures containing the promised information. [IV\/02(06)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                    IV\/03\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Items relating to HCR\u2019s journey to India. 1827. 2 items.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      \n
                                                                                                                    1. Foolscap sheet folded over. On the last page \u201cHenry\u2019s account on going out to India.\u201d The first page headed \u201cPaid for Henry\u2019s outfit expences [sic<\/em>] & pocket money previous to his going to India. Incomplete itemization totalling \u00a3454\/14\/0 [There is a small error in the addition. Since both HCR and his elder brother Abram are referred to by their first names, the writer is presumably their father. RBP.] [IV\/03(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                    2. \u201cJournal of an Exile.\u201d Account of the voyage to India in HCR\u2019s hand covering 46 numbered pages, followed by \u201csome scraps of poetry\u201d which he had composed to fill an on-board newspaper The Herald of the Deep.<\/em> Preceded by a single sheet in an unknown hand summarizing points of interest from the Journal. [IV\/03(02)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                      IV\/04\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>\u201cJournal of an Ensign\u201d Two stiff backed exercise books. The first headed \u201cJournal of an Ensign. H C Rawlinson attached to do duty with the second Bomb. Eur. Reg.\u201d runs from 1st<\/sup> December 1827 to 14th<\/sup> October 1828. (152 pages) The second volume recommences on October 25th<\/sup> \u2013 HCR excuses the hiatus by not having been able to procure a fresh book to write in. On the first page he writes \u201cContinuation of a Journal kept by Henry Creswicke Rawlinson of the first Bomb. Grenadiers in compliance with a promise made to his affectionate Sister Maria Rawlinson in the Spring of 1827.\u201d The second volume breaks off on December 26th<\/sup> 1828, ending with a letter to \u201cMy darling Biah\u201d from \u201cyour old Beazly General\u201d explaining that he cannot write any more as \u201cClibborn\u201d is about to embark for England, but promising to continue \u201cin my next book\u201d. \u201cI enclose some of my hair for you Geordie Bessy Powell or whoever may think it worthy of acceptance.\u201d Preceded by a single sheet in the same hand as that in IV\/03(02) similarly summarizing points of interest. [IV\/04].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      IV\/05\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>13 letters from HCR to his sister Maria dated from October 12 1828 to November 1833. Nos. 1 \u2013 9 are addressed to \u201cMiss M Rawlinson\u201d at the family home at Chipping Norton, Nos 10 \u2013 13 (i.e. from October 1832 onwards) to \u201cMrs M Brooke Smith, Park Street, Bristol. Numbered and with brief notes on the contents of each letter written on the front in red ink [in the hand of HCR\u2019s elder son H. S. Rawlinson?]. The letters are very long and hard to read, being written very small and much of it cross-ways. They seem to be concerned with personal and family matters and details of his military career. The last was written as he was leaving on his mission to Persia. [IV\/05(1-13).]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      IV\/06\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Manila folder with two typewritten labels pasted inside. On the outside is written in pencil: Autograph material of Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson Bart displayed in exhibitions of RAS Sesquicentenary 1973 \u2026 Feb. \u201974. Papers restored to various contexts mainly to HCR\u2019s correspondence with RAS. 11\/3 1975.\u201d Inside is a label describing a letter from HCR to his sister Maria [dated 1836?] announcing that he has sent a translation of the Old Persian inscription at Behistun to the RAS and his feelings of triumph. The folder is the only evidence currently [Feb. 2012] available of the existence of this letter, the location of which is unknown. [RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      IV\/07<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Material surviving from the period 1st<\/sup> January 1838 up to the end of HCR\u2019s service as Political Agent at Kandahar, Afghanistan (1842). 4 items.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                      When the British withdrew from Afghanistan at the end of 1842, HCR\u2019s effects, including his official records were sent by water. The boat caught fire on the River Sutlej and burnt to the water\u2019s edge. This cost HCR 6 months hard work reconstructing his accounts to the Government (over \u00a31m had passed through his hands during this period) which he was able to do successfully. Many of these papers show signs of scorching and water damage, some pages being stuck together. Documents in other HCR collections dating from this period show similar damage.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                        \n
                                                                                                                      1. The remains of a ledger \u2013 it is impossible to tell what kind of binding it originally had \u2013 which has been written in from both ends. At one end: \u201cAbstract of Private Correspondence commencing Janry<\/sup> 1st<\/sup> 1838 H C Rawlinson, Major serving in Persia Teheran.\u201d Abstracts of letters sent appear on the RH pages and letters received on the LH. The list of letters sent runs from January 1st<\/sup> 1838 to October 10th<\/sup> 1838 and then after a gap due to absence on travel from February 5th<\/sup> 1839 to October 17th<\/sup> The list of letters received runs from January 30th<\/sup> 1838 to October 8th<\/sup> 1838 and then from February 18th<\/sup> 1839 to May 22nd<\/sup> 1839. This list contains the only mention by HCR of his younger brother Richard Smith Rawlinson [see IV\/01] who trained as a doctor and died in India aged 36. At the other end: \u201cJournal 1841\u201d announces that he is recommencing a journal long laid aside.\u201d It runs from January 1st<\/sup> to January 21st<\/sup> when it was abandoned apparently due to pressure of work. On the page following the end of the journal there are pencilled notes on a \u201cJourney from Candahar to Mymuna (?).\u201d There is nothing further written on the pages of the ledger itself, but tucked into it are a large number of pieces of paper, most of which have financial calculations written on them. Most of these are unsigned and undated, but such dates as do appear are for 1841 and where any references are given they relate to \u201cCandahar\u201d. These notes may relate to HCR\u2019s retrospective reconstruction of the accounts. [IV\/07(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                      2. One double foolscap sheet and two single foolscap sheets written on four sides in HCR\u2019s hand, concerned with the contemporary political situation in Persia. Possibly the draft of a report to his superiors. One of the sheets appears to be in a slightly different (earlier?) hand than the others and was clearly written while he was based in Candahar. It is the only one to show signs of scorching. [IV\/07(02)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                      3. Letter in blue envelope. Addressed to Muhammad Karim Mirza from [Sir William Hay] Macnaghten, British envoy in Afghanistan, whose seal, dated 1838, appears on the reverse. Dated 18 October 1841, 7 Ramadan 1257. Thanks the recipient for news and sends greetings to Muhammad Ibrahim Mirza. [Macnaghten was killed outside Kabul on 23 December 1841.] Translation of this letter by Alexander Morton 24.2.10. <\/em>[IV\/07(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                      4. Small red notebook with label on the front \u201cSir Henry Rawlinson\u2019s Diary.\u201d The first page is headed \u201cPolitical Diary.\u201d Begins with an entry dated \u201cJuly 14 [1840]\u201d recording his taking up the post of Political Agent at Candahar. The last dated entry is August 29th<\/sup>. At the back of the book are various notes with the general explanation \u201cNotes taken on my trip from Baghdad to Hamadan and back by Sulimaneh in 1847(?) [The dates given i.e. Sunday 6th<\/sup> to Wednesday 9th<\/sup> October are not compatible with that year but could be 1844 or 1850. RBP.] This was the same journey as that reported on by Capt. Felix Jones in the \u2018Bombay Solutions.\u2019\u201d [IV\/07(04)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                        IV\/08<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Letters from HCR to his sister Maria, 3 from Baghdad January 28 to December 4 1848, 5 written during his stay in England, November 8 1850 to August 28 1851, and 4 after his return to Baghdad, February 29th<\/sup> 1852 to February 12th<\/sup> 1854.
                                                                                                                        \nThe letters deal mainly with family and personal matters, including his feelings of loneliness in Baghdad and his longing to get married as well as how his health suffers during the summers in Mesopotamia. The London letters also contain references to his angling for a more prestigious appointment. There are also complaints that Maria does not appreciate his scholarly achievements and one letter, dated March 4th<\/sup> 1853, refers to the presence of the refugee Queen of Persia in Baghdad.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                        IV\/09\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Passport dated 4th<\/sup> November 1856 issued to \u201cColonel Sir Henry Creswick Rawlinson K.C.B. (British Subject) travelling on the Continent.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                        IV\/10\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>MS consisting of 6 double foolscap sheets, not gathered, containing a draft \u201cBiographical notice of Maj. Gen. Sir H. Rawlinson KCB.\u201d Unsigned but dated \u201cLondon Sep. 30 1859.\u201d It is not clear what was the purpose of this account but it reads as though intended for publication. It ends with his departure as Ambassador to Teheran, where, it states, he expected to have leisure to produce the transliterations and translations which were to appear in the interleaved edition of Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia<\/em> which HCR was to publish at his own expense. As his letters to Norris from Teheran [III\/15] make clear this proved not to be the case, and he complains of being busier than he was in London.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                        IV\/11\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Octavo ruled notebook with stiff black oilcloth (?) cover, written in HCR\u2019s hand. On the verso of the flyleaf: \u201cJournal for wedding tour Sept<\/sup> 1862. Begins with their departure from London Sept<\/sup> 26th<\/sup> and is continuous for 23 pages to October 12th<\/sup> where it breaks off in the middle of a description of Padua. There follow 31 blank pages and then an entry of just over a page dated October 26th<\/sup> describing their arrival at Civita Vecchia by sea from Livorno and their subsequent departure for Rome. [In a letter to Norris (III\/17(03)) HCR explains that this sea trip was because his wife had been frightened by stories of brigands in the area of Tuscany they had originally planned to visit.] The diary largely consists of descriptions of works of art and architecture. At the back of the book are copies of inscriptions in various scripts.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                        IV\/12\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters from and about HCR\u2019s sons up to the time they left school. There are further letters, particularly about the boys, in Box V.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                          \n
                                                                                                                        1. Letters of congratulation on the birth of HCR\u2019s first son, Henry Seymour Rawlinson (Harry) January 1864. 4 items. [IV\/12(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                        2. Letters of congratulation on the birth of HCR\u2019s second son, Alfred Rawlinson January 1867. 15 items. [IV\/12)(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                        3. Enclosed in a folder with stiff covers. Miscellaneous items dating from 1870 to 1881, approximately 151 items. The majority are letters to HCR or his wife, either from the boys themselves or about them from nurses, governesses, schoolmasters etc. There are also a few school reports, bills etc. Some of the letters might be of interest to biographers of H S Rawlinson or historians of upper class education in the later nineteenth century. [IV\/12(03)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                          IV\/13\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Notebook with stiff covers with ruled pages, spine missing. The first few pages had been written on, but have been cut away. The first intact recto<\/em> is headed \u201cRough Annuary of Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson begun Oct: 31 1884 \u2013 21 Charles St. Underneath [in another hand?] is added \u201cfinished Dec. 1884.\u201d The next 33 openings contain entries giving the principal events of his life, year by year up to 1884. At the back of the book are five openings listing year by year the honours and appointments which HCR received. The main entries appear on the recto with additional notes written in a much smaller hand on the opposite page. At least some of these entries refer to HCR in the third person and may possibly be by his son H S Rawlinson. The entries for the early years contain many lively anecdotes not found elsewhere, but which are probably not of historical significance It should be noted that the accounts of events given in this book, and particularly of the motivation for HCR\u2019s actions, are sometimes at variance with statements in letters written at the time.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                          IV\/14\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Notebook with stiff covers. The first page is headed \u201cAbstract of accounts\u201d. It contains summaries of income and expenditure for each year from 1879 to 1890, expenditure on the left hand page and income on the right. On the page following the entry for 1890 there are figures for total expenditure for 1890 and 1891. At the back there are eight lines in pencil \u201cNotes on the Afghan frontier\u201d ending \u201cQuoted from the Standard March 13 1885.\u201d The summaries show that HCR\u2019s financial position was very finely balanced and that he was dependent on the salary from his post as a member of the Council for India to maintain his lifestyle and the position of his family.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                          IV\/15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letters to H S Rawlinson [HCR\u2019s elder son] while serving in India. 36 letters dated from August 16th<\/sup> 1888 to July 1889. Mostly from HCR, with occasional enclosures from his younger son (Toby) but there are one or two from his wife. Topics include: comments on the political and military situation in the Middle East (HCR was at this time serving on the Council for India); his younger son (Toby)\u2019s mysterious illness, which led to his return from India and his withdrawal from the Army until the outbreak of the First World War; complaints about Toby\u2019s subsequent extravagant lifestyle, which threatened to outrun HCR\u2019s resources but which he clearly had not the heart to curtail; Toby\u2019s determination to get married and arrangements for his support; concerns over HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s deteriorating health (she died at the end of 1889) and the visit of the Shah of Persia July 1889. The bond between father and son is illustrated by a phrase in one of HCR\u2019s letters \u201cI feel quite lost without you.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                          IV\/16\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Booklet consisting of 9 quarto leaves sewn together along one edge enclosed in a cardboard cover with Life of Sir H Rawlinson<\/em> embossed in gold on the front. It contains an unsigned biographical memoir written in 1877 cut from an unidentified periodical. [This memoir can fairly be described as uncritical and it is not clear what was the occasion for its publication at that time. The label \u201cLord Rawlinson\u201d pasted inside the front cover must refer to HCR\u2019s elder son, who was created Baron Rawlinson of Trent in 1919. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                          IV\/17\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Documents relating to HCR obituaries. 3 items as follows:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                            \n
                                                                                                                          1. Letter from Robert Cust, Hon Sec to the Royal Asiatic Society to an unidentified recipient. Dated \u201c63 Elm Park Gardens, Fulham Road, S.W. London 10 III 95 My dear Sir\u201d Requests help with the task of writing an obituary for the JRAS \u201cas I am not acquainted with the sons of my lamented friend \u2026\u201d Also offering suggestions as to the best way of disposing of HCR\u2019s library \u201cwhich is very valuable\u201d.<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                          2. Letter from Lord Roberts dated \u201cGlenart, Arklow 9th<\/sup> November 1897\u201d to \u201cMy dear Rawly [i.e. H S Rawlinson]. Discusses a possible contribution by Roberts to a Memoir of his father H C Rawlinson (d. 1895).<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                          3. Obituary of HCR from The Times 6th<\/sup> March 1895.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                            IV\/18\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Two double foolscap blue ruled sheets bearing verses, unsigned and undated but in HCR\u2019s handwriting. Judging by the alterations it is his original composition. It appears to refer to a disturbance arising out of a dispute about the relative rights of commoners and the Lord of the Manor. The title on the outside of the manuscript The Ballad of Haddon Hill<\/em> is in the handwriting of HCR\u2019s elder son H S Rawlinson.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                            BOX V<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                            Mainly family correspondence dating from after HCR\u2019s marriage<\/em>. This box had been arranged to a considerable extent before I started work on the collection and I have not interfered with the arrangement unless absolutely necessary. The original intention appears to have been to place in this box only letters between HCR and his wife, but other items were included. Many of the items are similar to those to be found in Boxes II or IV<\/em><\/p>\n

                                                                                                                            V\/01\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>2 letters which cannot be located in the other folders:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                              \n
                                                                                                                            1. Letter on notepaper embossed \u201cSecretary of State for India\u201d and dated \u201cFriday Decr<\/sup> 17th<\/sup> [this is compatible with the year 1858, during HCR\u2019s first period as a member of the Council for India. RBP.] From HCR to \u201cDear Alfred [his future brother-in-law Alfred Seymour]\u201d. Facetious in tone, about the affairs of \u201cAshley\u201d and also alludes to Alfred\u2019s brother Henry being stranded somewhere abroad and being unable to return until the spring, with Henry\u2019s concern at being absent from the House of Commons. [V\/01(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                            2. Unsigned note in Louisa Rawlinson\u2019s hand. It is about \u201ca letter of Lady C Masses to you asking about a man to find out springs of water.\u201d From the reference to \u201cNo 2 [Hill Street]\u201d it may be dated to 1868 because the house was not renumbered as No 2 until that year and was sold the following year. [V\/01(02)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                              V\/02\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Five letters dated 1862 with two envelopes addressed to \u201cMiss Seymour, 39 Grosvenor Street.\u201d Including:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                \n
                                                                                                                              1. Letter from HCR to \u201cDear Miss Seymour\u201d addressed 1 Hill Street, Berkeley Square, W Tuesday July 22nd<\/sup> 1862\u201d HCR\u2019s proposal of marriage.[V\/02(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                              2. Three letters from HCR to \u201cMy dearest Lou\u201d dated August 10, 11 and 12 1862. Addressed from \u201cHillside [the home of his married sister Maria Brooke Smith, where HCR was visiting his mother.] About how much he is in love and unable to think of anything else and how impatient he is to see her again. It would appear from these letters that Louisa kept him waiting for a week for an answer to his proposal. [IV\/02(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                              3. Letter dated \u201c11 Septr<\/sup> 1862\u201d from HCR\u2019s elder brother A L Rawlinson to \u201cMy dear Henry\u201d addressed from \u201cChipping Norton [the Rawlinson family estate, which ALR had inherited]. Family business. [V\/02(03)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                V\/03\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>14 letters. 11 from HCR to his wife dated in her hand to various dates in 1863, plus two notes simply dated \u201cMonday\u201d and \u201cSaturday\u201d [which I have left in this folder where I found them RBP]. plus one from his sister Maria to HCR expressing her concerns about their mother\u2019s declining health (she died in June 1863). Private and family business. [V\/03].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                V\/04\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>26 letters. 25 from HCR to his wife all but one dated to 1864, mostly in his wife\u2019s hand. The remaining note is dated \u201cThursday 5 PM\u201d. I have left it in this packet where I found it. There is also one from HCR\u2019s mother in law Jane Seymour dated \u201cTuesday 9 August\u201d \u2013 which is compatible with the year 1864. Jane Seymour was caring for HCR\u2019s elder son because HRC\u2019s wife was ill. Mostly private and family business, but there are passing references to HCR\u2019s public duties. [RBP]. [V\/04].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                V\/05\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>72 letters. 69 from HCR to his wife, all but two more or less completely dated to 1865, mostly in his wife\u2019s hand. [Some of these dates are clearly incorrect. RBP.] Mostly family and private matters, but there are references to HCR\u2019s public activities, including a lecture he gave in January to the RAS and a number written from Frome, Somerset, in July giving a blow-by-blow account of the election campaign when he was elected an MP for the second time. There are also three other letters:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                  \n
                                                                                                                                1. Letter from Maria Brooke Smith [HCR\u2019S sister] addressed \u201cCorsygedol Arms, Barmouth, Thursday [In the hand of HCR\u2019s son \u20181865?\u2019] My dear Louisa\u201d Primarily about Louisa\u2019s attempts to collect HCR\u2019s early letters. Promises to send her all the letters which HCR wrote to her from India etc but says that she has burnt those which he wrote to his mother because \u201cthey related to the only episode in his life that I considered not creditable to him\u201d. She also mentions that Lewis Pelly is staying with them and that they are having a good time. [V\/05(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                2. Letter from Lewis Pelly addressed \u201cMarseilles \u2013 19th<\/sup> September 1865 Dear Sir Henry. [It appears from other letters that he was en route to take up a post in Persia, but was proceeding by way of India. RBP.]\u201d Sets out proposed financial arrangements for his forthcoming marriage to Eudocia [Maria Smith\u2019s daughter] which he asks HCR to convey to the bride\u2019s father, but otherwise to treat in the strictest confidence. [V\/05(02)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                3. Letter from Maria Brook Smith as above to HCR addressed \u201cStoke Bishop, Friday [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand \u2018Nov. 1865\u2019]\u201d Expressing her outrage at the way her daughter Eudocia has been treated by \u201cthe villain\u201d [i.e. Lewis Pelly] who appears to have broken off the engagement as soon as he reached India. [It is not clear whether this Lewis Pelly is the distinguished soldier and diplomat Lewis Pelly (1825-1892), but I cannot trace anyone else of that name. RBP.] [V\/5 (03)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                  V\/06\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>32 letters from HCR to his wife, mostly dated in his wife\u2019s hand to 1866. [The few undated ones have been left in this packet where I found them. RBP] Very largely concerned with domestic and personal matters, although there are passing reference to what may be official duties such as \u201cthe Palestine affair\u201d and \u201cthe Mysore deputation.\u201d In addition, the packet contains:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                    \n
                                                                                                                                  1. Letter dated \u201c1 Hill Street [at the end] Saturday [added in pencil, but in the writer\u2019s hand] 1866 [from the reference to New Year greetings, may be dated to the beginning of January. Most probably Saturday January 6th<\/sup> RBP.]\u201d from \u201cL[ouisa] C[aroline] H[arcourt] R[awlinson] to \u201cDear Portia\u201d Mostly family news. \u201cI am glad Baby [HCR\u2019s elder son HS Rawlinson, who was 2 years old in 1866] has been to see his Granny [this must refer to Louisa\u2019s mother Jane Seymour, as HCR\u2019s mother died in 1863. RBP]\u201d Says how gloomy London is at Christmas \u201cour only waits a trumpet playing the Missletoe [sic<\/em>] Bough!\u201d and how she is looking forward to the return of her family. There is a PS from J[ane] P[leydell] B[ouverie] Louisa\u2019s elder sister saying \u201cLou is so glad to have \u2018the tenants\u2019 back again.\u201d [V\/06(01)<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                  2. Letter on Athen\u00e6um club notepaper dated \u201cJan. 8 -\/66\u201d from \u201cH.D.S [i.e. Henry Danby Seymour, HCR\u2019s brother-in law] to \u201cMy dearest Lou\u201d. Family matters, particularly about arrangements for the care of Louisa\u2019s mother, whose health was giving cause for concern. [V\/06(01)<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                  3. Letter undated, except for an addition in pencil \u201c1866\u201d from \u201cLCHR [i.e. Louisa Caroline Harcourt Rawlinson] to \u201cMy dearest Ellen.\u201d Family matters, particularly asking for details of a servant which Louisa was to engage for Ellen.<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                  4. Letter dated \u201cKnoyle House, Monday July 23rd<\/sup> [in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand \u20181866\u2019]\u201d from \u201cJane Seymour [Louisa Rawlinson\u2019s mother.] to \u201cMy dearest Lou\u201d with a brief message to \u201cDear Sir Henry\u201d on the back. Family matters. [V\/06(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                  5. Letter dated \u201cKnoyle, Tuesday 24 July [This is compatible with the year 1866. RBP.]\u201d from Jane Seymour as above to \u201cMy dear Mary [apparently Louisa was staying with her at this time]\u201d. Thanks for information about Louisa\u2019s health.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                    V\/07<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 29 letters from HCR to his wife datable to 1867. Mostly dealing with family matters, but there are references to his official duties, including the debates on the Parliamentary Reform Bill of that year, as well as to \u201cmy Indian Committee\u201d and to a meeting with Gladstone. One letter refers to the debate of 9th<\/sup> April on alleged corruption during the election of 1865 in the constituency of Totnes. During this debate HCR\u2019s brother-in-law Alfred, who had been the successful candidate, had to defend himself.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                    V\/08<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 57 letters from HCR to his wife datable to 1868, including 14 written from the German spa town of Bad Homburg, plus 14 to HCR from his wife during this visit. These letters also cover HCR\u2019s taking up his seat on the Council for India and his initial impressions of this. Plus:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                      \n
                                                                                                                                    1. A letter dated \u201cFrome, 7 Aug 1868\u201d from William Davis, Liberal agent for Frome, expressing disappointment at HCR\u2019s decision not to defend the seat at a forthcoming General Election, because he was seeking a seat on the Council for India.<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                    2. A letter dated \u201c47 Eaton Square, Novr<\/sup> 21 1868\u201d to HCR from \u201cAS [Alfred Seymour]\u201d requesting HCR\u2019s assistance in managing the affairs of Alfred\u2019s elder brother Henry.[V\/08].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                      V\/09\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>49 letters mostly datable to 1869: 35 letters from HCR to his wife dated January to April 1869; dealing with Louisa\u2019s mother\u2019s last illness and death and issues arising from winding up her estate; the disposal of HCR\u2019s house in Hill Street, and finding somewhere else to live; various other family matters, only passing references to HCR\u2019s official duties. 6 partially dated or undated letters from HCR to his wife, similar to the above. 5 letters from Louisa to her husband, all written from Taplow in August, where she was staying with their elder son Harry. Two notes from \u201cAlfred Rawlinson\u201d [presumably written by his nurse – I have left them in this folder where I found them although one of them would appear to have been written at the beginning of 1870. RBP.] one is addressed to his mother and the other to his brother Harry. One note from \u201cEllen Parry\u201d addressed \u201cMy Lady\u201d reporting on Alfred (Toby)\u2019s well being. [V\/09].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                      V\/10\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>9 letters from HCR to his wife dated 1870: 8 written at various dates in April, one in November. Mostly personal and family matters, but passing references to HCR\u2019s official duties. He also once mentions visiting the British Museum, although perhaps only to offer them some of \u201cmy M.S.S.\u201d. [V\/10]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                      V\/11\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>18 letters from HCR to his wife all dated \u201c1871\u201d in either his or his wife\u2019s hand, 3 written in January, 8 dated September, 3 in October, 4 in November, mostly dealing with family matters, with only passing references to HCR\u2019s official duties. Plus two letters to his sons from \u201cyour loving Papa\u201d, plus a letter from \u201cF Hilliard\u201d to \u201cMy lady\u201d apologizing for Harry not having written himself and one from \u201cP[hilip] P[pleydell] Bouverie [Louisa\u2019s brother-in-law]\u201d dated \u201cPall Mall East Nov. 4 1871\u201d to \u201cMy dear Louisa\u201d confirming the payment of the residue of the estate of \u201cyour relative Hopkinson decd<\/sup>\u201d and commenting \u201cThe d\u2015 to pay about the housemaid in Hill S\u2015. Don\u2019t let Rawlinson get too thick with the young lady.\u201d [V\/11].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                      V\/12\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>19 letters from HCR to his wife all dated 1872 in his wife\u2019s hand. 2 in July, 1 in August, 13 in Sep, 2 in Nov and 1 in Dec. Almost all to do with family matters but does include letters written during an extended visit to Scotland. [V\/12].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                      V\/13\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>16 letters from HCR to his wife, all dated \u201c1873\u201d either in HCR\u2019s hand or his wife\u2019s, except for one, which is dated \u201cWednesday\u201d in HCR\u2019s hand to which his wife has added \u201cJuly 26\u201d. [In fact, July 26 was a Saturday in 1873, however, I have left the letter in the place where I found it. RBP.] 1 letter was written in April, 4 in June, 4 in July, [including the one which is probably misplaced] 1 in October, 4 in November and 2 in December. The letters are mostly concerned with family matters, but some were written while HCR was attending the Shah of Persia on his State visit to Britain, and there are also references to his wife\u2019s involvement as a witness in the Tichborne Case. [V\/13].<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                      V\/14\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>27 letters from HCR to his wife, all but one dated \u201c1874\u201d in HCR\u2019s hand or his wife\u2019s [the one without a year is dated \u201cTuesday Oct 6\u201d which is compatible with the year 1874. RBP.]. 4 written in January, 3 in August, 2 in September, 13 in October, 4 in November and 2 giving no date except \u201c1874\u201d. Family matters, including one commenting on a note from his elder son Harry, who had started school, expressing misgivings about Harry\u2019s reports of bullying and stealing. In another letter he expresses concern that his younger son Toby is spending too much time with the servants. There are also 3 letters from Brooke Smith, who married HCR\u2019s elder sister Maria, dated 3rd<\/sup> April, 4th<\/sup> May and 18th<\/sup> June 1874 concerning certain financial transactions involving \u201cour precious brother-in-law\u201d, apparently the husband of \u201cGeorgiana\u201d [HCR\u2019s younger sister ??? \u2013 this could be clarified from the Rawlinson family tree. [IV\/01(02)]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        \n
                                                                                                                                      1. Note dated \u201cMonday\u201d and by his wife \u201cSep. 14 \/74\u201d and headed \u201cOriental Congress, London\u201d he writes \u201cI went to the Museum & saw Birch, Lepsius and others \u2013 and shall see the whole body of savants tonight at the Royal Institution – I shall modify my address a little in order not to appear too hard on G Smith, Sayce & others.[This refers to the inaugural meeting of the second International Congress of Orientalists which was held in London September 14th<\/sup> to 18th<\/sup> HCR was the President of the Semitic section. The Times<\/em> for September 15th<\/sup> lists in some detail the scholars attending and their achievements, as well as reporting the opening address by the President Dr Samuel Birch, HCR\u2019s address to the Semitic Section is reported in the Times<\/em> for Sept. 16th<\/sup>]\u201d [V\/14(01)].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/15\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>14 letters from HCR to his wife, all but 2 dated \u201c1875\u201d either in HCR\u2019s or, more often his wife\u2019s, hand. One of the remainder is dated \u201cSunday\u201d but refers to his wife\u2019s \u201cGood Friday letter\u201d and also to the fact that she and their sons are staying at Southsea; this implies that it was written on Easter Sunday, 28th<\/sup> March 1875. Of the datable letters, one each were written in January, February, April, July, September, October and December and 6 were written in March while his wife and sons were staying at Southsea, presumably during Harry\u2019s school holidays. The remaining letter is headed \u201cWednesday\u201d and gives no clues as to date, except that HCR is at a shooting party and tells his wife to \u201ckiss the boys for me\u201d. [I have left it in this packet where I found it; it cannot be much later than 1875 as Harry would have been too old to be kissed. RBP.] There are also two letters to Harry dated February and March. In the first of these, HCR says \u201cI am working hard on my \u2018Index\u2019 which may refer to an Index to his book England and Russia in the East <\/em>which was published in this year.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/16\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>20 letters from HCR to his wife, 19 of these are dated \u201c1876\u201d in either his or his wife\u2019s hand. [The 20th<\/sup> is headed \u201cWednesday\u201d but refers to a play called \u201cLord Bateman\u201d at \u201cthe Alhambra\u201d which he says he will take Harry to see before he goes back to school. I have found a reference in the online version of the Observer<\/em> to a play of this name at the Alhambra Theatre which had come off by 13th<\/sup> February 1876. RBP.] Of the dated letters, 4 were written in January, 1 in April, 3 in August, 8 in September, 1 in November and 2 in December. The September letters include 4 written from Brussels where HCR was attending a Geographical Congress held under the sponsorship of the King of the Belgians to co-ordinate efforts to \u201ccivilize\u201d Africa. Associated with these is a draft of an agreement to establish a TransAfrican railway system somewhere south of the Sahara.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/17\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>13 letters from HCR to his wife, all dated at least \u201c77\u201das above, 1 in April, 1 in May, 1 in June, 2 in August, 2 in September, 1 in October, 3 in November, 1 in December, and one simply dated \u201c77\u201d. There are also two letters to their son Harry, one from HCR and one from his wife. These are both dated July and deal with his coming home for the summer holidays.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/18\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>5 letters from HCR to his wife dated or datable to 1878. 3 written in October from Paris while HCR was attending the Paris Universal Exhibition and 2 in November from Bigods Hall, Dunmow, Essex where he was attending a shooting party.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/19\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>11 letters from HCR to his wife dated 1879. 1 written in February, 3 in September and 7 in October. One of the September letters mentions visiting the British Museum to look at inscriptions, but being frustrated by fog. The October letters refer to his writing an article for the Encyclopaedia Britannica<\/em> on Herat and to serious concerns about the behaviour of his younger son Alfred (Toby) who was about 11 at this time. In these letters, HCR shows himself to be an indulgent parent by the standards of the time, rejecting both his wife\u2019s suggestion of giving the boy a flogging and his headmaster\u2019s of sending him into the Navy in favour of a stern talking-to which \u201cleft the poor boy dissolved in tears and myself not much better.\u201d<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/20\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Four letters from HCR to his wife, all dated \u201c1882\u201d in either his or his wife\u2019s hand, 3 written from London in April and 1 from \u201cDown Hall\u201d in November, plus one dated \u201cMonday Jany<\/sup> 2nd<\/sup> [which is compatible with the year 1882]\u201d addressed to \u201cMy dear Harry [his elder son, then about 18 years of age.]\u201d and one dated \u201cMarch 7 1882\u201d to \u201cDear boys\u201d and one letter each [undated] from his two sons [the younger was about 15 at this time]. The letters are all about family affairs. There is no indication why there are no letters dating from 1880 or 1881 in this collection. It appears that the boys were at \u201cHyde Hall\u201d under the tutelage of a \u201cMr Hiley\u201d. This appears to refer to Hyde Hall, Sawbridgeworth, Hertfordshire at this time occupied by a Rev. Walter Hiley, who prepared private pupils for examinations, in Harry\u2019s case, Army entrance.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                        V\/21\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>12 letters from HCR to his wife, all dated \u201c1883\u201d in either his or his wife\u2019s hand, 4 written in January, 1 in July, 6 in October and one simply \u201c1883\u201d. By the end of the year, Harry had started at Sandhurst and had been given his own bank account while Toby was still at Hyde Hall. Includes:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                          \n
                                                                                                                                        1. A letter dated October 20th<\/sup> contains the first mention of a scheme to obtain for [Garnet Joseph] Wolseley the post of Commander-in-Chief India, which he coveted, in the expectation that he would, in return, further Harry\u2019s military career in India. [V\/21(01)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                          V\/22\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>22 letters from HCR to his wife, all but one dated \u201c1884\u201d mostly in his wife\u2019s hand, 7 dated in January, 1 in February, 3 in June, 1 in July, 4 in October and one \u201cNov.-Dec\u201d. 5 are dated \u201c\/84\u201d in HCR\u2019s wife\u2019s hand, while one is completely undated. Includes the following:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                            \n
                                                                                                                                          1. A letter from HCR\u2019s elder sister Maria to \u201cMy dear Louisa\u201d asking her to buy a present for Harry as from her and to send her the bill. The letter is dated \u201cStoke Bishop, Feb. 26th<\/sup>\u201d and says that Harry is to leave for India the following Tuesday. February 26th<\/sup> was a Tuesday in 1884, which would imply that Harry departed on March 4th<\/sup>. [V\/22(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                          2. A letter dated \u201cOct\/84\u201d enclosing a brief note from HCR\u2019s younger son Toby, one of the very few letters from him since he was a child. [V\/22(02)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                          3. A letter dated \u201cOct\/84\u201d \u201cI wrote to Wolseley yesterday & enclose you his answer \u2013 if he wants me to assist him in getting the India appointment he is the more likely to bestir himself in Harry\u2019s favor\u201d. The enclosure reads \u201cDear Rawlinson I am writing about your son & will let you know the result when I receive my answer. I should like India very well if Stewart came home. Sincerely yours Wolseley.\u201d [V\/22(03)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                            V\/23\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>14 letters from HCR to his wife, all dated \u201c1885\u201d mostly in his wife\u2019s hand. 1 in February, 2 in April, 3 in July, 1 in August, 2 in September, 1 in October and 4 in November. Included among them are the following:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                              \n
                                                                                                                                            1. Dated \u201cFeb. 28 1885\u201d summarizes a telegram from Wolseley on the military situation in Sudan. [V\/23(01)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                            2. Dated \u201cJuly 14 1885\u201d containing the first mention of the trouble which Toby has got into at Sandhurst, discussed in more detail in (4) below. [V\/23(02a and 02b)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                            3. Dated \u201cJuly 28 1885\u201d mentioning a suggestion that HCR should \u201cgo out as Ambassador to Persia to settle Treaty\u201d but he is not in favour as \u201cI am really too old.\u201d [V\/23(03)]<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                            4. Dated \u201cAug. 4th<\/sup>\u201d discussing difficulties arising for his younger son Toby who has been denounced for cheating in an examination at Sandhurst. \u201cIt seems they said at the College \u2018it is hard A.R. should suffer alone when cribbing was the common practice \u2013 let us look further into the matter.\u2019\u201d As a result several \u201ccribbers\u201d had been detected and the matter had been reported by one of the other students to his father, with the result that a public scandal had been created, which meant that the authorities would probably feel obliged to impose some punishment, for forms sake. [The issue seems to have been resolved in a manner favourable to Toby by the time of the first letter in V\/24. An account of the systematic cheating in examinations which was the norm at Sandhurst was published in The Deseret <\/em>[sic] News<\/em> Salt Lake City, for January 16th<\/sup> 1904, with the remark that the practice had been even more widespread in the past than it was at that time. Further information about Toby\u2019s brief military career and its abrupt termination will be found in HCR\u2019s letters to his son Harry at IV\/15. RBP.] [V\/23(04].<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                              V\/24<\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 7 letters from HCR to his wife, all dated \u201c1886\u201d 2 in May, 1 each in August and September, 3 in November including:<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                                \n
                                                                                                                                              1. Dated in HCR\u2019s hand \u201cFriday May 7 1886\u201d refers to his first visit to the \u201c[Colonial and Indian] Exhibition [South Kensington 4th<\/sup> May \u2013 10th<\/sup> November 1886]. \u201cToday I have been 4 mortal hours at the Exhibition \u2026 but it will take another half dozen visits to place me \u2018au courant\u2019 to such a wonderful collection.\u201d [There are references in many of the letters in this group to Toby\u2019s military career \u2013 his place in the Army seems to have been assured by the beginning of the year and he had set his heart on a commission in the 17th<\/sup> Lancers, but it is not clear when this was settled. He was still in England in November.] [RBP.] [V\/24(01)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                              2. Three letters dated in HCR\u2019s hand \u201cNovr<\/sup> 24, 25 and 26 1886\u201d describing a large shooting party given by Lord Salisbury [then Prime Minister] at Hatfield House attended by numerous Cabinet ministers etc where he says he \u201cfeels rather like a fish out of water among all these smart ladies and the house is so hot that I am half suffocated\u201d [V\/24(02a,b,c)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                              3. plus one letter to HCR from his elder sister Maria [datable to 7th<\/sup> February 1886] thanking him for his good wishes on her [82nd<\/sup>] birthday [V\/24(03)].<\/li>\n
                                                                                                                                              4. and one from HCR [dated \u201cAug. 15th<\/sup> 1886] to his brother-in-law Ayshford [Sanford] with an enclosure about assisting someone who wanted a job as a \u201cDuster\u201d (at the BM). [V\/24(04)]<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                                                                                                                                                V\/25\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>4 letters from HCR to his wife, none dated in HCR\u2019s own hand, and a telegram from his elder son Harry. This telegram is dated \u201cSimla, Ju 22 87\u201d and says \u201cStarting. Rawlinson.\u201d Harry may have been coming home for his parents\u2019 Silver Wedding on 2nd<\/sup> September 1887. One letter dated \u201cMonday 10AM [in his wife\u2019s hand] 1886, [altered from 1887]\u201d can probably be dated from the contents to January 17th<\/sup> 1887, one dated \u201cSaturday 5\u00bd PM [in his wife\u2019s hand] April 1887\u201d comments on the massive boxes which his son Harry has sent home from India, one dated \u201cSunday afternoon 4PM [in his wife\u2019s hand] Ap 1887\u201d contains the remark \u201cThey are just crying \u2018another attempt on the life of the Czar, but I daresay it is all humbug.\u201d [A plot to assassinate Alexander III was unmasked on March 1st<\/sup> 1887, but I cannot trace any later attempts in that year. RBP.] The fourth letter is dated \u201cMonday 5\u00bd PM [in his wife\u2019s hand] Easter 1887 [Easter Day 1887 was April 10th<\/sup>] contains the remark \u201cThere is immense excitement in Town today, as to what will take place in Parliament this evening \u2013 most people expect that Parnell will brazen it out and reject the \u2018Times\u2019 letter, but it is believed that they [sic] are more in the background.\u201d [This refers to the publication of letters \u2013 later shown to be forgeries \u2013 accusing Parnell of sympathy with the Phoenix Park murders in 1882, but I cannot make the dates tie up. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                                These are the last letters from HCR to his wife in the collection. It is clear from many allusions in previous letters that she had not enjoyed robust health during most of their married life and that she had been at best a semi-invalid during the whole of 1886 and 1887 (see, for instance, allusions to her needing a \u2018bath-chair\u2019 to visit the Colonial and Indian Exhibition in 1886 [V\/24(01)] and the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition in 1887 [II\/26(09)]). HCR\u2019s letters to his eldest son Harry at IV\/15 between August 1888 and July 1889 show his anxiety over his wife\u2019s deteriorating health.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                                V\/26\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>12 letters of condolence to HCR on the death of his wife. [I have not been able to establish the exact date of her death, but the earliest of these letters is dated November 1st<\/sup> 1889, so that death probably occurred in the last week of October. It is also clear that Harry was present at his mother\u2019s death, but it is not clear whether it was his mother\u2019s declining health prompted his return from India, or some other cause. HCR was badly affected by his wife\u2019s death and his son decided to remain in England to look after him. Several of the letters are annotated \u201cAnswered\u201d in Harry\u2019s hand. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                                V\/27\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>Letter to HCR from his sister Maria. Dated \u201cStoke Bishop, Monday\u201d and annotated in Harry\u2019s hand \u201cwritten in 1894 when she was 89\u201d. [According to the Rawlinson family tree in Box IV, Maria Smith was born in 1804, so that her 89th<\/sup> birthday would have occurred on 5th<\/sup> February 1893, which was a Tuesday. In this letter she says that she is \u201c\u2018going\u2019 hard for 89\u201d so the letter may have been written on February 4th. RBP]. A response to an enquiry about her state of well-being. There is also a reassuring comment about HCR\u2019s sons from which it appears that he had expressed misgivings about what they were doing with their lives.<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                                V\/28\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/strong>6 letters in envelopes, all dated March 1895, dealing with HCR\u2019s final illness and death, plus one empty envelope. The letters and envelope are all addressed to \u201cMrs Rawlinson\u201d i.e. Louisa, wife of George Rawlinson, HCR\u2019s brother who was then in Italy with her husband. 4 of the letters are written by HCR\u2019s elder son, Harry, but one is written by his wife Meredith \u201cMerrie\u201d, almost the only mention of her in the collection. The 6th<\/sup> letter is addressed from \u201c43 Eastbourne Terrace W\u201d to \u201cDearest Mother\u201d from \u201cM & T\u201d. [I have not been able to identify these. RBP.]<\/p>\n

                                                                                                                                                [\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                                                                                                                                [vc_row full_width=”stretch_row”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1605789733308{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][vc_single_image image=”20316″ img_size=”full” css=”.vc_custom_1713525773572{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row full_width=”stretch_row”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1605789733308{margin-top: 0px !important;margin-bottom: 0px !important;padding-top: 0px !important;padding-bottom: 0px !important;}”][vc_empty_space][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text] List of the RAS Collections of Sir Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810-1895) BOX I Documents primarily relating to the Seymour family. I\/01:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Bill of…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-2551","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2551","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2551"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2551\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":19422,"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2551\/revisions\/19422"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/royalasiaticsociety.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2551"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}