^{page 71 note 1} A great deal has been written on the subject of the Sumir and Akkad, the presumption universally being that the names indicated an ethnical distinction among the primitive inhabitants of Babylonia. My own view; however, has always been that the names merely appplied to the “fixed inhabitants” and the “Nomades,” or, which is the same thing, to the Lowlanders and Highlanders without any necessary distinction of nationality. which joined to emi or lissan “a race,” denotes the Sumir, certainly means “a fixed abode,” subtu; while the double , which is the Akkad monogram, is equated with huri “mountains,” the inhabitants of which along the Babylonian frontier are, and always tave been, “Nomadic.” Akkad for Ankad is the same word as the Arabic Nejd. I may add that a similar distinction between “hill” and “plain” also occurs in the Inscriptions under the form of Arman va Padin, sometimes corrupted to , Padan va Alman (see B.M.I. vol. ii. pl. 38, l. 40),Google Scholar the compound title being a mere transcription of the Padan Aram of the Bible. The original Turanian title of Kingi-Burbur must have meant etymologically “Plain” and “Hill,” rather than “fixed” and “nomade,” but subsequently the titles seem to have been used indifferently. It is quite possible that in Sumir-emi may have the original of the Greek used eponymously like Ninus, Medus, Perses, Armenus, etc., and referring to the fixed population both of Assyria and Babylonia.

^{page 73 note 1} The Tigris is here represented under its old Turanian form of Masgugar (as the name is phonetically spelt in a fragment recently discovered), which seems to have simply meant “flowing as water,” Supu, its Assyrian equivalent, answering to the Arabic Síb. Idik was probably a Turanian root with the same meaning, to which was added the suffix in na, as in Turna, Supna, Arna, etc. A feminine ending then formed Idiknat, which was corrupted into Idiklat, and ultimately Dijlat, the present name.

^{page 74 note 1} For the position of Cyrus in the family of the Achæmenidæ, see Rawlinson's, Herodotus, vol. iv. p. 260.Google Scholar The only modification in the Professor's genealogical scheme which the recent discovery renders necessary is the elimination of Cambyses, son of Teispes, doubtfully introduced on the authority of Diodorus, see Phot. Bib. p. 1158.Google Scholar

^{page 74 note 2} See Records of the Past, vol. vii. p. 87.Google Scholar

^{page 76 note 1} For a notice of the king of Ansan and Subartu united, see B.M.I. vol. iii. pl. 60, lines 67 and 68.Google Scholar

^{page 76 note 2} The name of the city of Erid is written phonetically in B.M.I. vol. iv.Google Scholar pl. 21, col. 2, l. 49, as i. e. Tsibba flrst and last characters being determinative and non-phonetic. Now Tsibba is repeatedly given as the Accadian form of Assyrian dábu, Heb. Arab. which is usually represented by the monogram ‘good’ or ‘blessed,’ and (as the name of the fameous city of Héa, and primitive capital of Southern Babylonia is commonly written) is thus shown to be the same as the Thib of modern geography. This city, halfway between Susa and Wasit, still exhibits some very remarkable ruins, having been until recently the head-quarters of the Sabæans of Irák, and is known traditionally as the city of Seth. Many circumstances, indeed, combine to show that the legend of a terrestrial Paradise arose from this region, the triad of Anu, Bel, and Héa answering to the Biblical Cain (the elder), Abel, and Seth, father of Enos or ‘mankind.’ But this difficult subject can hardly be treated in a casual note. A brief account of the ruins of Thib will be found in Layard's Khuzistau paper, Journ. Roy. Geog. Soc. vol. xvi. p. 69.Google Scholar

^{page 77 note 1} Markhasi has a very Arian aspect, standing probably for Marakhsh or the of Ptolemy. The name also occurs in B.M.I. vol. ii. pl. 50, l. 66, and it was evidently, therefore, a place of some consequence.Google Scholar

^{page 77 note 2} See the copies of these Elymæan inscriptions in Layard's collection, published by the British museum, pls. 31/32 and 36/37. Layard, in his paper on Khuzistan mentions twelve different localities in Elymais where Cuneiform Inscriptions are either known or believed to exist, yet of this grand historical collection we have only two short and badly copied specimens. What a field, then, does Elymais present for an enterprising archæologist!

^{page 77 note 3} I have frequently in this paper used the word Accadian in the sense in which it is now generally employed to denote the leading Turanian dialect of ancient Babylonia; but it must not be supposed that I really attach any special ethnical value to the designation. According to my view the Akkad were mere highland Nomades, who used a great variety of dialects, principally, but not exclusively, Turanian.

^{page 78 note 1} For equivalence of Guṭu and Garradu, see Delitzsch's, Assyr. Les. p. 58, l. 20.Google Scholar As a title of Nergal, Gut-gut and Garradu are used indifferently, B.M.I. vol. ii. pl. 54, l. 71;Google Scholar while (which was probably sounded Gut, the last letter being phonetic complement), when applied as an epithet to Merodach, is also translated by Gardu, B.M.I. vol. iv.Google Scholar pl. 20, lines 7 and 8. The same element occurs in the Accadian name of Gutibir, applying to Merodach, B.M.I. vol. ii. pl. 48, l. 36.Google Scholar

^{page 78 note 2} This name is written B.M.I. vol. ii.Google Scholar pl. 48, col. 3, l. 14, or with for the second letter in B.M.I. vol. ii. pl. 50, 1. 52,Google Scholar the first element being explained, both in a gloss to this latter passage and in Syllabary No. 399, by Gis-gal “the big wood,” which is translated in Assyrian by Manzaz “set up.” as a post (?). I do not pretend to explain the mythic origin of the name, but I was certainly wrong in connecting it with the Su-anna of Babylon, as I am quoted by Mr. Norris in his Dictionary, p. 205.

^{page 79 note 1} I proposed the reading of Agáni for this city more than twenty years ago (see Rawlinson's, Herod. vol. i. p. 611),Google Scholar comparing the of Abydenus and Akra-de-Agama of the Sanhedrim; and the reading was acquiesced in until recently, when Mr. G. Smith announced that he had discovered the true name to be Agadé. Mr. Smith may possibly be right, as the letter more frequently represents than ni; but I have never yet seen any proof of the new reading. The site may have been at the mouth of the Nahar Malcá, where there is a large mound still called AḲar-el-Ajdem (for Agadam). At any rate, the name does not represent the Chaldee “a lake or marsh” nor is it, I think, the original of the of Genesis.

^{page 79 note 2} Isnunnak, meaning “the house of the Ocean,” was the name of the region bordering on the Persian Gulf. Smith always gives the reading of Mullias, apparently from an erroneous view of the passage in B. M. I. vol. ii.Google Scholar pl. 39, l. 59. The name is of very common occurrence, and was probably replaced in Assyrian by Marat, B. M. I. vol. ii. pl. 47, lines 16 and 17.Google Scholar

^{page 79 note 3} Zamban may be oompared with the Sambana of Diodorus, which occurs on Alexander's march from Susa to Media; 1, Carrha or Kerkh; 2, Sambana; 3, Celonæ or Ghilán; and 4, Bagistane or Behistun. The province along the outer skirts of the hills was afterwards called Mah Sabadán, or the country of the Sambatæ.

^{page 79 note 4} The Turanian name of this city is very remarkable from its connexion with Nineveh (the shrine of the fish), and will some day form a curious subject of inquiry. It reads Hutu-ma-sa-isseku-kua-idu-ṣir.

^{page 79 note 5} Duran is a doubtful reading; Smith suggests Duban, but on no sufficient authority. The city is well known in Cuneiform Geography.

^{page 80 note 1} It has been admitted by all Assyriologists that the standard epithet of the kings of Babylon, “supporter of the Temples of Bit-Saggal and Bit-Zida,” must have some deeper significance than a mere record of architectural labours. Hincks explained the title as “Defender of the Military and Civil Institutions of the country.” Lenormant, still more daring, suggested that the two Temples typified the two Hemispheres. I myself believe that the distinction was religious, and implied a common Protectorate of the two rival sects of the country; and I may here add that according to my view there was a third sect, the followers of to which the monotheistic Hebrews of Ur belonged. This God, who is still usually known by the name of Héa, which I invented for him twenty years ago, is often called “God No. 1” by his especial votaries. He was “the Creator of mankind,” “the God of life and knowledge,” “the Lord of Thib (the blessed city) or Paradise,” and exhibits many other traces of identity with the Elohim of the Jews. There seems, indeed, to be an allusion to this deity being accepted by the Monotheists as the one true God, in the last verse of chap. iv. of Genesis, where, as I understand the passage, it is said that “about this time, he (i.e. Seth, the Lord of Thib) began to be called by the name of Jehovah.’

^{page 81 note 1} I have arrived at this appreciation of the various buildings at Babylon by a careful comparison of the Inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar one with the other. The only novelty in my view is that I maintain the Bit-Zida of the bricks, etc., to be Anú's temple at the Tul-illu or “Holy mound,” and to have nothing to do with the provincial temple of Bit-Zida at Borsippa, which was sacred to Nebo.

^{page 82 note 1} I am quite aware that in the present state of our Assyrian knowledge this proposed identification of with Calneh cannot be critically sustained. All the direct evidence that we possess tends to show that must, in the name in question, stand for emuḳ “power,” or “the hand,”—comp. B. M. I. vol. iv. pl. 18,Google Scholar lines 18 and 19, where the reading is given of Emuḳi zirati sa Anú for the name of a temple of Merodach at Babylon, and B. M. I. vol. iv. pl. 2, 1. 12, 13, where is translated emuḳa sa saḳa, “lofty power.” But, on the other hand, our information on the subject is as yet limited, and it is quite possible we may some day find among the equivalents of At any rate, the Temple of Emuḳi zirati m Anu, referred to by Smith (Discoveries, p. 232) is quite a different place from and has not necessarily the same pronunciation.Google Scholar

^{page 83 note 1} See, amongst other passages, B. M. I. vol. iv. pl. 19, lines 10 and 11.Google Scholar

^{page 84 note 1} The first six names in Ptolemy's Catalogue of the Cities of Persis evidently refer to this region between Shuster and Isfahan. 1. will he the city of the Uxii, taken by Alexander. 3. will answer to the Marḥasi of the Inscriptions. 4. will be Isfahan, and 6. I suspect to be “Assan of the Parthians,” the true reading being probably and the name being formed like the (Nissa of the Parthians) of Khorassan. The rich and ancient temples, as it is well known, of this region excited the cupidity of the Syrian and Parthian monarchs, and Antiochus the Great lost bis life in an attempt to plunder them.

^{page 93 note 1} A comparison of several passages in B. M. I. vol. iv. pl. 58, col. 1, lines 27 and 28, lines 50 sqq. and col. 2, lines 33 and 34, proves heyond doubt that ipri and tappé represent a connexion either of social juxtaposition or of consanguinity, the phrases in apposition being “father and son,” “brother and sister,” etc. I think “friend and neighbour” would be the most appropriate rendering, but I cannot discover a suitable etymology for tappé.Google Scholar

^{page 93 note 2} A root is often met with in the bilingual inscriptions, being used indifferently with to represent the Accadian monogram “to lengthen or extend;” but that can hardly be the signification in the present passage.

^{page 93 note 3} Sayce translates sapsaku by “opening,” Grammar, p. 107; but on the other hand I find sapsaḳi used for the usual paskuti “difficult,” in Layard's Ins. pl. 43, l. 1. The word may here signify either “reducing to straits” or “opening,” i.e. “conquering.”