13.07.2015 Views

A literary history of Persia

A literary history of Persia

A literary history of Persia

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

60 HISTORY Of PERSIAN PHILOLOGYthird on November I3th <strong>of</strong> the same year, and the fourthon May 20, 1803. Till this time, though Tychsen andMiinter had made vain attempts at decipherment, it was, as wehave seen when examining Hyde's work, very generally held,even by men <strong>of</strong> learning, that these characters were notwriting at all,but were either architectural ornaments, thework <strong>of</strong> worms or insects, or mason's marks and numericalsigns. Grotefend, primarily impelled to this inquiry by adispute with his friend Fiorillo as to the possibility <strong>of</strong> arrivingat the meaning <strong>of</strong> inscriptions where<strong>of</strong> the script and languagewere alike unknown or buried in oblivion, arrived in his firstcommunication at the following important general conclusions :(i) That the figures constituting these inscriptionsgeneral con- were graphic symbols ; (2) that the inscriptionswere trilingual,that is,that they consisted, asa rule, <strong>of</strong> three versions, each in a different language andscript ; (3) that the inscriptions which he proposed to explain,that is,those <strong>of</strong> the first class (the Old <strong>Persia</strong>n) in particular,and also those <strong>of</strong> the second, consisted <strong>of</strong> actual letters^ not <strong>of</strong>ideograms or logograms comparable to those employed inAssyrian and Chinese ; (4)that all known cuneiforminscriptions were constant in direction, being in every casewritten horizontally from left to right.From these general conclusions (all<strong>of</strong> which have sinceproved to be perfectly correct) Grotefend proceeded toexamine more minutely two inscriptions <strong>of</strong> themethod <strong>of</strong> first class,which he believed to be written in theprocedure.so-called Zend (i.e., Avestic) language a conjecturewhich, though not the truth, was near the truth andwhich he correctlyreferred to " some ancient king <strong>of</strong> the<strong>Persia</strong>ns between Cyrus and Alexander," in other words, to theAchaemenians. An 1 examination <strong>of</strong> the Pahlawi inscriptions1 The fact that the inscriptions <strong>of</strong> the first class were in the language <strong>of</strong>the Achsemenian kings in other words, in an Old <strong>Persia</strong>n language wassuggested to Grotefend by the position <strong>of</strong> honour always occupied by themin the trilingual tablets.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!