258 Rev. Dr. Watt on the different Kinds of Cuneiform Writing 
Behistun record in the kind of writing in question. Yet he has been very far 
from attaining to certainty in every part of his interpretation of this document, as 
may in a great measure be perceived from his own candid statement on the sub- 
ject, which is as follows : 
**T do not affect, at the same time, to consider my translations as unimpeach- 
able ; those who expect in the present paper to see the cuneiform inscriptions 
rendered and explained with as much certainty and clearness as the ancient tablets 
of Greece and Rome, will be lamentably disappointed. It must be remembered 
that the Persian of the ante-Alexandrian ages has long ceased to be a living 
language ; that its interpretation depends on the collateral aid of the Sanscrit, the 
Zend, and the corrupted dialects which, in the forests and mountains of Persia, 
have survived the wreck of the old tongue; and that, in a few instances, where 
these cognate and derivative languages have failed to perpetuate the ancient roots, 
or where my limited acquaintance with the different dialects may have failed to dis- 
cover the connexion, I have been obliged to assign an arbitrary meaning, obtained 
by comparative propriety of application, in a very limited field of research. I 
feel, therefore, that in a few cases my translations will be subject to doubt, and 
that, as materials of analysis continue to be accumulated, and more experienced 
orientalists prosecute the study, it may be found necessary to alter or modify some 
of the significations that I have assigned; but, at the same time, I do not, and 
cannot doubt, but that I have accurately determined the general application of 
every paragraph, and that I have been thus enabled to exhibit a correct historical 
outline, possessing the weight of royal and contemporaneous recital, of many great 
events which preceded the rise, and marked the career of one of the most cele- 
brated of the early sovereigns of Persia.’’* 
Though the general purport of the very interesting record here alluded to has, 
beyond all doubt, been penetrated by Major Rawlinson, the particular passages of 
it whose exact signification remains yet unascertained are not, perhaps, as few as 
a sanguine disposition has led him to suppose. But while I hesitate thus far to 
yield full assent to his description of what he has achieved, I feel pleasure in 
expressing my admiration of the great ability and adroitness with which he has 
brought his knowledge of oriental languages to bear upon this branch of the 
* Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. x. part i. p. 13. 
