634 KKroBT— 1880. 



The fourth character must he that for the title of king. 



The bottom character is Land, as suggested by Mr. Boscawen. 



The large side character must be Zutne or Rume. 



On leaving Dr. Birch and entering into the Museum I looked at the Carchemish 

 sculptures, and there I found almost a replica of the seal, and other parallels, to 

 which I called Dr. Birch's attention. 



This Carchemish parallel of mine throws the most remarkable light on the seal. 



It may be premised that my Carchemi.sh inscription does not read from top to 

 bottom, as we conceived from the Hamath the character does, but from left to right, 

 ■while both the seal inscriptions are from right to left. 



The animals are in the same order at Carchemish, apparently the secondary 

 first, and the male or determinative second, as should be the case according to the 

 comparative grammar I applied. 



Thus, instead of King Tarkondimotos being simply a king of Cilicia, as proposed 

 by Dr. Mordtmann, he must have been recognised on the site of the other 

 monuments. 



Another Carchemish parallel gives the female head, the kingly emblem, and the 

 Zumei character, but is accompanied b}^ a female emblem. 



On careful comparison of the seal-inscription I differ from Professor Sayce. I 

 find no determinative for God, and doubt if ' Land ' is a determinative, but consider 

 it to be a substantial word. 



In my Carchemish parallel there is, however, a determinative • | •, the very one 

 I fixed upon years ago in my first establi-shmeut of the Khita character from the 

 transcripts, which Capt. Burton thought to be registers of camel-marks. This 

 miile determinative is over the male or horned head, and I am not sure there is not 

 a female determinative over the other head. 



I must now communicate some further investigations, to enable the Section to 

 undei"stand the bearing of the facts before them. I was surprised to see a beast's 

 head where I had expected to find the symbol of a man's head ; but I saw that this 

 head and the two heads figured in Carchemish sculpture, and in Capt. Gill's West 

 China MSS., with this remarkable peculiarity, that the hair or beard under the 

 chin of the beast is marked with three strokes. 



I know that 3 is a sign for plural and collective, and 3 hairs represents many hairs. 



There are also three strokes on each of the two copies of the kingly emblem 

 and the seal, which may imply Great King. 



I know that in the languages that I have assigned for the comparative philology 

 of Khita, Tara and Kun figure for king, but as all such roots have several mean- 

 ings, it struck me on reflection that the words might also mean animals. 



On examination, I found that all the ancient words for king (and those now 

 used in Africa) figure also in the names for animals, and afterwards that the names 

 for God (and so far as I know Fetish) so figure. These are facts in perfect con- 

 formity with anthropological knowledge. 



The animal, in our inscriptions represented by his head or mask, is the totem or 

 fetish of the man — iu this case of the king. 



Why there should be two is, it maj^ be presumed, to have a fortunate pair, a 

 male and female, and for the same reason the inscription on the seal is double for 

 the right and left hand of the king. On the earliest coins two animals were found. 



Applying our anthropological knowledge we obtain a direct totem and fetish 

 explanation from the ' Khita ' mythology for that adopted from the ancients by the 

 Greeks. This explains to us the animal metamorphoses of the gods, heroes, and 

 kings, their animal emblems and animal sacrifices. The result of this will be a 

 final rejection of the scheme of Sanseritic weather mythology for the explanation 

 of more ancient anthropological facts. 



Besides our gain on that head, we now know absolutely the linguistic nature of 

 the Khita languages in Canaan, in Lydia, and in Etruria, whatever dialectic differ- 

 ences may have existed. The words Tar, ku or kun, and timme (dimi) are clear. 

 The latter is child, son, oSspring, 



It is separable, we see, at Carchemish, so that the name became Tarkun, like the 

 Etruscan Tarquin. 



