in his power to attempt. He had observed indeed that certain words in the East India House inscription <*orresponded to those found on the l^ricks, and he has collected them tojjether in Hue 19 of his Table, and ])laced them word for word below the brick inscription for purposes of comparison.^ But both are in the same lapidary character, and tlieir juxtaposition served only to show that the same words, and possibly portions of the same sentence, were to be found in each. Grote- fend, as we shall soon see, had not the smallest idea of their meaninir. It was the <?ood fortune of Dr. Hincks to ol)serve that ])()rtions of the text of the East India House inscription are reproduced in a frajziuentary inscription written in cursive characters and published by Ker Porter.- This, as he says, was 'a most im- portant discovery, as the ec^uivalence of certain cursive and lapidary characters which bore scarcely any re- semblance to one another was thus demonstrated, as well as the equivalence to each other of different lapidary characters which are constantly transcril)ed by one and the same cursive character.' By this means he succeeded in drawinjr up a Table of seventy-six cursive characters, selected from the third Perse- politan column, and placing** opposite each its equi- valent lapidary si</n taken from the East India House inscription.^
Hitherto the cuneiform inscriptions known to Europe had been practically limited to the Persepolitan and Babylonian styles of writing. A few examples of different varieties were, however, beirhuiinir to crowd upon the ])ewildered student. Almost the first examples of the
' Jicitnif/fy p. Hli. See Table, p. 72.
^ Ker Porter, PI. 78, vol. ii. Kasr India House Inscription, Col. III. lines 1.") 60. A]). Menant, EcrittnPif^ ]). 144. ' Nov. 1846 ; Ttan». li. I. Acad. xxi. 243 "..z 2