classes, Assyrian proper and Medo-Assyrian or Vaniiic ; but he also distinguished Assyrian proper into two sub- divisions, representing the lapidary and the ruiniing hand — a specimen of the latter being the Taylor prism. The Elymaean inscriptions he placed in a class apart, ' as entitled to an independent rank.' He pointed out that even the third Persepolitan writing is not identical with the cursive Babylonian, and that the variation is sufficient to constitute a serious impediment to study. The writhig on the Assyrian cylinders is ' quite distinct from any variety of character which occurs on similar relics at Baljylon ' ; and he found ' characters at Van that never occur at Khorsabad and vice versa.' He cannot, therefore, agree with liotta that they all ' belong to one single alphabetical system,' and that the differ- ences are merely ' varieties of hand.' ^ Farther study, however, led liim to alter his opinion, and in 1850 he admits that ' there is no doubt but that the alphabets of Assyria, of Anneiiia, of Babylonia, of Susiana and of Elymais are, so far as essentials are concerned, one and the same. There are peculiarities of form, a limitation of usage — but unquestionably the alphabets are " au fond" identical.' Mr. Lavard had also arrived at the
' ./. i2. yL. S. X. '2'2 tf. Uawliiuson's classification of the writing is as
followi* (1847):
/ Bricks and cylinders (Lapidary) / Babylonian 1 East India House Inscription proi)er "j
1 T> V 1 • J Cursive
1. Baby Ionian -( oii • i ,, v
.. Practicallv the same as the Cur-
sei)ohtan - • tj i i •
t^ ^ sn e Babvlonian Column ^
o
/ . . ( Lapidarv
I Assyrian | *-
2. Assyrum - * ' ( Cursive
[ \'an
o. IClymutan (found by Layard at .Malamir)
