A short time before the departure of Colonel Rawlinson from England, at the close of last year, that gentleman gave me leave to copy and publish the paper casts which he had made of the Scythic portion of the Behistun Monument of Darius, together with any memoir on the language which I might compile. I have availed myself of his permission, and the following paper is the result of my labour.

In the numerous letters and papers which I have addressed during the last two years to the Secretary of the Royal Asiatic Society, and which have been either read at the meetings of the Society, or in some instances published in the Journal, I have explained, in more or less detail, the successive discoveries which I have made in the history of ancient Assyria. Those discoveries have pretty well established the fact that an independent empire was first instituted on the Upper Tigris in the thirteenth century, B.C. They have furnished what may be considered an almost complete list of Assyrian kings from the above-named period to the destruction of Nineveh in B.C. 625, and they have further made us acquainted with the general history of Western Asia, during this interval of above seven centuries.

Muqeyer, in Arabic, signifies “bitumined,” or “covered with bitumen,” its root being . The Arabs of the country about Baghdad, Suk süh Shuyükh, and Busrah, universally give the Arabic (Qaf) the sound of the English g, and muqeyer then with them becomes mugeyer. This corrupt pronunciation has led foreign travellers astray as to the real meaning of the word, which they have interpreted “overturned;” “changed,” spelling the name of the ruins Megheyer, Megkalir, and sometimes also Umgheir. The reason for its present name, which is modern, is obvious to the visitor, as everywhere are to be seen large pieces of bitumen, and remains of masonry, formed by kiln burnt bricks, imbedded in the same material. The ruins are situated sixteen miles N.W. by N. from Sük ush Shuyükh, and six miles due west from the northern end of Arjé village, on the right bank of the Euphrates. Muqeyer itself is buílt upon a slight elevation; the country all about it is, however, so low, that, during the annual flood of the Euphrates, the whole becomes a marsh, and the ruins themselves an island in the middle. Seven miles west of Muqeyer is, a long, low range of sand hills (abounding in sand stones and pebbles), which bounds the district known by the Arabs as the Hejerra, and which terminates about eight miles N.W. of Semaweli. Between the ruins and this ridge the ground gradually descends for five miles; it then as gradually ascends for two, up to the summit of the ridge. At the other side is the valley or hollow of Abu Shahrezer. This ridge is called the Hazem. The plan will, I hope, convey a good idea of the general shape of the ruins and of the mounds composing them, together with the spots at which excavations were made. Plate 1 is a sketch of the principal building from the northern face. This is not, I must observe, exact in detail, and was only made to give an idea of the building as it at present exists. To these (and Plate 2, which is a sketch of a part of the same building) I shall refer, to elucidate my report, and to point out the different spots where the most interesting relics were discovered.

No one who takes interest in the discoveries daily made in Assyria and Babylonia can fail to have read the interesting and important communications from Colonel Rawlinson, which appeared in the Athenæum of the 18th March and 15th April last, conveying to the public a mass of new and most valuable material towards framing a continuous chronology of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires, even from their earliest origin: establishing the fact that Semiramis, queen of Babylon, was the wife of Pul, king of Assyria; and mentioning the discovery of Belsharezar son of Nabonidus, whom he supposes to be the Belshazzar of Scripture, and the last of the kings of Babylon.

Within the last decade of years, the museums of France and England have been enriched by numerous monuments of Assyrian art, that clearly show the soil from which they were obtained was peopled by a race who, to its warlike habits, added many of the refinements of civilized life. The researches of Botta and Layard—so far as lapidary tablets are capable of conveying the economy of a nation—hare familiarised us in some measure with the public rites and ceremonies of the Assyrians, as well as given an insight into their more domestic concerns; and the pens of these travellers have further elucidated the subject in a manner of which the praise of the public is guarantee to the ability displayed, while the monuments themselves, as patents of their energy, remain in the capitals of Europe, until, in the course of time, they share in the fate of their Assyrian predecessors. Profoundly indifferent, however, to such an event, our savans are in the mean time labouring to unravel the mystic characters engraved on the records so lately revealed to ua; and such is the progress made, that we may shortly expect to be as cognizant of the deeds of the “stouthearted king and the glory of his high looks,” as we are conversant with the celebrities of Greece or Rome. The only desideratum wanting, it appears, to complete the picture of Assyria, is a faithful sketch of her aspect in desolation, when she is “empty, and void, and waste; when flocks lie down in the midst of her; and when her rivers are opened, and her palace is dissolved.” This we have endeavoured to supply in the three maps of the vestiges of Assyria, made from actual survey of the spot. Topography, however, is a dry subject, and we enter upon it with diffidence and reluctance.

Much as I dislike discussions which have anything of the character of controversy, I am tempted by the interest I naturally take in Cuneiform research, to put together a few explanatory notes, with a view of remedying the confusion that Dr. Hincks's recent publications in the Literary Gazette have introduced into certain later portions of the Assyrian and Babylonian history.

Although my visit this year to Abu Shahrein has been unproductive of any very important results, yet the description of the ruins will, I hope, prove sufficiently interesting, to render the transcription of the rough notes I made upon the spot, not altogether superfluous.

In a paper which I had the honour of reading before this Society On the eighth of July last, I endeavoured to establish—First, that the remarkable astronomical phenomenon which occurred in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah, King of Jndah—viz., the retrograde motion of the sun's shadow on the dial, or steps, of the king's palace at Jerusalem, accompanied by some visible wonder in the heavens—must have been the effect of an eclipse of the sun. Secondly, that if the phenomenon was indeed caused by a solar eclipse, it must have been one combining the following distinguishing characters, viz.:—

1st, That it should have been visible at Jerusalem.

2nd, That it should have occurred within about twenty days of the winter solstice.

3rd, That it should have occurred about noon-day.

4th, That the occultation should have been on the upper limb of the sun.

In page 99 of this volume, in the remarks upon a passage recording the death of Bardes, the brother of Cambyses, I stated that we have at the beginning of line 23 ońly a few characters as the representatives of nearly two lines in the Persian original. There was obviously something wanting, and the word yufri, left incomplete at the end of line 22, ought to have aided in suggesting the omission of a line in my copy; but I had confidence in the pantograph, and made no further investigation, taking it for granted that all was right. I have since been informed, however, by Colonel Rawlinson, who made his copy from the rock itself, that I have left out a line; and a reference to the cast shows that this is the case. The omission arose from the crumpled state of the paper impression, which had been folded upon that very line, so as to obliterate every trace of a character, coupled with the fact that the instrument was shifted, and a new commencement made upon the same spot. The line is much injured, and these are the only characters preserved by Colonel Rawlinson:—