III. THE conclusion has been already expressed that the Hittite inscription of the Tarkutimme seal is, in the main, ideographic, and that the phonetic element is supplementary; that, in fact, regarding the figure of the king as part of the inscription, the sense is fully given without taking into account the phonetic element. Some scholars and investigators have, however, taken a different view. This fact, together with the alleged resemblance of some of the Hittite hieroglyphs to characters of the Cypriote syllabary, has had much influence on certain recent attempts at deciphering the Hittite inscriptions. With, regard to the alleged analogy of the Hittite and Cypriote characters, it may be allowed that the derivation of the latter from the former is in itself by no means impossible. As yet, however, the evidence of such derivation which has been presented is certainly inadequate: to a great extent it is little better than visionary. Moreover, if, from closeness of resemblance or otherwise, satisfactory proof of the derivation had been given, it would by no means necessarily follow that, when all or any of the Hittite inscriptions which we possess were sculptured, the Hittite writing had become already so far developed that the hieroglyphs generally, or in great proportion, had acquired distinct syllabic values. As to how far resemblances between the Hittite and Cypriote characters give evidence of essential connection or derivation, the reader may perhaps satisfy himself by inspecting the list given by Dr. Isaac Taylor (“The Alphabet,” 1883) and reproduced by Prof. Sayce in Wright's “Empire of the Hittites,” 1886, chap. xi. More extended lists have been given by Captain Conder (who follows to a considerable extent in the track of Prof. Sayce) in the plates of his “Altaic Hieroglyphs.” But, as it seems to me, in neither case have the Hittite characters been always given with such essential accuracy as is desirable. This remark applies more especially to some of Captain Conder's figures, notwithstanding his observation in “Altaic Hieroglyphs,” p. 35: “A careless reading and confusion of distinct emblems must lead us wrong; and for this reason exact copies are indispensable.” But, even if this objection be waived, the evidence must still be regarded as inadequate. As to “the subject of the inscriptions,” Captain Conder remarks that it “is exactly what we should have expected. They occur on statues of the gods, and they are invocations only” (op. cit. p. 149). Now that the inscriptions “occur on statues of the gods” is certainly not true with regard to most of those which are known to us, and as we have them. The “doorway inscription” in the British Museum and the inscriptions from Hamath are connected with no statue whatever. In other cases, where there is a statue, or large figure in relief, it is by no means to be assumed that the figure is always that of a deity. But, as a specimen of what Captain Conder finds in the Hittite inscriptions, I may give his “free rendering” of the first two lines of that very ancient inscription in the British Museum of which I have just spoken as the “doorway inscription.” I give Captain Conder's “free rendering” rather than his “verbatim translation,” as likely to convey a less unfavourable impression:—
Read full abstract
Dec 1, 1914
H R Hall 
Open Access
