ndesirable in this work to ignore the fact in individual
articles contributed by them. The better course seems to be to explain here
the nature of these variations.

The main difficulty in the reading of Babylonian and Assyrian proper names
arises from the preference given to the "ideographic" method of writing
them. According to the developed cuneiform system of writing, words may be
written by means of a sign (or combination of signs) expressive of the
entire word, or they may be spelled out phonetically in syllables. So, for
example, the word for "name" may be written by a sign MU, or it may be
written cut by two signs _shu-mu_, the one sign MU representing the
"Sumerian" word for "name," which, however, in the case of a Babylonian or
Assyrian text must be read as _shumu_--the Semitic equivalent of the
Sumerian MU. Similarly the word for "clothing" may be written SIG-BA, which
represents again the "Sumerian" word, whereas, the Babylonian-Assyrian
equivalent being _lubushtu_ it is so to be read in Semitic texts, and may
therefore be also phonetically written _lu-bu-ush-tu_. This double method
of writing words arises from the circumstance that the cuneiform syllabary
is of non-Semitic origin, the system being derived from the non-Semitic
settlers of the Euphrates valley, commonly termed Sumerians (or
Sumero-Akkadians), to whom, as the earlier settlers, the origin of the
cuneiform script is due. This script, together with the general Sumerian
culture, was taken over by the Babylonians upon their settlement in the
Euphrates valley and adapted to their language, which belonged to the
Semitic group. In this transfer the Sumerian words--largely
monosyllabic--were reproduced, but read as Semitic, and at the same time
the advance step was taken of utilizing the Sumerian words as means of
writing the Babylonian words phonetically. In this case the signs
representing Sumerian words were treated merely as syllables, and, without
reference to their meaning, utilized for spelling Babylonian words. The
Babylonian syllabary which thus arose, and which, as the culture passed on
to the north--known as Assyria--became the Babylonian Assyrian
syllabary,[32] was enlarged and modified in the course of time, the Semitic
equivalents for many of the signs being distorted or abbreviated to form
the basis of new "phonetic" values that were thus of "Semitic" origin; but,
on the whole, the "non-Semitic" character of the signs used as syllables in