Gewisse ideographische Schreibmungen in der babylonischen Keilschrift sind oft schwer zu enträtseln; aber wenn die Lesung gegeben wird, sieht jeder Keilschriftkundige sofort, daß die Lesung richtig ist, ebenso wie jemand, der einen Rebus nicht lesen kann, doch sofort im Stande ist, die Richtigkeit einer vorgeschlagenen Deutung zu beurteilen. Wenn jemand zur Zeit des Deutsch - Französischen Krieges von 1870/1 z. B. gefragt wurde, welche Depesche vom Kriegsschauplatze 2x2 = 4 ii darstellte, so war er nicht imstande, die Frage zu beantworten; wenn ihm aber dann gesagt wurde, 2 X 2 = 4 ii bedeute nichts neues (nämlich die Angabe 2 X 2 = 4) vor ein paar i's, d. h. Nichts Neues vor Paris, so sah er natürlich sofort die Richtigkeit der Lösung.
So, what is the solution of this rebus 2 X 2 = 4 ii ?
The reference is in Ecce Deus, p. 107, note 1:
In his wondrously learned Biblische Liebeslieder Professor Haupt has made this observation, and has illustrated it most felicitously by this example: 2 X 2 = 4 ii (Nichts neues vor Paris).
Certain ideographic spellings in Babylonian cuneiform are often difficult to decipher; but when the reading is provided, every cuneiform scholar immediately recognizes that the reading is correct, just as someone who cannot read a rebus is still able to judge the correctness of a proposed interpretation. For example, during the German-French War of 1870/1, if someone was asked what dispatch represented the war scene 2x2 = 4 ii, they would not be able to answer; but if they were then told that 2 X 2 = 4 ii meant nothing new (namely the statement 2 X 2 = 4) before a few i's, i.e., Nothing New before Paris, they would naturally see the correctness of the solution.
It says:
Even if you can't solve a word puzzle, you can still figure out whether a proposed solution to the puzzle is right.
Certain ideographic spellings in Babylonian cuneiform are often difficult to decipher; but when the reading is provided, every cuneiform scholar immediately recognizes that the reading is correct, just as someone who cannot read a rebus is still able to judge the correctness of a proposed interpretation. For example, during the German-French War of 1870/1, if someone was asked what dispatch represented the war scene 2x2 = 4 ii, they would not be able to answer; but if they were then told that 2 X 2 = 4 ii meant nothing new (namely the statement 2 X 2 = 4) before a few i's, i.e., Nothing New before Paris, they would naturally see the correctness of the solution.
It says:
Even if you can't solve a word puzzle, you can still figure out whether a proposed solution to the puzzle is right.
Exactly. And a pun
2 X 2 = 4 - nothing new - nichts Neues
(in front of) before - vor
ii - few "i"s - ein paar "i's"
vor ein paar i's, - before a few "i"'s
d. h. Nichts Neues vor Paris
Now I understand better the reference to that rebus in the wider context:
In the Old Testament, as well as in the New, an erring woman is the standing symbol for an idolatrous or apostate people. One need only think of the prophet Hosea, of Jeremiah iii, of Ezekiel xxiii (of Aholah and Aholibah), of Matthew's and Mark's "adulterous generation," of the Jezebel of Revelation. As soon as the suggestion is made it becomes clear as light that the sinful woman who anoints the Jesus and bathes his feet with her tears, and covers him with caresses of reverence and affection, can be none other than the converted heathen world, so long given up to the shameless service of polytheism. When a riddle or rebus is proposed, one may cudgel one's wits in vain to unravel it. Once, however, the solution is stated, there is no longer any doubt whatever; we see it clearly and distinctly enough to satisfy the most rigorous Cartesian. [1]
Note [1] reads:
In his wondrously learned Biblische Liebeslieder Professor Haupt has made this observation, and has illustrated it most felicitously by this example: 2 X 2 = 4 ii (Nichts neues vor Paris).
