<P> A month earlier, a friend and pupil of Burnouf's, Professor Christian Lassen of Bonn, had also published his own work on The Old Persian Cuneiform Inscriptions of Persepolis . He and Burnouf had been in frequent correspondence, and his claim to have independently detected the names of the satrapies, and thereby to have fixed the values of the Persian characters, was consequently fiercely attacked . According to Sayce, whatever his obligations to Burnouf may have been, Lassen's </P> <P>... contributions to the decipherment of the inscriptions were numerous and important . He succeeded in fixing the true values of nearly all the letters in the Persian alphabet, in translating the texts, and in proving that the language of them was not Zend, but stood to both Zend and Sanskrit in the relation of a sister . </P> <P> Meanwhile, in 1835 Henry Rawlinson, a British East India Company army officer, visited the Behistun Inscriptions in Persia . Carved in the reign of King Darius of Persia (522--486 BC), they consisted of identical texts in the three official languages of the empire: Old Persian, Assyrian and Elamite . The Behistun inscription was to the decipherment of cuneiform what the Rosetta Stone was to the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs . </P> <P> Rawlinson correctly deduced that the Old Persian was a phonetic script and he successfully deciphered it . In 1837 he finished his copy of the Behistun inscription, and sent a translation of its opening paragraphs to the Royal Asiatic Society . Before his article could be published, however, the works of Lassen and Burnouf reached him, necessitating a revision of his article and the postponement of its publication . Then came other causes of delay . In 1847 the first part of the Rawlinson's Memoir was published; the second part did not appear until 1849 . The task of deciphering the Persian cuneiform texts was virtually accomplished . </P>

List three ways the sumerians made use of cuneiform