352 NO ROD-CLOSE INTERCOURSE WITH EGYPT 



that country was only established by Tiglathpileser III., 

 c. 730 B.C. 



Passing now to the dates of the connection between this 

 Empire and Egypt, the first assigned is : 



{a) Early dynastic, say about 4400 B.C., which would 

 probably correspond to the early Sumerian periods. Some 

 authorities indeed hold that Egypt was invaded by Babylonians, 

 or was culturally permeated by the " proto-Babylonians," 

 or Sumerians. Of invasion we possess no proof, or even 

 strong suggestion ; of cultural permeation, to which Hommel, 

 in especial, attributes the whole primeval culture of Egypt, 

 some elements and some signs are possibly noticeable, but 

 even these are Semitic, not Sumerian, 1 while their total com- 

 pares insignificantly with those of native origin. 2 



Of these signs, the use by the Egyptians of the cylinder seal, 

 of which the Royal tombs of the first Dynasty afford examples, 

 stands out as the most important. As this characterised 

 Sumer and Babylonia at all times, while it fell into disuse in 

 the country of the Pharaohs, the seal was inferred to be an 

 original product of Sumer, whence it reached Egypt in late 

 pre-dynastic or early dynastic times. 



But (as King 3 continues) " Recent research— such as 

 Naville's at Abydos, and Reisner's at Naga-ed-Der — leaves 

 small room for the theory that early Egyptian culture was 

 subjected to any strong foreign influence in early dynastic 

 times ; thus the theory of the invasion by Semitic tribes 

 must be given up." Maspero m.aintains that as far back as 



^ The carved ivory handle of a flint knife in the Louvre proves (according 

 to Petrie) that the art of slate-palettes in Egypt originated from Elamite 

 civilisation, which flourished before its rise. It must be of pre-historic age, 

 yet shows a well-developed art with Mesopotamian or Elamite affinities 

 earlier than the sculptured slate-palettes and maceheads. M. G. Benedite 

 {Monuments Pict.) holds that in this knife-handle we have the most tangible 

 evidence yet found of a connection in very early times between the Egyptian 

 and Mesopotamian civiUsations. King (Jour. Egypt. Archcsology, vol. IV. 

 p. 64) suggests that there was a connection with Babylonian-Elamite seals 

 from Susa. 



^ Thus the general conception of pictographic wTiting might perhaps be 

 borrowed from the Euphrates valley, but not a single sign taken from the 

 Babylonian script can be found (W. Max MuUer, Encly. Bibl., p. 1233). Dr. 

 Alan Gardiner, on the origin of the Semitic and Greek alphabets, concludes 

 that the evidence does point to the alphabet being Semitic in origin and based 

 upon acrophonic picture signs (Journal oj Egyptian Archcsology, vol. Ill , p. 1 ). 



^ llislory of Sumer and Akkad (London, 1910), p. 322. 



