TWO SEMITIC PROBLEMS 91 



such resemblances do not afford a trustworthy foundation for a theory 

 of ethnical unity. The period of the supposed Mediterranean race 

 must have been very remote, and in the lapse of thousands of years 

 it is impossible for us to say what original resemblances and differences 

 may have been effaced, and what new resemblances and differences 

 may have arisen. It is well known that climatic and social conditions 

 tend to affect bodily forms. The period in question was doubtless 

 one of migrations and mixtures, of which, however, there is no his- 

 torical record. The interval between that remote period and the 

 beginnings of history is a blank. It is not possible, therefore, to rest 

 any trustworthy conclusion on a supposition such as is described 

 above. 



Putting the Mesopotamian theory aside, we have to ask whether 

 there is anything in the geographical and social conditions pointing 

 to one place or another as the probable home of the Hamito-Semitic 

 people. In historical times we find the Semites mostly in western 

 Asia, and the Hamites extending over a large space in northern 

 and northeastern Africa. The Semitic peoples form a compact 

 mass their languages are very nearly allied among themselves ; 

 and this suggests an original Semitic unity at a comparatively late 

 period. The Hamites, on the other hand, present a greater variety 

 their languages differ among themselves in grammar and vocabu- 

 lary to a much greater extent than is true of the Semitic tongues, 

 and they are spread over a very large territory. Hence it might be 

 inferred that Africa was the original seat of the combined people, 

 since it would be more natural that the larger part, remaining in the 

 primitive abode, should spread over a large space, while the seceding 

 part, smaller and compacter, would occupy a smaller territory. If 

 the body which later became the Semitic race withdrew from the 

 parent body, then the tribes that were left, constituting the majority, 

 might scatter over the whole of northern Africa, while the less 

 numerous body, the germ of the Semites, might withdraw to Arabia 

 or elsewhere. This is a not improbable supposition. But on the other 

 hand it is also not improbable that if the original seat of the Hamito- 

 Semites was in Arabia, a portion should have crossed over into 

 Africa, and there, under conditions which are not known, should 

 gradually have spread over a wide territory, this wide dissemination 

 itself giving rise to a greater diversity of dialects. The transit to 

 Africa might have been made by way of the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb, 

 or by the Isthmus of Suez. In either case a diffusion over the terri- 

 tory later occupied by the Hamites would be, as far as we know, 

 natural and easy. In the absence of all historical data, there is no- 

 thing in the climatic conditions to point to a decision of the question. 



We may distinguish between the original abode of the Semites and 

 their centre of distribution. It is possible, as is pointed out above, 



