ON THE CANAANITES. 69 
could do nothing you assigned it to the Turanian. You cannot take 
language as a test of race. Major Conder knows better than I do 
that in examining these monuments you find clear evidence of more 
than one race of people. One remarkable point I noticed on 
examining the monuments of Karchemish, and expecially one which 
I wish could be brought to this country: it is a large slab on which 
two male figures are represented standing on the back of a couchant ~ 
lion, and the figures we see there have quite a clear and cer- 
tainly not a Turanian type of face. They have long beards, their 
hair is looped up in Assyrian style, or curled, and the type of nose 
is straight, and not a small snub-nose, nor are the eyes small, as 
were those of the Turanian people. On the monuments of Boghaz 
Keui and other towns of Asia Minor you have again this same type 
of face. There is another record of the Hittites which seems clearly 
to indicate a mixed character. If they were Turanian, as Major 
Conder states, it is curious to notice that the Beni-Heth, with whom 
Abraham deals at Hebron, were apparently Semites. They were 
conversant with the Semitic tongue, and conducted their transactions 
according to the system of commerce instituted by the Babylonians, 
which was more Semitic in origin than Akkadian. In the Tel el- 
Amarna tablets, the general term for the South Palestinian tribes, 
including the Hittites, is Khabiri, “ the allies,” which would hardly 
be used were they one homogeneous whole. I think another point 
to be noticed is that the study of the Hittite monuments, though not 
followed much as yet, has been, principally from an archeological 
point of view, and work in that direction is mainly due to the 
French authors, MM. Perrot and Guillaume and M. Babelon,who have 
published works of great interest, and had put forward facts that I 
put forward in 1880 in the study of the Hittite monuments, dividing 
them into three periods. The Hittites oceupy very much the position 
of the Phcenicians, though they have not the high commercial 
instinct of the Phcenician people. They were a people with a 
certain degree of civilisation, who, coming in contact with nations 
more civilised than themselves, borrowed and adopted the customs, 
forms of art, and forms of religion from those with whom they 
came in contact. Understanding this, if you take the Hittite monu- 
ments and inscriptions, you find they can be divided into three 
periods. First, underlying the whole, is what I may call the 
native period. Then we have a period represented by later 
monuments, showing influence of the Assyrian court, and we 
have in addition to that, monuments which show a clear influence of 
