142 MR. BOSCAWBN ON THE HISTOEICAL 



grains, but, by-and-by, we look forward to the realisation of a full harvest. 

 There was one point referred to in Mr. Budge's criticisms on which 

 I should prefer to take the side of the paper, and that is, as to the 

 lack of tablets referring to transactions like that at Hebron. The lack 

 of evidence and tablets cannot be here used in argument. Whatever may 

 have been the practice in Babylon and Chaldea as to drawing up tablets, 

 it is quite certain that the transaction at Hebron was carried out as 

 narrated just in the same manner as similar negotiations are managed at 

 the present day. The same custom has been going on in that land from time 

 immemorial. Dr. Thomson, who knows the manners and customs of the 

 people of Syria and Palestine better than any living man, refers, in The 

 Land and the Booh, to the transaction at Hebron, in which he sees all the 

 processes of a modern bargain. " By these means," he says (vol. i. 249), 

 " the operation, in all its circumstances and details, is known to many 

 witnesses, and the thing is ' made sure ' without any written contract. In 

 fact, up to this day, in the very city of Hebron, a purchase thus witnessed 

 is legal ; while the best drawn deeds of a modern lawyer, though signed, 

 sealed, and attested, would be of no avail without such living witnesses." 

 We have to thank the Institute for bringing forward this subject. 

 While art and science in this country are patronised and pampered, 

 archaeology is neglected, notwithstanding the startling discoveries which 

 patient, unrewarded research is steadily bringing to light." 



After some criticisms from M. Bertin,* 



A Visitor said : I desire to ask a question for the information of 

 those who are not so learned on these subjects as some of the speakers. Is 

 there any confirmation of Mr. Proctor's statement ascribing the Abramic 

 visit to Egypt to the time of the building of the Great Pyramid, basing 

 his view on the astronomic period at which the Great Pyramid must have 

 been built, namely, 3300 B.C. ? \ 



Mr. W. St. Chad Boscawen. — I only wish to make two or three remarks, 

 in closing this discussion. With regard to what Mr. Budge has said about 

 the commercial tablets, I would point out that this paper deals almost 

 entirely with the migration of Abram, and therefore I omitted everything 

 relating to the time after Abram arrived in Canaan, intending at some 

 future time to continue the study of the monuments in relation to 

 early Hebrew history. With regard to the comments of Professor 

 Sayce, I may state that I did not see them until this morning, and 

 therefore, I have not had time to give the consideration to them that 



* M. Bertin desires that the following may be taken as giving the sub- 

 stance of his remarks : — 



'• M. Bertin said that the interesting paper of Mr. Boscawen was certainly 

 very ingenious, but, unfortunately, many of his conclusions are established 

 on doubtful facts, which no doubt he would have rejected if he had examined 

 them carefully. The lecturer, for instance, says that the camel is designated 

 as ' the animal with two humps,' but the cuneiform ideogram says ' the 

 animal of the sea.' The mistakes of transcriptions, which he is well able to 

 avoid, are numerous ; there are for instance seven mistranscriptions in the 



