172 



THEO. G. PINCHES, ESQ., NOTES UPON SOME OF THE 



times, and ifc is now very interesting to find that it is not the 

 Mons Porphyriticus porphyry, but another kind found in the 

 immediate neighbourhood of Magharah. Mr. Pinches' Paper 

 gives us an extremely valuable insight into Babylonian civilisation. 

 It settles many questions ; but one of the most interesting which 

 it leaves open, and which I always maintain will be left open, is 

 that of the disposal of the dead. No doubt in the number of 

 little state communities which grew up in Babylonia, various 

 customs would prevail, as shown by the words themselves. The 

 word for burial may also be used in many cases for burning, as 

 the custom changed. We know in our own country our words for 

 trees have changed from one class to another, as shown by the late 

 Professor Rolleston. 



Another point in Mr. Pinches' Paper, which I think of special 

 interest, has reference to the types of the faces. They go to prove 

 that we are not, in Babylonia, to deal emphatically with pure 

 races. It has always been a country of mixed races ; and to say 

 this is an Akkadian head or that a Semitic head is almost impos- 

 sible. From the earliest times we find traces of mixed races there, 

 and no doubt men rose to power in those days by intermarriage ; 

 therefore, to get a purely characteristic ethnological type would be 

 extremely difficult. Indeed we never have found, and probably 

 never shall find, any evidence of such purity of type as you find in 

 Egypt ; in Egypt the Egyptian language was the one language 

 from the Cataract down to the Delta ; with the exception of the 

 infiltration of the Nubian words in one element, and Semitic in 

 the others, it has been changed but little. 



With regard to Mr. Pinches' defence of the Akkadian language, 

 I do not think it needs defending. The theory put forward by a 

 Continental Assyriologist is simply a crotchet which scarce requires 

 notice, although indeed even from crotchets one does sometimes 

 get a valuable hint." 



M. Bertin (the late). — I agree with what Mr. Boscawcn has 

 said about the theory put forward in regard to the Akkadian 

 language. I would go further and say that it seems a mania. 

 There are two people on the Continent who take up that theory 

 of cryptography. One of these cannot bear the idea of anyone not 

 of Semitic race inventing anything ; and so, when any discovery 

 in Assyrian civilisation is attributed to the Akkadians (who were 

 non-Semites), he finds a simple way of doing away with it by sup- 



