RECENT DISCOVERIES IN THE REALM OF ASSYRIOLOGY, ETC. 179 



before been shown to have gone so far west, but this proof, with the 

 facts deducible from the Tel-el- Amarna letters, viz., that the Hittite 

 language was an Akkadian dialect, and that the intermediate 

 people of Mitani, between Babylonia and Hittite Syria, spoke a 

 kindred language, serves to connect the Hittites and Akkadians, 

 and to shew that the old Mongol raGe was very widely spread over 

 Western Asia. 



I venture to think Mr. Pinches is too modest in speaking of an 

 " Akkadian question." His own labours have added to our know- 

 ledge, and it is agreed by authorities such as Sir Henry Rawlinson, 

 Oppert, Lenormant, Delitszch, Hommel, and Dr. Sayce, that such 

 a language existed, that it was not Semitic, and that in gram- 

 matical structure and vocabulary it is closely akin to the Mongol, 

 Turkic, and Finnic languages of later times. I am not aware 

 that any great name save that of Halevy (a Semitic scholar) can 

 be quoted on the other side, and the theory as to cryptograms and 

 secret characters is but one of those clumsy excuses which are set 

 up to bar the way for scientific progress, by prejudiced scholars. 

 We have bilingual texts in Akkadian and Assyrian, bilingual 

 syllabaries explaining to Semitic scribes the Akkadian language, 

 and other such aids to study, which prove beyond doubt the 

 existence of this old Mongolic speech ; and the translation of 

 Akkadian texts by scholars who, being versed in Semitic 

 languages, know how to distinguish texts which are not Semitic, 

 puts the question beyond the pale of controversy. 



As regards the racial type, the round-headed and high-cheeked 

 personage at Tell Loh is clearly more like a Mongol than like any 

 other type. It may be that these Akkadians shaved — the Phoeni- 

 cians shaved head and upper lip in 1600 B.C., and the Egyptians 

 shaved — but it may be that the bare face shows Mongol nation- 

 ality ; for the Tartar beard grows very late in life, and the 

 bearded figures — kings and deities — may be intended to represent 

 veiy ancient and venerable persons. 



As regards further study of Akkadian, it seems to me that the 

 method followed by Oppert and Lenormant is the safest, namely, 

 the comparison with the most archaic living dialects of Turkic, 

 Finnic, and Mongol speech. It is true that Chinese has a remote 

 radical connexion with this group; but even the oldest known 

 Chinese dialects are so much corrupted, and have so much in them 

 that is foreign, that Chinese could only be used to illustrate 



