244 
***#*££%%* » ! 
ss»-3^g£? 
more completed evolution, we ^ fc f il mig ht not only 
understand how some of . th e Samitio ta ^ ^ Canaan 
even anterior to Abraham’s arrival among them. 
(4.) Ancient Susiana, or Elam, before Abraham. 
29. There is a similar difficulty also in Ration to** 
these ethnic elements r ^ od 0 f which I have just 
from Persia proper ; hut at the pe ents of Susa | 
spoken, there can he no doubt, horn It w iU be 
that the language spoken in Mam was Ham ^ H 
remembered that Chedorlaome ( • ’“the ravaeer of 
Eawlinson has identified with ^Tirhhah 
Syria,” was king of Elam ; beside p W £tiSl wX Tirhakah, 
occurs on the Susa records, a na . m ^ therefore 
king of Ethiopia (spoken of m 2 Kings xix. v), 
Hamitic. „ rc0 unt for this apparent 
30. It would be t P f/ e f^ t C now recognized fact that the 
discrepancy, were it for the n^^ ^ ^ Turanian 
Hamitic speech was most clo y made w ith comparative 
or Scythic, and that its evoln 1 time f or the evolution of 
quickness, while it required a S , ^ crystallized 
Semitic. That Semitism should thjefo^ have y game 
itself in Canaan on in Elam, pre- 
time that Hamitism should have teen re M 
sents us, in reality, with no ° ontrad X\ e mo dern Hamitic 
31. I might take you also among tne mou 
* Eawlinson says “^The o^ 60 ^ 1 ^ considerable 
rl^ l0 LTby" g ’e^; "g out Semitism." (Kawlmsons 
Herodotus, vol. i., Essay XL, P- 5 31;) 
t Chaldwa and Susiana, by Loltus, p. ye. 
