Legends of Babylon and Egypt in relation to Hebrew tradition | Page 5

while they
precluded Syria herself from attaining national unity, always tended to
protect her separate provinces, or "kingdoms," from the full effects of
foreign aggression. One city-state could be traversed, devastated, or
annexed, without in the least degree affecting neighbouring areas. It is
true that the population of Syria has always been predominantly
Semitic, for she was on the fringe of the great breeding-ground of the
Semitic race and her landward boundary was open to the Arabian
nomad. Indeed, in the whole course of her history the only race that
bade fair at one time to oust the Semite in Syria was the Greek. But the
Greeks remained within the cities which they founded or rebuilt, and,
as Robertson Smith pointed out, the death-rate in Eastern cities
habitually exceeds the birth-rate; the urban population must be
reinforced from the country if it is to be maintained, so that the type of
population is ultimately determined by the blood of the peasantry.(1)
Hence after the Arab conquest the Greek elements in Syria and
Palestine tended rapidly to disappear. The Moslem invasion was only
the last of a series of similar great inroads, which have followed one

another since the dawn of history, and during all that time absorption
was continually taking place from desert tribes that ranged the Syrian
border. As we have seen, the country of his adoption was such as to
encourage the Semitic nomad's particularism, which was inherent in his
tribal organization. Thus the predominance of a single racial element in
the population of Palestine and Syria did little to break down or
overstep the natural barriers and lines of cleavage.
(1) See Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 12 f.; and cf. Smith,
Hist. Geogr., p. 10 f.
These facts suffice to show why the influence of both Egypt and
Babylon upon the various peoples and kingdoms of Palestine was only
intensified at certain periods, when ambition for extended empire
dictated the reduction of her provinces in detail. But in the long
intervals, during which there was no attempt to enforce political control,
regular relations were maintained along the lines of trade and barter.
And in any estimate of the possible effect of foreign influence upon
Hebrew thought, it is important to realize that some of the channels
through which in later periods it may have acted had been flowing
since the dawn of history, and even perhaps in prehistoric times. It is
probable that Syria formed one of the links by which we may explain
the Babylonian elements that are attested in prehistoric Egyptian
culture.(1) But another possible line of advance may have been by way
of Arabia and across the Red Sea into Upper Egypt.
(1) Cf. Sumer and Akkad, pp. 322 ff.; and for a full discussion of the
points of resemblance between the early Babylonian and Egyptian
civilizations, see Sayce, _The Archaeology of the Cuneiform
Inscriptions_, chap. iv, pp. 101 ff.
The latter line of contact is suggested by an interesting piece of
evidence that has recently been obtained. A prehistoric flint knife, with
a handle carved from the tooth of a hippopotamus, has been purchased
lately by the Louvre,(1) and is said to have been found at Gebel
el-'Arak near Naga' Hamâdi, which lies on the Nile not far below
Koptos, where an ancient caravan-track leads by Wâdi Hammâmât to
the Red Sea. On one side of the handle is a battle-scene including some

remarkable representations of ancient boats. All the warriors are nude
with the exception of a loin girdle, but, while one set of combatants
have shaven heads or short hair, the others have abundant locks falling
in a thick mass upon the shoulder. On the other face of the handle is
carved a hunting scene, two hunters with dogs and desert animals being
arranged around a central boss. But in the upper field is a very
remarkable group, consisting of a personage struggling with two lions
arranged symmetrically. The rest of the composition is not very unlike
other examples of prehistoric Egyptian carving in low relief, but here
attitude, figure, and clothing are quite un-Egyptian. The hero wears a
sort of turban on his abundant hair, and a full and rounded beard
descends upon his breast. A long garment clothes him from the waist
and falls below the knees, his muscular calves ending in the claws of a
bird of prey. There is nothing like this in prehistoric Egyptian art.
(1) See Bénédite, "Le couteau de Gebel al-'Arak", in Foundation
Eugène Piot, Mon. et. Mém., XXII. i. (1916).
Perhaps Monsieur Bénédite is pressing his theme too far when he
compares the close-cropped warriors on the handle with the shaven
Sumerians and Elamites upon steles from Telloh and Susa, for their
loin-girdles are African and quite foreign to the Euphrates Valley.