generally wears a beard. Whether they regar led the licads of tlieir divinities as being shaved or not is uncertain, as they are commonly represented wearing hats.
In connexion with this may be mentioned, that the frreab majority of the names of the deities of the Babylonian pantlieoa are non-Semitic, and thisshows what a preponderating inflnenco that part of the population must have had. Indeed the reli'.noui system of the Assyro-lJahyloniaiis was probably to a great e-vtent alien, and the comparatively few Semitic divine names which are found are to all appearance often applied to deities which were at first non-Semitic.
As to the order of precedence of the two races— the non-Semites and the Semites — in occupying the country, we have no certain information. It is worthy of note, however, tliat Nimrod, the founder of the great cities of the land of Shinar, is represented as a son of Cush (Gn 10*), and that in Gn IP the name Sliinar is spoken of as if it existed before the foundation of Babylon and ita tower, — in other words, botli passages suggest that the non-Semitic occupation of Shinar preceded that of the Semites. This seems also to be confirmed by the indications of the ancient monuments of tlie country. The fiojures of non-Semitic type, for the most jiart, precede those of the Semitic period in chronological order ; the earliest inscriptions are in the language which the majority of Assyriolo- gists regard as the non-Semitic (Sumerian or Akka- dian) idiom ; the contract-tablets of the dynasty of Ur, called by Radau the fourth, are written in it, as are also, wholly or partlj', numbers of tablets of the dynasty of Babylon (that to which Ham- murabi belonged), though Semitic Babylonian at tliis period begins to take its place. The Semitic renderings of the early non-Semitic texts are some- times as much of the nature of glosses as of real translations, for they are written, where possible, in the blank spaces left for that purpose between the beginning and the end of the line.j of the original text.* Wlien not arranged thus, the non- Semitic te.xt of these bilingual tablets occupies the first, third, and remaining alternate lines of the inscription, or the left-hand (or first) column.
The early languages of Shinar (Sumerian or Akkadian) are mentioned more than once in the inscriptions of Babj'lonia and Assyria. Thus the tablet S. 1190 is described as containing 'two Sumerian incantations used (seeminglj') for the stUling of a weeping child'; another fragment .«a.ys 'the tongue of Sumer (?assumed) the likeness (of the tongue) of Ak(kad) ' ; whilst a third informs us that ' Akkad is above, SH(mer below),' but what this refers to is doubtful, — perhaps the position of the tablets of each dialect on tlie library shelves, or in the rooms. The tablet K. 11,856, a fragment which refers to 'the great tablet- house,' states that ' the tongue of Akkad is in the third . . .' (?room, space, division). What these di-sconnected statements refer to in reality will probably for some time be a matter for discussion, but the existence of other languages than Semitic Baby- lonian in Sliinar or ancient Babylonia can no longer be doubted. To the above indications that this was the case may be added the fact that Sumer was called also kura Emc-laha, ' the land of the noble (or pure) tongue,' as well as Kiiigi.
The bilingual lists of Babylonia and Assyria distinguish th« two dialects, but do not mention by what name the standard idiom (probably the older of the two) was known. The other, generally called by modem scholars * the dialect,' is distin- guished in the bilingual lists by the term eine-sala, generally translated ' tongue (of) the woman,' or ' women's tongue,' per- haps so called because it was softer, being more affected by phonetic decay. The possibility that this refers to women of ft conquered race taken as wives by the conquerors has been sug- gested, but seems unlikely.
To all appearance the non-Semitic idiom and it*
• The tablet inscribed with the bilingual story of the Creation is written almost wholly in this way, and haa therefore th« appearance of a text in three columns.
SHIOX
dialect pave way to Semitic Babylonian about tlie time of the dynasty to which Oaiuniurabi belonged, but when it linally ceased to be spoken is not known. Compositions were probabf}- made in it from time to time until a very late date. This is shown by the existence of a i)ilinf;ual hymn con- taining tlie name of As.5ur -bani - apli or Assur- bani))al, though the text bears the appearance of an ancient composition into which that king's name has been introduced. His brother Samas- sum-uktn (Saosduchinos), king of Babylonia, how- ever, seems to have had original com|iositions in this olil language made for him, as in tlie case of the text referred to above (5 R. pi. 62). It is noteworthy that all these late inscriptions, made when the non-Semitic idiom was a dead language, are in the 'dialect.' There is not much doubt that Semitic Babylonian was the language of tlie country from aliout B.C. 2000 onwards, and con- tinued in use until about the Christian era.
Besides the archaic historical inscri|)tions, of which the best examples come from the French excavations at Tel-loh ; the brick-inscriptions, of which most really ancient Babj'loiiian sites furnish many examples ; and numerous short inscrijitions on cylinder-seals, the bulk of the non - Semitic literature of Shinar consists of incantations, lij'mns, and penitential psalms. Several interest- ing but fragmentary liistorical inscriptions exist (accompanied by translations into the Semitic idiom), together with the remains of a chrono- logical text supposed to be that made use of by Berosua in his nistory. It is also worthy of note that several fragments of a glossary of the Semitic story of the Creation (art. Bahvlonia, vol. i. p. 2io'>, and NuiKOD, vol. iii. p. 523»), or the story of Bel and the Dragon, imply that tliat composi- tion existed in the old language of Shinar, and that it was a ' dialectic ' text. Classified lists of words, ^vithout Semitic translation, are also found. In all probability, however, many other inscrip- tions known only in their Semitic dress are really of non-Semitic origin. For an account of these, as also for a descriiition of the country, its historj', etc, see the article Babylonia.