OF the two civilizations which sprang up almost contemporaneously with one another, the one in the valley of the Tigris and Euphrates, the other in the alluvial lands of the Nile, the Babylonian unquestionably exercised the greater influence. The culture of Greece owed much to Babylonia, and European civilization became, in turn, heir to her achievements through the Greeks. It is not yet possible to discover all the lines of communication along which the thought of the East passed over in historic times to the mainland of Greece. It is still less possible to determine the prehistoric paths by which Babylonian ideas reached European nations and others beyond the bounds of Babylonian empire. Nevertheless, it is sufficient to point to the single word μva (the Babylonian mana, or weight of sixty shekels) as presumptive evidence of an influence that was far-reaching. The timepieces that we carry in our pockets, and place upon our mantels, are constant witnesses to the scientific influence of Babylonia.

The faces of our watches are divided into twelve periods corresponding to the old Babylonian division of the day into twelve double hours (kasbu). It was from this kasbu that the mile, as a measure of distance, was derived, the old mile representing the space traversed in two hours. The routes by which these products of ancient Semitic thought were transferred to the West lie, at present, quite beyond the bounds of our vision, but the agreement that exists, even in matters of detail, between the Babylonian mythology and that of the ancient Germans, and other peoples as well, precludes the possibility of their independent development. “The common endowment of the race” is an hypothesis that fails utterly to account not only for the main features in which these mythologies are agreed, but also, and more especially, for the evident accord in unimportant particulars.

The decipherment of the cuneiform inscriptions and the hieroglyphs of Egypt has extended our historical knowledge of Western civilization to a period almost twice as remote as that previously known. The history of Greece was known to us from the seventh or eighth century B.C. The oldest records of Babylonia and Egypt have lifted the veil that shrouded the centuries of the fourth millenium before our era. The period that separates their authors from that of Lycurgus and the foundation of Rome is, consequently, as long as that which lies between us and the historical beginnings of Hellenic life.

Babylonian civilization and history was not confined to the region watered by the Tigris and Euphrates. A civilization so advanced as that of Babylonia could not exist without attracting to itself the assistance of neighboring lands and carrying thither its own achievements. Thus we see, even in remote antiquity, Babylon reaching out toward Palestine, Armenia, Elam, and even to Arabia. Her merchants went forth in the pursuits of commerce, her soldiers to war and victory. The products of her artists and artisans were laid in foreign markets. Her superfluous population found homes on alien soil. There, however, they were often exposed to attack from barbarous neighbors and often succumbed to their superior numbers. Generally speaking, therefore, the history of the outlying countries and peoples is vitally connected with the history of Babylonia. It is no mere accident that we possess little or no knowledge of these peoples beyond that which has come to us from the Babylonians. The gaze of all these outlying peoples, and the direction of their movement, was toward the old culture-land, and that irrespective of the existing relation, whether ruled by the latter or imposing their rule upon it. Emphatic testimony is given to this fact in the extensive spread of the cuneiform writing, the pre-eminent achievement of the Babylonian intellect. Throughout the whole of Western Asia it became the medium of intellectual exchange. Everywhere, so far as we are at present able to see, we discover it. It was used in Elam, in Armenia, and even in Asia Minor, the home of the Hittite script, which still remains undeciphered. The peoples of Palestine were familiar with it, and through it with the Babylonian language and thought. It was studied at the court of the Pharaohs, and in the fifteenth century B.c. it was the medium of diplomatic and political correspondence between Egypt and the states of Western Asia.

Inasmuch, then, as the development of Babylonia conditioned the historical and cultural advance and political character of Western Asia, the task of presenting its history is many sided, especially so when this history is to deal with a civilization extending over three thousand years, developing in the midst of barbarian neighbors, and subject to the most varied succession of incursions from without. Babylonian civilization was not confined to a single people—on the contrary, it was enjoyed and transmitted by peoples, of different homes and blood, who entered in succession the great plain of the Tigris and Euphrates and there, under the influence of its dominant culture, started upon a fresh career. The same was true of the neighboring lands which felt in a measure the effects of this civilization, though with regard to these our knowledge is much more defective owing to the scantiness of our material.

Just as the great civilizations have developed along the great natural highways of communication, the great rivers, so the great movements of peoples originate in the treeless plains which afford grazing for the herds by which man lives in the nomad stage.

But great though the extent of this territory may be, to which the nomad lays claim, it is, nevertheless, able to yield support to only a comparatively small population. As the people multiply they are compelled to seek fresh fields for support, and naturally the simple, vigorous sons of nature are enticed by the attractions of civilization and the hope of easy victory over men who through the seductions of refinement have lost in virility.

As regards Babylonia there were three of these original centres which contributed to its population: the steppes of Europe, whence migrations took place over the Caucasus, around the Caspian Sea, or to the west through Asia Minor; the steppes of Central Asia to the northeast; south and southwest Arabia.

Of these three regions the first is of minor importance owing to the unfavorable conditions for numerical growth; the second, Central Asia, occupies a more important place. This, however, was true of both these centres: every wave of migration which went out from them toward Babylonia struck first upon the border states that stood under Babylonian influence, viz.: those of Asia Minor, where the Hittites had developed their peculiar life, and those of Syria, Armenia, and Elam. Babylonia was consequently protected, in a measure, by these buffer-states from incursions from both of these quarters. On the south and southwest it was different. Arabia, with its extended steppes, touched immediately upon Babylonia, and Arabia from time immemorial was the home of nomad tribes possessed of overmastering predatory instincts. The only natural boundary between the two lands was the Euphrates River. The roving nomad could sweep over the plain and skirt the cities on the west bank unhindered; that, too, even when a sturdy arm checked his passage to the rich pasturage on the east. The boundary which the Babylonians were compelled to defend was an extended one, and ran in parts through dreary wastes. It rarely happened, therefore, in olden days, any more than now, that the rulers of Babylonia were able to command a sufficient force to repel the impetuous rush of nomads and prevent them crossing the river. It was from this quarter that the old homeland of culture was exposed to the most frequent and permanent incursions, each, in turn, to spoil its predecessor of its title to sovereignty over the fertile plain. So far as our knowledge reaches, Arabia is the home of that family of people which, on linguistic grounds, we designate as Semitic. The history of Babylonia is, therefore, for the most part Semitic; the history of its neighboring peoples, so far as they were subject to her influence, is also Semitic. In so far as it was modified otherwise from without we must look to the other two main regions already referred to as the centres whence the influence proceeded. It was in Babylonia that the Semites achieved their greatest attainments. There they developed all that their natural endowments under the given conditions could effect; there Semitic history, so far as it is a history of civilized people, discovers its field of movement. Even Islamism has its proper seat there, but we can no more speak of a Semitic-Islamic civilization, indeed even less, than of a Babylonian-Semitic: the Arabs succeeded by virtue of the Persian-Byzantine culture.

The actors in Babylonian history, so far as it falls within our vision, are Semites. Their speech was preponderatingly Semitic despite the non-Semitic elements of admixture in the population. But our historical knowledge, it need not be stated, does not reach back to the beginnings of Babylonian civilization. History begins with written tradition. Written tradition, however, presupposes a long period of development during which the transition is made, on the one hand, from the first crude efforts to body forth an idea in written form to the achievement of a serviceable script, and, on the other hand, from incoordinated efforts in...