147 : 7 _seq._ Accad and Sumer. Prince, and Zaborowski (after de Sarzec) give the earliest date of Accad as about 3800 B. C., but Prince thinks this date too old by 700–1000 years. See also Zaborowski, 1, pp. 118–125. H. R. Hall, in _The Ancient History of the Near East_, reviews the entire work in this field in his first chapter. According to him, dates in Babylonia can be traced as far back as those of Egypt, without coming to a time when there was no writing or metal, while Egyptian records begin in a Neolithic culture. The earliest dates so far established are in the fourth millennium B. C., but already a high degree of civilization had been reached there or elsewhere by people who brought it to Babylonia. Hall, p. 176, says: “The most ancient remains that we find in the city mounds are Sumerian. The site of the ancient Shurripak, at Fârah in Southern Babylonia, has lately been excavated. The culture revealed by this excavation is Sumerian, and metal-using, even at the lowest levels. The Sumerians apparently knew the use of copper at the beginning of their occupation of Babylonia, and no doubt brought this knowledge with them.” See chap. V of Hall’s book, and the two great works of King, the _Chronicles Concerning the Early Babylonian Kings_, and _The History of Sumer and Akkad_, as well as Rogers’s _History of Babylonia and Assyria_. In his preface to the first mentioned of his two works King states that the new researches are resulting in a tendency to reduce the dates of these ancient empires very considerably, especially for the dynasties. Thus for Su-abu, the founder of the first dynasty, a date not earlier than 2100 B. C. is now given, and for Hammurabi one not earlier than the twentieth century B. C. Accad is by many authors, including Breasted, considered to have been Semitic from the beginning, and to have been established about 2800 B. C. But Zaborowski claims that it was not originally Semitic, but Semitized at a very early date. He makes both city-kingdoms originally Turanian [by which he means Alpine and pre-Aryan] with an agglutinative language related to the Altaic. See also Zaborowski, 2. He dates the cuneiform inscriptions between 3700 and 4000 B. C., after de Sarzec and de Morgan. Hall draws attention to the remarkable resemblance of the Sumerians to the Dravidians, and is inclined to believe that they may have come from India. Both G. Elliot Smith and Breasted claim the Babylonians derived their culture from Egypt, but the weight of evidence is gradually accumulating against them. See Hall, chap. V. The relations of the two regions and Egyptian dates are treated in Reisner’s _Early Dynastic Cemeteries of Naga-ed-Dêr_; and Eduard Meyer, _Geschichte des Altertums_, should also be consulted. Against these Egyptologists are most of the later writers, such as Hall and King and many others. The location of Babylonia is a fact distinctly in favor of its earlier beginnings. There is no denying the very remote origin of Egyptian