As to their language, J. D. Prince, correspondence, says that it was not Aryan, in spite of all conjectures to the contrary. “Friedrich Delitzsch analyzed some of the only syllabized material we have of this language, and I analyzed it still further in the _Journal of the American Oriental Society_, vol. XXII, ‘Hittite Material in the Cuneiform Inscriptions,’ reaching the conclusion as to the Non-Aryan character of this idiom. The so-called ‘Hittite Inscriptions’ are in hieroglyphs and give us no clue as to the pronunciation and hence none to the character of the language.” Von Luschan, p. 242, says: “Orientalists are unanimous in assuming that the Hittite language was not Semitic.” A very recent communication from Fr. Cumont, in _L’Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres_ for April 20, 1917, says that the tongue is proved to have been Aryan. As to their physical characters, all are agreed that the Hittites had short, brachycephalic heads, and thick, prominent noses. Myres, p. 44, remarks that the earliest portraits, which he dates about 1285 B. C., have been thought by some to be Mongoloid, but the evidence is still scanty and inconclusive. Surely if the older likenesses were Mongoloid, they bear no resemblance to the later types. On the monuments bearded figures are frequent and the type is Armenoid. See Hall, _The Ancient History of the Near East_, p. 334, for a criticism of the Mongol theory. 239 : 10. Sumer. J. D. Prince, in his article on the Sumerians in the _Encyclopædia Britannica_, classes the Sumerian language as agglutinative. The language of Susiana is also known as Anzanite, Susian or Elamite. The Anzanite may have been a dialect of Susian. Schiel’s work with de Morgan’s mission shows that Elamite was agglutinative and that inflections found in derived words are due to the influence of another language. The locality of Anzan is not known exactly, but is believed to have been in the plain south or southeast of Susa. See also Zaborowski, 1, pp. 149–150, and Hall, _The Ancient History of the Near East_. Hall agrees with Prince that Sumerian is agglutinative (p. 171). He also states that Elamite was agglutinative, but not otherwise like Sumerian. See his chap. V for the relationships of Sumerians and Elamites. For Media see the notes to p. 254 : 13. 239 : 12. Assyria and Palestine. Breasted, _Ancient Times_, p. 173 and Fig. 112; Hall, _History of the Near East_; Myres, _Dawn of History_, pp. 114–116, 140; and other histories of the Near East.