lanations are tor the most part adventurous, ra ix-y ictsecms philologically much more sound, " that these names < ear a Semitic, or at any rate not a pure Semitic stamp. " The I persons are the following, as represented by M. dc Rouge:] lanations are for the most part adventurous, and Hrugsch Bey s ver- that these names do not The names oE persons are the following, as represented Dy M. ueitouge: Kheta- sar, Maursar, Kauisar, Taurteribu, Aktasib, Net era, Tot as, Raba- suiiana, Tarakaunasa, Mait arima, Kamaiut a, Taatur, Sapalel, Sarna- risa, Paiusa, Akama, Tuher, Kirabsar. To these may be added the following from the list of nations of Thothmes III. : Pirkheta, Ai, A man, fhuka, Thcl-manna, Legaba, Tunipa, Ni, Ar, Zizal, Zakal, Arzakana (Brugsch, History of Egypt, ii. 5). No less un-Semitic for the most part are the names of Hittite persons and places which occur on the Assyrian monument. The following is a list of the kings of Khatti-land given by Shalmaneser II. on the monolith inscription : " Sangar of Carchumish, Kundaspi of Kummuch, Arami, son of Gusi, Lalli of Lallid, Chayan, son of Gabar, Girparud of Patin, Gir- prmid of Gamgum " (lines 82, 83), to which should be added "Sapalulmi of Patin" (lines 42, 43), which so strongly reminds one of the name of the king of Khita, Sapalili, mentioned in the treaty between Ramses II. and the Khita. The un-Semitic char acter of this group of names is the more remarkable, because (as Professor Sayce remarks) Assyrian, being itself a Semitic language, could not help representing foreign Semitic names in a form recog nizable as Semitic. How obviously Semitic, for instance, are the names of the kings of Hamath and Damascus, handed down to us in the Assyrian inscriptions! True, one of the above names of Hittite places, Carchemish (" fortress of Chemosh "), has a Semitic air, and the same may be said of Kadesh, the scene of the victory of Ramses II. But (1) it is not quite certain that Carchemish is Semitic (the Assyrians generally reproduce it under the form Gargamis, though sometimes Kargamis), and (2) even if it is Semitic, this may arise from the towns having been occupied by Semites prior to the Hittites. As for Kadesh (in the Egyptian inscriptions, Ketesh), though under the jurisdiction of the Khita, it was reckoned as a Canaanitish or more strictly an Amoritish town (Birch, Egypt, p. 116), while Orontes (in Egyptian, Arunata) has not even a Semitic appearance. It is true, again, that several of the Hittite proper names are compounded with snr e.g. , Khita-sar (the king who warred against Ramses II.), and that sar is evidently the Assyrian for " king" (also Hebrew for "prince "). But sar is also found in Egyptian inscriptions; it is in fact of Accadian (non-Semitic) origin, iinil was therefore borrowed by the Assyrians, before the Hittites and the Egyptians adopted it from them. The form of names like Kheta-sar (see list above) favours the view that the Hittite language was agglutinative, and consequently non-Semitic.
But this and all other aspects of Hittite culture will appear in a new light when the explorations have made further progress. At present we can only say that the probability is that the Hittites are not Semitic; in fact, they display an originality of genius which is not strikingly characteristic of pure Semitic races. The hypo thesis which regards them as the early civilizers of Asia Minor seems confirmed by the position of Carchemish, so favourable to the radi ation of civilizing influences. The importance of the Hittite capi tal in a commercial respect is known to all. The manch or mina of (Jarcheiuish is constantly mentioned on the cuneiform tablets; pro bably it was of lighter weight than the silver mina in use in Pha-nicia (see Mr Barclay V. Head s letter in Academy, Nov. 22, 1879). Of the religious life of the Hittites we are hardly in a posi tion to speak. We know indeed that, like the Hyksos, they worshipped Sutekh (who was localized, like Baal, as the patron of particular cities on the treaty of Ramses II.), and, like the Canaan- itcs, Astarata or Ashtoreth. The worship of Astarata will account for the name Hierapolis given afterwards, as it seems, to Carchem ish, as well as to other Syrian cities (Jerablus being a corruption of Hierapolis). But beyond this all is dark. Did the Hittites borrow in religious matters from the Assyrians? Had they legends relative to the origin of the world, and in what relation do these stand to the Hebrew narratives? Passing to philology in the narrower Reuse of the word, we wait longingly for a confirmation of Professor Sayce s view that the Hittites were the authors of the Hamathite hieroglyphics. No Semitic nation ever invented a syllabic system of writing; the Hittites are in all probability non-Semitic, and from their enterprising character are. precisely the people likely to have invented such characters. Professor Sayce has followed up this con jecture by another of no less importance, viz., that the enigmatical Cypriote syllabary is really derived from the hieroglyphics of Hamath. If this be proved (and the propounder of it claims to have the evidence ready and if the Hittites be really the inventors of the Hamathite hieroglyphics, this wonderful nation steps into a position hardly surpassed by that of any of the nations of the distant East.
Authorities.—Documents in Hi-ugseli s History of E jtipt, compared with the piu iillel passages in Records of the J cist, vols. ii., iv.; "Monolith Inscription of Shiilmaneser," Records of the J asl, iii. 25-^fi; Schradt r, Keilin&chriften iind GtKhichttforschuruj, pp. 2t>">- 2:)(; : Urugseh, History of Ei.nipt, " 2-8; Clialias, Voyage d un Egiiptien, pp. 31K-3JS2; Vicointc do Rouge, Melanges (Farcheologie Assyrienne et Egyptienne, 1875, p. 204, &c. (posthumous); letters of Professor Sayce in Academy. Aug. 1G and Nov. 1, l,H7i). On the site of Carcliemish, see Scnrader, Keilitischriften, Ac., pp. 221-225; Maspcro, Journal des Sarans, Oct. 1S73;;; nd Pncocke s Account of the Iluint of Jerabus (JeraUlui); A Descrip tion of Che East, &c., 1743-45, ii. 1C5.
HITTORFF, Jacques Ignace (1793–1867), French architect, was bora at Cologne, August 20, 1793. After serving an apprenticeship to a mason in his native town, ha went in 1810 to Paris, and studied for some years at the Academy of the Fine Arts, where he was a favourite pupil of the Government architect Belanger, who in 1814 appointed him his principal inspector. Succeeding Belanger as Government architect in 1818, he designed many important public and private buildings in Paris and also in the south of France. After making architectural tours in Germany, England, Italy, and Sicily, he published the result of his observations in the latter country in the work Architecture antique de la Sidle (3 vols. 1826-30; new edition, 1866- 67), and also in Architecture moderne de la Sidle (1826-35). One of his important discoveries was that colour had been made use of in ancient Greek architecture, a subject which he especially discussed in Architecture jyoltjchrome chez les Grecs (1830), and in Restitution du temple d Empedocle a Selinunte (1851); and in accordance with the doctrines enunciated in these works he was in the habit of making colour an important feature in most of his architectural designs. His principal building is the church of St Vincent de Paul in the basilica style. He also designed many of the embellishments of the Place de la Concorde, the Champs-Elysees where he constructed the Circus of the Empress, which has been the model of many simi lar buildings in various parts of Europe the Bois de Boulogne, and other places. In 1833 he was elected a member of the Academy of Fine Arts. He died at Paris, March 25, 1867.
