Language, (as I found it written upon by the Person that sent it me
from thence) but this whole Book (which I found was Printed) consisted
only of the _Chinese_ Characters without any Interpretation, or
Pronunciation; however by the help of the Pictures of that, and a
_Chinese_ Almanack, I quickly found out their Characters for Numbers,
and their way of Numeration, together with the Figure and Use of
their _Abacus_ or counting Board, for performing the Operations of
_Arithmetick_, which I find pretty near to agree with that of the
antient _Romans_ (a Description and Picture of which is given by
_Ursinus_, _Pignorius_ and _Velserus_) save only, that, instead of
Pins and sliding Groves of the _Roman_, the _Chinese Abacus_ hath
Strings or Wires and Beads, to slide upon them; and that, instead of
four Pins for Digits or Units, the _Chinese_ hath five Beads: So that
it may seem to argue that the _Chinese Abacus_ was designed for a
_Duodecimal_ Progression: Whereas that of the _Romans_ was design'd for
the _Decimal_.
One thing is remarkable in the _Chinese_, that I find the _Abacus_ to
lie Horizontal, and their first place to be that next the left Hand,
which I judge was also the first in their old way of reading, much
the same with ours, though their other Characters are erected (as I
shall by and by shew) from the posture of Writing and Reading, which
I conjecture they did at first make use of; and what does yet further
agree with this conjecture, is remarkable in the newly mentioned
Treatise of _Vulg. Beig._ That whereas the way of Writing and Reading
used by the _Arabs_, was from the right to the left, the first place or
the place of Units in their Numeration, was that next the right Hand;
and so came first to be read: As did that of _China_, who as I conceive
read the contrary way, from the left to the right.
It appears therefore by this Remark that we received this way of
expressing Numbers from the _Arabians_, for that we keep the same
posture or position of places with them, tho' our progression in
Writing and Reading be the contrary way. And though we now read them
also in the order they are set, twenty one, twenty two, thirty six,
forty eight, _&c._ yet we retain also the other way of Pronouncing,
_viz._ one and twenty, two and twenty, six and thirty, eight and forty,
_&c._
Now as the _Chinese_ and _Roman Abacus_ do much agree save only that
they proceed contrary ways, so doth their way of expressing Numbers by
Letters or Marks, one stroke or line signifying one; two lines two;
three lines three; a cross ten; two crosses twenty; three crosses
thirty; and so onwards to a hundred, which they expressed by a square
Mark, and a cross with a stroak added for a thousand, as will appear by
the Table annexed. And though the Characters are not all the same; yet
the order and method of one agrees very near with that of the other,
especially if I may be allowed my supposition, that the primitive way
of Writing and Reading with the _Chinese_ was Horizontal, and like the
_Greek_ and _Latin_ or _European_ way. Now that these are properly
numeral Figures, or Characters, is manifest from this, that they have
also word Characters for every Number, and they can (in the same manner
as the _Romans_ could) express a Number by their numeral characters
or Marks, and by their literal or word Characters; for as one single
stroak signifies one or the first, so does the Character (_in the Plate
marked with E_) signify the same thing, that is one or the first.
Having thus discovered their Characters for Numbers, and their way of
Numeration, I was next desirous to understand something concerning
their Language and Character.
Upon perusing all the Accounts I could meet with in Books, I found very
little satisfaction as to what I principally inquired after, which
was first concerning the method of the Character, whether it consisted
of a certain number of Marks methodically disposed like Letters in a
literal, or like Numbers in a Numeral, or like Radicals in composite
and decomposite Derivations? 'Tis said to be legible into a great
many Languages considerably different one from another, but how this
is effected is not related, only 'tis said that the Marks are of the
nature of our Arithmetical Figures, (which are become almost Universal
at least to us here in _Europe_,) and 2dly, concerning the number of
these Characters? to which I found as little satisfaction; for, by
some Relations I found that there were 120000, by others 80000, and
by others 60000. And that a Man must be able to remember to Write and
Read at least 8000, or 10000, before he will be able to express his
meaning thereby, and that it is the business of a Man's whole Life to
be throughly understanding in the whole Character; seeming to intimate
that the Characters are immethodical, and there are as many primitive
Characters as Words. Others tell us of various kinds of Characters
which have been in use in several Ages. The first they say were
_Hieroglyphical_ like the _Ægyptian_ or _Mexican_, consisting of the
Pictures of Animals and Vegetables. But that the last are made up of
Lines and Points, that they have no such thing as Letters or Syllables,
but every distinct Word and Notion has a distinct Character, and that
all are primitive or in composite, so that if _Calepines_ Dictionary
were to be translated into the _Chinese_, 'twere necessary to have
as many distinct radical Characters as there are Words therein to be
found, which accounts do seem to insinuate that this Character is the
most difficult, and the most perplexed piece of Learning in the World,
and depends wholly upon the strength of the Memory, in retaining the
form and signification of a perplexed scrawl. But whether they who gave
us these Accounts did do it knowingly, is much to be doubted, my own
Observations, at least, make me think otherwise.
I have not yet been able to procure sufficient helps to inform my self
of the whole Art of Writing and Reading the _Chinese_ Character, and I
fear the Relations I have hitherto met with concerning it, were written
by such as did not well understand it, however from such helps as I
had, what I collected or do conjecture, I shall here relate. The best
help I had, was the perusal of some Books Printed in _China_, with the
pronunciation and signification of the Character in Latin Letters. By
these Books then I observed, first, that every one of their Characters,
whether consisting of more or fewer strokes or marks, were comprised
within a certain square space, which is proportion'd according to the
bigness of the size or manner of Writing, they design there to make
use of, not that the whole Square is filled with every Character, but
that no part of that Character does exceed the limits of that Square,
so that tho' the Character have but one stroak, it takes as much room
in the line as another that hath 20 or 30 several Marks, so that their
Characters are most exactly ranged in Rank and File, not unlike our
Numbers in Arithmetick.
Notwithstanding which I find they do vary the bigness of the Character
upon several Occasions, as in the Titles of Books, in the Titles of
the Chapters or Sections, in the Comments, Explications or Notes, and
upon several other occasions of variety, which they do at Pleasure
with their Pencil, as we use variety of Letters in the Printing of a
Book. The Titles of Books are generally in very large Characters, 6 or
8 times as big as those of the Book, the explication Notes ½ of the
bigness, the Contents usually twice as big, and the like variety on
several other occasions. I have met with also three several kinds of
Characters, the most usual is the fixed or set square form. The second
sort is the running Hand, in which the orders of the Courts are written
by their Secretaries, of which I have seen 3 or 4 kinds, in which the
Pencil is never taken off, till the whole Character be finished, and
sometimes two or three are all written without break. The third seems
to be somewhat like the flourishing great Letters, used by Scriveners
at the beginning of Deeds, and by the _Germans_ in the beginning of
Chapters and Sections. They are compounded of the same strokes as the
set Character, but modulated and shaped a little otherwise to make them
appear the more beautiful and regular. A Specimen of each of these
three are in the Plate. This third is made use of for Epitaphs, and
other Inscriptions on Buildings or Monuments. These three sorts I may
call the three general kinds of Writing, but there is to be found an
almost infinite variety of forms which Men use. This will be the more
easie to be believed, when we consider that the Printed Characters
are exactly the same with the Written, insomuch that every variety in
each stroke, line or point, that is or can be made with the Pencil,
is perfectly expressed in the Impression, and the Form, Mode, or
Hand, as we call it, of every Writer is exhibited so curiously, that
I think it hardly possible to be performed after the way of wooden
Cuts, as Authors affirm it is, but must be done after the method of our
Copper Cuts, Printed by a Roll-press, which the way of expressing the
Running or Court-Hand, does, I conceive, most evidently demonstrate,
and from divers circumstances, I could evidently make appear from the
Book it self, which I cannot so well express in Writing. Their Paper
is generally very thin and fine, and very transparent, but brown, so
that whatever is Written or Printed on it, is almost as legible on
the back, as on the foreside, which is of great use in the cutting of
their Stamps. And thence they never Write or Print on both sides of
the same Leaf, but only on one, and to make the Leaf appear Printed on
both sides, they double the Sheet with the Printed sides outwards, and
putting the folded part forward, they Sew, Bind, or Stitch together,
all these Sheets with the cut Edges, and upon whole Sheets instead of
single Leaves; just in the same manner as the Plate annexed to this
Discourse is Printed. They begin the Book on the top of the right Hand
side of the Page that is next the right Hand, and they read downwards
to the bottom, then begin the next Line towards the left Hand at the
top, and so read to the bottom, and so proceed to the end of the Book.
But this I suppose not to be the primitive or first way of Writing or
Reading. The Title of the Book is set first upon a whole Leaf, usually
of a thicker Paper, and some Title is likewise Written upon the folding
or edge of every Sheet, where is set also the Number of the Book, and
the Number of the Sheet, half of which appears on one side, and half on
the other side of the fold.
As to the Character it self, (I find by all the Books and Writings
I have yet met with of that kind) that each of them is made up of a
certain number of Strokes, Lines or Marks, which are very distinct
from each other in their shape and position, and by reason that these
are single Strokes, and as I conceive uncompounded, I think they may
be called the Letters, Elements or Particles, out of which the more
compounded Characters are constructed or contexed. These are the first
kind of which there are but a very few, and I think those I have
described in the thirteenth Line of the Plate are all.
Two, three, four, or more of these joined together in a certain order
and contexture (in the doing of which there is a great Regularity and
Order observed, which is not varied from, and all within the regular
square Space) I conceive do make Syllables or primitive radical
Characters, each of which have a primitive, single or distinct Notion
or Signification as well as Sound, which is made much use of in the
more compounded Characters or Words. Of this kind I take the Figures
of the Numbers to be: If at least they are not single Letters like the
way of expressing Numbers in the _Hebrew_, _Greek_, _Arabick_, &c.
Languages, for though there may be two or three of the single strokes
joyned together into a compound Character, it hinders not, but that
it may still signify a Letter, as in the _Greek_ ΛΑ.Δ.Ι.Γ.Π.Γ. In
the Runick; where every Letter hath one upright Line and some other
additional Marks: In the _Roman_ I.L.F.E.O.Q.V.Y: Or it may signify a
Syllable as in the _Æthiopick_, and in the _Hanscret_, and _Sunscrit_
Languages and Characters: The first of which being the _Brackmans_
Character we find in _P. Kircher_'s _China Illustrata_, described by
_P. Roth_ who studied it seven Years; and the second (being a literal
Character used over all _India_ by the Merchants) I have seen in a
Transcript, brought lately out of _India_ by a very Worthy Gentleman
who lived there many Years, and had the Curiosity to cause to be
Transcribed and Translated also into English, a Dictionary of their
Language in their own Character: who did me the favour to let me peruse
it.
In which Characters or ways of Writing a Vowel is always join'd with a
Consonant into one compound Character to make it effable. And then the
single Strokes may be taken for single ineffable Letters as are the
Consonants, and the composition of two or three (of which one at least
may be a Vowel) will make Syllables.
Of this kind, there are not so many in the whole _Chinese_ Character,
but that it will be easie enough to assign each a proper Monosyllable
which shall only have 1 or 2 Consonants, and one or two Vowels; that
is, the Consonants together, and not separate, either both behind the
Vowel or Vowels, if it be a Diphthong or both after it or them.
Of this kind, I understand there are about 500, probably 8×8×8, or 512.
I could enumerate a great many, and give you also the Name or Words
by which they are pronounced as also their signification, but (as I
said before) first, I conceive the present _Chinese_ Language to have
no affinity at all with the Character, the true primitive, or first
Language, or Pronunciation of it, having been lost. And secondly, I
want some further help to make a full and compleat Discovery: What I
have learn'd from the Book of _Fohi_ I shall give the next opportunity;
which will explain the reason of the multiplication of 8. and the order
and method of places in the Letter or Word square.
The third sort of Characters, is a decompounded sort being made
up of two, three or more of those of the second kind, diminish'd
proportionably in their size, either as to their length, or breadth,
or both, from what they have in the same Writing when they are single
and fill up the whole Letter square or Words square. For there being
several of them to be crouded together within the same square,
according as there are more in number, so they are always more squeezed
together. In this decompound sort, there is a regular Order observed in
the placing of the several Characters of the 2d sort; there being some
that are always on the left side, some always on the right, some at
the top, some at the bottom. Of which I doubt not but that they have a
certain regular Method, which had we Dictionaries explained, would be
easie enough to be discovered.
This method alone of crouding together all the Characters (how many
soever go to make up the decompounded Character) into one square (which
is of the same size for the most Simple and for the most Compound)
seems to be the great singularity, by which the _Chinese_ Characters
differ from those of all the rest of the World. And this I conceive has
been the reason why all People, and possibly even the very _Chinese_
themselves have, and do believe it to be a real and not a literal
Character: For if the primitive Language, or pronunciation of the
Characters be lost (as I conceive it is) and that the disposition,
order, method, texture, or manner of placing the more simple in the
more compound Characters be also lost, forgotten, or not understood;
then the whole Characters becomes a real and not a literal Character:
And an immethodical one to such as want a method, that must be learned
by rote, and depend wholly upon the strength of the Memory to retain
it. But I conceive it might be at first either a literal Character, and
so the whole square Character was composed of so many distinct Letters
or Syllables, which composed the Word signified thereby; and so there
might be a regular Order of placing these Letters in the Character,
that is, that the whole square being divided into so many parts, there
was a Rule which was the first, second, third and fourth place: so
that there being placed in those the several Letters that made up the
Word, according to the order they had in the Word, it was easie by that
Rule to Decipher the said Character, and thence to find the Word and
the Signification, as regularly as if the Letters had been written one
after another, as most other literal Characters we know are at this Day
written.
Or Secondly, it might be a real Character consisting of divers Marks
or Letters, that expressed so many simple Notions, several of which
joined together might make up the more compounded Characters, of
which I have added some Examples in the Plate, which may be also made
literal and pronounceable, tho' that consideration were not made use
of, when they were first invented. What things I have observed in my
_Chinese_ Books that seem to respect this Method, I will give more
particulars of by the next opportunity, by Printing a Specimen of
the Book _Ye-kim_ which explicated by these Notions will I conceive
appear more intelligible, than by the Accounts we find given of it
by the _Chinese_ Commentators, and those that have Translated them
into _Latin_, who seem not to have understood the true design thereof:
For both the _Chinese_ and _European_ Commentators assert it to be a
Conjuring Book, or a Book to tell Fortunes by, and to be made use of
by the _Chinese_ for that purpose; whereas by the small Specimen I
have seen of it, I conceive it to contain the whole Ground, Rule or
Grammar, of their Character, Language and Philosophy, and that by the
understanding of it, the Foundation and Rule of their Language and
Character may be without much difficulty Deciphered and Understood.
The present use of this Character, I conceive to be differing from what
it was at first, both as to the position of Writing and Reading it, and
as to the Expression and Pronunciation thereof.
For the way of Writing and Reading it, I conceive might at first be
exactly the same with that of the _Greeks_, _Romans_, _English_, and
all other _European_ Nations, and also the _Æthiopick_ and _Coptick_.
That is, they began at the top of the Page towards the left Hand, and
so proceeded towards the right in the _Horizontal_ Line to the end of
it, and then began at the left end of the next Line under the first
and proceeded with that in the same manner, and so with the next under
that and all the remaining. Continuing to Write the Words of the Line
towards the right Hand, and the Lines of the Page one under another
till the whole Discourse were compleated, joyning Leaf to Leaf one
under another, after the same manner as the Rouls are at present Writ,
and as the _Volumina_ were of the Ancients. And to make the parts of
the Volume to be the more easily to be come at, without the trouble of
rolling and unrolling as the Ancient _Romans_ did, and we do with our
Rouls, they contrived to fold them, like the folds of a Fan, forwards
and backward: And so stitching them together, that the Written sides
might lie outwards, and open freely one from another, and the fair
sides might meet together, it came to make the present form of their
Book, which being laid as we generally place our Books before us, they
seem to begin at the top of the Page on the right Hand, and to proceed
to the bottom, and then at the top of the next Line towards the left
Hand, and descend as in the former; proceeding in this order with
all the rest, which way must needs be very inconvenient for Writing,
however they may use their Pencil differing from our Pen. Though there
be a way of Writing from the top to the bottom of the Page, which is
very convenient for Writing the _Syriack_, as also for Writing _Latin_,
_English_, or _Greek_, where the Writing is to be used for cutting the
Stamps of Wood, or graving of Copper Plates with the same Character for
Printing, in which Cases the Letters must be written backwards.
Secondly, as to the Pronunciation of this Character, by the Court
Language, or by any other now used, I conceive it to be wholly
differing from that of a literal Character, that is from being
pronounced or spoken according to the Marks or Figures thereof,
whether they be simple or compounded, and made up of simple Characters
(though there are some Instances of affinity in Characters and Words.)
The reason of which differing pronunciation I conceive may have
proceeded, partly from the loss of the primitive Language, for which it
was made, partly from a most inconvenient affection of Monosyllabical
Words in this Court Language, to help the Poverty of which, they are
fain to make one Syllable to signifie many differing Notions, to do
which they have introduced a kind of Musical toning or accenting of
each of them, and not single but compound of two or three Tones to each
signification of every one of these Monosyllables: Partly from the
using of this way of Writing, by divers Nations of differing Languages,
who minding only the Figure and Signification, read it into their own
Mother Tongues, as we in _Europe_ do Arithmetical Figures: And partly,
also from the omission of most Grammatical Distinctions, the same
Character serving for Substantive and Adjective, Singular and Plural,
in all Cases, (save only they have some Characters for Particles, as
_of_ and _to_ in English) for the Verb in all Tenses, and Numbers,
_&c._ for the abstract and the concrete Signification, and for divers
Metaphorical; if at least the Interpretation I have met with in the
Books I have perused be exact: Partly, also from the _Syntaxis_ of
them, it being necessary to consider the whole Sentence, to discover
which part of Speech each Character is of, in that Sentence, wherein
the Order and Positions of the Characters to one another, for which
they have Rules, hath its signification: And lastly, from the loss of
the very Notion of a literal Character, whence for the expressing of
proper Names, they are fain to make use of several Characters, whose
Sounds or Words come nearest to the Sounds of the Syllables of that
Name, as in the Plate _tam. jo, van_, for _Adam. Jovan_.