attribute the invention of it to some very early age, and some country
of the east; but they do not pretend to designate precisely either the
time or the place. They say, farther, that Cadmus introduced letters
from Phenicia into Greece, if we may credit the Parisian Chronicle, B.
C. 1519, that is, forty-five years after the death of Moses. Anticlides
asserts, and attempts to prove, that letters were invented in Egypt
fifteen years before Phoroneus, the most ancient king of Greece; that
is, four hundred and nine years after the deluge, and in the one hundred
and seventeenth year of Abraham. On this it may be remarked that they
might have been introduced into Egypt at this time, but they had been
previously invented by the Phenicians. Epigenes, who, in the estimation
of Pliny, is weighty authority, informs us that observations, made upon
the heavenly bodies for seven hundred and twenty years at Babylon, were
written down upon baked tiles; but Berosus and Critodemus, also referred
to by Pliny, make the number of years four hundred and eighty. Pliny
from these statements draws the conclusion that the use of letters, as
he expresses it, must have been eternal, that is, beyond all records.
Simplicius, who lived in the fifth century, states, on the authority of
Porphyry, an acute historian, that Callisthenes, the companion of
Alexander, found at Babylon a record of observations on the heavenly
bodies for one thousand nine hundred and three years. Of course the
record must have been begun B. C. 2234, that is, the eighty-ninth year
of Abraham. This statement receives some confirmation from the fact that
the month of March is called Adar in the Chaldaic dialect; and at the
time mentioned, namely, the eighty-ninth year of Abraham, the sun,
during the whole month of March, was in the sign of the zodiac called
Aries, or the Ram. The word Adar means the same with Aries. But, as
letters would be unquestionably first used for the purposes of general
intercourse, they must have been known long before they were employed to
transmit the motions of the stars. Of this we have an evidence in the
bill of sale, which, as we have reason to suppose from the expressions
used in Gen. xxiii, 20, was given to Abraham by the sons of Heth. Hence
it is not at all wonderful that books and writings are spoken of in the
time of Moses, as if well known, Exodus xvii, 14; xxiv, 4; xxviii, 9–11;
xxxii, 32; xxxiv, 27, 28; Numbers xxxiii, 2; Deut. xxvii, 8. Nor is it a
matter of surprise that long before his time there had been public
scribes, who kept written genealogies: they were called by the Hebrews
שוטרים, Exod. v, 14; Deut. xx, 5–9. Even in the time of Jacob, seals,
upon which names are engraved in the east, were in use, Gen. xxxviii,
18; xii, 42; which is another probable testimony to the great antiquity
of letters.
Letters, which had thus become known at the earliest period, were
communicated by means of the Phenician merchants and colonies, and
subsequently by Egyptian emigrants, through all the east and the west. A
strong evidence of this is to be found in the different alphabets
themselves, which betray by their resemblance a common origin. That the
posterity of the Hebrew patriarchs preserved a knowledge of alphabetical
writing during their abode in Egypt, where essentially the same alphabet
was in use, is evident from the fact, that the Hebrews while remaining
there always had public genealogists. The law, also, was ordered to be
inscribed on stones; a fact which implies a knowledge of alphabetical
writing. The writing thus engraven upon stones is designated by its
appropriate name, namely, חרות, Exodus xxxii, 16, 32. Not a few of the
Hebrews might be unable to read and write, Judges viii, 14; but those
who were capable of writing wrote for others, when necessary. Such
persons were commonly priests, who, as they do to this day in the east,
bear an inkhorn in their girdle, Ezek. x, 2, 3, 11. In the inkhorn were
the materials for writing, and a knife for sharpening the pen, Jer.
xxxvi, 23. The rich and noble had scribes of their own, and readers
also; whence there is more frequent mention made of hearing than of
reading, 1 Kings iv, 3; 2 Kings xii, 10; Isa. xxix, 18; Jer. xxxvi, 4;
Rom. ii, 13; James v, 11; Rev. i, 3. The scribes took youth under their
care, who learned from them the art of writing. Some of the scribes seem
to have held public schools for instruction; some of which, under the
care of Samuel and other prophets, became in time quite illustrious, and
were called the schools of the prophets, 1 Sam. xix, 16, &c; 2 Kings ii,
3, 5; iv, 38; vi, 1. The disciples in these schools were not children or
boys, but young men, who inhabited separate edifices, as is the case in
the Persian academies. They were taught music and singing, and without
doubt writing also, the Mosaic law and poetry. They were denominated, in
reference to their instructers, the sons of the prophets; teachers and
prophets being sometimes called fathers. After the captivity there were
schools for instruction either near the synagogues or in them.
The materials and instruments of writing were, 1. The leaves of trees.
2. The bark of trees, from which, in the process of time, a sort of
paper was manufactured. 3. A table of wood, πίναξ, לוח, Deut. ix, 9;
Ezek. xxxvii, 5; Luke i, 63. In the east, these tables were not covered
with wax as they were in the west; or at any rate very rarely so. 4.
Linen was first used for the object in question at Rome. Linen books are
mentioned by Livy. Cotton cloth also, which was used for the bandages of
Egyptian mummies, and inscribed with hieroglyphics, was one of the
materials for writing upon. 5. The paper made from the reed papyrus,
which, as Pliny has shown, was used before the Trojan war. 6. The skins
of various animals; but they were poorly prepared for the purpose, until
some improved methods of manufacture were invented at Pergamus, during
the reign of Eumenes, about B. C. 300. Hence the skins of animals,
prepared for writing, are called in Latin _pergamena_, in English
parchment, to this day, from the city Pergamus. They are sometimes
denominated in Greek, μεμβράνα, 2 Tim. iv, 13. 7. Tables of lead, עפרת,
Job xix, 24. 8. Tables of brass, δέλτοι χαλκαὶ. Of all the materials,
brass was considered among the most durable, and was employed for those
inscriptions which were designed to last the longest, 1 Macc. viii, 22;
xiv, 20–27. 9. Stones or rocks, upon which public laws, &c, were
written. Sometimes the letters engraved were filled up with lime, Exod.
xxiv, 12; xxxi, 18; xxxii, 19; xxxiv, 1; Deut. xxvii, 1–9; Joshua viii,
32; Job xix, 24. 10. Tiles. The inscriptions were made upon the tiles
first, and afterward they were baked in the fire. They are yet to be
found in the ruins of Babylon; others of later origin are to be found in
many countries in the east. 11. The sand of the earth, in which the
children in India to this day learn the art of writing, and in which
Archimedes himself delineated his mathematical figures, John viii, 1–8.
If in Ezekiel iii, 1, and in Revelation x, 9, we are informed that books
were eaten, we must remember that the descriptions are figurative, and
that they were eaten in vision; and consequently we are not at liberty
to draw the conclusion from these passages, that any substance was used
as materials for writing upon, which was at the same time used for food.
The representations alluded to are symbolic, introduced to denote a
communication or revelation from God.
As to the instruments used in writing, when it was necessary to write
upon hard materials, as tables of stone and brass, the style was made of
iron, and sometimes tipped with diamond, Jer. xvii. 1. The letters were
formed upon tablets of wood, (when they were covered with wax,) with a
style sharpened at one end, broad and smooth at the other; by means of
which the letters, when badly written, might be rubbed out and the wax
smoothed down. 2. Wax, however, was but rarely used for the purpose of
covering writing tables in warm regions. When this was not the case, the
letters were painted on the wood with black tincture or ink. 3. On
linen, cotton cloth, paper, skins, and parchment, the letters were
painted with a very small brush, afterward with a reed, which was split.
The orientals use this elegant instrument to the present day instead of
a pen. _Ink_, called דיו, is spoken of in Num. v, 23, as well known and
common, Jer. xxxvi, 18, and was prepared in various ways, which are
related by Pliny. The most simple, and consequently the most ancient,
method of preparation was a mixture of water with coals broken to
pieces, or with soot, with an addition of gum. The ancients used other
tinctures also; particularly, if we may credit Cicero and Persius, the
ink extracted from the cuttle fish, although their assertion is in
opposition to Pliny. The Hebrews went so far as to write their sacred
books in gold, as we may learn from Josephus compared with Pliny.
Hieroglyphics, that is, sacred sculptures or engravings, received that
appellation, because it was once, and indeed till very lately, thought,
that they were used only to express, in a manner hidden from the vulgar,
what was exclusively religious; and which it was thought proper to
conceal from all but the learned. The fact, however, is, that the
hieroglyphic was a kind of picture writing, which passed through various
modifications, and was applied alike to sacred and to civil purposes; to
the emblazonment of the attributes of idols, the exploits of warriors,
and the events of illustrious history. Rudiments of the same art have
been found among almost all savages. Among the semi-civilized Mexicans
history was pictorial: and in Ceylon and Continental India the same
vehicle of instruction is made use of on the walls of their temples, to
convey moral lessons, or to indicate the character and exploits of their
deities. In Egypt, however, the art was carried into a more perfect
system, and was more ostensibly set before the public eye on the massive
and almost eternal monuments which cover the country. There, too, it
ascends to ages of the world with which the Scriptures have made us
familiar, and stands associated with royal dynasties, and vicissitudes
of conquest, more intimately blended with that stream of civil history,
along the margin of which European education conducts us. These mystic
characters have acquired an adventitious interest also, from the
circumstance that the key to them was for so many ages lost. This
knowledge perished among that people themselves, the records of whose
kings and conquests lay hid under the inexplicable symbol, or the
fanciful representation of letters and sounds which were still familiar
to the lips of those to whom the signs had become wholly unmeaning. Age
after age they were gazed at by the curious; conjectures respecting
their nature and use were offered by the learned, some absurd and some
approaching the truth, but all failing to throw light upon a mystery,
which at length was surrendered, by common consent, to the receptacle of
lost and irrecoverable knowledge. Whether the hieroglyphics were symbols
only, or words, or picturesque alphabetical characters, or expressed the
popular tongue, or one known only to the priests, were questions
answered at random by the prompt and dogmatic; and even the more modest
and probable solutions of the cautious had so little collateral evidence
to support them, that they led to no result. As to their intent, one
thought that they involved the mysteries of magic; another, that they
were a form of the Chinese language; a third, that they veiled the
doctrines of the true patriarchal religion; a fourth, that they
enveloped the dogmatic arcana of the Egyptian priesthood. The great
point, however, to be determined was, whether the hieroglyphics were the
signs of a language; that is, of the sounds of any language; and, if so,
whether the language was now known, or knowable, from books still
extant. Each of these points was of equal importance; for in vain would
it have been ascertained that these signs represented the sounds of a
tongue once spoken, if that tongue had perished from the earth. Clement
of Alexandria, who lived about the end of the second century, asserted
that the Egyptians had three modes of writing,--the epistolographic, or
common characters; the hieratic, or sacerdotal, employed chiefly by the
priesthood in writing books; and the hieroglyphic, used on public
monuments. The symbolical he again distributes into imitative, which
represent the plain figure of an object, as a circle to express the sun,
and a half circle the moon; tropical,--which have recourse to analogy
for the representation of the object; and enigmatical,--as “a serpent,
to signify the oblique course of the stars.” This writer could not so
accurately have expressed the truth of the case, unless he had known
much more than he has written; and we may presume, that if he had been
more liberal in his communications, the present age would not have had
the honour of throwing open the gate to this branch of ancient learning.
The notion which has generally prevailed, that by whatever rule the
hieroglyphics were composed, they were invented by the Egyptian priests
to conceal their wisdom from the vulgar, was combated by Bishop
Warburton, with his usual acuteness. According to him, the first kind of
hieroglyphics were mere pictures; because the most natural way of
communicating our conceptions by marks or figures was, to trace out the
images of things. But the hieroglyphics invented by the Egyptians were
an improvement on this rude and inconvenient essay toward writing; for
they contrived to make them both pictures and characters. He proceeds to
other observations, which have lost their interest in consequence of the
recent discoveries; but he argues conclusively, that hieroglyphics could
not, in a vast number of cases, have been resorted to for purposes of
secrecy, since they were employed to record openly and plainly their
laws, history, and all kinds of civil matters. This, as a general view,
has been proved to be correct; but still no key to the reading of these
characters was found. The figures of deities might, in many instances,
be deciphered by their attributes; other symbols were not difficult to
explain, as they spoke a universal language. Thus two hands, one holding
a bow, and another a shield, suggested a battle; an eye and a sceptre, a
monarch of intelligence and vigilance; a ship and a pilot, the governor
of a state if associated with a man, the ruler of the universe if
associated with a deity. A lion was a natural emblem of strength and
courage; a bullock, of agriculture; a horse, of liberty; a sphynx, of
subtlety. But still those hieroglyphics were in the greatest number
which appeared to represent letters; and many might prove, at the same
time, both emblematic and alphabetical. Approaches to the truth of the
case had been, indeed, made. Warburton, from an attentive perusal of
what Clemens Alexandrinus had said on the subject, had, in fact,
concluded, in a way highly creditable to his acuteness, that
hieroglyphics were a real written language, applicable to the purposes
of history and common life, as well as to those of religion; and that,
among the different sorts of hieroglyphics, the Egyptians possessed
those which were used phonetically, or alphabetically, as letters; but,
till recently, the means of following out this ingenious and correct
conjecture were wanting to the learned. The first effectual step was
taken by M. Quattermere, who proved, in his work _Sur la Langue et
Littérature de l’Egypte_, [Concerning the Language and Literature of
Egypt,] that the Coptic, a language of easy attainment, at least to a
considerable extent, was the language of the ancient Egyptians. The
second favouring circumstance of modern times was, the publication of
the researches made as to the monuments of Egypt by the literary men and
artists who accompanied the French expedition to that country. Previous
to this, the specimens which had been brought to Europe were few, and
the impressions and the fac similes of them incorrect. Some, too, were
imitations, and others spurious. In the works published in France after
this expedition, the representations of Egyptian monuments were
numerous; and the inscriptions were given with perfect exactness and
fidelity. Still, however, those would have remained as unintelligible as
the originals but for the discovery of the Rosetta stone, now among the
Egyptian antiquities in the gallery of the British museum. This stone
was dug up by the French, near Rosetta, and contained an inscription in
three sets of characters: one in hieroglyphics; a second in a sort of
running hand, called enchorial, that is, in the common characters of the
country; and a third in Greek. The latter appearing, from the
disposition of the whole, to be a translation of the enchorial
inscription, as that was of the hieroglyphic, the importance of this
stone was at once seen by the French savans; but by the fortune of war,
it was taken, with other valuables, by the British troops, and was sent
to this country. The Antiquarian Society had it immediately engraved;
and the fac similes, which were circulated through Europe attracted
great attention. Dr. Young has, however, the honour of being the
discoverer of the nature and use of the hieroglyphical inscription. M.
de Sacy, and more especially Mr. Ackerblad, a Danish gentleman, made
some progress in identifying the sense of several parts of the second
inscription, or that in demotic or enchorial characters, but made no
progress in the hieroglyphics; and it was left for British industry to
convert to permanent profit a monument which had been a useless, though
a glorious, monument of British valour. The inscription upon this
celebrated stone proved to be a decree of the Egyptian priests, solemnly
assembled in the temple, to record upon a monument, as a public
expression of their gratitude, all the events of the reign of Ptolemy
Epiphanes; his liberality to the temples and to the gods; his success
against his rebellious subjects; his clemency toward some of the
traitors; his measures against the fatal consequences of excessive
inundations of the Nile; and his munificence toward the college of the
priests, by remitting the arrears of several years’ payment of taxes. It
was an important circumstance, that the whole concludes by ordering that
this decree “shall be engraved on a hard stone in sacred characters, in
common characters, and in Greek.” By this it was ascertained that the
second and third inscriptions were translations of the first; and that
the second inscription was in the common character of the country. It
was this that led Ackerblad to the investigation of the enchorial text,
in order to discover its alphabet; in which he partially succeeded. His
labours were, however, for some time unnoticed; but in 1814, Dr. Young
published, in the Archæologia, an improvement on the alphabet of
Ackerblad, and a translation of the Egyptian inscription. Difficulties
of no ordinary kind, beside those arising from the mutilated state of
the stone, presented themselves to all who had applied to make out even
the second, or enchorial inscription.
“The method,” says the Marquis Spineto, “pursued by our learned men in
this Herculean task of deciphering the Rosetta stone, deserves to be
noticed; it may serve to give you a proper idea of the infinite labour
to which they have been obliged to submit; a labour which at first
seemed calculated to deter the most indefatigable scholar. Figure to
yourself, for a moment, the fashion introduced of writing the English
language with the omission of most of its vowels, and then suppose our
alphabet to be entirely lost or forgotten, a new mode of writing
introduced, letters totally different from those we use, and then
conceive what our labour would be, if, after the lapse of fifteen
hundred years, when the English language, by the operation of ages, and
the intercourse with foreigners, was much altered from what it now is,
we should be required, by the help of a Greek translation, to decipher a
bill of parliament written in this old, forgotten, and persecuted
alphabet, in every word of which we should find, and even this not
always, the regular number of consonants, but most of the vowels left
out. And yet this is precisely what our learned antiquarians have been
obliged to do. The Egyptians, like most of the orientals, left out many
of the vowels in writing. The enchorial, or demotic alphabet, which they
used, has been laid aside since the second or third century of our era.
From that time to this, that is, for nearly sixteen hundred years, the
Coptic alphabet has been used; and yet in this Coptic language, and in
these very enchorial or demotic characters, was engraved on the Rosetta
stone the inscription which they have deciphered.”
The steps of this interesting process are given by Dr. Young, in the
Supplement to the Encyclopædia Britannica. The substance is as follows:
“As the demotic characters showed something like the shape of letters,
it was shrewdly suspected that they might have been used as an alphabet.
By comparing, therefore, its different parts with each other, and with
the Greek, it was observed that the two groups in the fourth and
seventeenth lines of the Greek inscription, in which Alexander and
Alexandria occur, corresponded with two other groups in the second and
the tenth line of the demotic inscription. These two groups, therefore,
were considered as representing these two names, and thus not less than
seven characters, or letters, were ascertained. Again: it was observed
that a small group of character occurs very often in almost every line.
At first it was supposed that this group was either a termination, or
some very common particle; and after some words had been identified, it
was found to mean the conjunction _and_. It was then observed, that the
next remarkable collection of characters was repeated twenty-nine or
thirty times in the enchorial inscription; and nothing found to occur so
often in the Greek, except the word king, which with its compounds, is
repeated about thirty-seven times. A fourth assemblage of characters was
found fourteen times in the enchorial inscription, agreeing sufficiently
well in frequency with the name of Ptolemy, which occurs eleven times in
the Greek, and generally in passages corresponding to those of the
enchorial text, in their relative situation; and, by a similar
comparison, the name of Egypt was identified. Having thus obtained a
sufficient number of common points of subdivision, the next step was to
write the Greek text over the enchorial, in such a manner that the
passages ascertained should coincide as nearly as possible; taking,
however, a proper care to observe that the lines of the demotic or
enchorial inscription are written from right to left, while those of the
Greek run in a contrary direction from left to right. At first sight
this difficulty seemed very great; but it was conquered by proper
attention and practice; because, after some trouble, the division of the
several words and phrases plainly indicated the direction in which they
were to be read. Thus it was obvious that the intermediate parts of each
inscription stood then very near to the corresponding passages of the
other.”