Al.rilAlSKT. 



AI.l'HAHKT. 



every direction, above, Mow, and around us. A doaf and dumb 

 savage who should wish to depict to friend n object upon the mad 

 must firat catch the attention of hu companion by the sense of touch, 

 just at in modem manufactories where the speaking-pipe is used, a 

 bell U atUched to H, the ringing of which first direcU the party who 

 U to be addressed to apply hi* ear to the other extremity of the pipe. 

 The mult of a comparison then between then two forma of language 

 may, perhaps, be fairly stated thus. The language of pictorial symbols 

 is more easily invented and understood at first. The other, when once 

 invented and understood, is bettor adapted for the ordinary uses of 

 life. The difficulty of invention, however, is a difficulty that occurs 

 but once ; the difficulties in the after use of the language, such as they 

 are, never cease. In the last place, sound travels without the aid of 

 light. It is therefore natural to conceive that oral language wonM 

 approach a comparatively perfect form with much greater rapidity 

 than that which addreatea itself to the eye. At the same time the two 

 forms of language might well be used to some extent simultaneously, 

 as indeed is even now nut {infrequently the case gesture being called 

 in aid. 



But the time would soon come when it would be desirable to record 

 for a shorter or longer time the acto and thoughts and commands and 

 duties of man ; and here the language of the voice would utterly fail, 

 while the other might ensure a continuance of existence, depending 

 upon the nature of the material on which the representation might be 

 made. In lees than a second the Hound of the human voice dies away, 

 but the picture even on the sea-sand lasts until the next tide washes it 

 away ; the waxen tablet would preserve its characters long enough for 

 the purposes of epistolary communication ; the papyrus, the cloth of 

 linen and cotton, the Kirk of trees, the harder woods, the skim of 

 animals, would retain the impressions upon them for centuries; and 

 lastly, bricks, and atone, and metal, under favourable circumstances, 

 might convey their records to a posterity of many thousand years. 

 Now, to represent visible actions and visible object* would, as we have 

 already stated, be an easy affair, and the signs for abstract qualities 

 might be obtained, as in sounds, upon the principle of association. 

 But instead of forming a new series of associations, which would not 

 easily become generally intelligible, it would no doubt lie found more 

 convenient occasionally to turn to account the already existing language 

 of sound. A few examples may perhaps explain our meaning. Visible 

 objects, in the first place, may be directly represented. No pictorial 

 symbol of an o.r can so readily convey that notion to the mind as the 

 representation of the animal itself, or, in order to save time, that purl 

 of the animal which is most characteristic of it might, and would, be 

 selected; in the present case we should propose the brad of the 

 animal with its horns. To signify a visible action, such OH liijlitiu;i, we 

 should, perhaps, avail ourselves of the fat, as the natural organ for that 

 purpose belonging to man, following therein the same direct principle 

 of association which has formed the Latin word puynarc, to fight, from 

 the clement pugnut, or rather pa;/, a fist. Jn this way we should form 

 a series of symbols altogether independent of the language of sound ; 

 but we repeat, it would often be more convenient to make the language 

 of visible signs in part dependent upon the oral symbols. This may be 

 most simply effected by what is in fact a species of punning : If, for 

 instance, a symbol were required of an Englishman for the abstract 

 notion of friendship, he might employ the two separate signs for a 

 friend and a ihip ; the first of which we will suppose to be ftro hands 

 tltuped, the other, of course, a hull trith a matt and enough riyyiiiii to 

 distinguish it from other objects. We should thus have two pictorial 

 symbols, which would separately excite in the mind first the n-Jlmi*. 

 and then the oral names of friend and ihip, and the combinations of 

 these sounds would recall that new notion, for which the articulate 

 sounds of the word frienildiip are already the conventional symbol. 

 Books of amusement for children, as is well known, have been formed 

 upon this principle; for example, such a sentence as / fair a boy 

 tfaUote a yuoieberri/, might be representented by uniting the picture's 

 of an eye, a tate, a buy, H /'*>*, and a brrry. 



So far we have only considered what the origin of written language 

 might have been. The records still existing of the Egyptians have 

 enabled modern discoverers to deduce with an evidence 

 approaching to certainty what it actually was. The hieroglyphic 

 characters of Kgypl boar UJK.II the very face of then, decided 'proof 

 that they are in their origin pi, t.. Hal emblems; and th.it they eon 

 stitute a language, appear* incontn.vcrtibly from the triple Kosetta 

 inscription, the Greek version of which expressly affirms, that the 

 decree contained in the inscription was ordered to be written in three 

 different characters ; the sacred letters, the letters of the country, an.) 

 the Greek. Tin- second of them- classes lias been called tin- nirWw/, 

 from the Greek term (ryxwpioi) signifying </ ilir rnuntri/, 

 demetif (Srutoruios) that is, of the j>eai>le. Hut although the hierogly- 

 l-hir characters may be for the most part pictorial emblems used 

 directly for the objects which they represent, or metaphorically for 

 other associated ideas, it has been established by most satisfactory 

 evidence, that they were also in some cases representatives of articulate 

 sound, not. howvrtr, of the whole oral name belonging to their original 

 object, but solely of the initial l. : tt*r, or perhaps syllable. This use of 

 the sacred pictorial characters as symbols of sound was perhapa origi- 

 nally confined to the expression of proper names. Such, for instance, 

 is their use Jn the hieroglyphic division of the Kowtta inscription for 



the name of Ptolemy and in another inscription for that of Cleopatra. 

 Thus the former name might be expressed hiorogtyphically in our own 

 language by the picture- .1 Inp, an otd, a torn, and a motor. 



It should be added, however, that when the sacred symbols are used 

 with this phonetic or vocal power for royal names, they are inch 

 an oral ring or cartouche. The enchorial character aeema at first to 

 bear little or no resemblance to the hieroglyphic ; but a comparison of 

 various manuscripts that have been found in mummies, containing 

 parallel passages in tin- two characters, has led to the certain con- 

 clusion that the enchorial themselves have arisen from the degradation 

 or corruption of the sacred pictorial characters. Dr. Young, in his 



'it article on Egypt, in the Supplement to the I 

 Britannica,' has given specimens which are perfectly suffici. 

 establish the connection. The subject, however, of Egyptian \ 

 in its different forms requires an investigation of so many details, 

 that we muat refer our readers to HIEROGLYPHICS. We must here be 

 satisfied with stating what appears to us to be a safe conclusion, that a 

 language originally hieroglyphic, would naturally wear away until the 

 characters lost nearly all trace of their original formation on the one 

 hand, and became eventually the mere representatives of phonetic 

 powers, first perhaps as syllables, afterwards as mere letters. 



The Hebrew alphabet again affords double evidence of the same 

 nature. The names of the letters, it is weU known, are also the names 

 of material objects, some of the very objects in fact, which would be well 

 adapted to pictorial representation. A part of these names, it is true, 

 are obsolete in the Hebrew language as at present known, that 

 authority for their meaning is solely traditional, as they are not found 

 in the existing writings of the language; but this fact, while it 

 affords evidence that the names are not the result of forgery, is 

 precisely what must necessarily have occurred in those changes to 

 which all language is exposed in the long course of ages. We have 

 given a table with the Hebrew names of the letters, which it will be 

 seen have been borrowed, with slight changes, for many other alphabets. 

 Rut it will be objected that in fact the letters, whatever they may be 

 called, bear no pictorial resemblance to the objects which it is pretended 

 they represent. If the Hebrew characters alone be considered, this 

 objection will not be unreasonable. But there is strong reason for 

 believing that the present Hebrew characters are of comparatively 

 modern date, and if so, there is nothing very violent in th- *upp 

 that they may have been derived by degradation from an earlier 

 pictorial form, as the enchorial of the Egyptians, it i 'ishcd. 



arose from the corruption of their hieroglyphic!-. Hut not to icly too 

 strongly upon theory, we may appeal to what are virtually / 

 alphabets, though called I'henician and Samaritan. In 1'Iate I. -,.]. -j lm 

 Nos. 2, 8, 4, 5, the reader will see specimens of these alphabet.". The 

 first two are taken from Boeckh's Inscriptions,' pp. .T_':t. .VJ7. and from 

 the coins given by Mionnet. The Samaritan characters arc taken 

 solely from Mionnet. Now among these, we find a few at least, which, 

 even to the sober minded, bear considerable resemblance to the natural 

 objects. The first letter in these alphabets, aleph, it is well known 

 means an ox ; indeed, the terms i\Kf>ai, clephtu, elephant, of the Greek, 

 Latin, and English languages, seem to be derived from this I! 

 name. If in Syria the name aleph was extended to tin < /-/i/miit. just as 

 the Greeks applied their term crocodile, properly a li:anl. to the 

 monster of the Nile when the word came to the Western nations in 

 connection with the < '/A/J. the original sense would be readily lost 

 in the secondary. The Romans too called the same animal lion Luaai, 

 the Lucanian Ox. We have already stated that the most simple mode 

 of representing an ox would be by a picture of its head and horns, and 

 if any one will turn the engraving of our second Phenician character, 

 so as to have the angular point downwards, he will aee a very fair 

 pioture of an ox's head, with its two horns and ears into the bargain. 

 Those who are determined to take nothing for a representative of an 

 ox that has not a body, four legs and a tail, may be asked to account 

 for the astronomical figure of Tattrut in the zodiac. 



Again, the Hebrew name for the letter m was mem, and this also was 

 the name for water. Now a very ordinary symliol for water U a zig- 

 zag line, which is no doubt intended to imitate undulation or rippling. 

 We tind this symbol for Ai/iuiriim in the zodiac, and we find it 

 Greek manuscripts, both for 6a\atT<ra the sea, and iiSwp water, the 

 former word having the symbol inclosed in a large circle or 1/nt.i, tin- 

 latter having its aspirate duly placed above the waving line. Indeed 

 every boy in his first attempt to draw water, represents it by a zigzag 

 line. But before we point out in the written characters what we look 

 upon as representing the wave, or (to lie candid) as being the corrupted 

 remains of what once was a wave, we must, premise a few wo- 

 the characters of the older Wi-tcrn languages. We have already 

 asserted -mi belief, that the Hebrew characters now used are of more 

 form than those in the I'lienician and Samaritan alphabets : we 

 will now go one step farther, and express our opinion, that in many of 

 the characters, the Greek alphabet and the Etruscan (which, notwith- 

 standing its independent name, is a mere offset from the Greek) gene- 

 rally present a more accurate picture of the original letters than those 

 of the three former alphabet*!. That all these alphabets are identical 

 in their origin, we will presently show in more detail. It is enough 

 here to rely ii|>oii the evidence of Herodotus (v. 68), who expressly 

 affirms (and he speaks from his personal examination) that the Ionian* 

 received their characters from the Phenieiatn. and that tic 



