VOL. LIX.] PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS. 687 



they had formed it. 2. The state of the question is expressed as follows: ' Mr. 

 Needham has observed, that the symbols or hieroglyphical characters of the Isis 

 of Turin, appear like several Chinese characters, such as they are found in the 

 great dictionary Tching, tsee, tong : on which be conjectures, l st, that the 

 Chinese characters are the same in many respects as the hieroglyphics of Egypt; 

 and 2dly, that one may be able to discover the sense of hieroglyphics by the com- 

 parative and appropriated signification of the Chinese characters.' 



3. The author having mentioned the difficulty of rendering himself intelligible 

 to the literati of Europe, for want of a certain acquaintance with proofs of fact 

 and history, criticism and grammar, proceeds to the historical detail, being the 

 subject he chiefly enlarged on. He notes the enthusiasm of Vossius for the an- 

 tiquity of the Chinese, and the rage of Renaudot against it; and then declares 

 his own opinion, that they have subsisted as a nation, from the time of the great 

 emigration which followed the confusion of tongues. He dates the antiquity of 

 Egypt from the same epoch, and gives reasons, particularly in the notes, for the 

 probability of their different routes. He inquires into the use of writing; and de- 

 clares his opinion, that it was already established in the antediluvian world; and 

 might be derived in common to the two nations in question. He makes light of 

 any supposed variation of it, at the confusion of tongues : and wishes that Mr. 

 Needham had expressed his own opinion concerning the commencement of it. 

 He affirms, that there is not the least mark or trace now remaining of any sub- 

 sequent communication between the Chinese and Egyptians. But whether our 

 author's opinion of the origin of writing, or the contrary one, of each nation 

 having invented its own, be adopted ; he candidly owns, that any connection 

 between the two modes of writing, is hardly discernible at this day. He affirms, 

 that the Chinese language is one of the most ancient; and perhaps the only one 

 which has been spoken without interruption; and is yet a living language ; the 

 small number and the shortness of its words having so guarded it from changes, 

 that they could scarcely extend further than the pronunciation. 



They distinguish in the Chinese language, 1st, the Kou-ouen, the language 

 of the book called the King, and other books written in this taste. The ha- 

 rangues of the Chou-king, and the songs of the Chi-king, prove that it was 

 spoken formerly. It is exceedingly laconic. 2dly, The Ouen-tchang, the lan- 

 guage of relevees, elevated compositions, and books. This language, excepting 

 some proverbs, axioms, and forms of compliment, is no longer used in speaking. 

 3dly, The Kouan-hoa, the language of men in office. This is the only language 

 spoken at court, and in good company, and used in books; and this alone runs 

 through the empire. 4thly, The Hiang-tan, patois or provincial jargon; of 

 which, each province and town, and almost every village has its own. Notwith- 

 standing these varieties, the Chinese tongue counts but about 330 words. Hence 



