Immagini della pagina
PDF
ePub

&c. conformable to what has been laid down concerning the use and application of the most early hieroglyphics. Others again of these books were written in symbols, particularly those two which the chanter had in care:—ὁ ᾠδὸς ἕν τι τῶν τῆς μουσικῆς ἐπιφερόμενος ΣΥΜΒΟΛΩΝ· τοῦτον φασὶ δύο βίβλους ανειληφέναι δεῖν ἐκ τοῦ 'Epuo. Here then we have all the three species of sacred writing, the hieroglyphic, the symbolic, and the hierogrammatic or sacerdotal; the last of which, as we hold, was by letters of an alphabet.

But an ALPHABET for secrecy, and consequently different from the vulgar, was a thing in use amongst the priesthood of almost all nations. Philo Biblius, in Eusebius, speaking of Sanchoniatho's history, tells us, that the author composed it by the assistance of certain records which he found in the temples written in AMMONEAN LETTERS, * not understood by the people: these Ammonean letters Bochart explains to be such as the priests used in sacred matters.† Diogenes Laertius informs us, from Thrasyllus, that Democritus wrote two books, the one of the sacred letters of the Babylonians, the other of the sacred letters of the city Meroë:‡ and concerning these last, Heliodorus saith, that the Ethiopians had two sorts of letters, the one called regal, the other vulgar; and that the regal resembled the sacerdotal characters of the Egyptians.§ Theodoret, speaking of the Grecian temples in general, says that they had certain forms of letters for their own use, called sacerdotal; || and Fourmont, and others, suppose that this general custom prevailed among the Hebrews also. Which opinion, a passage in Irenæus seems to support.**

And now we shall know how to deal with a strange passage++ of Manetho in Eusebius. This historian assures his reader, "that he took his information from pillars in the land of Seriad, inscribed by Thoyth the first Hermes, with hierographic letters in the sacred dialect; and translated, after the flood, out of the sacred dialect, into the

* Ὁ δὲ συμβαλὼν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἀδύτων εὑρεθεῖσιν ἀποκρύφοις ̓Αμμουνέων γράμμασι συγκειμένοις, ἃ δὲ οὐκ ἦν πᾶσι γνώριμα.-- Prap. Evang. lib. i. cap. 9. "Ammoneorum, i. e. Ammanim-Abenezra in Levit. xxvi. 30. Templa facta ad cultum Solis. Quod verissimum; Sol enim Hebræis est amma, unde amman templum Solis, quem solum Cæli Dominum crediderunt prisci Phoenices. Sanchoniathon, ToÛTOV yàp (Tày ἥλιον) θεὸν ἐνόμιζον μόνον οὐρανοῦ κύριον. Itaque hic praecipue cultus. Tamen, crescente superstitione, crediderim nomen Ammanim etiam ad alia delubra pertinuisse. Itaque litera Ammoneorum seu Ammanim sunt literæ templorum, literæ in sacris receptæ."- Geogr. Sacr. pars ii. lib. ii. cap. 17. ‡ See note SS, at the end of this book. § Ἐπελεγόμην τὴν ταινίαν γράμμασιν Αἰθιοπικοῖς, οὐ δημοτικοῖς, ἀλλὰ βασιλικοῖς ἐστιγμένην, ἃ δὴ τοῖς Αἰγυπτίων ΙΕΡΑΤΙΚΟΙΣ ΚΑΛΟΥΜΕΝΟΙΣ ὁμοιοῦνται. Lib. iv. || Ἐν τοῖς Ἑλληνικοῖς ναοῖς ἴδιοι τινὲς ἦσαν χαρακτήρες γραμμάτων, οὓς ΙΕΡΑΤΙΚΟΥΣ προσηγόρευον.-In Genes. Qu. 61. "Cette coûtume de la plupart des nations Orientales, d'avoir des Characteres Sacres, et des Characteres Profanes ou d'un usage plus vulgaire, étoit aussi chez les HEBREUX."Reflex. Crit. vol. i. p. 36. Antiquæ et primæ Hebræorum literæ, quæ SACERDOTALES nuncupatæ, decem quidem fuere numero.”—Adversus Hæret. lib. ii. cap. 41. + See STILLINGFLEET's Origines Sacræ, book i. chap. ii. § 11, and MR. SHUCKFORD'S "Connections," vol. i. ed. 2, p. 247.

[ocr errors]

Greek tongue, with HIEROGLYPHIC letters, and deposited in volumes by Agathodæmon, the second Hermes, father of Tat, in the Adyta of the Egyptian temples." The original is in these words: 'Ex Tw Μανεθῶ τοῦ Σεβεννύτου, ὃς ἐπὶ Πτολεμαίου τοῦ Φιλαδέλφου ἀρχιερεὺς τῶν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἰδώλων, χρηματίσας ἐκ τῶν τῇ Σηριαδικῇ γῇ κειμένων στηλῶν ἱερᾷ, φησὶ, διαλέκτῳ καὶ ἱερογραφικοῖς γράμμασι κεχαρακτηρισμένων ὑπὸ Θωὺθ τοῦ πρώτου Ἑρμοῦ, καὶ ἑρμηνευθεισῶν μετὰ τὸν κατακλυσμὸν ἐκ τῆς ἱερᾶς διαλέκτου εἰς τὴν ἑλληνίδα φωνὴν γράμμασιν ΙΕΡΟΓΛΥΦΙΚΟΙΣ, καὶ ἀποτεθεισῶν ἐν βίβλοις ὑπὸ τοῦ ̓Αγαθοδαίμονος τοῦ δευτέρου Ἑρμοῦ, πατρὸς δὲ τοῦ Τὰτ ἐν τοῖς ἀδύτοις τῶν ἱερῶν Αἰγυπτίων. * Stillingfleet objects, with reason, to the absurdity of translating into the Greek tongue with hieroglyphic characters: and the author of the Connections well seeing that by γράμμασιν ἱερογλυφικοῖς must be understood an alphabetic character, says the words should not be translated hieroglyphics, but sacred letters:† he might as well have said Gothic letters, ἱερογλυφικά being always used by the Ancients to denote characters for things, in opposition to alphabetic letters, or characters, composing words. It is certain the text is corrupt; as may be seen, 1. From the word γράμμασιν (which in strict propriety signifies the letters of an alphabet) its being joined to ἱερογλυφικοῖς, which denotes a species of marks for things. 2. From the mention of a sacred dialect, ἱερὰ διάλεκτος (of which more hereafter); for if these records were written in a sacred dialect, it is plain the character employed must be alphabetic; and so indeed it is expressed to be in the words ἱερογραφικοῖς γράμμασι, which immediately follow; and if, out of this dialect, it were translated into another, must not alphabetic characters be still employed? And now we see not only that the present reading is wrong, but are led, by this last observation, to the right; the passage being without all question to be read thus:μετὰ τὸν κατακλυσμὸν ἐκ τῆς ἱερᾶς διαλέκτου εἰς τὴν ἑλληνίδα φωνὴν γράμμασιν ΙΕΡΟΓΡΑΦΙΚΟΙΣ, καὶ ἀποτεθεισῶν ἐν βίβλοις, §ε-γράμμασιν ΙΕΡΟΓΡΑΦΙΚΟΙΣ, in speaking of the translation, being the very words just before employed in speaking of the original; and with great propriety : for ἱερογραφικά was used by the ancients as a generic term, to signify as well sacred letters composing words, as sacred marks standing for things ; ἱερογλυφικά not so, but denoting only marks for things: so that the plain and sensible meaning of the passage is, that a work, written by the first Hermes, in the sacred dialect, and sacred letters, was translated, by the second Hermes, into the Greek dialect; the original sacred letters being still employed. And the reason is evident; the Greek translation was for + Connection of the Sacred

• EUSEBII Chron. ed. Scal. Amst. 1658, p. 6. and Profane History," vol. i. p. 274, and vol. ii. p. 294.

the use of the Egyptians: but such would be soonest invited to the study of a foreign dialect when written in their own letters: a common inducement for translators into a foreign language, to preserve the original character. Besides, this version was not for the Egyptians in general, but for the priests only; and therefore their peculiar character was preserved.

We now begin to see that the whole extravagance in this account, which made it rejected by the Critics with so much contempt, is only in the high antiquity given to the fact; and this, the very circumstance of the fact refutes for it not only tells us of sacred alphabetic letters, which we have shewn to be of late use amongst the Egyptians, but likewise of a sacred dialect, which certainly was still later: And, if I be not much mistaken, a passage in Herodotus will lead us to the time when this translation was made. The historian tells us, that when Psammitichus, by the assistance of the Ionians and Carians, had subdued all Egypt, he placed these Greek adventurers on both sides the Nile; where he assigned them lands and habitations, and sent among them Egyptian youths to be instructed in the Greek language; from whence sprung the State-interpreters for that tongue :* Thus far the historian; from whose account of Psammitichus's project it appears, that his purpose was to establish a constant intercourse with the Grecian nations. The youth picked out for interpreters were, without question, of the priesthood, all letters and learning residing in that order; which had likewise a great share in the public administration. And now the priesthood having the Greek tongue amongst them, which its use in public affairs would make them diligently cultivate; Where was the wonder that, about this time, some of these interpreters, 'Epunvées, should employ themselves in translating the sacred Egyptian records into the Grecian language?

But then as to the precise time of the invention of EGYPTIAN LETTERS, it can never be so much as guessed at; because hieroglyphics continued to be in use long after that time; particularly on their public Monuments, where we find no appearance of alphabetic characters. However, that letters were very early, we have shewn above, as well from other circumstances, as from this, the giving the invention of them to the Gods.†

Those who are for deriving all civil improvements from the line of Abraham, of course, bestow upon it the invention of an ALPHABET.

* Τοῖσι δὲ Ἴωσι καὶ τοῖσι Καρσὶ, τοῖσι συγκατεργασαμένοισι αὐτῷ, ὁ Ψαμμίτιχος δίδωσι χώρους ἐνοικῆσαι ἀντίους ἀλλήλων, τοῦ Νείλου τὸ μέσον ἔχοντος· καὶ δὴ παΐδας παρέβαλε αὐτοῖσι Αἰγυπτίους, τὴν Ἑλλάδα γλῶσσαν ἐκδιδάσκεσθαι· ἀπὸ δὲ τούτων ἐκμαθόντων τὴν Ἑλλάδα γλῶσσαν, οἱ νῦν Ἑρμηνέες ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ γεγόνασι.-Euterpe, lib. ii. cap. 154. Hence it appears that the learned Dr. Prideaux was mistaken when he said-But the worst of it is, the ancient Egyptians did not speak Greek; the Ptolemys first brought that language amongst them—"Connection," part ii. lib. i. p. 12. † See p. 184 of this volume.

But as this fancy is only amongst the loose ends of an hypothesis, without any foundation in Scripture, these critics differ much about the time. Some suppose letters to have been in use amongst the Patriarchs; and, by them, transmitted to the Egyptians; but there are such strong objections to this opinion (to mention no other than the Patriarchs' sending verbal messages where it was more natural as well as more expedient to send them written), that others have thought proper to bring down the time to that of MOSES: * When GOD, they say, taught him the use of alphabetic letters, in the exemplar of the two tables written, as the text assures us, with the Finger of GOD. But how, from words, which at most only imply that the Ten Commandments were miraculously engraved as well as dictated, it can be concluded that letters were then first invented, I have not logic enough to find out. A common reader would be apt to infer from it, that letters were now well known to the Israelites, as GOD had thought fit to deliver the first elements of their religion in that kind of writing; I say, he would be thus apt to infer, though MOSES had never spoken of them on other occasions (which he hath done) as of things in familiar use: † But if GOD was indeed the revealer of the artifice, how happened it that the history of so important a circumstance was not recorded? for, as we shall see presently, the Memory of it would have been one of the strongest barriers to idolatry.

:

However, though I think it next to certain that Moses brought letters, with the rest of his learning, from Egypt, yet I could be easily persuaded to believe that he both enlarged the alphabet, and altered the shapes of the letters. 1. The Hebrew alphabet, which he employed in the composition of the Pentateuch, is considerably fuller than that which Cadmus brought into Greece. Cadmus was of Thebes in Egypt; he sojourned in Syria, and went from thence into Greece His country shews that his letters were Egyptian; and this, their difference in number from the Hebrew, sufficiently confirms ; Cadmus having only sixteen, and the Hebrews two and twenty. 2. That Moses likewise altered the shape of the Egyptian letters I think probable; all hieroglyphic writing was absolutely forbidden by the second commandment, and with a view worthy the divine wisdom; hieroglyphics being, as we shall see hereafter, the great source of their idolatries and superstitions. But now alphabetic letters (which henceforth could be only used amongst the Hebrews) being taken by the Egyptians § from their hieroglyphic figures, retained, as was natural, much of the shapes of those characters: to cut off therefore all occasion of danger from symbolic images, Moses, as I sup

• See note TT, at the end of this book. * See note XX, at the end of this book.

† See note UU, at the end of this book. § See p. 177, of this volume.

pose, altered the shapes of the Egyptian letters, and reduced them into something like those simple forms in which we now find them. Those who in much later ages converted the northern Pagans to the Christian Faith observed the same caution. For the characters of the northern alphabet, called RUNIC, having been abused to magical superstition, were then changed to the Roman.-"Tantas in his Runis” (says Sheringham) "latere virtutes Gothi ante fidem susceptam rati sunt, ut sive hostium caput diris sacrandum, sive pestis morbique amoliendi, sive aliud opus suscipiendum se incantationibus Runisque muniebant-Post fidem vero susceptam Runæ, qui incantationibus præstigiisque magicis in tantum adhibitæ fuerint, adeo fastidiri cœperunt, ut multi libri, multaque antiqua monumenta exinde præpostero zelo dejecta atque deleta sunt: unde historia Getica magnum detrimentum clademque accepit. Tandem vero, teste Loccenio, Sigfridi episcopi Britannici opera (Papa etiam Romano suam operam præstante) eò res devenit ut Runæ in Sueciâ A. D. M. L. penitus abolerentur ; et characteres Latini substituerentur." *

This account will reconcile the differing systems of Marsham and Renaudot; one of whom contends,† that the letters which Cadmus brought into Greece were Egyptian: the other, that they were Phenician; and both of them appeal to the authority of Herodotus ; who says plainly, "that the alphabet brought by Cadmus into Greece was Egyptian; and yet, speaking of the three most ancient inscriptions in Greece, he says, they were in Phenician characters, which very much resembled the Ionic: for if what has been here supposed be allowed, then the alphabet which Cadmus carried with him was doubtless of Moses's invention, as to the form, but Egyptian, as to the power. It may be just worth observing, that Renaudot's discourse is full of paralogisms, which this solution detects.

3. To this let me add another consideration. The vowel-points (as seems now to be generally agreed on) were added since the Jews ceased to be a nation. The Hebrew language was originally, and so continued to be for a long time, written without them. Now if God first taught Moses an alphabet, can we believe that the vowels would have been thus generally omitted? But suppose Moses learnt his alphabet of the Egyptians, and only made it fuller, and altered the form of the letters, we may easily give a good account of the omission. The Egyptian alphabet, as we observed, was invented for precision, and used for secrecy. Both ends were answered by an alphabet with hardly any vowels.

Thus we see that the form of alphabetic characters was a matter of much importance to the Hebrews, as to the integrity of their religion.

De Anglic. Gent. Orig. pp. 292, 293. des Lettres Grecques.

† Can. Chron.

Sur l'Origins

« IndietroContinua »