what Fatalist and Bigot should be used to designate-how often must he say: "That the soul be without knowledge, is not good!" Michael the archangel did not venture thus to oppose the very devil himself. Shall we deal with our brethren and fellow Christians more rigidly, than the great "accuser of the brethren" has himself been dealt with? I am aware after all-and this occasions the deepest sigh that I can utter that even argument comes to be looked upon by heated controversialists as designed abuse, and an exposure of absurdities in reasoning, as little better than party venom. Should the thoughts which I have now thrown before the public come before the minds of such individuals, I do not expect their ear or their approbation. Yet I would submit, with pa tience, to any reproach which they may utter; and wait in silent hope that the time of exasperation will soon pass away, and that candour and a peaceful spirit may then again claim and exercise their rights. In the hour of dangerous sickness; in the recesses of communion with our own spirits; on a dying bed; before the bar of God; it will not be matter of exultation that we have been fomenters of strife, nor that we have triumphed over, or trampled under foot, the Christian rights of our brethren to think and to decide for themselves, in matters pertaining to religious faith and doctrine. By his own master each man will ultimately stand or fall. And when we know this, and feel obligated to act in accordance with the views which it inspires, we must not shrink from our duty, either to gain any applause, or to avoid any obloquy, which may be consequent upon our efforts to restore peace and mutual confidence where they have been destroyed. ARTICLE IV. THE ORIGIN OF WRITING IN GREECE AND EGYPT.* By the Rev. T. Parker, West Roxbury, Mass. THE origin of all the most useful arts is involved in obscurity. The inventors of the Plough and the Loom, of the Ship and [* In a note accompanying this article, the author remarks that, in investigating the genuineness of the Pentateuch, he had often been embarrassed by the antecedent question concerning the state of letters the Harp, were deified because they were unknown. All inventions were ascribed to the gods, who, as Warburton has wittily said, "took what there were none to claim, as strays belong to the lord of the manor." The invention of letters is one of the most remarkable triumphs of the human mind. To devise a score of characters that shall represent the words of one man, or of all nations, countless as these words appear, is to render an unparalleled service to mankind. It is to invent a process whereby the thoughts of a uation shall be embalmed in beautiful speech, and preserved, without loss of vitality, to the end of time. The inquiry upon the origin of writing is attended with numerous and great difficulties. The early writers who touch upon the subject, were careless, uncritical and notoriously inaccurate. Some of them were industrious collectors of facts; others made ingenious arrangements of them, but few, if any, decided upon critical principles. Most of them merely reflect the current opinion of the market-place or the temple, without inquiring whether that opinion was true or false. Among the more modern writers, Theory has mostly taken the place of Observation; and conjectures, often fantastic, and sometimes absurd fill their pages. The most extravagant pretensions as to the antiquity of letters have been based on mere rumor or caprice. In this inquiry an attempt will be made to investigate the origin and early use of letters in Greece and Egypt. USE OF ALPHABETIC WRiting in Greece. I. 1. Early use of letters, in books, in Greece. It is the commonly received opinion that about 1500 B. C., Cadmus came from Phoenicia, or Egypt, to Greece, bringing with him alphabetical letters, which he introduced among the people.* Some maintain that the Greeks were previously ac in Egypt in the time of Moses, and so was led into this inquiry. The subject is important and interesting not only to the Biblical, but to the general scholar.-ED.] * See Jackson's chronological antiquities, London, 1792—3. Vol. IV. In his modest title-page the author says, "In this book all the difficulties of the Scripture chronology are cleared-the origin of letters, fully treated of and explained." He informs us of the veritable inventor of letters. It was one Taaut. By a singularly ingenious process, he determines the very year of the great invention, namely, 2619 before Christ! Reasoning from the use of letters at this date among the Phenicians, he concludes the Greeks must have been quainted with letters, and Cadmus merely exchanged them for the more convenient Phenician characters, which subsequently prevailed. Others contend, the Greeks had no letters, but employed hieroglyphics before the arrival of Cadmus. Learned authors are divided upon the question, but it is quite singular that no ancient writer, of any authority, ever pretends that the Greeks were acquainted with letters before that time. There are numerous passages, in which the old Pelasgi* are mentioned with applause and veneration; but the use of letters or even of picture writing is never once ascribed to them. The most satisfactory method of investigating the origin and early use of writing among the Greeks, is perhaps, to commence at some era, when letters were well known, and descend towards the time of the alleged arrival of Cadmus, noticing the state of letters as we proceed. In the time of Herodotus, letters were in common use, in compositions, both in verse and prose. In the year 445 B. C., he read his history at the public games. From the fact that a work of such extent and familiar with them long before the time of Cadmus, for how, he asks, Phoenices primi, famae, si creditur, ausi * See Wolfii Proleg. ad Homerum, Vol. I. Ch. XIII., who makes the above statement. The remark of Diod. Sic. Lib. V. p. 328 of Rhodoman's edition (fol. 1604), though often misunderstood, is no exception to this remark. See also Lib. III. p. 200 at bottom. 10 SECOND SERIES, VOL. II. NO. III. character was thus publicly read, it is safe to infer that writing was not common. But this inference is of little importance in the present question. Some years after this event, viz. 403 B. C., the Athenians for the first time received the present alphabet of twenty-four letters.* It is said that in the fifth and sixth century B. C., Epicharmus of Sicily and Simonides of Coos had completed the alphabet by the invention of some new letters. These letters were arranged in the present order by Callistratus, and as it appears were first received at Samos. This is called the Ionian alphabet, and is the same that the Athenians begun to use, 403 B. C. The two long vowels were not used before this date at Athens. Thespis the dramatist, is thought to have flourished about 536 B. C., and Susarion a little before him, but it is highly improbable that their plays were ever written.† The first of the Attic comic writers mentioned by Aristotle performed their pieces about 484 B. C., eight years before the time of Xerxes. There is no mention of Attic writers before this date, says Wolf, who is an oracle in matters of this sort,-whose authority is not destroyed by the circumstances of that age, or by the silence of the most approved and valuable writers. The laws of Solon were promulgated about 594 B. C. They were written on tables of wood in the boustrophedon style, (that is, in lines running alternately from left to right or from right to left,) and enclosed in an oblong box in such a manner that they could be turned round and all parts presented to the eye. Such was the rude material employed in recording the laws of the most flourishing city of Greece at the commencement of the sixth century. Were letters at that time applied to merely literary purposes? Solon composed in prose as well as in verse, and since the former could not be preserved in the memory so well as the latter, it is probable writing was then a little used in private compositions. To go back still farther we find the laws of Zaleucus were written about 664 B. C. according to Eusebius.‡ Clement of Alexandria calls him the first law-giver; un * See Bouhier ubi sup. § 66. Wolf ubi sup. Ch. XVI. Eusebius Chron. ad Olymp. XCIIII. 4. + Bentley's Epistle of Phalaris. Eusebius Chronicon ad Olymp. XXIV. Wolf, Ch. XVII. § Stromat. Vol. I. p. 309, cited by Wolf. He says Minos wrote laws, doubtedly he was the first who gave written laws. There is no evidence to prove that letters were used by the Greeks before his time, in composing literary works. Indeed it is highly probable that public laws would be written long before letters were used in more private works. From the time of Lycurgus and the age following, not a book, poem or epistle, says Wolf, has come down to us, nor any credible notice, or allusion to a book written during that period or before it. All the laws, decisions and oracles, the relics of olden times, are to be regarded as oral precepts, which there is no reason to believe were written in the age of their alleged publication. Some of them are not genuine, for it was the vice of the Greek writers to refer many modern institutions to their most ancient legislators. In the early ages, laws were published in the form of verses; and even in the time of Aristotle this custom still prevailed among the Agathyrsi. Now if letters were not used to record public laws in the ninth and eighth century, it is not probable they were used immediately after that age in writing books. A considerable time must needs elapse before they could be generally applied to this latter use. But in reply to all this, the poems of Homer are cited as conclusive evidence of the earlier use of writing. But Homer never mentions alphabetic characters, and never makes the most distant allusion to writing by letters or hieroglyphics. We cannot infer the existence of the art from any passage of his writings; and since they make allusions to almost every art or sience, or national custom known at that time, or at least lead us to infer them, it becomes probable that the art of writing was utterly unknown to him.* Occasions occur which render it indispensable to speak of letters if they were known to him. A monument is erected, but it bears no inscription. The carefullywrought shield, the work of a celestial artist, contains neither letter nor hieroglyphic. The warriors "make their mark," on the lots to be cast into the helmet, but they write no name. The ancient writers upon Homer, says Wolf, did not suppose he and others ascribe written laws also to Lycurgus, but they speak loosely, and it is unfair to press their words for a sense it is evident they were not intended to possess. Clement however says distinctly, the laws of Minos were written in letters of brass. He also thinks that tragedies were invented in that age!! * Wolf, p. 80. sq. |