London Publish’d Decr. 1. 1789. by G. Robinson & Co.
This I suppose was what formerly the Egyptians called a book, or almanack; a collection of these was probably hung up in some conspicuous place, to inform the public of the state of the heavens, and seasons, and diseases, to be expected in the course of them, as is the case in the English almanacks at this day. Hermes is said to have composed 36,535 books, probably of this sort, or they might contain the correspondent astronomical observations made in a certain time at Meroë, Ophir, Axum, or Thebes, communicated to be hung up for the use of the neighbouring cities. Porphyry[264] gives a particular account of the Egyptian almanacks. “What is comprised in the Egyptian almanacks, says he, contains but a small part of the Hermaic institutions; all that relates to the rising and setting of the moon and planets, and of the stars and their influence, and also some advice upon diseases.”
It is very remarkable, that, besides my Tot here described, there are five or six, precisely the same in all respects, already in the British Museum; one of them, the largest of the whole, is made of sycamore, the others are of metal. There is another, I am told, in Lord Shelburn’s collection; this I never had an opportunity of seeing; but a very principal attention seems to have been paid to make all of them light and portable, and it would seem that by these having been formed so exactly similar, they were the Tots intended to be exposed in different cities or places, and were neither more nor less than Egyptian almanacks.
Whether letters were known to Noah before the flood, is no where said from any authority, and the inquiry into it is therefore useless. It is difficult, in my opinion, to imagine, that any society, engaged in different occupations, could subsist long without them. There seems to be less doubt, that they were invented, soon after the dispersion, long before Moses, and in common use among the Gentiles of his time.
It seems also probable, that the first alphabet was Ethiopic, first founded on hieroglyphics, and afterwards modelled into more current, and less laborious figures, for the sake of applying them to the expedition of business. Mr Fourmont is so much of this opinion, that he says it is evident the three first letters of the Ethiopic alphabet are hieroglyphics yet, and that the Beta resembles the door of a house or temple. But, with great submission, the doors of houses and temples, when first built, were square at the top, for arches were not known. The Beta was taken from the doors of the first Troglodytes in the mountains, which were rounded, and gave the hint for turning the arch, when architecture advanced nearer to perfection.
Others are for giving to letters a divine original: they say they were taught to Abraham by God himself; but this is no where vouched; though it cannot be denied, that it appears from scripture there were two sorts of characters known to Moses, when God spoke to him on Mount Sinai. The first two tables, we are told, were wrote by the finger of God, in what character is not said, but Moses received them to read to the people, so he surely understood them. But, when he had broken these two tables, and had another meeting with God on the mount on the subject of the law, God directs him specially not to write in the Egyptian character or hieroglyphics, but in the current hand used by the Ethiopian merchants, like the letters upon a signet; that is, he should not write in hieroglyphics by a picture, representing the thing, for that the law forbids; and the bad consequences of this were evident; but he should write the law in the current hand, by characters representing sounds, (though nothing else in heaven or on earth,) or by the letters that the Ishmaelites, Cushites, and India trading nations had long used in business for signing their invoices, engagements, &c. and this was the meaning of being like the letters of a signet.
Hence, it is very clear, God did not invent letters, nor did Moses, who understood both characters before the promulgation of the law upon Mount Sinai, having learned them in Egypt, and during his long stay among the Cushites, and Shepherds in Arabia Petrea. Hence it should appear also, that the sacred character of the Egyptian was considered as profane, and forbid to the Hebrews, and that the common Ethiopic was the Hebrew sacred character, in which the copy of the law was first wrote. The text is very clear and explicit: “And the stones shall be with the names of the children of Israel, twelve, according to their names, like the engravings of signet; every one with his name, shall they be according to the twelve tribes[265].” Which is plainly, You shall not write in the way used till this day, for it leads the people into idolatry; you shall not type Judah by a lion, Zebulun by ship, Issachar by an ass couching between two burdens; but, instead of writing by pictures, you shall take the other known hand, the merchants writing, which signifies sounds, not things; write the names Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, in the letters, such as the merchants use upon their signets. And, on Aaron’s breast-plate of pure gold, was to be written, in the same alphabet, like the engravings of a signet, HOLINESS TO THE LORD[266].
These signets, of the remotest antiquity in the East, are worn still upon every man’s hand to this day, having the name of the person that wears them, or some sentence upon it always religious. The Greeks, after the Egyptians, continued the other method, and described figures upon their signet; the use of both has been always common in Britain.
We find afterwards, that, in place of stone or gold, for greater convenience Moses wrote in a book, “And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished;[267]”—
Although, then, Moses certainly did not invent either, or any character, it is probable that he made two, perhaps more, alterations in the Ethiopic alphabet as it then stood, with a view to increase the difference still more between the writing then in use among the nations, and what he intended to be peculiar to the Jews. The first was altering the direction, and writing from right to left, whereas, the Ethiopian was, and is to this day, written from left to right, as was the hieroglyphical alphabet[268]. The second was taking away the points, which, from all times, must have existed and been, as it were, a part of the Ethiopic letters invented with them, and I do not see how it is possible it ever could have been read without them; so that, which way soever the dispute may turn concerning the antiquity of the application of the Masoretic points, the invention was no new one, but did exist as early as language was written. And I apprehend, that these alterations were very rapidly adopted after the writing of the law, and applied to the new character as it then stood; because, not long after, Moses was ordered to submit the law itself to the people, which would have been perfectly useless, had not reading and the character been familiar to them at that time.