tute of this art long after it had prevailed in ad jacent countries.* Dr. Mc Knight remarks that "the literal method of writing, is generally said to have been first practised by the Phoenicians ;" though he himself countenances the idea that the first specimen of the art was that on the tables given to Moses. But, it may be shown with the utmost degree of probability that the Phoenician Alphabet was derived from the Hebrew. A learned writer in the Edinburgh En cyclopædia expresses the opinion, "that the pretensions of the Phoenicians must give way to the better established claim of the Hebrews." Goguet thinks it more probable that this invention is to be ascribed either to the Assyrians, or the Egyptians. It is true that the Assyrians were a more ancient people than the Hebrews; but, their antiquity extended beyond the period when letters were invented. On the mere ground of antiquity, they have a higher claim than any other nation. But I have found no evidence in

* The leading authors to which I have had access on this general subject are Winder's History of Knowledge-Goguet's Origin of Laws-Dugald Stewart's Dissertation prefixed to the Encyclopædia Brittanica-the Edinburgh Review for 1836,-the works of Lightfoot-Astle on the origin and progress of writing-Warburton's Divine Legation of Moses-Gilbert Wakefield's Dissertation on Alphabetical writing-Daubuz on the Revelation—and also some valuable thoughts at the close of the last volume of Dr. Mc Knight on the Apostolic Epistles.

in favour of their claims except this. On the contrary, the best authorities dispute their pretensions. With regard to Egypt, more may be said in invalidating its claims to this invention than has been said against those of Phoenicia and Assyria. Is there not a sort of literary mania which has led so many renowned men to ascribe almost all that is valuable in literature, science, or the arts to Egypt? Though comparatively a very incompetent judge of matters of this sort, I have never been so convinced as some have been of the superiority of this degraded and pagan empire. Egypt "owed her splendour to strangers, rather than to her own vigorous and nourished intellect." Scythia rivalled her in arms, Tyre in commerce, Syria in letters, Chaldea in astronomy, and Babylon in every department of natural science. Dr. Delaney in his Life of David, expresses the opinion that the great models of Grecian architecture, are not, as has more generally been supposed, to be traced to Egypt, but to that most perfect of all models, the Temple at Jerusalem, the entire plan of which was given to David by God himself. The hieroglyphics of the ancient Egyptians were never brought to such a state of perfection as to constitute a system of phonetic writing. They remain to the present day; and they are almost useless and silent, because they represent none of the elements of articulation, and bear no analogy to any other system, whether ancient or modern. Whatever may have been their learning of other kinds,

the Egyptians never possessed Alphabetical writing; they were "contented with their hieroglyphical method and never, of themselves, advanced beyond it." The same may be remarked of the Chinese even at the present day. It is a point well established that the elements of their writing, or keys as they are termed, are merely symbolical, and could never have given rise to any one of the Oriental alphabets. It is "purely an artificial structure which denotes every idea by its appropriate sign without any relation to the utterance. It speaks to the eye like the numerical cyphers of the Europeans, which every one understands and utters in his own way." Modern authors seem generally to agree in tracing the pervading ignorance of this people to this fact. Neither can the claims of the Hindoos be defended on any better grounds than those of the nations already named Sir William Jones has clearly made it appear that the Hindoo pretensions to antiquity are excessively extravagant, if not altogether fabulous. Events which they used to fix at a date of some million or two years back, actually took place in the tenth, or eleventh century of the Christian era. Their famous astronomical tables, by which it has been imagined that great antiquity might be assigned to this nation, are shown to be incorrect, and to have been calculated backwards. It has been satisfactorily proved that the Treatise which they consider the most ancient in the world, must have been compiled since the Christian era.

Though no man is warranted in speaking with confidence on this subject, yet is there not some good reason to believe that the earliest specimens of a written language came from the Hebrews? Is there not presumptive evidence of this, in the mere fact that the first oral language was the Hebrew? If the Hebrew language was the language originally imparted to men; if it was preserved through all the corruptions of the antediluvian world, through the division of the family of Noah in the time of Peleg, and through the subsequent confusion of tongues; if it was the lan guage in which God spoke to Abraham and to Moses, and in which Moses conveyed the revelation of the divine will to mankind; is there not some strong presumption in favour of the idea that it was the first written language?

Notwithstanding the efforts of the infidels of Germany, who have endeavoured to show that alphabetical writing was not in use at all even so early as the time of Moses, it will not be denied except by infidels of the boldest class, that the Hebrew characters existed in a perfect state when this inspired author wrote the Pentateuch. Dr. Winder, in his History of knowledge, maintains the position, that the art of alphabetical writing was communicated to Moses when the Great Lawgiver gave him the law upon mount Sinai. The considerations which support this hypothesis, to say the least, amount to strong presumption in its favour. With two exceptions writing is not even apparently

mentioned in the Scriptures before the giving of the law, and these as we shall presently show, may not invalidate the hypothesis of which we are speaking. There was no such thing as writing known before the flood, nor is there any mention made of it in the book of Genesis before that period. Nor was it known from the time of the flood to the time of Abraham's leaving Chaldea. Nor was it known in Canaan at the death of Sarah, and when Abraham bought the cave of Ephron of the sons of Heth. Goguet remarks, that "all deeds among the Hebrews at that time were verbal, and were authenticated and ascertained by being made in presence of all the people." Nor was it known at the time of Isaac's marriage. Nor was it known either in Phoenicia, or Canaan, at the time of Isaac's league with Gerar. Nor was it known either in Canaan or Syria, when Jacob went to Laban. Nor was it known in the family of Jacob, while Joseph was in Egypt, either during his servitude, or preferment. Nor was it known at the new settlement of the lands after the famine; nor when the Hebrews settled in Goshen; nor when their oppression began, and the sanguinary edicts were published.* Though these were periods and transactions, during which had alphabetical letters existed, they would not only have been of the greatest utility, but as it

* See these positions illustrated and defended in Winder.