1845.] Gesenius on Alphabetic Writing. 383 6. We now proceed to show by direct proof that alphabetic writing did exist, and was extensively employed at or before the time of Moses. It will be most satisfactory to state the evidence in the language of those, who, as all will acknowledge, are the best qualified to judge on this subject. Most of the writers, whom we shall quote, are far from entertaining undue respect for the word of God. A number of them are leading rationalists, who deny altogether that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch. Accordingly, their testimony must be regarded as specially valuable, for Moses could not have been the author of the books which are attributed to him, if alphabetic writing was then unknown. With the particular theories of the writers in regard to the country where writing had its origin, the mode of its extension, etc., it is not necessary here to inquire. No apology will be necessary for the introduction of a few facts and allusions, not specially bearing on the main object which we have in view. We begin with Gesenius. The passage is found in an appendix to the last edition of his Hebrew Grammar, published a short time before his death. "In order to understand the names and forms of the Hebrew letters, recourse must be had to the Phoenician alphabet, the parent of all the alphabets of western Asia and Europe. In this the forms of the twenty-two letters are still pictures, more or less manifest, of sensible objects, the names of which begin with these letters, while the names of the letters denote those objects. "Accordingly the Phoenician alphabet was developed from a hieroglyphic writing, and in such a manner that the characters no longer denote, as was the case in the hieroglyphics, the represented objects themselves, but solely the initial letters of the same This transition from hieroglyphic to alphabetic writing, we find very early among the Egyptians, at least 2000 B. C. [500 years before Moses]. The oldest writing of the Egyptians was solely hieroglyphic. But as this did not provide for the necessities, naturally often arising, to express the sound of words also, an ingenious expedient was devised of causing a number of pictures to denote merely the initial sound of the word indicated thereby; e. g. the hand, tôt, was assumed for t; the mouth, ro, for r, so the alphabetic writing was originated, which the ancient Egyptians used in constant connection with the hieroglyphic. Along with the are, also, throughout the book, marks of one controlling mind, unity of plan and design. So far as this concinnity of the different portions can be proved, so far is it shown to be necessary for the author to have possessed writing materials. latter which was used on the monuments, and which consists of perfect pictures, the Egyptians had s till another mode, though less exact, to express objects of common life, in which the pictures were often so abridged as to be indistinct, consisting only of rough elementary strokes. "In accordance with these historical premises, it is in the highest degree probable, that some Phoenician, connected in very ancient times with the neighboring Egyptians, invented his own alphabet, new and altogether more convenient and practical. Rejecting entirely the hieroglyphics and their innumerable characters, he selected simply twenty-two signs for the twenty-two consonant sounds of his language." "To determine the time and place of this discovery, facts are wanting, yet that it was made by the Phoenicians in Egypt, in accordance with its Egyptian type or model, somewhere near the time of the reign of the Shepherd kings in Egypt, is a very probable supposition."1 It is remarkable that the names of so many letters refer to objects of pastoral life; some seem to be of Egyptian origin, at least Tet."2 The following passages are from Prof. Ewald's latest work.3 "From a consideration of the Semitic languages, it appears that the Asiatic dialects at least, expressed the simplest ideas in respect to the art of writing in the same manner throughout, while later im The Shepherd kings, according to Wilkinson and others, conquered Egypt before Joseph was carried captive there.-Wilkinson, I. 38. * On another page, Gesenius remarks, "that the high antiquity of the Hebrew pronouns appears from their most extraordinary agreement with the pronouns of the ancient Egyptian language, by far the oldest of which we possess any written memorials." All the separate pronouns in the Egyptian are compounded of the proper germ of the pronoun and a prefixed syllable, an, ant, ent, which must have given it a demonstrative sense, and served to impart to a short word more power and body. The Hebrew pronouns of the first and second persons, have this prefixed syllable, at least an. It is not found in the third person, in the biblical Hebrew, yet it is seen in the Talmudic. The essential pronominal forms in both languages correspond, e. g. Egypt. 3d pers. pl. sen, to Heb. hem, hen. The demonstrative prefixed syllable an, in (), has a manifest analogy with see etc. "It now appears to be probable, that between the Hebrew and ancient Egyptian, there was not merely the reciprocal reception of words already formed, but a relationship of stem, lying deeper, and as old at least as that with the Indo-Germanic stock." "The correspondencies of the Hebrew with the ancient Egyptian are still more important than with the Coptic."-Gesenius's Heb. Gram. 13th edition. Halle Lit. Zeit. 1839, No. 80, 1841, No. 40. 3 Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 1843, I. P. 68-71. Not only an, to write, with its many derivatives, is common to all the 1845.] Ewald on the early Origin of the Alphabet. 385 provements in the art could be easily expressed by each in a different way. This phenomenon is not otherwise explainable than as follows: This existing writing was first used, in its simplest application, by an unknown primitive Semitic people; from them it was received, together with the most necessary designations of the object, by all the Semitic tribes known to us in history,-just as certainly as the fact that the term Elóah, for God, common to all the Semitic nations, shows that already the primitive people from whom they separated, designated God by this name. Following such traces, we may be led to the most surprising truths, beyond the most distant periods of the history of nations." "We thus here see how every investigation into the origin of writing among the primitive tribes leads us back to the remotest misty antiquity, to a more exact investigation of which all our present helps are not adequate. Among these tribes, writing is always earlier than we can follow it historically, just as every original art certainly springs from the most direct necessities of life, and may be soonest developed by a people extensively engaged in commerce; its use for the purpose of writing history, or only of fixing laws, lies manifestly very early back. Whatever may have been the primitive Semitic people to whom half of the civilized world are indebted for this inestimable gift, so much cannot be mistaken, that it appears in history as a possession of a Semitic people, long before the time of Moses; and that Israel had already, before his time, known and employed it in Egypt, can be assumed without difficulty." "The kindred nations may have had not only the art of writing, but an historical literature also, earlier than Israel, since, according to all the traces, Israel was among the smallest and latest of the tribes in the series of the larger and earlier developed brothernations. In our opinion the notices in respect to Edom, definite and copious as they are given in Gen. xxxvi, bear altogether the marks of having been drawn, by the writer, from older Edomitish sources; then, also, the report in regard to the wisdom of the Edomites must have had some ground. We also call to mind the primitive narration, Gen. xiv (wholly different from all the other notices), where Abraham is spoken of as a Hebrew," almost a stranger to the narrator, just as a Canaanitish historian might Semitic languages (perhaps with the exception of the Aethiopic), but also o book, and 17, ink; only the instrument for writing must have been early changed, since and stand nearly alone, the Syrians using, instead of it,, and the Arabians and Ethiopians, together with the later Jews,xdlaμos. speak of him. The information incidentally preserved Num. 13: 22, in respect to the time of the building of the early founded cities, Hebron in Canaan and Tanis in Egypt, appears altogether like the fragment of a Phoenician work, or of one not Hebrew." "Thus it appears to us not only as very probable, but rather certain, that the earliest historians of Israel found already in existence a multitude of historical works of the kindred tribes. That the Tyrians possessed historical books, carefully written, with an exact chronology, we know definitely from fragments of the works of Dios and Menander of Ephesus, which they prepared for the Greeks." "Thus the position is firmly established that from the time of Moses, Hebrew historical writing could have been developed, and was developed." Our next extract is from Von Lengerke, a professor in the university of Königsberg. "The use of writing and of the easier writing material, that made of skins, is thus presupposed by the oldest tradition, to have been in existence at the time of Moses, and there is no sufficient ground to doubt it." "At all events, it appears to be historically proved from their names, e. g. Kirjathsepher, city of the book, etc., that writing was practised by the inhabitants of Canaan, at a very early time, before the return of the Israelites from Egypt." "That the Israelites appropriated to themselves many arts while in Egypt, e. g. the art of weaving, of fusing and working metals, etc., is undeniable; and probably the like may be concluded of the art of writing, though the discovery of a Semitic alphabet cannot be of Egyptian origin; still the supposition is probable, that the Egyptian hieroglyphic writing was transformed by the Hyksos, (Shepherd kings) into alphabetic writing, and that this discovery then passed over to the other Semitic tribes." "The Tyrians certainly had an historical literature in the Mosaic era; for, though the fragments from Dios and Menander of Ephesus do not relate to a time earlier than that of David and Solomon, still, we may draw the conclusion from the genuinely historical stamp of these notices, that Phoenician historical writers flourished at a far earlier period." "The conclusion does not appear hasty," says Prof. A. T. Hartmann of Rostock, "that the art of writing for a long time employed by the Babylonians, passed over to the Phoenicians, as soon as the latter felt their need of it. Now if this was the case, Kenaan. Volks-und Religionsgeschichte Israel's, 1844, Introduction pp. XXX. XXXI., and p. 374. 1845.] Style of the Pent. does not prove its later Origin. 387 the Phoenicians had learned to use this invaluable art, certainly at a period which extends far back of Moses and the residence of the Israelites in Egypt." "Acquaintance with alphabetic writing," says Vater "on the part of Moses and his contemporaries, is not merely possible but more than probable.”2 "The inscriptions on the Babylonian bricks," says Boeckh,3 which are written in a character similar to the Phoenician, exhibit a later form than the oldest Phoenician; yet this by no means proves that the Phoenician character did not originate in Babylon; for it certainly often happens that the older form of writing is preserved in a derived alphabet longer than in the original one, as the Italian alphabet and particularly the Latin, show in relation to the Greek." "The Egyptians on one side," says Prof. Olshausen of Kiel, "the Hebrews and Phoenicians on the other, we find, at a time which extends back of all sure chronology, in possession of an alphabet, which has one and the same extraordinary principle to denote the sound. For this purpose an object was represented or pictured, whose name in the various spoken languages of Egypt or the Semitic tribes, begins with this sound." "Moses at least was acquainted with the Egyptian writing; he himself could write; from him begin the notices in respect to the practice of the art of writing among the Israelites."4 It is unnecessary to multiply these references any further. The argument from this source against the genuineness of the Pentateuch is wholly untenable, and is generally abandoned in Germany. As, however, it has been recently brought forward with considerable confidence, and as the discussion of it might cast light on other topics which may come under consideration, we have thought it worth while to devote some space to it. 5. Language and Style of the Pentateuch does not prove its later Origin. It is confidently affirmed by some in our country, that the Pentateuch must be of comparatively recent origin from the fact that its language and idiom do not differ from those of the professedly later books. Moses, as is affirmed, wrote, six or eight centuries 1 Histor. Krit. Forschungen, 1831, p. 615. 2 Vater, quoted by Hengstenberg, Beiträge I. p. 424. Metrolog. Untersuch. p. 40. • Ueber den Ursprung d. Alphabetes, 1841, pp. 5, 6. |