not mere accident or some unknown circumstance have thrown in twenty or thirty similar words, and what influence can they have on the whole extent and on the structure of the languages? Nay, we will challenge Mr. Webster to show us any two languages whatever, in which we shall not be able to point out at least forty or fifty words resembling each other, if not entirely the same in both languages. It appears to be his object to trace words to their primitive sources, where history refuses all aid, and by what means, will he be guided in this research? Has he at least cleared up all doubts and obscurities respecting the primitive languages? Which are they? How many different dialects did they present? In what do the differences consist? What are the grammatical and philosophical principles of those languages? What have they in common, and in what do they differ? In what connexion do they stand with the Greek dialects? In what way have the Greek dialects been formed from the Oriental? There are difficulties enough we will answer for him-we need not increase them.

The common appellation "Oriental languages" does not embrace all the languages which are spoken by the many and various tribes of Asia, but is generally confined to those tongues which were formerly spoken by the Jews, Phoenicians, Syrians and Chaldeans, as well as to those which are still living and are. spoken by the Arabs and Ethiopians, and we may justly add the ancient Egyptian tongue which became extinct with the nation, some traces of which, however, may probably be discerned among the Copts, who are supposed to be their descendants. The affinity between all these languages is of such a nature that we ought to regard them not as different tongues, but as dialects of one general and primitive language. It is, therefore, useless to enter here into a discussion which has vainly occupied so many learned men of different countries, and which Mr. Webster has canvassed with fresh courage through many an idle page of his introduction, namely, which of all these languages may be considered as the primitive, and which was at first spoken by the first men? Every one of these languages has had its partizans; and the question must remain unsettled. We will, therefore, quit these useless researches, the results of which can only be uncertain conjectures, to give way in their turn to others as vague and as indefinite. Such labours we relinquish willingly to those who are condemned to this Danaidean task, while we will endeavour to show, in the first place, the close affinity and connexion between all these languages, examine their differences, and then leave the reader to judge whether the slight orthographical alterations, to which all languages

spread over extensive countries are exposed, can be supposed to form and deserve to be styled distinct languages, or should be considered as mere dialects. We will next enter into some mechanical detail, respecting the Western languages as the derivatives of the former, and try how far the grammatical and etymological knowledge of our author extends in all these languages.

We shall, in the course of our criticisms, be obliged sometimes to discuss grammatical subtleties, however dry they may appear, but we beg in return to remark, that this article may be in some degree useful to those who intend to learn the Oriental languages, and that it is no more than our duty to point out to those who have no idea of these languages, the incorrect views of Mr. Webster, to which he has generally been led by his imperfect grammatical knowledge of the Oriental and many of the European languages which he honours with the high-sounding titles of Shemitic and Japhetic tongues.

All the Oriental languages we have enumerated above, have alphabets formed of letters which are written from the right to the left, and which have in all these languages nearly the same appellations-thus, the first letter is called in the Hebrew, Aleph, in the Syriac, Olaph, in the Arabic, Eliph, and hence in the Greek, Alpha; and so on with the names of the other letters. We do not know what reasons the Eastern nations might have had to induce them to direct their writing from the right to the left, but we know that this mode was imitated or adopted by the early Greeks, who changed it afterwards, and finally determined to write exclusively from the left to the right, which mode has subsequently been adopted by all the European nations.*

The

The alphabets of all the Eastern nations of which we are now speaking, consist of twenty-two letters or consonants, vowels not having been ranked by them among the letters. Arabs who follow the same practice, have, it is true, twentyeight letters, but this addition of six letters is only to distinguish the hard, soft and aspirated pronunciation of some of the twenty-two letters. It is supposed that at the time of Cadmus, only sixteen letters were in existence, but in proportion as language became more cultivated and more perfect, the want of more letters to serve in distinguishing sounds, and in facilitating pronunciation as well as to form new words, was sensibly felt. The Greeks and Latins have, in turn, added new letters to the ancient oriental stock.†

i. e.

"to trace the lines as the oxen do in ploughing." Tacit: Annal: xi. 14.

* βουστροφηδόν γραφείν, Solon's laws were written in this way.

The honour of having invented the first letters, has been a subject of literary controversy even among the ancients. Lucan* says

Phoenices primi famæ si creditur, ausi
Mansuram rudibus vocem signare figuris

Pliny, the elder,† refers it to the Assyrians, "Literas semper arbitror Assyrias fuisse." The Eastern historians Ebn Chalecan and Ben Shahnah, suppose the Mosnad or Hemearitan alphabet to be the oldest, and report that there has been found in Yemen an inscription in these characters, as old as the time of Joseph. As this question has not been settled, we will pass it over in silence.

The figures of the various Oriental alphabetical letters differ from each other. Thus the Hebrew characters are square, the Arabic round and joined, while the Syriac keep a medium between them-I mean that they are less squared than the Hebrew, and less rounded than the Arabic. The present Hebrew characters are, in the opinion of many, the same as those which the Chaldeans formerly employed, and which the Jews adopted during, and preserved after the Babylonish captivity, out of hatred towards their fraternal enemies the Samaritans, who continued to use the ancient letters of the Jews, which are now known as the Samaritan characters, and which have been preserved to us in a copy of the Pentateuch.

The characters now in use among the Arabs, were invented in the fourteenth century by Ben Molahh. But when we compare them with the ancient Arabic characters called Koofic, from the town Koofa, where they were invented, we easily perceive that Ben Molahh has done nothing but render the ancient characters more disengaged and more oblique, so that he rather merits the title of a reformer, than of an inventor of these letters. The African Arabs have more faithfully preserved the

It may be of some interest to give here the opinions of the learned bibliographer, Hadji Khalfi, on this subject. "It is said that writing was originally invented by Adam, who traced the figures on clay, which was hardened afterwards in the fire, by which means they were preserved during the deluge Others ascribe the invention to Edris. It is reported on the authority of Ebn Albas, (one of the most celebrated Arabian collectors of their ancient traditions, who died in the 68th year of the Hegira) that the origin of the Arabic letters goes back to three persons of the family of Boulan, (a tribe of the descendants of Tai) who had settled in the town of Arbar. The first of them, called Morar, (more accurately Moramer) invented the forms of the letters; the second, called Aslam, devised a figure by which the letters were to be joined or separated; the third, Amor, invented, the diaritical points. Others attribute the invention of writing to six persons of the race of Tasm, who were called Aboodied, Hawaz, Korishat, Hati, Caloomen, and Safas. These six persons after they had invented writing, added some figures at the end of the alphabet, which did not enter into the composition of their alphabetical

ancient characters, and their letters closely resemble the Koofic. Upon monuments, the Arabs still use the ancient Koofic letters,

letters. These persons were, according to another tradition, Kings of Madian. We read in the Sirat of Ehor-Hesham, (who died about 200) that Hymiar, the son of Saba, was the first who made use of the Arabian letters. Sohaili, (who died about 600) in his work styled Atharif-Ovalim, says, 'the truest report of all is what we learn by our prophet, that the first who wrote in Arabic was Ismaël.' This tra dition rests on the authority of Ebn-Abd-Albarr, who died about 473.

"The Moola Abool-hhair (who died about 1000) speaks on the subject of writing, in the following manner:- We must know that the writings of the different rations are reduced to twelve, viz. the Hymyarite, the Arabic, that of the Grecians, Persians, Syrians, Hebrews, Romans, Copts, Berbers, (probably the Berberins or Barabrans in the eastern part of Africa) the Andalusians, Indians and Chinese. Five of these twelve kinds of writing have entirely disappeared, and no one knows any thing of them-I mean the Hymyaritan, Grecian, Coptic, Berberan and Andalusian. Three are still used in the countries to which they belong, viz. the Roman. Indian and Chinese, but no one among the Mussulmen knows them. Four only are in use among the Mussulmen, the Arabic, Persian, Syriac and Hebrew.' "The above passage of Abool-hhair will lead to some observations.

"1. The number to which he reduces the different kinds of writing is not exact. For without mentioning those which have ceased to be employed, even those which are still in use are much greater in number than he supposes. Whosoever glances upon the works of the ancients, which are written in Greek and Latin, as well as upon the books of authors who have treated of the arts and spoken of different kinds of writing and of letters, will easily perceive that I am right. This calculation alone betrays the little erudition of this author.

"2 He commits another mistake in saying that five kinds of writing have entirely disappeared, for the Greek is now very much in use among the most distinguished Christians-I mean among the members of the celebrated academies or universities which exist in Spain, France and Germany, which are vast countries, and contain a great number of states. The Greek language is the foundation of all their sciences.

"3. Abool-hhair is equally mistaken in adding that there is no one among the Mussulmen who has any knowledge of the Roman; for there are in the Mussulman countries, and chiefly in ours, so many who understand the Roman language, that it is impossible to enumerate them. We must also know that the Roman writing, which is now in use, is the Greek, but a little altered; the characters which, at present, the Infidels at Rome use, is the very Greek itself.

"4. This writer accounts the Syriac and Hebrew writings among those which are in use in the countries of the Mussulmen. This is incorrect. The Syriac letters are an ancient, nay, the most ancient of all writings. It derives its name from Sooria, now known under the name of Cilad Shamiyya. The ancient inhabitants of this country have disappeared, and we have no traces of them according to the reports of history. The Hebrew characters are now in use among the Jews. They are the same Hebrew characters which we consider as the primitive source both of the Arabic language and writing. There is a strong resemblance between the Hebrew and Arabic pronunciation, but a very feeble one between their writings.

"In all languages except the Arabic, the letters in their alphabets are arranged in the following order-a, b, g, d. In all languages except the Arabic, Syriac and Magolian, the characters are separated. The Greeks, Copts and Romans write from the left to the right. The Hebrews, Syrians, Arabs, Persians and Turks, write from the right to the left.

"The inhabitants of Zanguebar and Abyssinia have a singular order in their writings. Their letters are joined like the Hymyaritan, but are directed from the left to the right. They also put three points between every word.

"Ebn Ishak says that the characters of Mecca are the most ancient Arabian let. ters; next to them are those of Medina; and lastly, those of Koofa. In the characters of Mecca and Medina, the Eliph is strongly inclined to the right, and the figures of the letters are somewhat horizontal. Kendi says, 'I know of no writing in which the figures of the letters can be more readily enlarged or diminished, or written with a greater rapidity than the Arabic.' "

which were invented by an Arab named Moramer, not long before Mahomet. Before that time, the Arabs had no peculiar character which could be called national. These Koofic characters are supposed to be entirely different from the beforementioned Hemearitan or Homeritan letters, called Mosnad, which were in writing joined together. The Arabian literati date their invention at a very early period, and say that at the time they were in use, no profane subjects were permitted to be written in them; and, that moreover, they were not publicly taught. This assertion or tradition confirms the suggestion, that in those early ages few were initiated in the sciences.

The twenty-eight Arabian letters consist only of seventeen figures. Points called diaritical, which are placed in different numbers, from one to three, above or below some letters, and which must not be confounded with the vowel points, characterize different letters-although they retain the same figure. Thus one and the same figure with one or more points above or below it, may be b or t, n or i, &c. By this means the reading of the Arabian characters is rendered more difficult than the Hebrew, all of which have figures absolutely different. The Turks and Persians have adopted the Arabic alphabet; these two languages, however, differ from each other as well as from the Arabic; even their grammars have no analogical connexion with the Arabic, and the principal stocks of their words are foreign. The Turkish language is derived from the Tartarian dialects; the Persian is original, but has been enriched with Median, Greek, Latin and even German words.

The Syrians, like the Arabians, have also two alphabets; the ancient called Strangelo is now in use only for ornament on title pages. The modern, now in general use, is more round than the former. All the figures of the Syrian letters are differently formed, with the exception of the v and d, a simple point above or below the figure is the only mark of the difference between these two letters. According to Assemani, a Syriac priest, by the name of Paul of Antioch, had an intention of adding some letters to the Syriac alphabet, and commissioned Jacob of Edessa to execute this task, but the latter refused, for fear lest the works which were written in the ancient characters, might, by means of this innovation, be neglected and lost; still he himself invented seven vowel figures which he sent to Paul of Antioch.

The Phoenician characters have been known to us only since the beginning of the last century. Rheinfordius made some attempts to read and explain different monuments and medals, VOL. V.—NO. 10.

44