that, in the primitive state of society, mankind had no other method to express their ideas in writing than the simple representation of the objects. We must, therefore, endeavour, 'if possible, to ascertain what alterations were made in this picture-writing before the different figures became what we now, strictly speaking, term hieroglyphics.

We are

Unfortunately, the total deficiency of monuments of the first attempts of mankind, puts it out of our power to speak with certainty of the expression and purpose of this mode of writing. totally unacquainted with, and most likely we shall continue for ever ignorant of, the primitive efforts of the Egyptians in hieroglyphical writing. The monuments which still exist on this ancient land, although much anterior to any thing of the sort which has as yet appeared in Europe, far from exhibiting the first originals, are the result of the considerable improvement which they had made in painting, sculpture, and architecture. The basso relievos by which they are ornamented are generally attached to legends, perfectly similar in their form and combination to those which, in later ages, were dedicated to the Grecian kings and Roman emperors and, for the space of more than three thousand years before Christ, we cannot discover the least difference in the manner and arrangement of hieroglyphics.

In attempting, therefore, to explain the nature and use of hieroglyphics during these primi

tive ages, we have no other guide than probability, no other resource than analogy; and it is by their assistance and the peculiar situation in which the Egyptians found themselves when they first went to settle in that country, that we must endeavour to ascertain the nature and use of their hieroglyphical writing.

We have seen that the representation of the objects themselves was, as it must have been, the first method adopted by mankind to communicate their thoughts in writing. This mode must have preceded by many centuries the Dispersion; for it is found to have existed, more or less, among the most rude, as well as the most polished nations of the globe; nations who, from their natural position, and the immense distance which separated them from the other civilized parts of the world, could not have intercourse with the rest of mankind.

held any

The difficulty and labour attached to this mode of writing soon persuaded the people to be satisfied with the outlines only of the figure which expressed the object; and this seems, in fact, to have been the method used by most, if not all the nations of the earth. It was found in Mexico and in Peru, at the discovery of America, and, in some respects, still exists in China, as we shall see in a future Lecture.

But as this method of expressing the objects even by outlines was still very troublesome, the Egyptians adopted another and more simple mode of writing, and that was, to substitute a kind of

mark, or simple character, for the outlines of the object. These marks, or these characters, still retained some resemblance to the figure made by the outlines; but they were less difficult, needed less skill, and much less trouble, and they were, therefore, soon generally used. They were, however, still intricate, and required a certain degree both of patience and skill. To simplify, therefore, the method of writing, the priests turned these outlines into marks which, although they retained some resemblance to the outlines for which they had been substituted, were, however, more simple and expeditious.

In this manner the Egyptian hieroglyphics underwent the same revolution to which they had been exposed in China. In that country, the primary institution of writing by the representation of figures, was soon turned into arbitrary marks, which, although in the beginning they might still preserve a little resemblance to the natural objects, yet in course of time deviated so much from their originals, as to render it impossible to trace them to their archetype.

The Egyptian priests, however, for reasons which will be shewn in the course of these Lectures, although they adopted these marks as the general method of writing, yet for their own purposes invented other characters, and other marks, which were more arbitrary than the former. They were absolutely symbolical, and of a nature which was very difficult to be understood, without a previous

knowledge or study; and it seems that they did so in three ways.

The first was to employ the most remarkable circumstance attending any subject, to express the subject itself. Thus, if they wished to represent two armies ready to come to battle, they painted two hands, the one of which held a bow, the other a shield, as we find amongst the hieroglyphics of Horapollo.

The second was more ingenious, and it consisted in substituting for the thing which they wished to exhibit, the real or metaphorical instrument by which the thing itself could be done; thus, an eye and a sceptre represented a king; a sword a tyrant; a vessel with a pilot the ruling power of the universe; the emblem of nature, for the productive power of the earth.

The third mode went still further; it employed one thing for another, in which there was no other resemblance than that which convention had established; thus, a serpent, with its tail in its mouth, forming a circle, became the symbol of the universe, and the spots on its skin the emblems of the stars.

In process of time, the use of this third mode was extended to express the qualities of substances by sensible images; for instance, a hare meant an openness of character; a buck, impudicity; a fly, impudence; an ant, science; a client flying for relief to his patron, and receiving none, was represented by a sparrow and an owl; a king, inexorable and

S

estranged from his people, by an eagle; a man who exposes his children through poverty, by a hawk; a wife who hates her husband, or her children, by a viper; one initiated in the mysteries, or under an obligation of secrecy, by a grasshopper, which was thought to have no mouth. And thus, by degrees, they imagined symbols, or symbolical images, to express those things which, being merely qualities or powers, have no visible form.

It is from this third mode of writing, and from the custom of expressing the qualities of things by the picture of visible objects, that scholars have experienced the greatest, if not the whole difficulty of understanding hieroglyphics; and this difficulty is not entirely removed by the recent discoveries; for, indeed, we are not yet sufficiently acquainted with the natural history of ancient Egypt, or with the prejudices and notions of the people, to be able to ascertain how they could find any similarity between two objects, in which we find none. Thus, for instance, he who had borne his misfortunes with courage, and had at last surmounted them, was signified by the picture of an hyena, because the skin of that animal was supposed to make the wearer fearless and invulnerable.

But the department in which the priesthood exercised all their ingenuity, in regard to symbols, was their theology; for we find the most extraordinary figures employed emblematically, to represent their gods and goddesses. Originally, as we shall see in a future Lecture, these symbols were