practising the same system. But what other nation is there in Asia, which fulfils this condition, and which had so far preceded the Chinese in the degree of civilization inferred by the want of the art of writing? It is true, we only know India as possessing an alphabetical system, so that she must at first have either invented a figurative writing, which she subsequently abandoned, or have received the alphabetical system from a nation, which had had time to arrive at such a system before India herself; but in either case we must take into account, how much time was necessary for either of the two nations to reach this point.

According to the Chinese, and what they have recorded as to the origin of their writing, we must suppose that they adopted the successive use of knotted cords, notched pieces of wood, trigrams, and signs derived from the traces left by the feet of birds in wet earth; and that after these rude methods they arrived at a real writing, according to the general acceptation of the word, which means the art of rendering, by the aid of signs, thoughts and words sensible to the eyes and understanding. From this point we may proceed with certainty in the history of writing among the Chinese.

Their earliest characters consisted of the figures of the objects, of which they desired to express the idea. This initial step is common to them with the Egyptians, the Mexicans, and all other nations and individuals who have desired to designate by a sign any material object; all have traced the portrait by its outline. Those learned persons who have felt surprise at the discovery of this analogy between the Egyptian and Chinese writing, are precisely in the same position as the man, who should be astonished that the same figure was employed to represent a horse at Paris and Rome, at Memphis, Pekin, or Timbuctoo! We need scarcely remark how idle are the conclusions derived from such an observation, as to the supposed common origin and identity of the people

of such different countries, simply because they have figured by means of the same strokes the representation of the same object.

The analogy between the earliest writing of the Chinese and Egyptians is a fact immaterial therefore with reference to the origin of these two peoples, which are of different races; the uniformity in the proceeding is the only thing worthy of remark in the history of their institutions. But was it possible for them to have taken any other first step?

As to the priority of the invention, it cannot be denied to Egypt; the Chinese do not quote, even traditionally, any monument which can approach in antiquity the inscriptions on the pyramids of Memphis.

Having thus noticed the existence of this primary and identical step in the practice of writing among the Egyptians and Chinese, it is worthy of our curiosity to inquire into the subsequent progress, and to learn how the very different genius of these two celebrated nations advanced beyond this first graphical movement, and brought it to perfection, in proportion to the wants of its progressive civilization, and the workings of its own peculiar genius.

It may be affirmed without hesitation, that Egypt proceeded in a strictly logical manner; she was rationally progressive, and either from a more real advance in the philosophical sciences, or from a greater perfection in the constitution of the national language, her system of writing, without laying aside the use of its primitive signs, is found in its complete state at once simple, regular, intelligible by all, absolute in its rules, and sufficient for all the wants of a people advanced to the highest state of civilization.

On the contrary, in its actual state, which is the most perfect, these qualities are not found to the same degree in the writing of the Chinese; there are, as it were, evident marks in it of that weakness which characterizes all the inven

tions of the genius of this nation of aged infants. Some observations in reference to the exposition of certain details will better illustrate our meaning.

In the specimen, No. 1, of Plate I., are delineated twenty-four signs of the primitive Chinese writing; they are all figurative, that is, they express the simple ideas of the objects of which they are the portraits, and consist of the figures of men, animals, furniture, and houses. With the exception of three, which express a complex idea, namely, the signs father, son, and nephew, all these signs indicate to the mind the object of which they are delineations or outlines. To paint or to express the same ideas the Egyptians employed the same signs.

The use of these signs, of which the outline ought to be regular, so as to constitute a real picture, would require some study of the art of design; but as an entire nation could neither be taught to draw, nor to abstain from writing, in China a linear trace of the figure was allowed, but somewhat abridged, and with some irregularities; which owing to the greater facility in combining its lines, rendered the use of this figurative writing more general to a greater number of persons. Specimens of this second form of these figurative signs are to be found in No. 2 of Plate I. Egypt did not proceed otherwise, and the two kinds of Chinese signs above described exactly correspond with those forms of Egyptian writing, which are termed pure hieroglyphics and linear hieroglyphics.

We may easily conceive how arbitrary or negligent details would be introduced in the usage of these linear signs. The first column of Plate II. furnishes instances in China, whilst in Egypt they are to be met with in manuscripts and inscriptions intended for the lower classes, or executed by unskilful hands.

In China these figurative and isolated characters also

served, when combined together, to express complex and metaphysical ideas. Examples of these combinations occur in No. 2 of Plate II.; thus an ear between two folding doors expresses to hear, to understand; a mouth and a bird signifies to sing; a woman, a hand, and a broom, designates a married woman; the sun above a tree means to burn. This combination of figurative signs, to attain the same object, was similar and not less common in Egyptian writing: the heaven and a star signified night; a man carrying a whip expressed the idea to guard or conduct, &c.

Taking for granted the acceptation of the various signs which compose the whole system of the figurative writing of the Chinese, they may readily be distributed into several classes, comprehending the indicative signs, or signs of number, and metaphorical, comprehending the signs of material objects, which being metaphorically or allusively separated from their physical sense, have become attached to the expression of moral or metaphysical ideas; and all these signs, whatever may be the number of classes into which they are distributed, will find a place perfectly analogous in the much less sub-divided nomenclature of the signs, which in the Egyptian writing are comprehended under the denominations of figurative, symbolical, or symbolicofigurative. We also find signs which the Chinese call turned backwards or inverted, and which written in the contrary direction from that of the other signs in the same phrase, express by their reverse position the contrary of their natural sense. So, in Egyptian writing, the figure of a man walking in the direction of the other signs of the phrase, indicates to go, but if he is represented walking in a contrary direction, the figure signifies to return.

With more or less of caprice or ingenuity, or with more or less real science or reserve in the invention of the means whereby metaphysical ideas were written with the sign

portraits of physical objects, the process was the same in Egypt and in China; both being restricted to the use of figurative or symbolical signs, and neither being yet acquainted with the phonetic signs of sounds.

The necessity of this important advance towards perfection was, however, perceived in both countries. Did Egypt at once arrive at the perfection exhibited in her most ancient monuments, or, as in China, was her first step very insufficient, requiring subsequent advancement, before she arrived at the extreme limits of this inappreciable state of perfection? As made known to us in her most ancient monuments, the perfection of the phonetic mode of writing is of the highest antiquity in Egypt; there is no trace of a less perfect attempt. In the more modern monuments of China, the imperfection of the other invention is exhibited in a manner not less manifest; and it is from this point that we can trace the vast differences which are to be noticed in the progressive march of the two systems of Chinese and Egyptian writing, hitherto approaching to each other by such real, or rather inevitable resemblances, which in China, as in Egypt, consisted of figured signs, which are read with as much certainty as our books in Europe, each group of written signs corresponding to a word in the spoken language, expressing by its sound the same idea as this group of signs.

When, therefore, a learned Chinese scholar has stated, that this people, in endeavouring to express by writing the sounds of the language, adopted a very ingenious process, (the only one, perhaps, which could present itself to their minds,) he doubtless desired indulgent critics to forgive the Chinese for having, in this grave operation, invented a syllabic system instead of an alphabet, and, what is still more irrational, a syllabic system composed of a series of signs with double meanings, which delineate an idea in one phrase, and express phonetically a syllable in another phrase.