Forty-fi\e of the Egyp. Hieroglyphics had acquired, as we have seen, a semi-alphabetic char acter, and Ue Roug6 contended that the Hieratic representatives of 21 of the most suitable of tlie>e Hieroglyphs were selected, and employed by some Sem. people as the prototypes of tlie .-V. they constructed, only one of the 22 letters being due to a non-Egyptian source. These Hieratic characters, traced from the Papj'rus Prisse, are given in col. 2 of the table, and the corresponding Hieroglyphs, which face the other way, will be found in col. 1.
The oldest Sem. forms witli which we are acquainted are shown in col. .S. In comparing them witli theii assumed Hieratic proto'iyjies ;t must be remembered that they are not coi-.tem-
EVOLUTION OP THE HEBREW ALPHABETS.
EGYPTIAN.
ISRAELITIC.
ARAM/iAN.
HEBREW.
Namee.
Valuet,
1
^
^
A
^ f^
/^
x<
X
iC
'Alepla
'a
2
^
:^
^
i^ ^
i>
:3
n
n
Belh
b
3
a
2r
>
K
X
X
:i
\
Gimel
9
^
^
^
A
^ V
^
•1
*t
^
Dalelh
d
5
ra
m
-^
1 -^
n
TS
n
h
He
h
6
Vr^.
^
V
1
1
^
)
\
Vau
V
7
fe
t
:r
T
T
t
1
t
Zayin
z
8
o
k£>
H
A/
w n
Jt
rt
n
Heth
h
9
c=:^
^
e
^
x>
v>
U
u
Telh
t
10
w
Y
^
\
A
JJ '
^
^
Yod
y
11
v_:a
n
i
7
"3
:>
^1
51
Kaph
k
12
?tft
^
L
4
Lr
5,
h
v
Lamed
I
13
k
:>
>
y ^
0^
!^h
5t)
an
Mem
m
14
JM^AA*
^
'z
J )
tf
Ji
n
Nun
n
it
-#*
f
^fi
"7
V
t7
D
Samekh
9
16
o
V
y
b>
1
y
J>
'Ayin
'a
1?
e
^
9
-)
"J
o
i)
;^n
Pc
P
IB
n
/
r
rr
^
y
Y
:^r
Z.i.ie
J
to
/}
^
T
■^ ^
^
7
V
?
Knph
/;
20
<:. >
^
^
y ^
1
-J
^
1
K.'sh
7-
2!
J,U
s^
w
>o
^
t^
v^
i:7\i'
Shin
sA
22
]
1 1
1 1 1
IV
V
VI.
VII.
VIII.
Tau
c
EXPLANATION OF THE TABLE.
Cn\. I. EovFTiAS IIir.iiooMrmcs. (aiinf to the litt. ("1. II. IIikhatio Ciiaractsiih, (mine to tho rialit Col. IH. OLntsT IftRAKLiTKofiriKKMi-lAN LKfTKK.H, (roin tliu Mfiut Lftuiiion ftli<l Moftliitu iilswjrij)tioii8 (tfco. XI. to I,\. II. c). Col. IV. AllAM.KAN, ri^'lifr to Iflt, from the coiim o( tlic Sntropii » iiiiil Ei{v|>. iiiiwriplioiiD and papyri (sec. V. to I. li.c). I'ol. V. Oldkut S«i akb HEmmw, frinn inncriptions m-nr JiTUHalcni (llcroilian period). Col. VI. S«iaiiI! IIkuubw, from Bahyloniuu Ijowls (sec. IV. to VII. A.D.). Col. VII. !im.iRi! UtiiREW, (rum Codes Babjlouicus at St. Petcrabur^t (IIIU A.li.) Col. VIII. Moiikrn Suuark IIkurbw.
12
ALPHABET
ALPHaBEI'
porary forms, but are separated by at least ten, or more probably by twelve centuries, a period durinj; which considerable ditierences of form must almost necessarily have arisen, in addition to which the Hieratic forms are cursive, freely traced on papjTus with a brush, while the Sem. letters are lapidary types, engraved with a chisel upon stone or bronze, which would entail ditierences of form similar to those which exist between our printed capitals A, i>, E and the script forms a, b, e of our modern handwriting. This alone would account for the alterations in the shapes of such letters as dalcth, UetU, resh, or mem, the change from a cursive to a lapidary type causing the characters to become more regular in size and inclination, bold curves being simplified, closed ovals becoming triangles or squares, and the curved sweeping tails becom- ing straight and ri"id lines.
For 21 of the 22 letters of the Sem. alphabet De Rouge ha£ found a prob. Hieratic prototype, in 18 cases taking the normal Egyp. equivalent of the Sem. sound, and in 3 instances only, alcph, beth, and zayin, having recourse to a less usual homo- phone. In one case he fails. The peculiar guttural breathing denoted by the Sem. letter 'ayin did not exist in Egyp. speech. For this letter no Egyp. prototype has been discovered, and it is supposed that it was an invention of the Semites, the sjTubol
0 being regarded, as the name suggests, as the picture of an 'eye.' (See No. 16, col. 3.)
How, when, or by whom the Sem. A. was thus evolved from the Egyp. Hieratic it is im- possible to say with precision. The possible limits of date are believed to lie between the 23rd and ■;he 17th centuries B.C. It seems probable that the development was efl'ected by some Sem. people who were in commercial intercourse with the Egyptians, — possibly, it has been conjectured, the Semites of S. Arabia, possibly the Hyksos, if these Shepherd kings were Semites, and not, as IS now supposed, of Mongolian race, hardly the Hebrews, who seem to be excluded by the limits of date, but most probably a Phccn. trading colony settled on the shores of Lake Menzaleh in the Delta. On the Egyp. monuments they are called Fenekh (Phoenicians), and also Char or dial, a name used to designate the coast tribes of Syria. The native land of the Char was called Kaft, whence part of the Delta was called Caphtor, or the 'greater Kaft.' If the A. arose in Caphtor it would easily spread to Phoenicia, and then to the kindred and neighbouring races.