href="@public@vhost@g@gutenberg@html@files@38773@[email protected]#fn1" class="fnanchor pginternal" tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">[1] just prior to the delivery of the law, and in connection with the account of Jethro, his father-in-law; subsequently, constant allusion is made to writing. There is only one reference to this art in Homer (Il. z. 168.). The author of Job, who appears to have had a much more enlarged knowledge of art and science than Moses, speaks of the cutting and painting (for so the Arabic and Hebrew words should be rendered, and not printing) on a roll, i.e. with the style and brush; also of the cutting (felling) with a chisel (in Arabic, a digger) on lead, or on a rock.[2]

[1] "Jehovah said to Moses, Write this as a memorandum on a roll, and let it be read to Joshua, that I intend to obliterate entirely the memory of Amalek here below. And Moses built an altar and called it Jehovah Nissi (Jehovah is my banner). The reason he assigned for the name was that a hand (power) opposed to the throne of Jah was (the cause of) Jehovah's perpetual warfare against Amalek." This is the sense of the Hebrew as it stands, in the current language of our day, and not a copy of the words merely,—an error, it is conceived, into which most of the translators, from the Seventy downwards, have often fallen. If a conjectural criticism might be offered, let כ, caf, be inserted for נ, nun, and instead of Jehovah Nissi (banner), read Jehovah Cissi, "Jehovah is my throne;" then the reason assigned by Moses for the name becomes intelligible, which it certainly is not in the existing text, undoubtedly very ancient, being confirmed by the Samaritan.]

[2] The word, correctly translated for ever, according to the Masoretic system, means "as a witness or testimony," if pointed with Tsereh instead of Pathach. The general sense of this chapter, in some respects obscure, appears to be, "I seek for justice, but cannot obtain it. Every obstacle is put in my way. Neither my own kindred nor servants obey me. Look at my most wretched condition; although I call you friends, you all hate me. You are not satisfied with persecuting my body, but you afflict my soul also. Oh that I could make an impression upon you. I would set forth my petition for relief from your persecutions on a roll, on lead, or on a rock, as a constant memorial in testimony of my sufferings and your hate; as I know that my Goel (Redeemer or Avenger) lives, and will at length ascend from the dust (sand or soil). (In his approach he raises a cloud of dust.) Then arise and destroy this (memorial), for, living, I shall get a judgment on my case, being personally present and not by representative, although I may be hardly able to attend from mental anxiety. Then you will say, why did we persecute him, we were all wrong. And you will fear punishment because you will learn that justice must be satisfied."

Divested of its highly poetic diction, the above gives the subject matter in the vernacular.]

The examination of the copies of the inscriptions already in our possession will probably determine whether the language is hieroglyphic, syllabic, or alphabetic. The principal point is to enumerate the characters found to be clearly distinct from each other. Should there be found two to three hundred decidedly distinct characters—assuming it to be one language and one uniform character of that language, for many nations (peoples) use more than one character—the language à priori must be hieroglyphic. If 70 to 90, it will be syllabic; but if only 20 to 50, it may be safely concluded that it is alphabetic. The letters distinct from each other may be less than 20, inasmuch as in the Arabic, most probably the language which will solve this problem, one character represents several sounds, the points, usually omitted, alone distinguishing the difference between be, te, tse, nun, and jod, between jim, ha and cha, between dal and zal, between re and se, sin and shin, zad and dad, fe and kaf, &c. &c. On the other hand, the language has increased the number of its characters, by distinguishing initial from medial and terminal letters, having retained only thirteen originally distinct characters in its alphabet.

The Ethiopic, written from left to right, has manifestly furnished the Arabs with their cursive character, the one uniformly printed, written from right to left, or otherwise both have derived them from a common source. Of the intimate relation early subsisting between the Ethiopians and their Shemitic congeners in Asia, one remarkable instance is the former retaining to themselves exclusively "the exalted horn," so often mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, the wearing of which has been long abandoned by every other family of that race.

T. J. BUCKTON.

Lichfield.

ADDITIONS TO CUNNINGHAM'S HAND-BOOK OF LONDON.

St. Stephen's Church, Walbrook.

—Sir Robert Chicheley, alderman and twice Lord Mayor of London, is said, in Wm. Ravenhill's Short Account of the Company of Grocers from their Original (4to. Lond. 1689), to have purchased the ground whereon St. Stephen's church stands, and to have built, at his own charge, the church which was afterwards replaced by the edifice of Sir Christopher Wren. The founder was a member of that company, and to them he gave the advowson. He was the youngest of three brothers, of whom the eldest was Henry Chicheley, Archbishop of Canterbury temp. Henry VI. The second brother was Sir William, who, like Robert, was an alderman, and a member of the Grocers' Company. From the younger brother, Robert, descended Sir Thomas Chicheley, who was Master of the Ordnance and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in the reign of Charles II.

Grocers' Hall.

—In 1411 the custos or warden and brethren of the Grocers' Company purchased of Robert Lord Fitzwalter his mansion-house and lands, extending from near the Old Jewry to Walbrook in the centre of the city of London, for 320 marks, and soon afterwards laid the foundation of their new Common-hall. In 1429 they had license to acquire lands of the value of 500 marks. There was "a fair open garden behind, for air and diversion, and before the house, within the gate, a large court-yard." The company, after the fire of London, rebuilt and enlarged the old Hall, says Ravenhill in his Account of the Grocers' Company (Lond. 1689), "with offices and accommodations far beyond any other place, for the most commodious seat of the chief magistrate." (See Mr. Cunningham's quotation from Strype, as to its civic uses.) King Charles II. accepted the office of Master of the Company, and they set up his statue in the Royal Exchange. See Ravenhill's Short Account of the Company of Grocers, and Howel's