Some Observations and Conjectures concerning the Chinese Characters. Made by R. H. R. S. S.

Whether there ever were any Language natural, I dispute not: But that there have been, are, and may be, artificial Languages 'tis not difficult to prove. The Chinese Court Language is said to be of this kind, invented and spoken by the Literati and Mandarines throughout the whole Empire of China, differing from all the other Languages spoken in it, and I conjecture it to be nothing else but the Names of the Character by which they write and express their meaning, arbitrarily imposed by them, as we in Europe set names to Arithmetical Figures, not as we pronounce Words written with a litteral Character. This I Judge by comparing the Characters with the Names, Monosyllables or Words they pronounce and read them with. Nor do they ascend above a Monosyllabical Name, tho' the Character be composed of many single Characters, each of which hath its proper Sense, and Monosyllabical Name, and though the meaning of each Character, be an ingredient in the Notion of that compounded Character.

I might give an Instance also in the Artificial Language Invented by the Late Reverend Bishop of Chester Dr. Wilkins, which in all the accomplishments of Language doth excel any one yet extant; to which is also annexed a real Character, Legible into that or any other Language Spoken. By which Language the Character and every additional Mark is effable, and yet the Character is not Literal but Real, which is more curious and useful than the Chinese way. Great pity it is that Discourse is not published in Latin, that the Learned of Europe, may think of further Improving it, and bringing it to Use.

But whatever we may judge of Language, 'tis past dispute that Writing was ever Artificial, how Antiently so ever it were in Use, and was the Invention of some thinking and Studious Men. 'Tis also evident that there have been various ways thought of for Expressing Significancy, according to the several Genii of the Persons that were the Inventors. As may be guessed by the Ægyptian Hieroglyphicks, the Chinese Characters, the Mexican Chronology, and the Literal Characters of several Nations, each of which seem to proceed upon differing methods, and from differing thoughts of Invention.

Which of these ways is the most Antient, is hard to prove. The Ægyptian Mummies and Obelesks prove a great Antiquity of the Hieroglyphicks, but yet the Chinese Chronology (if to be credited) outstrips the Ægyptian in pretence to Antiquity. For the Chinese make Fohi, the first King of China, to be the inventer of their Character: And account him to have lived 2950 Years before the time of Christ, during all which time they pretend to have a certain and written Account in their Books: But their Account of the times preceding, they esteem more Hypothetical and Fabulous; depending chiefly upon Fiction and Oral Tradition: As you will easily believe, when you understand how many Years they make it since the Creation of the World to the present Year 1686. which by the Account thereof in Mr. Graves's Translation of Vulg. Beig. will be found to be no less than eighty eight millions six hundred and forty thousand one hundred and two Solar Years, there having been run out since the Creation 8864 Ven. of Years (every Ven. containing ten thousand such Years) and of the present Ven. this Year 1686. is the 102d. Which Account is abundantly more extravagant than the Ægyptian: But this need not invalidate their History since Fohi; by which it appears that their Character was invented before the time of Moses about 1400 Years, and even before Menes the first King of Ægypt about 500 Years. So that the Chinese Invention of Writing or Characters, seems to be the most ancient of that kind. And the Book Yekim said to be written by Fohi, the most antient Book.

These Accounts made me the more desirous to understand somewhat of the Reality and Truth, of what is related concerning the Knowledge of Literature and manual Arts, which these People of China are said to have possessed so long a time in so great Perfection, and without Alteration from the primitive Institution, especially upon the Account of their Art of Printing, which gave a hint to the Inventors of that admirable and most useful of all Inventions (for the Common Wealth of Learning) the way of Printing here in Europe. For Paulus Jovius affirms that the first occasion of that Invention in Germany, was a German Merchant, who returning out of China into his own Country, related what he had observed concerning the Practice of it as used in that Country. And tho' the Chinese way be wholly differing as to the method of composing, from what was invented and perfected here: Yet such an intimation was enough to an ingenious Artist to improve the first Contrivance, and make it more accomodate to the literal way of Writing with us: And as our way may possibly be now brought to the greatest Perfection for exactness and expedition, so without doubt must be their way of Printing any thing just as it is written, since I find, that they can engrave their Stamps for a Sheet, as soon as one of our Compositers can set and correct a Sheet of our literal Character, and when so done, one Man alone will print off 1500 Sheets in one Day. And though 'tis generally believed to be much the same with our Wooden Cuts for Printing, yet from some Observations I have made, I believe it to be much another way; of which I shall hereafter say more when I describe their other Arts of Pottery, Staining, Varnishing, &c.

By a Chinese Manuscript, out of which I transcribed the Lord's Prayer in the Year 1666 (when it was lost) I found that the Pronunciations had no affinity with the stroaks of the Character. Whence I conceived it was either a numeral Character consisting of Numbers, or else a real Character, but not a literal, unless it were a literal Character of some other Language than that by which it was pronounced, whose pronunciation is lost though the significancy be retained, as if one should read what is written in Hebrew ????????? into the Latin or Roman Language, In Principio CrÆavit instead of Brasit bra, or Beresith Bara according to the MasorethÆ.

Since that time I procured from China, a Dictionary of the Court Language, (as I found it written upon by the Person that sent it me from thence) but this whole Book (which I found was Printed) consisted only of the Chinese Characters without any Interpretation, or Pronunciation; however by the help of the Pictures of that, and a Chinese Almanack, I quickly found out their Characters for Numbers, and their way of Numeration, together with the Figure and Use of their Abacus or counting Board, for performing the Operations of Arithmetick, which I find pretty near to agree with that of the antient Romans (a Description and Picture of which is given by Ursinus, Pignorius and Velserus) save only, that, instead of Pins and sliding Groves of the Roman, the Chinese Abacus hath Strings or Wires and Beads, to slide upon them; and that, instead of four Pins for Digits or Units, the Chinese hath five Beads: So that it may seem to argue that the Chinese Abacus was designed for a Duodecimal Progression: Whereas that of the Romans was design'd for the Decimal.

One thing is remarkable in the Chinese, that I find the Abacus to lie Horizontal, and their first place to be that next the left Hand, which I judge was also the first in their old way of reading, much the same with ours, though their other Characters are erected (as I shall by and by shew) from the posture of Writing and Reading, which I conjecture they did at first make use of; and what does yet further agree with this conjecture, is remarkable in the newly mentioned Treatise of Vulg. Beig. That whereas the way of Writing and Reading used by the Arabs, was from the right to the left, the first place or the place of Units in their Numeration, was that next the right Hand; and so came first to be read: As did that of China, who as I conceive read the contrary way, from the left to the right.

It appears therefore by this Remark that we received this way of expressing Numbers from the Arabians, for that we keep the same posture or position of places with them, tho' our progression in Writing and Reading be the contrary way. And though we now read them also in the order they are set, twenty one, twenty two, thirty six, forty eight, &c. yet we retain also the other way of Pronouncing, viz. one and twenty, two and twenty, six and thirty, eight and forty, &c.

Now as the Chinese and Roman Abacus do much agree save only that they proceed contrary ways, so doth their way of expressing Numbers by Letters or Marks, one stroke or line signifying one; two lines two; three lines three; a cross ten; two crosses twenty; three crosses thirty; and so onwards to a hundred, which they expressed by a square Mark, and a cross with a stroak added for a thousand, as will appear by the Table annexed. And though the Characters are not all the same; yet the order and method of one agrees very near with that of the other, especially if I may be allowed my supposition, that the primitive way of Writing and Reading with the Chinese was Horizontal, and like the Greek and Latin or European way. Now that these are properly numeral Figures, or Characters, is manifest from this, that they have also word Characters for every Number, and they can (in the same manner as the Romans could) express a Number by their numeral characters or Marks, and by their literal or word Characters; for as one single stroak signifies one or the first, so does the Character (in the Plate marked with E) signify the same thing, that is one or the first.

Having thus discovered their Characters for Numbers, and their way of Numeration, I was next desirous to understand something concerning their Language and Character.

Upon perusing all the Accounts I could meet with in Books, I found very little satisfaction as to what I principally inquired after, which was first concerning the method of the Character, whether it consisted of a certain number of Marks methodically disposed like Letters in a literal, or like Numbers in a Numeral, or like Radicals in composite and decomposite Derivations? 'Tis said to be legible into a great many Languages considerably different one from another, but how this is effected is not related, only 'tis said that the Marks are of the nature of our Arithmetical Figures, (which are become almost Universal at least to us here in Europe,) and 2dly, concerning the number of these Characters? to which I found as little satisfaction; for, by some Relations I found that there were 120000, by others 80000, and by others 60000. And that a Man must be able to remember to Write and Read at least 8000, or 10000, before he will be able to express his meaning thereby, and that it is the business of a Man's whole Life to be throughly understanding in the whole Character; seeming to intimate that the Characters are immethodical, and there are as many primitive Characters as Words. Others tell us of various kinds of Characters which have been in use in several Ages. The first they say were Hieroglyphical like the Ægyptian or Mexican, consisting of the Pictures of Animals and Vegetables. But that the last are made up of Lines and Points, that they have no such thing as Letters or Syllables, but every distinct Word and Notion has a distinct Character, and that all are primitive or in composite, so that if Calepines Dictionary were to be translated into the Chinese, 'twere necessary to have as many distinct radical Characters as there are Words therein to be found, which accounts do seem to insinuate that this Character is the most difficult, and the most perplexed piece of Learning in the World, and depends wholly upon the strength of the Memory, in retaining the form and signification of a perplexed scrawl. But whether they who gave us these Accounts did do it knowingly, is much to be doubted, my own Observations, at least, make me think otherwise.

I have not yet been able to procure sufficient helps to inform my self of the whole Art of Writing and Reading the Chinese Character, and I fear the Relations I have hitherto met with concerning it, were written by such as did not well understand it, however from such helps as I had, what I collected or do conjecture, I shall here relate. The best help I had, was the perusal of some Books Printed in China, with the pronunciation and signification of the Character in Latin Letters. By these Books then I observed, first, that every one of their Characters, whether consisting of more or fewer strokes or marks, were comprised within a certain square space, which is proportion'd according to the bigness of the size or manner of Writing, they design there to make use of, not that the whole Square is filled with every Character, but that no part of that Character does exceed the limits of that Square, so that tho' the Character have but one stroak, it takes as much room in the line as another that hath 20 or 30 several Marks, so that their Characters are most exactly ranged in Rank and File, not unlike our Numbers in Arithmetick.

Notwithstanding which I find they do vary the bigness of the Character upon several Occasions, as in the Titles of Books, in the Titles of the Chapters or Sections, in the Comments, Explications or Notes, and upon several other occasions of variety, which they do at Pleasure with their Pencil, as we use variety of Letters in the Printing of a Book. The Titles of Books are generally in very large Characters, 6 or 8 times as big as those of the Book, the explication Notes ½ of the bigness, the Contents usually twice as big, and the like variety on several other occasions. I have met with also three several kinds of Characters, the most usual is the fixed or set square form. The second sort is the running Hand, in which the orders of the Courts are written by their Secretaries, of which I have seen 3 or 4 kinds, in which the Pencil is never taken off, till the whole Character be finished, and sometimes two or three are all written without break. The third seems to be somewhat like the flourishing great Letters, used by Scriveners at the beginning of Deeds, and by the Germans in the beginning of Chapters and Sections. They are compounded of the same strokes as the set Character, but modulated and shaped a little otherwise to make them appear the more beautiful and regular. A Specimen of each of these three are in the Plate. This third is made use of for Epitaphs, and other Inscriptions on Buildings or Monuments. These three sorts I may call the three general kinds of Writing, but there is to be found an almost infinite variety of forms which Men use. This will be the more easie to be believed, when we consider that the Printed Characters are exactly the same with the Written, insomuch that every variety in each stroke, line or point, that is or can be made with the Pencil, is perfectly expressed in the Impression, and the Form, Mode, or Hand, as we call it, of every Writer is exhibited so curiously, that I think it hardly possible to be performed after the way of wooden Cuts, as Authors affirm it is, but must be done after the method of our Copper Cuts, Printed by a Roll-press, which the way of expressing the Running or Court-Hand, does, I conceive, most evidently demonstrate, and from divers circumstances, I could evidently make appear from the Book it self, which I cannot so well express in Writing. Their Paper is generally very thin and fine, and very transparent, but brown, so that whatever is Written or Printed on it, is almost as legible on the back, as on the foreside, which is of great use in the cutting of their Stamps. And thence they never Write or Print on both sides of the same Leaf, but only on one, and to make the Leaf appear Printed on both sides, they double the Sheet with the Printed sides outwards, and putting the folded part forward, they Sew, Bind, or Stitch together, all these Sheets with the cut Edges, and upon whole Sheets instead of single Leaves; just in the same manner as the Plate annexed to this Discourse is Printed. They begin the Book on the top of the right Hand side of the Page that is next the right Hand, and they read downwards to the bottom, then begin the next Line towards the left Hand at the top, and so read to the bottom, and so proceed to the end of the Book. But this I suppose not to be the primitive or first way of Writing or Reading. The Title of the Book is set first upon a whole Leaf, usually of a thicker Paper, and some Title is likewise Written upon the folding or edge of every Sheet, where is set also the Number of the Book, and the Number of the Sheet, half of which appears on one side, and half on the other side of the fold.

As to the Character it self, (I find by all the Books and Writings I have yet met with of that kind) that each of them is made up of a certain number of Strokes, Lines or Marks, which are very distinct from each other in their shape and position, and by reason that these are single Strokes, and as I conceive uncompounded, I think they may be called the Letters, Elements or Particles, out of which the more compounded Characters are constructed or contexed. These are the first kind of which there are but a very few, and I think those I have described in the thirteenth Line of the Plate are all.

Two, three, four, or more of these joined together in a certain order and contexture (in the doing of which there is a great Regularity and Order observed, which is not varied from, and all within the regular square Space) I conceive do make Syllables or primitive radical Characters, each of which have a primitive, single or distinct Notion or Signification as well as Sound, which is made much use of in the more compounded Characters or Words. Of this kind I take the Figures of the Numbers to be: If at least they are not single Letters like the way of expressing Numbers in the Hebrew, Greek, Arabick, &c. Languages, for though there may be two or three of the single strokes joyned together into a compound Character, it hinders not, but that it may still signify a Letter, as in the Greek ??.?.?.G.?.G. In the Runick; where every Letter hath one upright Line and some other additional Marks: In the Roman I.L.F.E.O.Q.V.Y: Or it may signify a Syllable as in the Æthiopick, and in the Hanscret, and Sunscrit Languages and Characters: The first of which being the Brackmans Character we find in P. Kircher's China Illustrata, described by P. Roth who studied it seven Years; and the second (being a literal Character used over all India by the Merchants) I have seen in a Transcript, brought lately out of India by a very Worthy Gentleman who lived there many Years, and had the Curiosity to cause to be Transcribed and Translated also into English, a Dictionary of their Language in their own Character: who did me the favour to let me peruse it.

In which Characters or ways of Writing a Vowel is always join'd with a Consonant into one compound Character to make it effable. And then the single Strokes may be taken for single ineffable Letters as are the Consonants, and the composition of two or three (of which one at least may be a Vowel) will make Syllables.

Of this kind, there are not so many in the whole Chinese Character, but that it will be easie enough to assign each a proper Monosyllable which shall only have 1 or 2 Consonants, and one or two Vowels; that is, the Consonants together, and not separate, either both behind the Vowel or Vowels, if it be a Diphthong or both after it or them.

Of this kind, I understand there are about 500, probably 8×8×8, or 512. I could enumerate a great many, and give you also the Name or Words by which they are pronounced as also their signification, but (as I said before) first, I conceive the present Chinese Language to have no affinity at all with the Character, the true primitive, or first Language, or Pronunciation of it, having been lost. And secondly, I want some further help to make a full and compleat Discovery: What I have learn'd from the Book of Fohi I shall give the next opportunity; which will explain the reason of the multiplication of 8. and the order and method of places in the Letter or Word square.

The third sort of Characters, is a decompounded sort being made up of two, three or more of those of the second kind, diminish'd proportionably in their size, either as to their length, or breadth, or both, from what they have in the same Writing when they are single and fill up the whole Letter square or Words square. For there being several of them to be crouded together within the same square, according as there are more in number, so they are always more squeezed together. In this decompound sort, there is a regular Order observed in the placing of the several Characters of the 2d sort; there being some that are always on the left side, some always on the right, some at the top, some at the bottom. Of which I doubt not but that they have a certain regular Method, which had we Dictionaries explained, would be easie enough to be discovered.

This method alone of crouding together all the Characters (how many soever go to make up the decompounded Character) into one square (which is of the same size for the most Simple and for the most Compound) seems to be the great singularity, by which the Chinese Characters differ from those of all the rest of the World. And this I conceive has been the reason why all People, and possibly even the very Chinese themselves have, and do believe it to be a real and not a literal Character: For if the primitive Language, or pronunciation of the Characters be lost (as I conceive it is) and that the disposition, order, method, texture, or manner of placing the more simple in the more compound Characters be also lost, forgotten, or not understood; then the whole Characters becomes a real and not a literal Character: And an immethodical one to such as want a method, that must be learned by rote, and depend wholly upon the strength of the Memory to retain it. But I conceive it might be at first either a literal Character, and so the whole square Character was composed of so many distinct Letters or Syllables, which composed the Word signified thereby; and so there might be a regular Order of placing these Letters in the Character, that is, that the whole square being divided into so many parts, there was a Rule which was the first, second, third and fourth place: so that there being placed in those the several Letters that made up the Word, according to the order they had in the Word, it was easie by that Rule to Decipher the said Character, and thence to find the Word and the Signification, as regularly as if the Letters had been written one after another, as most other literal Characters we know are at this Day written.

Or Secondly, it might be a real Character consisting of divers Marks or Letters, that expressed so many simple Notions, several of which joined together might make up the more compounded Characters, of which I have added some Examples in the Plate, which may be also made literal and pronounceable, tho' that consideration were not made use of, when they were first invented. What things I have observed in my Chinese Books that seem to respect this Method, I will give more particulars of by the next opportunity, by Printing a Specimen of the Book Ye-kim which explicated by these Notions will I conceive appear more intelligible, than by the Accounts we find given of it by the Chinese Commentators, and those that have Translated them into Latin, who seem not to have understood the true design thereof: For both the Chinese and European Commentators assert it to be a Conjuring Book, or a Book to tell Fortunes by, and to be made use of by the Chinese for that purpose; whereas by the small Specimen I have seen of it, I conceive it to contain the whole Ground, Rule or Grammar, of their Character, Language and Philosophy, and that by the understanding of it, the Foundation and Rule of their Language and Character may be without much difficulty Deciphered and Understood.

The present use of this Character, I conceive to be differing from what it was at first, both as to the position of Writing and Reading it, and as to the Expression and Pronunciation thereof.

For the way of Writing and Reading it, I conceive might at first be exactly the same with that of the Greeks, Romans, English, and all other European Nations, and also the Æthiopick and Coptick. That is, they began at the top of the Page towards the left Hand, and so proceeded towards the right in the Horizontal Line to the end of it, and then began at the left end of the next Line under the first and proceeded with that in the same manner, and so with the next under that and all the remaining. Continuing to Write the Words of the Line towards the right Hand, and the Lines of the Page one under another till the whole Discourse were compleated, joyning Leaf to Leaf one under another, after the same manner as the Rouls are at present Writ, and as the Volumina were of the Ancients. And to make the parts of the Volume to be the more easily to be come at, without the trouble of rolling and unrolling as the Ancient Romans did, and we do with our Rouls, they contrived to fold them, like the folds of a Fan, forwards and backward: And so stitching them together, that the Written sides might lie outwards, and open freely one from another, and the fair sides might meet together, it came to make the present form of their Book, which being laid as we generally place our Books before us, they seem to begin at the top of the Page on the right Hand, and to proceed to the bottom, and then at the top of the next Line towards the left Hand, and descend as in the former; proceeding in this order with all the rest, which way must needs be very inconvenient for Writing, however they may use their Pencil differing from our Pen. Though there be a way of Writing from the top to the bottom of the Page, which is very convenient for Writing the Syriack, as also for Writing Latin, English, or Greek, where the Writing is to be used for cutting the Stamps of Wood, or graving of Copper Plates with the same Character for Printing, in which Cases the Letters must be written backwards.

Secondly, as to the Pronunciation of this Character, by the Court Language, or by any other now used, I conceive it to be wholly differing from that of a literal Character, that is from being pronounced or spoken according to the Marks or Figures thereof, whether they be simple or compounded, and made up of simple Characters (though there are some Instances of affinity in Characters and Words.) The reason of which differing pronunciation I conceive may have proceeded, partly from the loss of the primitive Language, for which it was made, partly from a most inconvenient affection of Monosyllabical Words in this Court Language, to help the Poverty of which, they are fain to make one Syllable to signifie many differing Notions, to do which they have introduced a kind of Musical toning or accenting of each of them, and not single but compound of two or three Tones to each signification of every one of these Monosyllables: Partly from the using of this way of Writing, by divers Nations of differing Languages, who minding only the Figure and Signification, read it into their own Mother Tongues, as we in Europe do Arithmetical Figures: And partly, also from the omission of most Grammatical Distinctions, the same Character serving for Substantive and Adjective, Singular and Plural, in all Cases, (save only they have some Characters for Particles, as of and to in English) for the Verb in all Tenses, and Numbers, &c. for the abstract and the concrete Signification, and for divers Metaphorical; if at least the Interpretation I have met with in the Books I have perused be exact: Partly, also from the Syntaxis of them, it being necessary to consider the whole Sentence, to discover which part of Speech each Character is of, in that Sentence, wherein the Order and Positions of the Characters to one another, for which they have Rules, hath its signification: And lastly, from the loss of the very Notion of a literal Character, whence for the expressing of proper Names, they are fain to make use of several Characters, whose Sounds or Words come nearest to the Sounds of the Syllables of that Name, as in the Plate tam. jo, van, for Adam. Jovan.

Now, though I conceive this Character is not effable properly as a literal Character by any of their present Languages: And though possibly it might be at first a real Character, that is each of them compounded of such Strokes or Marks as by their Figures, Positions and Numbers in the square, denoted the several Philosophical Ingredients, that made up the Notion of the whole Character, as the Book Ye-Kim seems to shew by giving Rules as I conceive for the Order and Significancy of places in the Square, &c. Yet I think it not difficult to make it a Literal, or at least a Syllabical Character, and legible into a Language somewhat after the manner of the Universal Character I mentioned before. And tho' this would not be the primitive Language for which it was made, yet for the present uses of it (the chiefest of which is the assisting and refreshing the Memory, and helping the Imagination by proper Sounds) it might be as good: Wherein the single Characters might be Monosyllables and the compounded Dissyllables, Trissyllables, &c. According to the Numbers and Order of simple Characters in the square of the Compounded. And I am apt to think that the present pronunciation of Languages, as of Hebrew, Syriack, Arabick, Greek and Latin, or any other Language that has been so long Written, may be as much differing from what it was 2000 Years since, as an Arbitrary one now invented, and grounded on the Letters, might possibly be. And such an arbitrary Pronunciation if generally agreed upon might serve as well for a help to learn the signification of Words, or Word Combinations of Characters, as if we now knew the exact primitive Pronunciations, as critically as the MasorethÆ are said to have done that of the Hebrew; and possibly also a much better, for that by such a one a great many irregularities and difficulties of Pronunciation (which are to be found in all Languages now spoken) might be omitted, and the whole made exactly regular and easie, as might be shewn in the Hebrew and Greek, and especially in the Arabick, whose difficulties are sufficiently manifested by Alphabetum Arabicum, Printed at Rome 1592. Now as by such a Language the Character might be made effable without Musical Tones or difficult Aspirations, so had we Dictionaries of the signification of the Characters, we might as soon learn the Chinese Characters, as we can Latin, or any other Language to be learn'd by Book, and not by speaking.

IMPRIMATUR,

John Hoskyns Vice P. R. S.
July 17th., 1686.