Dr. Clarke and the First Written Document.
By Editor
ED. SIGNS: I find that Dr. Clarke teaches that the law of ten commandments is the first instrument in writing ever seen by man. Is this true in the light of revelation and history? INQUIRER. It is too often the case that, in exalting the merit of some person or thing which they greatly admire, and which they want others to admire, and which is really admirable in itself, men overdo the matter and really belittle the subject of their admiration. An instance of this which we recall, occurred in relation to General Grant about the time of his death. In illustrating the General's evenness of temper, and his gentleness under great provocation, an instance was cited which should really be no provocation to any person, and which, if it had worked as this person supposed it naturally should in General Grant's case, would simply show him to have been little and spiteful and mean. And the narrator instead of by his narrative illustrating General Grant's greatness, only exposed his own lack of capacity to appreciate greatness. Another notable instance is that wherein ministers and others in portraying the merit of the Saviour, quote Napoleon's estimate of him. We have known one preacher in particular who apparently never lost an opportunity to parade Napoleon's opinion of Christ. As though the approval, or even the admiration of such a character as Napoleon, would be a recommendation of anybody, much less of the perfect goodness of the divine Saviour. For our part we should rather by a vast degree have Christ's opinion of Napoleon, than to have Napoleon's opinion of Christ. But the most singular instance of this overdoing the thing that we have ever seen is the one referred to by our correspondent. We know not by whom it was originated, but the idea is sanctioned, as our680correspondent says, even by Dr. Adam Clarke, that the decalogue was the first written document on earth! It is singular that so eminent a scholar as was Dr. Clarke,—a biblical scholar too,—should be led to indorse such an idea. And that the idea still passes current as though it were a piece of astonishingly exceptional wisdom, is a singular instance of the facility with which a thing passes on from generation to generation by sheer "reiteration and no examination." Dr. Clarke, in his comment on Ex. 31:18, "tables of stone, written with the finger of God," attributes the idea to Dr. Winder, saying: "Dr. Winder, in his 'History of Knowledge,' thinks it probable that this was the first writing in alphabetical characters ever exhibited to the world." But in his "Key to the Bible," Dr. Clarke himself gives it the weight of his own authority. In speaking of the Scriptures, he says:—
"They contain the most ancient writings in the world, the decalogue, or ten commandments, a part of the book of Exodus, being probably the first regular production in alphabetical characters ever seen by man." That might look very well as a theory, but there are a multitude of facts which go to show that it is but a figment of the imagination. It cannot be expected that we should attempt to give all the facts, for that would require that we should write a book. But we shall give a few which we hope may be useful on this point. Here is the English of part of a document that was written at Babylon nearly fifty years before the tables of stone were seen by man. It was written by Khammu-rabi, king of Chaldea, or his scribe, whose reign was about B. C. 1546 to 1520. He says:—
"I have caused to be dug the canal of Khammu-rabi, a blessing to the men of Babylonia. I have directed the waters of its branches over the desert plains; I have caused them to run in the dry channels, and thus given unfailing waters to the people. I have distributed the inhabitants of the land of Shumir and Accad [Gen. 10:10] among distant cities. I have changed desert plains into well-watered lands. I have given them fertility and abundance, and made the abode of happiness."—Lenormant's Ancient History of the East, Book IV, chap. 1, sec. 5; Rawlinson's Monarchies, First Mon., chap. 8, par. 29, 30. But there was writing away beyond that. The great Sennacherib, king of Assyria, who invaded Palestine B. C. 713, began to reign about B. C. 716. About the tenth year of his reign (cir. B. C. 707), he set up a monument with an inscription stating that he had recovered from Babylon certain images of gods which had been carried there by a king of Babylon, who took them from Tiglath-Pileser I., king of Assyria, 418 years before. This carries us back, 707+418=1125 years before Christ. Now this same Tiglath-Pileser wrote a long account of his wars, his conquests, his buildings, etc., and this document is in the British Museum. In it Tiglath-Pileser says that he rebuilt a temple in Assyria which had been torn down sixty years before, after it had stood 641 years from its foundation by Shamas-Vul, son of Ismi-Dagon. He rebuilt this temple at the beginning of his reign, which was about ten years before his war with the king of Babylon in which he lost his gods. This would give, 1125+10=1135 years B. C. But the temple had then been in ruins sixty years, after standing 641, which would give, 1135+60+641=B. C. 1836 for the foundation of the temple by Shamas-Vul. But he says Shamas-Vul was the son of Ismi-Dagon, which would demand at least thirty years more for the reign of Ismi-Dagon, which would give, without a single missing link, B. C. 1866 for the beginning of the reign of Ismi-Dagon, which was 375 years before the tables of stone were "ever seen by man." And Ismi-Dagon, or his scribe, could write. And he did write, he and his two sons, Gurguna, who succeeded him as king in Ur of the Chaldees whence Abraham came, and Shamas-Vul who reigned as viceroy in Assyria. And their writings are now in the British Museum and are known and read of all Assyriologists. But these are not exceptions in the matter of writing. Writing was a familiar thing in the countries of Chaldea and Assyria, even a long while beyond the day of Ismi-Dagon. There were Arioch of Genesis 14:1, king of Ellasar, and Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, who invaded the borders of Palestine in the days of Abraham. Both are mentioned on the monuments, and this very Arioch is written, "King of Ellasar," and we are told that his father's name was Chedormabug, and that his grandfather's name was Simtisilhak. Writing that was written not only in the days of Abraham, but even before that, is now familiar to oriental scholars. Writing was a familiar thing in Chaldea 450 years before the tables of stone were seen by Israel. The same is true of Egypt. The following is the English of a document written by a discontented warrior, who was an officer in the army of the king "which knew not Joseph" (Ex. 1:8), or in the army of that king's father:—
"When you receive the verses I have written may you find the work of the scribe agreeable.
"I wish to depict to you the numberless troubles of an unfortunate officer of infantry.
"While still a youth he is entirely shut up in a barrack, a tight suit of armor encases his body, the peak of his helmet comes over his eyes;
"The visor is over his eyebrows; so that his head is protected from wounds.
"He is wrapped up like a papyrus roll, and can hardly move his limbs in fight.
"Shall I tell you of his expeditions into Syria, his marches in far distant lands?
"He is obliged to carry water on his shoulder as an ass bears its burden;
"His back is bent like that of a beast of burden, his backbone is bowed.
"When he has quenched his thirst with a drink of bad water, he is obliged to mount guard for the night.
"If he meets the enemy he is like a bird in a net, his limbs have no strength left.
"When he returns to Egypt, he is like a piece of worm-eaten wood.
"If he is too ill to stand, they put him on the back of an ass;
"His baggage is plundered by robbers, and his servant deserts him."—Lenormant, Id., Book III, chap. 5, sec. 6. But it may be said that these writings were all Egyptian, Assyrian, or Babylonian, while the ten commandments were written in Hebrew, and that this was the first written document in that kind of characters. Very well, of this kind of writing, Dr. Wm. Hayes Ward says:—
"It was not many years ago that it was stoutly asserted that Moses could not have written a book of the law, or the ten commandments, because writing was not then invented. . . . But within the past twenty years the history of Phoenician writing used by the Hebrews has been carefully studied; and it is now the general conclusion of the best scholars that it originated during the time of the conquest of Egypt by the Shepherd Kings four or five centuries before Moses. The last student of the subject, Mr. Isaac Taylor, thus sums up the result of long and careful investigation: 'The possible date of the origin of the alphabet . . . lies between the twenty-third and seventeenth centuries; and there seems to be no reason why we should not provisionally accept the approximate date which has been proposed by De Rouge, and place it in or about the nineteenth century B. C.'"—The Bible and the Monuments, in Sunday School Times, Volume 25, Number 42, pp. 659, 660. If, however, these evidences should be questioned or should not be considered sufficient to show that the decalogue was not the "first writing in alphabetical characters ever seen by man," we have the evidence of the Bible itself. 1. According to the best evidence and authorities, Job lived more than 500 years before the children of Israel left Egypt, and he exclaims, "Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed [graven, carved] in a book! That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock forever." Here we have the plain words "written," "book," and "pen." We cannot conceive how Job could have talked about his words being written if writing was not known. And if there was no writing there could have been neither book nor pen. Under Dr. Clarke's supposition, the words of Job are not only utterly meaningless, but it is impossible to conceive how he could have so named things that had no existence. This is not the only instance of it. In Job 31:35, he says, "My desire is, that . . . mine adversary had written a book." The only reasonable conclusion is that in the days of Job pens and writing were familiar things and to such an extent that books were written. 2. In Ex. 17:14 we read: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua; for I will utterly put out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven." This was after the battle with Amalek at Rephidim, and before Israel came to Sinai. Now if the decalogue was the first written document ever seen by man, Moses at this time could not have known what it was to write, much less could he have known what such a thing as a book was; and so the Lord had commanded him to do what was simply a physical, moral, and intellectual impossibility. But this is not all. 3. We know that Moses could write, and that he did write in a book, before either he or anybody else on earth ever saw the tables of stone. In Exodus 24:4, 7, we read: "And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill." "And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people; and they said, All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Now it was not till after that that the Lord told Moses to come up and get the tables of the decalogue; for in verse 12 it is said: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there; and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them." And Moses was there in the mount "forty days and forty nights," before he came down with the tables of stone. Therefore the word of God shows positively that here was a "regular production in alphabetical characters," a "written document" written and seen and read by men before ever the tables of stone were seen by Moses, and more than forty days before they were ever seen by any man besides Moses. The idea of the ten commandments being the first written document on earth is a myth. Lest there should be any who may have so rested upon this statement of Dr. Clarke as being of authority that they might think its destruction would weaken the claims of the law of God, we would say that even though the statement were true it would not strengthen the claims of the law a particle. The ten commandments are the law of God. They were written with the finger of God, on the tables of stone, and whether they were the first writing, or the last, that man ever saw, neither adds to them, nor diminishes from them, a single element of force. And if the statement in question is not true, then it could not add any to the strength of the decalogue anyhow; for the truth can never be helped by that which is not the truth; its sole tendency would be to weaken the truth, and the sooner it was destroyed the better. There is, however, a principle involved here that justifies the question of our correspondent, and the exposure of this error. It is this: If it were true that writing was not then known on the earth, that of itself would be a sufficient reason why the Lord himself must write the law. For if man was to have the written law at all, the Lord would have to write it, because man couldn't; which we say would imply that that was the reason why the Lord did write it. But when we allow the truth to stand as it is, that writing, both on stone and in books, was a familiar thing to men and nations, then it shows that there was that about the giving and the writing of the law, which God regarded as of too much importance to be intrusted to the hand of man. J.