Fresh Batch #112: The Writing of England, Ireland, and Scotland

Origin and Progress of Writing Part 5

The following is my continued examination of Thomas Astle’s research regarding the origin and progress of writing.

Of Writing in England

Astle observed, that the ancient Britons don’t have the use of letters in a provable way prior to the Romans, yet, the letters they do have use of match the Phoenician alphabet prior to the increase of letters, which roughly dates to circa 750-500 BC. However, this may be forgery. Though the oldest Irish manuscripts are written in the Latin language using Irish letters, the ancient Irish alphabet nearly matches the Phoenician according to some of these “pretended alphabets” as Astle called them. My investigation explores whether the ancient Britons are indeed descended from the Phoenician as language indicates, which their upper echelon of society (captains, priests, nobility, and the like) would’ve had use of letters were this true, and there is not one idea I am unwilling to entertain or examine should it have merit. However, the following is one of many reasons as to why I claim the diaspora of these people and systems are from Italy and not Britain. He wrote (Ib. p. 96), “After the most diligent inquiry it doth not appear, that the Britons had the use of letters before their intercourse with the Romans. Although alphabets have been produced, which are said to have been used by the Ancient Britons, yet no one MS. ever appeared that was written in them (I have several of these pretended alphabets in my collection; though they are only Roman letters deformed). Cunobeline, king of Britain, who lived in the reigns of the emperors Tiberius and Caligula, erected different mints in his island, and coined money in gold, silver, and copper, inscribed with Roman characters. From the coming of Julius Cæsar, till the time the Romans left the island in the year 427, the Roman letters were as familiar to the eyes of the inhabitants, as their language to their ears, as the numberless inscriptions, coins, and other monuments of the Romans still remaining amongst us, sufficiently evince. However, we are of opinion, that writing was very little practiced by the Britons, till after the coming of St. Augustin, about the year 596.

“The Saxons, who were invited hither by the Britons, and who arrived about the year 449, were unacquainted with letters. The characters which they afterwards used, were adopted by them in the island, and though the writing in England from the fifth to the middle of the eleventh century is called Saxon (the architecture in England, which preceded the Gothic, is usually called Saxon, but it is in fact Roman), it will presently appear, that the letters used in this island were derived from the Roman, and were really Roman in their origin, and Italian in their structure at first, but were barbarized in their aspect by the British Romans and Roman Britons (see Whitaker’s Manchester, vol. II. p. 329; where he shews that the opinion of Mr. Wanely, that the Saxons brought letters with them to England, is ill-founded).”

He continued on the next page, “The capital letters in the fourteenth plate are taken from the Textus Sancti Cuthberti, written in the seventh century, formerly preserved in the cathedral of Durham, but now in the Cottonian library (Nero. D. 4).

Textus Sancti Cuthberti

“In this fine MS. we find several of the capital letters, which were used by the Greeks, the Etruscans, the Romans, the Visigoths, the Saxons, the French, and the Germans. The Φ (phi; ph), the parent of the Roman F, was not disused at the time this MS. was written. (That’s his claim; I suspect Roman comes from Etrusco-Phoenician because Rome was quasi-Etruscan according to Etruscologists like Michael Grant, and it makes no sense given the Un-Greek nature of the Etruscans). The Roman F, and also the F used by the northern nations, appear in the alphabet which we have engraven, as doth the M of the Pelasgians, of the Etruscans, of the Oscans, and of the Romans. The different forms of the letter O, in this alphabet, were also common not only to the people last mentioned, but likewise to the Phenicians, and to the Greeks; the Y is not unlike the Greek Υ. This alphabet alone, bears strong testimony, that the letters used by our Saxon ancestors, are derived from the Phenician, the Greek, and the Etruscan letters, through the medium of those of the Roman.

“The capital letters in the fifteenth plate, No. I, which are taken from a MS. written in the latter end of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh century, confirm this opinion. It is observable that the Pelasgian M, was used in MSS. so late as the eighth century.”

Specimens: I. Roman Saxon square capitals, from the gospels of St. Matthew & St. Mark, formerly preserved in the Cottonian library (Otho. c. 5.), perished by the fire in the Cottonian library in 1731. (I suspect this library was burned to destroy evidence of forgery because it was claimed to have been St. Augustin’s book but seems to have been written in England.) III. Charter of king Athelbald, dated A.D. 749, and inrolled in a MS. formerly preserved in the Cott. lib. (Otho. A. I.), a mixture of Roman-Saxon and Set-Saxon letters. IV. Taken from a MS. in the Harleian library (No. 2965), written in England in the 8th century, in strong Set-Saxon characters. Square, or cornered characters, were not disused at this time in the titles of MSS. V. Textus Sci Ceddæ, or St. Chad’s gospels, c. 7th century, preserved in the church of Lichfield, from the first chapter of St. Luke’s gospel, ver. 3 & 4.

It is my opinion that the real reason libraries were burnt or destroyed was because the awareness of the masses was reaching a degree where the texts could be examined or analyzed by uninitiated people who could then see the mistakes or details that betray the official narratives of their origin, so rather than barbarians destroying them, it was the monks who did so to preserve their authority and power, and they blamed it on conquerors. It would be similar to a corporation destroying its documents so an internal investigation would have no evidence to implicate its corruption. I’ve come to this conclusion based on the legendary stories of how these manuscripts came into existence, i.e., surviving destruction by the Danes through falling in the sea, and then washing up on shore miraculously through the merits of St. Cuthbert, the sea ebbing much further than usual, returning the book above three miles from shore without degradation from the water, as claimed by Turgot. I think the burning of libraries is to destroy evidence of priestly crimes.

Astle also made the connection of the Dragon to the Egyptian triad (Ib. p. 103), “The Dragon, in the ornamented letter, is the emblem of vigilance, and was used as such, by the Phenicians, the Greeks, and the Romans. The three most ancient symbols are the Circle, the Serpent, and the Wings. The Circle represented the Eternity of the Deity. The Serpent, his Wisdom. The Wings, his Providence over, and protection of all created beings. The Dragon is the Serpent dignified.”

But dragons are also depicted with wings and moving in circles, or cycles, which in my opinion would be the Egyptian Triad personified. However, I’d be willing to concede that the Egyptian Triad may be a symbol of the Dragon should more evidence of forgery emerge regarding Ancient Egypt.

Become a member to access the rest of this article. If you’ve never been a member and want a comped month to see if my work is a good fit for you, follow these simple instructions:

1. Go to my Instagram

2. Message me ‘Dylan Substack’ only (this lets me know where you got the offer)

3. Then, in a separate message, send me your email only