Appendix 4. - (152)

The most ancient data we have referring to the imposition of names is the famous passage in Genesis (c. 2, 19) where we are told that Adam gave their names to all the animals God created. After this account, the sacred historian adds: Whatever Adam called every living creature, that was its name. In explaining this passage, Eusebius says that Moses wished to indicate how the names assigned to the animals expressed their nature: 'When he says, "That was its name", what else did it mean except that these were the names that nature recommended they be given?' (Praep. Evan. vol. 9, c. 6). Now the names given to the different animal species created by God to signify their nature, are in fact merely common names. Thus, the most ancient, authoritative document surviving on the early formation of language clearly demonstrates that the first names given to things were common, not proper names. Hebrew traditions and the opinions of the rabbis corroborate Eusebius's opinion. Anyone wishing to see this collective evidence, needs only to consult Giovanni Buxtorfio Junior (Dissert. Philologico-theologicae 1, §24) or Giulio Bartolucci (Biblioth. Magna rabbin., vol. 1) or other writers.

Moreover, it is not only the ancient Hebrew texts which assure us that common nouns, which signified the nature or quality of things named and not their individuality were the first and most ancient. This is the view of all the ancient world and the fact presented by ancient languages. I do not have enough time now to offer the countless proofs which these languages offer. All I would say is that Plato's Cratylus is substantially given over to proving this very point, that is, that in very ancient times, names were given to things not arbitrarily but rationally. If we have to assign new names, we too must try, as the ancients did, to form and assign names which express the qualities and nature of the things to be named. Finally, in using names that have already been assigned, we should be careful to employ them with complete propriety so that they do, in fact, correspond to their meaning.

Because ancient names were common and referred to common qualities, species, essences, the ancients clung to the firm, universal opinion that the fullness of wisdom consisted in the study of names, which had to be jealously and immutably guarded. They were to be handed down to the children as they had been received, a precious and sacred heirloom which contained the deposit of religion and wisdom, and the key to human happiness.

Superstitions associated with the use of certain names came from the same source. The reverence which the old showed for these names, and the importance they gave to keeping them intact and handing them down to their descendants, was later transformed into blind, indiscriminate veneration. Such excess, to which every human passion is always inclined allows the imagination to run riot and produce the most capricious effects.