{"collection":"egy","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/browse/egy/trs/trs06.htm","path":"egy/trs/trs06.htm","source_url":"https://sacred-texts.com/egy/trs/trs06.htm","text":"The Rosetta Stone, by E.A.W. Budge, [1893]\n| In favour of Young. | In favour of Champollion. | \n| The first idea of certain hieroglyphics being intended to represent sounds was suggested by Dr. Young, who, from the names of Ptolemy and Berenice, had pointed out nine, which have since proved to be correct; the former taken from the Rosetta inscription, and the latter deduced with singular ingenuity from the enchorial of the same monument. [M. Champollion fils seems to be unwilling to allow this: but the fact is evident; and surely he has accomplished too much to stand in need of assuming to himself the merits of another. Note I, p. I.] Working upon this basis, M. Champollion, with happy success, made out four or five others, as also about thirty synonymes; and by the ingenious application of these, the merit of which is all his own, he has been able to turn to effect the discovery, and to decipher therewith a great number of the names of the Ptolemies and of the Roman emperors . . . . . \u2013SALT, H., Essay on Dr. Young's and M. Champollion's Phonetic System of Hieroglyphics; London, 1825. Amidst this mass of error and contradiction, the application of the phonetic principle by Young, in 1818, had all the merit of an original discovery . . . . and it was only by a comparison of the three kinds of writing that he traced the name of Ptolemy up in his own way, | His [Young's] translations, however, are below criticism, being as unfounded as those of Kircher. How far even, in the decipherment, he proceeded correctly, may be doubted. . . . But even here [in interpretation] there is much too incorrect in principle to be of real use; much of it is beneath criticism.\u2013BIRCH, Hieroglyphs, p. 196. It is even to this day a common habit of Englishmen to couple the name of their countryman, Dr. Thomas Young, with that of Champollion, as sharing with him the glory of this discovery. No person who knows anything of Egyptian philology can countenance so gross an error. . . . . . . But it is not true that he discovered the key to the decipherment of hieroglyphics, or even that his labours assisted Champollion in the discovery. When the key was once discovered and recognized as the true one, it was found that one or two of Young's results were correct. But there was nothing in his method or theory by which he or anyone else could distinguish between his right and his wrong results, or which could lead him or anyone else a single step in advance ., . . . . If anyone has a right to be named in conjunction with Champollion, it is not Young, but Akerblad, to whom he does full justice (as he does indeed to Young himself) at the very beginning of his letter to M. Dacier. \u2013RENOUF, Hibbert Lectures; London, 1880, pp. 12-16. | \n| p. 149 | | \n| In favour of Young. | In favour of Champollion. | \n| from the demotic into hieratic, into hieroglyphs.\u2014BIRCH, Hieroglyphs, in WILKINSON, The Egyptians, pp. 195, 196. Fast gleichzeitig mit dem alten Jomard . . . ; hatte Dr. Young das Gl\u00fcck aus den hieroglyphischen Texten die Bezeichnungen f\u00fcr die Einer, Zehner, Hunderte, und Tausende richtig herauszuerkennen und \u00fcberdies den hieroglyphischen K\u00f6nigsnamen\u2014 ihre entsprechende griechische Form Ptolemaios und Berenike gegen\u00fcberzustellen, eine Entdeckung, die ihm allein geb\u00fchrt und die den Ausgangspunkt der sp\u00e4teren Entzifferungen bilden sollte . . . . . Dr. Young's gl\u00fcckliche Zusammenstellungen der oben aufgef\u00fchrten \u00e4gyptisch-hieroglyphischen Eigennamen mit ihren entsprechenden griechischen Vorbildern sollten ihm pl\u00f6tzlich die Augen \u00f6ffnen und ihn [i.e., Champollion] auf den rechten Pfad f\u00fchren.\u2014BRUGSCH, Die Aegyptologie, pp. 9, 11. Ein solcher Ring mit Hieroglyphen fand sich nun auch an den betreffenden Stellen der Inschrift von Rosette und er musste den Namen des Ptolem\u00e4us bilden. Es war der bekannte englische Naturforscher Thomas Young, der im Jahre 1819 | S\u00e6culi enim hujus et initium usque quum cognitio hieroglyphorum, quibus veteres Aegyptii in sacra dialecto scribenda utebantur, densissimis tenebris scateret, ita quidem ut fere omnia, qu\u00e6 antea vel eruditissimi hommes summo ingenii acumine explorasse sibi visi sunt, si hodie forte legimus risum vix tenere possimus: hoc lapide detecto postquam omnium animi ad spem enucleandi tandem istud monstruosum et perplexum per tot s\u00e6cula quasi involucris involutorum genus signorum arrecti sunt, unus vir Champollio Francogallus exstitit, qui mira sagacitate incredibilique studio adjutus totam hieroglyphorum rationem nulla fere parte relicta luce clarius explanavit et exposuit.\u2014BRUGSCH, Inscriptio Rosettana; Berlin, 1851, pp. 1, 2. Unabh\u00e4ngig von Young kam gleichzeitig ein junger franz\u00f6sischer Gelehrter, Fran\u00e7ois Champollion, zu der gleichen Vermutung und ihm war es beschieden, sogleich ein v\u00f6llig richtiges Resultat zu erhalten. \u2013ERMAN, Aegypten, p. 14. . . . . .Young, qui, le premier, fit l\u2019application du principe phon\u00e9tique \u00e0 la lecture des hi\u00e9roglyphes. Cette id\u00e9e fut, dans la r\u00e9alit\u00e9, le fiat lux de la science . . . Toutefois, malgr\u00e9 quelques succ\u00e8s remarquables, Young ne sut pas la f\u00e9conder; il avait bien reconnu dans les hi\u00e9roglyphes les noms de Ptol\u00e9m\u00e9e et de B\u00e9r\u00e9nice, mais sans r\u00e9ussir \u00e0 assigner \u00e0 chacun des signes qui les composent leur v\u00e9ritable valeur; ses autres lectures sont fausses, quoiqu\u2019il ait rencontr\u00e9 juste dans la d\u00e9termination de la valeur | \n| p. 150 | | \n| In favour of Young. | In favour of Champollion. | \n| diesen scharfsinnigen und v\u00f6llig richtigen Schluss machte und wenigstens f\u00fcr einige Zeichen des Namens den Lautwert feststellte.\u2014ERMAN, Aegypten, p. 14. Der erste, der es that und von dem richtigen Grundsatze ausging, dass die K\u00f6nigsnamen alphabetisch geschrieben sein m\u00fcssten war der ber\u00fchmte englische Physiker Thomas Young (geboren 1773). Er erkannte in der h\u00e4ufigsten in dem Dekret von Rosette vorkommenden Gruppe den Namen Ptolem\u00e4us, er vermochte ein sp\u00e4ter zum grossen Teile best\u00e4tigtes hieroglyphisches Alphabet aufzustellen und sie \u00fcber das System der \u00e4gyptischen Schrift vollkommen richtige Ansichten zu bilden. So haben wir denn in Young den eigentlichen Entzifferer der \u00e4gyptischen Schrift zu sehen, wenn es ihm auch nicht gelang, der Sprache selbst Herr zu werden.\u2014WIEDEMANN, Aegyptische Geschichte, p. 29. In the first work of Champollion, his essay De l\u2019Ecriture hi\u00e9ratique des Anciens Egyptiens, published in 1821, he recognized the existence of only the first of these three ways of representing words, supposing that all the Egyptian characters represented ideas. When he discovered the erroneousness of this opinion, he used all possible efforts to suppress the work in which he had stated it. That work, however, contained a valuable discovery. . . | alphab\u00e9tique de plusieurs caract\u00e8res. Quelques minces qu\u2019ils soient, ces premiers r\u00e9sultats constitueraient en faveur du docteur Young un titre consid\u00e9rable, s\u2019il ne les avait pas compromis lui-m\u00eame en s\u2019engageant dans une fausse voie, et en publiant des traductions tout aussi imaginaires que celles de ses devanciers. La solution du probl\u00e8me \u00e9tait r\u00e9serv\u00e9e au g\u00e9nie de Champollion le jeune; c\u2019est un honneur que personne ne peut lui disputer.\u2014CHABAS, L\u2019Inscription de Rosette, p. 5. Wenn wir die Frage so stellen: Wer hat zuerst einige hieroglyphische Zeichen in ihrem Lautwerthe richtig bestimmt? oder besser gesagt, zuf\u00e4llig errathen, so m\u00fcssen wir antworten: das war Th. Young; den Schl\u00fcssel zur Entzifferung der Hieroglyphenschrift jedoch hat er nicht gefunden. Fran\u00e7ois Champollion, geb. den 23. December 1790, gest. den 4. M\u00e4rz 1832, er ist es, den die Wissenschaft der Aegyptologie in dankbarer Verehrung als ihren eigentlichen Begr\u00fcnder nennt . . . . . . \u2014D\u00dcMICHEN, Geschichte des alten Aegyptens, Berlin, 1878, s. 304. Zwei grosse M\u00e4nner, in England der auf vielen Gebieten des Wissens ausgezeichnete Thomas Young, in Frankreich Fran\u00e7ois Champollion, begaben sich zu gleicher Zeit, aber unabh\u00e4ngig von einander, an die Arbeit. Beider Bem\u00fchungen lohnte sch\u00f6ner Erfolg. Champollion aber wird mit Recht vor seinem britischen Rivalen als Entzifferer der | \n| p. 151 | | \n| In favour of Young. | In favour of Champollion. | \n| . . . . . . In the year after this publication, Champollion published his Lettre \u00e0 M. Dacier, in which he announced the phonetic powers of certain hieroglyphics and applied them to the reading of Greek and Roman proper names. Had he been candid enough to admit that he was indebted to Dr. Young for the commencement of his discovery, and only to claim the merit of extending and improving the alphabet, he would probably have had his claims to the preceding and subsequent discoveries, which were certainly his own, more readily admitted by Englishmen than they have been. In 1819 Dr. Young had published his article \"Egypt\" in the Supplement to the Encyclop\u00e6dia Britannica; and it cannot be doubted that the analysis of the names \"Ptolem\u00e6us\" and \"Berenice,\" which it contained, reached Champollion in the interval between his publication in 1821 and 1822, and led him to alter his views. . . . . . . The Grammaire Egyptienne ought to have been given to the public as his sole bequest in the department of Egyptian philology. It was published from a manuscript written in 1831, immediately before his last illness. Shortly before his decease, having carefully collected the sheets, he delivered them to his brother, with the remark, \"Be careful of this; I trust that it will be my visiting card to posterity.\" Even the warmest admirers of Champollion must admit that he left his system in a very imperfect state. Few, probably, will deny that he held many errors to the close of his life, both in what respects the | [paragraph continues] Hieroglyphen genannt werden m\u00fcssen.\u2014EBERS, Aegypten in Bild und Wort; Leipzig, 1879, Bd. ii., s. 49. Un savant anglais du plus grand m\u00e9rite, Th. Young, essaya de reconstituer l\u2019alphabet des cartouches. De 1814 \u00e0 1818, il s\u2019exer\u00e7a sur les divers syst\u00e8mes d\u2019\u00e9criture \u00e9gyptienne, et s\u00e9para m\u00e9caniquement les groupes diff\u00e9rents dont se composaient le texte hi\u00e9roglyphique et le texte d\u00e9motique de l\u2019inscription de Rosette. Apr\u00e8s avoir d\u00e9termin\u00e9, d\u2019une mani\u00e8re plus ou moins exacte, le sens de chacun d\u2019eux, il en essaya la lecture. . . . . Ses id\u00e9es \u00e9taient justes en partie, mais sa m\u00e9thode imparfaite; il entrevit la terre promise, mais sans pouvoir y entrer. Le v\u00e9ritable initiateur fut Fran\u00e7ois Champollion. . . . . . . \u2014MASPERO, Histoire Ancienne; Paris, 1886, pp. 729, 730. Ce fut en 1819, que le Dr. Young d\u00e9clara le premier que les cartouches, ou encadrements elliptiques, dans le texte hi\u00e9roglyphique de l\u2019inscription de Rosette, correspondaient aux noms propres grecs et particuli\u00e8rement \u00e0 celui de Ptol\u00e9m\u00e9e du texte grec, et aux groupes, du m\u00eame nom, dans le texte interm\u00e9diaire en \u00e9criture \u00e9gyptienne d\u00e9motique ou vulgaire, groupes qui avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9j\u00e0 reconnus et d\u00e9compos\u00e9s par MM. Silvestre de Sacy et Akerblad. Il allait encore plus loin en supposant que chaque signe du cartouche repr\u00e9sentait un son du nom de Ptol\u00e9m\u00e9e et en cherchant \u00e0 les d\u00e9finir r\u00e9ellement un \u00e0 un par une analyse tr\u00e8s ing\u00e9nieuse . . . . Plusieurs signes | \n| p. 152 | | \n| In favour of Young. | In favour of Champollion. | \n| reading of the characters, and in what respects the interpretation of the texts.\u2014HINCKS, On the Number, Names, and Powers of the Letters of the Hieroglyphic Alphabet, in Trans. Royal Irish Acad., Vol. XXI., Section Polite Literature, pp. 133, 134, Dublin, 1848. | avaient \u00e9t\u00e9 faussement interpr\u00e9t\u00e9s et la preuve la plus \u00e9vidente en \u00e9tait qu\u2019il ne r\u00e9ussissait pas \u00e0 lire d\u2019autres noms que ceux de Ptol\u00e9m\u00e9e et de B\u00e9r\u00e9nice. Il faut donc avouer que, malgr\u00e9 cette d\u00e9couverte, les opinions du Dr. Young, sur la nature du syst\u00e8me hi\u00e9roglyphique, \u00e9taient encore essentiellement fausses et que cette d\u00e9couverte elle-m\u00eame serait probablement rest\u00e9e infructueuse et \u00e0 peine signal\u00e9e comme d\u00e9couverte dans la science, si on avait suivi le chemin que son auteur lui-m\u00eame avait propos\u00e9.\u2014LEPSIUS, Lettre \u00e0 M. le Professeur F. Rosellini sur l\u2019Alphabet Hi\u00e9roglyphique; Rome, 1839, p. 11. | \nSeyffarth and others reject Champollion's system.It could hardly be expected that the system of decipherment proposed by Champollion would be accepted by those who had rival systems to put forth, hence we find old theories revived and new ideas brought to light side by side with Champollion's method of decipherment. Among those who attacked the new system were, Spolm, the misguided Seyffarth, Goulianoff and Klaproth. Spolm and Seyffarth divided hieroglyphics into emphonics, symphonics and aphonics, by which terms they seem to imply phonetics, enclitics and ideographics. Their hopelessly wrong theory was put forth with a great show of learning in De Lingua et Literis veterum \u00c6gyptiorum at Leipzig, 1825-31. Goulianoff 1 did not accept Champollion's system entirely, and he wished to consider the phonetic hieroglyphics acrologic; this also was the view taken by Klaproth, who bitterly attacked Champollion in his Lettre sur la d\u00e9couverte des hi\u00e9roglyphes acrologiques, adress\u00e9e \u00e0 M. de Goulianoff, Paris, 1827, and also in his Examen critique des travaux de feu M. Champollion sur les Hi\u00e9roglyphes, Paris, 1832. To the first of these two works Champollion published a reply entitled Analyse critique de la\nlettre sur la d\u00e9couverte des hi\u00e9roglyphes acrologiques par. Klaproth (Extr. du Bulletin de F\u00e9russac), Paris, 1827, in which he showed the utter worthlessness of the theory. In 1830, when the correctness of Champollion's system was fully Persistence of false systems of interpretation.demonstrated, Janelli published at Naples his Fundamenta Hermeneutica Hieroglyphicae, in three volumes, in which the old symbolic theory of the hieroglyphics was re-asserted! and there were many who hesitated not to follow the views of Fran\u00e7ois Ricardi, feu Charles d\u2019Oneil, the soundness of which may be estimated by the title of one of his works, \"D\u00e9couverte des Hi\u00e9roglyphes domestiques phon\u00e9tiques par lesquels, sans sortir de chez soi, on peut deviner l\u2019histoire, la chronologie (!!), le culte de tous les peuples anciens et modernes, de la m\u00eame mani\u00e8re, qu\u2019on le fait en lisant les hi\u00e9roglyphes \u00e9gyptiens selon la nouvelle m\u00e9thode;\" Turin, 1824. 1 Little by little, however, Champollion's system was accepted. In 1835 Leemans published his edition of Horapollo, in which the results of the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphics were ably applied, and two years later Richard Lepsius published his famous Lettre d M. F. Rosellini sur l\u2019alphabet hi\u00e9roglyphique, wherein he 'discussed the whole question of the decipherment, and showed that Champollion's method was, without any question, correct. About this time students, who worked on Champollion's plan, sprang up in Holland, Italy, France and England, and the misguided Seyffarth alone continued down to 1855 to write and protest against the new system.\n152:1 See his Essai sur les Hi\u00e9roglyphes d\u2019Horapollon, Paris, 1827.\n153:1 Another of his works was entitled, Triomphe sur les impies obtenu par les adorateurs de la tr\u00e8s-sainte Trinit\u00e9 et du Verbe \u00e9ternel, sous le gouvernement des sixi\u00e8me et septi\u00e8me rois d\u2019Egypte au VIe si\u00e8cle apr\u00e8s le d\u00e9luge. Sculpt\u00e9 en signes hi\u00e9roglyphiques sur l\u2019 Ob\u00e9lisque Barberinus et maintenant expliqu\u00e9; Geneva, 1821.","title":"The Rosetta Stone: Opinions of Egyptologists on Young and...","type":"page"}