316 Hieroglyphical Fragments. 



As an instance of a hasty and undemonstrated assertion, I 

 shall mention his explanation of the group of characters which 

 he considers (Syst^me, p. 82) as *' forming the third person 

 plural of the future in all the verbs of the last nine lines of the 

 hieroglyphical text of Rosetta, expressing the different dispo- 

 sitions of the decree, and answering to Greek verbs which are 

 always in the infinitive," and which he naturally enough 

 reads SNE. 



There is nothing absolutely incorrect in this statement, but 

 the reader naturally infers from it that the group in question 

 occurs either exclusively or principally in, these nine lines. 

 The fact is, however, that in the first five lines, or rather half 

 lines, the group is found ten times, and in the remaining nine, 

 only eighteen, that is, about half as frequently, in proportion to 

 the actual length of the lines : nor can I find any where a 

 context that favours Mr. ChampoUion's interpretation ; though 

 I have lately observed that an Enchorial group, resembling 'O, 

 is found almost uniformly to answer to the Greek infinitive : 

 being read perhaps MNR or MARE ; but I cannot make 

 these characters agree either with the hieroglyphics in question, 

 or with the sounds SNE, which Mr. Champollion attributes 

 to them. 



So little is Mr. Champollion in the habit of distinguishing 

 proofs from assertions in his own case, that it is the less sur- 

 prising that he should sometimes confound them with respect 

 to others. He says, for example, with respect to the nature of 

 the Hieratic characters, which he explained to the Academy of 

 Belles Lettres in 1821, " je me suis convaincu depuis que M. le 

 Dr, Young avaitpublie avant moi ce mdme resultat, et de plus, 

 que nous avions ete prevenus de quelques annees, Vun et 

 V autre, quant au principe de cette decouverte et sa definition, 

 par M. Tychsen de Goettingue." (p. 20.) Professor Tychsen 

 had asserted this agreement as a probable opinion : it was 

 amply demonstrated in 1816; five years afterwards Mr. 

 Champollion thinks he has a right to conhdder himself as a 

 new inventor of the doctrine, because he chose to neglect what 

 was done in a neighbouring country, and to undervalue the 

 actual proof, in which he had been anticipated, by classing it 

 jyith, a bare assertion to be found in a German publication. 



