76 TRANS. ST. LOUIS ACAD. SCIENCE. 



consonants. Should Lepsius, however, notice that our inscription 

 cannot be explained without taking 54 hieroglyphic figures for 

 syllabic signs, he is morally bound to confess publicly that he 

 grievously erred in declaring Champollion to have discovered the 

 key to Egyptian literature, and my own system to be the outcast 

 of literary productions. The latter he has done in all his public 

 and private lectures and writings. Let him not recur to another 

 misstatement, that he himself discovered the syllafcic hieroglyphs. 

 For the law that the Egyptian literature was, in general, a sylla- 

 bic one, and that certain figures expressed certain consonantal 

 syllables, was discovered in 1826, eleven years prior to Lepsius's 

 Egyptian career. His syllabic hieroglyphs, published in Bun- 

 sen's work ("Egypt's Place," 1843), were preceded by those in 

 my "Astronomia ^^g." 1S33, those in my " GrundsJitze," 1843, 

 and by the 30 syllabic hieroglyphs in my "Alphabeta genuina," 

 1840, fixed five years prior to Bunsen's "Egypt's Place," 1845. 

 Besides, Lepsius ignoring that regularly each of the 630 hiero- 

 glyphs represents the two or three consonants contained in the 

 name of the figure, it came to pass that nearly all his syllabic 

 figures were erroneously determined. May Lepsius remember 

 that it is not shameful to confess blunders, nor to make reparation 

 to injured men, and that he remains responsible for every untruth 

 and calumny. (See Leipz. Repertor. 1849, vol. ii. p. 6.) 



The Champollionist Brugsch, having denied the existence of 

 syllabic hieroglyphs down to 1851, suddenly changed his opinion 

 as soon as he received my printed syllabic alphabet, and then he 

 translated the Rosetta-stone in 185 1 by clandestinely adopting 

 my syllabic hiei^oglyphs. (See Leipz. Repertor. 1852, p. 26.) 

 He took 122 hieroglyphs for syllabic signs, of which nearly all 

 were first determined in my pamphlet transmitted to Brugsch, 

 whilst not a jot of them is to be found in Champollion's works. 

 Now, what did our Champollionist do? He began his work with 

 the imposition that it was Champollion who discovered the syl- 

 labic hieroglyphs and the key to the Egyptian literature, and that 

 my discoveries are "vana ficta" — " docti viri tanto plus se profe- 

 cisse arbitrati, quanto mirabiliora auditu in medium protulissent." 

 This ignoble conduct of soiling another's name, and then appro- 

 priating his property, will meet with its just award. Since, 



