SEYFFARTH THE HIEROGLYPHIC TABLET OF POMPEIUM. 29I 



viated words, e.g., s instead of suten^ o for onch, etc. At present 

 no Cht. recurs any more to Ch's abbreviations. 



5. Ch. never asserted that the Egyptians appplied sometimes 

 two, three, even four determinatives for one group ; that the 

 same used "quiescent hieroglyplis," and " put determinatives in 

 the midst of the groups," as B. imposes upon his readers. 



In spite of all these and man}/ similar absurdities, and although 

 ChampoUion knew not the real key to the Egyptian literature, 

 that regularly each hieroglyph expresses syllabically the conso- 

 nants contained in its name, and that the i£[>f^ ocdkexzo^ was a 

 Hebrew dialect, and that ideologic hieroglyphs were unknown in 

 Egypt ; though he ignored the most common signs of plurality, 

 of adjectives, participles, the pronouns, the suffixes occurring 

 almost on each line ; — in spite of all these facts, I say, B. has the 

 sauciness to tell persons who possess only a literary knowledge 

 of the matter, that '*• Master Ch. acquired the immortal merit of 

 having discovered the key to the literature of the ancient Egyp- 

 tians." Concerning this point, however, B. seems to have been 

 not quite sure; for in the Preface, p. iii., he forbids criticism, 

 and all researches concerning priority he calls in advance " dis- 

 agreeable questions." 



In short, once more we challenge B. and all the Chts. to trans- 

 late and interpret the Pompeian stele according to Ch's true sys- 

 tem, and not to its present transfiguration. Should he accomplish 

 the theme in a satisfactory manner, then the strife is finished. 

 Should he, however, refuse to accept the challenge, then he will 

 remember that he is a responsible man, and that lie is morally 

 bound to repent of the immense injuries which he has done to 

 science and truth during the last thirty-three years. Let him 

 remember that " honesty is the best policy." 



In conclusion, it is now time to refute a new series of shame- 

 ful calumnies originating at the residence of Ebers, a pupil of 

 Lepsius and a clever novelist, and published in the New York 

 " Staatszeitung," 1871, Nos. 77 & 82, and in the German journal 

 " Daheim." 



To wit, Ebers, whilst lecturing in Leipzig and other places, 

 guilefully impressed upon his audiences that it was ChampoUion 

 who discovered the key to the Egyptian literature. To this false 

 insinuation, soon afterwards. Prof. H. Wultke, in Leipzig, a sa- 



