1886.] on Thomas Young. 585 



questions regarding Young's method, whicli in certain cases appeared 

 to him enigmatical. The requisite explanations were promptly- 

 given by Young. In a labour of the kind here under consideration, 

 that force of genius which we vaguely term intuition must come con- 

 spicuously into play ; and it is not always easy for him to whom the 

 exercise of this force is habitual to make plain to others the nature 

 and results of its action. 



De Sacy embodies in the letter above quoted some personal 

 remarks which, were it not that their omission would involve a virtual 

 injustice to Young, one would willingly pass over. " Si j'ai un conseil 

 a vous donner," writes the Baron, " c'est de ne pas trop communiquer 

 vos decouvertes a M. Champollion. II se pourrait faire qu'il pre- 

 tendat ensuite a la priorite. II cherche en plusieurs endroits de son 

 ouvrage a faire croire qu'il a decouvert beaucoup des mots de 

 I'inscription egyptienne de Eosette. J'ai bien peur que ce ne soit 

 la que du charlatanisme : j'ajoute memo que j'ai de fortes raisons de 

 le penser." The work of Champollion here referred to was entitled 

 *L'Egypte sous les Pharaons, ou recherches sur la geographic, la 

 religion, la langue, les ecritures, et I'histoire de I'Egypte avant 

 I'invasion de Cambyses.' Two volumes of the work were published 

 in 1814, but it was never completed. 



In a letter written towards the end of 1816 Young passes the 

 following judgment upon this book in regard to its relation to the 

 Eosetta inscriptions : — 



" I have only spent literally five minutes in looking over Cham- 

 pollion, turning, by means of the index, to the parts where he has 

 quoted the inscription of Eosetta. He follows Akerblad blindly, 

 with scarcely any acknowledgment. But he certainly has picked 

 out the sense of a few passages in the inscription by means of Aker- 

 blad's investigations — although in four or five Coptic words which he 

 pretends to have found in it, he is wrong in all but one — and that is 

 a very short and a very obvious one. 3Ij/ translation is printed ; it 

 is anonymous, and must for some time remain so ; hut everybody whose 

 approbation is worth having will know the author." 



Our neighbours, the French, have been always fond, perhaps 

 rightly fond, of national glory, not only in military matters, but 

 also in science and literature. They rallied round Champollion. 

 Even De Sacy. who had previously warned Young against him, 

 eventually joined in the general paean. Arago also, who, in regard 

 to the optical discoveries of Young had behaved so honourably, 

 delivered an Eloge of Young, founded, according to Peacock, on 

 the most imperfect and narrow views of the case. In fact, patriot- 

 ism came into play, where cosmopolitanism ought to have been 

 supreme. Arago seeks to make out that Young stands in the same 

 relation to Champollion as Hooke, in regard to the doctrine of inter- 

 ferences, stands to Young. This is certainly a bold comparison. If, 

 as observed by Young's editor, Arago had gone as far back as Zoega, 



