1886.] on Thomas Young. 687 



questionably have increased his own reputation, without making any 

 sacrifice." In another place, Wilkinson remarks, in regard to the 

 reading of the hieroglyphics, " that Dr. Young gave the first idea 

 and proof of their alphabetic force, which was even for some time 

 after doubted by Champollion." 



Peacock speaks with wondering admiration of the modesty and 

 forbearance which he invariably showed in regard to Champollion. He 

 complained a little, but he throws no doubt or insinuation upon the 

 Frenchman's honour. He confines himself exclusively to his published 

 writings, and makes no reference to the loads of labour which lay 

 upon his shelves unpublished. Peacock complains, and justly complains, 

 of the unfairness of comparing the Champollion of 182*4 with the Young 

 of 1816. Young was the initiatory genius. He gave Champollion the 

 key, which he used subsequently with that masterly skill and sagacity 

 which have rendered his name illustrious. But Peacock emphatically 

 affirms that, while Champollion passed over Young's special researches 

 in connection with the papyri of Grey and Cassati, he affirms with 

 equal emphasis that whatever principle of discovery had been per- 

 ceived and established or made known, is appropriated without 

 acknowledgment, and the dates which would have proved the unques- 

 tionable priority of Dr. Young are carefully suppressed. No oppor- 

 tunity is lost of bringing prominently before the reader whatever 

 error he may have committed, with a view of showing not only his 

 (Champollion's) own superiority, but his entire independence and 

 originality. 



The Dean of Ely obviously felt very sore in regard to the treat- 

 ment of Dr. Young. " It is not our object," he says, " to underrate 

 the merits of the great contributions which were made by Cham- 

 pollion to our knowledge of hieroglyphical literature, but to protest 

 against the persevering injustice with which he treated the labours of 

 Dr. Young ; and we feel more especially called upon to do so in 

 consequence of finding that an author like Bunsen, occupying so 

 high a position among men of letters, should have supported with 

 the weight of his authority some of the grossest of his misrepresenta- 

 tions." Peacock acknowledges his own obligations to the valuable 

 labours of his friend Mr. Leitch ; but he also claims to have pursued 

 an independent course by consulting the unpublished documents in 

 his possession, which were unknown even to himself, until he was 

 compelled to study them in connection with the publications which 

 had been founded upon them. " It was only," he says, " after this 

 perusal that I became fully aware how imperfectly the published 

 writings of Dr. Yonng represented either the extent or the character 

 of his researches ; or the real progress he had made in the discovery 

 of phonetic hieroglyphics many years before Champollion had made 

 his appearance in the field." 



