304 THOMAS YOUNG. 



admira la science avec laquelle M. le Docteur Young 

 avait retabli la chronologie des Rois d'Egypte, ne com- 

 mencant leur serie qu'a la XVIII djnastie de Manethon, 

 en regardant les series anterieures comme inadmissi- 

 bles ; resultats auxquels des travaux tout differents 

 avaient egalement conduit M. de Paravey : et, en outre, 

 il jugea, et il juge encore, que le premier il entrait 

 d'une maniere plausible et sure dans l'interpretation des 

 hieroglyphes, fournissant ainsi a M. Ckampollion le 

 jeune une clef sans laquelle ce dernier rt aurait jamais 

 pu arriver aux resultats importants et curieux que 

 depuis il a obtenus? 



In the same sense, and almost in the same words, 

 writes Sir Gardner Wilkinson, an ardent admirer of 

 Champollion, and his chivalrous defender against the 

 assaults made upon him after his death. After speaking 

 of him as the kindler into a flame of the spark obtained 

 by Young, he continues thus : — < Had Champollion been 

 disposed to give more credit to the value and origin- 

 ality of Dr. Young's researches, and to admit that the 

 real discovery of the key to the hieroglyphics, which in 

 his dexterous hand proved so useful in unlocking those 

 treasures, was the result of his [Young's] labours, he 

 would unquestionably have increased his own reputa- 

 tion without making any sacrifice.' 



Peacock speaks with wondering admiration of the 

 modesty and forbearance which Young invariably 

 showed in regard to Champollion. He complained a 

 little, but he threw no doubt or insinuation upon the 

 Frenchman's honour. He confined himself exclusively 

 to his own published writings, and made no reference to 

 the loads of labour which lay upon his shelves unpub- 

 lished. Peacock complains, and justly complains, of 

 the unfairness of comparing the Champollion of 1824 



