328 THOMAS YOUNG. 



criticism might have been fairly applied ; he takes up the 

 cause of Young with a less scrupulous zeal ; and though with 

 perfect good temper, yet with deeply damaging force of argu- 

 ment and statement of facts, exposes the very unjustifiable 

 nature of Champollion's assumptions, and vindicates the 

 claims of Young to his fair and important share in these dis- 

 coveries. 



, He dwells on the tone of assumption in which Champollion 

 presents himself to his readers as in exclusive possession of 

 a province of which he had long since been the sole con- 

 queror, and regards every question raised as to his exclusive 

 rights as an unjustifiable attack to be resented and repelled ; 

 while he studiously suppresses the dates of the successive 

 stages of the discovery, and thus attacks Young on the asser- 

 tions made on imperfect knowledge in the earlier stages of 

 his investigations, with the aid of all his own accumulated 

 information acquired subsequently ; a proceeding the iniquity 

 of which needs only stating to stand exposed. 



As instances of this, it is mentioned that Young, in 1816, 

 on the strength of comparatively imperfect information then 

 acquired, made some representations respecting the enchorial 

 characters in the Rosetta inscription, and their relation to 

 those employed in the funereal rolls. These Champollion 

 criticizes and exposes without reserve, from the more full 

 knowledge he had obtained in 1824 ; entirely passing over 

 Young's own later statement on the same subject, correcting 

 his former views, and from which even Dr. Peacock considers 

 Champollion himself probably derived a large portion of his 

 own knowledge of the subject ! 



Dr. Peacock has collected, in one point of view, Champol- 

 lion's main assertions as representing the state of the case. 

 But he has shown that some of the propositions dwelt upon 

 were, in point of fact, never maintained by Dr. Young; and 

 it was chiefly by his later researches, that the erroneous im- 

 pressions at first entertained, respecting the points to which 

 they relate, had been corrected, and their true nature estab- 

 lished. 



