540 SEYFFARTH—CHAMPOLLION AND RENOUF. 
to be en to write such articles. As, however, my motto is 
cuique—or, Truth for friends and enemies—I can but 
admire the eminent superiority of the Rev. P. Renouf of Dub- 
lin. On the other hand, I can not conceal that his treatise 
is so full of contradictions, misrepresentations, insinuations, 
and calumnies, = nda page, that a small volume would not 
suffice to refute Il. 
et us come te ‘ihe point, and first to the apotheosis of 
ae system. A hieroglyphie cites we under- 
the contrary, it is false if it yields nonpainty or, at “i ast, furn- 
ishes translations differing from the writer’s meaning. In this 
respect, the touchstones are ail those Egyptian inscriptions 
translated by the ancients, particularly the Rosettana, Her- 
xpion’s Obelisk, the Table of Karnak, Manetho’s Dynasties 
ahesh, the Table of Abydos, the Door of Phila, the Cata- 
ees of the Astronomical Decani, and many minor monu- 
ments. 
The origin of Champollion’s system was as follows:—First, 
- 1821, he published a pamphlet, “De VEcriture Hiératique,” 
ich he attem mpted to prove the hieroglyphic writings to 
be wholly < heey (point alphabetique). It would, howev- 
er, be indiscreet to criticise the different systems which were 
in royal es, 
and alphabetically, Champollion published his “Lettre 
ier iglesia many other royal names, and 
augmen rrected Y 
1824 (2d ed. 1828), 1 he published his 
lyphique des anciens Egyptiens ;” a in 1836 to . 
his large caine: wid Dictionary app ared. In those —_ 
the whole system o f Champollion, w o died in 1832, exhi 
3 OWES 
—“L. The language of the hieroglyphic inscriptions ons is partly 
an n ideal one, regarding all th the symbolic hieroglyp hs, pat 
the Coptic, spoken 3,000 years after Menes, and ocerved 
the Coptic works of the secon cond and following centuries ACs 
