ee ee 
snk atin pian iain 
ean not 
SEYFFARTH—CHAMPOLLION AND RENOUF. 547 
anew, among a thousand other curiosities, in the Muse- 
‘os ‘kept by the advocate of Champollion’s system. 
Such is the key “of the whole Egyptian philology,” discov- 
ered by re ane verified by a new member of the 
“orthodox school.” As everybody sees, “it isnow absurd to 
speculate upon the possibility or impossibility of reading hie- 
roglyphic merrpone Perhaps, aaah) the disappointed 
reader of the “Atlantis” will now say in the Reviewer's 
words: “I feel obliged to cierea? my conviction that the 
whole of that system is fondamentally unsound, and simply 
.”” “The fundamental objection to that system con- 
sists in the apparent impossibility of learning and teaching 
bee ie it is not very different from the system of the Jesuit 
"The second object of the Reviewer is to make his readers 
at the absurdities of my own system, namely, that com- 
plex of rules for reading and explaining espe texts, 
my own investigations since 1824, which I first 
_ der Geschichte des gH Aaa al rae Got 
ed attack from the quarter of the “orthodox school” be- 
erent systems 
Sack Kase « appear aed T won dion’ that ar Rey. gentle- 
blush: to write down that € : 
e wro oka; ig bene Sy for 
ossess but what is called a literary knowledge 
vr sy” The fet i is “nk Ihave never, since 1826, 
quent publications, cha the substance 
3 for he e system set forth in my Rudimenta and 
= ota my 
a 
