DECIPHERMENT OF THE HIEROGLYPHS.
The idea long prevailed that the hieroglyphic characters were ideographic—i.e. that they represented ideas, not sounds; and any attempt at decipherment was hopeless. Before the end of last century, however, a hint had been thrown out that the characters might prove to be phonetic—i.e. representing sounds like the letters of our ordinary alphabets. And a further suggestion had been offered that the words enclosed within ovals might be the names of royal personages. But unless some means existed of comparing those names with the same names written in a known language, not a single hieroglyph could be read. The discovery of the Rosetta stone in 1799 supplied the means required. On that stone was engraved an inscription in three characters—the hieroglyphic, the demotic or popular Egyptian, and the Greek. Scholars, however, turned their attention at first rather to the comparison of the demotic and the Greek, as the idea still prevailed that the hieroglyphs were not phonetic. It happened, also, that the beginning of the hieroglyphic and the end of the Greek inscription were wanting, which added greatly to the difficulty of comparing the texts. Thus ‘the seals of the mysterious book were still unclosed’ when Champollion began his labours. He succeeded in identifying the names of Ptolemy and Cleopatra, and by comparing them with each other and with their Greek counterparts he identified ten letters which were clearly phonetic. The first and second characters in the king’s name were found in their right places in that of the queen, and the initial letter of Cleopatra did not occur in the name of Ptolemy, etc. By the examination and comparison of other proper names other letters were determined, and a phonetic alphabet gradually acquired. But the formidable task remained of examining, reducing to order, and deciphering the vast mass of characters that were still unread.
The fact is that in the Egyptian hieroglyphic writing, hundreds of characters are employed as well as the letters of the alphabet; these characters represent syllables, words, or ideas, and could be used instead of the letters, almost at the pleasure of the writer. This gradually became apparent to Champollion, and as, fortunately, there are a very great number of copies extant of the same MSS., he was able, by laborious and persevering collation of those MSS., to determine the phonetic value of a great number of characters. To use a familiar illustration, it is as though two copies of an English sentence were compared by a foreigner who was acquainted only with the alphabet; in one of them occurred the word three and the word and, whilst in the other copy, in the places occupied by those words, appeared the character 3 and the character &; or in an astronomical treatise, he would find the words sun and Taurus interchangeable with the signs ☉ and ♉. It would clearly be possible for him to read the four signs into the words for which they respectively stand, by a comparison of copies. The only difference is that the use of signs, whether for syllables, words, or ideas, is carried to such an immense extent in the old Egyptian writing, that their decipherment was a work of the most arduous kind. Champollion, nevertheless, succeeded in recovering and reading the old Egyptian language to a great extent, and his work has been ardently carried forward by his successors. The language, however, even when deciphered and read, must have remained unintelligible, if modern Coptic (the descendant of the ancient tongue) had not afforded the key to its translation.