Hieroglyphs before Champollion

Jean-François Champollion. Wikimedia Commons.

The decipherment of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs is generally attributed to Jean-François Champollion, and particularly the publication of his Lettre à M. Dacier on 27th September 1822. In this breakthrough publication, he determined that the hieroglyphic writing system is ‘figurative, symbolic and phonetic all at once’. This breakthrough allowed him to identify hundreds of Egyptian hieroglyphs and words, through his study of Egyptian texts including, but not limited to, the famous Rosetta stone.

Although Champollion undoubtedly had the most memorable impact, there have also been many other individuals who studied ancient Egyptian scripts over the centuries. Below is a brief introduction to a selection of earlier scholars, and their contributions to knowledge of ancient Egyptian scripts.

Jabir Ibn Ḥayan (7th-8th centuries)

Although none of Jabir Ibn Ḥayan’s work on Egyptian scripts survives today, it was widely known to those who studied ancient Egyptian scripts in the centuries following his life. For example, in his own work on ancient Egyptian scripts, Ibn Waḥshiyah directed his readers to the more detailed work of Jabir Ibn Ḥayan, Ḥall Al-Rumuz wa Mafatiḥ Al-Kunuz. Also, writers including Dhu Al-Nun Al-Miṣri and Ibn Waḥshiyah referred to ‘the script of Jabir Ibn Ḥayan’ in reference to an apparently Egyptian script, of which many signs appear to be Demotic, one of the scripts used to write the ancient Egyptian language between the 7th century BCE and the 2nd century CE.

Some works by Jabir Ibn Ḥayan on other topics have survived, in which he references several languages that he evidently knew, including Arabic, Greek, Alexandrian, Persian and Himiyarite. His interest in ancient Egyptian scripts may have stemmed from his belief in the equal importance of the forms of letters and the meanings they represented, which he developed in his ‘Balance of Letters’ (Mizan Al-Ḥuruf) philosophy. He believed that letters represented phonetic values, as is the case in every ancient Egyptian script, and that the order in which they appeared designated meaning, which is a prominent characteristic of the Egyptian hieroglyphic script in particular.

Dhu Al-Nun Al-Miṣri (796-861)

Dhu Al-Nun Al-Miṣri was a Ṣufi master (an Islamic religious leader), alchemist, and poet. He took an interest in many scripts, including those of ancient Egyptian. He reportedly lived inside (or nearby) the temple of Akhmim. There he studied the ancient Egyptian script of the temple inscriptions, from which it was widely believed that he learnt the secrets of ancient Egyptian alchemical knowledge. Dhu Al-Nun Al-Miṣri himself stated that he was the student of the Egyptian priests, via the knowledge they left inscribed on temple walls.

In his work Kitab Ḥall Al-Rumuz, which in total contains over 300 scripts, Dhu Al-Nun Al-Miṣri produced tables in which he gave the letters of the Arabic alphabet and their phonetic values as a header, and underneath provided the corresponding letters to each Arabic letter in 28 different scripts. The scripts displayed include the ancient Egyptian scripts. One script cited in his work, referred to as ‘the script of Jabir Ibn Ḥayan’, shows the correct copying and identification of many Demotic signs.

Ibn Waḥshiyya (9th-10th centuries)

Ibn Waḥshiyya’s work Shauq Al-Mustaham covered 93 scripts, including ancient Egyptian scripts. Several centuries after it was written, in 1806, this was published in Arabic with an English translation by Joseph Hammer, under the lengthy title Science Alphabets and Hieroglyphic Characters Explained; with an Account of the Egyptian Priests, their Classes, Initiation, and Sacrifices, in the Arabic Language by Ahmad Bin Abubekerr Bin Wahshih; and in English by Joseph Hammer, Secretary to the Imperial Legation at Constantinople. Hammer’s publication has subsequently been noted as an English contribution to the decipherment of hieroglyphs by some later scholars, with no acknowledgement of the original Arabic author Ibn Waḥshiyya.

The Rosetta Stone. Image: Christoffer Ek.

Within this work, Ibn Waḥshiyya correctly identified the phonetic values of a number of Egyptian hieroglyphs. He also correctly identified determinatives, an important part of Egyptian scripts which do not have any phonetic value of their own, but appear at the end of words to provide further information about the category that the meaning of the word fits into (e.g. words relating to women, words relating to gods, words relating to trees etc.). Within Ibn Waḥshiyya’s work, determinatives were distinguished from hieroglyphs with phonetic values in the extensive lists of hieroglyphic words which he copied and correctly provided meanings for.

Abu Al-Qasim Al-ꜤIraqi (d.1341)

Abu Al-Qasim Al-ꜤIraqi was foremost an alchemist, but evidently had an interest in ancient Egyptian scripts. His surviving works contain a number of correctly copied hieroglyphic signs. In several cases the correct phonetic values of hieroglyphs are also given. Within each of the two known works in which he gave lists of hieroglyphic signs with corresponding phonetic values, around 4 or 5 signs were correctly identified. Although this is not a lot in relation to the total number of hieroglyphic signs, which ranged from 750-850 in the Middle Kingdom (c.2055-1650 BCE) to around 5,000 in Ptolemaic times (332-30 BCE), it is a greater number of signs than many contemporaries of Abu Al-Qasim Al-ꜤIraqi, and later scholars, were able to correctly identify. He also accurately copied a stela of Amenemhat II, including the name and titles of the king.

Athanasius Kircher (1602-1680)

A German priest and antiquarian, Athanasius Kircher took an interest in ancient Egyptian scripts. He produced the first Coptic grammar in a European language, and recognised that the Coptic language was a direct descendant of the language written in the older hieroglyphic script.

As well as Coptic, Athanasius Kircher also studied the hieroglyphic script. Within his work he questioned the belief that hieroglyphic signs each represented a single concept. This had been believed among European scholars since Greco-Roman times, although many Arabic scholars, including those mentioned above, evidently did not hold this belief and were aware that hieroglyphs could have phonetic values. Athanasius Kircher also correctly suggested that Egyptian hieroglyphic signs could represent phonetic values within his work, although he translated hieroglyphs based on symbolic inferences, rather than giving a phonetic value. In 1652-1654 he published a work of around 2000 pages, titled Oedipus Aegyptiacus, the third volume of which consisted of his inaccurate attempts to translate Egyptian hieroglyphs. His work was an influence for later European scholars.

Georg Zoëga (1755-1809)

Georg Zoëga was a Danish antiquarian and scholar. He worked on producing a corpus of all the hieroglyphic signs he could find, and reached a number of conclusions regarding the hieroglyphic script. He correctly noted that the direction that hieroglyphs faced was important (this indicates the direction in which they are to be read), and independently suggested that the hieroglyphic words which appeared written within cartouches were royal names. He also suggested that hieroglyphic signs could be alphabetical letters. However Georg Zoëga did not attempt to decipher and translate any hieroglyphic signs himself.

Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy (1758-1838)

Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy was Professor of Arabic at Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. His work on Egyptian scripts focussed on the Demotic text on the Rosetta stone, following its discovery in 1799. He was able to recognise and transcribe three names from this Demotic text: Ptolemy, Alexander, and Alexandria. However, he was unable to correctly break down these words into individual letters. He also incorrectly believed that Demotic was a purely alphabetic script, and he classified its signs into 25 groups, following the 25 letters of the Egyptian alphabet mentioned in Plutarch. His belief that Demotic was purely alphabetic prevented him from making any further advancements. He did, however, influence several individuals who did make greater progress, and it is perhaps in this respect that Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy had his greatest impact on the decipherment of Egyptian scripts. He corresponded with Thomas Young, and was the teacher of both Johan David Åkerblad, and Jean-François Champollion.

Johan David Åkerblad 's Demotic alphabet. Wikimedia Commons.

Johan David Åkerblad (1763-1819)

A Swedish diplomat who studied under Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy, Johan David Åkerblad also worked on the Demotic text of the Rosetta stone. He compared this Demotic text to the corresponding Greek text (the Rosetta stone contains the same text in the hieroglyphic, demotic and Greek scripts), and was able to confirm the names that Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy had recognised, and additionally identify the names Arsinoë, Berenike, and Aetos. He also identified third person pronouns in Demotic, and distinguished the Demotic words for ‘Egypt’ ‘the temples’ ‘many’ ‘the king’ and ‘Greek’.

In 1802 Johan David Åkerblad published a Demotic alphabet. However, like his teacher Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy, he incorrectly believed that Demotic was a purely alphabetic script, preventing him from further progress. Of the 29 letters in the Demotic alphabet he published, around half were correctly identified. Johan David Åkerblad’s Demotic alphabet was rejected by later scholars such as Thomas Young.

Thomas Young (1773-1829)

Thomas Young primarily conducted research in optics, with his most famous discovery being the wave-theory of light. However, throughout his career in medicine and physics, he maintained the interested in linguistics that he had developed at a young age. By the age of 14 Thomas Young had attained at least some knowledge of Greek, Latin, French, Italian, Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Samaritan, Arabic, Turkish, Persian, and Ethiopic.

His first work on ancient Egyptian scripts was on a damaged papyrus from Luxor, but he subsequently turned his attention to the text on the Rosetta stone. His findings regarding ancient Egyptian scripts included affirming a relationship between Coptic and earlier Egyptian scripts, and noting that certain hieratic and demotic signs descended from hieroglyphic signs. He divided the Rosetta stone’s Demotic text into 86 mostly correct word groups, and suggested that the demotic script was comprised of both ideograms and phonograms, rather than being purely alphabetical as Antoine-Isaac Silvestre de Sacy and Johan David Åkerblad believed.

However, following the Classical tradition, Thomas Young believed that the signs of the hieroglyphic script were primarily symbolic, and that phonetic hieroglyphic signs were only used in specific cases. Despite this incorrect belief, he did make progress in his study of hieroglyphs. He independently suggested that the hieroglyphic words encircled by cartouches were royal names, being unaware that others had previously also suggested this. He also read the names of Ptolemy, with two of Ptolmey’s epithets, and of Berenike, also recognised a feminine word ending within Berenike’s name.

He produced a list of 13 hieroglyphic signs and their values, 6 of which were correct, and 3 of which were partially correct. He later added more signs to this list. In 1827 Thomas Young abandoned his work on hieroglyphs in favour of working on the demotic script. However, he was hindered by other duties, and illness.

The advancements in the decipherment of hieroglyphs made by Jean-François Champollion built upon many centuries of work, including that of the individuals named above. While Champollion is undeniably deserving of much credit for the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs, there is no doubt that there are many others whose achievements deserve recognition, and without whose advancements in knowledge the all-important breakthrough may never have been made.