table of contents

10/12/2011

Patrick Hunt on the Rosetta Stone

Patrick Hunt earned a Ph.D. from the Institute of Archaeology, UCL, University of London in 1991. He has been teaching humanities, the arts, archaeology and mythology at Stanford University since 1993. His Hannibal Expedition was sponsored in 2007-2008 by the National Geographic Society’s Expedition Council. He is Director of the Stanford Alpine Archaeology Project 1994-2011. […]

download transcript [vtt]
00:00:00.000
[ Music ]
00:00:07.000
This is KZSU Stanford.
00:00:10.000
Welcome to entitled opinions.
00:00:12.000
My name is Robert Harrison, and we're coming to you from the Stanford campus.
00:00:18.000
[ Music ]
00:00:28.000
[ Music ]
00:00:51.000
This earth that we live on, walk on, feed on, and dream on, this earth with all its heavy elements
00:01:06.000
is the storehouse of our cultural memory.
00:01:09.000
The fossil record of the human story has been preserved in earth and matter like clay, bronze
00:01:15.000
or stone, and most of what has survived across the ages did so because it found its way into the earth's humus.
00:01:25.000
The earth is our ultimate burial ground.
00:01:28.000
It is what civilizations sink into when they die.
00:01:33.000
If we have a historical memory, it is thanks in large part to this terrestrial, receptacle that
00:01:41.000
and serves fragments of the past, even as it covers up all traces of them.
00:01:47.000
The modern discipline of archaeology consists essentially of digging into the earth and bringing
00:01:54.000
to light cultural deposits that have been buried there either by accident or by design.
00:02:01.000
Archaeology is at bottom, geology.
00:02:04.000
Stay tuned in title opinions on the Rosetta Stone coming up.
00:02:08.000
[ Music ]
00:02:18.000
[ Music ]
00:02:47.000
We haven't done nearly enough shows about archaeology on entitled opinions, but we're going to correct that,
00:02:55.000
beginning with our show today about the Rosetta Stone.
00:02:59.000
I have with me in the studio my colleague Patrick Hunt, Patrick has served as the director of the Stanford Alpine Archaeological
00:03:06.000
Projects in 1994.
00:03:08.000
He also directs the National Geographic Society's Hannibal Expedition.
00:03:13.000
He has been elected fellow of the Royal Geographical Society in London.
00:03:17.000
He has written over 100 articles, has broken over 20 bones in falls from stone monuments during field work,
00:03:24.000
or so I learn from the bio in the book of his that we'll be talking about today.
00:03:30.000
And there's a lot more to his bio that will post on the entitled opinions website.
00:03:35.000
But more importantly for our purposes today, Patrick has recently published a book with the plume division of Penguin
00:03:41.000
Books called Ten Discoveries that rewrote history.
00:03:46.000
At first I thought we would do a show that touched on all ten of these discoveries, but superficiality is not our MO on entitled
00:03:54.000
opinions, so we decided to focus most of our attention today on only one of these discoveries, namely the Rosetta Stone.
00:04:02.000
But before we get down into the trenches, let me welcome my guest Patrick to the show, Patrick,
00:04:07.000
it's great that you could join us today.
00:04:09.000
Thank you Robert, it's a pleasure and an honor.
00:04:12.000
Thank you. Now before we talk about the Rosetta Stone, I'd like to read aloud for our listeners the chapter titles of your book in order
00:04:20.000
and ask you to say something about this list of top ten discoveries in the history of archaeology.
00:04:26.000
So the first one indeed is the Rosetta Stone, the key to Egyptian history, chapter two is Troy, the key to Homer and Greek history,
00:04:38.000
three,
00:04:40.000
Nine of us Assyrian library, the key to Mesopotamia,
00:04:44.000
four King Tut's tomb, the key to Egypt's God Kings,
00:04:48.000
five Machu Picchu, the key to Inca architecture, six Pompeii, the key to Roman life,
00:04:55.000
seven Dead Sea Scrolls, the key to biblical research, eight Thera, the key to the Aegean Bronze Age, nine,
00:05:05.000
The Old Divide Georg, the key to human evolution, and ten, the tomb of ten thousand warriors, the key to imperial China.
00:05:14.000
And that sounds like we have a lot of potential future shows in waiting, but could you tell us a little bit about how you narrow down your top ten
00:05:24.000
10-picks, Patrick? Yes Robert, it's an interesting idea that anyone could choose ten out of the hundreds of possible candidates.
00:05:36.000
What seems to be the common thread through here is that if you ask archaeologists who work on global contexts across five or six continents, different regions,
00:05:50.000
they might be hard pressed to create a list, but I found from my own experience when I've asked colleagues, places in the looves where the British Museum or the Met or places like that, world-class museums,
00:06:06.000
in looking at their collections, how would they assess or rate the most important sites, the weight of the discovery, how much it affected our interpretations of history, our reconstructions of the past.
00:06:19.000
Then there's a sort of a subplot here. One of the things that ties these ten together is that, unusually so for an archaeologist, I've been very fortunate to work on these places, these sites, all ten of them, all ten of these objects, or the cultures.
00:06:37.000
That is unusual because what started out for me as a material archaeologist was that while most archaeologists isolate or work on one culture, one time period, one material, I worked first on one material, stone, and that took me around the world for my PhD research before and since.
00:07:01.000
So it was sort of a natural that if I could find ten sites, ten places, major places that were also in my own sort of experience that I'd worked on these materials or these objects or worked in these places.
00:07:14.000
I could, I pulled together a book, it had to be something that I was familiar with in terms of the whole story, and it's ambitious to try to do this, even a little bit who brisket to think that you could choose a top ten list.
00:07:30.000
I was thinking a lot about stone for today's show, not just because we're going to talk about the Rosetta Stone, but it struck me again also I was thinking of Keats of all people who's tombstone in Rome, and Protestant cemetery, now called the non-Catholic cemetery of Rome, where he says,
00:07:51.000
He realized one whose name was written in water, because he thought that he was dying too young to actually have inscribed his name in stone, namely in the hard core memory of British poetry.
00:08:07.000
And this medium in which so much is preserved stone or clay, then it becomes papyrus and there's a whole history of this.
00:08:18.000
But I was thinking about how impossible it is for me to even find the technology that will read discs that I was using in my computer in the 80s.
00:08:32.000
And we think that we have this huge archive of knowledge that is being preserved forever in digital form, but every decade it seems like if you don't have that program, we are just not going to be able to decode what was done in 50 years from now.
00:08:50.000
I was going to be like hieroglyphs, like the Egyptian hieroglyphs compared to what that was in the period that we're going to be talking about when this Rosetta Stone was discovered.
00:09:01.000
So, stone, if I had to be an archaeologist, I would want to work in stone too.
00:09:06.000
That's very prescient of you to note that because the ephemerality of materials, there's a funny book written in the last century called the Motel of the Mysteries and how archaeologists in the somewhat near future, a few hundred years from now, try to interpret things.
00:09:28.000
For example, they pick up a toilet seat and think it's some kind of mesmerizing pectoral jewelry.
00:09:36.000
You could say the same thing if our culture crashed and people thought CD discs with their shimmering iridescence were jewelry also because they couldn't access the data.
00:09:47.000
And I think it's interesting too that the term stone age is a bit of a misnomer because even though it's sensible to create these ideas of stone age, bronze age, or copper age bronze age, iron age, and if we're now in an age, the age of plastic or whatever, the problem is that people for at least a hundred thousand years have been using also organic materials would bone textile skins.
00:10:16.000
But those things don't survive because they're organic, they decompose and usually only the stone is left.
00:10:24.000
Exactly.
00:10:25.000
So when it comes to the stone, it's something where something can be inscribed and it can last a very long time.
00:10:36.000
It's not, there's nothing eternal. It also has its own age, but it just ages at a much slower rate than other things.
00:10:48.000
And here what we want to talk about is the first chapter of your book about the Rosetta stone, which is almost the archetype of a place of inscription because you have, you'll give us a detail so it, but you have a text which is inscribed in three different
00:11:05.000
alphabets or at languages and it enabled the Europeans to finally understand the Egyptian hieroglyphic language after a long, kind of intense period of decodification we want to get into the details of that.
00:11:23.000
So if we can jump right into that first chapter of your book there on the Rosetta stone,
00:11:29.000
first thing, why is it called the Rosetta stone?
00:11:35.000
That's because it was found in a branch of the Nile that an Arabic would be called al-Rashid.
00:11:43.000
Al-Rashid.
00:11:44.000
Al-Rashid.
00:11:45.000
It's the branch that runs fairly close to the west, to Alexandria.
00:11:50.000
And over time it's been given that European name Rosetta.
00:11:56.000
And this stone, can you just reconstruct a little bit about how it was discovered and what its fate had been?
00:12:03.000
And I gather from reading you that it was actually inscribed somewhere about 200 years BC.
00:12:10.000
Yes, 196 BC.
00:12:13.000
Under Ptolemy V. And Ptolemy V had been preceded by his father, whose death was not a good thing.
00:12:24.000
It was probably an assassination.
00:12:26.000
It was elimination.
00:12:27.000
And there was political instability.
00:12:29.000
And Ptolemy V's reign was very, shall we say, at least tentative.
00:12:35.000
And no one knew for sure if he was going to make it.
00:12:38.000
And he was just a boy king.
00:12:39.000
And advisors and so on.
00:12:41.000
There's a lot of chaos in the regime.
00:12:44.000
So there was a stone made.
00:12:46.000
And it wasn't the only stone made.
00:12:48.000
It's just the copy that it survived and even that in fragment form.
00:12:53.000
But there was now a threat.
00:12:56.000
The British were coming and the French had already occupied Egypt under Napoleon.
00:13:01.000
They'd sent their expeditionary forces there and they had sort of what we could call one of the world's first scientific expeditions.
00:13:08.000
Historians, geographers, botanists, zoologists.
00:13:12.000
Everyone went to Egypt because it was still largely unknown.
00:13:17.000
And the exploration of Europe, the ruins of Greece and Rome had already been in many times in ways pilfered by Europeans.
00:13:27.000
The kings and queens and nobles, the aristocrats of Europe had descended on Italy and Greece.
00:13:35.000
And taken much.
00:13:37.000
You could look at the Elgin marbles.
00:13:39.000
You could look at all kinds of examples of that.
00:13:41.000
But Egypt was still pretty much unclaimed.
00:13:44.000
And it was exotic.
00:13:46.000
Napoleon was looking at that as his own personal feftum.
00:13:49.000
So he sent his forces there.
00:13:51.000
But they knew the Brits were coming.
00:13:53.000
The Brits had their eyes on Egypt.
00:13:55.000
And of course, Nelson's forces were assembling.
00:13:58.000
There was going to be a blockade in the Nile.
00:14:00.000
And it was building.
00:14:01.000
The tension was building.
00:14:03.000
So Napoleon, now who's going back and forth to France, has commanded his engineers to rebuild a fort there on the Nile on the Alreshead branch.
00:14:15.000
The fort was Fort St. Julian.
00:14:18.000
So a lieutenant, Boucher, one of the engineering officers, was having work crews, prize out stones from the quays from the warves.
00:14:27.000
Some of them underwater, some of them in berms of dirt and earth.
00:14:31.000
And they'd been in there for probably well night, 2000 years, maybe even longer.
00:14:37.000
And so stones weren't in their original placements.
00:14:40.000
They were already now in secondary or tertiary placements.
00:14:44.000
And stones moved around.
00:14:47.000
So Boucher had his workforce pulling out these stones and they would fall out in the dust.
00:14:53.000
And suddenly, here in 1799, as far as we can tell, this stone falls out.
00:14:59.000
When the dust settles, Boucher looks at it.
00:15:02.000
And he's amazed.
00:15:03.000
Because while some of the stones they had prized out and were rebuilding of the fort had bits of hieroglyphs on them,
00:15:11.000
this was a long text. And it wasn't just one text.
00:15:15.000
It was three separate texts.
00:15:17.000
The top text was hieroglyph.
00:15:19.000
The second text looked like sort of a cursive shorthand type.
00:15:22.000
And the third text, this is what caught Boucher's attention.
00:15:26.000
It was in Greek.
00:15:27.000
And he knew it was Greek because as an engineer, he knew the language of mathematics and could recognize some of the Greek letters.
00:15:33.000
Deltas and lambdas and things like that.
00:15:35.000
So he saw that it was a text. And you can imagine his amazement because a bright man, a good engineer, deductive person,
00:15:46.000
he asked this question, "I wonder with this long text, the longest text that had been seen before, all in one stone."
00:15:55.000
He asked, "I wonder if it says the same thing in three languages."
00:16:02.000
And that would have been extraordinary because for a while, at least a few centuries, people had been intrigued by the hieroglyphic language and had been trying to decode it.
00:16:13.000
And I did a show on Kierkerer, you know, at the 17th.
00:16:16.000
Yes, at the New Adamaceous Kierkerer.
00:16:18.000
And then Kierkerer, who had some wild attempts to theories of transcription.
00:16:25.000
And of course, the speculation had been rife, but this would have been, yeah, I can appreciate Bruce Shays.
00:16:34.000
And I think you mentioned in your book that it's just a happy coincidence that that stone happened to land face up rather than face down, had it landed face down.
00:16:47.000
Who knows?
00:16:48.000
Exactly.
00:16:49.000
And there were 50 probabilities and knowing that nobody knew how to read hieroglyphs at this point.
00:16:57.000
1799, there were a lot of theories like Athanasius Kierkerer's out there.
00:17:02.000
Many people took their best shots at it, but whether they were linguists or not, there was no key.
00:17:09.000
There was no template.
00:17:10.000
And this was the first and only one.
00:17:12.000
Yes.
00:17:13.000
For the time.
00:17:14.000
Now, we have a few others that have turned out there in the Museo Ejitzio in Torino.
00:17:20.000
There is a good example, but found later and now in the Sheper-Rely collection there.
00:17:25.000
So what happens after the stone is discovered in Boucher, it appreciates the importance of it as a discovery.
00:17:32.000
He knew it meant something.
00:17:35.000
And you're absolutely right.
00:17:37.000
The import of this to him, he knew that it meant something more to scholars.
00:17:43.000
So he put it into a cart and it went all the way across bouncing over those roads and through the pirates' swamps down to Cairo.
00:17:56.000
And it went to General Abdullah Manu, who was one of the generals in charge of the forces now with Napoleon being gone.
00:18:03.000
And Manu immediately seized it as his personal property, but words spread like wildfire.
00:18:09.000
It was set up on exhibit and thousands of French soldiers, especially the officers who were often by large educated with commissions.
00:18:20.000
They went and they all came and flocked to see this stone.
00:18:24.000
And they made lithographs of it, John just paper squeezes and word spread, not only all over Egypt, word got back to France and from France it spread through Europe.
00:18:35.000
So it stays in Cairo under French, let's say, claims.
00:18:43.000
And first, let's just reconstruct the political, because the whole thing is very involved in the political geopolitics of Europe at the time.
00:18:52.000
So it, and then there is a rivalry about whether it's the Frenchman or the Englishman who really is the one who did most of the work in the decoding.
00:19:02.000
But very shortly thereafter, the English take possession of Egypt and the stone passes over into British hands, correct?
00:19:13.000
That's correct. By 1801, after the blockade of the Nile, the French were forced to concede Egypt to the Brits.
00:19:23.000
And the surrender includes envoys and ligates, but a special envoy went to General Menu.
00:19:32.000
And they, it was like espionage of the times, they knew exactly what he had, because word had gotten out across the channel to the Brits.
00:19:40.000
They knew this stone was really important.
00:19:43.000
And so the envoy came and they made their presentation of what would be the results of the negotiations, what would be given to whom, who would keep what.
00:19:57.000
And so they pressed General Menu.
00:20:00.000
And this envoy included a Colonel Turner and included a very famous Brit, Sir William Hamilton.
00:20:07.000
Hamilton had been the Minister, plenty, potentiary for King, the King's, the Georgian Kings, in Naples to the Bourbon court.
00:20:18.000
And he was a great collector of antiquities. His collection eventually became one of the book collections, one of the Hallmark collections of the British Museum.
00:20:28.000
So he knew antiquities very well.
00:20:30.000
And he was part of this entourage.
00:20:32.000
And they demanded the Rosetta Stone from General Menu, who said, absolutely not, this is my personal property.
00:20:42.000
They said, oh, you can't keep it.
00:20:45.000
And we know you have it hidden under your tent, which was true.
00:20:49.000
And they demanded, and he exclaimed after that, even he had no choice in the matter they forced his hand.
00:20:55.000
And he said, never has such barbarous exploitation, never has such robbery taken place in history.
00:21:01.000
And of course, overlooking the fact that he had sort of sequestered it for his own personal collection.
00:21:07.000
But it went to Britain by ship.
00:21:10.000
And some of the assessments of people at the time of how important it was, the Brits knew full well how important it was.
00:21:18.000
For example, if you want me to make some of the statements, Colonel T.H. Turner said that it was the most valuable relic of antiquity.
00:21:29.000
And he also said, now it's a proud trophy of the arms of Britain and the Society of Antiquaries in London, named it this precious monument.
00:21:41.000
Thomas Young, who will figure in this story soon, he said a few years later that any fragment that could have been found in Egypt that would attach to this piece, any fragment would be worth its weight in diamonds.
00:21:58.000
So that just tells you some of the assessment.
00:22:01.000
Now, of course, someone who's famous as the Yale Archaeologist Michael Coe says that the Rosetta Stone is the most famous piece of rock in the world.
00:22:12.000
And I think William Hamilton, Colonel Turner, Thomas Young, the Brits, they all agreed this was really valuable, perhaps the most valuable relic.
00:22:24.000
And the Yale professor said that recently, more recently, no?
00:22:28.000
Yes, that's only about 19 years ago.
00:22:30.000
Yeah, it's still the case that the Rosetta Stone is the most important rock.
00:22:35.000
I believe that that assessment holds today.
00:22:40.000
Even...
00:22:41.000
Now why is that? Because it just enabled us to read the Egyptian hieroglyphs.
00:22:45.000
I mean, couldn't we have done without understanding the Egyptian hieroglyphs?
00:22:49.000
That's such a good question because it's true that you could say some of this romance could be stripped away.
00:22:59.000
And it's after all a very mundane inscription on it.
00:23:03.000
But it set the whole tone.
00:23:05.000
It was the precedent that has allowed archaeologists, the pigrofers, linguists ever since.
00:23:14.000
It's a model for translation to go from the known, in this case, the Ptolemaic Greek of the third century BC, early third century, from that Ptolemaic Greek, the known language provided then a transcription for the unknown.
00:23:34.000
And that model has been followed ever since. That's happened with Cuneiform. It's happened with Maya. It's happened all over the world.
00:23:42.000
So the reason why it could still be called the most important piece of rock in the world is because it started the whole process.
00:23:50.000
And without language, without knowing a culture's language in their own words, we're left to only try to interpret the objects themselves.
00:24:00.000
And some of those objects are eloquent, but many of them are mute.
00:24:04.000
And in this case, it's not so much, as you mentioned, the content of what is written in the stone, because from what I gather, it's actually just a Ptolemaic giving a tax exemption to the priests.
00:24:18.000
Because a high priest were important politically for a regime that wasn't quite as you call it tentative, so he needed.
00:24:28.000
So it's not like the epic of Gilgamesh that is on that tablet.
00:24:33.000
No, it's important as it means of decoding until then unknown language or indecipherable.
00:24:43.000
Exactly. It has very little literary value, almost no commercial value, maybe a proper statistic value, but essentially just that.
00:24:52.000
It establishes that the priests are going to back this king for tax exemptions.
00:24:58.000
So in the discovery of the Rosetta Stone in three languages, as you mentioned, there's the hieroglyphic.
00:25:06.000
That is called the Demotic and the Greek.
00:25:10.000
The story is not by any means solved then, because there's an actually quite protracted, laborious chapter of trying to use the known language in order to conjecture what the unknown language is saying.
00:25:29.000
Yes.
00:25:30.000
And you mentioned Thomas Young, who was Thomas Young.
00:25:34.000
Well, Thomas Young was connected to the Royal Society of Antiquaries.
00:25:40.000
He had in that sense a capacity.
00:25:44.000
He was called phenomenon young.
00:25:47.000
He was a genius from childhood on was taught Latin and Greek, and he grew.
00:25:54.000
He knew six or seven ancient languages and four or five modern languages fluent in French and certainly some other European languages.
00:26:03.000
As a physicist, which was his primary training, he worked in optics and light, and he made some refinements to Newton's discoveries.
00:26:12.000
But one of the things he's known for today, he's very famous for what's called Young's modulus of elasticity and plasticity, sort of a physical characteristic of materials.
00:26:24.000
So he stumbled upon this not so much by accident because he really was good at linguistics.
00:26:31.000
But you're absolutely right too, that it took a whole generation before people could begin working this out from essentially 1800,
00:26:39.000
to talk about 1818.
00:26:42.000
And Thomas Young now had access to that stone because it was in first what was called Somerset House on the Thames River.
00:26:51.000
That's where the Admiralty still is today and King's College and the Courtauld Institute of Art.
00:26:57.000
But it was the House there first, and of course then it was moved to the British Museum.
00:27:02.000
But Thomas Young had access like no one else and being a linguist and being deductive and being trained in deductive processes.
00:27:12.000
He began asking some really good questions.
00:27:16.000
Well, it would be fair to say that having direct access to the stone was not as essential in this case because so many transcriptions or reproductions had been made that the script was readily available to scholars all around the world.
00:27:35.000
Yes, and of course that's where the French get back involved.
00:27:39.000
It was in their possession first, and now they only have copies of the impressions.
00:27:44.000
Well, in fact, I think I'm on the French side usually in all these matters historical between the long feud between the Brits and the French.
00:27:53.000
But Thomas Young of course, because I've always thought that Jean Paul Young, the young French wonder boys, one who finally had the breakthrough when it came to the Rosetta Stone.
00:28:06.000
But Thomas Young, we have to give him his fair do, no? Because he...
00:28:12.000
Yes. What was his contribution to the outcome of that Jean Paul Young is associated with?
00:28:20.000
No one could ever undermine Champolian's genius and his contributions in this.
00:28:26.000
The French were right to claim a huge stake in this decoding.
00:28:30.000
And history may in future generations still give him the lion's share.
00:28:36.000
But Thomas Young's part cannot be overlooked.
00:28:40.000
And if we see this as you mentioned sort of a geopolitical feud between the Brits and the French, both of them disparaging each other all too often, competing for many things in the European theater,
00:28:54.000
The French had discovered the Rosetta Stone, but the Brits took it from them. And you could say in a sense that the French are going to get their payback with Champolian.
00:29:03.000
If we can't own it, at least we're going to be the ones to solve it.
00:29:06.000
And to a large degree, Champolian did that.
00:29:09.000
Young's contribution, though, comes because of his possible mathematical bent.
00:29:15.000
He was looking at the Rosetta Stone and saw, because he could read the Ptolemaic Greek.
00:29:21.000
He could probably read it like you and I would read the New York Review of Books.
00:29:26.000
He could read it with great facility. He could read the Greek.
00:29:29.000
And he noticed that when he compared the distance, the spaces in the Greek, he recognized, of course, famous Ptolemaic Royal names.
00:29:38.000
He recognized the name of Ptolemy. He could read that in Greek.
00:29:41.000
And he also could recognize the name of one of the queens, Cleopatra.
00:29:45.000
This is not the last Cleopatra, they're so famous.
00:29:48.000
These are both very famous Greek names of the Egyptian rulers now.
00:29:53.000
But he looked at the hieroglyphs.
00:29:56.000
And he noticed something peculiar about the hieroglyphs that there were these sort of oval elliptical enclosures around several of the sets of groups of hieroglyphs.
00:30:10.000
And he counted out the spaces.
00:30:12.000
And he looked at the space in the Greek text between the first mention of the name Ptolemy and the first mention of the name Cleopatra.
00:30:19.000
And they were several lines apart.
00:30:21.000
And he looked back up in the hieroglyphs and he saw that relatively speaking, if you count the frequency of letters, if you want to call them that, the frequency of characters,
00:30:31.000
the frequency of the distance between Cleopatra and Ptolemy in the Greek was roughly the same in these hieroglyphs spaces.
00:30:39.000
So he began to wonder, could those enclosures that we now call Cartusius, could those actually be the names, the role names of Ptolemy in Cleopatra?
00:30:48.000
And he knew, as anyone would, looking at those names, that they both share Ptolemy and Cleopatra.
00:30:56.000
And he looked at the sequence of those letters, Ptolemy and the sequence of those letters in Cleopatra, which would be, not necessarily the same, would be L-P-T.
00:31:08.000
He slightly changed. And he saw that those, he saw similar characters that looked in the same sequence in those Egyptian Cartusius.
00:31:16.000
And that was his first breakthrough.
00:31:19.000
And he identified after that the K and the R and the M and so on.
00:31:27.000
And he built up and he was lucky that at that point, Egyptian had borrowed Greek vowels into itself, because before this, in Middle Egyptian and Old Egyptian, there were no words.
00:31:37.000
So he was very, Sarah Diplis for him that that was there, because then he could also work out O and E and Y.
00:31:46.000
This mathematical one-for-one correspondence of the L-P-T or the Ptole and then the K and the R and the M and the Y, he was able to reconstruct them, the Royal names of Ptolemy, Cleopatra and Baronique.
00:31:59.000
And that was the key. And he set that out and he shared this with other linguists, including Sace in Paris, who at that time had been the professor of this very young teenager, Jean-Fonsqua, Jean-Poleon.
00:32:19.000
And Sace and Jean-Poleon started corresponding with Thomas Young and asked him for some of these keys that he had been making out.
00:32:27.000
And being a generous person, Thomas Young, his correspondence, sent his keys. He sent his Ptolemy, Cleopatra, Baronique and other words that he'd solved to Shampolium.
00:32:40.000
And that's all Shampolium needed. Being a genius, he put the rest together.
00:32:44.000
Whereas Young had not been able to put the rest together.
00:32:48.000
This was something that Young was doing only on the side. It was one of his many, many pastimes.
00:32:54.000
And while linguistics for him was an easy process, it wasn't his first love.
00:33:01.000
It was just sort of a hobby, but for Shampolium, it was his passion.
00:33:07.000
Shampolium's older brother, Fisciac Shampolium, Jacques had told him earlier, and his older brother, Shampolium's brother, Fisciac Shampolium, had told him because he knew that his young teenage brother was so obsessed with Egyptian things in Egyptology.
00:33:24.000
He said, perhaps, brother, your future lies in Egypt. And it was true. Shampolium put it all together.
00:33:33.000
How old was he when he, and how long did it take him to put it all together?
00:33:39.000
Not long. We have actually correspondence from Thomas Young that shows that he put his first ideas together in 1818.
00:33:50.000
And he--
00:33:51.000
Oh, did Young or Thomas Young did it? In 1818, he set his material together.
00:33:57.000
And Thomas Young, who's born in 1773, and dies in 1829, Thomas Young is just a little bit, you know, older, a half-generation older than Jean-Fantzwa, who's born in 1790 and dies just a few years later than Young in 1832.
00:34:16.000
But Young, Shampolium, at this point, is really essentially about 1920 years old when he makes his first breakthrough.
00:34:29.000
He started at about age 14 or 15, and then by his correspondence dates, we can work out that if in 1818, 1819, Young is corresponding to the Shampolium.
00:34:42.000
But in by 1822, Jean-Fantzwa, Shampolium, goes before the French Institute, the assembly of French scientists, and he reads, he first constructs a letter to Monsieur Dacier, basically the president of this French body of scholars.
00:35:01.000
And his brother, Fijia, is the secretary to that body, so that's his entree.
00:35:07.000
And letter to Monsieur Dacier, 1822, Young Jean-Fantzwa, Shampolium, sets forth all his discoveries.
00:35:14.000
Pages upon pages upon pages of brilliant deductions, stroke after stroke of lightning genius.
00:35:21.000
And then he reads it before the assembly, and guess who's there in the audience to hear it.
00:35:27.000
Thomas Young.
00:35:28.000
Is he?
00:35:29.000
Yes.
00:35:30.000
There was enough time for him to get over across the channel.
00:35:33.000
So he was there present that day.
00:35:36.000
And you can just imagine the thunderous applause of the French standing up in ovation for Young Jean-Fantzwa, Shampolium, and you also sort of wonder how did Thomas Young feel about that?
00:35:48.000
But we have later correspondences that show that Thomas Young sort of shrugged it off.
00:35:56.000
He was quite a generous guy. There's one statement that perhaps, I don't know if you can locate it, but he's very gracious in the best British style, and wants to give--
00:36:11.000
Do you have that?
00:36:12.000
Yes.
00:36:13.000
Yes.
00:36:14.000
It's a letter of Thomas Young to Sir William Gell, another famous Brit, scholar, an antiquarian, a linguist.
00:36:22.000
And this letter is dated just the year after the discovery and the huge Paris pomp.
00:36:31.000
And September 18, 23, here's what Thomas Young says to Sir William Gell.
00:36:36.000
"I have now considered my Egyptian studies as concluded.
00:36:41.000
I sent it--"
00:36:43.000
He's speaking of his major phonetic discovery.
00:36:46.000
"I sent it at that time to Shampolium, and he acknowledged the receipt of it.
00:36:51.000
To have placed more emphasis on the precise states than I have done would have been to display more parade than the thing required.
00:37:02.000
Or to have shown too much hostility to Shampolium, to whom I would rather give up something that is my right than take from him anything that ought to be his."
00:37:14.000
Yes. That's the nobility of that British spirit of the Thomas Young.
00:37:22.000
Yeah, he's a hero.
00:37:23.000
He has to be a hero in this regard because you're right to think of him in that audience, to think of himself that he was there.
00:37:35.000
He was on the path.
00:37:36.000
He could have done it himself at a more time.
00:37:39.000
But no, he's cool.
00:37:41.000
He's cool.
00:37:42.000
And Shampolium also, later on, just the next year, gives young some of the credit.
00:37:50.000
Do we have the text there as well?
00:37:52.000
Yes.
00:37:53.000
And it's interesting too because Shampolium is not exactly his generous as Thomas Young was.
00:37:59.000
And, you know, when you look at this, what happens later, what ensues, it's really important for Shampolium.
00:38:04.000
And Shampolium says this, "I recognize that he, young, was the first to publish some correct ideas about the ancient writings of Egypt, that he also was the first to establish some correct distinctions,
00:38:19.000
consturing the general nature of these writings, by determining through a substantial comparison of texts, the value of several groups of characters.
00:38:28.000
I even recognize that he published before me his ideas on the possibility of the existence of several sound signs.
00:38:36.000
Finally, that most of your young was also the first to try to give a phonetic value to the hieroglyphs making up the two names of Ptolemy."
00:38:46.000
So it's interesting, he says some, some, some.
00:38:50.000
And he does conclude.
00:38:52.000
I mean, technically, that's true, no.
00:38:53.000
Yes, it's only some.
00:38:54.000
It is, it is only some.
00:38:55.000
It may be a major key.
00:38:57.000
It may be the first breakthrough, but it's by no means the full reconstruction.
00:39:01.000
And it's phenomenal how accurate Shampolium was here now, essentially, you know, 200 years after the fact.
00:39:11.000
Many of the major propositions linguistically, syntax, and so on, that Shampolium set forth, without any precedent, still hold true today.
00:39:24.000
And of course, Shampolium and the French rightfully made a big deal out of this.
00:39:31.000
That, okay, the Brits have the stone, but we made the bulk of the discovery.
00:39:36.000
And furthermore, Shampolium, who was very much a Napaelinesse.
00:39:41.000
He was a, he was someone who was very much a Bonaparteist.
00:39:46.000
Yeah.
00:39:47.000
And it may have dinged him a bit later on, but he became one of the major directors of the Louvre and went on, even, you know, for the first time.
00:39:53.000
Even, you know, for the few years he had left back to Egypt for expeditions.
00:39:57.000
So he became the lion of Egyptology in the world.
00:40:02.000
And, uh, young, well, he died in 1829, wasn't much credited then.
00:40:09.000
And all the fanfare around Shampolium wouldn't really allow that fanfare to come through until now with a little retrospect.
00:40:17.000
But Patrick, it's also the case that there was a furious rush to decipher among a bunch of people at the same time, no.
00:40:26.000
And I remember reading a life of Shampolium where he was, he was working furiously because he knew that it's just a matter of time before some intelligent person got there.
00:40:38.000
So, yes.
00:40:39.000
It was a race against time.
00:40:41.000
Are there other people who have not gotten credit that they might have deserved or are there tragic stories of someone who was like just three months away from breaking it in the know?
00:40:53.000
We may never know the full story, but I'm sure there were some Scandinavians involved.
00:41:01.000
There were some Germans involved.
00:41:03.000
There we have some names at time at places who were corresponding.
00:41:06.000
But on the other hand, a lot of these people kept their material to themselves.
00:41:12.000
We often know in history now that there's sort of a simultaneous discovery of things that there could be multiple claims.
00:41:21.000
But really, Shampolium does deserve the lion's share of the credit for making this.
00:41:27.000
Whether or not he knew he was racing against competitors, he had all the right stuff.
00:41:33.000
He had all the intellectual and even maybe social and political national reasons and causes to get there first.
00:41:46.000
So, he really did pull it off.
00:41:50.000
I should have studied up on this better than I have for our show today, but our hieroglyphs, because it sounds like the method of decoding was that it seems to suggest that the hieroglyph is actually alphabetic language.
00:42:08.000
But I always thought it's more like idiogrammatic.
00:42:11.000
It's very complicated. There are idiograms, phonograms, there are rebus images.
00:42:17.000
No, it's not exactly originally phonetic.
00:42:21.000
But by the time of the Ptolemies, the Greeks had the deal.
00:42:27.000
Now, the Egyptians are having over them a culture ruling them the Greeks.
00:42:35.000
The Greeks.
00:42:36.000
So, some Alexander the Greeks conquered the Egypt.
00:42:39.000
So, now the Egyptians have to deal with a bulk of a bureaucracy that is not Greek.
00:42:49.000
And the Egyptians have been pulling in these Hellenisms now for some time.
00:42:58.000
There's a huge intellectual ferment going on in Alexandria, sort of the intellectual first cosmopolis of the world.
00:43:05.000
And so, one of the benefits of moving from a very complicated system, which is a syllabary, which is ideogram, which is phonogram, which is rebus, which is pictographic.
00:43:17.000
All these very complicated linguistic signifiers and determinants and so on become somewhat simplified.
00:43:25.000
And it exchanges with Greek, Ptolemaic Greek, some of these ways in which the complexity of Egyptian may be now sublimated under the new alphabet of Greeks, which included vowels.
00:43:46.000
But you're absolutely right. It's very, very complicated ancient Egyptian.
00:43:50.000
And today we have to look at a lot of grammars to pull out some of the subtleties and nuances of hieroglyphs.
00:44:01.000
And another very naive question, if you don't mind, is having now knowing the hieroglyphic language, what did that yield in terms of access?
00:44:17.000
The way in which Egyptian texts had not been accessible for essentially 1500 years, people were using hieroglyphs in Egypt up until the Roman period.
00:44:33.000
And then with the fall of the Roman Empire, the gradual demise, nobody, even the cops, nobody had, nobody was using hieroglyphs anymore.
00:44:46.000
Although some of the words end up, Egyptian words end up in Coptic, and Coptic borrows mostly the Greek alphabet.
00:44:55.000
But this stuff became the whole history of Egypt, Kings' lists, religious texts, literature, poems, hymns, agricultural texts, medical texts, science texts,
00:45:11.000
Everything, including thousands of papyrite that have subsequently been discovered in oxyrencus elsewhere, all this material was just completely closed.
00:45:28.000
We knew really nothing, we had pictures, we had some Egyptian artifacts, we had monuments, even with pictures and Egyptian art and fresh, what we call tomb paintings.
00:45:42.000
Still, we didn't really understand much about Egypt.
00:45:47.000
We had this idea, this mysterious, mortuary culture, but we had no idea that they had done immense research on astronomy, the Rind of Papyrus.
00:45:59.000
They'd done immense research on science, the Ebers, the Harris, but Papyrite.
00:46:03.000
They had thousands of years of accumulated science, history, agriculture, and so all that was opened up.
00:46:15.000
I was huge in Colossal.
00:46:17.000
Really, and for a culture that still may be one of the mother cultures of the whole old world, to not be able to touch that stuff, what do we really know about history? Very little.
00:46:31.000
Is it conceivable that it would have remained closed to this day? Had the Rosetta Stone not been discovered?
00:46:39.000
Or would we have found other means of finally making sense of it?
00:46:45.000
I think that the discovery of the Rosetta Stone certainly accelerated the decoding, and then as I said, setting precedent for others, but had it not been found in 1799, probably within half century or so, something else would have been found.
00:47:08.000
But something else that was found was known to be important because of the Rosetta Stone, so it's not easy to say that it would have happened as quickly.
00:47:17.000
I think it's probably fair to say we'd be a good 75 years behind, in other words, it could have taken until modern age of computing to make sense out a lot of these texts, and of course computers are used widely now.
00:47:36.000
But I think the other part of it is that when archaeologists first started exploring the rest of the ancient Greeks, including Mesopotamia, had they not had the Rosetta Stone to work as a template to move from the known to the unknown to the unknown to the unknown to the unknown, that whole area would have been closed off.
00:47:59.000
It wasn't just Egyptology that was opened up, it was also a seriology and Sumerology and Babylonian lore, and that has continued to be a process this rippling outward of knowledge by the precedent of the Rosetta Stone.
00:48:14.000
So if you don't have the Rosetta Stone, you don't have a model, you don't have a precedent.
00:48:19.000
And I think we'd be really behind knowing a lot about the ancient world.
00:48:25.000
And we were behind for a long time as it was because our colleague, my colleague, especially in my department, Michel Serr, who's been a guest on the show twice before, although in French, our covers.
00:48:41.000
I think he points out something very important about, let's say modern Western civilization, having four major currents feeding into it, two of which are primarily text-based, or let's say the word, where the word is the most important medium,
00:49:10.000
and that would be the Greek heritage and the Hebrew.
00:49:17.000
So it's a almost textual tradition.
00:49:21.000
And the two others are back to stone, they kind of embodied their knowledge and wisdom or think in a kind of stone in building.
00:49:33.000
And that would be the Roman and the Egyptian.
00:49:36.000
Yes.
00:49:37.000
Where stone is, the massive materiality of it contains a certain sort of hardness that then endures.
00:49:52.000
And of course, our colleague Michel Serr thinks that in our own era, and for quite some time, if you said to me, it's really been the Greek Hebrew that has one
00:50:05.940
out over the Roman Egyptian, and that contemporary technologies, especially as you were mentioning, computer technology, everything that's in the realm of the soft, the lighter, the area is where now it's all sort of happening.
00:50:22.940
Whereas the ponderous weight of the stony, which is Egyptian, and in many respects also Roman, is kind of far away from that.
00:50:36.940
And perhaps one reason that the Egyptian river that feeds into, if you want to speak about it, and those metaphors of the four sources of that,
00:50:48.940
that it took so long for us to have access to this whole body of knowledge that you were referring to.
00:50:59.940
Whereas Latin, we knew about Latin Greek and Hebrew, the Western had access for that for a much longer period.
00:51:11.940
Maybe there's a future to our free--
00:51:15.940
That's fast-reval.
00:51:17.940
Yes.
00:51:17.940
The Egyptian--
00:51:19.940
To their legitimate claims to being one of these utterly astonishingly great and still mysterious civilizations.
00:51:30.940
Yes.
00:51:31.940
That actually makes me wonder, too, about when you read Herodotus and others, their admiration for ancient Egypt comes through very strongly that they recognized Egypt was way ahead in so many areas.
00:51:51.940
And yet, what the Greeks were constantly doing is comparing themselves.
00:51:57.940
And you look at something you've just maybe think about, the seven wonders of the ancient world.
00:52:03.940
That's a Greek list compiled by Hellenistic Greeks.
00:52:07.940
The first two things they put in that list were the great pyramids of Egypt and the hanging gardens of Mesopotamia.
00:52:15.940
And yet, then the next five are all essentially Greek.
00:52:18.940
And they want to basically compare themselves favorably.
00:52:22.940
Well, here's what the ancient world did.
00:52:24.940
And now here's what we have done.
00:52:26.940
And they're copying and imitating the monumentality of the much older Egypt and Mesopotamia.
00:52:34.940
But at the same time, they're the ones who've made the list.
00:52:40.940
They're writing this down.
00:52:42.940
Now, the other wonders that you said they're all Greek, the other five?
00:52:46.940
Greek or sort of Greek-ish.
00:52:49.940
But these are objects in the world, though.
00:52:52.940
They're material things.
00:52:54.940
But one could really say that the wonders of the Greek world would be like Plato's dialogues or the theorems of our communities.
00:53:04.940
These things that are not incarnate in stone or in, it's not like the pyramids.
00:53:10.940
No. So their genius was in the area and let's say the abstract if you want.
00:53:16.940
Egypt, there's a wisdom there that is incarnate in the stone as such.
00:53:24.940
Yes.
00:53:26.940
I mean, this is fascinating to think of these legacies because Egypt's legacy today is not Euclid.
00:53:35.940
It's not Aristotle.
00:53:37.940
It's ruins.
00:53:39.940
If you look at Shelley's poem, "Ozomandius," look on my works, E. Mighty, and despair.
00:53:45.940
That romantic notion of Egypt, what has Egypt contributed today?
00:53:52.940
Well, without any way denigrating Egypt's magnificent past and its head start and a lot of the sciences,
00:54:00.940
it's really, you're right.
00:54:02.940
It's the Greeks and the Hebrew people of the book that have much more of a--
00:54:09.940
We're much more of a--
00:54:10.940
That's because we're partial to the book.
00:54:12.940
We're more of the children of a book culture than we are of the stone or the building or the aqueducts or the Roman roads or the Egyptian pyramids and the tombs and the Sphinx and things of that sort.
00:54:26.940
And it's not a question of weighing one higher than the other.
00:54:31.940
It's that they're--
00:54:32.940
These are different kinds of heritage.
00:54:39.940
And we have gone so far and I think in the direction of the abstract and the area and the non-grounded that where Keats again to go back to hear lies one whose name was written in water.
00:54:52.940
I just sometimes worry that we're writing everything in not even in water but in a kind of air and that we need some stone back into the equation.
00:55:03.940
Some durability and some permanence.
00:55:05.940
Some kind of durability and permanence because that's also, if you read the beginning of the time-yas,
00:55:12.940
Credius tells an old-world story to Socrates about that he heard from his grandfather who got it from his grandfather about
00:55:20.940
Solan, the sage of Greece going to Egypt to the city of Sais.
00:55:24.940
And there there's a bunch of old Greek--
00:55:28.940
I'm sorry old Egyptian priests who ask him to tell them the stories of their origins.
00:55:36.940
And so Solan starts telling the myths that were known to the Greeks at the time about forronius and Dukeleon and Pyre and Neophyph.
00:55:44.940
Oh, Vlad, yes.
00:55:45.940
And he gets interrupted by an old Greek priest and he says, "Oh, Solan, you Greeks are nothing but children.
00:55:53.940
You have no ancient traditions that are horry with age or that go back because you keep losing your memories."
00:56:01.940
And he goes on to say that the difference between Egypt and Greece is that in Egypt you have the flatness of the Nile, the Delta and the Nile,
00:56:10.940
and that the floods, he said that there's periodic heavenly declinations or deviations which cause catastrophes in the mountainous terrains of Greece, where you have fire and water, and everything gets drowned and civilizations just kind of washed away in the sea.
00:56:27.940
And you have to start all over again, you Greeks, over and over like children.
00:56:31.940
So you don't have any ancient memories, whereas here in Egypt the water comes from below and up above.
00:56:36.940
And we we weather without rupture.
00:56:39.940
And so we have a continuum.
00:56:41.940
And so now let me tell you the story and they goes on to tell the story of Atlantis, which Solan's Greeks have no recollection that their remote ancestors, the Athenians actually saved your Europe from the invasion of the Atlanteans and so forth.
00:56:56.940
Because the Egyptian memory is far more continuous with the remote pass and that of the kind of more volcanic Greek memory.
00:57:09.940
So this is a beautiful allegory for what you what you gain and what you lose.
00:57:14.940
On the one hand you have this youthfulness and this kind of energy and dynamism of no one wants to take anything away from the Greeks and in that regard on the contrary.
00:57:24.940
On the other you have continuity deep time and you know kind of senile with not senile in the sense of decrepit but the fullness of age.
00:57:35.940
And going to Egypt is the palpable sense of the age of civilization is it's a wonder.
00:57:44.940
And that also reminds me too that the Greeks under the Ptolemese began to copy Egyptian kings' lists.
00:57:56.940
Even today in archaeology and in history we use the Egyptian kings' lists as touchstones to chronologize much of ancient history.
00:58:07.940
They survived.
00:58:09.940
And now we have them in Egyptian. So the kings' lists of Egypt were the chronometer for the rest of the world because Greece didn't have them.
00:58:19.940
Rome didn't have them. Egypt had kings' lists with long, long periods of time thousands of years.
00:58:28.940
Well I want to thank you for coming on Patrick. We've been speaking with Patrick Hunt from Stanford.
00:58:36.940
Our colleague here at Stanford and we've been talking about the first chapter.
00:58:40.940
Only the first chapter of his book, The Ten Discoveries at rewrote history.
00:58:43.940
And we'll be looking forward to having you back on for another show about some of these other chapters.
00:58:50.940
In particular, I'm particularly fascinated by a few of them.
00:58:55.940
Especially the one about the 10,000 warriors and imperial China.
00:59:00.940
And of course the whole thing about the Aegean Bronze Age and other things like that.
00:59:06.940
What a pleasure. Thank you so much for letting me come.
00:59:10.940
It's my pleasure Patrick. So take care for entitled opinions. We'll be with you next week. Bye bye.
00:59:16.940
[MUSIC]
00:59:26.940
[MUSIC]
00:59:36.940
[MUSIC]
00:59:46.940
[MUSIC]
00:59:56.940
[MUSIC]
01:00:06.940
(upbeat music)
01:00:09.520
(upbeat music)
01:00:12.100
(upbeat music)
01:00:14.680
(upbeat music)
01:00:17.260
(upbeat music)
01:00:19.840
(upbeat music)
01:00:22.420
(upbeat music)
01:00:25.000
(upbeat music)
01:00:28.000
(upbeat music)
01:00:32.540
(upbeat music)
01:00:41.080
(upbeat music)
01:00:47.080
(upbeat music)
01:00:55.740
(upbeat music)
01:01:01.720
(upbeat music)
01:01:08.760
(upbeat music)
01:01:12.760
(upbeat music)
01:01:20.800
(upbeat music)
01:01:33.820
(upbeat music)
01:01:40.860
(upbeat music)
01:01:49.840
(upbeat music)
01:02:01.860
(upbeat music)
01:02:07.860
(upbeat music)
01:02:25.880
(upbeat music)
01:02:34.920
(upbeat music)
01:02:52.940
(upbeat music)
01:03:01.980
(upbeat music)
01:03:20.000
(upbeat music)
01:03:29.040
(upbeat music)
01:03:37.060
(upbeat music)
01:03:39.060
(upbeat music)
01:03:40.060
(upbeat music)