The early opportunities which Champollion had enjoyed for the preparation of his great work were peculiarly significant. He was educated by his elder brother, a man of great learning, professor of Greek in the Academy of Grenoble, whose companionship early influenced the direction of his younger brother to linguistic studies. In addition to this, the intense interest aroused throughout Europe by the vast collection of antiquities brought thither by the men of letters and science who accompanied Napoleon’s army in Egypt, had compelled the attention of scholars to this special field of research as never before. With this guidance, and moved by the spirit of the times, Champollion’s studies in ancient Greek led him to an early acquaintance with the Coptic language. It is said that, as a result of this study, at the age of sixteen he read a paper before his academy, maintaining that the Coptic was the language of the ancient Egyptians. This is not now a spoken language, having been supplanted by the Arabic since the seventeenth century, A. D. It, however, survives in the service ritual of the Coptic churches of to-day, and, though written in old Greek characters, the ancient language is still heard, though but few understand it. As Champollion made use of his hieroglyphic alphabet for the spelling of other words than proper names, his satisfaction may be imagined when he found that these were Coptic words. Thus, the sign for “mouth” for the letter _R_, was the initial letter or syllabic sign of the Coptic word _Ro_, signifying mouth. The picture of a lion for the letter _L_ also represented the initial letter or initial syllable of _Lavo_, the Coptic for lion. The picture of an eagle, representing the sign for the letter _A_, is also the sign for the initial sound or letter in _Ahem_, the Coptic for eagle, and so on. The language, then, of the Hieroglyphs was Coptic, or rather in the Coptic we have a survival of the ancient Egyptian, the language of the pyramid builders. More correctly speaking, it is the Egyptian language of the Ptolemaic period, corrupted with Arabic and Greek idioms, but still including the language of old Egypt. It was, indeed, a thing which might have been expected, that the language expressed by the ancient Hieroglyphs should bear a resemblance to Coptic, but that the resemblance should be as close as it has proved could scarcely have been expected. Again, of special interest in this connection, is the fact that in the Greek the writing and language of Egypt should be thus preserved. [1]“The romance of language could go no further,” says Mr. Butler, “than to join the speech of Pharaoh and the writing of Homer in the service book of an Egyptian Christian.” At this point, a brief reference, bridging the centuries from the decline of the use of hieroglyphics to the later appearance of the language in its Coptic and Greek forms, should have a place.