What do you think?
Rate this book
Cracking the Egyptian Code: The Revolutionary Life of Jean-François Champollion
In 1799 Napoleon's army uncovered an ancient stele in the Nile delta. Its inscription, recorded in three distinct scripts - ancient Greek, Coptic, and hieroglyphic--would provide scholars with the first clues to unlocking the secrets of Egyptian hieroglyphs, a language lost for nearly two millennia. More than twenty years later a remarkably gifted Frenchman named Jean-Francois Champollion successfully deciphered the hieroglyphs on the stele, now commonly known as the Rosetta Stone, sparking a revolution in our knowledge of ancient Egypt.
Cracking the Egyptian Code is the first biography in English of Champollion, widely regarded as the founder of Egyptology. Andrew Robinson meticulously reconstructs how Champollion cracked the code of the hieroglyphic script, describing how Champollion started with Egyptian obelisks in Rome and papyri in European collections, sailed the Nile for a year, studied the tombs in the Valley of the Kings (a name he first coined), and carefully compared the three scripts on the Rosetta Stone to penetrate the mystery of the hieroglyphic text. Robinson also brings to life the rivalry between Champollion and the English scientist Thomas Young, who claimed credit for launching the decipherment, which Champollion hotly denied. There is much more to Champollion's life than the Rosetta Stone and Robinson gives equal weight to the many roles he played in his tragically brief life, from a teenage professor in Revolutionary France to a supporter of Napoleon (whom he met), an exile, and a curator at the Louvre.
Extensively illustrated in color and black-and-white pictures, Cracking the Egyptian Code will appeal to a wide readership interested in Egypt, decipherment and code-breaking, and Napoleon and the French Revolution.
Cracking the Egyptian Code is the first biography in English of Champollion, widely regarded as the founder of Egyptology. Andrew Robinson meticulously reconstructs how Champollion cracked the code of the hieroglyphic script, describing how Champollion started with Egyptian obelisks in Rome and papyri in European collections, sailed the Nile for a year, studied the tombs in the Valley of the Kings (a name he first coined), and carefully compared the three scripts on the Rosetta Stone to penetrate the mystery of the hieroglyphic text. Robinson also brings to life the rivalry between Champollion and the English scientist Thomas Young, who claimed credit for launching the decipherment, which Champollion hotly denied. There is much more to Champollion's life than the Rosetta Stone and Robinson gives equal weight to the many roles he played in his tragically brief life, from a teenage professor in Revolutionary France to a supporter of Napoleon (whom he met), an exile, and a curator at the Louvre.
Extensively illustrated in color and black-and-white pictures, Cracking the Egyptian Code will appeal to a wide readership interested in Egypt, decipherment and code-breaking, and Napoleon and the French Revolution.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 2012
29 people are currently reading
409 people want to read
About the author
Andrew Robinson
462 books76 followers(William) Andrew Coulthard Robinson is a British author and former newspaper editor.
Andrew Robinson was educated at the Dragon School, Eton College where he was a King's Scholar, University College, Oxford where he read Chemistry and finally the School of Oriental and African Studies in London. He is the son of Neville Robinson, an Oxford physicist.
Robinson first visited India in 1975 and has been a devotee of the country's culture ever since, in particular the Bengali poet and philosopher Rabindranath Tagore and the Bengali film director Satyajit Ray. He has authored many books and articles. Until 2006, he was the Literary Editor of the Times Higher Education Supplement<?em>. He has also been a Visiting Fellow at Wolfson College, Cambridge.
He is based in London and is now a full-time writer.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads data base.
Andrew Robinson was educated at the Dragon School, Eton College where he was a King's Scholar, University College, Oxford where he read Chemistry and finally the School of Oriental and African Studies in London. He is the son of Neville Robinson, an Oxford physicist.
Robinson first visited India in 1975 and has been a devotee of the country's culture ever since, in particular the Bengali poet and philosopher Rabindranath Tagore and the Bengali film director Satyajit Ray. He has authored many books and articles. Until 2006, he was the Literary Editor of the Times Higher Education Supplement<?em>. He has also been a Visiting Fellow at Wolfson College, Cambridge.
He is based in London and is now a full-time writer.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads data base.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
November 24, 2014
Very good, almost excellent biography of Jean-Francois Champollion. The author focuses not only on Champollion's life, but on the process of decipherment as well. It is very detailed and well written, the best book on the subject at the time. The author is very talented and experienced since he has written books on the history of writting, of decipherment of ancient languages, general historical surveys, other biographies, etc.
April 29, 2024
Great read about the tortured genius who deciphered Egyptian hieroglyphs. A well-documented read which also credits Champollion's rival Young. Full of details, which make the book feel as a discovery and being a fly on the wall in Champollion's room.
June 1, 2013
I haven't read any of Robinson's other books, which is perhaps unfortunate: It seems that Cracking the Egyptian Code: The Revolutionary Life of Jean-François Champollion might best be understood through the context of Robinson's longer term project of understanding the particular nature of the kind of "genius" that has allowed apparently unusual individuals to decipher the scripts of forgotten languages. In addition to two books on "genius", a general history of ancient script decipherment, and a book on undeciphered scripts, Robinson has written biographies of Michael Ventris (Linear B) and Thomas Young (a competitor of Champollion's in the decipherment of hieroglyphic and demotic Egyptian in the 1810s and 1820s). These books do not form the entirety of Robinson's writing (he's also written biographies of Satyajit Ray and Rabindranath Tagore, as well as more general popular scientific historical works), but these books seem to form a particular project. The last of these, in particular, is never far from the surface of Cracking the Egyptian Code.
The book serves as a general biography of Champollion, focusing (as any biography of so obsessive a life would have to) on the process of the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs. This is highlighted by the opening and closing chapters: the first focuses on Egyptomania prior to Champollion, and the latter on the further development of the project of decipherment after Champollion (particularly through the work of Richard Lepsius). As such, the book is intriguing, but frustrating. The most meaningful phase of Champollion's work, where he was able to go beyond what had been achieved by Young and others of his predecessors and contemporaries, was from 1822–1824. Robinson is able to break this down into three periods, characterised broadly by Champollion's beliefs about Egyptian writing in those periods, but the process of the realisations that led to decipherment is insufficiently documented. That said, there are some useful pieces: Robinson places the Rosetta Stone in a useful context (Champollion never published a translation, and needed to work from cartouches from a number of different texts in order to adequately chart out the "uniliteral" phonemic signs of Egyptian that were fundamental to his decipherment), and highlights Champollion's realisation of the important role of determiners (signs which have no spoken value, but which simply indicate what sort of notion a word might refer to) during his expedition to Egypt.
But, as I said, Robinson's larger project seems nearly always to be quite present in his mind, and he makes no pretense that his perspective is not coloured by his prior research into Thomas Young. In fact, much of the book is spent detailing the Young-Champollion rivalry, and Robinson concludes that the Archimedean notion of the solitary genius, working in isolation and experiencing sudden epiphanies, is a deficient caricature of the kinds of thinking necessary for discoveries like the decipherment of Egypt. I'll quote Robinson's final paragraph directly:
This perspective, more than anything else, is what sets the book apart.
So much for Robinson's perspective and what he intended. I'm struck by what's not in the book. Transcription from Egyptian, for the first fifteen chapters, use a non-linguistic English transcription—frustratingly inexact for the interested amateur Egyptologist (a fringe population, to be sure, but surely a significant portion of the book's probable readership)—only to switch to the British academic transcription in the final chapter. I balance this gripe about a concession to accessibility to the detriment of precision with a counter-gripe: Egyptian hieroglyphs (beautifully typeset) occur throughout the latter half of the book, with explanations about how recognition of particular signs aided Champollion and others in their attempts to decipher the writing system. But these quotes appear exclusively in hieroglyphs, without transcription. I do not think that these hieroglyphic citations are navigable for the general reader.
But most flagrantly missing from the books is any recognition that the past 35 years have happened. Robinson's focus is on a comparison of two kinds of mind, and how they may express "genius" and contribute to intellectual problems of the type posed by undeciphered scripts for forgotten languages. While, throughout the biography, Robinson of necessity pays heed to Champollion's (usually straitened) financial circumstances, and how his benefactors made his research possible, he does not give the same attention to how the material conditions of pre-colonial Orientalism made Champollion's and Young's research possible. Champollion's life could easily be symbolically sandwiched between Napoléon's "adventure" in Egypt (undertaken when Champollion was eight) and the French conquest of Algiers (undertaken two years before Champollion's death). The former of these French proto-colonial efforts in Arabic-speaking lands was the starting point—along with the Description de l'Égypte—of Edward Said's analysis in Orientalism. Orientalism was already 34 years old when Cracking the Egyptian Code was published. And yet there's next to no attention paid to the role that protocolonialism and "adventurer" theft played in the acquisition of materials which made the decipherment project possible. Gifts from Ottoman or semi-Ottoman Khedivate officials to European governments abound. When there's any discussion of snatching of the Rosetta Stone, it's by the British from France, rather than by Napoléon from Egypt! Giovanni Belzoni and even Champollion, to a degree, get tsked for cutting walls or ceilings out of standing temples (the latter, however, gets a pass for a bit of graffiti in Thebes!), but the criticism seems to stem from the integrity of sites of archaeological interest, rather than from the notion that taking historical artefacts from another society is theft.
In Orientalism, Champollion gets off fairly lightly: Said's critical writing about Champollion is primarily about the man's attempted decipherment of Egyptian as a powerful metaphor, rather than anything Champollion himself did, said, or wrote. In this period, when so much that characterised later Orientalism was still so protean, when the power difference was not yet clear, when Orientalist mobility within the Orient was not yet guaranteed, what did Orientalist discourse look like? A tantalising, but because too brief, passage in the book is a debate between Champollion (a Revolutionary, Napoleonic liberal) and Mehmet Ali Pasha (really an Ottoman colonial ruler, though we don't tend to talk about the Ottomans as a colonial power) over the educational rights of Ottoman subjects in Egypt.
Certainly, there are mindsets that lead to different kinds of discovery. And certainly, enthusiastic outsiders often lend vital contributions to stagnant fields. But it is not a coincidence of "genius" that Epigraphic South Arabian was deciphered by Germans, that Egyptian was deciphered by a Frenchman and an Englishman, that Mayan was deciphered by an American. These stories of decipherment need to include the material conditions of colonialism that have shaped these particular acts of discovery (and not the discoveries themselves): Why was the Rosetta Stone being deciphered in Grenoble and Somerset rather than ar-Rašīd? Because ar-Rašīd was no longer where the Stone was. I know that this is not the book that Robinson sought to write, but without looking at the access to information conditioned by Orientalism and colonialism, an exploration of the temperamental facets of "genius" of this kind cannot be meaningful.
The book serves as a general biography of Champollion, focusing (as any biography of so obsessive a life would have to) on the process of the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphs. This is highlighted by the opening and closing chapters: the first focuses on Egyptomania prior to Champollion, and the latter on the further development of the project of decipherment after Champollion (particularly through the work of Richard Lepsius). As such, the book is intriguing, but frustrating. The most meaningful phase of Champollion's work, where he was able to go beyond what had been achieved by Young and others of his predecessors and contemporaries, was from 1822–1824. Robinson is able to break this down into three periods, characterised broadly by Champollion's beliefs about Egyptian writing in those periods, but the process of the realisations that led to decipherment is insufficiently documented. That said, there are some useful pieces: Robinson places the Rosetta Stone in a useful context (Champollion never published a translation, and needed to work from cartouches from a number of different texts in order to adequately chart out the "uniliteral" phonemic signs of Egyptian that were fundamental to his decipherment), and highlights Champollion's realisation of the important role of determiners (signs which have no spoken value, but which simply indicate what sort of notion a word might refer to) during his expedition to Egypt.
But, as I said, Robinson's larger project seems nearly always to be quite present in his mind, and he makes no pretense that his perspective is not coloured by his prior research into Thomas Young. In fact, much of the book is spent detailing the Young-Champollion rivalry, and Robinson concludes that the Archimedean notion of the solitary genius, working in isolation and experiencing sudden epiphanies, is a deficient caricature of the kinds of thinking necessary for discoveries like the decipherment of Egypt. I'll quote Robinson's final paragraph directly:
In my view, the single most fascinating aspect of the story of how Egyptian hieroglyphic was deciphered is that both a polymath [Young] and a specialist [Champollion] were required to crack the code. Young's myriad-mindedness provided some initial insights in 1814–19 — but then his versatility obstructed him from making further progress. Champollion's single-mindedness hindered him from arriving at these insights in the same period — but once he got started his tunnel vision allowed him to begin to perceive the system behind the signs. Both Young's breadth of interests and Champollion's narrowness of focus were essential for the revolutionary breakthrough that Champollion, alone, announced in 1822–1823.
This perspective, more than anything else, is what sets the book apart.
So much for Robinson's perspective and what he intended. I'm struck by what's not in the book. Transcription from Egyptian, for the first fifteen chapters, use a non-linguistic English transcription—frustratingly inexact for the interested amateur Egyptologist (a fringe population, to be sure, but surely a significant portion of the book's probable readership)—only to switch to the British academic transcription in the final chapter. I balance this gripe about a concession to accessibility to the detriment of precision with a counter-gripe: Egyptian hieroglyphs (beautifully typeset) occur throughout the latter half of the book, with explanations about how recognition of particular signs aided Champollion and others in their attempts to decipher the writing system. But these quotes appear exclusively in hieroglyphs, without transcription. I do not think that these hieroglyphic citations are navigable for the general reader.
But most flagrantly missing from the books is any recognition that the past 35 years have happened. Robinson's focus is on a comparison of two kinds of mind, and how they may express "genius" and contribute to intellectual problems of the type posed by undeciphered scripts for forgotten languages. While, throughout the biography, Robinson of necessity pays heed to Champollion's (usually straitened) financial circumstances, and how his benefactors made his research possible, he does not give the same attention to how the material conditions of pre-colonial Orientalism made Champollion's and Young's research possible. Champollion's life could easily be symbolically sandwiched between Napoléon's "adventure" in Egypt (undertaken when Champollion was eight) and the French conquest of Algiers (undertaken two years before Champollion's death). The former of these French proto-colonial efforts in Arabic-speaking lands was the starting point—along with the Description de l'Égypte—of Edward Said's analysis in Orientalism. Orientalism was already 34 years old when Cracking the Egyptian Code was published. And yet there's next to no attention paid to the role that protocolonialism and "adventurer" theft played in the acquisition of materials which made the decipherment project possible. Gifts from Ottoman or semi-Ottoman Khedivate officials to European governments abound. When there's any discussion of snatching of the Rosetta Stone, it's by the British from France, rather than by Napoléon from Egypt! Giovanni Belzoni and even Champollion, to a degree, get tsked for cutting walls or ceilings out of standing temples (the latter, however, gets a pass for a bit of graffiti in Thebes!), but the criticism seems to stem from the integrity of sites of archaeological interest, rather than from the notion that taking historical artefacts from another society is theft.
In Orientalism, Champollion gets off fairly lightly: Said's critical writing about Champollion is primarily about the man's attempted decipherment of Egyptian as a powerful metaphor, rather than anything Champollion himself did, said, or wrote. In this period, when so much that characterised later Orientalism was still so protean, when the power difference was not yet clear, when Orientalist mobility within the Orient was not yet guaranteed, what did Orientalist discourse look like? A tantalising, but because too brief, passage in the book is a debate between Champollion (a Revolutionary, Napoleonic liberal) and Mehmet Ali Pasha (really an Ottoman colonial ruler, though we don't tend to talk about the Ottomans as a colonial power) over the educational rights of Ottoman subjects in Egypt.
Certainly, there are mindsets that lead to different kinds of discovery. And certainly, enthusiastic outsiders often lend vital contributions to stagnant fields. But it is not a coincidence of "genius" that Epigraphic South Arabian was deciphered by Germans, that Egyptian was deciphered by a Frenchman and an Englishman, that Mayan was deciphered by an American. These stories of decipherment need to include the material conditions of colonialism that have shaped these particular acts of discovery (and not the discoveries themselves): Why was the Rosetta Stone being deciphered in Grenoble and Somerset rather than ar-Rašīd? Because ar-Rašīd was no longer where the Stone was. I know that this is not the book that Robinson sought to write, but without looking at the access to information conditioned by Orientalism and colonialism, an exploration of the temperamental facets of "genius" of this kind cannot be meaningful.
January 27, 2020
Andrew Robinson brings to life Champollion in this well-written biography. The coloured plates and interspersed black and white pictures enhanced my understanding of Champollion and the people around him. Robinson's dry sarcastic wit made this book thoroughly enjoyable.
My only complaint, as a native English speaker, is the French names were hard to keep track - it would have been nice to have a cast of characters at the front with their birth and death dates, professions, and relationships to Champollion.
This book has done what all excellent books should do - made me want to learn more. The supporting players in Champollion's life were only touched upon in this biography and I am eager to learn more about them and their contributions to Egyptology. Well done, Andrew Robinson.
My only complaint, as a native English speaker, is the French names were hard to keep track - it would have been nice to have a cast of characters at the front with their birth and death dates, professions, and relationships to Champollion.
This book has done what all excellent books should do - made me want to learn more. The supporting players in Champollion's life were only touched upon in this biography and I am eager to learn more about them and their contributions to Egyptology. Well done, Andrew Robinson.
August 9, 2025
I learned a lot.
Champollion was a flawed, humorous, passionate man who gave a gift to people who love and wish to understand the past.
Champollion was a flawed, humorous, passionate man who gave a gift to people who love and wish to understand the past.
May 3, 2019
The study of the deciphering of various ancient languages has led me to understand all the more clearly that to decipher a past language is an act that requires a great deal of intense creativity, in that it requires us to put ourselves in the perspective of the past and seek out the internal logic of the language that we are working with, which is likely to be very different than the logic of our own age. Linear B, after all, was a script that used a particularly infelicitous syllabary to write out archaic Greek, and the Egyptian hieroglyphs use a baffling array of signs for syllables, logographs, phonemes, and determinatives to portray Egyptian. For those who think English is a particularly madcap language, the writings of the ancient world show even less attention to consistency and our own logic of one letter = one phoneme than contemporary languages and alphabets do. And this book does a good job at figuring out that complexity and how much of a challenge it was to understand the precise nature of Egyptian writing even when there were two forms of Egyptian and a comprehensible koine Greek combined together on the same Rosetta stone, as it were.
This book of about 250 pages is divided into sixteen chapters. The author begins with acknowledgements and a discussion of the mania for Egypt that followed Napoleon's invasion of that country in 1798. After that the author discusses the state of heiroglyphic understanding before Champollion (1) before discussing the subject's revolutionary childhood (2) and his being a reluctant student as many bright people are (3). The author then talks about Champollion's encounter with Egypt (4) and his going to Paris to study the copy of the Rosetta stone there (5), as well as his role as a teenage professor in Grenoble with his older (half-)brother (6). At this point the author discusses the beginning of the race to understand the hieroglyphics (7), the subject's relationship with Napoleon (8), and his exile from Grenoble after Waterloo and the revolt that was soon undertaken there (9). The author discusses the breakthrough in better understanding the complexities of Egyptian writing (10), an Egyptian renaissance that followed (11), and Champollion's time as curator at the Louvre (12) before the subject goes to Egypt (13). After this the author marches steadily to the conclusion of Champollion's short life with a discussion of the subject's time in Egypt in search of Ramesses (14), his role as the first professor of Egyptology (15), and the state of hieroglyphics and Egyptology after his death (16), as well as a discussion of geniuses and polymaths.
There is a lot to enjoy about this book if one is a fan of the mysteries of ancient languages as I am. There are, however, at least a few difficulties I have with the author's framing of the work. For one, the author seems to excuse the bullying and abusive behavior of the subject towards others as well as the foibles of his revolutionary politics because he was a genius, as if being a genius made it unnecessary to behave properly towards others. Likewise, the author makes much ado about the apparent discrepancy between the Egyptian dynasty lists and biblical chronology, attempting to portray the Egyptian chronology as superior despite the fact that frequently two or even three dynasties that reigned simultaneously in different parts of Egypt were given different dynasty numbers and portrayed as reigning in sequential order, demonstrating that Egyptian chronology, when taken at face value, was far inferior to biblical chronology, despite the author's desire to denigrate biblical authority. Alas, people write histories and biographies and not all people are able to frame ancient history in a fair-minded fashion, like the author.
This book of about 250 pages is divided into sixteen chapters. The author begins with acknowledgements and a discussion of the mania for Egypt that followed Napoleon's invasion of that country in 1798. After that the author discusses the state of heiroglyphic understanding before Champollion (1) before discussing the subject's revolutionary childhood (2) and his being a reluctant student as many bright people are (3). The author then talks about Champollion's encounter with Egypt (4) and his going to Paris to study the copy of the Rosetta stone there (5), as well as his role as a teenage professor in Grenoble with his older (half-)brother (6). At this point the author discusses the beginning of the race to understand the hieroglyphics (7), the subject's relationship with Napoleon (8), and his exile from Grenoble after Waterloo and the revolt that was soon undertaken there (9). The author discusses the breakthrough in better understanding the complexities of Egyptian writing (10), an Egyptian renaissance that followed (11), and Champollion's time as curator at the Louvre (12) before the subject goes to Egypt (13). After this the author marches steadily to the conclusion of Champollion's short life with a discussion of the subject's time in Egypt in search of Ramesses (14), his role as the first professor of Egyptology (15), and the state of hieroglyphics and Egyptology after his death (16), as well as a discussion of geniuses and polymaths.
There is a lot to enjoy about this book if one is a fan of the mysteries of ancient languages as I am. There are, however, at least a few difficulties I have with the author's framing of the work. For one, the author seems to excuse the bullying and abusive behavior of the subject towards others as well as the foibles of his revolutionary politics because he was a genius, as if being a genius made it unnecessary to behave properly towards others. Likewise, the author makes much ado about the apparent discrepancy between the Egyptian dynasty lists and biblical chronology, attempting to portray the Egyptian chronology as superior despite the fact that frequently two or even three dynasties that reigned simultaneously in different parts of Egypt were given different dynasty numbers and portrayed as reigning in sequential order, demonstrating that Egyptian chronology, when taken at face value, was far inferior to biblical chronology, despite the author's desire to denigrate biblical authority. Alas, people write histories and biographies and not all people are able to frame ancient history in a fair-minded fashion, like the author.
May 2, 2020
A fascinating book despite the lack of proper notes, footnotes and decent referencing where everything is just dumped at the end of the book without any reference to which chapters or pages they correspond too.
The author also spent too many pages finger pointing at Champollion as a potential plagiarist or at best as an ungrateful scientist who didn’t care to recognize the effort Thomas Young had done and the results he reached that inspired him... the whole point is not who preceded who but rather who was the first to reach a definitive and clear conclusion... it was a bit too much of the author especially with him going over and over this very same point without a single solid piece of proof
The author also spent too many pages finger pointing at Champollion as a potential plagiarist or at best as an ungrateful scientist who didn’t care to recognize the effort Thomas Young had done and the results he reached that inspired him... the whole point is not who preceded who but rather who was the first to reach a definitive and clear conclusion... it was a bit too much of the author especially with him going over and over this very same point without a single solid piece of proof
September 8, 2016
Kā biogrāfija izcila, autors ir izsijājis iepriekšējos darbus, pacēlis vecas sarakstes un tā tālāk. No padomjlaiku grāmatām man kaut kā bija radies priekšstats par Šamoplionu kā par nūģi bēniņos, kurš zinot daudzas valodas ne no kurienes uzrodas ar visu hieroglifu atšifrējumu. Iespējams, ka es jaucu ar puisi, kurš atkoda ķīļrakstus. Labi uzrakstīts, autors arī centies īpaši nepadarīt grāmatu par mācību grāmatu hieroglifu apguvējiem, tā ka praktiskā te būs maz, jo kurš gan mūsdienās zina koptu valodas gramatiku. Kā jau visās biogrāfijās bija arī trakoti garlaicīgas vietas, kurās nelīdzēja pat Šampoliona kašķīgais raksturs.
December 22, 2023
The decipherer of hieroglyphs was a true genius. He was also an emotional, brash, and sometimes prejudiced man who too often jumped ahead of himself or, on occasion, failed to give credit where it was due. Robinson has an excellent background for this subject, having written about the decipherment of forgotten languages and Champollion's rival, Thomas Young. He doesn't gloss over Champollion's flaws but makes him appealing all the same. For anyone interested in ancient Egypt, it's easy to be swept up in the man's fervor.
Robinson starts with a prologue about the sarcophagus of Seti I, which caused a stir among Europeans much like Tutankhamun's treasure a century later. With Champollion's breakthroughs still a few years in the future, people marveled at the sarcophagus but had no clue about its origins or the meaning of its inscriptions. The book then jumps back to Champollion's upbringing in the immediate wake of the French Revolution, his amazing aptitude for languages, and his first academic studies under a teacher who both marveled at his abilities and was annoyed by his presumption.
Champollion settled on the decipherment of hieroglyphs as his life's goal early on, but he took many zigs and zags on the way. His revolutionary sympathies, in a period when the reactionaries were beginning to win out, nearly derailed his progress more than once. Even when he was able to concentrate, he spent many years stuck in place, leaning on the intellectual and financial support from his very patient brother, Jacques Joseph. Thomas Young's decipherment of some hieroglyphic letters seems to have given Champollion the push he needed, though he never adequately acknowledged it, and from then he sped ahead to dramatic breakthroughs that overturned centuries of conventional wisdom. From there, Champollion's drive pushed him onward to Egypt, an exhausting but joyous visit that served as something of a climax to his life. A few years later, his death, seemingly brought on by overwork, left his great hieroglyphic grammar and dictionary unfinished. (Why isn't Champollion more often cited as an exemplar of the Romantic era?)
Robinson makes an admirable effort to follow the steps of Champollion's thought process, in the crucial period from 1820 to 1824, where Robinson acknowledges the sequence of events is uncertain and may in some cases be clouded by mythmaking. Some of the details in this account have recently been superseded by the in-depth research of Jed Z. Buchwald and Diane Greco Josefowicz in The Riddle of the Rosetta, but Robinson's book is a much easier read.
The final chapter clearly describes the state of understanding of hieroglyphs after Champollion's death. Many doubters of his work remained, and his understanding of the system had some fundamental gaps and errors. But a handful of figures whom Champollion never even knew, especially Karl Richard Lepsius, finally corrected the errors and filled the gaps while proving his basic approach correct. Oddly, Robinson's biography spends more space giving these people their due than most books about the decipherment process itself. A postscript compares Young with Champollion as a study in different styles of intellectual pursuit: the mild-mannered polymath versus the passionate specialist.
Robinson starts with a prologue about the sarcophagus of Seti I, which caused a stir among Europeans much like Tutankhamun's treasure a century later. With Champollion's breakthroughs still a few years in the future, people marveled at the sarcophagus but had no clue about its origins or the meaning of its inscriptions. The book then jumps back to Champollion's upbringing in the immediate wake of the French Revolution, his amazing aptitude for languages, and his first academic studies under a teacher who both marveled at his abilities and was annoyed by his presumption.
Champollion settled on the decipherment of hieroglyphs as his life's goal early on, but he took many zigs and zags on the way. His revolutionary sympathies, in a period when the reactionaries were beginning to win out, nearly derailed his progress more than once. Even when he was able to concentrate, he spent many years stuck in place, leaning on the intellectual and financial support from his very patient brother, Jacques Joseph. Thomas Young's decipherment of some hieroglyphic letters seems to have given Champollion the push he needed, though he never adequately acknowledged it, and from then he sped ahead to dramatic breakthroughs that overturned centuries of conventional wisdom. From there, Champollion's drive pushed him onward to Egypt, an exhausting but joyous visit that served as something of a climax to his life. A few years later, his death, seemingly brought on by overwork, left his great hieroglyphic grammar and dictionary unfinished. (Why isn't Champollion more often cited as an exemplar of the Romantic era?)
Robinson makes an admirable effort to follow the steps of Champollion's thought process, in the crucial period from 1820 to 1824, where Robinson acknowledges the sequence of events is uncertain and may in some cases be clouded by mythmaking. Some of the details in this account have recently been superseded by the in-depth research of Jed Z. Buchwald and Diane Greco Josefowicz in The Riddle of the Rosetta, but Robinson's book is a much easier read.
The final chapter clearly describes the state of understanding of hieroglyphs after Champollion's death. Many doubters of his work remained, and his understanding of the system had some fundamental gaps and errors. But a handful of figures whom Champollion never even knew, especially Karl Richard Lepsius, finally corrected the errors and filled the gaps while proving his basic approach correct. Oddly, Robinson's biography spends more space giving these people their due than most books about the decipherment process itself. A postscript compares Young with Champollion as a study in different styles of intellectual pursuit: the mild-mannered polymath versus the passionate specialist.
September 22, 2025
I learned that Champollion was probably “illegitimate”, as they used to say it. His features and skin coloring were quite different from his brother, who called himself Champollion-Figeac, after the town of their birth.
A fiery personality, Champollion made enemies, not least by way of being an ardent supporter of Napoleon Bonaparte. It was mildly interesting to have the French political scene of the first two decades of the 1800s play out, as essential context for the Champollion story. I did not know about the Napoleonic “100 days”. I also did not appreciate that, in those days, one required passports to travel from region to region or from town to town, within France. Hence, Champollion got himself banished from Grenoble back to Figeac. The book has a photo of his passport document. OK.
There was just not as much about the decoding work as I think I would have liked. I appreciated The Writing of the Gods: The Race to Decode the Rosetta Stone for that aspect of the story. That book made me appreciate, for the first time, how much less like a mathematical code a written language is, and how much more a cultural product rife with inscrutable meanings. What would a future archaeologist make of a garment bearing the inscription “I (heart symbol) NY”? I got almost none of that sense of mystery.
Very late in the book, Robinson quotes a letter where Champollion describes a symbol as “ determinative”, with promise that this will be important later. But, thirty pages from the end, it hasn’t come up again, and Champollion has died at the age of 41, “undoubtedly accelerated by overwork.” (Really? A very 19th century diagnosis).
Now ten pages from the end. Quoting Champollion.
"Such an arrangement does not sound easy to use…"
Quoting a later Egyptologist:
Karl Richard Lepsius, a German, built upon Champollion’s work.
The book ends with two pages that cursorily explain today’s understanding of the hieroglyphic system, including (of course) the use of determinatives. OK.
The book does a good job of narrating Champollion’s life, but a poor job of describing the work for which his life is remembered.
A fiery personality, Champollion made enemies, not least by way of being an ardent supporter of Napoleon Bonaparte. It was mildly interesting to have the French political scene of the first two decades of the 1800s play out, as essential context for the Champollion story. I did not know about the Napoleonic “100 days”. I also did not appreciate that, in those days, one required passports to travel from region to region or from town to town, within France. Hence, Champollion got himself banished from Grenoble back to Figeac. The book has a photo of his passport document. OK.
There was just not as much about the decoding work as I think I would have liked. I appreciated The Writing of the Gods: The Race to Decode the Rosetta Stone for that aspect of the story. That book made me appreciate, for the first time, how much less like a mathematical code a written language is, and how much more a cultural product rife with inscrutable meanings. What would a future archaeologist make of a garment bearing the inscription “I (heart symbol) NY”? I got almost none of that sense of mystery.
Very late in the book, Robinson quotes a letter where Champollion describes a symbol as “ determinative”, with promise that this will be important later. But, thirty pages from the end, it hasn’t come up again, and Champollion has died at the age of 41, “undoubtedly accelerated by overwork.” (Really? A very 19th century diagnosis).
Now ten pages from the end. Quoting Champollion.
In the general order of the divisions, the characters are placed according to the order of merit of the object that they represent: heaven before the stars, which appear therein, man before all other animated creatures, the products of divine creation before the products of human invention, plants before objects of art and fantastic emblems. Finally, the whole before the parts, and these even in a certain order or relative pre-eminence, which is regulated by the customs or opinions of the world.
"Such an arrangement does not sound easy to use…"
Quoting a later Egyptologist:
“His alphabet was thus in every point of view defective; and though highly creditable to him as a first attempt, is quite unworthy of the present state of hieroglyphical knowledge, and unfit to be even made the basis of a more perfect arrangement.”
Karl Richard Lepsius, a German, built upon Champollion’s work.
The book ends with two pages that cursorily explain today’s understanding of the hieroglyphic system, including (of course) the use of determinatives. OK.
The book does a good job of narrating Champollion’s life, but a poor job of describing the work for which his life is remembered.
November 25, 2023
Actually 60% done...
I really want to love this book. The life of Jean-François Champollion is beyond fascinating! Being a childhood genius, having to balance politics during the Napoleonic Wars, battling academic rivalry – and even a romance worthy of Jane Austen. Since I came across Champollion in a documentary about the Rosetta Stone I’ve wanted to know more about him. So when I got this book (two years ago!) I started to read it right away ready for the read of a lifetime, and maybe that was my mistake. Because this book is hard to follow. The events are only semi-chronological, and the book keeps making the most obscure references to the world and time of Champollion that I have no way of following – and I have a master in European History! Seriously, how many know about some weird infighting between some small-town-France mayors in the 1810s?! Secondly the number of random knowledge the author chooses to share is almost comical! Why spend almost 30 pages on the history of a school, only to conclude that Champollion spend three years there, not liking anyone or knowing how to teach students older than him – which was a condition for having access to their special library. How more interesting would that chapter not be if it dealt whit the difficulties of a 14 year-old genius having to deal with academic life, that telling the story about some random French School. But I understand that the author is limited by historical evidence, documents and so on, and naturally there exists more historical proof of the school’s history, than on how Champollion felt teaching there, but then maybe don’t spend 30 pages on it? I really wish that authors were pays for the quality of their work, not the number of pages they spit!
One day – I hope – one day, I’ll finish this book, because I really want to love it…
I really want to love this book. The life of Jean-François Champollion is beyond fascinating! Being a childhood genius, having to balance politics during the Napoleonic Wars, battling academic rivalry – and even a romance worthy of Jane Austen. Since I came across Champollion in a documentary about the Rosetta Stone I’ve wanted to know more about him. So when I got this book (two years ago!) I started to read it right away ready for the read of a lifetime, and maybe that was my mistake. Because this book is hard to follow. The events are only semi-chronological, and the book keeps making the most obscure references to the world and time of Champollion that I have no way of following – and I have a master in European History! Seriously, how many know about some weird infighting between some small-town-France mayors in the 1810s?! Secondly the number of random knowledge the author chooses to share is almost comical! Why spend almost 30 pages on the history of a school, only to conclude that Champollion spend three years there, not liking anyone or knowing how to teach students older than him – which was a condition for having access to their special library. How more interesting would that chapter not be if it dealt whit the difficulties of a 14 year-old genius having to deal with academic life, that telling the story about some random French School. But I understand that the author is limited by historical evidence, documents and so on, and naturally there exists more historical proof of the school’s history, than on how Champollion felt teaching there, but then maybe don’t spend 30 pages on it? I really wish that authors were pays for the quality of their work, not the number of pages they spit!
One day – I hope – one day, I’ll finish this book, because I really want to love it…
August 13, 2020
Excellent biography. Just enough historical background to sketch a context, without belaboring the point. The first 1/3 was a skim for me, as it covered more of Champollion's early life, education, employment, etc. My interest was in his work on the Rosetta Stone and in founding Egyptology at the university. Recommended for those interested in the French Revolution, Egyptology, or the process of decipherment (which, to me, looks like a totally made-up word).
Honestly, most of the process for breaking the Rosetta Stone "code" was philology 101--with the exception of having to set aside the preconceived assumption that the hieroglyphs were symbolic rather than phonetic. Once Champollion (inspired, perhaps, by Thomas Young) was willing to to operate under new assumptions, the key came together quite well. Champollion is the unquestioned expert on hieroglyphs, developing the alphabet most fully, being the most fluent reader, and most systematic student of the language. This, coupled with his expedition to Egypt where he studied the art, culture, and language of ancient Egypt, establish him as the true Father of Egyptology. He even thought in terms of Egyptian worldview and understands their mind and culture far more than modern scholars do, from my perspective. Basing worldview in language is a solid place to sink roots, and that was the driving force for Champollion.
This biography does attempt to develop the man, not just the achievements, but it doesn't quite succeed in his springing off the pages. Readers can definitely get the sense that Champollion was no saint, but it "told" more than "showed" his character. Still a fine introductory read about a fascinating man.
Honestly, most of the process for breaking the Rosetta Stone "code" was philology 101--with the exception of having to set aside the preconceived assumption that the hieroglyphs were symbolic rather than phonetic. Once Champollion (inspired, perhaps, by Thomas Young) was willing to to operate under new assumptions, the key came together quite well. Champollion is the unquestioned expert on hieroglyphs, developing the alphabet most fully, being the most fluent reader, and most systematic student of the language. This, coupled with his expedition to Egypt where he studied the art, culture, and language of ancient Egypt, establish him as the true Father of Egyptology. He even thought in terms of Egyptian worldview and understands their mind and culture far more than modern scholars do, from my perspective. Basing worldview in language is a solid place to sink roots, and that was the driving force for Champollion.
This biography does attempt to develop the man, not just the achievements, but it doesn't quite succeed in his springing off the pages. Readers can definitely get the sense that Champollion was no saint, but it "told" more than "showed" his character. Still a fine introductory read about a fascinating man.
July 8, 2018
Robinson provides an excellent biography of Champollion le Jeune as he was known, detailing his early life growing up in Figeac and the profound effect his brother, Jacques-Joseph, had on his education and upbringing throughout his childhood years, and even into later life.
Little time is spent talking about how Champollion deciphered the Egyptian hieroglyphs, although Robinson does take you through some of the major breakthroughs, not only those belonging to Champollion, but also those of Thomas Young, Champollion's main rival in the race to decipher the hieroglyphs. Unfortunately for the premature death of Champollion (41), it seems he never got to fully perfect his system of decipherment, struggling in his final year of life to publish what he had figured out so far, so I can understand the authors decision not to include a more in depth look at the how the Egyptian system worked, that and it would probably take a whole other book in itself.
Overall it was an interesting read and a must for those interested in Egypt or in the decipherment of ancient languages. Micheal D. Coe's "Breaking the Maya Code" is next for me, I think.
Little time is spent talking about how Champollion deciphered the Egyptian hieroglyphs, although Robinson does take you through some of the major breakthroughs, not only those belonging to Champollion, but also those of Thomas Young, Champollion's main rival in the race to decipher the hieroglyphs. Unfortunately for the premature death of Champollion (41), it seems he never got to fully perfect his system of decipherment, struggling in his final year of life to publish what he had figured out so far, so I can understand the authors decision not to include a more in depth look at the how the Egyptian system worked, that and it would probably take a whole other book in itself.
Overall it was an interesting read and a must for those interested in Egypt or in the decipherment of ancient languages. Micheal D. Coe's "Breaking the Maya Code" is next for me, I think.
December 29, 2019
As a scholarly, thoroughly researched, completely informative account of the life of Champollion and how he deciphered hieroglyphs, Robinson's book is first class all the way. Where it fell short for me, however, was what I regard as the most important part of the whole story. It's all very well to dot all the scholarly i's and cross the scholarly t's, but the excitement of what Champollion was about is lacking. Champollion was clearly obsessed with his mission, but the magic that hieroglyphs held for him might as well have not been there as far as this book is concerned. In order to tackle this, the status of Ancient Egypt in the European cultural mind had to be addressed, from far out theories as to their magical powers to the more prosaic questions as to how they produced such architectural wonders and such a long lived civilisation. Robinson treats the matter as if Champollion had been trying to decipher Linear B, as a purely nuts and bolts matter, which leaves the question of his motivation an unaddressed mystery.
December 22, 2017
The Rosetta Stone was the clue to the decode of Ancient Egypt. Easy to say, easy to type. But the struggle to discover whether the hieroglyphs are words, letters, sounds, or iconic mythic symbols is the part of the struggle we don't regard. It was a battle of culture: the French vs the English: who would uncover it first? Champollion, without me revealing who "won" was a genius. He actually learned Coptic to bring him closer to the environs of Ancient Egypt. If you want a historical account of a mental contest/adventure, this book is the one to read.
October 4, 2022
A clear and concise biography. Accessibly written and thoroughly researched. A useful introduction to the Rosetta Stone and the unlocking of Egyptian hieroglyphics.
At times, Robinson seems unsure how to view Champollion, torn between his admiration for His rival, Young, and the Frenchman’s singular achievements.
We are left in no doubt that Champollion could be difficult and preciously nurtured his reputation in the face of much opposition.
For a man almost forgotten after his death, it is good to have a full biography, albeit a short one, in English.
Very well illustrated.
At times, Robinson seems unsure how to view Champollion, torn between his admiration for His rival, Young, and the Frenchman’s singular achievements.
We are left in no doubt that Champollion could be difficult and preciously nurtured his reputation in the face of much opposition.
For a man almost forgotten after his death, it is good to have a full biography, albeit a short one, in English.
Very well illustrated.
October 4, 2018
Robinson manages to picture a balanced portrait of Champollion, not too laudatory, not too critical, which is something somehow difficult taking into account the ghost of Thomas Young, always luring over the decoding of the Egyptian alphabet.
I missed a more nuanced and in depth account of Champollion's visit to Egypt, but since this is an informative text I suppose that I must look elsewhere for this.
I missed a more nuanced and in depth account of Champollion's visit to Egypt, but since this is an informative text I suppose that I must look elsewhere for this.
March 26, 2023
Me? Reading non fiction? Trust me, I’m just as shocked. But after watching the fantastic Egypt Code Breakers documentary, I had to pick this up. I was immensely pleased to find this a well- and at times amusingly-told recount of a fascinating man’s fascinating life. Had I been the type to annotate my books (and had this been my book), I imagine at least a third of it would have been highlighted. Suffice it to say that I enjoyed every minute.
March 20, 2018
I've been fascinated by ancient Egypt for many decades.
I've made several visits to the Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum in San Jose, California.
I've seen many TV programs about ancient Egypt over the years.
I found this biography of Champollion very interesting.
I've made several visits to the Rosicrucian Egyptian Museum in San Jose, California.
I've seen many TV programs about ancient Egypt over the years.
I found this biography of Champollion very interesting.
Read
May 17, 2021A very meticulous biography of this remarkable man, who rendered a huge service to humanity in such a short life. A little note, I am a night reader and the font size is rather small so I just bought a book light and enjoyed the reading immensely.
February 25, 2025
Champollion's story was fascinating and well explored, I just found some of the language a little pretentious. I understand this is an academic piece of work, but I felt like I needed a thesaurus to full understand parts. Regardless, I enjoyed the read.
February 14, 2018
This was a very interesting bio about the man who (mostly) decoded Egyptian Hieroglyphics. Champollion lived a fascinating, albeit short, life. Engaging and well-written.
July 4, 2018
Wonderful book about the deciphering of the hieroglyphs. This book really revived my love for ancient Egypt!
April 18, 2020
Very interesting reading!!
July 28, 2020
Wanted a little more linguistics
August 18, 2020
Despite being a very good biography of Champollion, this book is not really about “cracking“. Will be a bit of a disappointment for linguistics lovers.
April 30, 2021
It was pretty good. Alot of information to research.
March 31, 2022
Too much autobiography, less about the cracking of hieroglyphs.
May 6, 2023
Extremely well written and easy to read. Very enjoyable!
August 8, 2024
Cracking the Egyptian code is an enjoyable book, even for someone like my. Egyptology is not my favorite subject to read. Nevertheless, there were parts of this book that I throughly appreciated.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews