the Society. Carefully litliograpliod copies had been executed for this purpose, so that there mioht be iio variation in the text. A competent jury of examiners were selected, amoiig whom were Professor Wilson (the President), Mr. Grote, Dean Milman, Sir Gardner Wilkinson, and Wliewell ; and on the day appointed the sealed packets were opened in their presence. It was found that Dr. Hincks had not had time to trans- late the whole, and that 0])pert had connnitted the double blunder of working from a copy executed by himself, and of makinu' his translation in Eno-lish, a language with which lie was imperfectly acquainted. A careful comparison was. however, undertaken, and the Jury issued their report on May 2iK lb57. Grote and Milman were of opinion ' that the coincidences betweeri the translations, l)ot]i as to the sense and the verbal rendering' were very remarkable.' Wilkinson made a sepai'ate re[)ort, and stated that ' the similarity is quite equal to what it would be in the translation of an ordinary historical inscription in ]\i>yptian hiero- glyphics.' Indeed,' he adds, 'the resemblance is so great (very often exactly the same, woi'd for word) that the interpretation could not ])e arl)itrary ' ; but while ' there is a remarkaljle concurrence as to the u'eneral meaning of each })aragraph . . . very many words were diirerentlv translated.' The closest resemblance \yas found to exist Ijetween the versions of Eawlinson and Iliiicks. Talbot was ' less positive and precise,' and ()i)pert showed the greatest divergence. The examiners farther noted their opinion passage by passage, and as we look down the pages, among many yerdicts of 'very near,' ' nnich alike,' and so on, we (ind other judgments much less satisfactory, such as • many coincidences and many variations ' : ' some
