It may have been just an old photo, Psus. When I went to the BM, back in 1990, the Rosetta was not in a case. Hard to believe, but it was completely accessible to the public--just sitting on a pedestal at the entrace to the Egyptian Collection. This was before it was cleaned, and it looked as if it were basalt.
I was wondering, too, just what the "truth" was about the decipherment of the stone. Bel?

Grr. I hate that Alsaadawi person. He just looks as the pictures and then claims to know what they mean. When I look at the hieroglyphs I laugh at his translations of the Rosetta stone, because not only do they not fit at all with the Ancient Greek, and secondly because the actual Egyptian makes so much more sense!

Back on topic,
I still don't think the Rosetta stone was discovered 1,000 yr's. before previously thought; it is the instrument to which we look for in heiroglyph's.

peace out!

bel, the original article didn't say that the Rosetta Stone had been found 1000 years ago, but just that the Heiroglyphs had been translated a thousand years before Champollion used the Rosetta Stone in his decipherment. The work done by Arab scholars has been long ignored, qiuite often because of the difficulting in reading Arabic.