(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1:
Line 1:
{{FairMormon}}
{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation Book of Abraham}}
<onlyinclude>
{{H2
|L=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Missing portions
|H=Restoration of missing portions of the facsimiles
|S=Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
|L1=Question: How were the missing portions of the Joseph Smith Papyri facsimiles restored?
|L2=Question: What portions of the image were missing from Facsimile 1?
|L3=Question: Was the head of the priest in Facsimile 1 incorrectly restored?
|L4=Question: When was the scroll containing Facsimile 1 damaged?
|L5=Question: Were missing portions of Facsimile 2 incorrectly restored?
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Question: How were the missing portions of the Joseph Smith Papyri facsimiles restored?}}
{{:Question: What portions of the image were missing from Facsimile 1?}}
{{:Question: Was the head of the priest in Facsimile 1 incorrectly restored?}}
{{:Question: When was the scroll containing Facsimile 1 damaged?}}
{{:Question: Were missing portions of Facsimile 2 incorrectly restored?}}
{{Header}}
{{Critical sources box:Book of Abraham facsimiles/Missing portions/CriticalSources}}
==Could Joseph Smith's theology as described in the Book of Abraham have been influenced by Thomas Dick's book The Philosophy of a Future State?==
=== Fawn Brodie suggested that Joseph Smith developed the theology described in the Book of Abraham by reading Thomas Dick’s ''The Philosophy of a Future State''===
This criticism was advanced by Fawn Brodie, who suggested that Joseph Smith developed the theology described in the Book of Abraham by reading Thomas Dick’s ''The Philosophy of a Future State''. An excerpt from Dick’s work was published by Oliver Cowdery in the ''Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate'' in December 1836,<ref>{{MAfairwiki | author=Oliver Cowdery (editor) | article=ON THE ABSURDITY OF SUPPOSING THAT THE THINKING PRINCIPLE IN MAN WILL EVER BE ANNIHILATED |vol=3|num=3|date=December 1836|start=423|end=425 }} (An extract from "Thomas Dick's Philosophy of a Future State.") It should be noted that the November 1836 date given for this article given by Brodie in ''No Man Knows My History'' on page 171 is incorrect.</ref> therefore one could assume that Joseph had access to the book in the 1835-1836 timeframe during which the Book of Abraham was being produced. Dick's book was also in the possession of the Prophet by 1844, at which time he donated his copy to the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute. <ref>Kenneth W. Godfrey, "[http://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFLibrary/14.3Godfrey.pdf A Note on the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute]," ''BYU Studies'' 14, no. 3 (1974).</ref>
It is also known that two of Dick's books were available in the Manchester Library;<ref>Robert Paul, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/joseph-smith-and-manchester-new-york-library Joseph Smith and the Manchester (New York) Library]," ''BYU Studies'' 22, no. 3 (1982): 333–356.</ref> although none of the Smith family were actually members of the library and were unlikely to have had access to its resources.<ref>John L. Brooke, ''The Refiner's Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844'' (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 207.</ref> Based upon this circumstantial evidence, Brodie not only assumes that the Prophet must have read the book, but that he incorporated Dick’s ideas into the Book of Abraham.
===Many of the ideas promoted by Thomas Dick were common Protestant beliefs, however, Joseph Smith rejected or contradicted many of the ideas put forth by Dick===
It should first be noted that commentary on Abraham in Philosophy of a Future State does not mention him in any context that is similar to the Book of Abraham. There are references to "The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,"<ref>Thomas Dick, [https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=jhUHAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q=Abraham&f=false ''Philosophy of a Future State''] (London: William Collins, 1830), 121.</ref> to Abraham living as an intelligent being in another state at the time of Moses at the burning bush,<ref>Ibid.</ref> to Abraham "giving up the ghost" and being "gathered to his people,"<ref>Ibid.</ref> to Abraham being buried at Machpelah,<ref>Ibid.</ref> to the ability to sit with "Abraham , and Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven,"<ref>Ibid., 123.</ref> and to Abraham's "[expectation] of a future city which had foundations, whose builder and maker is God." It is said that "[h]e obtained no such city in the earthly Canaan; and therefore we must necessarily suppose, that his views were directed at the mansions of perpetuity beyond the confines of the present world."<ref>Ibid., 119.</ref> With regards to Moses, he is not mentioned in a context similar to that of the Book of Moses. There is reference to Moses being animated by the conviction of a future world and life, <ref>Ibid.</ref> reference to Moses "being gathered to his people" as an evidence for the doctrine of afterlife in the Old Testament,<ref>Ibid., 121.</ref> a reference to "holy intelligences" singing praises to God with the song of Moses--a reference to Revelations 15:3,<ref>Ibid., 125.</ref> another reference to the same verse on page 225, a reference to Moses as a possible messenger to John regarding the "New Jerusalem" mentioned in revelations,<ref>Ibid., 276.</ref> and a reference to Moses and others hypothetically forming "something approaching to a paradise on earth."<ref>Ibid., 279.</ref> Many of the ideas promoted by Thomas Dick were common Protestant beliefs and were therefore available without having to read Dick’s work. Joseph Smith never made any public or written statements indicating that he was aware of or that he had ever read Dick’s book. The only evidence that even suggests the possibility is circumstantial and is based upon the appearance of several passages from ''A Philosophy of a Future State'' in the ''Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate''. More importantly, Joseph Smith rejected or contradicted many of the ideas put forth by Dick in ''A Philosophy of a Future State''. It is therefore unlikely, contrary to Brodie’s speculation, that Joseph had been “recently reading” Dick’s work and that it made a “lasting impression” upon the Prophet.<ref>{{NoMa'am0}}</ref><ref>Edward T. Jones, "[http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/MTGM&CISOPTR=40776 The Theology of Thomas Dick and its Possible Relationship to that of Joseph Smith]," BYU Master's Thesis, 1969, 94–96.</ref>
==How do the theological concepts of Joseph Smith actually compare to those of Thomas Dick?==
===A comparison of several of the theological concepts of both Joseph Smith and Thomas Dick shows major contrasts===
Thomas Dick was a Scottish born minister, writer, astronomer and philosopher, whose published works in the early 1800’s attempted to reconcile science with Christianity. Dick believed that "mind and matter" were the two basic principles of the universe.<ref>Edward T. Jones, "[http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/MTGM&CISOPTR=40776 The Theology of Thomas Dick and its Possible Relationship to that of Joseph Smith]," BYU Master's Thesis, 1969, 27.</ref> Dick believed God was of "a spiritual uncompounded substance, having no visible form."<ref>Thomas Dick, ''The Philosophy of a Future State'' (New York: R. Shoyer, 1831), 188.</ref> The reason for the existence of matter is to allow the mind to be able to focus on God through the observance of his creations.
According to Dick:
:[F]or the Creator has ordained, as one part of their mental enjoyments, that they shall be furnished with the means of tracing the mode of his operations, and the designs they are intended to accomplish in the different departments of nature.<ref>Ibid., 212.</ref>
The following is a comparison and contrast of several of the theological concepts of both Joseph Smith and Thomas Dick.
||None but that Eternal Mind which counts the number of the stars, '''which called them from nothing''' into existence, and arranged them in the respective stations...<ref>Ibid., 192.</ref>
|| Now, I ask all who hear me, '''why the learned men who are preaching salvation, say that God created the heavens and the earth out of nothing'''? The reason is, that they are unlearned in the things of God... <ref>Joseph Fielding Smith, ''Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1977), 350.</ref>
|-
|Intelligences
|| The Creator stands in '''no need of innumerable assemblages of worlds and of inferior ranks of intelligences''', in order to secure or to augment his felicity. Innumerable ages before the universe was created, he existed alone, independent of every other being, and infinitely happy in the contemplation of his own eternal excellencies.<ref>Dick, ''Philosophy'', 52.</ref>
|| I dwell in the midst of them all; I now, therefore, have come down unto thee to declare unto thee the works which my hands have made, wherein my wisdom excelleth them all, for I rule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; '''I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen'''. Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones; ({{scripture||Abraham|3|21-22}})
|-
|Nature of God
||a spiritual uncompounded substance, '''having no visible form'''.<ref>Ibid., 188.</ref>
||God himself was once as we are now, and '''is an exalted man''', and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!<ref>Smith, ''Teachings'', 345.</ref>
|-
|Ability to comprehend God
||But the eternity, the omnipresence, and the omniscience of the Deity, are equally mysterious; for they are equally incomprehensible, '''and must for ever remain incomprehensible''' to all limited intelligences.<ref>Dick, ''Philosophy'', 83.</ref>
|| It is the first principle of the Gospel '''to know for a certainty the Character of God''', and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth. <ref>Smith, ''Teachings'', 345.</ref>
|-
|Nature of Matter
|| What successive creations have taken place since '''the first material world was launched into existence by the Omnipotent Creator'''? What new worlds and beings are still '''emerging into existence from the voids of space'''?<ref>Dick, ''Philosophy'', 214</ref>
||33 For man is spirit. '''The elements are eternal''', and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;<ref>[https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/93.33?lang=eng#32/ D&C 93:33]. An interesting thing for this reference is that the revelation cited comes from the year 1833--nearly three years before he began any academic study of the Hebrew language.</ref>
|}
One critic has claimed that Dick's use of the word "intelligences" to refer to spirits is a significant parallel to the Book of Abraham since, he claims, it substantiates the theory that Joseph "consulted contemporary literature then writing the book [sic] of Abraham, for the Bible does not use 'intelligence' in this particular context."<ref>Michael W. Goe, ''Mormonism Without Theism: The Non-Theistic Origins of Mormon Theology and Mythology'' (N.P.: Self-Published, 2017), Kindle Loc 4216.</ref> This is severely complicated by the fact that "intelligence" was used commonly to refer to "a spiritual being" in Joseph Smith's day.<ref>Webster's Dictionary 1828, "Intelligence," <http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/intelligence> (20 June 2020).</ref> Also complicated by the fact that Dick would have believed that the spirit was immaterial rather than material as taught by Joseph Smith.<ref>[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/131.7?lang=eng Doctrine and Covenants 131:7].</ref> Finally, the Book of Abraham uses the words "intelligence," "spirit," and "soul" interchangeably. For example, one reads in Abraham 3:22-23:
::22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the '''intelligences''' that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;
::23 And God saw these '''souls''' that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were '''spirits''', and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.<ref>[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/pgp/abr/3.22-23?lang=eng&clang=eng#p21,22 Abraham 3: 22–23].</ref>
Regarding the claimed similarity between Joseph's and Dick's conception of "The Throne of God," Edward T. Jones, in a comprehensive review of Dick's and Joseph's theology, wrote:
<blockquote>
What of the references to the "Throne of God?" The solution to this seems to be found in statements referring to Him who "sits on the throne of the universe," or "upon the throne of universal nature."<ref>Dick, ''Philosophy'', 204.</ref>These statements seem only to imply that the universe is God's throne. This position is further defensible from several other statements Dick makes in an introduction he wrote in 1845. He referred to "the majesty of Him who sits on the throne of the universe."<ref>"Introduction", to Burritt. XV</ref> He later refers to "him who 'sitteth on the circle of the heavens.'" There cannot be a geographic center of the universe, for that would require boundaries to be placed on the infinite, a concept which, as previously indicated, was rejected by Dick. There cannot be a "spiritual" center at which place God resides—he does not possess a body either physical or spiritual; he is omnipresent, existing everywhere. He is a Spirit which fills every bit of the universe, as has been determined earlier. Thus, Dick would appear to be speaking metaphorically when he refers to a center of the universe or to a Throne of God.
[. . .]
Though she does not state it explicitly, Mrs. Brodie infers that the concept of Kolob being near the throne of God (as taught in the Book of Abraham) came from Thomas Dick. Having referred to this relationship between Kolob and the Throne of God in the body of the text, she then states in a footnote: Compare the Book of Abraham with Dicks "The Philosophy of a Future State." As has already been observed, the concepts of God held by those two theologians are quite in contrast to each other. For Joseph Smith, God was "an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens."<ref>Smith, ''Teachings'', 305.</ref> For Thomas Dick, God was an uncompounded spiritual substance who "sits upon the throne of universal nature."<ref>Dick, ''Philosophy'', 204.</ref> It is true that Dick does in one place state that there may be a grand center about which the planetary systems revolve. But God Himself fills the immensity of space, and cannot therefore be located in any single spot; certainly not upon a throne in the sense the Prophet uses the term (and if the definitions agree, similarities are impossible. The terms may be the same, but if they stand for different things, there can be no equating of one to the other). For the latter the throne of God was a glorified or celestialized earth, upon which God, an "exalted man," dwelt. For Dick the throne constituted no planetary body, though there may be a geographical location at which spot Jesus and the holy angels reside, God Himself is every where, yet nowhere. God, as a physical, tangible being, does not exist. As a spiritual Essence, pervading the universe He does exist. Hence, to say that the planets revolve around the throne of God is meaningless, unless it is understood that God "sits upon the throne of universal nature." In this sense God takes on a character not unlike Joseph Smith's concept of the Light of Christ (with distinctions, of course,) It would appear that on this point Mrs, Brodie is again mistaken. It is true that Joseph's thinking may have been aided by some of the concepts he may have read in Dick's writings. But it appears to be a small probability that he was influenced by what Dick taught. If the Prophet "had recently been reading" Dick's works it would appear that he rejected most of that which Dick believed most strongly, while retaining that which Dick seemed to reject. There are several references in the Old Testament to the throne of God. These are referred to, and quoted by Dick, Joseph Smith could likewise have gained knowledge from the Old Testament, not to mention the Book of Mormon. Again, the possibility for influence is present, though small.<ref>Jones, "Possible Relationship," 85–87.</ref></blockquote>
Additional differences can be noted by reading Dr. Jones' thesis cited and linked below. The connection is specious at best.
{{endnotes sources}}
{{endnotes sources}}
<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
[[Category:Book of Abraham]]
[[es:El Libro de Abraham/Acusaciones de plagio/Thomas Dick]]
[[es:El Libro de Abraham/Papiros de José Smith/Facsímiles/Porciones faltantes]]
[[pt:O Livro de Abraão/Acusações de plágio/Thomas Dick]]
Summary: Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
Question: How were the missing portions of the Joseph Smith Papyri facsimiles restored?
It is likely that Joseph Smith or Reuben Hedlock (the engraver) simply filled in the lacunae in the papyri the best he could for purposes of publication
The facsimiles in the Joseph Smith papyri contain some missing sections. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
It is not known who performed the "restoration" of the missing sections. It is likely that Joseph Smith or Reuben Hedlock (the engraver) simply filled in the lacunae in the papyri the best he could for purposes of publication. Modern documentary editing standards would require that any holes or gaps in the papyri be represented as such, but the Book of Abraham was published long before the rise of such standards. Just as it was the practice of the day to edit out infelicities rather than to preserve them (as modern scholars do), so it would have been thought inaesthetic to publish incomplete or marred facsimiles. If this is the correct explanation, one need not suppose that the textual repair for purposes of publication was the result of revealed insight. Some restorations were actually correct and/or were okay considering the message of the Book of Abraham. See here and here for more details.
Joseph was involved in the preparation of the plates of metal that were made for the purpose of publication, however.
Willard Richards recorded the involvement of Joseph Smith in his journal on:
23 February 1842
Gave R. Hadlock [sic] instructions concerning the cut for the altar & Gods in the Record of Abraham. As designed for the Times & Seasons.[1]
1 March 1842
"During the forenoon at his office. & printing office correcting the first plate or cut. of the Records of Father Abraham, prepared by Reuben Hadlock [sic] for the Times & Seasons [2]
As John Gee explains about this entry in "An Introduction to the Book of Abraham":
Examination of the metal plates that Hedlock used shows that Joseph Smith changed only the position of some of the numbers. The first installment of the Book of Abraham that was published in the Times and Seasons (vol. 2, no 9, containing Abraham 1:1-2:18 and Facsimile 1) is dated to 1 March but apparently did not actually come on this day.[3]
4 March 1842
Exhibiting the Book of Abraham, in the original, To Bro Reuben Hadlock [sic], so that he might take the size of the several plates or cuts, & prepare the blocks for the Times & Seasons & also gave instructions concerning the arrangement of the writing on the Large cut, illustrating the principles of Astronomy."[4]
As John Gee explains about this journal entry in "An Introduction to the Book of Abraham":
The "large cut" was Facsimile 2, which was printed in a special foldout printed to size, and the image was larger than the page of the Times and Seasons[5]
Question: What portions of the image were missing from Facsimile 1?
Examination of the extant papyri fragments reveals that portions of Facsimile 1 (the only facsimile that survived) are damaged
For a number of years, scholars have debated whether the facsimile was damaged before or after Joseph acquired the papyri. It seems that the Book of Breathings scroll (containing Facsimile 1) was marred by a lacuna—a missing portion—that had torn off the scroll. The debate over the date of the lacuna directly relates to the images on Facsimile 1. This vignette—as shown in the LDS Book of Abraham—shows a figure (interpreted as Abraham) lying on a lion couch with arms raised as if attitude of pleading or prayer. The figure standing over Abraham is a bald man (presumably an Egyptian priest) with a knife in one hand—as if he was about to kill Abraham. Flying just above Abraham is a hawk (or falcon) with outstretched wings. The scroll's lacuna extends over an area which includes the Egyptian priest's head, the knife, and one of Abraham's supplicating arms.
Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith PapyriError creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127This photo of a lion couch scene was taken at the Louvre. Note the mummy-like appearance of the figure on the couch. The two legs are wrapped, unlike those of the figure in Facsimile 1. Also note that there is only one bird.An overlay of the existing facsimile over the restoration.In the penciled in restoration, the knife is in the priest's right hand, and the face is viewed from the front.
Question: Was the head of the priest in Facsimile 1 incorrectly restored?
The head of the priest may have been restored simply by copying the head of the figure lying on the lion couch
Since Facsimile 1 appears to be a fairly typical scene from Egyptian funerary texts, the critics note that other similar Egyptian motifs depict the priest (an embalmer) with the head of Anubis (an Egyptian god) rather than a bald, human head. Other comparable Egyptian embalming scenes do not show the priest holding a knife, they do not show any man pleading or praying, and they generally show two hawks.
Joseph interpreted this figure to be "The idolatrous priest of Elkenah attempting to offer up Abraham as a sacrifice." This figure is normally represented in lion couch scenes as having the jackal head of Anubis. If the portion of the priests head was indeed missing at the time that the facsimile was copied prior to its publication in the Times and Seasons, it may have been restored simply by copying the head of the figure lying on the lion couch. Unlike standards that would be following in publishing today, it was not considered acceptable at that time to publish a figure with missing gaps.
Joseph correctly interpreted the figure as a priest
Joseph correctly interpreted the figure as a priest. Whether the priest has a human head or is wearing the mask of Anubis makes no difference to the interpretation.
Question: When was the scroll containing Facsimile 1 damaged?
Evidence supports the conclusion that the scroll was damaged after Joseph translated the vignette representing Facsimile 1
Many LDS scholars believe that the scroll was damaged after Joseph translated the vignette and some evidence seems to support this view. One early Latter-day Saint who saw the papyri in 1841, for instance, described them as containing the scene of an altar with "'a man bound and laid thereon, and a Priest with a knife in his hand, standing at the foot, with a dove over the person bound on the Altar with several Idol gods standing around it.'"[6] Similarly, Reverend Henry Caswall, who visited Nauvoo in April 1842, had a chance to see some of the Egyptian papyri. Caswall, who was hostile to the Saints, described Facsimile 1 as having a "'man standing by him with a drawn knife.'"[7]
Another possibility is that part of the scroll tore/fell away when it was first unrolled and prior to Joseph's translation
The critics, however, claim that evidence supports a belief that the scroll was already damaged prior to Joseph's involvement and that Joseph merely sketched in the parts missing in the lacuna. It's seems apparent, for example, that the lacuna descends several layers into the rolled scroll (the larger tear is at the first—or top—part, and the same outlined tear—only smaller—appears in the lower layers). Non-LDS Egyptologists do not think Joseph's "restoration" accurately reflects what was originally shown on the papyri, and in at least some instances, it seems that Joseph invented hieroglyphic characters to fill in for missing characters lost by the lacuna. This suggests that part of the scroll's tore/fell away when it was first unrolled and prior to Joseph's translation. For the sake of argument, let us grant the theory proposed by the critic—that the lacuna was present prior to Joseph making a translation and that Joseph (or some other early leader) "restored" the missing information.
Some considerations: there is at least some evidence that the LDS version has precedence in ancient Egyptian drawings. Some LDS researchers, for instance, have argued that the fingers/wing-tips look significantly more like fingers (according to Egyptian drawings) than hawk wing-tips. A number of scholars have noted that the Egyptians were very specific in how they drew wings and thumbs.[8]
Nobody knows who sketched the missing portions of Facsimile 1
Another consideration: We don't know that Joseph was the responsible party for sketching in the missing portions of Facsimile 1. It is possible that one of Joseph's contemporaries "restored" the missing parts, or it is possible that "J-red" or some other Jewish copyist "restored" the parts in order to more closely approximate the details conveyed by the Abrahamic text. It is certainly also possible that Joseph "restored" the missing parts either because they were in the original papyri—as edited by "J-red"—or because Joseph felt that such restorations more accurately reflected the Book of Abraham's intended use of the graphic as pertaining to the details discussed in the text.
Joseph's amendments to later editions of the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine & Covenants, and even the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible, are all instructive when we compare the graphical alterations in Facsimile 1. In each case, Joseph Smith—by way of revelation, inspiration, or prophetic analysis—"restored" or amended scripture to more closely approximate the additional insights he had gleaned by divine revelation.
Question: Were missing portions of Facsimile 2 incorrectly restored?
Missing portions of Facsimile 2 were filled in with images and characters taken from other parts of the Joseph Smith papyri before being published in the newspaper
Regarding Facsimile 2, it should be noted that portions of the original Facsimile 2 appear to have been missing, and that the missing portions were filled in with characters or images taken from other sources before the image was published in the Times and Seasons. Some material was copied from the Joseph Smith papyri. Among the missing sections may have been the area identified as section #3, which matches a figure which appears on Joseph Smith Papyrus IV. One interesting thing about this restoration is that the figure in the boat actually does appear in this section of at least one other hypocephalus.
Charles M. Larson, By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri, 2nd ed., (Grand Rapids, MI: Institute for Religious Research, 1992), xxx.
Notes
↑ Joseph Smith, Journal 1841-1842, in Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, 2:36; Jessee, Papers of Joseph Smith, 2:360
↑ Joseph Smith, Illinois Journal, 1841-1842, in Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, 2:39; Jessee, Papers of Joseph Smith, 2:363-64
↑Gee, John "An Introduction to the Book of Abraham" Deseret Book (2018): Salt Lake City, UT
↑Joseph Smith, Illinois Journal, 1841-1842, in Joseph Smith Papers: Journals, 2:39; Jessee, Papers of Joseph Smith, 2:366
↑Gee, John "An Introduction to the Book of Abraham". Deseret Book (2018): Salt Lake City, UT p. 19
↑William I. Appleby Journal, 5 May 1841, ms. 1401 1, pp. 71–72, Church Archives; as quoted in John Gee, "Eyewitness, Hearsay, and Physical Evidence of the Joseph Smith Papyri," The Disciple As Witness: Essays on Latter-day Saint History and Doctrine in Honor of Richard Lloyd Anderson, eds., Stephen D. Ricks, Donald W. Parry, and Andrew H. Hedges (Provo: FARMS, 2000), 184.
↑Rev. Henry Caswall, The City of the Mormons: Or, Three Days at Nauvoo in 1842 (London: Rivington, 1842), 23. Work quoted in Gee, "Eyewitness, Hearsay, and Physical Evidence," 186.
