Array

The Joseph Smith Papyri: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary
 
(248 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{draft}}
{{Main Page}}


In July 1835, Joseph Smith purchased a collection of papyri and mummies that had been discovered in Egypt and brought to the United States. Joseph Smith stated that one of the rolls contained, "the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, purportedly written by his own hand, upon papyrus,"{{ref|hc1}} and he commenced a translation of the papyri.
{{Epigraph|An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose.<br><br>
&mdash;Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', p. 46}}
{{parabreak}}


The translated text and facsimiles of three drawings were published in the early 1840s in serial fashion in the LDS newspaper ''Times and Seasons''. The entire work was published in 1852 in England as part of ''The Pearl of Great Price'', which was later canonized as part of LDS scripture.
<onlyinclude>
{{T5
|L=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri
|H=The Joseph Smith Papyri
|V=<embedvideo service="youtube">pNBzMhJFGWo</embedvideo>
|S=Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a hypocephalus (Facsimile 2). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below. <ref>Criticisms regarding the Book of Abraham and Joseph Smith papyri are raised in the following publications: “Universalism in Ohio,” ''Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate'' (Utica, New York) (12 September 1835): 291. {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=1061&REC=8}}; {{CriticalWork:Ashment:Egyptian Magical Papyri|pages=1&ndash;}}; {{CriticalWork:Larson:By His Own Hand|pages=1&ndash;}}; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," ''Salt Lake City Messenger'' 82 (September 1992): 1&ndash;12.; {{CriticalWork:Tanner:Changing World|pages=Chapter 11}}; {{CriticalWork:Watchman Fellowship:Articles|pages=3}}</ref>


The original papyri were thought to have been completely destroyed in the Chicago fire of 1871. However, fragments of them, including Facsimile number 1, were discovered in 1967 in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City, and given to the Church of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
<small>Video published by the Church History Department.</small>
|L1=Online source documents
|L2=The Joseph Smith Papyri: Source Quotes
|L3=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession
|L4=When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?
|L5=Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?
|L6=The facsimiles in the Book of Abraham
|L7=Antiquity of the Book of Abraham
}}


==Criticism==
Critics of the Book of Abraham attack it from several directions. This article will address these major criticisms:
*The Joseph Smith papyri date to about the 2nd century, <small>B.C.</small> Latter-day Saints, however (including, perhaps, Joseph Smith), have claimed that the papyri were written by Abraham who lived about 2,000 years earlier.


*The surviving Egyptian papyri appear to be (from what we may surmise of the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers") the source for the Book of Abraham. Egyptologists, however, agree that these papyri are part of a collection of Egyptian funerary documents known as the ''Book of Breathings'' and do not deal with Abraham.
{{SeeAlso|Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers}}
</onlyinclude>


*Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. While it appears that Joseph "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate.  
{{Source documents label}}
*View high [http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/egyptian-papyri resolution images of the Joseph Smith Papyri online].


===Source(s) of the criticism=== <!--Books or web sites where the criticism originated-->
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Quotes}}
*Edward H. Ashment, ''The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review,'' Salt Lake City: Resource Communications, 1993.
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Identity and nature}}
*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.
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"}}
*Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," ''Salt Lake City Messenger'' 82 (September 1992): 1&ndash;12.
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Preservation of Ancient Core}}


==Responses==


===The Book of Abraham and the Joseph Smith Papyri===
{{Critical sources box:Book of Abraham/Papyri/Long article/CriticalSources}}
The Church owns various extant (surviving) portions of the original Joseph Smith Papyri (or JSP) from whence, supposedly, Joseph "translated" the Book of Abraham. In Joseph's day ancient Egyptian could not be read. Today, however, Egyptologists have a relatively good grasp of ancient Egyptian texts, hieroglyphics and lore. Modern critics are quick to note that the extant portions of the JSP are from the common Egyptian funerary texts and seemingly have nothing to do with Abraham. Not only don't they have anything to do with Abraham, but Joseph's interpretations of the papyri facsimiles (graphical drawings on the papyri, which can be found in the LDS Book of Abraham), are at odds with modern Egyptologists' interpretation of the facsimiles.
{{endnotes sources}}
<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
[[Category:Book of Abraham]]


There is some truth to these claims. It should be noted, however, that in several instances, Joseph did get some of the details correct. This is no small thing considering that neither Joseph, nor any one in his day, could translate Egyptian. For the purposes of this paper, one example will have to suffice.
[[de:Buch Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri]]
 
[[es:El Libro de Abraham/Papiros de José Smith]]
====The Sons of Horus====
[[pt:O Livro de Abraão/Joseph Smith Papiros]]
Facsimile 2 (shown between Chapters 3 and 4 of the Book of Abraham in the LDS Pearl of Great Price), is known as a hypocephalus ("under the head") and was a small disk-shaped object that was placed under the head of the deceased. The Egyptians "believed it would magically cause the head and body to be enveloped in flames or radiance, thus making the deceased divine."{{ref|rhodes1}} In this drawing (or vignette), stand four mummy-like figures known &mdash; to Egyptologists &mdash; as the Sons of Horus. Their images were also on the canopic jars (the jars that stored the internal organs of the deceased) that we see under the lion couch in Joseph Smith's Facsimile 1. Joseph revealed that these four figures represented "this earth in its four quarters." According to modern Egyptologists, Joseph Smith is correct. The Sons of Horus "were the gods of the four quarters of the earth and later came to be regarded as presiding over the four cardinal points."{{ref|rhodes2}}
 
====Abrahamic Traditions====
Years ago, Dr. Nibley pointed out that the critics generally focus on the Egyptian facsimiles in the Book of Abraham and the papyri but neglect the much richer Abrahamic traditions found in the ancient Near East.{{ref|nibley1}} This is really where Joseph shines. Recent research into ancient Abrahamic lore and Jewish traditions preserved in ancient texts, show some surprising parallels to what we find in the text of the Book of Abraham. Some of these parallels are very convincing and imply that Joseph (who likely could not have had access to many of these traditions) actually restored authentic ancient Abrahamic traditions. Some of these parallels include early Jewish traditions about Abraham's life &mdash; details not found in the Bible.{{ref|abrtrad1}} Two such ancient documents that show some surprising parallels to our Book of Abraham are the ''Apocalypse of Abraham''{{ref|astpapcov1}} and the Testament of Abraham{{ref|testabr1}} (the Apocalypse of Abraham dates to about the same time as the Book of Abraham papyri).
 
Other interesting parallels include ancient names and astronomy. Ancient Egyptian names, for example, that would have been unknown to Joseph Smith, are accurately represented in the Book of Abraham both phonetically as well as in meaning.{{ref|phone1}} With regard to astronomy, we find that in Joseph Smith's day "heliocentricity" (as proposed by Copernicus and Newton) was the accepted astronomical view. Nineteenth-century people (including the most brilliant minds of the day) believed that everything revolved around the Sun &mdash; therefore the term heliocentric (Greek sun and center). (In the twentieth-first century we generally accept an Einsteinian view of the cosmos.) The Book of Abraham, however, clearly delineates a geocentric view of the universe &mdash; or a belief that the Earth (geo) stood at the center, and all things moved according to our planet.
 
According to ancient geocentric cosmologies and what we read in the Book of Abraham, the heavens (which is defined as the expanse above the earth &mdash; no celestial object is mentioned to exist below the earth) was composed of multiple layers or tiers &mdash; each tier higher than the previous. Therefore the Sun is in a higher tier than the moon, and the stars are in higher tiers still ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/3/5,9,17#5 Abraham 3:5, 9, 17]).{{ref|astpapcov2}} According to geocentric astronomy, celestial objects have longer time spans (or lengths of "reckoning") in their relative distance from the earth. "Thus, the length of reckoning of a planet is based on its revolution (and not rotation)."{{ref|astpapcov3}} The higher the celestial object, the greater its length of reckoning (compare to [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/3/5#5 Abraham 3:5]). Likewise, in [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/3/8-9#8 Abraham 3:8&ndash;9], we read that "there shall be another planet whose reckoning of time shall be longer still; And thus there shall be the reckoning of the time of one planet above another, until thou come nigh unto Kolob."
 
Ancient geocentric astronomers believed that the stars were "the outer-most celestial sphere, furthest from the earth and nearest to God."{{ref|astpapcov4}} We find in the Book of Abraham that the star Kolob was the star nearest "the throne of God" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/3/9#9 Abraham 3:9]). In the ancient, yet recently discovered, Apocalypse of Abraham (which dates from about the same time period as the JSP), we find that God's throne is said to reside in the eighth firmament (the firmaments, being another term for the varying tiers in the heavens above the Earth).{{ref|astpapcov5}}
 
The Book of Abraham also reveals that those celestial objects that are highest above the earth, "govern" the objects below them (see [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/3/3,9#3 Abraham 3:3, 9] and [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_2 Facsimile 2, fig. 5]). This sounds familiar to the beliefs of those who accepted an ancient geocentric cosmology:
 
:Throughout the ancient world the governing role of celestial bodies was conceived in similar terms. God sits on his throne in the highest heaven giving commands, which are passed down by angels through the various regions of heaven, with each region governing or commanding the regions beneath it.''{{ref|astpapcov6}}
 
We find this governing order described in the Apocalypse of Abraham and other ancient sources. All of this makes sense only from an ancient geocentric perspective (such as that believed in Abraham's day) and makes no sense from a heliocentric perspective (which is what Joseph would have known in his day).
 
A different and interesting parallel comes from [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1] (Abraham on the lion couch). According to Egyptologists, this is a typical Egyptian embalming scene and has nothing to do with Abraham or sacrifice. In fact, the critics assure us, Abraham is not a topic of discussion in Egyptian papyri, and there is no connection with Abraham and the embalming lion couch.
 
Recent discoveries, however, suggests that the Biblical Abraham does appear in some Egyptian papyri that date to the same period as the JSP. In one instance (thus far discovered) Abraham's name appears to have a connection to an Egyptian lion couch scene.{{ref|gee1}}
 
The stories and worldviews we find in the translated text of our Book of Abraham coincide nicely with what we find from ancient Abrahamic lore.
 
====A Jewish Redactor====
Ancient traditions about Abraham provide circumstantial support for the ancient authenticity of the Book of Abraham. Joseph's "translations" of the Egyptian facsimiles, however, do not (as yet) have the same support from modern Egyptology &mdash; despite a number of interesting parallels. There appears to be a noticeable disconnect between what Joseph claimed that the characters in the facsimiles represent, verses what Egyptologists tell us the characters represent. The critics, of course, see this as evidence of Joseph's fraudulent claims of revelation. There is, however, a likely scenario that explains this disconnect.
 
It should first be explained that we do not have all the papyri that Joseph Smith had when he translated the Book of Abraham. Some of the papyri were burned in the Chicago fire and it's possible that other fragments were lost or destroyed elsewhere. Yale-trained Egyptologist, Dr. John Gee, believes that Joseph Smith originally had five papyrus scrolls (one of which was the hypocephalus).{{ref|gee1}} Of these five scrolls, only eleven fragments of two scrolls have survived. The "Scroll of Hor" (the Egyptian Book of Breathings) from where we get Facsimile 1 (and most certainly [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_3 Facsimile 3] &mdash; which didn't survive) is incomplete.
 
Dr Nibley writes:
 
:We are told that papyri were in beautiful condition when Joseph Smith got them, and that one of them when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House.{{ref|nibley2}}
 
Nothing like this has survived today. Dr. Gee estimates that the Scroll of Hor (likely the putative [supposed] source for the Book of Abraham) may have been ten feet long{{ref|gee2}} and that in all, Joseph may have had eight times as much papyri as what is currently extant.{{ref|gee3}} A number of scholars contend that the reason that the extant papyrus fragments don't have anything to do with the Book of Abraham is because we don't have that portion of the papyrus that served as the text from whence Joseph translated the Book of Abraham.
 
In rebuttal, the critics claim that, since the Scroll of Hor is a typical Book of Breathings scroll, we would know that the entire scroll would not be much longer than the extant portions of the papyrus fragments; therefore, what we have is virtually all there was of this particular papyrus. And, they contend, we know that this particular scroll is the source for the Book of Abraham, because in Joseph's translation, Abraham make the following statement:
 
:...that you may have a knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation [Facsimile 1] at the commencement of this record." ([http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/1/12#12 Abraham 1:12])
 
The Egyptians, like the Hebrews, wrote from right to left. And while Joseph didn't know Egyptian, he was (at this point in his life) studying Hebrew and he may have assumed that the Egyptians wrote in the same direction. At the right end of the scroll (the beginning of the scroll), we find Facsimile 1. It seems logical, therefore, to surmise that Abraham (or the 3rd century <small>B.C.</small> copyist) was claiming that that Facsimile 1 was at the beginning of "this record." The attempt at backward translation (as evidenced in the Kirtland Egyptian Papers) &mdash; which will be discussed shortly &mdash; also suggests that Joseph believed that this particular scroll contained the manuscript of Abraham. The critics are probably correct that the Book of Breathings was a fairly typical Egyptian funerary text, and that it is doubtful that it would have included the Book of Abraham.
 
And while it's true that the extant portions of the JSP are from the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings and do not, according to Egyptologists, translate to anything like the LDS Book of Abraham, this doesn't necessarily mean that the translation didn't derive from Joseph's papyri. There are other scenarios that are compatible with Joseph's claims. We know from other sources, for instance, that sometimes scrolls were attached together. To quote Gee:
 
:Some people assume that if the documents [JSP] are funerary they cannot contain anything else. Some Book of the Dead papyri, however, do contain other texts. For example, a fragmentary Eighteenth-Dynasty Book of the Dead in Cairo...contains account texts on the front side (recto) [with the Book of the Dead on the back side]. Papyrus Vandier also has a Book of the Dead on the verso (back side), but the recto contains the story of Meryre, who was sacrificed on an altar (an intriguing similarity to the Book of Abraham). The Book of the Dead of Psenmines...and Pawerem...both contain temple rituals. Both Papyrus Harkness and BM 10507 (demotic funerary papyri) contain several different texts. Just because the preserved sections of the Joseph Smith Papyri are funerary in nature does not mean that they could not have had other texts, either on the verso or on missing sections of the rolls.{{ref|gee4}}
 
It is therefore possible that the Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings. But why? Why would an important Semitic document be attached to a pagan (Egyptian) funerary text?
 
Kevin Barney posits that the Book of Abraham material was passed on through the generations from Abraham to Jews of the 2nd century <small>B.C.</small> &mdash; or the Ptolemaic period &mdash; just as Old Testament scriptures were passed on to later generations. Sometime in the Ptolemaic period, a hypothetical Jewish redactor (editor), whom Barney labels "J-red" attached the Book of Abraham to the Egyptian papyri. Why? Because of the useful symbolism contained on the Egyptian funerary text.
 
This claim is supported by at least three known ancient Jewish texts. Barney notes that many Biblical scholars believe that an ancient Egyptian book &mdash; the Instructions of Amenemope &mdash; may have been the source for the biblical book of Proverbs.{{ref|barney1}}
 
The Testament of Abraham (mentioned previously) has several similarities to the LDS Book of Abraham. The book also has strong similarities to an Egyptian papyrus related to the Book of the Dead. For example, notes Barney, it is widely recognized that a judgment scene described in the Testament of Abraham was
 
:influenced by an Egyptian psychostasy ("soul weighing") papyrus.... It may even be that the author [of the Testament of Abraham] was gazing on such a psychostasy papyrus when he penned his account. But while there is a clear relationship between the Egyptian psychostasy scene and the judgment scene of the Testament of Abraham, the scene has been transformed to accord with Semitic needs and sensibilities. Osiris [Egyptian god] has become Abel; the Egyptian gods have become angels. Our author looks at the Egyptian illustration, yet sees a situation peopled with Semitic characters.{{ref|barney2}}
 
Note the Osiris-Abel connection, as we will return to this below.
 
The third example comes from the book of Luke's story of the rich man and Lazarus. In this tale, the beggar Lazarus ate the crumbs that fell from a rich man's table. When Lazarus died, angels carried him to Abraham's bosom. When the rich man died, he awoke in Hell but could see &mdash; far away &mdash; Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham. The rich man begged Abraham to send the dead Lazarus to his brothers so that they would repent and not befall the same terrible fate. (See [http://scriptures.lds.org/luke/16/19-31#19 Luke 16:19&ndash;31]).
 
Scholars have shown that this story is based on a popular Jewish tale, written in Hebrew, but ultimately based on an Egyptian story. In the original Egyptian legend, the names are different (as are some of the general details of the story) but the basic account and moral is the same. In the Egyptian version, however (the version upon which the Hebrew tradition depends), Osiris plays the part later adapted (by Jews) to Abraham.{{ref|osiris1}} It seems that the early Jews had no problem adapting the pagan god Osiris to important Judaic figures such as Abel or Abraham.
 
Not only do we see, in the Book of Luke, a Jewish adaptation of an Egyptian judgment scene, but we also find some interesting parallels to Facsimile 1 from the Book of Abraham. In this vignette, Joseph identified the figure lying on the lion couch as Abraham. Egyptologists, however, identify the figure as Osiris.{{ref|osiris2}} Based on an early Judaic adaptation of Facsimile 1, Joseph got it exactly right.
 
Instead of focusing on how Egyptians of the 2nd century <small>B.C.</small> or 2000 <small>B.C.</small> understood the motifs, Barney convincingly argues that Abraham did not draw the facsimiles (which date nearly two thousand years after Abraham lived) but that these Egyptian vignettes "were either adopted [copied wholesale as the Egyptians drew them] or adapted [altered to more accurately reflect the Semitic perspective] by an Egyptian-Jewish redactor as illustrations of the attempt on Abraham's life and Abraham's teaching astronomy to the Egyptians."{{ref|barney3}} Barney argues that we should focus our attention on understanding how Jews of the 2nd century <small>B.C.</small> understood the Egyptian graphics.
 
In Facsimile 1 (the lion couch scene), for instance, under the floor there is a crocodile. Under the crocodile are numerous vertical lines. Joseph interpreted these lines as representing the "pillars of heaven." Egyptologists, however, tell us that this is incorrect. These lines really signify the palace façade. The etched lines around the crocodile signify, according to Joseph, "Raukeeyang" or "the expanse or firmament over our heads," or the high "heavens." Egyptologists, however, tell us that the lines are simply waters in which the crocodile swims. So according to an Egyptian interpretation, Joseph got it all wrong.
 
What if we compare Joseph's interpretation to how 2nd century <small>B.C.</small> Jews might have understood the scene? Firstly, Joseph's "Raukeeyang" is very similar to the Hebrew word for "expanse."{{ref|barney4}} "In Hebrew cosmology," writes Barney, the Hebrew "'firmament' was believed to be a solid dome, supported by pillars." Recall the vertical lines in the vignette. This, "in turn was closely associated with the celestial ocean, which it supported." And remember that in Facsimile 1 it appears that the pillars are under the water in which the crocodile swims.
 
:In the lower half of Facsimile 1, we have [the firmament]...(1) connected with the waters, as with the celestial ocean, (2) appearing to be supported by pillars, and (3) being solid and therefore capable of serving itself as a support, in this case for the lion couch. The bottom half of Facsimile 1 would have looked to J-red very much like a microcosm of the universe (in much the same way that the divine throne chariot of Ezekiel 1&ndash;2, which associates the four four-faced fiery living creatures with the [firmament].. above their heads on which God sits enthroned, is a microcosm of the universe).{{ref|barney5}}
 
If we accept a Jewish redactor adapting Egyptian motifs to a Hebrew understanding, we can easily appreciate the possibility that "J-red" attached the Book of Abraham manuscript to the Book of Breathings in order to graphically convey the doctrines portrayed in the manuscript. Barney gives this useful comparison to the Book of Mormon:
 
:The gold plates were untouched by human hands from the time Moroni deposited them in a stone box in the fifth century <small>A.D.</small> until Joseph's retrieval of the cache in 1827. Prior to that time, however, the records of the Book of Mormon peoples underwent an express redaction process at the hands of Mormon and Moroni. Similarly, the papyrus source for the Book of Abraham sat untouched from the time it was deposited in the tomb during Greco-Roman age until Lebolo retrieved it [about 1820]. Before that time, though, it circulated among people and was subject to normal transmission processes. My hypothetical redactor, J-red, was in essentially the same position with respect to the Book of Abraham as Mormon was with respect to the Book of Mormon.{{ref|barney6}}
 
===The date of the Book of Abraham vs. the date of the papyrus===
When Joseph Smith attained the papyrus in 1835, he reportedly said that "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham...."{{ref|hc2}} According to Joseph's scribes, this scroll was "written" by Abraham's "own hand upon papyrus."{{ref|marquardt1}} It seems reasonable to conclude that Joseph believed that Abraham himself, with pen in hand, wrote the very words that he was translating. The problem is that most modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to a few centuries before Christ, whereas Abraham lived about two millennia before Christ. Obviously, Abraham himself could not have penned the papyri.
 
This issue is very similar to that of Book of Mormon geography. It is very likely that Joseph Smith believed in a hemispheric Book of Mormon geography &mdash; it made sense to his understanding of the world around him. Such a misinformed belief makes him no less a prophet; it simply provides us with an example of how Joseph &mdash; like any other human &mdash; tried to understand new information according to his current knowledge. So likewise with the Abrahamic papyri: Joseph, by way of revelation, saw that the papyri contained scriptural teachings of Abraham. It would be natural, therefore, to assume that Abraham wrote the papyri. But, some will ask, how could the teachings of Abraham be present on a document written two thousand years after Abraham lived? As Gee notes, we find the same thing with Biblical manuscripts. There is a major difference, he explains, "between the date of a text [the information contained on the papyri] and the date of a manuscript [the papyri itself]."{{ref|gee5}}
 
:The date of a text is the date when the text was written by its author. A text can be copied into various manuscripts or translated into other languages, and these manuscripts or translations will have different, later dates than the date of the original text. When we refer to the date of a text, we refer to the date of the original text. For example, the text of the Gospel of Matthew was written in the first century <small>A.D.</small>, but the earliest manuscript that we have of Matthew was copied in the third century.{{ref|gee6}}
 
If, for example, I held out my Bible and pointing to 1 Corinthians asked, "Who penned this book?" most people would respond with, "Paul." My scriptures, however, were printed within the last few decades and the English wording is based on what King James Scholars decided that the ancient biblical manuscripts said. Paul, himself, did not pen my copy of the scriptural book even if he did author the original text. How can we fault Joseph for basically stating the same thing?
 
Some LDS scholars propose that the original Book of Abraham "text" was written by Abraham and then "passed down through his descendants (the Jews), some of whom took a copy to Egypt where it was copied (after being translated) onto a later manuscript."{{ref|gee7}} Such a proposal makes a lot of sense since we recognize that is the typical provenance of most Biblical documents.
 
===Restoring gaps in the drawings===
[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|frame|200px|right|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]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 &mdash; a missing portion &mdash; that had torn off the scroll. The debate over the date of the lacuna directly relates to the images on Facsimile 1. This vignette &mdash; as shown in the LDS Book of Abraham &mdash; 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 &mdash; 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.
 
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. The critics claim that Joseph Smith drew in the missing parts by adding (incorrectly) those things which we find in the LDS version of this Egyptian scene. What Joseph saw as fingers of Abraham's outstretched hands, for instance, were actually (according to the critics) the wing-tips of the missing second hawk.
 
Most 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.'"{{ref|appleby1}} 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.'"{{ref|caswall1}}
 
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 &mdash; or top &mdash; part, and the same outlined tear &mdash; only smaller &mdash; appears in the lower layers). This suggests that the scroll's lacuna appeared when the scroll was rolled and therefore prior to Joseph's acquisition. For the sake of argument, we'll accept the theory proposed by the critic &mdash; 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.{{ref|shirts1}}
 
It's also interesting to note that although embalming priests are typically drawn with Anubis heads in Book of Breathing motifs, other Egyptian graphics show that Egyptian priests are represented as bald and that Anubis heads were worn as masks to emulate the gods.{{ref|shirts2}} When compared to other Egyptian drawings, some of the Book of Abraham restorations are plausible.
 
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 &mdash; as edited by "J-red" &mdash; 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 &mdash; by way of revelation, inspiration, or analysis &mdash; "restored" or amended scripture to more closely approximate the additional insights he had gleaned by divine revelation.
 
===The Kirtland Egyptian Papers===
Among the early manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith, we have a number of papers that relate to the Book of Abraham. These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes. Each paper is divided by a vertical line about one fourth of the paper is to the left of the line. About three fourths of the paper is the right of each line. To the left of the line are Egyptian characters. These are the same characters that follow Facsimile 1 of the Book of Breathings (keeping in mind that Facsimile 1 was virtually the first thing that appears on the right side of this scroll and that Egyptian was read right to left). To the right of the vertical line (on the Kirtland papers) appear to be a "translations" of the Egyptian character on the left.
 
Initial reaction is the presumption that the so-called Kirtland Egyptian Papers (or KEP) indicate Joseph's attempt to translate the hieroglyphics from those portions that are still extant. According to most Egyptologists, the "translations" do not accurately reflect the meanings of the hieroglyphics. In some cases, several paragraphs of English text (the English translation of the Book of Abraham) are written in what appears to be an English translation of these Egyptian characters (in some instances, one character seems to yield several sentences of English text). On the surface, it appears that Joseph put the characters on the left and then translated these characters with the translation on the right. As the critics correctly point out, the translations do not match the characters. Egyptologists assure us that there is no relationship between the characters and the text. To the critics, this is proof that Joseph was a false prophet.
 
There is, however, a likely scenario that is compatible with Joseph's prophetic claims. Many LDS scholars have claimed that the Kirtland Egyptian Papers are an example of a backwards translation. In other words, Joseph translated the Book of Abraham prior to the creation of the KEP and then he, and other early LDS brethren, tried to match the translated text to what they believed were the characters that were used to illicit the translation. In this scenario the KEP was not the product of revelation, but was rather an attempt to "study out" the translation, after-the-fact, in what might have been an experiment to create an Egyptian alphabet.{{ref|nibley3}}
 
But why would Joseph select the wrong characters (those characters that were from the first scroll &mdash; the Book of Breathings) rather than the characters from the appended scroll (the scroll with the Book of Abraham material)? The answer is, as noted above, because Abraham referred the Facsimile ("the representation") at the beginning of "this record." To the early Saints, this would have seemed to indicate that the "record" of Abraham was part of the early portion of the scroll and thus they began their backwards translation from this point. In reality, however, "this record" probably referred to the beginning of the combined scrolls (that begins with Facsimile 1) but not the beginning of the Abrahamic text (which would have been appended to the Book of Breathing scroll).{{ref|barney7}}
 
It must be remembered that Joseph could not read Egyptian. He did not "translate" in the normal sense. He translated by the power of God. It's possible that Joseph, at times, translated the Book of Mormon while the plates were covered, or perhaps even while the plates were removed from the room.
 
While an actual Book of Abraham manuscript could have been present among (as an appendage to) the Book of Breathings manuscript, it's significant to recognize that revelation was the method by which the text was translated. This realization allows for other possibilities. If, for example, the appended Abrahamic scroll was damaged, Joseph would still have been able to "translate" the text. If the appended scroll was partially missing, the "translation" might not have suffered. It's also possible that Joseph, in the process of creating the KEP, looked at the Egyptian characters and &mdash; thinking that they were the Egyptian symbols composed by Abraham &mdash; proceeded to "translate" from these characters. In such a scenario the actual Book of Abraham translation could still be based on a real manuscript, but not on what Joseph thought was the manuscript. Whichever scenario, we need not reject Joseph's prophetic calling. The evidence from antiquity &mdash; both in Abrahamic tradition and in the Jewish recontextualization of Egyptian vignettes and dramas &mdash; lends support to the claim that Joseph translated (albeit by unconventional means) the Book of Abraham from an authentic ancient source.
 
==Conclusion==
When we critically examine the charges against the Book of Abraham in light of what we now know about ancient Jewish traditions and the adaptation of Egyptian iconography, we find that an ancient Book of Abraham is not only plausible, but believable.
 
==Endnotes==
#{{note|hc1}}''History of the Church'' 2:235, 236, 348&ndash;351.
#{{note|rhodes1}}Michael D. Rhodes, "[http://home.comcast.net/~michael.rhodes/JosephSmithHypocephalus.pdf The Joseph Smith Hypocephalus...Twenty Years Later]."
#{{note|rhodes2}}Ibid.
#{{note|nibley1}}Hugh W. Nibley, "The Unknown Abraham," ''Improvement Era'' (January 1969), 26.
#{{note|abrtrad1}}See John A. Tvedtnes, Brian M. Hauglid, and John Gee, eds., ''Traditions About the Early Life of Abraham'' (Provo: FARMS, 2001).
#{{note|astpapcov1}}For some of the parallels see Hugh Nibley, ''Abraham in Egypt,'' 8&ndash;40; John Gee, William J. Hamblin, and Daniel C. Peterson, "'And I Saw the Stars': The Book of Abraham and Ancient Geocentric Astronomy," ''Astronomy Papyrus, and Covenant'' (Provo: FARMS, 2005), 1&ndash;16.
#{{note|testabr1}}See Jeff Lindsay, "[http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Abraham.shtml Could there have been a real Egyptian scroll that actually, literally discussed Abraham?]" (accessed 23 September 2005); Michael D. Rhodes, "The Book of Abraham: Divinely Inspired Scriptures," ''FARMS Review'' 4/1 (1992), 120&ndash;6; Hugh Nibley, "The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham," ''Sunstone'' (December 1979), 49&ndash;51; Kerry Shirts, "[http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/egyptian.htm The Book of the Dead and the Book of Abraham]"; Hugh W. Nibley, ''Abraham in Egypt,'' eds., Gary P. Gillum and Michael P. Lyon (Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1999).
#{{note|phone1}}See John A. Tvedtnes, "Authentic Ancient Names and Words in the Book of Abraham and Related Kirtland Egyptian Papers," presentation at the 2005 FAIR Conference; Kerry Shirts, "[http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/onthe.htm On the Names of the Four Canopic Jars in Facsimile 1]."
#{{note|astpapcov2}}Gee, Hamblin, and Peterson, "'And I Saw the Stars'", 5.
#{{note|astpapcov3}}Ibid., 8.
#{{note|astpapcov4}}Ibid., 9.
#{{note|astpapcov5}}Ibid.
#{{note|astpapcov6}}Ibid., 10.
#{{note|gee1}}John Gee, "Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts," Ensign (July 1992), 60&ndash;?; John Gee, "Abracadabra, Isaac and Jacob," ''FARMS Review'' 7:1 (1995), 19&ndash;84.
#{{note|guidejsp1}}John Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri'' (Provo: FARMS, 2000), 12&ndash;13.
#{{note|nibley2}}Hugh W. Nibley, "Phase One," ''Dialogue'' 3/2 (Summer 1968), 101.
#{{note|gee2}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 12&ndash;13.
#{{note|gee3}}John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.
#{{note|gee4}}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), 192.
#{{note|barney1}}Kevin L. Barney, "The Facsimiles and Semitic Adaptation of Existing Sources," ''Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant,'' 115&ndash;116.
#{{note|barney2}}Ibid., 117&ndash;118.
#{{note|osiris1}}Barney, "The Facsimiles," 119&ndash;21; Blake T. Ostler, "Abraham: An Egyptian Connection" (FARMS paper, 1981); Kerry Shirts, "[http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/abraham.htm Abraham, Father of the Faithful, or Osiris, Pagan Egyptian God?]")
#{{note|osiris2}}Charles M. Larson, ''By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri'' (Grand Rapids, MI: Institute for Religious Research, 1992), 102.
#{{note|barney3}}Barney, "The Facsimiles," 114.
#{{note|barney4}}Ibid., 123; see also Tvedtnes, "Authentic Ancient Names."
#{{note|barney5}}Ibid., 123.
#{{note|barney6}}Ibid., 126.
#{{note|hc2}}''History of the Church'' 2:236.
#{{note|marquardt1}}Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note &mdash; Hugh Nibley's ''Abraham in Egypt''" (2000).
#{{note|gee5}}John Gee, "A History of the Joseph Smith Papyri and the Book of Abraham" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 15.
#{{note|gee6}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 23&ndash;24.
#{{note|gee7}}Ibid., 28.
#{{note|appleby1}}William I. Appleby Journal, 5 May 1841, ms. 1401 1, pp. 71&ndash;72, LDS Church Archives; as quoted in Gee, "Eyewitness, Hearsay, and Physical Evidence," 184.
#{{note|caswall1}}Henry Caswall, ''The City of the Mormons; or, Three Days at Nauvoo, in 1842'' (London: Rivington, 1842), 23; quoted in Gee, "Eyewitness, Hearsay, and Physical Evidence," 186.
#{{note|shirts1}}Kerry A. Shirts, "[http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/charles.htm On Wings & Thumbs & Other Things]"; Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 38.
#{{note|shirts2}}Kerry A. Shirts, "[http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/rename.htm On Anubis, Masks, and Uniqueness of Facsimile #1 in the Book of Abraham]."
#{{note|nibley3}}Hugh W. Nibley, "[http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=121 The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers]," ''BYU Studies'' 11/1 (Summer 1971), 350&ndash;99.
#{{note|barney7}}Barney, "The Facsimiles," 127.
 
==Further reading==
 
===FAIR web site===
*FAIR Topical Guide: [http://fairlds.org/apol/ai125.html Book of Abraham]
 
===External links=== <!--Links to external web pages-->
*John Gee, [http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=171 "Abracadabra, Isaac and Jacob"], ''FARMS Review of Books'' 7/1 (1995): 19&ndash;84
*Kerry Shirts, [http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/abraham.htm "Abraham, Father of the Faithful, Or Osiris, Pagan Egyptian God?"], ''Mormonism Researched'' (accessed 6 October 2005).
<!--
===Printed material===
-->

Latest revision as of 02:59, 2 May 2024


An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose.

—Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist, p. 46
∗       ∗       ∗


The Joseph Smith Papyri

Summary: Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a hypocephalus (Facsimile 2). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below. [1]

Video published by the Church History Department.

Load video
YouTube

Jump to Subtopic:


See also: Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers


Online source documents


The Joseph Smith Papyri: Source Quotes

Summary: A collection of source quotes related to the Joseph Smith Papyri


Jump to details:


Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession


Jump to details:


When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?

Summary: Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the Improvement Era (the predecessor to the Ensign) less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum. The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham.


Jump to details:


Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?

Summary: We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost. 4) Perhaps there was a way of understanding the Egyptian ideograms anciently that is unknown to Egyptology in our day, yet to be discovered, deciphered or acknowledged, that could yield an interpretation of a text that is different than the standard Egyptological reading.

Load video
YouTube

Jump to Subtopic:


The Kirtland Egyptian Papers

Summary: Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes.

Load video
YouTube

Jump to Subtopic:
Articles about Joseph Smith
Life and Character
Youth
Revelations and the Church
Prophetic Statements
Society
Plural marriage (polygamy)
Death

Overview
Accuracy of Church History
Forgeries and folklore

What are the Kinderhook Plates?

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127

Book of Mormon Central, KnoWhy #454: What Do the Kinderhook Plates Reveal About Joseph Smith’s Gift of Translation? (Video)

The Kinderhook Plates are a forged set of metal plates that were given to Joseph Smith to translate

Image of front and back of four of the six Kinderhook plates are shown in these facsimiles (rough copies of even earlier published facsimiles), which appeared in 1909 in History of the Church, 5:374–375. Volume 5 link

A set of small plates, engraved with characters of ancient appearance, were purported to have been unearthed in Kinderhook, Illinois, in April 1843. The so-called "Kinderhook plates" have been something of an enigma within the Mormon community since they first appeared. While there are faithful LDS who take a number of different positions on the topic of these artifacts, most have concluded that they were fakes.

Joseph Smith appears to have had the plates in his possession for about five days.

Joseph Smith's personal secretary, William Clayton said,

President Joseph has translated a portion [of the Kinderhook plates], and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found; and he was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom through the ruler of heaven and earth.

Chemical analysis performed by the Chicago Historical Society on one of the plates in 1981 showed that the plates were fake.[2] Before the release of the CHS' analysis, criticism of the episode from those outside of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was infrequent.[3] After the release, criticism became much more frequent.[4] All critics have believed that this episode brings into question any claim of "inspiration" that Joseph used to translate the Kinderhook Plates and by extension any other revelations he received.

Joseph Smith "translated" a portion of those plates, not by claiming inspiration, but by comparing characters on the plates to those on his "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language" (GAEL)

However, Joseph Smith "translated" a portion of those plates, not by claiming inspiration, but by comparing characters on the plates to those on his "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language" (GAEL). (The GAEL was composed in Kirtland about the time of the translation of the Book of Abraham.) Joseph found one of the most prominent characters on the plates to match a character on the second page of characters in the GAEL. Both were boat shaped. The GAEL interpretation of this boat-shaped character included everything that William Clayton said Joseph said.

Corroborating this is a letter in the New York Herald for May 30th, 1843, from someone who signed pseudonymously as "A Gentile." Research shows "A Gentile" to be a friendly non-Mormon then living in Nauvoo by the name of Sylvester Emmons.[5] He wrote:

The plates are evidently brass, and are covered on both sides with hieroglyphics. They were brought up and shown to Joseph Smith. He compared them, in my presence, with his Egyptian Alphabet…and they are evidently the same characters. He therefore will be able to decipher them.

We know that Joseph was interested in languages. He studied Greek, Hebrew, and German in a secular manner. Therefore, we can easily believe that he attempted to translate the Kinderhook plates without assuming prophetic powers, which powers consequently remain credible.

There are 11 important documents to deal with when dealing with the Kinderhook Plates. This article examines all of them.

There exist several accounts that describe the plates. Not all of the account agree on the details.

William Clayton 1 May 1843

I have seen 6 brass plates which were found in Adams County by some persons who were digging in a mound. They found a skeleton about 6 feet from the surface of the earth which was 9 foot high. [At this point there is a tracing of a plate in the journal.] The plates were on the breast of the skeleton. This diagram shows the size of the plates being drawn on the edge of one of them. They are covered with ancient characters of language containing from 30 to 40 on each side of the plates. Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharoah king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth. [6]

Charlotte Haven 2 May 1843

Charlotte Haven claimed to have heard from a friend that Joseph:

said that the figures or writing on them was similar to that in which the Book of Mormon was written...thought that by the help of revelation he would be able to translate them. So a sequel to that holy book may soon be expected.[7]

Brigham Young 3 May 1843

Brigham Young also drew an outline of one of the Kinderhook plates in a small notebook/diary that he kept. Inside the drawing he wrote:

May 3—1843. I had this at Joseph Smith’s house. Found near Quincy.[8]

The Quincy Whig 3 May 1843

The Quincy Whig (a newspaper from a local town near Kinderhook) published their reaction to the plates. It reads:

Finally, a company of ten or twelve repaired to the mound, and assisted in digging out the shaft commenced by Wiley. After penetrating the mound about 11 feet, they came to a bed of limestone, that had apparently been subjected to the action of fire, they removed the stone, which were small and easy to handle, to the depth of two feet more, when they found SIX BRASS PLATES, secured and fastened together by two iron wires, but which were so decayed, that they readily crumbled to dust upon being handled. The plates were so completely covered with rust as almost to obliterate the characters inscribed upon them; but after undergoing a chemical process, the inscriptions were brought out plain and distinct... [9]

Times and Seasons Editorial 3 or 4 of May 1843

Mr. Smith has had those plates, what his opinion concerning them is, we have not yet ascertained. The gentleman that owns them has taken them away, or we should have given a fac simile of the plates and characters in this number. We are informed however, that he purposes returning with them for translation; if so, we may be able yet to furnish our readers with it.

Joseph Smith Journal 7 May 1843

Joseph Smith's journal entry for 7 May 1843 reads:

May 7[th] Sunday 1843. forenoon visited by several gentlemen concerning the plates which were dug out of a mound near quncy [Quincy] sent by Wm Smith to the office for Hebrew Bible & Lexicon— Mr Vickers the wire dancer called. A.M.— court of 1st Preside[n]cy met & adjond [adjourned] one week, 2 P.P. [p.m.] 399President not well— councellors acted.—

evening preaching by Elder [Orson] Hyde text Luke 21 chapter.[10]

Parley P. Pratt's account 7 May 1843

Parley P. Pratt's account conflicts with Clayton's in some regards:

Six plates having the appearance of Brass have lately been dug out of a mound by a gentleman in Pike Co. Illinois. They are small and filled with engravings in Egyptian language and contain the genealogy of one of the ancient Jaredites back to Ham the son of Noah. His bones were found in the same vase (made of Cement). Part of the bones were 15 ft. underground. ... A large number of Citizens have seen them and compared the characters with those on the Egyptian papyrus which is now in this city. [11]

Comparison of Clayton and Pratt Accounts of Kinderhook Plates

Story Element Clayton Account Clayton Correct? Pratt Account Pratt Correct?
Skeleton Yes Incorrect Yes Incorrect
Size skeleton 9 feet Incorrect Normal size Incorrect
Depth buried 6 feet Incorrect 15 feet Incorrect
Location plates On breast of skeleton Incorrect No mention N/A
Dig site Adams county Incorrect Pike county Correct
Cement vase No mention Correct Mention Incorrect

John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff broadside 24 June 1843

The contents of the Plates, together with a Fac-simile of the same, will be published in the ‘Times & Seasons,’ as soon as the translation is completed.[12]

Wilbur Fugate 30 June 1879

Wilbur Fugate, one of the perpetrator's of the hoax, wrote a few decades later:

Our plans worked admirably. A certain Sunday was appointed for the digging. The night before, Wiley went to the Mound where he had previously dug to the depth of about eight feet, there being a flat rock that sounded hollow beneath, and put them under it. On the following morning quite a number of citizens were there to assist in the search, there being two Mormon elders present (Marsh and Sharp). The rock was soon removed but some time elapsed before the plates were discovered. I finally picked them up and exclaimed, 'A piece of pot metal!' Fayette Grubb snatched them from me and struck them against the rock and they fell to pieces. Dr. Harris examined them and said they had hieroglyphics on them. He took acid and removed the rust and they were soon out on exhibition. Under this rock (which) was dome-like in appearance (and) about three feet in diameter, there were a few bones in the last stage of decomposition, also a few pieces of pottery and charcoal. There was no skeleton found. [13]

Later he declared in affidavit:

Those plates are a HUMBUG, gotten up by Robert Wiley, Bridge Whitton and myself. … None of the nine persons who signed the certificate knew the secret, except Wiley and I. We read in Pratt’s prophecy that ‘Truth is yet to spring out of the earth.’ [The quote is from Parley P. Pratt’s 1837 missionary tract Voice of Warning.] We concluded to prove the prophecy by way of a joke. We soon made our plans and executed them. Bridge Whitton cut them out of some pieces of copper; Wiley and I made the hieroglyphics by making impressions on beeswax and filling them with acid and putting it on the plates. When they were finished we put them together with rust made of nitric acid, old iron and lead, and bound them with a piece of hoop iron, covering them completely with the rust.[14]

Stanley Kimball Article (Ensign, Aug 1981)

Stanley Kimball published findings demonstrating the plates a hoax:

A recent electronic and chemical analysis of a metal plate (one of six original plates) brought in 1843 to the Prophet Joseph Smith in Nauvoo, Illinois, appears to solve a previously unanswered question in Church history, helping to further evidence that the plate is what its producers later said it was—a nineteenth-century attempt to lure Joseph Smith into making a translation of ancient-looking characters that had been etched into the plates.[15]

Why does History of the Church say that Joseph Smith said "I have translated a portion of them..."?

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
This shows the hostile "Mormoninfographic" that is accurate, but will still probably misread readers because it doesn't explain the whole story.

History of the Church was written by others in the "first person," as if Joseph wrote it himself

The following is from Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to Be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign, August 1981 off-site

These two oblique references to a “translation” were followed thirteen years later by a more direct published statement that until recently was wrongly thought to have been written by Joseph Smith himself. On September 3 and 10, 1856, the following paragraphs appeared in the Deseret News as part of the serialized “History of Joseph Smith”:

“[May 1, 1843:] I insert fac similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. R. Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton, and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

“I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.” (Then followed a reprint of material from the Times and Seasons article.)

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”

Did Joseph Smith attempt to translate the Kinderhook Plates?

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
This data was introduced by Don Bradley, "'President Joseph Has Translated a Portion': Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates," Proceedings of the 2011 FAIR Conference (August 2011). link video

Joseph Smith attempted to translate a character on the Kinderhood Plates by matching it to his "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL)"

Don Bradley presented compelling evidence during his 2011 FAIR Conference presentation that Joseph Smith did indeed attempt to translate a character on the Kinderhook Plates.[16] Bradley noted that William Clayton's account is likely representing personal and specific knowledge acquired from Joseph Smith, since evidence indicates that he made his journal entries that day while he was at the Prophet's home. Clayton's account states that

Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharoah king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.

Bradley noted that one of the most prominent characters on the Kinderhook Plates (a symbol shaped like a boat), when broken down into its individual elements matched a symbol found on page 4 (the second page of characters) of the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL), often referred to as the "Egyptian Alphabet. The GAEL provides meanings for the individual symbols, and the meaning assigned to the particular symbol found on the plates supports the translation reported to have been provided by Joseph.

The conclusion is that Clayton's account appears to be accurate, that Joseph did attempt to translate "a portion" of them by non-revelatory means, and the translation provided matches a corresponding symbol and explanation in the GAEL.

  • As William Clayton noted in his journal, Joseph "translated a portion" of the Kinderhook plates. Joseph attempted to translate one of the characters on the plates by matching it to a similar character on the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL), a document that was produced in the same timeframe as the Book of Abraham. It is from the GAEL that he derived the "descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh" meaning.


Did Joseph attempt to translate the Kinderhook Plates using the "gift and power of God?"

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
This shows the hostile "Mormoninfographic" that tells part of the story, but will still probably misread readers.

Joseph apparently did not attempt to translate by the "gift and power of God". Joseph never translated more than the single character

At the time that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, he only claimed the ability to translate by the "gift and power of God." Over time, Joseph studied other languages and wished to learn to translate by other means. His attempt to use the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (a document that he and others had created) to attempt a translation of the Kinderhook Plates fits in with this desire. Since only a single character "matched," Joseph would have been unable to continue to translate the plates in this manner. This may explain why such a translation was never produced: beyond the single character which happened to match, it would not have even been possible to translate the fraudulent plates either manually or by the "gift and power of God." Therefore, no translation was ever produced.

What does Joseph's attempt to translate the Kinderhook Plates tell us about his "gift of translation?"

Joseph's attempt to translate manually tells us that he didn't attempt to translate the plates using the "gift and power of God"

A critical graphic from "mormoninfographics" states that "Joseph didn't discern the fraud. The LDS Church now concedes it's a hoax. What does this tell us about Joseph Smith's gift of translation?"

Simply put, Joseph's attempt to translate the plates manually tells us that he didn't attempt to translate the plates using the "gift and power of God."

Why is the statement of William Clayton regarding the Kinderhook Plates in History of the Church written as if Joseph Smith himself said it?

History of the Church was written in the "first person" after Joseph's death

It should be noted that the critical "mormoninfographic" includes a portion of a quote from History of the Church that is written as if it came from Joseph Smith.

The graphic is correct, but it is useful to know the actual source of the quote used by History of the Church.:

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters. I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

The quote in question was written in William Clayton's journal. It was rewritten in the first person (as if Joseph Smith had said it himself) when it was included in History of the Church. Clayton's journal is the primary source, which was used in History of the Church (a secondary source).

The quote by William Clayton is indeed accurate: Joseph Smith did attempt to translate a portion of the Kinderhook Plates. This is explained in the following section.

The following is from Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to Be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign, August 1981 off-site

These two oblique references to a “translation” were followed thirteen years later by a more direct published statement that until recently was wrongly thought to have been written by Joseph Smith himself. On September 3 and 10, 1856, the following paragraphs appeared in the Deseret News as part of the serialized “History of Joseph Smith”:

“[May 1, 1843:] I insert fac similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. R. Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton, and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

“I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.” (Then followed a reprint of material from the Times and Seasons article.)

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”

Could the "Egyptian Alphabet" used in an attempt to translate the Kinderhook plates have actually been the Anthon transcript?

Summary: A non-Mormon made the following statement regarding the Kinderhook Plates: ""They were brought up and shown to Joseph Smith. He compared them in my presence with his Egyptian alphabet, which he took from the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated..." Why does the non-Mormon eyewitness say that the "Egyptian Alphabet" was "from the plates which the Book of Mormon was translated?"

Don Bradley, "‘President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates"

Don Bradley,  Proceedings of the 2011 FAIR Conference, (August 2011)

So, a larger conclusion that we can draw is that we’ve got both the smoking-gun – the GAEL that he uses to translate, and we’ve got an eyewitness. We know exactly how Joseph Smith attempted to translate from the Kinderhook plates and obtain the content that Clayton says he did. A larger conclusion, then, that we can draw is that Joseph Smith translated from the Kinderhook plates not by revelation, but by non-revelatory means.

Click here to view the complete article

Learn more about the Kinderhook plates
Key sources
  • Don Bradley, "'President Joseph Has Translated a Portion': Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates," Proceedings of the 2011 FAIR Conference (August 2011). link video
  • Saints (lds.org 2018) "Kinderhook Plates"
  • Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to Be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign 11/8 (August 1981): 66.off-site
Wiki links
FAIR links
  • Ask the Apologist: How do we explain the early comments about the Kinderhook Plates? FAIR link
Online
Video
  • "The Kinderhook plates," BH Roberts Foundation print-link. Video version: "Was Joseph Smith tricked by the Kinderhook Plates?,"  (5 January 2024). video-link.
  • Don Bradley 2011 FairMormon Conference Presentation
Load video
YouTube

  • The Interpreter Foundation
Load video
YouTube

  • Saints Unscripted "Do the Kinderhook Plates Prove Joseph Smith Was a False Prophet?"
Load video
YouTube

Print
  • Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 5:372. Volume 5 link
Navigators
Sub categories

Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources

Notes

  1. ↑ Criticisms regarding the Book of Abraham and Joseph Smith papyri are raised in the following publications: “Universalism in Ohio,” Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate (Utica, New York) (12 September 1835): 291. off-site; Edward H. Ashment, The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review (Salt Lake City: Resource Communications, 1993), 1–.; 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), 1–.; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," Salt Lake City Messenger 82 (September 1992): 1–12.; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), Chapter 11.( Index of claims ); Watchman Fellowship, The Watchman Expositor (Page 3)
  2. ↑ Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to be a Nineteenth Century Hoax," Ensign 11 (August 1981).
  3. ↑ Notable works that mentioned it are William Alexander Linn, The Story of the Mormons: From the Date of Their Origin to the Year 1901 (New York: Macmillan, 1902) and Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Archaeology and the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Modern Microlm, 1969).
  4. ↑ Edward J. Decker and Dave Hunt, The God Makers: A Shocking Exposé of What the Mormon Church Really Believes (Eugene, OR: Harvest, 1984), 99–115; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?, 4th ed.(Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987); John Ahmanson, “The Book of Mormon," Ahmanson’s Secret History: A Translation of Vor Tids Muhamed, trns. Gleason L. Archer, (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1984), 75–102; Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), 30–34, 259; Jeremy T. Runnells, CES Letter: My Search for Answers to My Mormon Doubts (American Fork, UT: CES Letter Foundation, 2017), 77–80.
  5. ↑ Don Bradley and Mark Ashurst-McGee, “‘President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Joseph Smith and the Mistranslation of the Kinderhook Plates,” Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith's Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity, eds. Michael Hubbard McKay, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Brian M. Hauglid (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2020), 499–502.
  6. ↑ William Clayton Diary, 1 May 1843. Printed in William Clayton and George D. Smith (editor), An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1995), 100.
  7. ↑ Charlotte Haven, "A Girl’s Letters from Nauvoo," Overland Monthly 16, no. 96, December 1890, 630; letter written May 2, 1843.
  8. ↑ L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Brigham Young University
  9. ↑ Quincy Whig Wednesday, 3 May 1842.
  10. ↑ "Journal, December 1842–June 1844; Book 2, 10 March 1843–14 July 1843," p. [195], The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 30, 2019, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/journal-december-1842-june-1844-book-2-10-march-1843-14-july-1843/203
  11. ↑ Parley P. Pratt letter to John Van Cott, Sunday, 7 May 1843, original in John Van Cott correspondence, Church Archives.
  12. ↑ See "A Brief Account of the Discovery of the Brass Plates Recently Taken from a Mound near Kinderhook, Pike County, Illinois," (Taylor & Woodruff, June 24, 1843).
  13. ↑ W. Fugate to Mr. Cobb, 30 June 1879, Mound Station, Illinois and Fugate affidavit of same date; cited in Welby W. Ricks, "The Kinderhook Plates," reprinted from Improvement Era (September 1962).
  14. ↑ W. Fugate to Mr. Cobb, 30 June 1879, Mound Station, Illinois and Fugate affidavit of same date
  15. ↑ Stanley Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to be Nineteenth Century Hoax," Ensign 10 (August 1980).
  16. ↑ Don Bradley, "President Joseph Has Translated a Portion': Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates," FAIR Conference 2011.


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • Edward H. Ashment, The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review, Salt Lake City: Resource Communications, 1993.
  • 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), .
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," Salt Lake City Messenger 82 (September 1992): 1–12.
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), Chapter 11.( Index of claims )

Notes


Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=The_Joseph_Smith_Papyri&oldid=255428"