Array

The Kirtland Egyptian Papers: Difference between revisions
Line 31: Line 31:
{{Detail|/Historical LDS approaches|l1=Historical LDS approaches to the KEP}}
{{Detail|/Historical LDS approaches|l1=Historical LDS approaches to the KEP}}


==Criticisms==
==Response==


Some of the contested issues for which such a study could bring enlightenment include the following:


===Involvement of Joseph Smith===
==Were the KEP produced prior to the Book of Abraham?==
That Joseph was involved to some degree in the project is clear. His handwriting appears on two of the documents, and there are references to the project in his journals. The extent of his involvement is a hotly contested issue and needs to be clarified. Nibley tried hard to distance Joseph from the work of the scribes. Edward Ashment has questioned Nibley's position. The extent to which Joseph dominated the process, or the scribes acted independently, or they all acted in a collaborative manner, needs to be clarified.
The placement of a translation of the Book of Abraham prior to the production of the KEP renders Ashment's chronology, and the entire discussion regarding which document came before which other documents, irrelevant. The production of the KEP after the Book of Abraham indicates that the KEP does not represent "translation documents" documenting a physical process by which translation was attempted.


===Meaning of technical terminology like "degree" and "part"===
It should be noted that this does not change the relationship of the Book of Abraham to the Joseph Smith Papyri. It does not address the issue of whether or not the text of the Book of Abraham was actually present on the Scroll of Hor (the "long scroll" theory), or whether the scroll was simply a catalyst for revelation (the "short scroll" theory).
The terms "degree" and "part" seem to be used in the KEPE as some sort of grammatical terms of art. If so, their meaning needs to be divined. Conversely, John Tvedtnes has argued that they are not grammatical terms at all, but refer to locations on the papyri where particular symbols were located; a sort of latitude and longitude system. According to this view, for example, the "first part" is what we call [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1], and the "first degree" of that part is the first column of the facsimile, while the second degree is the second column. The second part is what Nibley called the Small Sensen Papyrus (JSP XI), and the first degree of the second part is the first of its columns, counting from the right (away from Facsimile 1). Tvedtnes' explanation of the usage of these terms needs to be evaluated; in particular, as to whether his proposed system in fact holds for all uses of the terms.


===Sequencing issues===
===The earliest document in the KEP (pre-dating the recovery of the papryi) assigns meanings to non-Egyptian characters, and a later document assigns new meanings to these same characters===
Although the handwriting of the various scribes on the various texts has been identified, there are numerous sequencing issues that need to be explored. Is there a way to determine in what sequence the documents were created? Were the KEPA documents created at the same time from dictation, or were they visually copied from a single source, and if so, which is the source document? Which was written first on the page, the hieratic symbols in the left margin of the KEPA documents or the English text to the right? Were the hieratic symbols visually copied from the Sensen Papyrus, and if so, can we determine who copied them?


===Why does the scope of the English text not match the scope of the hieratic symbols in the margins of the KEPA?===
The earliest datable document in the collection is a letter from W. W. Phelps to his wife describing a selection of the "pure language". It is dated to May of 1835. The document contains a sequence of six characters, three of which may belong to a Masonic cipher. Each character is also given a name, a pronunciation and an explanation. However, what is significant is that all six of these characters appear in an identical order in other KEP documents, except they are ''given different names, sounds and explanations.'' None of these six characters come from the Papyri.
There is a substantial and obvious disproportion between the hieratic symbols in the left margins of the KEPA and the accompanying English text to the right. Critics often trot this fact out as an obvious artifact of Joseph's ignorance. But this begs the question why such a disproportion exists. The disproportion is so marked that surely even Joseph must have been aware of it, and even if he were not, the scribes involved in the project had training in other languages, such that they would have noted and objected to the disproportion. It is not enough merely to observe the disproportion, it must be explained. What did these men think they were doing? Does the juxtaposition of a hieratic symbol and an entire paragraph of English text intend to reflect a translation process, or is some other process at work, and if so, what?
 
===Some source material used in the KEP is taken from sections of the D&C===
In the KEP, when a character in the Grammar is given multiple degrees, it does so usually by taking the source text and break it up into consecutive pieces. So, the first line might be the first degree, the second line the second degree, and so on. There is evidence that some of the source material in these explanations comes from sections of the D&C rather than the Book of Abraham.  
 
 
==Do the Kirtland "Egyptian" Papers deal with Egyptian?==
===Some of the Kirtland "Egyptian" Papers do not contain Egyptian at all===
The "Egyptian Counting" document which is part of the KEP, like the grammar documents, has a character, a sound, and an explanation for each, yet none of the characters are Egyptian. Nor do they contain a single character from the Joseph Smith papyri.
 
==What was the purpose of the KEP?==
===The historical record already indicates that Joseph was interested in encoding certain items===
The historical record already confirms that efforts were made to encode certain things in order to prevent them from being read and understood by enemies of the Church. An effort to create such an encoding scheme using the KEP fits very well within the existing historical context. The Grammar seems to have been a project that suffered an early termination, and it was not pursued further.


=={{Conclusion label}}==
=={{Conclusion label}}==

Revision as of 20:45, 7 August 2010
Answers portal
The Book of Abraham
Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
    RESOURCES

FAQ:

Book of Abraham content:

Production:

    PERSPECTIVES
    MEDIA
    OTHER PORTALS
  • [Pending]


This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.

==

Questions

==

The following critical claims relate to the KEP:

  1. that the KEP were produced prior to the Book of Abraham, and that they therefore represent the "translation working papers" for the Book of Abraham. A chronology of events related to the production of the Book of Abraham produced by Edward Ashment is used by critics to support this claim;
  2. that the KEP deal with the Egyptian language, and that they demonstrate that Joseph did not understand Egyptian;
  3. that the KEPA demonstrate that the Sensen Papyrus was believed to be the source for the Book of Abraham; and
  4. that since the Sensen Papyrus is in fact not the Book of Abraham but an Egyptian Book of Breathings, whatever else the Book of Abraham may be, it is not an accurate translation of an ancient Egyptian text.
  5. that the purpose of the KEP was to provide a visible prop in order to convince people that Joseph could indeed translate Egyptian.

To see citations to the critical sources for these claims, [[../CriticalSources|click here]]

==

Detailed Analysis

==

Background

The Kirtland Egyptian Papers (KEP) are a collection of documents written by various individuals, mostly dating to the Kirtland period of Church history (early- to mid-1830s), constituting some sort of study documents relating to the Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri.

For a detailed response, see: Background and provenance of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers

Approaches to the KEP

A key assertion claimed by critics is that these documents were produced prior to the Book of Abraham manuscript, and that they therefore constitute a "smoking gun" that proves that Joseph was making up translations for Egyptian characters taken from the existing fragments of the Joseph Smith Papyri. Critics often refer to these papers as the "translation documents" for the Book of Abraham.

For many years, the KEP were not well studied. A variety of possible explanations have been offered by LDS researchers over the years.

For a detailed response, see: Historical LDS approaches to the KEP

Response

Were the KEP produced prior to the Book of Abraham?

The placement of a translation of the Book of Abraham prior to the production of the KEP renders Ashment's chronology, and the entire discussion regarding which document came before which other documents, irrelevant. The production of the KEP after the Book of Abraham indicates that the KEP does not represent "translation documents" documenting a physical process by which translation was attempted.

It should be noted that this does not change the relationship of the Book of Abraham to the Joseph Smith Papyri. It does not address the issue of whether or not the text of the Book of Abraham was actually present on the Scroll of Hor (the "long scroll" theory), or whether the scroll was simply a catalyst for revelation (the "short scroll" theory).

The earliest document in the KEP (pre-dating the recovery of the papryi) assigns meanings to non-Egyptian characters, and a later document assigns new meanings to these same characters

The earliest datable document in the collection is a letter from W. W. Phelps to his wife describing a selection of the "pure language". It is dated to May of 1835. The document contains a sequence of six characters, three of which may belong to a Masonic cipher. Each character is also given a name, a pronunciation and an explanation. However, what is significant is that all six of these characters appear in an identical order in other KEP documents, except they are given different names, sounds and explanations. None of these six characters come from the Papyri.

Some source material used in the KEP is taken from sections of the D&C

In the KEP, when a character in the Grammar is given multiple degrees, it does so usually by taking the source text and break it up into consecutive pieces. So, the first line might be the first degree, the second line the second degree, and so on. There is evidence that some of the source material in these explanations comes from sections of the D&C rather than the Book of Abraham.


Do the Kirtland "Egyptian" Papers deal with Egyptian?

Some of the Kirtland "Egyptian" Papers do not contain Egyptian at all

The "Egyptian Counting" document which is part of the KEP, like the grammar documents, has a character, a sound, and an explanation for each, yet none of the characters are Egyptian. Nor do they contain a single character from the Joseph Smith papyri.

What was the purpose of the KEP?

The historical record already indicates that Joseph was interested in encoding certain items

The historical record already confirms that efforts were made to encode certain things in order to prevent them from being read and understood by enemies of the Church. An effort to create such an encoding scheme using the KEP fits very well within the existing historical context. The Grammar seems to have been a project that suffered an early termination, and it was not pursued further.

==

Answer

==

When the Joseph Smith Papyri were recovered and the connection to the KEP first noted, Richard Howard, then historian for the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (now the Community of Christ), was quoted in the New York Times as saying that we now knew the modus operandi by which the translation of the Book of Abraham was created.[1] But this statement was premature. We do not know the modus operandi at all. If we were to give the complete KEPE, the Joseph Smith Papyri, and the sequence of hieratic symbols in the left margins of the KEPA to someone and then ask that person to recreate the Book of Abraham from those materials, he could not do it. The KEPE reflect a half-dozen phrases from the Book of Abraham, isolated and without context. But the Book of Abraham is a coherent and readily understood English text, while the KEPE is a mishmash of linguistic gobbledygook. It is completely unclear how one could possibly get the one from the other.

So what is the source of the English Book of Abraham? It would appear that the English text is a revelation to the Prophet Joseph Smith, whatever he thought he was doing in the KEP project. There is ample precedent for the Prophet receiving such coherent revelations before that did not require him to wrestle with deciphering the ancient language of the source text. For example, Joseph translated the Book of Mormon almost entirely without reference to the gold plates themselves, and Doctrine and Covenants 7 is a revealed translation of ancient parchment that was never physically given to Joseph.

The coherent words of the Book of Abraham did not really come from an analysis of the Egyptian materials before Joseph or his scribes; rather, they were uttered by the Prophet and recorded by his scribes in much the same way that all of his revelatory translation projects were done. To the critic, this simply means that Joseph made up the coherent text and dictated it; to the believer, it means that Joseph received the text by revelation and dictated it. The difference between these two points of view is a matter of faith, and not something that any amount of wrangling with the KEP can resolve definitively one way or the other.

== Notes ==

  1. [note] John Gee, "Eyewitness, Hearsay, and Physical Evidence of the Joseph Smith Papyri," p. 196.
  2. [note] Until recently this was believed to be W.W. Phelps' handwriting.
  3. [note] Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet & Grammar, Salt Lake City: Modern Microfilm Company, 1966.
  4. [note] New York Times, 2 May 1970.

Further reading

FairMormon Answers articles

The Kirtland Egyptian Papers

The Book of Abraham is "an inspired translation of the writings of Abraham. Joseph Smith began the translation in 1835 after obtaining some Egyptian papyri."[1] "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the book of Abraham as scripture. This book [is] a record of the biblical prophet and patriarch Abraham."[2]

To view articles about the Book of Abraham, click "Expand" in the blue bar:

Articles about Book of Abraham
Papyri translation and related documents
Relation to other texts
Purported issues


Video published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Load video
YouTube


Notes

  1. ↑ Introduction, Pearl of Great Price.
  2. ↑ "Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham," Gospel Topics Essays, ChurchofJesusChrist.org.

FairMormon web site

FAIR Book of Abraham materials
  • Michael Ash & Kevin Barney, "The ABCs of the Book of Abraham" (2004 FAIR Conference presentation) FAIR link
  • Michael Ash, "Book of Abraham 201: Papyri, Revelation, and Modern Egyptology" (2006 FAIR Conference presentation) FAIR link YouTube link
  • John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah) [ FAIR link
  • Brian Hauglid, "Investigating the Kirtland Egyptian Papers: Myths and Realities" (2006 FAIR Conference presentation) FAIR link

Videos

Investigating the Kirtland Egyptian Papers: Myths and Realities, Brian Hauglid, 2006 FAIR Conference (YouTube Video)

External links

Book of Abraham on-line materials

FARMS Studies in the Book of Abraham series

Individual authors

  • Kevin L. Barney, "The Facsimiles and Semitic Adaptation of Existing Sources," Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant (Studies in the Book of Abraham, No. 3), John Gee and Brian M. Hauglid, eds., (Provo: FARMS, 2006): 107–30.off-site
  • E. Douglas Clark, "A Powerful New Resource for Studying the Book of Abraham (Review of Traditions about the Early Life of Abraham)," FARMS Review 15/1 (2003): 91–95. off-site
Gee
  • John Gee, "Abracadabra, Isaac and Jacob (Review of The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review by Edward H. Ashment)," FARMS Review of Books 7/1 (1995): 19–84. off-site
  • John Gee, "'Bird Island' Revisited, or the Book of Mormon through Pyramidal Kabbalistic Glasses: Review of Written by the Finger of God: A Testimony of Joseph Smith's Translations by Joe Sampson," FARMS Review of Books 7/1 (1995): 219–228. off-site
  • 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).
  • John Gee, A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2000).
  • John Gee, "A Method for Studying the Facsimiles; Review of: A Study Guide to the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham," FARMS Review 19/1 (2007): 347–353. off-site wiki
  • John Gee, "New Light on the Joseph Smith Papyri," FARMS Review 19/2 (2007): 245–260. off-site wiki
  • John Gee, "One Side of a Nonexistent Conversation (Review of: The Papyri of Abraham: Facsimiles of the Everlasting Covenant)," FARMS Review 15/1 (2003): 81–85. off-site
  • John Gee, "Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts," Ensign (July 1992): 60.
  • John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," FARMS Review 20/1 (2008): 113–138. off-site wiki
  • John Gee, "Telling the Story of the Joseph Smith Papyri (Review of The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham: A Study of the Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri by James R. Harris)," FARMS Review of Books 8/2 (1996): 46–59. off-site
  • John Gee, "A Tragedy of Errors (Review of By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri by Charles M. Larson," FARMS Review of Books 4/1 (1992): 93–119. off-site
Hauglid
  • Brian M. Hauglid, "Nibley's Abraham in Egypt: Laying the Foundation for Abraham Research," FARMS Review 15/1 (2003): 97–90. off-site
  • Brian M. Hauglid, “Thoughts on the Book of Abraham,” in No Weapon Shall Prosper: New Light on Sensitive Issues, ed. Robert L. Millet (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011), 245–258.
  • Larry E. Morris, "The Book of Abraham: Ask the Right Questions and Keep On Looking (Review of: “The ‘Breathing Permit of Hor’ Thirty-four Years Later.” Dialogue 33/4 (2000): 97–119)," FARMS Review 16/2 (2004): 355–380. off-site
Muhlestein
  • Kerry Muhlestein, “Egyptian Papyri and the Book of Abraham: A Faithful, Egyptological Point of View,” in No Weapon Shall Prosper: New Light on Sensitive Issues, ed. Robert L. Millet (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011), 217–243.
Nibley
  • Hugh W. Nibley, Abraham in Egypt, 2nd edition, (Vol. 14 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by Gary P. Gillum, Illustrated by Michael P. Lyon, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2000). ISBN 157345527X.
  • Hugh Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Abraham, edited by John Gee, Vol. 18 in the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley (Salt Lake City and Provo, Utah: Deseret Book / FARMS, 2009). ISBN 1606410547.
  • Hugh Nibley, "The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham," Sunstone 4:5-6 no. (Issue #17.18) (December 1979), 49–51. off-site
  • Hugh W. Nibley, The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment, 2nd edition, (Vol. 16 of the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley), edited by John Gee and Michael D. Rhodes, (Salt Lake City, Utah : Deseret Book Company ; Provo, Utah : Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2005), 1. ISBN 159038539X. 1st edition GL direct link
  • Hugh Nibley, One Eternal Round, edited by Michael D. Rhodes, Vol. 19 in the Collected Works of Hugh Nibley (Salt Lake City and Provo, Utah: Deseret Book / FARMS, 2009). ISBN 9781606412374 .
  • Hugh W. Nibley, "Phase One," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 3 no. 2 (Summer 1968), 101.
  • Hugh W. Nibley, "Approach to John Gee, Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri (Review of: A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri)," FARMS Review of Books 13/2 (2001): 63–64. off-site
  • Hugh W. Nibley, "The Meaning of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers," Brigham Young University Studies 11 no. 1 (Summer 1971), 350–399.off-site
Rhodes
Tvedtnes
  • John A. Tvedtnes, "The Use of Mnemonic Devices in Oral Traditions, as Exemplified by the Book of Abraham and the Hor Sensen Papyrus," Newsletter and Proceedings of the SEHA 120 (April 1970): 2–10.
  • Benjamin Urrutia, "The Joseph Smith Papyri," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 4 no. 2 (Summer 1969), 129–134.

Printed material

Book of Abraham print materials
  • Richley Crapo and John A. Tvedtnes, "A Study of the Hor Sensen Papyrus." Newsletter and Proceedings of the SEHA 109 (25 October 1968): 1–6.
  • Richley Crapo and John A. Tvedtnes. "The Hor Sensen Papyrus as a Mnemonic Device: A Further Study." Newsletter and Proceedings of the SEHA 114 (2 June 1969): 6–13.
  • John Gee, A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2000).
  • H. Donl Peterson, The Story of the Book of Abraham: Mummies, Manuscripts, and Mormonism (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1995); ISBN 0875798462, ISBN 978-0875798462.

off-site

Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=The_Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers&oldid=79210"