Saturday, April 25, 2009

The Book of Abraham

Q. Egyptoligists refute Joseph's Translation of the Book of Abraham.

A. This is a common criticism based upon the questionable assumption that the text of the Book of Abraham came from the text of the eleven papyri fragments recovered in 1967. While these fragments contain the original vignette from which Facsimile 1 was taken, there are good reasons to believe that the text of the Book of Abraham was on a different portion of the Joseph Smith papyri now missing.

 

First some background.

 

            In late June 1835, Joseph Smith purchased four mummies with some Egyptian papyrus that was found with them. The Prophet indicated this collection of papyri included important ancient records relating to the ancient biblical patriarchs Abraham and Joseph. These papyri, as described by those who saw it, consisted of two long rolls of papyrus as well as an unspecified number of other fragments and pieces, some of which had been damaged previous to their arrival in Ohio. In his history, the Prophet recorded that “with W.W. Phelps and Oliver Cowdery as scribes I commenced the translation of some of the characters or hieroglyphics, and much to our joy found that one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt”(History of the Church 2:236). In 1842, the text of the Book of Abraham, as we have it now was published in March an April of that same year.

 

            During this period (from 1835-1844) many people, including both friends and foes, visited Joseph Smith. Some of them described the papyrus, which he displayed freely. From these descriptions we can gain a general idea of the condition of the papyri collection when the early Mormons had them in Ohio and Illinois. At least one of the rolls, apparently the one which Joseph Smith associated with Abraham’s record, was partially damaged before it came into the Prophet’s possession. Those pieces of papyri, that were damaged were carefully cut from the outside beginning portion of the roll and placed on paper and in wooden frames under glass to facilitate their display. One of these was the original for facsimile # 1 in the Pearl of Great Price. In 1856, twelve years after the Prophet’s death, the mummies and the papyri were sold to a man named Abel Combs, who in turn sold or gave them to various people. Some of these papyri were sold to the Woods Museum in Chicago. Unbeknown to Latter-day Saints, ten additional fragments, including the original for facsimile 1 were given to his granddaughter. After several decades her family sold these to the Metropolitan Museum in New York City. In the 1870s the Woods Museum in Chicago burned down in the Chicago fire. Other papyri associated with that collection may or may have perished there.

 

            In 1967, the Metropolitan Museum in New York returned the fragments in their possession to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Eleven fragments of the papyri once possessed by Joseph Smith are now in their possession. Eight of these small fragments are parts of the Egyptian Book of the Dead. Three other fragments (the original for facsimile 1 and two adjoining pieces) originally formed the outside or beginning of one roll were part of an Egyptian text, sometimes called the Book of Breathings by Isis. Both the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings were associated with Egyptian temple practices and sometimes accompanied some Egyptian burials in order to assist the dead to successfully pass by heavenly guardians in the afterlife. None of the extant eleven fragments contain any of the text from the Book of Abraham narrative.

 

            The rediscovery of eleven fragments from Joseph Smith’s collection of Egyptian papyri, clarify some historical issues surrounding the Joseph Smith papyri and also raise several questions of interest to Latter-day Saints relating to the Book of Abraham. First, the papyri fragments which have been recovered date to a period long after the time of Abraham. Latter-day Saints assume that the papyri in Joseph Smith’s possession contained a copy of what Abraham once wrote  rather than the original document Abraham wrote with his own hand upon papyrus. Similarly, ancient biblical manuscripts contain copies of Paul’s writings which he once wrote by his own hand, even though they may date hundreds of years after the time of Paul. While Abraham may have originally prepared illustrations to accompany the text, his original illustrations may not have survived in later copies. Egyptian vignettes and motifs from a later period may have been adopted or adapted by a later scribe to accompany a copy of the Book of Abraham narrative in order to  explain or represent events and teachings in the Abraham account, much like Jews and Christians of the Hellenistic and Roman periods adapted Greek, Roman and other foreign motifs and symbols to depict Biblical events. Under this assumption, Joseph Smith’s inspired interpretations would provide, not an explanation of Egyptian funerary practices, but rather explanations of how those symbolic Egyptian vignettes and motifs were designed by Abraham or a later scribe to represent events and teachings from Abraham’s life.

 

Second, it is now clear that we don’t have all the papyri that Joseph Smith once had. This is clear from the statements of those who viewed and examined the papyri in Joseph Smith’s day. After the damaged fragments were cut off the outside of the rolls and placed under glass, visitors report being shown long rolls of papyri. What this means is that the eleven small fragments, which could be easily laid out on a small desk represent only a very small portion of what Joseph Smith once had. Although not known in Joseph smith’s day, Recent research indicates that Egyptian papyri sometimes contain several documents, including Books of the dead and other unrelated documents on the same roll or papyri. It is sometimes assumed that if the Joseph Smith papyri contained so-called funerary documents, they could not contain anything else. Current evidence suggests that the Joseph Smith papyri rolls may have contained, as other known papyri do, multiple texts. The evidence of papyri containing multiple documents allow for the possibility that the Abraham text was a secondary document on the inside of the papyrus roll. Another mistaken assumption is that because the first fragment from the outside of the Abraham roll contains the original to facsimile 1 that the accompanying text must be the text of the Book of Abraham. Some scholars note that pictures adjoining the texts on Egyptian papyri often have nothing to do with the accompanying texts, but may refer to events described in other documents on a different portion of the papyri or roll. Also, in late copies of documents, the vignettes can often get mixed up in their placement in relation to the text that is copied.

            Third, although the recovered papyri fragments contain the original vignette for facsimile one, it is clear that the accompanying text of the Egyptian Book of Breathings on this and two other fragments do not contain the text of the Book of Abraham narrative. In light of this fact, some may wonder why a Jewish scribe would associate an account about Abraham with Egyptian themes and vignettes. Although entirely unknown to in Joseph Smith’s day, there is now evidence that ancient writers, sometimes did so. Some recent scholars assert that the story that Jesus told about the Rich man and the poor man Lazarus who die and go to hades (Luke 16:19-31) may have been patterned after of adapted from the Egyptian tale of Satme Khamuas. In the New Testament story, the angels in the account are a substitute for an Egyptian figure , “perhaps Horus or the falcon of Horus.” (K. Grobel, “`. . . Whose Name was Neves,’” New Testament Studies 10 (1963): 378.). Moreover, “Abraham,” in the story related in Luke, “must be a Jewish substitute for the pagan god Osiris” who in Egypt was originally the Lord of the Amente, the Egyptian equivalent of hades (Grobel, 380).

 

            A second example is also of interest. In the Jewish apocryphal text, entitled the Testament of Abraham, which dates to the first century A.D., Abraham is shown many things before he dies, including a representation of the final judgement. In that text the patriarch describes seeing Adam and Abel and Enoch and several angels participating in various roles. Scholars who study this ancient Jewish text affirm that the description of the judgement in this ancient apocryphal story is based upon a judgement scene from the Egyptian Book of the Dead and that the Jewish scribe adopted these judgement motifs in describing a Jewish understanding of the Judgement. (George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jr., “Eschatology in the Testament of Abraham: A Study of the Judgement Scenes in Two Recensions.” Nickelsburg,  Studies on the Testament of Abraham (Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1976), 32-33, 39-40.).  The Jewish writer in this case substituted Abel for the Egyptian god Osiris, and the angels Dokiel and Puroel and other angels for the gods Anubis, Horus and Maat. Enoch the scribe fills the roll of Thoth. In other words, Egyptian religious symbols were in this case, adopted and modified by a Jewish scribe to convey an apocryphal Jewish story. Similarly, although Latter-day Saints accept the Book of Abraham as authentic scripture, not apocrypha, it is not unreasonable to assume that Jewish writer may have adapted illustrations from Egyptian religious art to accompany a copy of the Book of Abraham.

 

            It is also significant that the name Abraham appears in other late Egyptian papyri, nearly contemporary with the Joseph Smith papyri. One document contains a representation of a figure on a lion couch similar to the one portrayed in facsimile 1 of the Book of Abraham. Below this figure are the words, “Abraham who is upon . . .” It also says, “[write these] words and this image on a new papyrus.” (  John A. Tvedtnes, Brian M. Hauglid and John Gee, eds., Traditions about the Early Life of Abraham (Provo: FARMS, 2001), 501-502.). Another document speaks of “Abraham, the pupil of the wedjat eye,” an term which the Egyptian Book of the Dead applies to a deity associated with hypocephali such as facsimile 2 (Tvedtnes, Hauglid and Gee, 50). Since many of these papyri come from Thebes, where the Joseph Smith papyri were also discovered, they may shed additional light on the Book of Abraham.

 

I would highly recommend the following article by Kevin Barney, “The Facsimiles and Semitic Adaptation of Existing Sources,” in John Gee and Brian M. Hauglid, eds., (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies Brigham Young University, 2005), 107-30. There is a link to it here

 

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=40&chapid=168

 

If you would like me to make you a hard copy, just let me know and I will get one to you. Also, if you would like further explanation of anything I have said, I would be glad to go into more detail.

 

While this does not specifically relate to your question, there is evidence suggesting that the Book of Abraham is indeed an authentically ancient account that fits well into the what we now know about the age of Abraham. For example, the Book of Abraham mentions a place called Olishem (Abraham 1:10), a name which does not appear in the Bible. This name place name is attested in ancient Near Eastern documents from Abraham’s day. There are other examples of this kind of thing, which may also be of interest to you. Just let me know and I will provides copies of the material for you.

No comments:

Post a Comment