Note: This was going to be the next part of the series on the Egyptian ankh, and its relationship with the papyri and Book of Abraham, but I thought an intro to these first would be a better place to start.
Let’s return again to the subject of the ankh, and related symbols, that we’ve briefly studied, and look to see if these symbols figure at all on the Joseph Smith Papyri. As we’ve seen, these particular hieroglyphs have a strong connection to temple themes, being bestowed by the Egyptian gods in a manner reminiscent of the way eternal life is portrayed symbolically in the temple today. But do these symbols appear on the papyri from which the Book of Abraham was translated, or in the facsimiles, and what does that mean?
Many in the Church probably do not know much about the Joseph Smith Papyri or the origins of the Book of Abraham. And they don’t necessarily care to know. What we know is usually limited to the few facts that the writings were translated from some papyri that Joseph had, which also came with some mummies from Egypt. Beyond this, most other historical issues are beside the point of the actual text of the scripture, which we know is from God by the witness of the Holy Ghost.
But I believe having a deeper understanding and knowledge of the papyri illuminates the Book of Abraham in marvelous ways and is further evidence of the divine calling of the Prophet Joseph Smith, and the restoration of the temple rites in this dispensation.
But first, let’s cover some basics about the papyri’s relationship to the Book of Abraham. The best introduction to the origins of this scripture can be found in John Gee’s excellent summary A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri. It is only 70 pages long, and does an excellent job of briefly describing the history, controversies, and interpretations surrounding the papyri from which the Book of Abraham came forth. Here are some points he makes:
- Michael Chandler arrived in Kirtland, Ohio, on July 3, 1835 and showed Joseph and the saints some mummies and papyri which he had bought from an antiquities dealer in Egypt. ((John Gee, A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri, FARMS (2000), 1-5.))
- Joseph examined them and said that “one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham, another the writings of Joseph of Egypt, etc.” ((ibid., 3.))
- In July 1835 Joseph Smith and others paid $2400 for 4 mummies and “at least five papyrus documents, including two or more rolls.” ((ibid., 3.))
- “Joseph Smith began translating the papyri in early July 1835. The current text of the Book of Abraham was translated by the end of the month.” ((ibid., 4.))
- Joseph continued translating until November 26, 1835. ((ibid., 4.))
- In 1842 the translation began to be published in the Times and Seasons periodical.
- “Only three installments were published, which included about one quarter of what Joseph Smith translated. Unfortunately the location of the original manuscripts of his translation is presently unknown and thus about three quarters of Joseph Smith’s translation of the Book of Abraham is lost.” ((ibid., 4-6.))
- On November 27, 1967 some fragments of the Joseph Smith Papyri were presented to the Church, their whereabouts being unknown to the Church for over a hundred years. ((ibid., 9.))
- “To the disappointment of many, while these remaining fragments contained the original drawing for Facsimile 1, they were not the portion of the papyri that contained the text of the Book of Abraham.” ((ibid., 9.))
- “Because we do not have all the papyri that Joseph Smith had, and because those that have been preserved do not contain a copy of the text of the Book of Abraham, there is no simple answer to the question, ‘Did Joseph Smith translate the Book of Abraham correctly?'” ((ibid., 19.))
- “Some have reasoned that since the preserved papyri account for no more than 13 percent of all the papyri that Joseph Smith possessed, the Book of Abraham does not match the translation of the preserved papyri because it was most likely translated from a portion of the papyri that is now missing.” ((ibid., 23.))
- “Only the subject illustrated by Facsimile 1 corresponds with the text of the Book of Abraham; the other facsimiles correspond to portions of the Book of Abraham that were not published.” ((ibid., 34.))
The points that strike me most are that the papyri contained some of the writings of Joseph of Egypt too. Unfortunately, Joseph Smith never translated these.
We also only have about one quarter of the text that Joseph Smith did translate of the Book of Abraham. Can you imagine the scriptural treasure if our current Book of Abraham were four times longer? This would make the Book of Abraham closer to twenty chapters long instead of five. Dr. John Gee believes that the text might have continued up until the sacrifice of Isaac. ((Olivewood Bookstore lecture, June 19, 2008.))
Because we don’t have most of the text of the Book of Abraham, we don’t have an explanation of how facsimiles 2 and 3 fit into the broader picture of Abraham, such as is given for facsimile 1 in Abraham 1. The only description we have from Joseph Smith for the latter two facsimiles are an identification of the figures.
We also now know what the Egyptian text says on the other papyri fragments that were recovered, which gives some very interesting insight into our restored temple rites. ((See Hugh Nibley’s The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: An Egyptian Endowment.))
In the next part of my series on the ankh we will take a closer look at where these symbols appear in the papyri and facsimiles, and if they correspond whatsoever to Joseph Smith’s descriptions, something our critics vehemently deny.
Do I understand correctly that the existing Abraham translation is only 25% of what Joseph Smith produced? How did Gee determine that? How do we know the quantity of something we do not have or have ever seen?
In any case, I am looking forward to reading your series on the Book of Abraham.
Yes. According to Gee, we only have 25% of the text that Joseph translated of the Book of Abraham. The rest is lost. We don’t know where the manuscripts are of the original translation. The only reason we have the text we do is because it was published in the Times and Seasons. The rest of it wasn’t published in the newspaper, unfortunately. I’m not sure where Gee got his information on how long the text was. What we do know is that Joseph spent several more days after July 1835 on the translation, and none of that translation is extant today. I’ll see if I can find out more.
Not only are we missing the rest of the Book of Abraham (which, if you see how the text ends in the P of GP– rather abruptly — you’ll know that Gee was right), but we are also missing the entire Book of Joseph that the Prophet had too.
I’m interested in your stuff on the Facsimiles. I think it is highly under-appreciated.
All of the Book of Abraham that we have now was published in the Times and Seasons in March and May of 1842. However, a year later, the February 1, 1843 issue of the Times and Seasons states that “we had the promise of Br. Joseph, to furnish us with further extracts from the Book of Abraham.” But these were never published in the newspaper.
Oliver Cowdery noted in December 1835 that he thought the book would take up volumes – “When the translation of these valuable documents will be completed, I am unable to say; neither can I give you a probably idea how large volumes they will make; but judging from their size, and the comprehensiveness of the language, one might reasonable expect to see a sufficient to develop much upon the mighty acts of the ancient men of God…” (Oliver Cowdery, Messenger and Advocate, 2, no. 15 (Dec. 1835): 234-236.). On the same occasion Oliver described the text as relating the stories of the fall of man, Enoch’s pillar, and Seth, subjects which are not treated in our current Book of Abraham.
H. Donl Peterson also notes, “If Anson Call’s account is accurate that some brethren in Missouri read from the writings of Abraham for nearly two hours, the Prophet translated considerably more of the papyri than is currently printed in the Pearl of Great Price. An average reader can read aloud the published Book of Abraham account in approximately thirty to thirty-five minutes” (Peterson, The Story of the Book of Abraham, 156.).
A non-member once recalled, “The Mormons have four mummies, and a quantity of records, written on papyrus, in Egyptian hierogliphics, which were brought from the catacombs near Thebes, in Egypt. They say that the mummies were Egyptian, but the records are those of Abraham and Joseph, and contain important information respecting the creation, the fall of man, the deluge, the patriarchs, the book of Mormon, the lost tribe, the gathering, the end of the world, the judgment, &c. &c. This is as near as I can recollect; if there is an error I hope some of the Mormons will point it out, and I will recall it. These records were torn by being taken from the roll of embalming salve which contained them, and some parts entirely lost but Smith is to translate the whole by divine inspiration, and that which is lost, like Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, can be interpreted as well as that which is preserved; and a larger volume than the Bible will be required to contain them” (HC 5:293).
I’ll have to do some more digging, but perhaps Gee is going off of Call’s account that the book took the brethren two hours to read. If our text takes a half-hour to read today, then the early saints might have had four times as much text originally. In any case, from these quotes we get a picture that the text was much longer than what we have printed today. It gets hard to track down exactly how much he translated, and when he translated which parts, however.
I don’t think the “writings of Joseph of Egypt” were ever translated. The last journal entry from Joseph that mentions translating on March 9, 1842 says that he was continuing to translate and revise the Book of Abraham. So while he may have had the papyri of the Book of Joseph, he probably didn’t get a chance to translate it.
Well, many members don’t pay attention to the fourth that we have, maybe the Lord withheld the rest so as to prevent us from greater condemnation for not take that seriously as well! It’s really too bad that we didn’t get at least some of the writings of Joseph as well, though. Great post, Bryce!
It’s certainly possible. We probably won’t receive the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon until we are worthy for it as well. Joseph’s writings would have been great! Thanks!
You write very well.
Thank you Twila. 🙂
Regarding the Book of Joseph, one wonders if the scroll contained the same scriptures that we have from the Brass Plates, as summarized and quoted by Nephi (2 Nephi 3:5-21 and 2 Nephi 4:2).
Where is the information about Anson Call and the Book of Abraham found. I am a relative and have his journal but no where does it mention the Book of Abraham. Is there another journal that our family doesn’t know about?