FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Approaching the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham
Home > Book of Abraham Sandbox > Joseph Smith's "Incorrect" Translation of the Book of Abraham Papyri > The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham > Approaching the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham
Approaching the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham
| This page is still under construction. We welcome any suggestions for improving the content of this FAIR Answers Wiki page. |
Summary: The Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham pose a conundrum for faithful students of the Book of Abraham: there is no agreed upon method for interpreting them by scholars of the Book of Abraham. This page presents the reasons for that disagreement and some starting assumptions and procedures for those that want to learn more about the Facsimiles.
From Whose Perspective Should We Be Judging Joseph Smith's Explanations of the Facsimiles?
The illustrations were original to Abraham
To interpret them we should look to how Egyptians in Abraham’s day, or Abraham himself, would have understood them.
The illustrations were original to Abraham but were modified over time for use by the ancient Egyptians
The illustrations we have as preserved in the facsimiles are much later and altered copies of Abraham’s originals. To interpret them we should consider the underlying Abrahamic elements and compare them with how the Egyptians understood these images.
The illustrations were connected to the Book of Abraham when the Joseph Smith Papyri were created in the Ptolemaic period (circa 300–30 BC)
To interpret them we should look to what Egyptians of that time thought these drawings represent.
The illustrations were connected to the Book of Abraham for the first time in the Ptolemaic period, but to interpret them we should look specifically to what Egyptian priests who were integrating Jewish, Greek, and Mesopotamian religious practices into native Egyptian practices would have thought about them
The illustrations were connected to the Book of Abraham in the Ptolemaic period, but to interpret them we should look to how Jews of that era would have understood of them
The illustrations were never part of the ancient text of the Book of Abraham, but instead were adapted by Joseph Smith to artistically depict the ancient text he revealed/translated
We can make sense of Joseph’s interpretations by expanding our understanding of his role as a “translator.”
The facsimiles were never part of the Book of Abraham, but Joseph Smith, by revelation, perceived the meaning of the figures in their ancient Egyptian context and based on similarities syncretized many of them to details within the context of Abraham’s life.
Interpreting Joseph Smith's Explanations
How Egyptologists Arrive at Their Interpretations of the Figures
Intepretation is Not Always Clear. Depending on Intepretation, Ancient Support Increases or Decreases
Joseph Smith's explanations of the Facsimiles can be interpreted in different ways. Depending on how one interprets the explanations, the support for the explanation can become weaker or stronger.
Represent, Signify, and Make to Represent
Ruben Hedlock's Copying Reliability
Ancient Author's Composition Reliability
Approaching Facsimile 1
Approaching Facsimile 2
Approaching Facsimile 2
Facsimile 2 is a particular kind of document. It is a copy of what is known as a hypocephalus.
Before we proceed with our commentary on Joseph Smith's explanations of Facsimile 2, there is a point that should be kept in mind.
Portions of Papyrus that Contained Facsimile 2 Were Missing When the Papyrus Arrived to Joseph Smith
The original hypocephalus was missing large portions when Joseph Smith originally received it. This is confirmed by a sketch of the hypocephalus that was likely done by Willard Richards.
(Image from the Joseph Smith Papers
The missing parts of the hypocephalus correspond to Figures 1, 3, 12, 13, 14, and 15. Those portions are highlighted portions of Facsimile 2.
publication (Click to enlarge)
Figure 1 may have had its heads restored by comparison to and copying of Figure 2.
Figure 3 appears to have been taken from Joseph Smih Papyri IX (see the bottom right corner of the papyrus, depicted below).
to fill in a missing section of Facsimile 2.
Figures 12–15 were taken from Joseph Smith Papyri XI. It is because of the removal of characters from JSP XI to the hypocephalus that the translation of these characters renders nonsense in the context of the hypocephalus.
Some question whether it could be a legitimate practice to "replace" several figures of the hypocephalus with figures from other papyri fragments. We'd argue "yes" for two reasons:
- In the case of Figure 3, the same figure appears in the same spot on at least one other hypocephalus that Hugh Nibley was able to find.
- With regards to Figures 12–15, Joseph Smith may have wanted to indicate that he did not translate Joseph Smith XI. That will be explained more below.
- Joseph Smith's explanations of the figures, regardless of the figures' exact origins, have some striking earmarks of antiquity that we explore on our page commenting on Joseph Smith's explanations.