From: gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com (Glenn Clapp)
Subject: BoA Papyrus (SLCM-9/92-2/7)
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:23:20 GMT


A DEVASTATING FIND

        While the discovery that the papyri Joseph Smith believed
contained the Book of Abraham and the Book of Joseph were nothing but
pagan Egyptian funerary texts came as a great blow to church leaders, a
far more distressing development occurred. Within six months from the
time the Metropolitan Museum gave the papyri to the church, the Book of
Abraham had been proven untrue! The fall of the Book of Abraham was
brought about by the identification of the actual fragment of papyrus
from which Joseph Smith claimed to translate the book. The
identification of this fragment was made possible by a comparison with
_Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar_--handwritten documents we
photographically reproduced in 1966. Charles M. Larson gives this
information about this matter:

                "Smith's 'Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar,' as it has come
   to be called, had never really been lost or missing. For a long time
   it was simply ignored, and more recently it had been considered
   restricted. It was among that portion of early Church records the
   Mormons managed to take with them when they left Nauvoo in 1846, and
   it was included in the list of materials recorded in the Church
   Historian's Office Journal as having been deposited in the
   Historian's vault in Salt Lake City in 1855.... as late as 1960...
   Dr. Sperry remarked at BYU's _Pearl of Great Price Conference_ that
   he did not know whether or not the Church authorities would yet allow
   it to be published, adding that he thought 'it would be a little
   premature, perhaps, to do it now, until we can really do a good job
   of it.'

                "Others who had occasion to come into contact with the
   material apparently disagreed with the Church's reluctance in the
   matter. Late in 1965 a microfilm copy of the entire work was 'leaked'
   to Jerald and Sandra Tanner of _Modern Microfilm Company_ (now Utah
   Lighthouse Ministry). The Tanners were former Mormons who were
   rapidly gaining a reputation for printing documents relating to
   Mormonism that, though authentic, made Church officials
   uncomfortable. By 1966 the Tanners had produced the first complete
   photomechanical reprint and transcription of the entire _Egyptian
   Alphabet and Grammar_.

                "But contrary to what most Mormons evidently expected,
   publication of the _Alphabet and Grammar_ in no way substantiated
   Joseph Smith's ability to translate ancient Egyptian. Quite the
   opposite, for the book turned out to be nothing but page after page
   of nonsensical gibberish. Though it had apparently succeeded at one
   time in impressing unsophisticated minds, the work was unable to
   withstand the scrutiny of experts.

                "Professional Egyptologists to whom the _Alphabet and
   Grammar_ was submitted for examination were quick to point out that
   the material in Joseph Smith's notebook bore no resemblance at all to
   any correct understanding of the ancient Egyptian language. As one of
   them, I.E. Edwards, put it, the whole work was 'largely a piece of
   imagination and lacking in any kind of scientific value.' He added
   that it reminded him of 'the writings of psychic practitioners which
   are sometimes sent to me.'" (_By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus_, pages
   4243)

        When characters in the original Egyptian papyri were compared
with those copied into the translation manuscripts of the Book of
Abraham, found in _Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar_, it
became apparent that one piece of papyrus supplied the characters which
Joseph Smith claimed to translate as the Book of Abraham! This papyrus
was identified in the Mormon Church's publication _Improvement Era_,
Feb. 1968, p. 40-I, as "Xl. Small 'Sensen' text (unillustrated)." We
presented photographic evidence that Joseph Smith used the "Sensen' text
to create his Book of Abraham in the March 1968 issue of the _Salt Lake
City Messenger_. In _Mormonism--Shadow or Reality?_ we have additional
proof that Smith used this papyrus. Surprisingly, _Dialogue: A Journal
of Mormon Thought_, asked us to work with Grant Heward to prepare an
article presenting the evidence. This article, "The Source Of The Book
Of Abraham Identified," was published in _Dialogue_, Summer 1968, pages
92-98.

        Egyptologist Klaus Baer accepted this identification without
question. Speaking of the "Sensen" papyrus, Dr. Baer wrote: "Joseph
Smith thought that this papyrus contained the Book of Abraham." (Ibid.,
page 111) In footnote 11 of the same article, Professor Baer observed:
"This identification is now certain." Mormon scholar Richley Crapo spoke
of "the startling fact that one of the papyri of the Church collection,
known as the Small Sen-Sen Papyrus, contained the same series of
hieratic symbols, which had been copied, in the same order, into the
Book of Abraham manuscript next to verses of that book! In other words,
there was every indication that the collection of papyri in the hands of
the Church contained the source which led to a production of the Book of
Abraham." (Book of Abraham Symposium, LDS Institute of Religion, Salt
Lake City, April 3, 1970, p. 27)

        Although Mormon apologist Hugh Nibley later reversed his
position in a desperate attempt to save the Book of Abraham, in 1968 he
frankly admitted that Joseph Smith used the "Sensen" papyrus for the
text of the Book of Abraham. At a meeting held at the University of Utah
on May 20, 1968, Dr. Nibley made these comments:

                "Within a week of the publication of the papyri,
   students began calling my attention... to the fact that, the very
   definite fact that, one of the fragments seemed to supply all of the
   symbols for the Book of Abraham. This was the little 'Sensen' scroll.
   Here are the symbols. The symbols are arranged here, and the
   interpretation goes along here and this interpretation turns out to
   be the Book of Abraham. Well, what about that? Here is the little
   'Sensen,' because that name occurs frequently in it, the papyrus in
   which a handful of Egyptian symbols was apparently expanded in
   translation to the whole Book of Abraham. This raises a lot of
   questions. It doesn't answer any questions, unless we're mind
   readers."

        At one point Dr. Nibley became so desperate to save the Book of
Abraham that he suggested the "Sensen" text may have a second meaning
unknown to Egyptologists (see Mormonism--Shadow or Reality? pp. 319-20).

        In his article in _Dialogue_, pp. 111-113, Egyptologist Klaus
Baer set forth another serious problem confronting those who would try
to save the Book of Abraham: the papyrus Joseph Smith identified as
Facsimile No. 1 from the Book of Abraham was originally part of the
same scroll which contained the "Sensen" text--i. e., they were both
part of the Book of Breathings. The two pieces had been cut apart in
Joseph Smith's time and mounted on paper, but Dr. Baer demonstrated that
they fit together perfectly. Dr. Hugh Nibley later acknowledged that
they were both part of the Book of Breathings: "It can be easily shown
by matching up the cut edges and fibres of the papyri that the text of
the Joseph Smith 'Breathing' Papyrus (No. XI) was written on the same
strip of material as Facsimile No. 1 and immediately adjoining it." (The
Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri: an Egyptian Endowment, 1975, page
13)

        The text of the Book of Abraham itself demonstrates that the
drawing appearing as Facsimile No. 1 was supposed to be at the beginning
of the scroll just as Professor Baer's research has revealed. The
original manuscripts of the Book of Abraham, as they appear in _Joseph
Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar_, reveal that Joseph Smith was
using characters from the "Sensen" papyrus when he "translated" the
first chapter of the Book of Abraham. In Abraham 1:12 the patriarch
Abraham was supposed to have said the following: "And it came to pass
that the priests laid violence upon me, that they might slay me also, as
they did those virgins upon this altar; and that you may have a
knowledge of this altar, I will refer you to the representation at the
commencement of this record." It is clear, therefore, that the picture
shown as Facsimile No. 1 was the start of the papyrus scroll, and that
Joseph Smith was claiming to translate from the very next portion--the
Small "Sensen" text.

        A larger "Sensen" text follows the Small "Sensen" text. The name
"Abraham" does not appear on any of the three pieces of papyri. On the
other hand, the Egyptian name Hor appears on every piece. We have found
it in at least nine places. Although the original piece of papyrus
Joseph Smith used to prepare Facsimile No. 3 is missing, Egyptologists
have also found the name "Hor" on the printed facsimile. Professor Baer
believes the scene shown in Facsimile No. 3 ended the Book of Breathings
which was prepared for the man Hor who had died and needed the magical
papyrus which contained the charms which were necessary to reach the
"world of the hereafter."

        Hugh Nibley was willing to concede that Facsimile No. 3 was
probably part of the original Book of Breathings scroll:

                "For the Book of Breathings is before all else, as
   Bonnet observes, a composite, made up of 'compilations and excerpts
   from older funerary sources and mortuary formulas.'...

                "Of particular interest to us is the close association
   of the Book of Breathings with the Facsimiles of the Book of
   Abraham.... the text of Joseph Smith Pap. No. XI was written on the
   same strip of material as Facsimile Number 1, the writing beginning
   immediately to the left of the 'lion couch' scene. The British Museum
   Book of Breathing[s], 'the Kerasher Papyrus,' has both the 'lion
   couch' scene... and a scene resembling our Facsimile Number 3... This
   last stands at the head of the 'Kerasher' text, and suggests that our
   Fac. No. 3 was originally attached at the other end of the Joseph
   Smith Papyrus, coming after the last column, which is missing.... the
   Book of Breathings... contains the essential elements of the Egyptian
   funerary rites from the earliest times... The Book of Breathings is
   not to be dismissed, as it has been, as a mere talisman against
   stinking corpses; it is a sermon on breathing in every Egyptian sense
   of the word." (Brigham Young University Studies, Winter 1971, pp.
   158, 160, 162, 164, 166)

        All of the evidence adds up to the inescapable conclusion that
although Joseph Smith claimed to translate the Book of Abraham from the
papyrus he had in his possession, the words that he dictated came from
his own imagination. That papyrus, in fact, contains a pagan text having
nothing to do with Abraham or his religion. We have counted the names of
at least fifteen Egyptian gods or goddesses which appear on the papyrus,
but it contains absolutely nothing regarding the God of the Bible.

        Since the Joseph Smith Papyri were rediscovered and translated
by Egyptologists, a number of prominent Mormon scholars seem to have
been living in a fantasyland with regard to the Book of Abraham. Instead
of facing the truth about Joseph Smith's work, they have come up with a
number of incredible explanations. Dr. Hugh Nibley has led the parade by
setting forth all sorts of reasons why a person should go on believing
the Book of Abraham even though the evidence clearly shows it is the
work of Joseph Smith's own imagination. Since the discovery of the
papyri in 1967, Professor Nibley has stubbornly fought against the truth
with regard to the Book of Abraham. Although he put up many smoke
screens to try to divert attention from the real issues he has not been
successful in silencing the opposition. In _Sunstone_, Dec. 1979, Edward
Ashment, a Mormon Egyptologist who has worked in the Translation
Department of the church, demonstrated that Dr. Nibley's work on the
Joseph Smith Papyri was filled with serious errors. He, in fact,
demolished Nibley's arguments at every turn.

        In a response, published in the same issue, Hugh Nibley
acknowledged that "Since hearing Brother Ashment I have to make some
changes in what I have said already." (Ibid., p. 51) On page 49 of the
same article, we find this startling statement coming from the church's
chief apologist for the Book of Abraham: "I refuse to be held
responsible for anything I wrote more than three years ago."
-- 
=============================================================================
= Glenn Clapp                          |  gclapp@thunder.sim.es.com         =
= Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp.  |  My opinions are my own, but then  =
= Salt Lake City, Utah  (801) 582-5847 |  that's my opinion.                =
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc