Array

The Joseph Smith Papyri: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary
 
(110 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{draft}}
{{Main Page}}
{{summary}}


{{BofAPortal}}
{{Epigraph|An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose.<br><br>
==Criticism==
&mdash;Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', p. 46}}
The are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below.
{{parabreak}}


{{CriticalSources}}
<onlyinclude>
{{T5
|L=Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri
|H=The Joseph Smith Papyri
|V=<embedvideo service="youtube">pNBzMhJFGWo</embedvideo>
|S=Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a hypocephalus (Facsimile 2). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below. <ref>Criticisms regarding the Book of Abraham and Joseph Smith papyri are raised in the following publications: “Universalism in Ohio,” ''Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate'' (Utica, New York) (12 September 1835): 291. {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=1061&REC=8}}; {{CriticalWork:Ashment:Egyptian Magical Papyri|pages=1&ndash;}}; {{CriticalWork:Larson:By His Own Hand|pages=1&ndash;}}; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," ''Salt Lake City Messenger'' 82 (September 1992): 1&ndash;12.; {{CriticalWork:Tanner:Changing World|pages=Chapter 11}}; {{CriticalWork:Watchman Fellowship:Articles|pages=3}}</ref>


==Summary==
<small>Video published by the Church History Department.</small>
===What is the relationship of the Joseph Smith Papyri to the Book of Abraham?===
|L1=Online source documents
In July 1835, Joseph Smith purchased a portion of a collection of papyri and mummies that had been discovered in Egypt and brought to the United States. Believing that one of the papyrus rolls contained, "the writings of Abraham while he was in Egypt," and "purportedly written by his own hand, upon papyrus,"{{ref|hc1}} Joseph commenced a translation. The Book of Abraham was the result of his work.
|L2=The Joseph Smith Papyri: Source Quotes
|L3=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession
|L4=When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?
|L5=Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?
|L6=The facsimiles in the Book of Abraham
|L7=Antiquity of the Book of Abraham
}}


The translated text and facsimiles of three drawings were published in the early 1840s in serial fashion in the LDS newspaper ''Times and Seasons''. The entire work was published in 1852 in England as part of ''The Pearl of Great Price'', which was later canonized as part of LDS scripture.


===What happened to the papyri after Joseph's death?===
{{SeeAlso|Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers}}
After Joseph's death, the collection was eventually sold and split up. The original papyri were thought to have been completely destroyed in the Chicago fire of 1871. Fragments, however, including the illustration represented in [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1], were discovered in 1966 in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, who gave them to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in November 1967.
</onlyinclude>


{{SeeAlso|/Identity and nature|l1=Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession}}
{{Source documents label}}
*View high [http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/egyptian-papyri resolution images of the Joseph Smith Papyri online].


===How much of Joseph Smith's papyri were recovered?===
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Quotes}}
Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocephalus hypocephalus] ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_2 Facsimile 2]). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed.
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Identity and nature}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Text}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles}}
{{:Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Preservation of Ancient Core}}


Dr. John Gee (Ph.D., Egyptology, Yale) has presented evidence demonstrating that at least 87% of the original collection is still missing.{{ref|gee2007}} Dr. Gee used a standard Egyptological calculation for estimating the amount of missing papyrus on a scroll.  These calculations rely on how tightly papyrus can be rolled, and measuring the crease marks on the rolled papyrus.


Critics who claim that we have all, or a majority, of the papyri possessed by Joseph Smith are simply mistaken.
{{Critical sources box:Book of Abraham/Papyri/Long article/CriticalSources}}
 
{{endnotes sources}}
===Do the recovered papyri include the Egyptian text of the Book of Abraham?===
<!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
No. Other than the vignette represented in Facsimile 1, the material received by the Church does not include anything like the Book of Abraham.
[[Category:Book of Abraham]]
 
===What ''is'' on the recovered papyri?===
The Egyptian characters on the recovered documents are a portion of the "Book of Breathings," an Egyptian religious text buried with mummies that instructed the dead on how to successfully reach the afterlife.
 
(This particular Book of Breathings was written for a deceased man named Hor, so it it usually called ''the Hor Book of Breathings''.)


:''Wikipedia article: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_the_dead Book of the Dead]''
[[de:Buch Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri]]
 
[[es:El Libro de Abraham/Papiros de José Smith]]
===When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?===
[[pt:O Livro de Abraão/Joseph Smith Papiros]]
[[File:IE_Jan1968_cover.jpg|thumb|400 px|right|Cover of the January 1968 issue of the ''Improvement Era'', the Church's official magazine of the time. Note the color photograph of the recovered [http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 Facsimile 1].]]
Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. No. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the ''Improvement Era'' (the predecessor to the ''Ensign'') less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum.{{ref|improvera}} The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham. Although the article erroneously identified the papyrus as the Egyptian "Book of the Dead," it was later correctly identified as a "Book of Breathings."
 
{{Detail|/Church disclosure of "Book of the Dead"|l1=Disclosure of the Joseph Smith Papryi by the Church as the "Book of the Dead"}}
 
===The date of the Book of Abraham vs. the age of the papyrus===
Modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to the Egyptian Ptolemaic period, somewhere between 220 <small>B.C.</small> and 150 <small>B.C.</small>
 
===But didn't Joseph Smith say Abraham ''himself'' wrote the material on the papyri?===
 
Joseph did say "one of the rolls contained the writings of Abraham,"{{ref|hc2}} and his scribes quoted him as saying the scroll was "written by his [Abraham's] own hand, upon papyrus."{{ref|marquardt1}} The problem is that most modern scholars (including LDS scholars) date the papyri to a few centuries before Christ, whereas Abraham lived about two millennia before Christ. Obviously, Abraham himself could not have penned the papyri.
 
The phrase "by his own hand" can simply mean that Abraham is the author of the book. Similarly, we could hold a modern printed Bible in our hands, point to 1 Corinthians, and say, "This was written by the Apostle Paul."
 
Joseph was translating the writings of Abraham, so it is quite possible that he believed that the actual scroll in his possession was written by Abraham himself. There is no evidence, however, that this belief was based on revelation.
 
{{Detail|/Dating|l1=Dating of the Joseph Smith Papyri}}
 
===Why isn't the Book of Abraham on the papyri?===
We don't know. There are several possible theories:
 
===="Revealed text" theory====
This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was not'' on the papyri; he received the text by revelation, with the papyri acting as a catalyst. This is a possibility because Joseph used the word "translation" to mean several things, including the process of receiving pure revelation. (Joseph Smith's revelations call his revision of the Bible a "translation" ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?search=D%26C+73%3A4%3B+D%26C+76%3A15%3B+D%26C+90%3A13%3B+D%26C+94%3A10%3B+D%26C+124%3A89 D&C 73:4; 76:15; 90:13; 94:10; 124:89]), even though he didn't use any Hebrew of Greek manuscripts. Also, {{s||DC|7|}} is a revealed translation of a lost record written by the Apostle John.)
 
===="Missing papyrus" theory====
This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham ''was'' on the papyri in Joseph Smith's possession, but the portion recovered from the Metropolitan Museum doesn't include it. This is a possibility because the recovered portion is less than 13% of the total material held by Joseph.{{ref|13percent}}  Eyewitnesses also reported that the length of the papyri in Joseph's possession was much more extensive than the fragments now held by the Church.{{ref|jfs1}}
 
Some of the papyri were burned in the Chicago fire and it's possible that other fragments were lost or destroyed elsewhere. Yale-trained Egyptologist, Dr. John Gee, believes that Joseph Smith originally had five papyrus scrolls (one of which was the hypocephalus).{{ref|gee1}} Of these five scrolls, only eleven fragments of two scrolls have survived. The "Scroll of Hor" (the Egyptian Book of Breathings) from where we get Facsimile 1 (and almost certainly [http://scriptures.lds.org/abr/fac_3 Facsimile 3]&mdash;which didn't survive) is incomplete.
 
Dr. Nibley writes:
 
:We are told that papyri were in beautiful condition when Joseph Smith got them, and that one of them when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House.{{ref|nibley2}}
 
Nothing like this has survived today. Dr. Gee estimates that the Scroll of Hor (likely the putative [supposed] source for the Book of Abraham) may have been ten feet long{{ref|gee2}} and that in all, Joseph may have had eight times as much papyri as what is currently extant.{{ref|gee3}} A number of scholars contend that the reason that the extant papyrus fragments don't have anything to do with the Book of Abraham is because we don't have that portion of the papyrus that served as the text from whence Joseph translated the Book of Abraham.  At the very least, the critics ought to be cautious if only 13% of the ancient scrolls are currently known!
 
{{Detail|Book_of_Abraham/Size_of_missing_papyrus|l1=How much of the original papyrus is still missing?}}
 
====Jewish redaction theory====
This theory assumes that the Book of Abraham was on a scroll which is no longer extant. While it's true that the extant portions of the JSP are from the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings and do not, according to Egyptologists, translate to anything like the LDS Book of Abraham, this doesn't necessarily mean that the translation didn't derive from Joseph's papyri. There are other scenarios that are compatible with Joseph's claims. We know from other sources, for instance, that sometimes scrolls were attached together.
 
{{Detail|/Jewish redaction|l1=Jewish redaction}}
 
===The Kirtland Egyptian Papers===
From what may be surmised from the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" the surviving Egyptian papyri are claimed by critics to be the source for the Book of Abraham. Critics point out that Egyptologists agree that these papyri are part of a collection of Egyptian funerary documents known as the ''Book of Breathings'' and do not deal with Abraham.
 
Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes. Critics charge that the KEP represent Joseph's attempt to translate the hieroglyphics from those portions that are still extant, noting that Egyptologists tell us that the alleged "translations" do not accurately reflect the meanings of the hieroglyphics. In some cases, several paragraphs of the English translation of the Book of Abraham are associated with Egyptian characters from the Joseph Smith papyri. In some instances, one Egyptian character seems to yield several sentences of English text. To the critics, this is proof that Joseph was a false prophet.
 
{{Detail|/Kirtland Egyptian Papers|l1=Kirtland Egyptian Papers}}
 
===Facsimiles===
 
{{Main|/Facsimiles|l1=Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham}}
 
Several criticisms relate to the three facsimiles associated with the Book of Abraham.
 
====Did Joseph accurately translate the facsimiles?====
[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|frame|200px|right|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]In the Book of Abraham, Joseph included three facsimiles of illustrations from the papyri, along with commentary about what the images and their individual parts represented. Some of Joseph's interpretations are similar to those of trained Egyptologists, but most are not.
 
{{Detail|/Facsimiles/Facsimile 1|/Facsimiles/Facsimile 2|/Facsimiles/Facsimile 3|l1=Facsimile 1|l2=Facsimile 2|l3=Facsimile 3}}
 
====Did Joseph inaccurately restore missing sections of the facsimiles?====
Part of the drawings (vignettes) on the papyri have been destroyed. Before the facsimiles were published, the missing sections were filled in. While it appears that Joseph or someone else "restored" these missing parts, non-LDS Egyptologists do not recognize these restorations as accurate. Critics charge that the sections that were filled in are incorrect, and that this proves that Joseph Smith was not a prophet.
 
{{Detail|Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Facsimiles/Missing portions|l1=Restoration of the missing portions of the facsimiles}}
 
==Endnotes==
#{{note|hc1}}{{HoC|vol=2|start=235, 236, 348|end=351}}
#{{note|gee2007}}John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah). (''Link forthcoming.'')
#{{note|improvera}}The 11-part series, written by Dr. Hugh Nibley and entitled "A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price", began in the January 1968 ''Improvement Era'' and ran in every issue until May 1970 (with the exception of December 1969 and February 1970). Nibley's series has been available as a FARMS reprint (N-NEP) since 1990, and several chapters became part of Nibley's book ''Abraham In Egypt''.
#{{note|hc2}}{{HoC1|vol=2|start=236}}
#{{note|marquardt1}}Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note &mdash; Hugh Nibley's ''Abraham in Egypt''" (2000).
#{{note|13percent}}John Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 23.
#{{note|jfs1}} "In 1906, while visiting Nauvoo, President Joseph F. Smith related to Preston Nibley his experience as a child of seeing his Uncle Joseph in the front rooms of the Mansion House working on the Egyptian manuscripts. According to President Smith, one of the rolls of papyri "when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House." This would have been sometime between 1843 when the Mansion House was completed and the prophet's death in June 1844, one or two years after other parts of the papyri had been cut up and placed under glass. - See {{Dialogue1|author=Hugh Nibley|article=Phase I||vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}}  See also {{IE|author=Hugh Nibley|article=New Look at the Pearl of Great Price|vol=71|date=March 1968|start=17|end=18}} and Hugh Nibley, "Judging and Prejudging the Book of Abraham," Nibley archive, 1979, 6-7; reprinted as an appendix in Robert L. and Rosemary Brown, ''They Lie in Wait to Deceive'', vol. 1, ed. Barbara Ellsworth, rev. ed. (Mesa, AZ: Brownsworth, 1982), 236&mdash;245.
#{{note|gee1}}{{Ensign|author=John Gee|article=Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts|date=July 1992|start=60|end=?}}; {{FR-7-1-5}}
#{{note|nibley2}}{{Dialogue1|author=Hugh W. Nibley|article=Phase One|vol=3|num=2|date=Summer 1968|start=101}}{{link|url=http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=1659&REC=10}}
#{{note|gee2}}Gee, ''A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri,'' 12&ndash;13.
#{{note|gee3}}John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.
 
==Further reading==
 
===FAIR wiki articles===
 
{{BookofAbrahamWiki}}
 
===FAIR web site===
 
{{BookofAbrahamFAIR}}
 
===External links===
{{BookofAbrahamLinks}}
 
===Printed material===
{{BookofAbrahamPrint}}
[[Category:Book of Abraham]]

Latest revision as of 02:59, 2 May 2024


An example of what I am talking about is the recent discovery of the papyrus scrolls from which Joseph Smith was presumed to have translated the book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. Modern scholars, looking at the scrolls, found nothing they considered to be similar to that book. I remarked at the time that such a finding didn't bother me in the least. God doesn't need a crib sheet in the form of a papyrus scroll to reveal Abraham's thoughts and words to Joseph Smith, with any degree of precision He considers necessary for His purposes. If the only function of the scrolls was to awaken the Prophet to the idea of receiving such inspiration, they would have fulfilled their purpose.

—Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist, p. 46
∗       ∗       ∗


The Joseph Smith Papyri

Summary: Joseph Smith had in his possession three or four long scrolls, plus a hypocephalus (Facsimile 2). Of these original materials, only a handful of fragments were recovered at the Metropolitan Museum. The majority of the papyri remains lost, and has likely been destroyed. There are a number of criticisms related to the recovered fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri. These criticisms are addressed below. [1]

Video published by the Church History Department.

Load video
YouTube

Jump to Subtopic:


See also: Book of Abraham/Joseph Smith Papyri/Kirtland Egyptian Papers


Online source documents


The Joseph Smith Papyri: Source Quotes

Summary: A collection of source quotes related to the Joseph Smith Papyri


Jump to details:


Identity and nature of the papyrus in the Church's possession


Jump to details:


When did the Church disclose that the Joseph Smith Papyri were an Egyptian funerary text?

Summary: Critics often assert that the Church did not identify the Joseph Smith Papyri as an Egyptian funerary text until after Egyptologists examined them. They also claim that the Church is hiding or "covering up" the papyri's actual contents. Both assertions are incorrect. In fact, the Church ran a multi-part series with color pictures of the papyri in the Improvement Era (the predecessor to the Ensign) less than two months after they were received from the Metropolitan Museum. The series repeatedly affirmed that the recovered papyri contained Egyptian funerary materials and not the text of Book of Abraham.


Jump to details:


Why is the Book of Abraham text not on the papyri?

Summary: We do not claim to know why the text of the Book of Abraham (or the missing Book of Joseph) is not in evidence on the fragments of papyrus that were recovered. Critics, of course, simply assume this to be conclusive evidence that Joseph was a fraud. From a believer's perspective, however, there are several possible theories to account for this: 1) The text was revealed much in the same manner as that of the Book of Mormon, without the need for the actual papyri, 2) The text was present on portions of the papyri that are missing, and 3) The Book of Abraham manuscript was attached to the Book of Breathings manuscript and was lost. 4) Perhaps there was a way of understanding the Egyptian ideograms anciently that is unknown to Egyptology in our day, yet to be discovered, deciphered or acknowledged, that could yield an interpretation of a text that is different than the standard Egyptological reading.

Load video
YouTube

Jump to Subtopic:


The Kirtland Egyptian Papers

Summary: Among the early Book-of-Abraham-related-manuscripts that have survived from the days of Joseph Smith are a number of papers collectively referred to as the "Kirtland Egyptian Papers" (KEP). These pages were written while the Saints lived in Kirtland, Ohio, and were recorded in the general time frame that Joseph was translating the Book of Abraham. They are in the same handwriting of several of Joseph's scribes.

Load video
YouTube

Jump to Subtopic:
Articles about Joseph Smith
Life and Character
Youth
Revelations and the Church
Prophetic Statements
Society
Plural marriage (polygamy)
Death

Overview
Accuracy of Church History
Forgeries and folklore

What are the Kinderhook Plates?

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127

Book of Mormon Central, KnoWhy #454: What Do the Kinderhook Plates Reveal About Joseph Smith’s Gift of Translation? (Video)

The Kinderhook Plates are a forged set of metal plates that were given to Joseph Smith to translate

Image of front and back of four of the six Kinderhook plates are shown in these facsimiles (rough copies of even earlier published facsimiles), which appeared in 1909 in History of the Church, 5:374–375. Volume 5 link

A set of small plates, engraved with characters of ancient appearance, were purported to have been unearthed in Kinderhook, Illinois, in April 1843. The so-called "Kinderhook plates" have been something of an enigma within the Mormon community since they first appeared. While there are faithful LDS who take a number of different positions on the topic of these artifacts, most have concluded that they were fakes.

Joseph Smith appears to have had the plates in his possession for about five days.

Joseph Smith's personal secretary, William Clayton said,

President Joseph has translated a portion [of the Kinderhook plates], and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found; and he was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom through the ruler of heaven and earth.

Chemical analysis performed by the Chicago Historical Society on one of the plates in 1981 showed that the plates were fake.[2] Before the release of the CHS' analysis, criticism of the episode from those outside of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was infrequent.[3] After the release, criticism became much more frequent.[4] All critics have believed that this episode brings into question any claim of "inspiration" that Joseph used to translate the Kinderhook Plates and by extension any other revelations he received.

Joseph Smith "translated" a portion of those plates, not by claiming inspiration, but by comparing characters on the plates to those on his "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language" (GAEL)

However, Joseph Smith "translated" a portion of those plates, not by claiming inspiration, but by comparing characters on the plates to those on his "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language" (GAEL). (The GAEL was composed in Kirtland about the time of the translation of the Book of Abraham.) Joseph found one of the most prominent characters on the plates to match a character on the second page of characters in the GAEL. Both were boat shaped. The GAEL interpretation of this boat-shaped character included everything that William Clayton said Joseph said.

Corroborating this is a letter in the New York Herald for May 30th, 1843, from someone who signed pseudonymously as "A Gentile." Research shows "A Gentile" to be a friendly non-Mormon then living in Nauvoo by the name of Sylvester Emmons.[5] He wrote:

The plates are evidently brass, and are covered on both sides with hieroglyphics. They were brought up and shown to Joseph Smith. He compared them, in my presence, with his Egyptian Alphabet…and they are evidently the same characters. He therefore will be able to decipher them.

We know that Joseph was interested in languages. He studied Greek, Hebrew, and German in a secular manner. Therefore, we can easily believe that he attempted to translate the Kinderhook plates without assuming prophetic powers, which powers consequently remain credible.

There are 11 important documents to deal with when dealing with the Kinderhook Plates. This article examines all of them.

There exist several accounts that describe the plates. Not all of the account agree on the details.

William Clayton 1 May 1843

I have seen 6 brass plates which were found in Adams County by some persons who were digging in a mound. They found a skeleton about 6 feet from the surface of the earth which was 9 foot high. [At this point there is a tracing of a plate in the journal.] The plates were on the breast of the skeleton. This diagram shows the size of the plates being drawn on the edge of one of them. They are covered with ancient characters of language containing from 30 to 40 on each side of the plates. Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharoah king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth. [6]

Charlotte Haven 2 May 1843

Charlotte Haven claimed to have heard from a friend that Joseph:

said that the figures or writing on them was similar to that in which the Book of Mormon was written...thought that by the help of revelation he would be able to translate them. So a sequel to that holy book may soon be expected.[7]

Brigham Young 3 May 1843

Brigham Young also drew an outline of one of the Kinderhook plates in a small notebook/diary that he kept. Inside the drawing he wrote:

May 3—1843. I had this at Joseph Smith’s house. Found near Quincy.[8]

The Quincy Whig 3 May 1843

The Quincy Whig (a newspaper from a local town near Kinderhook) published their reaction to the plates. It reads:

Finally, a company of ten or twelve repaired to the mound, and assisted in digging out the shaft commenced by Wiley. After penetrating the mound about 11 feet, they came to a bed of limestone, that had apparently been subjected to the action of fire, they removed the stone, which were small and easy to handle, to the depth of two feet more, when they found SIX BRASS PLATES, secured and fastened together by two iron wires, but which were so decayed, that they readily crumbled to dust upon being handled. The plates were so completely covered with rust as almost to obliterate the characters inscribed upon them; but after undergoing a chemical process, the inscriptions were brought out plain and distinct... [9]

Times and Seasons Editorial 3 or 4 of May 1843

Mr. Smith has had those plates, what his opinion concerning them is, we have not yet ascertained. The gentleman that owns them has taken them away, or we should have given a fac simile of the plates and characters in this number. We are informed however, that he purposes returning with them for translation; if so, we may be able yet to furnish our readers with it.

Joseph Smith Journal 7 May 1843

Joseph Smith's journal entry for 7 May 1843 reads:

May 7[th] Sunday 1843. forenoon visited by several gentlemen concerning the plates which were dug out of a mound near quncy [Quincy] sent by Wm Smith to the office for Hebrew Bible & Lexicon— Mr Vickers the wire dancer called. A.M.— court of 1st Preside[n]cy met & adjond [adjourned] one week, 2 P.P. [p.m.] 399President not well— councellors acted.—

evening preaching by Elder [Orson] Hyde text Luke 21 chapter.[10]

Parley P. Pratt's account 7 May 1843

Parley P. Pratt's account conflicts with Clayton's in some regards:

Six plates having the appearance of Brass have lately been dug out of a mound by a gentleman in Pike Co. Illinois. They are small and filled with engravings in Egyptian language and contain the genealogy of one of the ancient Jaredites back to Ham the son of Noah. His bones were found in the same vase (made of Cement). Part of the bones were 15 ft. underground. ... A large number of Citizens have seen them and compared the characters with those on the Egyptian papyrus which is now in this city. [11]

Comparison of Clayton and Pratt Accounts of Kinderhook Plates

Story Element Clayton Account Clayton Correct? Pratt Account Pratt Correct?
Skeleton Yes Incorrect Yes Incorrect
Size skeleton 9 feet Incorrect Normal size Incorrect
Depth buried 6 feet Incorrect 15 feet Incorrect
Location plates On breast of skeleton Incorrect No mention N/A
Dig site Adams county Incorrect Pike county Correct
Cement vase No mention Correct Mention Incorrect

John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff broadside 24 June 1843

The contents of the Plates, together with a Fac-simile of the same, will be published in the ‘Times & Seasons,’ as soon as the translation is completed.[12]

Wilbur Fugate 30 June 1879

Wilbur Fugate, one of the perpetrator's of the hoax, wrote a few decades later:

Our plans worked admirably. A certain Sunday was appointed for the digging. The night before, Wiley went to the Mound where he had previously dug to the depth of about eight feet, there being a flat rock that sounded hollow beneath, and put them under it. On the following morning quite a number of citizens were there to assist in the search, there being two Mormon elders present (Marsh and Sharp). The rock was soon removed but some time elapsed before the plates were discovered. I finally picked them up and exclaimed, 'A piece of pot metal!' Fayette Grubb snatched them from me and struck them against the rock and they fell to pieces. Dr. Harris examined them and said they had hieroglyphics on them. He took acid and removed the rust and they were soon out on exhibition. Under this rock (which) was dome-like in appearance (and) about three feet in diameter, there were a few bones in the last stage of decomposition, also a few pieces of pottery and charcoal. There was no skeleton found. [13]

Later he declared in affidavit:

Those plates are a HUMBUG, gotten up by Robert Wiley, Bridge Whitton and myself. … None of the nine persons who signed the certificate knew the secret, except Wiley and I. We read in Pratt’s prophecy that ‘Truth is yet to spring out of the earth.’ [The quote is from Parley P. Pratt’s 1837 missionary tract Voice of Warning.] We concluded to prove the prophecy by way of a joke. We soon made our plans and executed them. Bridge Whitton cut them out of some pieces of copper; Wiley and I made the hieroglyphics by making impressions on beeswax and filling them with acid and putting it on the plates. When they were finished we put them together with rust made of nitric acid, old iron and lead, and bound them with a piece of hoop iron, covering them completely with the rust.[14]

Stanley Kimball Article (Ensign, Aug 1981)

Stanley Kimball published findings demonstrating the plates a hoax:

A recent electronic and chemical analysis of a metal plate (one of six original plates) brought in 1843 to the Prophet Joseph Smith in Nauvoo, Illinois, appears to solve a previously unanswered question in Church history, helping to further evidence that the plate is what its producers later said it was—a nineteenth-century attempt to lure Joseph Smith into making a translation of ancient-looking characters that had been etched into the plates.[15]

Why does History of the Church say that Joseph Smith said "I have translated a portion of them..."?

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
This shows the hostile "Mormoninfographic" that is accurate, but will still probably misread readers because it doesn't explain the whole story.

History of the Church was written by others in the "first person," as if Joseph wrote it himself

The following is from Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to Be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign, August 1981 off-site

These two oblique references to a “translation” were followed thirteen years later by a more direct published statement that until recently was wrongly thought to have been written by Joseph Smith himself. On September 3 and 10, 1856, the following paragraphs appeared in the Deseret News as part of the serialized “History of Joseph Smith”:

“[May 1, 1843:] I insert fac similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. R. Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton, and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

“I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.” (Then followed a reprint of material from the Times and Seasons article.)

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”

Did Joseph Smith attempt to translate the Kinderhook Plates?

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
This data was introduced by Don Bradley, "'President Joseph Has Translated a Portion': Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates," Proceedings of the 2011 FAIR Conference (August 2011). link video

Joseph Smith attempted to translate a character on the Kinderhood Plates by matching it to his "Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL)"

Don Bradley presented compelling evidence during his 2011 FAIR Conference presentation that Joseph Smith did indeed attempt to translate a character on the Kinderhook Plates.[16] Bradley noted that William Clayton's account is likely representing personal and specific knowledge acquired from Joseph Smith, since evidence indicates that he made his journal entries that day while he was at the Prophet's home. Clayton's account states that

Prest J. has translated a portion and says they contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharoah king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.

Bradley noted that one of the most prominent characters on the Kinderhook Plates (a symbol shaped like a boat), when broken down into its individual elements matched a symbol found on page 4 (the second page of characters) of the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL), often referred to as the "Egyptian Alphabet. The GAEL provides meanings for the individual symbols, and the meaning assigned to the particular symbol found on the plates supports the translation reported to have been provided by Joseph.

The conclusion is that Clayton's account appears to be accurate, that Joseph did attempt to translate "a portion" of them by non-revelatory means, and the translation provided matches a corresponding symbol and explanation in the GAEL.

  • As William Clayton noted in his journal, Joseph "translated a portion" of the Kinderhook plates. Joseph attempted to translate one of the characters on the plates by matching it to a similar character on the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (GAEL), a document that was produced in the same timeframe as the Book of Abraham. It is from the GAEL that he derived the "descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh" meaning.


Did Joseph attempt to translate the Kinderhook Plates using the "gift and power of God?"

Error creating thumbnail: /bin/bash: line 1: /usr/bin/convert: No such file or directory Error code: 127
This shows the hostile "Mormoninfographic" that tells part of the story, but will still probably misread readers.

Joseph apparently did not attempt to translate by the "gift and power of God". Joseph never translated more than the single character

At the time that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, he only claimed the ability to translate by the "gift and power of God." Over time, Joseph studied other languages and wished to learn to translate by other means. His attempt to use the Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language (a document that he and others had created) to attempt a translation of the Kinderhook Plates fits in with this desire. Since only a single character "matched," Joseph would have been unable to continue to translate the plates in this manner. This may explain why such a translation was never produced: beyond the single character which happened to match, it would not have even been possible to translate the fraudulent plates either manually or by the "gift and power of God." Therefore, no translation was ever produced.

What does Joseph's attempt to translate the Kinderhook Plates tell us about his "gift of translation?"

Joseph's attempt to translate manually tells us that he didn't attempt to translate the plates using the "gift and power of God"

A critical graphic from "mormoninfographics" states that "Joseph didn't discern the fraud. The LDS Church now concedes it's a hoax. What does this tell us about Joseph Smith's gift of translation?"

Simply put, Joseph's attempt to translate the plates manually tells us that he didn't attempt to translate the plates using the "gift and power of God."

Why is the statement of William Clayton regarding the Kinderhook Plates in History of the Church written as if Joseph Smith himself said it?

History of the Church was written in the "first person" after Joseph's death

It should be noted that the critical "mormoninfographic" includes a portion of a quote from History of the Church that is written as if it came from Joseph Smith.

The graphic is correct, but it is useful to know the actual source of the quote used by History of the Church.:

I insert fac-similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. Robert Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton and were covered on both sides with ancient characters. I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the Ruler of heaven and earth.

The quote in question was written in William Clayton's journal. It was rewritten in the first person (as if Joseph Smith had said it himself) when it was included in History of the Church. Clayton's journal is the primary source, which was used in History of the Church (a secondary source).

The quote by William Clayton is indeed accurate: Joseph Smith did attempt to translate a portion of the Kinderhook Plates. This is explained in the following section.

The following is from Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to Be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign, August 1981 off-site

These two oblique references to a “translation” were followed thirteen years later by a more direct published statement that until recently was wrongly thought to have been written by Joseph Smith himself. On September 3 and 10, 1856, the following paragraphs appeared in the Deseret News as part of the serialized “History of Joseph Smith”:

“[May 1, 1843:] I insert fac similes of the six brass plates found near Kinderhook, in Pike county, Illinois, on April 23, by Mr. R. Wiley and others, while excavating a large mound. They found a skeleton about six feet from the surface of the earth, which must have stood nine feet high. The plates were found on the breast of the skeleton, and were covered on both sides with ancient characters.

“I have translated a portion of them, and find they contain the history of the person with whom they were found. He was a descendant of Ham, through the loins of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth.” (Then followed a reprint of material from the Times and Seasons article.)

Although this account appears to be the writing of Joseph Smith, it is actually an excerpt from a journal of William Clayton. It has been well known that the serialized “History of Joseph Smith” consists largely of items from other persons’ personal journals and other sources, collected during Joseph Smith’s lifetime and continued after the Saints were in Utah, then edited and pieced together to form a history of the Prophet’s life “in his own words.” It was not uncommon in the nineteenth century for biographers to put the narrative in the first person when compiling a biographical work, even though the subject of the biography did not actually say or write all the words attributed to him; thus the narrative would represent a faithful report of what others felt would be helpful to print. The Clayton journal excerpt was one item used in this way. For example, the words “I have translated a portion” originally read “President J. has translated a portion. …”

Could the "Egyptian Alphabet" used in an attempt to translate the Kinderhook plates have actually been the Anthon transcript?

Summary: A non-Mormon made the following statement regarding the Kinderhook Plates: ""They were brought up and shown to Joseph Smith. He compared them in my presence with his Egyptian alphabet, which he took from the plates from which the Book of Mormon was translated..." Why does the non-Mormon eyewitness say that the "Egyptian Alphabet" was "from the plates which the Book of Mormon was translated?"

Don Bradley, "‘President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates"

Don Bradley,  Proceedings of the 2011 FAIR Conference, (August 2011)

So, a larger conclusion that we can draw is that we’ve got both the smoking-gun – the GAEL that he uses to translate, and we’ve got an eyewitness. We know exactly how Joseph Smith attempted to translate from the Kinderhook plates and obtain the content that Clayton says he did. A larger conclusion, then, that we can draw is that Joseph Smith translated from the Kinderhook plates not by revelation, but by non-revelatory means.

Click here to view the complete article

Learn more about the Kinderhook plates
Key sources
  • Don Bradley, "'President Joseph Has Translated a Portion': Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates," Proceedings of the 2011 FAIR Conference (August 2011). link video
  • Saints (lds.org 2018) "Kinderhook Plates"
  • Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to Be a Nineteenth-Century Hoax," Ensign 11/8 (August 1981): 66.off-site
Wiki links
FAIR links
  • Ask the Apologist: How do we explain the early comments about the Kinderhook Plates? FAIR link
Online
Video
  • "The Kinderhook plates," BH Roberts Foundation print-link. Video version: "Was Joseph Smith tricked by the Kinderhook Plates?,"  (5 January 2024). video-link.
  • Don Bradley 2011 FairMormon Conference Presentation
Load video
YouTube

  • The Interpreter Foundation
Load video
YouTube

  • Saints Unscripted "Do the Kinderhook Plates Prove Joseph Smith Was a False Prophet?"
Load video
YouTube

Print
  • Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 5:372. Volume 5 link
Navigators
Sub categories

Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources

Notes

  1. ↑ Criticisms regarding the Book of Abraham and Joseph Smith papyri are raised in the following publications: “Universalism in Ohio,” Evangelical Magazine and Gospel Advocate (Utica, New York) (12 September 1835): 291. off-site; Edward H. Ashment, The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review (Salt Lake City: Resource Communications, 1993), 1–.; Charles M. Larson, By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri, 2nd ed., (Grand Rapids, MI: Institute for Religious Research, 1992), 1–.; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," Salt Lake City Messenger 82 (September 1992): 1–12.; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), Chapter 11.( Index of claims ); Watchman Fellowship, The Watchman Expositor (Page 3)
  2. ↑ Stanley B. Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to be a Nineteenth Century Hoax," Ensign 11 (August 1981).
  3. ↑ Notable works that mentioned it are William Alexander Linn, The Story of the Mormons: From the Date of Their Origin to the Year 1901 (New York: Macmillan, 1902) and Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Archaeology and the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Modern Microlm, 1969).
  4. ↑ Edward J. Decker and Dave Hunt, The God Makers: A Shocking Exposé of What the Mormon Church Really Believes (Eugene, OR: Harvest, 1984), 99–115; Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?, 4th ed.(Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987); John Ahmanson, “The Book of Mormon," Ahmanson’s Secret History: A Translation of Vor Tids Muhamed, trns. Gleason L. Archer, (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1984), 75–102; Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), 30–34, 259; Jeremy T. Runnells, CES Letter: My Search for Answers to My Mormon Doubts (American Fork, UT: CES Letter Foundation, 2017), 77–80.
  5. ↑ Don Bradley and Mark Ashurst-McGee, “‘President Joseph Has Translated a Portion’: Joseph Smith and the Mistranslation of the Kinderhook Plates,” Producing Ancient Scripture: Joseph Smith's Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity, eds. Michael Hubbard McKay, Mark Ashurst-McGee, and Brian M. Hauglid (Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press, 2020), 499–502.
  6. ↑ William Clayton Diary, 1 May 1843. Printed in William Clayton and George D. Smith (editor), An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1995), 100.
  7. ↑ Charlotte Haven, "A Girl’s Letters from Nauvoo," Overland Monthly 16, no. 96, December 1890, 630; letter written May 2, 1843.
  8. ↑ L. Tom Perry Special Collections, Brigham Young University
  9. ↑ Quincy Whig Wednesday, 3 May 1842.
  10. ↑ "Journal, December 1842–June 1844; Book 2, 10 March 1843–14 July 1843," p. [195], The Joseph Smith Papers, accessed July 30, 2019, https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/journal-december-1842-june-1844-book-2-10-march-1843-14-july-1843/203
  11. ↑ Parley P. Pratt letter to John Van Cott, Sunday, 7 May 1843, original in John Van Cott correspondence, Church Archives.
  12. ↑ See "A Brief Account of the Discovery of the Brass Plates Recently Taken from a Mound near Kinderhook, Pike County, Illinois," (Taylor & Woodruff, June 24, 1843).
  13. ↑ W. Fugate to Mr. Cobb, 30 June 1879, Mound Station, Illinois and Fugate affidavit of same date; cited in Welby W. Ricks, "The Kinderhook Plates," reprinted from Improvement Era (September 1962).
  14. ↑ W. Fugate to Mr. Cobb, 30 June 1879, Mound Station, Illinois and Fugate affidavit of same date
  15. ↑ Stanley Kimball, "Kinderhook Plates Brought to Joseph Smith Appear to be Nineteenth Century Hoax," Ensign 10 (August 1980).
  16. ↑ Don Bradley, "President Joseph Has Translated a Portion': Solving the Mystery of the Kinderhook Plates," FAIR Conference 2011.


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • Edward H. Ashment, The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review, Salt Lake City: Resource Communications, 1993.
  • Charles M. Larson, By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri, 2nd ed., (Grand Rapids, MI: Institute for Religious Research, 1992), .
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, "Solving the Mystery of the Joseph Smith Papyri," Salt Lake City Messenger 82 (September 1992): 1–12.
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), Chapter 11.( Index of claims )

Notes


Retrieved from "http://104.237.154.152/answers/index.php?title=The_Joseph_Smith_Papyri&oldid=255428"