The Papers
Browse the PapersDocumentsJournalsAdministrative RecordsRevelations and TranslationsHistoriesLegal RecordsFinancial RecordsOther Contemporary Papers
Reference
PeoplePlacesEventsGlossaryLegal GlossaryFinancial GlossaryCalendar of DocumentsWorks CitedFeatured TopicsLesson PlansRelated Publications
Media
VideosPhotographsIllustrationsChartsMapsPodcasts
News
Current NewsArchiveNewsletterSubscribeJSP Conferences
About
About the ProjectJoseph Smith and His PapersFAQAwardsEndorsementsReviewsEditorial MethodNote on TranscriptionsNote on Images of People and PlacesReferencing the ProjectCiting This WebsiteProject TeamContact Us
Published Volumes
Enhanced Facsimile ViewX
  1. Home > 
  2. The Papers > 

Explanation of Facsimile 2, circa 15 March 1842

Source Note

Explanation of Facsimile 2, [, Hancock Co., IL, ca. 15 Mar. 1842]; handwriting of ; three pages; Book of Abraham Manuscripts, CHL.
A large bifolium leaf that, when folded vertically, makes two leaves, each measuring 7⅞ × 9⅞ inches (20 × 25 cm). The paper is ruled with thirty blue lines, now faded. The document was folded twice horizontally, presumably for storage. No other docketing or markings give clues about the custodial history of the document. Unlike other Egyptian-language and Book of Abraham documents, the pages of this manuscript are not labeled with letters of the alphabet, which indicates that this document was not stored with the related documents that were marked in the late nineteenth or early twentieth century. That this item is not found on the 1956 microfilm roll of the Book of Abraham and Egyptian-language materials held in the Historian’s Office indicates that it was still stored separately at that time. The document is present with the other Book of Abraham and Egyptian-language documents in a microfilm made in 1971.

Footnotes

  1. [1]

    Genealogical Society filming of “Egyptian Alphabet,” 14 Sept. 1956, Egyptian Documents Film, CHL.

    Egyptian Documents Film, 14 Sept. 1956. Microfilm. CHL.

  2. [2]

    Historian’s Office filming of “Book of Abraham Manuscripts,” 15 July 1971, Book of Abraham Manuscripts, CHL.

    Book of Abraham Manuscripts, ca. 1835–1838, ca. 1841–1843. CHL.

Historical Introduction

In three issues of the Times and Seasons in early 1842, JS and his associates published facsimiles of two ancient Egyptian vignettes and one hypocephalus—an inscribed papyrus or other object that was traditionally placed beneath the head of a deceased person for burial—all of which were part of the collection of mummies and papyri purchased by JS and others in 1835. Each facsimile was published with an accompanying “explanation,” which provided interpretations of various figures or hieroglyphs in the vignettes. Little is known about the origins of the explanations published with the facsimiles. In the explanation featured here, the final line speaks in the editorial “we,” presumably attributing authorship to JS, the editor of the newspaper in which it would be published. The manuscript calls the explanation a “translation,” which reflects JS’s view of its content. The explanations are not, however, scholarly translations or explanations of the ancient Egyptian characters on the vignettes and the hypocephalus. The following document is a manuscript draft of the published explanation for Facsimile 2, which JS apparently prepared with the assistance of .
The original hypocephalus on which Facsimile 2 was based is not extant, though an early copy made by JS or one of his clerks indicates that such a document was among the papyri and mummies purchased by JS and others. No evidence indicates that JS studied any of the hieroglyphs from the hypocephalus in his 1835 effort to understand the Egyptian language. However, the explanation of Facsimile 2 is clearly related to that effort, since some of the entries in this document borrow heavily from the Grammar and Alphabet volume. Some definitions and transliterations from the Grammar and Alphabet volume appear in the explanation, though the two manuscripts contain different characters or hieroglyphs. At times the explanation of Facsimile 2 follows the Grammar and Alphabet volume word for word, while at other times it borrows and expands upon concepts from that volume. Some concepts and ideas in the explanation are unique, having no precedent in the surviving manuscripts related to JS’s 1835 study of the Egyptian language or in the surviving manuscripts of the Book of Abraham.
While some of the explanations accompanying Facsimile 2 correspond with those in the Grammar and Alphabet volume, the majority of the entries seem to anticipate future translation efforts. Three entries indicate that the relevant hieroglyphs “ought not to be revealed at the present time,” and one entry states that several other interpretations “will be given in the own due time of the Lord.” Another entry notes that the writings “cannot now be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God.” Several weeks after the publication of Facsimile 2 and its accompanying explanation, JS introduced the ceremony that was meant to take place inside the in , Illinois, which was then being constructed. This entry likely meant that concepts would be incorporated into the temple ceremony. It may also have referred to a plan to display the Egyptian artifacts in the temple. In 1840, an anonymous writer for the Alexandria (Virginia) Gazette reported being shown the mummies and papyri by JS in Nauvoo. The writer advised JS to “have these ancient manuscripts handsomely set, in appropriating frames, and hung up around the walls of the temple which you are about to erect in this place.” JS reportedly agreed and added that in addition to the papyri, “the translation” should be “hung up with them.”
See also Introduction to Book of Abraham Manuscripts, circa February–circa 15 March 1842.

Footnotes

  1. [1]

    Rhodes, Joseph Smith Hypocephalus, 1; Ritner, Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri, 215.

    Rhodes, Michael D. The Joseph Smith Hypocephalus . . . Seventeen Years Later. FARMS Preliminary Reports. Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1994.

    Ritner, Robert K. The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri: A Complete Edition, P. JS 1–4 and the Hypocephalus of Sheshonq. Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2011.

  2. [2]

    Book of Abraham and Facsimiles, 1 Mar.–16 May 1842.

  3. [3]

    For more on JS’s translating of the Egyptian language, see “Book of Abraham and Related Manuscripts.” For more on the hypocephalus, see Rhodes, Joseph Smith Hypocephalus, 1–12; Ritner, Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri, 215–226; and Gee, “Towards an Interpretation of Hypocephali,” 330–334.

    Rhodes, Michael D. The Joseph Smith Hypocephalus . . . Seventeen Years Later. FARMS Preliminary Reports. Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1994.

    Ritner, Robert K. The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri: A Complete Edition, P. JS 1–4 and the Hypocephalus of Sheshonq. Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation, 2011.

    Gee, John. “Towards an Interpretation of Hypocephali.” In Mélanges offerts à Edith Varga: “Le lotus qui sort de terre,” edited by Hedvig Györy, 325–334. Budapest: Musée Hongrois des Beaux- Arts, 2001.

  4. [4]

    See Copy of Hypocephalus, between ca. July 1835 and ca. Mar. 1842. Evidence suggests that part of the hypocephalus was damaged—perhaps from the initial acquisition—and when published, the lacunae were filled in with material from other papyri. (See “Facsimile Printing Plates, ca. 23 Feb.–ca. 16 May 1842.”)

  5. [5]

    See Grammar and Alphabet of the Egyptian Language, ca. July–ca. Nov. 1835.

  6. [6]

    The anticipation of future translation has precedent in the Book of Mormon, which mentions that some of the plates were not to be translated until a future time. (Book of Mormon, 1830 ed., 546 [Ether 4:5–6].)

  7. [7]

    JS, Journal, 4 May 1842.

  8. [8]

    “A Glance at the Mormons,” Alexandria (VA) Gazette, 11 July 1840, [2], italics in original; see also “Egyptian Papyri, ca. 300–100 bc.” There is no evidence that the papyri or the translation were displayed in the temple following its partial completion in December 1845, more than a year after JS was murdered.

    Alexandria Gazette. Alexandria, VA. 1834–1877.

Page 2

answering to the measuring of the time of Oliblish, which is equal with Kolob in its revolution & in its measuring of time. time.
No 5. is called by the Egyptians Enish-go-on-dosh; that is one of the governing planets also, & is said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, & to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kaevanrash <​ke​> Kae-E-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or in other words, the Governing power, which governs 15 other fixed planets or Stars, as also Floese <​Floeese​> or the moon, the earth and the Sun in their annual revolutions, this planet receives its power <​power​> th[r]ough the medium of Kli-flos-is-es, or Hah-ko-kau-beam, the stars represented by numbers 22, & 23, reciving light f[r]om the revolutions of Kolob.
No 6. Represents this earth in its four quarters.
No 7. Represents God Sitting upon his throne, revealing, throuph the heavens, the grand Key words of the Priesthood; as, also, the signs of the Holy Ghost unto Abraham, in the form of a dove.
No 8. contains writing that cannot now be revealed unto the world; but is to be had in the Holy Temple of God.
No 9. ought not to be reveald at the present time.
No 10. Also.—
No 11 also.— if the world can find out these n[u]mbers, So mote it be, Amen.
[p. 2]
View entire transcript

|

Cite this page

Source Note

Document Transcript

Page 2

Document Information

Related Case Documents
Editorial Title
Explanation of Facsimile 2, circa 15 March 1842
ID #
7645
Total Pages
4
Print Volume Location
JSP, R4:276–283
Handwriting on This Page
  • Willard Richards

Footnotes

  1. [10]

    TEXT: This entry is loosely based upon the entries for characters 2.37, 2.38, 2.39, and 2.40 in the fifth degree of the second part in the Grammar and Alphabet volume.

  2. [11]

    TEXT: The letter form seems to be misshapen.

  3. [12]

    TEXT: The triple underlining was canceled by wipe erasure.

  4. [13]

    TEXT: An archaic phrase meaning “so may it be.” (See “Mote,” in Oxford English Dictionary, 6:689.)

    The Oxford English Dictionary. Edited by James A. H. Murray, Henry Bradley, W. A. Craigie, and C. T. Onions. 12 vols. 1933. Reprint, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970.

© 2024 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.Terms of UseUpdated 2021-04-13Privacy NoticeUpdated 2021-04-06