Mormonien saattaa kuulla väittävän, että Franklin
Spalding "petkutti ja valehteli" antamalla väärennetyt
tai muutellut kopiot asiantuntijoiden tutkittaviksi voidakseen näin
kumota aikansa mormoniuskon puolustajien väitteet. Heillä
ei kuitenkaan ole mitään todisteita sellaisille väitteille.
Spalding käytti mormonikirkon itsensä lehdessään
Times and Seasons v. 1842 julkaisemia kuvia.
Eipä edes apostoli John A. Widtsoe, joka antoi virallisen
vastineen Spaldingin kirjalle Deseret Evening Newsissä
8.3.1913, maininnut mitään epäilystä tällaisesta
väärien kopioiden näyttämisestä asiantuntijoille.
Vastavetona voisi esittää, että kirkko itse on kyllä
muutellut alkuperäisten papyruksien kuvia useaankin kertaan.
Esimerkiksi Min-jumalan penis on välillä mukana, välillä
se taas on häveliäästi poistettu (kuten esim. suomalaisesta
v. 1997 laitoksesta, ks. kuvio 2, kohta 7). Penistä mormonit
väittävät milloin käsivarreksi, milloin kaivertajan
virheeksi, milloin huonosta kopioinnista johtuvaksi. Jos katsoo,
millainen kuvio 2 oli alkuperäisessä papyruksessa, huomaa
miten paljon Smith joutui lisäilemään siihen saadakseen
aikaan siistin ympyrän.
Elleivät mormonit keksi mitään muuta vastaväitettä,
he sanovat, ettei asialla oikeastaan ole väliä. Taaskaan
he eivät siis todella ole kiinnostuneita totuudesta, vaan vain
siitä, miten voisivat pitää kynsin hampain kiinni
erheellisestä uskostaan.
Alkuperäisistä puuttui myös osia, jotka Smith (apulaisineen?)
on täyttänyt omalla mielikuvituksellaan. Useat pakanalliset
jumalat on kuitenkin kopioitu tarpeeksi selvästi, jotta ne
voidaan tunnistaa, kuten asiantuntijat tässä selittävät.
Ei ole epäilystäkään esim. Min-jumalan, Hathorin
ja Horuksen neljän pojan identiteetistä.
Kirjasessa on mukana egyptologi Samuel Mercerin artikkeli, jossa
tuomitaan Smithin selitys piirroksista vääräksi,
sekä hänen vastineensa tyypillisille mormonien vastaväitteille.
Tri. Mercer kiteyttää kahdeksan asiantuntijan mielipiteet
näin:
Kukaan ei voi olla huomaamatta, että kaikki kahdeksan tutkijaa
ovat yksimielisiä johtopäätöksissään.
Erittäin pätevä oppineiden tuomaristo on osoittanut
Joseph Smithin epäonnistuneen täydellisesti pyrkiessään
tai teeskennellessään tulkitsevansa ja kääntävänsä
egyptiläisiä piirroksia ja hieroglyfejä. (Spalding,
s. 10).
Hän huomautti myös:
Jos joku oppilaistani osoittaisi niin täydellistä tietämättömyyttä
egyptin kielestä kuin Smith osoittaa, hän ei mitenkään
voisi odottaa saavansa parempaa arvosanaa kuin nolla egyptologian
kokeessa. (Improvement Era, vol. 16, p. 615.)
Vaikkei Smith ollut niin tarkka kuin olisi voinut olla kopioidessaan
eri pakanajumalia piirroksessa n:o 2, ja vaikka hän tekikin
tahallisen vääriä restaurointeja, on jäljellä
silti tarpeeksi yksityiskohtia, niin että ammattimaiset ja
puolueettomat egyptologit pystyvät varmasti tunnistamaan erinäisiä
egyptiläisiä jumalia ja muita peruspiirteitä hypokefaluksessa.
New Yorkin Metropolitanin taidemuseon kuraattori tri. James Allen
egyptiläisen taiteen osastolta tunnisti vaikeuksitta sekä
Min-jumalan että Nehebkaun kuviossa 7. Asiantuntijamielipiteenään
egyptologi Allen ei näe "mitään syytä asettaa
kyseenalaiseksi niiden tunnistamista Minin ja Nehebkaun muodoiksi,
sillä sitä osoittavat rinnakkaiskappaleet niiden olevan."
(James P. Allen kirjeessään Mark Hinesille 8.9.1999)
Vaikkei Amon-jumalalla ollutkaan kuviossa 2 piirroksessa 2 koko
vasenta käsivarttaan siinä kirkon julkaisemassa kopiossa,
jota Spalding käytti, on jäljellä tarpeeksi, jotta
hänet voidaan tunnistaa Amoniksi. Jopa BYU:n professori Michael
Rhodes tunnistaa hänet Amon-Re-jumalaksi.
Rhodesin
artikkeli
Spaldingin kirjasta
voi tilata the Utah Lighthouse Ministrystä valokopioidun
kappaleen n. 2.50 US-dollarin hinnalla (+postikulut).
Otteita Spaldingin käyttämien asiantuntijoiden kommenteista:
- Dr. A.H. Sayce, Oxford, Englanti:
- "On vaikea ottaa vakavasti Joseph Smithin häpeämätöntä petosta."
- Dr. W.M. Flinders Petrie, Lontoon yliopisto:
- "Olen tutkinut 'Kallisarvoisessa Helmessä' painetut
kuvat. Ensinnäkin ne ovat kopioita (hyvin huonosti tehtyjä)
hyvin tunnetuista egyptiläisistä aiheista, joita minulla
on tusinoittain. Toiseksi, ne ovat monia vuosisatoja myöhemmältä ajalta kuin Aabraham."
- James, H. Breasted, Ph.D., Haskellin Itämainen Museo,
Chicagon yliopisto:
- "Joseph Smithin tulkinta niistä osana ainutlaatuista Aabrahamin
kautta saatua ilmoitusta osoittaa sen vuoksi hyvin selkeästi,
ettei hän tunnistanut näiden dokumenttien merkitystä
ollenkaan ja oli täysin tietämätön yksinkertaisimmistakin
egyptiläisen kirjoituksen ja sivilisaation tosiseikoista."
- Dr. Arthur C. Mace, Apulaisintendentti, Metropolitanin
taidemuseo, New York, Egyptiläisen taiteen osasto:
- "'Aabrahamin kirja' on, tuskin edes tarpeellista sanoa,
silkkaa satuilua."
- Dr. John Peters, Pennsylvanian yliopisto:
- "'Kallisarvoisessa Helmessä' mukana olevat piirrokset
ovat melko koomiset ja hyvin heikkoja egyptiläisten alkuperäiskuvien
mukaelmia."
- Rev. Prof. C.A.B. Mercer, Ph.D., Läntinen teologinen
seminaari, Hibbardin kokoelman hoitaja (egyptiläisiä
jäljennöksiä):
- "... hänen kuvioidensa selityksiä ei voi kukaan
tutkija ottaa vakavasti, sillä ne näyttävät
epäilemättä pelkiltä mielikuvituksen tuotteilta."
- Dr. Edward Meyer, Berliinin yliopisto:
- "Se egyptiläinen papyrus, jonka Smith julisti olevan
'Aabrahamin kirjan' ja jonka hän 'käänsi' tai selitti
omalla mielikuvituksellisella tavallaan, ja josta kolme otetta
on julkaistu 'Kallisarvoisessa Helmessä', ovat osia hyvin
tunnetusta 'Kuolleiden kirjasta'. Vaikka jäljennökset
ovatkin hyvin huonoja, voi niistä helposti tunnistaa tuttuja
näytöksiä tästä kirjasta."
- Dr. Friedrich Freiheer Von Bissing1, Münchenin yliopiston
egyptologian professori:
- "Huolellinen tutkimus on vakuuttanut minut siitä,
että Smith todennäköisesti uskoi vakavasti selvittäneensä
muinaisia hieroglyfejä, mutta hän epäonnistui täydellisesti.
Se, mitä hän kutsuu 'Aabrahamin kirjaksi', on egyptiläinen
hautausteksti, luultavastikaan ei sen vanhempi kuin kreikkalaisajoilta
peräisin."
1. En osaa sanoa, oliko tri von Bissing paroni, vai onko sana Freiheer
nimen osa.
The full comments of the eight experts on Egyptian antiquities,
as they appear in F. S. Spalding's Joseph Smith, Jr., as a Translator
(Salt Lake City, Utah: The Arrow Press, 1912)
On December 29, 1912, the New York Times headlines about
Joe Smith's Book of Abraham blared, "Sacred Books Claimed to
Have Been Given Divinely to the First Prophet Are Shown to be Taken
from Old Egyptian Originals, Their Translation Being a Work of Imagination."
The headlines were based on the book Joseph Smith, Jr., As a Translator
by F. S. Spalding (Salt Lake City, Utah: The Arrow Press, 1912).
In the book, eight experts on Egyptian antiquities found Smith's
explanations of the Facsimiles in the Book of Abraham false. All
universally respected Egyptologists who have since examined the
matter have pronounced Smith's translation of papyri and explanation
of Facsimiles completely incorrect. Here are the scholars who caused
the 1912 headlines and who showed Smith's translation to be an embarrassment:
"It is difficult to deal seriously with Joseph Smith's impudent
fraud. His fac-simile from the book of Abraham No. 2 is an ordinary
hypocephalus, but the hieroglyphics upon it have been copied so
ignorantly that hardly one of them is correct. I need scarce say
that Kolob, etc., are unknown to the Egyptian language. Number 3
is a representation of the Goddess Maat leading the Pharaoh before
Osiris, behind whom stands the Goddess Isis. Smith has turned the
Goddess into a king and Osiris into Abraham. The hieroglyphics,
again, have been transformed into unintelligible lines. Hardly one
of them is copied correctly."
Dr. A. H. SAYCE,
Oxford, England.
(p. 23)
"I have examined the illustrations given in the Pearl of Great
Price. In the first place, they are copies (very badly done) of
well known Egyptian subjects of which I have dozens of examples.
Secondly, they are all many centuries later than Abraham. On Number
2, I think there is--so far as the copy shows it--they name of Shishak,
a popular name in Egypt from about 950 to 750 B. C., and such seems
to be about the date of the other figures.
Third, as to the real meaning of them: Number 1 is the well known
scene of Anubis preparing the body of the dead man: 1. Is the hawk
of Horus. 2. Is the dead person. 3. Is Anubis. 4. Is the usual funeral
couch. 5, 6, 7, 8 are the regular jars for embalming the parts of
the body, with the head of a hawk, jackal, ape and man, of which
dozens may be seen in the museums. 10. Are the funeral offerings
covered with lotus flowers.
Number 2 is one of the usual discs with magic inscriptions placed
beneath the head of the dead. Three fine ones of the same nature
you can see in my Abydos 1 LXXVII, LXXIX. The figures are well known
ones in Egyptian mythology.
Number 3 is the very common scene of the dead person before the
judgment seat of Osiris, which occurs in most copies of the funeral
papyri:
1. Is Osiris in the usual form. 2. Is Isis behind him. 3. Is the
stand of offerings with lotus flowers. 4. Is the Goddess Nebhat
or Maat (too badly drawn to know which). 5. Is the dead person.
6. Is the God Anubis, the conductor of the souls of the dead.
The inscriptions are far too badly copied to be able to read them.
To any one with knowledge of the large class of funeral documents
to which these belong, the attempts to guess a meaning for them,
in the professed explanations, are too absurd to be noticed. It
may be safely said that there is not one single word that is true
in these explanations.
If any one wishes to verify the matter, they have only to ask any
of the curators of Egyptian museums. Prof. Breasted of Chicago,
Dr. Lythgoe of New York, or any one else who knows the subject.
None but the ignorant could possibly be imposed on by such ludicrous
blunders.
Pray make any use you like of this letters."
Dr. W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE.
London University.
(pp. 23-24)
"I have been greatly interested in the documents you have
sent me regarding the connection of Joseph Smith with the Egyptian
materials purchased by his people in 1835, and concerning the whole
situation I should like to make the following statement:
"In 1822 Champollion published the first successful steps
in the decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphics. It was only very
gradually after this that he gained the ability to read the simpler
and clearer sentences in hieroglyphic records. Little of the language,
comparatively speaking, was understood when he died in 1832. He
left in manuscript an elementary grammar, which was published by
the government, beginning in 1836, and reaching completion in 1841.
It would have been impossible for any American scholar to know enough
about Egyptian inscriptions to read them before the publication
of Champollion's grammar. I may add at this point that American
Universities have never until recently given such studies any attention,
and there is still only one professorship of the science in the
United States, though it is now taught in the leading American Universities.
"It will be seen, then, that if Joseph Smith could read ancient
Egyptian writing, his ability to do so had no connection with the
decipherment of hieroglyphics by European scholars. Now, according
to the statements of Joseph Smith himself, the three Egyptian documents
which he publishes in connection with the Book of Abraham in 'The
Pearl of Great Price,' were secured by some of his followers, together
with some mummies, purchased at Kirtland in 1835. The point I wish
to bring out is that the three fac-similes from the Book of Abraham
were associated with mummies. This fact is in complete harmony with
the further fact that the three fac-similes are part of the usual
equipment of the dead in the later period of Egyptian civilization
before the Christian era. The three fac-similes in question represent
equipment which will be and has been found in unnumbered thousands
of Egyptian graves. In accepting them, then, as parts of the Book
of Abraham, let it be understood that they were in universal use
among the pagan Egyptians, and that for some reason the doctrines
of Joseph Smith's monotheistic Abraham were universally accepted
and used among the polytheistic Egyptians. In accepting these fac-similes
as part of the Book of Abraham it remains then for any one who so
accepts them to explain why they were thus universally employed
by a people who knew nothing of Abraham's God or Abraham's religion.
The point, then, is that in publishing these fac-similes of Egyptian
documents as part of an unique revelation to Abraham, Joseph Smith
was attributing to Abraham not three unique documents of which no
other copies exist, but was attributing to Abraham a series of documents
which were the common property of a whole nation of people who employed
them in every human burial, which they prepared. This was, of course,
unknown to Smith, but it is a fact not only of my own knowledge,
but also a commonplace of the knowledge of every orientalist who
works in the Egyptian field.
"Taking up these fac-similes now, let us discuss them in order.
Number 1 depicts a figure reclining on a couch, with a priest officiating
and four jars beneath the couch. The reclining figure lifts one
foot and both arms. This figure represents Osiris rising from the
dead. Over his head is a bird, in which form Isis is represented.
The jars below, closed with lids carved in the forms of animal's
heads, were used by the Egyptians to contain the viscera taken from
the body of the dead man. This scene is depicted on Egyptian funeral
papyri, on coffins and on late temple walls, unnumbered thousands
of times. If desired, publications of fac-similes of this resurrection
scene from papyri, coffins, tomb and temple walls could be furnished
in indefinite numbers.
"Fac-simile Number 2 represents a little disc, sometimes made
of metal, sometimes of papyrus, sometimes of woven goods with a
smooth stucco surface. It is commonly called among Egyptologists
a hypocephalus. It was placed under the head of the mummy and the
various representations upon it were of a magical power designed
to assist the deceased in various ways, especially to prevent the
loss of his head. These did not come into use until the late centuries
just before the Christian era. They did not appear in any Egyptian
burials until over a thousand years after the time of Abraham. They
were unknown in Egypt in Abraham's day.
"Fac-simile Number 3: This scene depicts the god Osiris enthroned
at the left, with a goddess, probably Isis, behind him and before
him three figures. The middle one, a man, led into the presence
of Osiris by the goddess Truth, who grasps his hand, accompanied
by a figure represented in black, the head of which probably should
be that of a wolf or a jackal, but which is here badly drawn. A
lotus-crowned standard (numbered 3) bearing food, stands as usual
before Osiris. This is the judgment scene, in which the dead man,
led in by Truth, is to be judged by Osiris. This scene again is
depicted innumerable times in the funeral papyri, coffins and tomb
and temple walls of Egypt. No representation of it thus far found
in Egypt, though we have thousands of them, dates earlier than 500
years after Abraham's age; and it may be stated as certain that
the scene was unknown until about 500 years after Abraham's day.
"To sum up, then, these three fac-similes of Egyptian documents
in the Pearl of Great Price depict the most common objects in the
mortuary religion of Egypt. Joseph Smith's interpretation of them
as part of a unique revelation through Abraham, therefore, very
clearly demonstrates that he was totally unacquainted with the significance
of these documents and absolutely ignorant of the simplest facts
of Egyptian writing and civilization. Not to repeat it too often,
the point I wish to make is that Joseph Smith represents as portions
of a unique revelation through Abraham things which were commonplaces
and to be found by many thousands in the every-day life of the Egyptians.
We orientalists could publish scores of these 'fac-similes from
the Book of Abraham' taken from other sources.
"For example, any visitor in a modern museum with an Egyptian
collection can find for himself plenty of examples of the four jars
with animal heads--the jars depicted under the couch in fac-simile
number one. It should be noted further that the hieroglyphics in
the two fac-similes from the Book of Abraham (Nos. 2 and 3), though
they belong to a very degenerate and debased age in Egyptian civilization,
and have been much corrupted in copying, contain the usual explanatory
inscriptions regularly found in such funerary documents."
JAMES H. BREASTED. Ph.D.,
Haskell Oriental Museum, University of Chicago.
(pp. 24-27)
"I return herewith, under separate cover, the Pearl of Great
Price. The Book of Abraham, it is hardly necessary to say, is a
pure fabrication. Cuts 1 and 3 are inaccurate copies of well known
scenes on funeral papyri, and cut 2 is a copy of one of the magical
discs which in the late Egyptian period were placed under the heads
of mummies. There were about forty of these latter known in museums
and they are all very similar in character. Joseph Smith's interpretation
of these cuts is a farrago of nonsense from beginning to end. Egyptian
characters can now be read almost as easily as Greek, and five minutes'
study in an Egyptian gallery of any museum should be enough to convince
any educated man of the clumsiness of the imposture."
DR. ARTHUR C. MACE
Assistant Curator, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Department
of Egyptian Art.
(p. 27)
"The plates contained in the "Pearl of Great Price"
are rather comical and a very poor imitation of Egyptian originals,
apparently not of any one original, but of Egyptian originals in
general. Apparently, the plate on page 50 represents an embalmer
preparing a body for burial. At the head, the soul (Kos) is flying
away in the form of a bird. Under the bed on which the body lies
are the canopic jars to hold the organs and entrails removed from
the body in the process of embalming. In the waters below the earth
I see a crocodile waiting to seize and devour the dead if he be
not properly protected by ritual embalming against such a fate.
"The latter (page 62) is also connected with burial, a representation
of the life of the deceased on earth. The hieroglyphics which should
describe the scenes, however, are merely illegible scratches, the
imitator not having the skill or intelligence to copy such a script.
"The name 'reformed Egyptian' is, if I forget not, a term
used in the early days of Egyptian study, before much was known,
by certain persons to designate one form of Egyptian script. The
text of this chapter, as also the interpretation of the plates,
displays an amusing ignorance. Chaldeans and Egyptians are hopelessly
mixed together, although as dissimilar and remote in language, religion
and locality as re today American and Chinese. In addition to which
the writer knows nothing of either of them."
DR. JOHN PETERS,
University of Pennsylvania. In charge of expedition to Babylonia,
1888-1895.
(p. 28)
"After examining 'The Pearl of Great Price,' by Joseph Smith,
Salt Lake City, Utah, The Desert News, 1907, and in particular the
three fac-similes, Nos. 1, 2 and 3, I am convinced that the following
are facts:
"1. That the author of the notes on the three fac-similes
had before him Egyptian inscriptions, either on papyrus or some
other material, or else fac-similes of such inscriptions. Compare,
for example, No. 2 with the fac-similes of similar hypocephali in
W. M. F. Petrie's Abydos, Pt. 1, 1902, Plate LXXVI, LXXVII and LXXIX,
in which are sections exactly corresponding to sections in this
fac-simile (No. 2).
"2. That the author either knew Hebrew or had some means of
arriving at, at least, an elementary knowledge of that language.
Compare for example, the transliteration and translation [ayin yod
qoph resh] in No. 1, note 12, although the transliteration 'Rankeeyang'
is far from accurate.
"3. That the author knew neither the Egyptian language nor
the meaning of the most commonplace Egyptian figures; neither did
any of those, whether human or Divine, who may have helped him in
his interpretation, have any such knowledge. By comparing his notes
on fac-similes Nos. 1, 2 and 3 with any elementary book on Egyptian
language and religion, and especially by comparing the notes on
No. 2 with the explanation of the above named plate on page 49 ff.
of the work of Petrie already named (the explanation is by A. E.
Weigall, Chapter V), this becomes unquestionably evident.
"In general, it may be remarked that his explanations from
a scientific and scholarly standpoint are absurd. Compare No. 1,
note 1: No. 2, notes 4, 8, etc.: No. 3, notes 2, 4, 5. The word
'Jah-oh-eh' in note 1 of No. 2, which he calls an Egyptian word
(!) is his faulty transliteration of the Hebrew [heh vav heh yod].
If Abraham wrote anything while he was in Egypt, it would most likely
have been written in the Cuneiform, as that was the langua franca
of his day and his own native language.
"Many proofs of the correctness of the above three conclusive
points may be offered if desired. A criticism in his explanations
could be made, but the explanatory notes to his fac-similes cannot
be taken seriously by any scholar, as they seem to be undoubtedly
the work of pure imagination."
REV. PROF. C. A. B. MERCER, Ph.D.
Western Theological Seminary, Custodian Hibbard Collection, Egyptian
Reproductions.
(pp. 28-29)
"The Egyptian papyrus which Smith declared to be the 'Book
of Abraham,' and 'translated' or explained in his fantastical way,
and of which three specimens are published in the Pearl of Great
Price, are parts of the well known 'Book of the Dead.' Although
the reproductions are very bad, one can easily recognize familiar
scenes from this book: 'the body of the dead lying a ba' (bier).
The canopic jars containing the entrails under it; the soul in the
shape of a bird flying above it, and a priest approaching it, or
Osiris seated on his throne, Isis behind him, the Goddess of Righteousness
with the feather on her head awaiting the deceased from the throne
of Osiris."
DR. EDWARD MEYER.
University of Berlin
(pp. 29-30)
"I have been interested since a long time in the Mormons and
Joseph Smith's supposed translations of Egyptian texts. A careful
study has convinced me that Smith probably believed seriously to
have deciphered the ancient hieroglyphics, but that he utterly failed.
"What he calls the Book of Abraham is a funeral Egyptian text,
probably not older than the Greek ages. His figure 1 should be commented
upon as follows:
"The dead man (1) is lying on a bier (4) under which are standing
the four canopic jars (5-8) and before which is standing the offering
table (10). The soul is leaving the body in the moment when the
priest (3) is opening the body with a knife for mummification. Fig.
3 may be part of the same papyrus--the Goddess Maat (Truth) is introducing
the dead (5) and his shadow (6) before Osiris (1) and Isis (2) before
whom an offering table stands (3).
"It is impossible from Smith's bad fac-similes to make out
any meaning of the inscriptions, but that they cannot say what Smith
thought is clear from the certain signification of the figures 1-5.
6 only may be interpreted in different ways, but never as Smith
did.
"Fig. 2 is copied from a hypocephalus of the ancient Egyptians,
a magical book on which Dr. Birch has often written in the proceedings
of the Biblical Archaeological Society, and Dr. Leamans in the Actes
des Congress des Orientalistes of Leyden. None of the names mentioned
by Smith can be found in the text, and he has misinterpreted the
signification of every one figure: Fig. 5 is the divine cow Hathor,
6 are the four children of Horus as the Canopic Gods, 4 is the God
Sokar in the Sacred Book, etc.
"I hope this will suffice to show that Jos. Smith certainly
never got a Divine revelation in the meaning of the hieroglyphic
texts at all. He probably used Athenasius Kirsher the Jesuit's work,
and there found a method of reading the old Egyptian signs very
much like his own."
DR. FRIEDRICH FREIHEER VON BISSING
Professor of Egyptology in the University of Munich
(p. 30)
|