Joseph Smith and Hannibal: Mount Hanabal in Joseph Smith Translation Genesis 14:10

The Prophet Joseph Smith left for the benefit of the Saints not one but two books of Abraham. The first appears in the added words, phrases, sentences, and even paragraphs of the New Translation of Genesis. The second came to light from a roll of papyrus, written in hieratic script and purporting, in its title, to be The Book of Abraham, Written by His Own Hand upon Papyrus. Like the gold plates of the Book of Mormon, the record on papyrus, scribal copy though it be, becomes a tangible earnest of the resurrection of the dead. Together, these two offerings yield startling details, stories, and revelations not found in the Holy Bible and set forth the covenant of the priesthood God made with the fathers.

Among the many easily missed details Brother Joseph added to the ancient story of Abraham is the place name Hanabal, a name which could refer to one or several of the Mountains of Moab--perhaps Jebel Shihan, with its high ruins and caves. A stele depicting a form of Ba'al wearing Egyptian accoutrements was found just to the west of Shihan. Another candidate is Bemot Ba'al, the High Place of Ba'al, to which "Balak took Balaam" (Numbers 22:41). The mountain towers out of nowhere in Joseph Smith Translation Genesis 14:9--a verse not found in the footnotes of the current LDS edition of the Holy Bible.

The story begins with KJV Genesis 14:10:

1 And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations;

2 That these made war with Bera king of Sodom, and with Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, and Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar.

8 And there went out the king of Sodom, and the king of Gomorrah, and the king of Admah, and the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (the same is Zoar;) and they joined battle with them in the vale of Siddim;

9 With Chedorlaomer the king of Elam, and with Tidal king of nations, and Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar; four kings with five.

10 And the vale of Siddim was full of slimepits [JST OT Manuscript 1 has: was filled with slime pits]; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; and they that remained fled to the mountain.

To the last verse, the Prophet adds:

and they that remained fled to the mountains [with the s crossed out] which is called Hanabal. (Old Testament Manuscript 2, p. 640),

or,

to the Mountain [note the capital letter] which was called [Hanable: crossed out] Hanabal (Old Testament Manuscript 1, p. 125).

In an earlier essay, posted on 21 June 2010, I suggested deriving the name from the root n-b-l. Ha-nabal (even Har-nabal) could signify either The Lofty, the Elevated, or Mount Lofty, Mount Eminent, and so forth. I no longer subscribe to that view.

The name of Mount Hanabal clearly combines the root h-n-n (to be gracious, graced) and the epithet Ba'al (master, husband). The author of Genesis 14, after all, had a "predilection for composite place names," and the like (Michael C. Astour, "Hazazon-Tamar", Anchor Bible Dictionary, III, 86). Though I did, in my first try, briefly compare Hanabal to the name of the Carthaginian general Hannibal, the name of another odd mountain known to the patriarchs, Lubar (in Jubilees and the Genesis Apocryphon), threw me off track. Lubar, nevertheless, has its own fascinating etymology. . .

Hanabal signifies Ba'al is gracious, or Ba'al graces, even as the Hebrew name Hananiah signifies Jehovah is gracious. The Old Testament does twice attest Ba'al-Hanan (the Akkadian Ba'al ha-nu-nu), Ba'al has shown mercy: Ba'al Hanan names a king of Edom (Genesis 36:38; see Ernst Axel Knauf, "Baal-Hanan," Anchor Bible Dictionary I 551-2). A list of personal names from Ebla yields Hanna-Il, "God (Il or El) is gracious" (#792). Also from Ebla: Har-Ba'al, Harra-Ba'al, Ba'al is a Mountain (see Cybernetica Mesopotamica: Ebla PNs).

Ba'al is a Mountain also reminds me of Mount Lubar. Might not Lubar derive from Ilu-Ba'al, a combination of the two divine names Ilu and Ba'al? If so, Lubar could then be read as Ba'al is (my) God. Lubar is leading me off track again. . . Delitzsch derives Lubar from the Alborz Mountains of Persia (The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1906, "Noah"). The derivation doesn't go far enough. In the Encyclopaedia Iranica entry for "Alborz," we read that the Hara berezaiti in Avestan texts (later shortened to Harborz) names a vast cosmic mountain or mountain range stretching from horizon to horizon; the connection with the Persian range dates to later times. Lubar is a kind of cosmic mountain for Noah and his sons. Can Lubar really derive from Hara berezaiti? It can.

When looking for derivations, we mustn't expect exact matches. Shouldn't we demand of Joseph Smith the spelling Hananabal in place of Hanabal? Consider Hannibal and Hamilcar of Carthage: here we find West Semitic names in Latin texts and Latin forms. Today we might justifiably spell Hannibal in a variety of ways: Hananibal, Hananibal, Hananabal, Hannabal, even Anibal (as in Spanish). Joseph Smith's Hanabal (or even the odd Hanable) sufficiently signals Hannabal or, just so well, Hananabal. Joseph Smith gives us only one n, it is true, but the consonant is long. (Semitic languages have long consonants.)

How have students understood the name Hannibal? Hannibal may signify "Ba'al has been gracious (in providing me with a son")--that's Hamilcar speaking; others read "Ba'al is gracious." John Huehnergard, "Semitic Roots," in The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5th edition, suggests Hann-i-bal, "my grace is Baal." 

Why the name of a mountain? One has only to consider the home of Ba'al Hadad on Mount Zaphon, just north of Latakia. Zaphon was Ba'al Hadad's Olympus, but, for the Canaanites, other mountain tops also reflected that central home. Hadad's thunder reverberated from peak to peak. And then there's the name from Ebla: Har(ra)-Ba'al.

Balak, king of Moab, takes the prophet Balaam to Bemot Ba'al, the High Place of Ba'al: "And it came to pass on the morrow, that Balak took Balaam, and brought him up into the high places of Ba'al, that thence he might see the utmost part of the people" (Numbers 22:41). Standing upon that High Place of Ba'al, Balaam asks Balak to build seven altars in preparation for the cursing of Israel. The pair then travel to Peor to build yet another seven high altars (Numbers 23). The Bible attests a particular worship of Ba'al at Peor, in the name of Ba'al Peor (the Ba'al of Peor). Bemot Ba'al and Peor, though attested after the Patriarchal Age, give good Biblical evidence for such a mountain in Moab as Hanabal.

We return to the stele found "in the vicinity of Jebel Shihan [Mount Shihan]," another candidate for our Hanabal: "The Rujm al-'Abd figure with its downward-thrusting spear, cap with streamer, and accompanying lion fits iconographic features used to identify the Canaanite god Ba'al, especially when fused with Seth as the slayer of Apophis the serpent in Egyptian art" (Bruce Edward Routledge, Moab in the Iron Age: Hegemony, Polity, Archaeology, 180). Again: "Some scholars have speculatively identified this figure as the god Kemosh, a suggestion that cannot be completely discounted, as local deities were frequently represented as the hypostasis of Ba'al as storm god" (180; illustration of stele on page 179). The Rujm al-'Abd figure, which blends Egyptian and Canaanite iconography in violent aspect (and note the lion!), might as well be called Facsimile 4 of the Book of Abraham. 

And any reader familiar with the hill at the head of the plain of Olishem, the place of Elkenah's sacrifical altar in Abraham 1, will wish to visit the hilltop stele of Ramesses the Great, which overlooks an obscure Syrian village. The stele shows the pharaoh offering a figurine of Ma'at to a divinity sporting a bizarrely horned Osirian Atef Crown. An accompanying legend yields: Ilu (El) k-n-a Zaphon, which both Giveon and de Moor read as El qny Zaphon (El Creator of Zaphon). While the transliteration and meaning of the sequence k-n-a is disputed, it does recall "the god of Elkenah" in the Book of Abraham. Or what to make of the many bronze figurines of El, accoutred in "the manner of the Egyptians" and in the pose of a smiting god? So accoutred, the priest of Elkenah, who was also priest of Pharaoh, sought to slay Abraham upon the altar (Kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions II, 263.)

Because people are constantly casting aspersions on the Prophet's Book of Abraham, Latter-day Saints might consider a standard response. One response would be to invite all to see in the Joseph Smith Translation yet another restored Book of Abraham. Criticize Abraham's works and watch how, like his seed, they multiply. More scripture from father Abraham is forthcoming. 

Nephi has another response: "But behold, there are many that harden their hearts against the Holy Spirit, that it hath no place in them; wherefore, they cast many things away which are written and esteem them as things of naught" (2 Nephi 33:2). Cast out the pearl of great price, then where will you be? 

Learned posturing borders on imposture:

"Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see" (Revelation 3: 17-18). 

None of us sees very well in the mortal state--and we must walk by faith--still, what evidence we do have for the divine Book of Abraham shows that it deserves a second look. 

Because the scriptures revealed through the Prophet Joseph Smith give us many a mountain and hill heretofore unknown: Shelem, Hanabal, Potiphar, Cumorah, etc., we should take that second look from a lofty perspective. From a cosmic vantage point, we may see all heights and depths.

Yet before we consider Joseph Smith as linguist (or as student of early Canaanite religion), let's taste of his prophetic irony:

10 And the vale of Siddim was full of slimepits [JST OT Manuscript 1 has: was filled with slime pits]; and the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, and fell there; and they that remained fled to the mountain,

which is called Hanabal (Old Testament Manuscript 2, p. 640),

which is, being interpreted, Ba'al is gracious. 

Some final words

Abraham holds the keys of the Book of Abraham. To diminish the Book of Abraham is thus also to diminish Abraham, a god, who "hath entered into his exaltation and sitteth upon his throne" (Doctrine and Covenants 132), and, ultimately, to challenge and to diminish the purposes of the God of Abraham, the God of the living. Neither need we redefine Abraham; his years exceed ours.

Latter-day Saints have long ago (1880 and 1890) taken upon themselves, by obligation, a covenantal promise to reverence the Book of Abraham as scripture. For the Saints, there is no more need to revisit the genuineness of the writings of Abraham than there is to revisit the reality of the exalted Abraham himself. The Book of Abraham comes to us clothed in purity as a translated record of the living father of the covenant people. Abraham is a living prophet, and the Book of Abraham, a true record of his revelations, covenants, ministry, and teachings. 

The doctrine is simple: God is God; Abraham is Abraham; covenants are covenants, and scripture is scripture. The Book of Abraham serves as a compass pointing to true north; we take our bearings by it in both time and eternity and, by this means, avoid the errors inherent in the never-settled, ever-shifting theories of men. 

As President Boyd K. Packer teaches, we are to examine and scrutinize, yes, critique, the learning of men from the perspective of gospel and scriptural truth--not the other way round. As we do so, the truth will shine fair as the sun, clear as the moon, and terrible as an army with banners. Errors in our understanding of history, language, and letters will take flight as we raise high those bright banners to the glory of God. Then intelligence will be ours.

NOTES

1) The text of JST Genesis 14, transcribed according to accepted standards, appears in Joseph Smith's New Translation of the Bible: Original Manuscripts, Scott Faulring, Kent Jackson, Robert Matthews (eds). The introduction to the volume, with its explanations of the various manuscripts of the JST, are invaluable. I further recommend "The Doctrinal Restoration," the transcript of a talk delivered by Elder Bruce R. McConkie, The Joseph Smith Translation, Monte S. Nyman and Robert S. Millet (eds).

Other useful editions of the JST include Joseph Smith's "New Translation" of the Bible (Independence, Missouri, 1970), which I studied as a young child and of which I'm fond, and The Bible Corrected by Joseph Smith, Kenneth and Lyndell Lutes (eds), which shows the changes with more clarity. Neither is a perfect edition, and both perpetuate errors. Other editions are available, given that Latter-day Saints never tire of publishing the same things over and again.

2) Geography of the Pentapolis: J. Simons, The Geographical and Topographical Texts of the Old Testament, 222-229; Neballat: Simons, p. 390. 

Of Jebel Shihan: it "overlooks the Wadi al-Mujib (the Arnon) and the Dead Sea. It rises to 965 meters above sea level, and its summit is occupied by ruins and caves [a place of refuge]," Online Article: "The Karak District in the Madaba Map," by Fawzi Zayadine, part of the study, Jordan: the Madaba Mosaic Map, on the Franciscan Cyberspot. Ba'al's Mount Zaphon itself is not so very much higher: ca. 1500 meters.

Omer, King; Emer, Witness (The Book of Ether Testifies of Jesus Christ)

Chapters eight and nine of the Book of Ether yield, in a sweep of narrative and admonitory commentary, the "exceedingly many days" of Omer, the son of Shule, "which were full of sorrow." Here we see the dancing "daughter of Jared"; we see enamored Akish, who turned, with the turn of a foot, from close friendship for Omer, to found a secret association in "the house of Jared" in order to kill Omer and take away his kingdom.

Like Lehi, Omer dreamed a dream "that he should depart out of the land" and "traveled many days" with his family. "He pitched his tent" in "a place which was called Ablom, by the seashore." (And, perhaps, "by" New York City.) There he lived, in exile, until civil war engulfed the kingdom of Akish, "Wherefore, Omer was restored again." He lived long enough to beget an heir, Emer. After anointing Emer "to be king to reign in his stead," Omer "saw peace in the land for two years, and he died." Emer "did prosper exceedingly" and "saw peace"; "yea, and he even saw the Son of Righteousness, and did rejoice and glory in his day; and he died in peace."

What does Omer signify? According to a glossary of Semitic roots, prepared by John Huehnergard for the 5th edition of the American Heritage Dictionary, the Central Semitic verbal root 'mr [ayin-mem-resh] signifies "to live, dwell, build." As a noun, *'umr is Life. Professor Huehnergard goes on to say that Israelite King Omri (my life) bears a shortened form of the name Omriyah (Jehovah [is] my life = Hebrew *'omer ~ *'umr, life). Here we recall the Arab caliph, Omar. (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5th ed., "Semitic Roots": "Proto-Semitic Language and Culture; Semitic Roots.")

Life begets Life, and that new Life lives to see The Light and the Life of the world.

That Omer and Emer bear ancient Semitic names, which trace back to early Proto-Semitic rootage, attests to the truth of the Book of Mormon. But the Book of Mormon, through its many testimonies, all the more importantly attests to the reality of the Son of Righteousness, even Jesus Christ! It is that second attestation--the manner in which the Book connects the reader to Christ--that brings testimony not only unto, but into the heart.

Emer, who shall live ("he shall live" - with "e" as third person verbal prefix), both lives and prospers as he builds upon his father's heritage. And, unique among kings and captains of the earth, he lives to see the Son of God. Emer thus becomes a witness of Him who shall live "in his day," and who shall live forevermore.

The root that underlies Emer, ayin-mem-resh, also invokes--at least to the modern reader--aleph-mem-resh ("to see, know, make known, say"). The anointed King who "shall live," shall also see, know, and make known. Perhaps Emer signifies sight, after all. Huehnergard also gives the Proto-Semitic verb for anoint, that is, the same ancient root known to Ether. M-sh-h likewise names Christ, the Messiah.

Ether, after bearing testimony of the glory and rejoicing--and the longed-for peace--quietly moves on. Yet even in the quick passing of a single, light-bearing verse, with Abraham as co-witness, who also, in his day, saw His day, we receive in the Holy Ghost Another Testament of Jesus Christ.

Reading the Rim: Restoring The Missing Hieroglyphs on Book of Abraham Facsimile 2

While most of the hieroglyphs on the rim of the lost Joseph Smith hypocephalus come through clearly on both the printed facsimile made from the Hedlock woodcut (Book of Abraham, Facsimile 2) and the early pen-and-ink copy (Kirtland Egyptian Papers, Church Historian's Office), about a third has vanished. Can that third be restored? We'll need a parallel text and at least one readable trace lingering on the torn or erased right-side portion of our rim.

And a trace we do have. At the upper end of the torn and rubbed-out rim (and much of the right side) of the hypocephalus, we find on both Hedlock and the Church Historian's copy the traces of three signs: from top to bottom, a horizontal, a dot, and a horizontal (the Church Historian shows two specks and a horizontal). Examination of a like text on the rim of Leiden AMS 62 gives the reading away: the high horizontal stroke represents n; the mid-level dot, t; the low horizontal, s (on Leiden), or perhaps f, or n. Nts is the 3rd person feminine singular independent personal pronoun, she, and refers to the lady Tanetirt, owner of the Leiden hypocephalus. Because the owner of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus appears to be a certain Sheshonq, we would expect the 3rd person masculine, ntf. The question remains whether the last horizontal stroke is consistent with an f, given the fact that it appears to end at left in a tiny, near-rectangular loop. But such a loop at the tip of the tail of the viper also appears in the other, clearer instances of the f on our hypocephalus.

While one word might appear to be a slim basis for the reconstruction of a third of the rim, given the close parallel otherwise found between the rims of Leiden AMS 62 and the Joseph Smith hypocephalus, one word suffices.

Any other traces? Yes, but only a trace. The break in the text on the Joseph Smith hypocephalus begins just after the place name Heliopolis and what remains of the following word, a trace of low horizontal strokes. Hedlock shows something like a loop at the end of the horizontal stroke; the Church Historian's copy shows two small horizontal strokes, which together make up nearly a loop (the feet of an owl?). The low horizontal is consistent with the feet of the owl hieroglyph (an m) that, together with the arm, writes the imperative mj (Come!) on the Leiden rim. On Leiden mj immediately follows Heliopolis.

Nibley and Rhodes translate the Leiden rim as follows (One Eternal Round, 231):

"O Debabty in the House of the Benben most high and most glorious, procreating bull mighty and great in the house of the Great Old One in Heliopolis! Come to the Osiris, the priestess of Re [her name and the names of her justified parents follow], Justified! Grant that she become as one of your followers. She is that god who is in the temple (house) of the Great Old One in Heliopolis."

The wording is close to that found on the Joseph Smith hypocephalus on ps. 334-5. Here is my translation of the hieroglyphs reproduced in Nibley and Rhodes.

"I am the Db3.ty [the one of the Db3.t-box or shrine] in the House of the Benben in Heliopolis, most high and most glorious, the matchless procreating bull, even this particular (greatest) god in the House of the Benben in Heliopolis [long break] that (greatest) god in Heliopolis."

Here is Michael Rhodes's translation, which includes his reconstruction of the missing part, a reconstruction he also derives from comparing like hypocephali:

"I am Djebabty in the temple of the benben in Heliopolis. [I am] exalted and very glorious. [I am] a copulating bull without equal. [I am] that Mighty God in the temple of the benben in Heliopolis. [May the Osiris Shishaq live forever, di 'anx b3 Wsir SSq r nHH D.t] with that Mighty God in Heliopolis" (335).

As can be seen from the foregoing, in reading the rim of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus I prefer following the translation given for the Leiden hypocephalus on page 231 of One Eternal Round, rather than that given for Facsimile 2 itself on page 335. 



Despite tearing and erasures, can we yet fill in the blank space on the rim of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus? If we follow Leiden AMS 62, and so consider the traces to represent the independent pronoun ntf, and in the other trace see m[j], we might expect, given the space left to us: mj rk n wsjr SS[n]q m3'-xrw dj=k xpr=f mj w' m sSm.w=k ntf nTr pf '3 m iwnw, Come to the Osiris Sheshonq, Justified! Grant that he become as one of your followers. He is as that (greatest) god in Heliopolis. 

One slight correction is in order. Michael Tilgner, who has worked with Leiden AMS 62, reads the formula (and I think the reading preferable to my own): "Grant that he become as one of your followers, for he is as that greatest god in Heliopolis." What we then have is: "Come to the Osiris Sheshonq, Justified! and grant that he become like one of your followers, since he is [even as] that greatest god in Heliopolis" (better: "for he is indeed that same Heliopolitan god." i.e., Re/Osiris). That is the reading I now propose for the missing and erased portion of the rim. 

As does Michael Rhodes, I reconstruct the rim by using like hypocephali. The difference lies in my use of the traces on both Hedlock and the Church Historian's copy to match any possible reconstruction and in the estimate of space available on the rim. Let's turn now to the question of available space.

The very same expression dj=k xpr=s mj w' m sSm=k (Grant that she become as one of your followers) appears on the fourth (and lowest) left-hand panel of another hypocephalus, Ashmolean 1982-1095, where it follows the petition formula on Panels 2 and 3: "Come to the Osiris so-and-so." The rim of Ashmolean 1982-1095 has another petition formula of the type "Come and Rescue Osiris so-and-so," but here the sought-for blessing is much expanded: dj=k n=s 3x.w m pt xr r', wsr m t3 xr gb, m3'-xrw xr n3 nb.w dw3.t. Nts nTr pfy m Hw.t wr m jwnw (Cause thou that she will be an Akh (or glorious) in heaven along with Re, mighty on earth with Geb, and justified along with the lords of the netherworld. She is that god who is in the Shrine of the Great One (Old One) in Heliopolis).

The blessing formula on Ashmolean 1982.1095 (Tasheritenkhonsu) runs too long for the blank space on the right rim of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus; the Leiden formula fits nicely. That same compact formula also appears on the left-hand panels of the Ashmolean hypocephalus, evidence it had already become a fixed blessing following the petition "Come and Rescue." What we find on the rim of Ashmolean 1982.1095 therefore clearly represents an expansion on the theme found on its panels and also on the rim of Leiden. "Grant that she may become as one of your followers in the solar circuit" perforce also comprehends the three spheres of heaven, earth, and underworld. The conception of the Egyptian cosmos as a three-tiered world is central to the doctrine of the Transcendent Amun, yet we are to think of the three worlds not only as tiers but also as stations along the solar circuit. The followers of Re visit each of these stations, in a continual round, and in turn, participate in the glories and ceremonies therewith associated (an idea also set forth in Doctrine and Covenants, Section 88). The message of the hypocephalus embraces cosmic fullness.

Now that we have it in its entirety, how is the text on the rim of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus to be understood? There are four parts to the inscription. The first part manifests the god who is invoked for help. The invocation is expressed on various hypocephali either directly as O Db3.ty or, indirectly, through the disarmingly powerful first person assertion: I am the Db3.ty. Next follows the prayer, a desperate prayer: Come to his aid! Third, we meet a petition: Grant him a place in the solar retinue! At last, comes the hoped-for conclusion: He is now even as Thou art.


Notes

Images Consulted: New and startlingly clear images of the Church Historian's copy of Facsimile 2, along with the other so-called Kirtland Egyptian Papers, were made in 2009 and are housed in the Church History Library. I was given permission to view this sole image. [Note: the same image may now be found online on the Joseph Smith Papers Web page.]

For the Hedlock woodcut, as found in the Pearl of Great Price, see http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/fac-2?lang=eng

Reuben Hedlock prepared woodcuts of the facsimiles, from which lead printer's plates were made. These served for the original publication in the Times and Seasons periodical (1842). "All three of the Hedlock woodcuts were subsequently reproduced and have been used since the 1981 printing of the Pearl of Great Price" (Catalog for "Treasures of the Exhibition: Presidents of the Church," Church History Library, April 2013). The catalog does not give the entire picture where Facsimile 1 is concerned: the new woodcut would show the details of the now-recovered, though much damaged, vignette (recovered from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1966), as well as what appears on the original Hedlock cut.

For Leiden AMS 62 (Tanetirt), which is housed at the Rijsmuseum va
n Oudheden in Leiden, Netherlands, see: http://www.rmo.nl/collectie/zoeken?object=AMS+62.

For Ashmolean 1982.1095 (the Tasheritenkhonsu hypocephalus), see: http://www.ashmoleanprints.com/image/453787/amuletic-disk-hypocephalus-made-for-tasheritenkhonsu

Erasures on the rim: The rim of Facsimile 2 has suffered erasure and tearing on both the right and left sides. Because the loss of signs on the left side is minimal, restoration by comparison with parallel hypocephali makes for a simple task.

Michael Tilgner: Tilgner's work with the rim inscription appears on an online Egyptology discussion Web site:

http://www.aegyptologie.com/forum/cgi-bin/YaBB/YaBB.pl?board=guan&action=display&num=1167121882&start=0


An update of earlier work

The foregoing discussion on the rim is taken from a longer piece in which I examine the entire text found on the Joseph Smith hypocephalus ("Book of Abraham Facsimile 2: A New Reading," published and copyrighted on 5 October 2010). I extracted the discussion on the rim and made slight modifications to it, so that it may be read and assessed more directly.

All translations of the rim are my own and depend upon the work of no other person, except as clearly stated (Nibley, Rhodes, Tilgner). Nothing I write here should be taken as the official interpretation or doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Everyone has the right to his or her own interpretation of Facsimile 2. Despite new readings derived from parallel hypocephali, the starting place for all translations of Facsimile 2 remains the work of Michael Rhodes (for which now see Hugh Nibley and Michael Rhodes, One Eternal Round, 2010).

Professor Robert K. Ritner, The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri, 2011, also draws on the several hypocephali to suggest readings for the Joseph Smith hypocephalus rim. Though he does not try to match traces to these hypocephali or to consider the question of spacing with any more precision than does Rhodes (as the ellipses show), he does transcribe closer to that which I suggest: [. . . my Wsir SSnq  m3' xrw z3     . . .], [. . . Come to the Osiris Shoshenq, the justified, son of. . .], page 217-8. For the remainder of the rim, Professor Ritner reads: ntf nTr pf '3 m Hw.t Sr, "He is that great god in the House of the Noble," Ibid.

Recovering the Missing Hieroglyphs on the Right Panels of the Book of Abraham Facsimile 2

The nearly blank panels numbering from top down: 12, 13, 14, 15, as found on the right side of Book of Abraham Facsimile 2, have for too long remained unrestored and thus unread. Joseph Smith leaves their interpretation to futurity: "12. Figures 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 will be given in the own due time of the Lord." (For LDS Book of Abraham Facsimile 2, see: http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/fac-2?lang=eng.)

Reuben Hedlock's woodcut facsimile of the original hypocephalus, as reflected in the extant printer's plate for the Times and Seasons periodical (1842), adds hieratic characters, taken from the Book of Breathings as filler, to the blank spaces of the right panels and the right-side of the rim, and to a smaller degree, to a blank patch in the left panels. Such mixing of hieratic with the few extant hieroglyphic traces on those "blank spaces" precludes a ready reading. 

Why are there blank spaces on the right side? A piece of the original hypocephalus has been torn away; other writing has, in part, been rubbed off. Here an undated pen-and-ink copy of the hypocephalus showing a few remaining hieroglyphs and traces of others becomes essential, for these few are enough to match up with what appears on other hypocephali. Hugh Nibley calls the pen-and-ink copy, which is housed in the Church's historical archives, the Church Historian's copy.

The key to reconstructing the text of these four panels lies in the traces of the noun phrase md.t=f (his word) in figure 15 (that is, right-hand panel 4), followed by the determinative sign of a seated god or seated man. Because that same noun phrase, in the company of a specific prayer for divine aid, is also found in the side panels of at least three other hypocephali (Hesikheb = BM 37908 = BS.8445f, panel 2 only; Wien AS 253 a/1, on right side, panels 1, and part of 2 and of 3 only, panel 4, nearly all torn away; Leiden AMS 62, on left side), we can confidently move forward. The task will not be difficult if extant traces show the way, though wording and spelling on the several hypocephali may vary.

Panel 1 (fig. 12) is the logical place to start, as we work our way down to md.t=f. Panel 1, reading from right to left, shows, on the left, traces of what I take to be two flowering reeds and a short mid-level horizontal stroke ending at left in a small knob. I reconstruct the second, leftmost reed from traces of two vertical strokes that nearly touch, the right stroke being a bit longer than the left. Though the signs find no match in the corresponding panel of BM 37908, Wien AS 253 a/1, or Leiden AMS 62, working from what I see on the top panel of yet another hypocephalus (Ashmolean Museum 1982.1095), that is, j nTr pfy '3, I transcribe the reeds and the horizontal stroke on the Joseph Smith hypocephalus as y and '3 (great) respectively, and thus as belonging to a partly erased pfy '3. The demonstrative pronoun pf(y), with its superfluous y tagged on, as is common in late texts, means "that"; '3 means "great" or "greatest": "O that great(est) god." We can leave such descriptive flourishes out when translating: no need to state the obvious about each god being the greatest of all. . . What we are left with, then, is simply the invocation of "that particular god" shown in figure 1 (Kolob; the Transcendent, Universal Amun) of the hypocephalus.

Moving to Panel 2 (fig. 13), both Hedlock and the Church Historian's copy show many traces (except at very right), including traces of the sail, or hieroglyph for air, as also found on our three presumably parallel hypocephali, where we read 'nx m T3w (the one who lives on air, that is, by breathing air). It is not easy to read the traces on the left half of Panel 2 on either the Hedlock or the Church Historian's copy. Still, the first few dots, or right descending oblique strokes, as the Hedlock cut particularly makes clear, outline the hieroglyph of the owl, which writes the preposition m (in, from, out of). 

Moving to the left, at center panel we note two low oblique strokes descending to the right and a low dot, or stroke. Here are the owl's tail feathers and--as the other hypocephali suggest--traces of the following sign). On Hedlock, just a glance takes in head and horns, back, tail, and feet of the owl. There follows a high horizontal stroke from which hang two small, leftward facing hooks conjoined to parallel diagonals descending to the left. These last match the right-hand portion of the sail hieroglyph on Wien AS 253 a/2. But what about the bold curving stroke just to the left? To a keen eye, there is no difficulty in assigning it to the left side of the very same sail. While these traces, at first blush, appear to be too extensive for a single hieroglyphic sign, that indeed is what we have.

The parallel hypocephali next show jw (or jw.t) m mw (who travels through water). Michael Tilgner, who says jw m mw occurs nowhere else, creatively chooses to read the signs as prj m nwn (who emerges from Nun, i.e., the cosmic Waters). Does Facsimile 2 also reflect the verbal phrase jw m mw? Other traces immediately follow on the left of the sail, near the edge of the panel. The Hedlock is the clearest. At top we see two small right descending strokes: the hieroglyph of walking legs, which signifies jw (to travel). Hedlock shows the strokes coming together at an apex: the reading is clear. A small slightly oblique stroke at mid-level, also descending to right, and a low dot probably are to be read, respectively, as a short vertical stroke that "fills in" the hieroglyphic constellation of walking or traveling and as a -t (a perhaps superfluous grammatical marker following the verb).

Panel 3 (fig. 14) yields only a long blank that ends in the hieroglyph of the sun (that is, Re), followed by j + w. A comparison of other known instances of the w-sign on the hypocephalus helps to confirm the reading. The signs reading j + w have two possible outcomes: they might either spell jw, a declarative particle marking the beginning of new sentences or even sections of discourse, or they might represent an alternative spelling for the preposition r (to or toward). Re also appears on Panel 3 of Wien AS 253 a/1 and BM 37908, and in both cases the name is followed by the preposition r (in its more common spelling).

We return now to the partially preserved noun phrase that provides the key for reading the whole. Panel 4 (fig. 15), at center and left, yields a determinative sign of a man with hand over mouth, followed by three marks of plurality and, underneath the last, the horned viper (the masculine possessive suffix -f = his). There is one more sign at the edge of the panel: the determinative of the seated god.

These last remnants on Panel 4 find a match in the beautifully written Leiden hypocephalus (Leiden AMS 62), where the same word is found written in full: staff + hand + bread loaf (the letter -t), followed by that man with his hand to his mouth, and then the horned viper. And an even closer match in spelling appears on BM 37908. (Wien AS 253 a/2, though also a match, has an abbreviated spelling.) And what is the word? Again, it's md.t, the word for word or words (earlier Egyptian writes the word as mdw, a plural form). And, following the rest of the line in Leiden et alia, we know whose word it is: Osiris' word. 

Words must not be thought of, however, as an ordinary plural form, that is, one for which a singular form perforce exists. Plurality is built into the lexically frozen mdw (or mdw(.w)) or, later, md.t, or md(.w)t), whether specifically written with the determinative of plurality or not. It is the very notion of speech which requires plurality, whether specifically so marked or not: mdw=f, or md.t=f signifies not only his words but also his speech or his petition, a matter, necessarily, of many words (see the Woerterbuch der Aegyptischen Sprache, Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar, and Antonio Loprieno's Ancient Egyptian: A Linguistic Introduction [Cambridge, 1995]). 

Nibley and Rhodes (One Eternal Round, 230ff) helpfully provide full discussion of Leiden AMS 62, though without reference to the fragmentary final line in the Abraham hypocephalus. The remaining hieroglyphs in panel four, however, had already been noted by several students. Dee Jay Nelson, although not formally trained in Egyptian, gives the phrase as mdw=f, "his words," in his Joseph Smith's Eye of Ra: a preliminary survey and first translation of facsimile no. 2 in the Book of Abraham (1968), 4, 28. Nelson also correctly reads the final sign at the end of the panel, just after mdw= or md.t=f, as a seated man, but gives no further interpretation for it. Nelson, in a hand-drawn copy of the hypocephalus (p. 4), for these right-hand panels, also tries to transcribe several traces: Panel 1: to the left of center, two reeds (which wrongly face rightwards); Panel 3: left of center, circle at top with vertical line underneath (he does not include a dot in the middle of the circle or the translation of sun or Re), followed by a reed (again, wrongly facing rightwards); Panel 4 center to left, he gives as mdw=f, followed by the seated man. In Rhodes, "Seventeen Years Later," we find the phrase cautiously transcribed as =f, "his;" Professor John Gee has also read these few signs as mdw=f. A few, then, have at least begun to guess correctly about what was originally written on the right panels of Facsimile 2. . . The restoration of the text is not philologically demanding, and it is surprising, given the evidence of the like documents, that no one thus far has read the traces--yet traces are tricky.

The entire petition, beginning at the top left hand panel in the Leiden hypocephalus, and as Leiden has it, reads:

O noble god (or, O Shepsi--a solar god), 
who lives on air. 
Come through (or on, or over, or out of) the water. 

Re shall enter (i.e., go down) to hear his word (or his words, speech, or call). 

Come to the Osiris Tayat, etc.

Is this not, with a slight variation in the first phrase, the very text that was once found, before erasures, on the Abraham hypocephalus? 

Again, what we see on Facsimile 2, fig. 13 (= Panel 3), is Re, followed by the flowering reed (j) and then what appears to be a w. That's the end of the panel, but the succeeding panel (fig. 14) is blank until we come to the broken md.t=f, followed by the sign of a seated god. At very least we can posit that the blank space of Panel 4 includes a sentence about coming to hear Osiris: r sDm md.t=f ("to hear his word"); at most, we would hope to find in panels 3 or 4 the name of the invoked god (Re) and a verb of motion: 'q (enter), jw (walk toward), or the like.

That the seated god should immediately follow the noun phrase md.t=f (his petition) shows something is missing. The possessive pronoun his must somehow relate to that out-of-place hieroglyph--it must then represent Osiris as petitioner--yet no clear syntactical element connects it with the preceding noun phrase. Comparison to the Leiden hypocephalus resolves the matter. After md.t=f, Leiden begins a new sentence: mj n Wsjr (Come to Osiris), followed by the name of the deceased, that is, Osiris Tanetirt. We are so to understand the stand-alone sign on the Joseph Smith hypocephalus: Come to the Osiris Shoshenq! Come and rescue him! That is the theme of the right-hand panels of Facsimile 2.

A single sign suffices to prompt a legomenon. Scribes may abbreviate things as they will; the formula would have remained clear to any Theban priest. There are various ways to write the name Osiris, and the seated god here suffices. The meaning of the sign is clear: it represents Osiris and his call. And who is his help? It is the sun god, who descends at night to rescue him from the tomb. In other texts a drowning, floating Osiris calls out, and Thoth, the heavenly messenger, comes. The Metternich Stela (Spell 5) states: "Cause Thoth to come to me at my voice (xrw=j)" (see Val H. Sederholm, Papyrus British Museum 10808 and Its Cultural and Religious Setting [Leiden, 2006], 100). The Leiden text is very specific: Re answers the call by coming through the waters and literally entering into ('q) the tomb.

Let's recap. Does the correct reading of a new word in the Joseph Smith hypocephalus make any difference? And could yet more words now missing from our hypocephalus be identified by comparing our document against others? For one, the single word md.t clinches the case for the Joseph Smith hypocephalus belonging, like Leiden, to that class which represent prayers. And perhaps the best translation for md.t is, after all, prayer. (For the two classes of hypocephali, prayers and answers, see One Eternal Round, 230ff.)

The inscription on the right side of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus thus matches, with some differences of spelling, the left side of Leiden and also the right sides of both Wien AS 253 a/2 (though partly erased) and BM 37908. (There is one sign on Wien difficult to read: just before Re we see something like a crest over a bird's head: could these traces spell 'q?)

The placement of the traces on Facsimile 2 lines up neatly with hieroglyphs found on BM 37908, and attention to such matters of mise-en-page unlocks the reading. The text of BM 37908 reads:

j nTr pf '3
'nx m T3w 
jw/m mw

'q r'/"nTr"-sign + r sDm md.t=f

O god (or greatest god), 
who lives off air, 
and travels in water (or comes on the water): 

May Re descend in order to hear Osiris' prayer!

How is the petition to be understood? The first part, the invocation proper, at once refers to both Re and Osiris, or, to be specific, the petition invokes the figure found at the center of the hypocephalus, the transcendent Amun-Re, Amun-Re/Osiris, or even Shu-Amun. Amun (the hidden one) stands "preeminent among deities, and combines in a single figure all the characteristics of the creator and sustainer of the world," including both Re, the god who empowers the solar globe, and Shu, god of the air, or rather, "of the space between earth and sky and of the light that fills that space," which again recalls figure 4 of Facsimile 2 (E. Hornung, The One and the Many: Conceptions of God in Ancient Egypt, 274-5, 283).

Complicated? The whole matter works itself out as mystery, paradox, and an opposition in all things. Re and Osiris make up the complete cycle of the sun god through sky and netherworld--air and water--while Amun-Re describes his hidden yet transcendent nature. The demonstrative pronoun pfy may mark a distancing of sorts (that, not this). David Klotz's comments on a Hibis Temple hymn also shed light on the theme of breathing in our prayer: "Amun enables birth [resuscitation, rebirth] by 'providing the breath of life,' which is precisely the role of the 'Ba of Shu.' In this sense, it is through Amun's manifestation of pneuma (= Ba of Shu) that the Royal Ka [the power to rule] is passed from generation to generation," or from Horus to Horus (David Klotz, Adoration of the Ram, 36). Water, and the successful navigation of waters, also bespeaks renewal and rebirth.

We now consider the second portion of the petition, which is the pronouncement of the blessing; for the supreme though paradoxical god once invoked, blessing now follows. The blessing reads: "May Re enter to hear his prayer." Here is something wonderful. Just as the invocation mingles the nature of Re and Osiris, sky and watery netherworld, at once within water and rising from water, at once awaiting saving air and carrying that air into the darkness; so the subsequent blessing separates the two gods just long enough to describe the moment of rescue prior to resurrection. As Hugh Nibley, commenting on the Leiden hypocephalus, etc., points out, it is the prayer of Abraham on his lion couch, of Osiris on his.

Has the text of the right hand panel of Facsimile 2 been recovered? Yes! The result, in standard computer transcription--and in just 15 words--reads: 

j nTr pfy 'A 
'nx m TAw 
jw m mw: 

'q r' jw [or, r] sDm md.t=f. 

[Mj n] Wsjr. 

What do the words mean? As set forth above, the officiator, calling upon that special, particular, transcendent god, who lives by breathing, who negotiates the waters, pleads from the depths: 

May Re descend to hear Osiris' words! 
Come to Shoshenq, who is dead! 

The Psalmist so pleads:

Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O Lord. 
Lord, hear my voice: let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications.
(Psalm 130:1-2). 

Thou, which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and shalt bring me up again from the depths of the earth. 
(Psalm 71:20). 

The prayer on the hypocephalus has a biblical ring!

Hugh Nibley, who anticipates so many things, also anticipated this new reading; in One Eternal Round we find two pages of translation and commentary (230-1) on this very petition in its Leiden version! (Note the positive comments on reconstructing all missing portions of Facsimile 2 on the basis of other hypocephali, ps. 325-6.)

We now turn to the left-hand panels, where the prayer for rescue blossoms into resurrection (and, again, in a mere 15 or 16 words, depending on whether we take zp-tpj to be a sole word):

j nTr Sps m zp tpj
nb p.t, tA, dA.t, mw, [Dw.w]: 

s'nx bA wsjr SS[n]q

O noble god in the First Time, 
lord of heaven, earth, duat, waters, [and mountains]:

s'nx the b3 of Osiris Sheshonq. 

The reading "noble god," nTr Sps, is that of Professor Robert Ritner; "waters and mountains," instead of "his great waters," as Michael Rhodes reads, derives from formulaic parallels that always include "mountains," as I noted in 2010, and as has also been noted by both Robert Ritner and John Gee. The reading s'nx, the causative form of the verb 'nx, (to cause to live), was, as I thought, my sole contribution to reading the lowest panel; I now see Professor Ritner also suggests the same reading (or, alternatively, mj, "give"). (For Ritner's readings see his Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri [published, 2012], 222, and 222 notes 36 and 37.) Here's a bit more. Given the space available on Hedlock, and since this is the wording to be found on Hypocephalus Cairo CG 9448 (which Ritner takes as being very close to our own document), I further suggest that "mountains" be followed by "djet" (D.t, eternity, that is, r D.t, forever). My own reconstruction, then, would read: 

O noble god at the moment of creation--
Lord of heaven, earth, netherworld, waters, mountains, even forever--

Enliven the Ba of Osiris Sheshonq! (Cause the Ba of Osiris to attain to Eternal Life.)

To the attentive reader, the balanced prayers on the Joseph Smith hypocephalus bear striking resemblance to the poetic, and very Egyptian, language describing the four theophanies of the Book of Abraham. Hugh Nibley's ear was ever attentive to the echoes and cadences that obtain between the story of Abraham's rescue from the altar and the theme of prayer and divine response, as found on 48 hypocephali and in the Book of the Dead (One Eternal Round, 224ff., 233). 

Abraham rejoices:

Thy servant has sought thee earnestly; 
now I have found thee; 

Thou didst send thine angel to deliver me. . . 
and I will do well to hearken unto thy voice [r sDm md.t=k]
 (Abraham 2:12-3). 

The found God of Abraham (a leading theme in New Kingdom piety texts) reveals himself as the Lord of heaven, earth, sea, fire, wind, and the mountains:

I dwell in heaven; 
the earth is my footstool; 
I stretch my hand over the sea, and it obeys my voice; 
I cause the wind and fire to be my chariot; 
I say to the mountains--Depart hence
(Abraham 2:7). 

And in answer to Abraham's pleas from the altar or lion couch (pictured on Fac. 2, fig. 15), he responds: 

Behold, I lifted up my voice [xrw; mdw] unto the Lord my God, 
and the Lord hearkened and heard [sDm]. . . 
and the angel of his presence stood by me, 
and immediately unloosed my bands [mummy wrappings = Abraham as Osiris]. . . 

Abraham, Abraham, 
behold, my name is Jehovah, 
and I have heard [sDm] thee, 
and have come down [mj; 'q] to deliver thee [nHm, deliver ~ nHm.t, nHb, the lotus, as symbol of Abraham's deliverance]
(Abraham 1:16). 

The descent only mirrors that of primordial times (m zp tpy): 

I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences [Eg. Akh = 3x = spirits of light]
(Abraham 3:21). 

No wonder the Prophet Joseph places the hypocephalus immediately after Facsimile 1: its panels describe the very same rescue as that depicted in the scene representing Osiris' lion-couch bier, which is, at once, Abraham's altar.

It is not a difficult matter to picture the Book of Abraham written in hieroglyphs on an Egyptian papyrus; the hypocephalus alone has things covered.





Notes

Images consulted: New and startlingly clear images of the Church Historian's copy of Facsimile 2 (along with the other so-called Kirtland Egyptian Papers) were made in 2009, and are housed in the Church History Library. I was given permission to examine this sole image at the library. [Note: The Joseph Smith Papers Web site now features the same.] The Reuben Hedlock print of Facsimile 2, taken from his original woodcut, appears in all editions of the Book of Abraham in the Pearl of Great Price. A larger print, which reflects the size of the original hypocephalus, may be found in the Times and Seasons, March 1842. The hypocephalus has been lost; both the Church Historian's copy and Hedlock show some things not found on the other copy.  

According to the catalogue for the "Treasures of the Collection: Presidents of the Church" exhibit at the Church History Library (April 2013), Reuben Hedlock first prepared woodcuts of the three facsimiles of the Book of Abraham for its publication in the Times and Seasons, 1842; from these woodcuts, printing plates were then made. "All three of the Hedlock woodcuts were subsequently reproduced and have been used since the 1981 printing of the Pearl of Great Price." The lead printing plates have been exhibited at least twice in the Church History Library.

The Joseph Smith (or Abraham) Hypocephalus:
http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/fac-2?lang=eng

For other hypocephali, I also give the following links: 

Leiden AMS 62, Hypocephalus of Tanetirt at Leiden's Rijksmuseum van Oudheden
http://www.rmo.nl/collectie/zoeken?object=AMS+62

Wien AS 253 a/1, Hypocephalus of Aset-weret at Vienna's Kunsthistoriches Museum
http://bilddatenbank.khm.at/viewArtefact?id=316439
Note: Nibley and Rhodes, One Eternal Round, list the same hypocephalus as AS 253 a/2 

BM EA 37908, Hypocephalus of Herikheb at the British Museum
http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details/collection_image_gallery.aspx?assetId=232640&objectId=166743&partId=1

Ashmolean 1982.1095, Hypocephalus of Tasheritenkhonsu at the Ashmolean Museum
http://www.ashmoleanprints.com/image/453787/amuletic-disk-hypocephalus-made-for-tasheritenkhonsu


Revision of work published in October 2010

I cull the foregoing remarks about the right panels from a longer article that examines the entire text found on the Joseph Smith Hypocephalus ("Book of Abraham Facsimile 2: A New Reading," published and copyrighted on 5 October 2010). I extracted the piece on the right panels from the longer article, added a paragraph or two, and reworked some of its sentences, so that the explanations of both hieroglyphs and traces of hieroglyphs on the panels might be understood and assessed more directly. 

After appreciatively reviewing Professor Robert Ritner's suggested transcriptions of the hypocephalus, I have made one correction in my reading of the left-hand panel invocation: "O noble god," now reading Sps (noble) instead of sDr (Robert Ritner, The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri: A Complete Edition, "Hypocephalus of Sheshonq," 215-226 (published 2011; 2nd ed., 2013). For discussion of the significance of the new reading, see my post of 20 April 2012, "Book of Abraham Facsimile 2: The August God and the 'Noble and Great Ones." I was surprised to see Professor Ritner's book, though I had read a prior article of his on the other Joseph Smith papyri, the Book of Breathings. 

All translations of the right-hand panels are my own and depend upon the work of no other person, except as clearly stated here. It is Hugh Nibley who first emphasized the Leiden hypocephalus as fundamental to our understanding of Facsimile 2. There have been and yet will be other attempts at interpretation of the Joseph Smith hypocephalus; the privilege belongs to everyone. 

Professor Robert Ritner, whose book on the Joseph Smith Papyri came out in 2011, does not attempt a reconstruction of these right-hand panels, and certainly not one based on similar hypocephali. "The traces are too inexact for secure translation, and the following bits are only suggestions" (p. 223):

(1) [. . .] y n 
(2) [. . .] n rd.wy . . .
(3) [. . .] R' i
(4) [. . .].w=f

(1) . . .
(2) [. . .] on the feet . . .
(3) [. . .] Re. O
(4) [. . .] his (divine) [words(?)]."

Ritner's suggestions confirm several of my own. 

Panel 1: For the two reeds, we both see y; the following horizontal, which I read as '3, can just as easily be taken for an n. 

Panel 2 represents the only significant difference in transcription. 

Panel 3: We both duly note the sign for R', followed by the reed, j. 

Panel 4: "The signs indicate a plural number of entities determined by a man-with-hand-to-mouth and the sign for god" (223 note 4). 




The Due Time of the Lord


Only the living Prophet and President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the right, in the due time of the Lord, to interpret, in the fullest sense of the word, the writings and representations found on the hypocephalus and, by so doing, complete the Prophet Joseph Smith's Explanation of Facsimile 2. 

A Future for Brigham Young University's Neal A. Maxwell Institute!

Elder John A. Widtsoe, a modern John the Beloved, dreamed dreams about Brigham Young University. And by dreams he meant tasks: BYU must become a center for the study of just government, for the study of happy family life, for the promotion of the Lord's law of health, and for an evidentiary study of the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. (Mormonism produced the book, after all, and is founded upon its testimony.) So runs the short list--the vital things--but "Following the revealed word of God, it could and must win prominence and assume leadership in many distinctive fields which lie embedded in the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

Such aspirations bespeak love, and his love for the university blossomed during the briefest stay as a visiting professor. Dr. Widtsoe, who had established himself at Utah State University, suddenly found himself without a job (and the firing was unjust) too late in the year to seek another place. In the midst of the crisis, an old teacher counseled Brother Widtsoe "to stay sweet." Then Brigham Young University came to the rescue. . .

BYU weaves a spell about those who find safe haven there.

And note the unique tie between BYU and the Gospel. BYU "could and must win prominence and assume leadership." In what? "In many distinctive fields," he says. But do not all universities seek the same? No. In the case of BYU there is a strict limitation and focus: "in many distinctive fields which lie embedded in the Gospel of Jesus Christ." Much else may be studied for profit and learning; leadership and prominence are reserved for those specific areas of study that channel saving Gospel principles to a thirsting world: "it must emphasize, for all the world to see, that peace and prosperity, for which the world hungers, may be produced only from adherence to gospel principles."

Let's roll up our sleeves, he says:

"[And] set up academic units to study, assemble, investigate, teach and publish the gospel message as it pertains to the following fields which are especially prominent in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ:

(1) wise and successful government, both national and international;

(2) happy family life built around our understanding of the eternity of family relations;

(3) health producing nutrition, embodying the principles of the inspired Word of Wisdom;

(4) American archaeology to substantiate the claims of the Book of Mormon.

The four enumerated are of especial importance. It must also pass on a well-rounded cultural education. Based on latter-day revelations these four items have the right to be heard and taught in terms of man's accumulated knowledge and the Lord's revelations. The world is pleading for such guidance in these and other matters within the possession of the Church.

Such deliberate organization and effort would enable the B.Y.U. to give service of tremendous value to mankind. Gradually, fearless, intelligent, well-organized teaching of these subjects will not only win general academic acclaim but also the respect and praise from people everywhere of any faith, land or station. The consequent blessing to our own people would be incalculable.

As the conserver and preserver of existing knowledge the B.Y.U. must bravely recognize its great responsibility and accept its magnificent opportunity. Unless it does so it will remain one of the tread-mill workers in the educational fraternity--a little better than the others because of the practice of gospel principles on its campus.

The B.Y.U. must look up to the skies; it must have the courage to challenge, if needs be, the whole world."


As I have pondered over the years this charge of Elder Widtsoe, my heart has soared. I was a student once--and I cannot get the place and the goals out of my heart. I don't teach there now; but one bright semester, years ago, I got to teach two classes--and I still dream of BYU.

I don't know much about world government, but I deeply wish to drink from the teaching BYU will afford us as we move closer to millennial peace. I do know something about efforts to establish centers of study for the Book of Mormon--after all, Elder Widtsoe recruited Hugh Nibley to BYU, and how we all loved to hear him teach from an open copy of that cornerstone Scripture.

There once was an institute promoting Book of Mormon archaeology at BYU: it fell into ruins. Marvelous work in Mesoamerican archaeology and linguistics and on the Popol Vuh has come out of the Y, and I rejoice in much light shed on the Holy Word of God, though the little institute itself become a silent tell.

Great dreams continue to be dreamed, and from such dreams there came so-called FARMS, the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, whose mission was to publish on all things Egyptian and Hebrew and Mayan and Arabic and Greek, as such might pertain to the Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price. A journal was bravely launched; the title was simple and to the point: The Journal of the Book of Mormon.

And, in time, the institute become an official part of Brigham Young University. The Prophet himself issued the invitation. Then, to my shock (not feeling it worthy), there came to grace the program the sacred name of another apostle, Elder Neal A. Maxwell. Though shocked, I saw there remained but one honorable outcome: The institute would simply have to prove worthy of the name. The Prophet said "I think we will not see [Elder Maxwell's] like again"--but somehow, however long and hard the road, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute of Religious Scholarship would have to live up to its name. And it would have to live up to the name of exemplary Brigham Young.

Has it? No. (What organization could?)

And has the Maxwell Institute that now houses FARMS lived up to Elder Widtsoe's dreams? No. On the other hand, I was startled to find a Neal A. Maxwell Presidential Endowed Chair at the University of Utah's Department of Political Science. Somehow its honorees rise to the assigned task. . .

Yet much good has been done! And I'm convinced the dream will unfold in a wonderful way.

How?

By rolling up sleeves--and by counting the cost.

The Maxwell Institute alone publishes three journals and one newsletter. Now count, if you will, the many overlapping institutes, programs, journals, centers, departments, colloquia, and symposia BYU now sponsors, all of which, in divers ways, do the work that ought to belong to a unified institute of Book of Mormon studies. The number will blow your mind! Think of the cost. Imagine the bewildered students.

Second, consider how many gifted BYU professors, as peer reviewers, writers, editors, contribute to outside journals, symposia, Web sites, and organizations all of which publish on the Book of Mormon. Look at one such: FAIR. FAIR's symposia and publications, often praiseworthy, first rivaled, then overshadowed FARMS itself. Yet it's mostly just the same stuff--and the same staff. I wonder just how it is that the Church's flagship university allows wee organizations, bursting with zeal, to eclipse a well-known institute set up by and named after living prophets--and effectively to do the eclipsing within the prophets' own lifetimes?

Specific BYU institutes set up for specific gospel-related tasks ought, by all rights, to eclipse all rivals, however worthy, whether within or without the university walls. The world may be our campus--but let us at least have a campus. Let there be at least a friendly competition. And let's win one for the Cougars!

We learn and grow from vigorous competition--survival of the fittest--and we will yet join forces. Judah will not envy Ephraim, and the Kennedy Center will not do the work of the Maxwell Institute, nor will the Religious Studies Center and its Religious Educator sap strength from the Journal of the Book of Mormon.

Competition?

Elder Maxwell was "touched by the combination of world-class scholarship and world-class testimony" on BYU's three campuses. Yet, as he reminds us--and here we see both the experienced administrator and the true Christian--"There will always be a need for civility and trust throughout the large BYU faculty, harnessed as we are together." (As if, once yoked in Christ, we could ever become unharnessed!)

With that gentle but laser-like foresight apostles enjoy, he then quotes President John Taylor, who also "being dead yet speaketh":

Many of us are tried and tempted, and we get harsh and hard feelings against one another. And it reminds me of your teams when going down hill with a heavy load. When the load begins to crowd on to the horses, you will frequently see one snap at his mate, and the other will prick up his ears and snap back again. And why? A little while before, perhaps, and they were playing with each other. Because the load crowds on them. Well, when the load begins to crowd, do not snap at your brethren, but let them feel that you are their friends, and pull together (Journal of Discourses 21:214-15; Elder Neal A. Maxwell, "Out of the Best Faculty," BYU Annual University Conference, August 26, 1993).

Go team!

BYU weaves a spell about those who find safe haven there.

We start with competition--we all need a starting point to do great work. Then with "deliberate organization and effort," we come together in a glorious cause: "Proving to the world that the holy scriptures are true" (Doctrine and Covenants 20:11). Elder Widtsoe dreamt; we must wake. Now is the time. Friendship will flourish. God's work will be done.

"So ran my thoughts during the valued interlude at the Brigham Young University, and so run my thoughts and prayers today, after these many years. The B.Y.U. must become earth's greatest university."



Notes

The chapter from which I quote (introducing slight editing) is entitled "An Interlude at B.Y.U." It appears In a Sunlit Land. The Autobiography of John A. Widtsoe, 88-97 (1952, Salt Lake City).

I honor anyone who publishes good tidings from the Book of Mormon, no matter how or where. And I honor BYU's Maxwell Institute (and at its heart, the Laura F. Willes Center for Book of Mormon Studies), its friends and employees, and marvel at how far it has come in fulfilling prophecy. I know it will always have a bright future. (See http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/insights/vol=27&num=3&id=503.)

Latter-day Saint Scholars Versus Lay Members: A New Priestcraft (3 Nephi 6:12)

It startles the honest reader to learn of a new dichotomy, now much drummed as if decree, separating Latter-day Saint "scholars" from "lay members," "lay readers," and the like. A word to the wise: We are all students, from Kindergarten up. 

FARMS betimes snorted that whiff of nonsense: "The new format will serve two audiences. The first is scholars presenting their findings to fellow scholars." There do exist "tens of thousands of intelligent nonspecialist readers" (we're breaking it gently), and, for their beguilement, "We plan to use superior contemporary design and attractive illustrations" ("The Editor's Notebook," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 7.1, 1998). 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does enjoy a lay ministry. And, following the logic of such an organization, Christians who do not hold high office may, perchance, boast of being rank-and-file members. But every candid soul must object to a dichotomy slicing "lay members" from "scholars." 

Nephi would object: "And the people began to be distinguished by ranks, according to their riches and their chances for learning; yea, some were ignorant because of their poverty, and others did receive great learning because of their riches" (3 Nephi 6:12). 

Should we liken the scripture unto ourselves, there's precious little mutatis to mutandis.

Fools before God (2 Nephi 9:42). Let the scholar beware! He may soon appear a fool before God, for even run-of-the-mill Saints receive the promise: "God shall give unto you knowledge by his Holy Spirit, yea, by the unspeakable gift of the Holy Ghost, that has not been revealed since the world was until now" (Doctrine and Covenants 121:26). "As well might man stretch forth his puny arm to stop the Missouri river in its decreed course, or to turn it up stream, as to hinder the Almighty from pouring down knowledge from heaven upon the heads of the Latter-day Saints" (v.33). Those that "aspire to the honors of men," the called but not chosen, "do not learn [even] one lesson" (vs.34-5)! 

Besides, the Lord "[reasons] in plainness and simplicity--to prepare the weak [for] the day when the weak shall confound the wise" (133:58). Thus even "the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints. . .shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures" (89: 3; 19). Don't debate the Saints!

What, if anything, have graduate degrees or expectations of graduate degrees in 2015 or 2017 to do with scholarship anyhow? There has to be some limit to careening arrogance. It's enough to make one seasick--scholars soaring on one deck; everybody else at the oars!