Revision as of 20:18, 3 October 2014 (view source) RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (→‎) ← Older edit		Revision as of 20:21, 3 October 2014 (view source) RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) Newer edit →
Line 5:		Line 5:
	{{QA label}}		{{QA label}}
	{{:Question: What are the criticisms related to Facsimile 1?}}		{{:Question: What are the criticisms related to Facsimile 1?}}
−
−
−
	{{:Source:Gospel Topics:Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimiles of the book of Abraham contain additional earmarks of the ancient world}}		{{:Source:Gospel Topics:Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimiles of the book of Abraham contain additional earmarks of the ancient world}}
		+	{{:Question: What does the lion couch scene normally represent?}}
−	== ==
−	{{Response label}}
−
−	==Question: What does the lion couch scene normally represent?==
−	===The lion couch vignette usually represents the embalming of the deceased individual in preparation for burial===
−
−	[[Image:BOAfacsimile1.jpg|300px|right|thumb|Photograph of Facsimile 1 from the recovered Joseph Smith Papyri]]
−	The papyrus with the illustration represented in Facsimile 1 ([http://scriptures.lds.org/en/abr/fac_1 view]) is the only recovered item that has any connection to the text of the Book of Abraham.
−	This vignette is called a "lion couch scene" by Egyptologists. It usually represents the embalming of the deceased individual in preparation for burial. However, this particular lion couch scene represents the resurrection of Hor (figure 2), aided by the Egyptian god Anubis (3).<ref>Michael D. Rhodes, ''The Hor Book of Breathings: A Translation and Commentary'' (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2002), 19 (18&ndash;23).</ref>
−	{{s||Abraham|1|12}} and the notes to Facsimile 1 identify it as representing Abraham being sacrificed by the priest of Elkenah in Ur.
	==Question: Is Joseph Smith papyri Facsimile 1 common and similar to other such scenes?==		==Question: Is Joseph Smith papyri Facsimile 1 common and similar to other such scenes?==

---

Revision as of 20:21, 3 October 2014

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Book of Abraham Facsimile 1: The "lion couch" scene

Question: What are the criticisms related to Book of Abraham Facsimile 1?

The following claims are made regarding Facsimile 1:

• That facsimile 1 is simply a typical funerary scene and there are many other papyri showing the same basic scene.
• It is claimed that the missing portions of the drawing were incorrectly restored:
  • The head of the priest should have been that of Anubis.
  • The priest should not have been holding a knife.
  • The portion portrayed as Abraham's second hand should have been the wing of a second bird.
• It is claimed that Abraham has never been associated with the lion couch vignette such as that portrayed in Facsimile #1 of the Book of Abraham.

Gospel Topics: "Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimiles of the book of Abraham contain additional earmarks of the ancient world"

"Facsimile 1 contains a crocodile deity swimming in what Joseph Smith called 'the firmament over our heads'"

Gospel Topics on LDS.org:

Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimiles of the book of Abraham contain additional earmarks of the ancient world. Facsimile 1 and Abraham 1꞉17 mention the idolatrous god Elkenah. This deity is not mentioned in the Bible, yet modern scholars have identified it as being among the gods worshipped by ancient Mesopotamians. Joseph Smith represented the four figures in figure 6 of facsimile 2 as “this earth in its four quarters.” A similar interpretation has been argued by scholars who study identical figures in other ancient Egyptian texts. Facsimile 1 contains a crocodile deity swimming in what Joseph Smith called “the firmament over our heads.” This interpretation makes sense in light of scholarship that identifies Egyptian conceptions of heaven with “a heavenly ocean.” ^[1]

Question: What does the lion couch scene in Book of Abraham Facsimile 1 normally represent?

The lion couch vignette usually represents the embalming of the deceased individual in preparation for burial

The papyrus with the illustration represented in Facsimile 1 (view) is the only recovered item that has any connection to the text of the Book of Abraham.

This vignette is called a "lion couch scene" by Egyptologists. It usually represents the embalming of the deceased individual in preparation for burial. However, this particular lion couch scene represents the resurrection of Hor (figure 2), aided by the Egyptian god Anubis (3).^[2]

Abraham 1꞉12 and the notes to Facsimile 1 identify it as representing Abraham being sacrificed by the priest of Elkenah in Ur.

Question: Is Joseph Smith papyri Facsimile 1 common and similar to other such scenes?

Joseph Smith papyri Facsimile 1 has a number of unique features that are not present in other lion couch scenes

Although many similar lion couch scenes exist, this one has quite a few unique features:

• No other lion couch scene shows the figure on the couch (Osiris) with both hands raised. (There is a dispute regarding whether or not two hands are represented. See below)
• No other lion couch scenes show the figure lying on the couch clothed in the manner shown in Facsimile 1. In most other lion couch scenes, the reclining figure is either completely nude or fully wrapped like a mummy. There is one known scene in which the figure is wearing a loin cloth. None to date show the type of clothing being worn by the figure in Facsimile 1.
• No other lion couch scenes to date have shown the reclining figure wearing anklets or foot coverings.
• No other lion couch scenes show a crocodile beneath the couch.
• The original of Facsimile 1 shows the couch behind the priest's legs, and the reclining figure's legs are shown in front of the priest's. The figure was transferred on to the woodcut prior to publication in the Times and Seasons. The wood cut attempted to correct this odd perspective by placing the legs of the priest behind the lion couch.
• No other such scenes have hatched lines such as those designated as "Expanse" or "Firmament" in Facsimile 1.
• No other such scenes are known to have the twelve gates or pillars of heaven or anything like them.
• No other such scenes show a lotus and an offering table. These items are common in other Egyptian scenes, but do not appear in the lion couch scene.

Therefore, we do not agree that it is the "same funeral scene." Facsimile 1 actually depicts the resurrection of Osiris. The figure on the couch is alive. The figures to which it is compared all show the preparation of a mummy.

Evidence

Muhlestein and Gee: "It is now apparent that human sacrifice did indeed occur in ancient Egypt"

Abraham noted that the attempt to sacrifice him "was done after the manner of the Egyptians" (Abraham 1:11). Egyptologists Kerry Muhlestein and John Gee note that evidence has been uncovered of the practice of human sacrifice in ancient Egypt,

[A]rchaeologists have discovered evidence of human sacrifice. Just outside the Middle Kingdom fortress at Mirgissa, which had been part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia, a deposit was found containing various ritual objects such as melted wax figurines, a flint knife, and the decapitated body of a foreigner slain during rites designed to ward off enemies. Almost universally, this discovery has been accepted as a case of human sacrifice.20 Texts from this and similar rites from the Middle Kingdom specify that the ritual was directed against "every evil speaker, every evil speech, every evil curse, every evil plot, every evil imprecation, every evil attack, every evil rebellion, every evil plan, and every evil thing,"^[3] which refers to those who "speak evil" of the king or of his policies.^[4] The remains in the deposit are consistent with those of later ritual texts describing the daily execration rite, which was usually a wax figure substituting in effigy for a human sacrifice: "Bind with the sinew of a red cow . . . spit on him four times . . . trample on him with the left foot . . . smite him with a spear . . . decapitate him with a knife . . . place him on the fire . . . spit on him in the fire many times."^[5] Again we see that the use of a knife was followed by burning. The fact that the site of Mirgissa is not in Egypt proper but was part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia informs us that the Egyptians extended such practices beyond their borders.

In fact, throughout time we find that ritual violence was often aimed at foreign places and people.^[6] Their very foreignness was seen as a threat to Egypt's political and social order. Hence many of the known examples of ritual slaying are aimed at foreigners, such as those at Mirgissa or Tod. All three examples we have shared involve protecting sacred places and things, such as the boundary of a necropolis, a temple, or even Egypt itself.^[7]

Muhlestein: Sacrifice could be extended to foreigners who lived beyond the boundaries of Egypt

The attempted sacrifice of Abraham, who was not Egyptian, occurred outside of Egypt. (Abraham 1꞉1, Abraham 1꞉10 and Abraham 1꞉20).^[8] There is now evidence that foreigners could be sacrificed outside of the boundaries of Egypt.

Just outside the Middle Kingdom fortress at Mirgissa, which had been part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia, a deposit was found containing various ritual objects such as melted wax figurines, a flint knife, and the decapitated body of a foreigner slain during rites designed to ward off enemies. Almost universally, this discovery has been accepted as a case of human sacrifice.20 Texts from this and similar rites from the Middle Kingdom specify that the ritual was directed against "every evil speaker, every evil speech, every evil curse, every evil plot, every evil imprecation, every evil attack, every evil rebellion, every evil plan, and every evil thing,"21 which refers to those who "speak evil" of the king or of his policies.22 The remains in the deposit are consistent with those of later ritual texts describing the daily execration rite, which was usually a wax figure substituting in effigy for a human sacrifice: "Bind with the sinew of a red cow . . . spit on him four times . . . trample on him with the left foot . . . smite him with a spear . . . decapitate him with a knife . . . place him on the fire . . . spit on him in the fire many times."23 Again we see that the use of a knife was followed by burning. The fact that the site of Mirgissa is not in Egypt proper but was part of the Egyptian empire in Nubia informs us that the Egyptians extended such practices beyond their borders.^[9]

Muhlestein and Gee: "Sacrifice was a penalty for desecrating the sacred house of an Egyptian god"

Abraham rejected his father's worship of idols, and may have tried to destroy some of them.^[10] A human sacrifice was the penalty for desecrating the sacred house of an Egyptian god.

That the penalty of human sacrifice (including burning) was carried out in some circumstances can be shown from a historical account left by Sesostris13 I (1953–1911 BC).14 Sesostris I recounts finding the temple of Tod in a state of both disrepair and intentional desecration, something he attributed to Asiatic/Semitic interlopers he thus deemed as enemies.15 In response, he submits the purported perpetrators to varying punishments: flaying, impalement, beheading, and burning. He informs us that "[the knife] was applied to the children of the enemy (ms.w ḫrwy), sacrifices among the Asiatics."16 Sesostris intended a sacrificial association to be applied to the executions he had just enacted.17 This point is augmented by the fact that some temple sacrifices were consumed by fire.18 While a lacuna makes it impossible to be certain, some of the victims may even have been stabbed with a knife before being burned. In other eras of Egyptian history, this practice of burning seems to have been carried out when ritually slaying a human.19 Clearly, when the sacred house of a god had been desecrated, the Egyptian king responded by sacrificing those responsible.^[11]

Video

For further information related to this topic

Is there one bird or are there two?

Summary: With relation to the claim that a missing portion of Facsimile 1 contained a second bird, the partial figure interpreted as Abraham's second hand is claimed to actually be a portion of the wing of this bird. It is claimed by some that this scene should contain two birds. However, not all lion couch images contain two birds.

Was the head of the priest incorrectly restored?

Summary: Joseph interpreted this figure to be "The idolatrous priest of Elkenah attempting to offer up Abraham as a sacrifice." This figure is normally represented in lion couch scenes as having the jackal head of Anubis. If the portion of the priests head was indeed missing at the time that the facsimile was copied prior to its publication in the Times and Seasons, it may have been restored simply by copying the head of the figure lying on the lion couch. Unlike standards that would be following in publishing today, it was not considered acceptable at that time to publish a figure with missing gaps. Joseph correctly interpreted the figure as a priest. Whether the priest has a human head or is wearing the mask of Anubis makes no difference to the interpretation.

Association between Abraham and the lion couch scene

Summary: It is claimed that Abraham would never be associated with the Egyptian "lion couch" scene.

Notes

1. ↑ "Translation and Historicity of the Book of Abraham," Gospel Topics on LDS.org (8 July 2014).
2. ↑ Michael D. Rhodes, The Hor Book of Breathings: A Translation and Commentary (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2002), 19 (18–23).
3. ↑ Berlin execration texts section p 1–9, in Kurt Sethe, Die Ächtung feindlicher Fürsten, Völker und Dinge auf altägyptischen Tongefässscherben des Mittleren Reiches (Berlin: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1926), 71–72.
4. ↑ PT 23 §16.
5. ↑ P. Louvre 3129 B 44–48, in Siegfried Schott, Urkunden mythologischen Inhalts (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1929), 5; compare P. Bremner Rhind 22/2, 9, 17, 23–24, 23/5, 12, in Raymond O. Faulkner, Papyrus Bremner-Rhind (Brussels: La Fondation Égyptologique Reine Élisabeth, 1933), 42–47. See Gee, "History of a Theban Priesthood," 67–69, and Gee, "Execration Rituals," 67–80.
6. ↑ See Kerry Muhlestein, "Violence in the Service of Order: The Religious Framework for Sanctioned Killing in Ancient Egypt" (PhD diss., University of California, Los Angeles, 2003), all of chapter 10.
7. ↑ Kerry Muhlestein and John Gee, "An Egyptian Context for the Sacrifice of Abraham," Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 20/2 (2011)
8. ↑ Abraham 1:1 - In the land of the Chaldeans, at the residence of my fathers..."; Abraham 1:10 - "Even the thank-offering of a child did the priest of Pharaoh offer upon the altar which stood by the hill called Potiphar’s Hill, at the head of the plain of Olishem."; Abraham 1:20 - "Behold, Potiphar’s Hill was in the land of Ur, of Chaldea."
9. ↑ Kerry Muhlestein and John Gee, "An Egyptian Context for the Sacrifice of Abraham," Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 20/2 (2011)
10. ↑ According to Muhlestein and Gee, "Many later sources also paint a picture that Abraham's life was sought because he had broken down or otherwise desecrated idols; see John A. Tvedtnes, Brian M. Hauglid, and John Gee, eds., Traditions about the Early Life of Abraham (Provo, UT: Institute for the Study and Preservation of Ancient Religious Texts, Brigham Young University, 2001)"
11. ↑ Kerry Muhlestein and John Gee, "An Egyptian Context for the Sacrifice of Abraham," Journal of the Book of Mormon and Other Restoration Scripture 20/2 (2011)