The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part X – Understanding Elkenah

Having discussed the purpose of canopic jars in the last post, a look at Facsimile 1 shows the hawk-headed canopic, called Elkenah, beneath the lion couch (altar) on which Abraham is bound. Obviously, as shown in the last post, Elkena, was not a god associated with funery canopic jars. At the same time, the word “canopic” is not found or implied in the text of the Book of Abraham.

What is found is a drawing, Facsimile 1, which shows four objects labeled as “gods” in the “Explanation of the Above Cut,” that everyone has called canopic jars. However, while there are four objects under the lion couch, or altar, they are representative of named gods, not as jars anymore than the offering table or lotus plant are actually there as a table or a flower, i.e., the lotus flower, commonly associated with Upper Egypt, one of the two lands, when part of the funery imagery actually represented re-birth—in fact, the Book of the Dead contains spells for “transforming oneself into a lotus” and thus fulfilling the promise of resurrection. At the same time, the offering table in a funery scene represents the “offering formula,” a formal set of offerings in the name of the king (Htp Di nsw=hotep di nisu: “A gift [offering] which the king gives”) that includes phrases to confirm that speaking the offering formula would allow n-kA-n imAh, “for the ka of the revered one,” to gain access to the offerings listed after it on their trip into the afterlife.

Like many symbols in Egypt, the Lotus flower had many meanings. In this tomb painting, it is representative of fertility. In other images, it represents the universe, and sometimes considered to be magical, and sacred, and appears as a common motif in numerous ancient paintings 

These items are representative of things, not objects in and of themselves. As an example, the “offering formula” was the principal inscription on the False Door from the Early Dynastic period onward, and overcame the Egyptian concern of not being prepared when entering their tomb in death.

The canopic jars beneath the lion couch in a funery scene, actually contained the four principle organs of the deceased that had been removed from his body during mummification, and the heads upon the later jars represented the gods who guarded and protected those organs into the afterlife when they would be needed once again by the deceased. The gods represented in the Facsimile 1 scene are not there to contain or protect anything, nor do they represent the viscera of the deceased, but are strictly representative of the idolatrous gods involved in the “four corners” of the Egyptian world.

That is, while the Babylonians thought the earth was hollow to provide space for their underworld, Aristotle believed the earth was a sphere, though George Gamow thought it flat, and the monk Cosmas Indicopleustes described it square as did Egyptians, who thought the earth not only square, but having four corners, and mountains at the edge supporting the vault of the sky.

The Egyptian gods of the four corners, shown in the funery canopic jars, were: Qebehsenuef for the West; Hapi for North, Imsetyh for South, and Duamutef for East. As for the gods Abraham describes, shown in imagery beneath the altar, we have the Egyptian understading of the four corners, along with the Sumerian idolatrous gods, or the four directions of the earth:

1) The god Libnah, meaning “white, light, shining,” and in Hebrew, the root lbn, means lebonah and in Greek, libanos, Arabic lub-anun, which also applies to El Lubban, or to Labanah, meaning the “moon.” All of these are representative of “white.” As for a directional country, Labanon, associated with the snow covered Antilibanus, and Libanos in the Greek for the entire Mountain Range. Robert Smith, a Cuneiform and Assyrian scholar, in his commentary on the Book of Abraham identified the jackal-headed as Libnah, the correct designation for the West. And the Egyptians connected it with the white land, which is the meaning of the name. And Anubis, the God of the West, the White land of the Westerners, and is associated with the moon! The Egyptologist Hermann Kees noted that the epithet, nb ta djesr, "Lord of the White Land" derived from the idea of "Lord of the shining, sanctified land." That is a euphism for the necropolis itself, which is in the West. That would make him Lord of the Westerners! In addition, Egyptologist Brusch claims the four canonical colors of Egypt always has white as the color the West. Also the Libyans to the West of Egypt were noted for their white skin and blue eyes. Thus, we have the god Libnah  (meaning White Land), having the god mask of Anubis (god of the West), representing the West corner of the Egyptian world.

2) The god Mahmackrah, the ape’s head, baboon head or bull’s head, interchangeable in canopic jars, which the Egyptians always placed in the north. The mackr element of this name is very important in Canaanite names such as Mhr-Anat which means "champion, or upholder of the goddess Anat." Ramses II called himself Mahr-B'l meaning upholder of Ba'al, the Canaanite god. Mahr-Rah would be the champion or upholder of Rah, the Egyptian equivilant of Ba'al. We need to note that the "h" in the root must have a heavy sound in order not to be swallowed up by the "r" which follows. The shift between the "k" and the "h" can be seen in our own name Mi-cha-el which the Jews wrote Mi-ka-el. Incidentally, the form of the name rather neatly parallels our Ma-mackr-rah. Mi-cha-el, like Mi-ca-iah (1 Kings 22). The Canaanite name Maq'arah means a burning, a form of sacrifice. The idolatrous god of Beth-shan is called "Mkl'a", the great god. The first element in his name, Mkl is Canaanite, while the ending "a" is Egyptian. Another interesting name form is the Egyptian Mai-m-hqa meaning "the lion is ruler." Thus, the god Mahmackrah would be Mai-m-akr-ah which would mean The lion Akr is great! Akr being the earth god as lion, and Abraham is on the Lion Couch. Obviously then, the name is not meaningless.

3) The god Korash, with the variant spelling of Koash, correlates to the South, and could be the Land of Cush, the region south of Egypt, called Nubia or Ethiopia in Hebrew and other ancient languages which expanded south of Elephantine and Syene (aswan). The names of the four brothers, Mizraim, Punt, Canaan, and Cush, which obviously refers to the division of the world into four regions, with the Queen of Punt living in the South. The natives of Saba, at the far south end of Arabia worshipped a goddess Iagouth, who came from Heliopolis, and a local form of the Goddess Hathor, the regent of Heliopolis, worshipped at Punt and Saba. Her people were known as the Koraish! They were also called the Beni Qananee, or sons of Canaan. And in Heliopolis, she went by the name of Wadjit which was Semiticized into Ozza, under which title she turns up as one of the principle idols of the Qoreish in Mekkah. This Qoreish is the diminutive of the name Koraish.

4) The god Elkenah. H. Seebass notes that the Kenites provide the link between the Patriarchal period and the desert period of Israel in their original home being the Negev, and are from the Egyptian point of view, "the people to the East." Their name El-kenah might well refer to the god of an eastern region or people. It should be noted that in one system of classification the East is the hawk-headed disc Re-Harahkte, Lord of Heaven. J. De Witt has noted in the "Chron. D' Egypte," at the purification of the king, the East is the Hawk. In addition, Elkenah corresponds with the Egyptian "qen" or "qeni" the sound of a hard "k". The Egyptian element "qen" [Ken] means mighty or powerful and is used in various names of kings according to the Berlin Dictionary, which also claims that in Palestine and Syria, it is common to find such names combining Egyptian and West Semitic elements.

The four angels (their wings symbolize power) seen by John, “four angels standing on the four corners of the earth, holding back the four winds of the earth” (7:1) may well be the basis of the four corners of the world in Egyptian thought and their four “gods” standing at the corners
Robert Smith also mentioned that Elkenah correlates with the Biblical Hebrew word El-qanah, a name for six or more persons mentioned in the Bible. In Genesis 14:19 we read "El Elyon qoneh shamayim we'aretz," "El, the Exalted one, Creator of Heaven and Earth." It is a common hypocoristic form in the late Hittite story of Asherah and El-Qone-ersi: "El-Creator-of-the-Earth" (which is written El-ku-ni-ir-sa and pronounced Elkoners according to Albright and Clifford. El-Qone-ersi means "El-Creator-of-the-Earth," El-Qone-ersi is written Elkunirisa, and Elkunirisa is pronounced Elkoners. Thus, the East was identified with the falcon headed canopic counterpart of Elkenah. All in all, the names of the four idolatrous gods Abraham mentioned correlate to the exact correct regional directions of which are depicted on the heads of the four god images under the altar in Facsimile 1.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VIII – Ur of the Chaldees,” for more information on Abraham’s home and his nearly being sacrificed to Elkenah)

The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VIII – Canopic Jars

Egyptologists and critics alike have labeled the four images below the lion couch in the Abraham Facsimile 1 as canopic jars. However nowhere in the scriptural record of the Book of Abraham, in Facsimile 1, or any other written manner from Abraham’s writings do we find any reference to the images beneath the couch or altar being canopic jars.

First of all, canopic jars were those actual jars used by the ancient Egyptians in the early period of their embalming to store the deceased’s viscera. In order to preserve the body long enough for the “Ba” to carry out its assignment of transferring the deceased’s “personality” or essence to the “Ka” for its trip into the afterlife, time was needed (see the last post), therefore, the embalming process was intended to do that so the body could lie intact and “in state” for a period of time. But in those early periods, it was believed that the deceased’s internal organs needed to be removed for the preservation of the body. In later periods, the embalming process was so improved that the removal of the viscera was not necessary.

Top Row: Early canopic jars were simple clay jars with flat lids; Bottom Row: Later jars had heads from early simple carved images to later far more elaborate, even made of gold, highly decorated and very costly

The word canopic, like many terms related to ancient Egypt, comes from a misunderstanding. The ancient classical writers believed that the Greek hero, Kanopos, helmsman for Menelaeus, was worshipped at Canopus in the form of a jar. The very early explorers and later Egyptologists saw a connection between that object and the actually unrelated visceral jars discovered in tombs, and began calling them “canopic.” The name stuck and eventually was used to describe all kinds of receptacles intended to hold viscera removed during the mummification process. 

Modern research confirms Herodotus’ claim, writing in the latter half of the 5^th century B.C. (The Histories, Book II, Chapter 86), that the entire process of mummification lasted for seventy days, though the removal of the viscera was accomplished in the first few days after death. In fact, the Ancient Egyptians believed that a dead person would need his organs in the afterlife. For this purpose, four major organs were taken out of the body during the mummification process, and stored in the Canopic jars. The brain was believed to be responsible only for producing mucus and was allowed to liquefy and then completely removed from the corpse through the nose.

Beginning in the period known as the Old Kingdom (2600-2100 B.C.), the viscera was removed and stored in the jars for the owner’s afterlife. Four main organs were involved: the liver, lungs, stomach and intestines—the heart was the home of the dead person’s spirit and the Egyptians believed it stayed with the body. The early canopic jars were rarely inscribed and had a plain lid. Later, during the Middle Kingdom (2055 to 1650 B.C.) inscriptions on the jars became were introduced and became more frequent, and the lids were often in the form of human heads. By the Nineteenth dynasty (1292 to 1189 B.C.), the lids depicted one of the four sons of Horus as guardians of the organs: Duamutef, the jackal-headed god representing the east, guarded the stomach which was protected by the goddess Neith; Hapi, the baboon-headed god representing the north, whose jar contained the lungs and was protected by the goddess Nephthys; Imseti, the human-headed god representing the south, guarding the liver and was protected by the goddess Isis; and Qebehsenuef, the falcon-headed god representing the west, guarding the intestines and was protected by the goddess Silket.

The organs were wrapped in linen, put into the jars, and consecrated oil was poured into after, and then the jars were sealed as part of the funerary rituals. These jars were wide-mouthed, to allow the placement of the organs inside, and from 5 to 10 inches tall, and through the dynasties of Egypt, the jars evolved from a plain ritual jar to an elaborately decorated tomb ornament.

This set of canopic jars was made to contain the internal organs removed from the body during the mummification process. The four sons of the god Horus were believed to protect these organs. (left to right): The jackal-headed Duamutef protected the stomach; the baboon-headed Hapi, the lungs; the falcon-headed Qebehsenuef, the intestines;and human-headed Imsety, the liver

In the Third Intermediate Period (1070 to 664 B.C.) the organs were left in the body and dummy canopic jars were introduced, because of improved embalming techniques, however, the canopic jars remained a feature of tombs, but were no longer hollowed out for storage of the organs, having a symbolic rather than a containment function. At this time, the viscera was coated in resin and rolled up within linen “visceral packets,” and stored within the thoracic and pelvic cavities.

By the Twentieth Dynasty (1187 to 1064 B.C.), the canopic jars were no longer placed in a canopic chest, instead, much larger individual jars bearing the heads of the goddesses were used, though it is unknown how the jars were stored in the tomb. During the 21^st Dynasty, the viscera of most mummies were returned to the bodies during the mummification process, and the canopic jars were left empty, but by the 22^nd Dynasty, the jars were solid dummy jars, though in the case of Sheshonq II, the dummy jars held dummy packets of viscera. By the 23^rd Dynasty, the text associated with canopic equipment became much simpler, often only naming the deceased and the genius, and later this equipment became painted with bright polychrome and highly decorative.

This funery process has been studied by Egyptologists, and though they have not always agreed with one another on some of the points, they have become familiar with the details mentioned above. Unfortunately, their tendency is to translate anything resembling a funery process by this understanding—the mummification process of a funery event. This is exactly what happened in the Egyptologists’ interpreting the Abraham Facsimile 1 vignette; however, the scene Abraham describes is not about mummification, or about a funery process at all, but about human sacrifice—something most Egyptologists have claimed did not take place in ancient Egypt, even though there are some indications available to suggest otherwise.

In short, the emblems, or gods, depicted in Facsimile 1 beneath the altar, or lion couch, are not canopic jars at all, but symbols of the four corners of the earth of the Egyptian world, and so depicted by the four images of the sons of Horus, yet representing the idolatrous gods of Sumeria which Abraham knew. It should also be noted that Abraham was pointing out the ancient Egyptian customs which took place in his earlier life to a non-Egyptian audience! That is, he knew who would be reading this in the future would not be Egyptians and may not have any idea of Egyptian customs, beliefs and practices. But like many professional people, the Egyptologists who later tried to interpret Abraham’s drawing, blindly assumed they knew what the scene depicted and interpreted it as such, claiming the drawing was a funery scene and claimed that Abraham’s depiction and description (Joseph Smith's translation) was inaccurate. Of course, it would be inaccurate if it were a funery scene—but it was not, as Abraham so clearly described the events. And when looking at the vignette in the light of Abraham’s description, and what is actually known about the changing process of the ancient Egyptian funery process over the dynasties, it is clearly a different and separate vignette, or story.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part IX – Understanding Elkenah,” for more information on the god behind the human sacrifice of Abraham)

The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VII – Symbolism of the Papyri

Continuing from the last few posts regarding the Book of Abraham and Joseph Smith’s translation along with the facsimiles used, and showing the misunderstanding about the hovering bird in Facsimile 1.

One of the many important ideas about Egyptology seldom understood by the layman, and even overlooked by some Egyptologists is the fact that the symbols, or hieroglyphs, used in hieroglyphic writing is that one “picture” does not always mean the same thing.

As an example, in the funery scenes typically shown in ancient papyri and on tomb paintings is that of the bird “ba,” which represents the human soul. This bird is typically drawn hovering over his newly mummified master on the lion couch bier.

Ba, the human soul, which is depicted as a bird, hovers over his newly mummified master, the body wherein Ba formerly dwelt, now laying on the bier. Note the bird has the head of a human, and typically that of the deceased

To understand the scene depicted above, it needs to be kept in mind that the Egyptian purpose of preserving the body through embalming was clearly shown in the two components of Egyptian thought—the physical body was essential for the existence and eternal life for the deceased. That is, the Egyptians believed that every person (during life and after) was followed by an invisible double called “Ka,” which was created at the moment of birth and stood for "force of life" for the person. He could not be seen or depicted, but all big tombs had a "blind door" for him to use.

After death a transformation of rebirth took place and every night he was released to give his dead master a spiritual travel to the land of the living. The travel itself was made by his soul “Ba,” shown hovering over the mummified body above. This was a link from the tomb to life on earth that was supposed to go on forever.

Right: The bird “Ba” hovering over the mummified body on the bier is also depicted in other ways, as in the (Left) tomb painting where the “Ba” is at rest being held by two priests on the disc representing the Sun

The commoners who couldn't afford an embalming were offered small simple statuettes of mummies to give their “Ka” someone to stand beside in the life beyond and thereby please their life-long companion and get eternal rest themselves.

Further, “Ba,” the human soul was always depicted as a bird with a human head and face, sometimes with the features of the dead person. Like the “Ka,” the “Ba” appeared for the first time at the moment of birth, but the “Ba” was dwelling within the body, and after death in the mummy. During life he was his master's conscience and after death he was himself protected from being misled by evil spirits through rituals and prayers from "The Book of the Dead" performed by priests or relatives. A correct behavior in both worlds was essential to the Egyptians.

The mummy, prepared and laid upon the funery couch by the Jackal-headed priest. Note the human-headed “Ba” bird hovering over the mummy

After death “Ba” was released from the mummy every night and could fly back to the world of the living to check things out. Before sunrise he was back within his master, who thus never lost contact with the world he had left. Thus, in the funery scene, or vignette, “Ba,” the bird image, was always shown hovering over the mummified body on the lion couch, or bier.

In addition, the “Ba” was considered to be an individual’s distinctive manifestation similar to our concept of personality. It comprised all non-physical attributes, which made a human unique. It was the entire deceased person with its own identity and was not separate from the body. In Egyptian thought, the dead body was unable to journey of its own, thus it was the job of the individual’s “Ba” to do this. After death, the “Ba” bird collected the deceased's personality from the mummified remains and took it to be reunited with the deceased’s physical astral “twin.” Only after this union, when a person was “complete,” was it possible for them to be reborn as an “effective one” in the next world.

Although it is not entirely clear, it is likely that this process of transferring one’s manifestation took time, with the “Ba” flitting between the mummified remains and the “Ka” to ensure every aspect of its humanity was transferred to its double above. It was therefore helpful for the perfectly persevered body to lie in state in its tomb. This gave the “Ba” bird plenty of time to relocate every aspect of the deceased person’s personality as it carried out its duty. Obviously, the god Anubis wrapping the mummy in tons of silk was necessary for the prolonged time needed for the “Ba” to carry out its assignment.

The bird form was chosen because of its ability to navigate land, sea, air and space (the Egyptians were unaware that space was devoid of air). They believed that conditions above were similar to those on Earth, particularly in relation to Upper Egypt, which was exactly the same as Earth, only better. The Egyptians believed all astral bodies were living “Ka”s. After death, it made sense to use the “Ba” bird as a manifestation of oneself to provide a direct link to ones Ka,” therefore, dying was referred to as “going to one's Ka.” 

Once the “Ba” and “Ka” were united and the astral twin was complete, a final journey to the Next World was undertaken. This was a journey fraught with dangers as the body traveled from a chaotic intermediate location to the relative tranquility of heaven. Chaos posed an ever-present threat in the transitional location and Egyptians therefore needed assistance, which led to the need for Magical funerary spells and amulets that were used to help guarantee a safe passage. Known as the Book of the Dead spells, they were written on papyri and placed in coffins or were put in magical amulets and wrapped in mummy bandages. Much time and resources were spent assisting the dead to the Next World where they were transformed into the ultimate form—that of an immortal akh.

These texts were a necessary part of the funery equipment and were thought to help through dangers of the Underworld. Over 150 burial spells were written on papyrus and placed with the dead and the content has been traced back to the Old Kingdom Pyramid Texts from 2300 B.C. and had probably a long oral tradition before that. Each nome (province) and even towns had their own version putting text mentioning the local gods in favor of other local gods. For the average Egyptian man and woman, there were versions not so elaborate or expensive, and just containing the essence. After invoking numerous confessions and spells, and being approved by the jury in the Underworld, the person was ready to embark on the boat of Re to sail to the “Land in the West” for their eternal rest.

It should also be noted that a bird hieroglyphic was not a singular matter—there were numerous bird symbols in Egyptian hieroglyphic writing. They used the vulture; the Ibis (divine); a bird for knowledgeable man; a bird for right or west; quail (letter “w”); sparrow (bad times); swallow, etc. In fact, Gardiner’s Egyptian Sign List shows 53  different birds and their meanings. And none resemble either the funery “Ba” bird, or that shown in Facsimile 1, suggesting that birds may well carry their own interpretation according to the scene in which they are depicted.

Now the point of all of this is simple: In a funery vignette, of which Facsimile 1 is not, the bird or falcon has the head of the deceased and flies or hovers over the mummy on the lion couch. It should be noted that in Abraham’s Facsimile 1, the bird shown is neither hovering over the couch, nor has a human head. Thus, Egyptologists claim it is in error. However, it is the Egyptologists who are in error because they are trying to make this vignette a funery scene, which it clearly is not for the many reason stated previously in these posts.

The first nine drawings are those of Egyptian funery birds (the “Ba”). Note how they are all different, but all hovered over the mummy on the lion couch, as seen in numerous funery scenes. The last image, bottom right, is from the Abraham Facsimile 1, which depicts a bird unlike any of the others and, according to Abraham, represented something different from the “Ba” —that of the Spirit of the Lord

The bird shown is representative, as most Egyptian hieroglyphs are, and in this case, representative of the Spirit of God, or an angel, as Abraham states, and clearly fits in with the hieroglyphic nature of the scene being depicted. This vignettes, like all Egyptian vignettes, or scenes, tell a story—not a story the Egyptologist would understand or recognized, but an accurate story none-the-less.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VIII – Elkenah and the Canopic Jars,” for answers to another area of criticism about the Abraham Facsimile 1 vignette)

The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VI – The Lion Couch

Continuing with the posts regarding the papyri of the Book of Abraham, which Joseph Smith translated, and which have come under numerous attacks from Egyptologists and others, the following is included in our showing the facts of the matter as opposed to many other people's beliefs and misguided criticisms.

As an example, while some claim that the Lion Couch upon which Abraham is laying in Facsimile 1 is a typical funerary scene with several extant papyri showing the same basic scene with the same characters in the same positions, this it not correct. In fact, in examining the evidence of the numerous scenes on papyri and also temple and tomb paintings in ancient Egypt (some of which have been displayed in these posts), we find that the “Lion Couch Scene” in Facsimile 1 is unique in several ways.

Here are at least twelve (15) differences that are shown in the Abraham Facsimile 1 that are not found on any other Egyptian funery or similar vignette:

1. No other funery vignette has the unfamiliar writing that frames the scene on either side, and the stage-like foundation of elements found on the Abraham Facsimile 1;

2. No other funery scene has a priest other than that of the jackal-headed god Anubis performing an activity with the image on the couch;

3. No other funery scene shows the resurrection, procreation or embalming scene without the presence of Isis and Nephthys and other dignitaries, including Anubis;

4. The figure of Abraham on the couch has both arms raised, as if in prayer. In all other such scenes, the person’s arms are lowered, or wrapped, or within a casket;

5. No other funery scene has hatched lines designed as Expanse or Firmament;

6. No other funery scene shows the common Egyptian religious and secular images of the lotus and offering table;

7. No other funery scene has twelve gates or pillars of heaven or anything like them;

8. The clothing on the figure of Abraham is unique. No other funery vignette scene shows the reclining figure on the couch so dressed. Others are either naked or fully invested as mummies, though one can be found wearing a loincloth;

9. No other funery scene shows the reclined figure wearing anklets or slippers;

10. No other funery scene has a crocodile under the priest’s feet (in this case, representing the idolatrous god of Pharoah—the crocodile of Egypt, or possibly Sobrek, at one time venerated in Mesopotamia);

11. No other funery scene shows a bird flying over the couch with the priest in the position shown in the Abraham Facsimile 1 vignette;

12. No other funery scene shows the bird’s wings in the position of the Abraham Facsimile 1 vignette;

13. Other funery scenes show the august figures of the gods standing by in solemn religious dignity, kneeling in mourning, standing guard, or raising hands in praise or magical passes, which Facsimile 1 does not have;

14. Other funery scenes show the figure on the table in a tranquil position (both legs lowered), wrapped as mummies, or in a casket. In Facsimile 1, Abraham is in a position of action;

15. 3. No other funery scene has the reclining figure, the priest and the couch out of line with one another (the priest is actually standing between Abraham’s legs and the couch to the left of the scene);

Note the priest’s body between Abraham’s legs and the table he is supposed to be laying upon. Also note the lettering on either side of the vignette as mentioned above

As Hugh Nibley pointed out regarding these differences, “It is true that individual sign and figure can be matched rather easily somewhere else, just as every word on this page can be found in almost any English book, but it is the combination of perfectly ordinary signs that makes extraordinary compositions and we may well repeat the words of Professor Nagel: ‘It would be easy to find numerous parallels to each of these figures, but that would not mean much... for the combination here is different’.”

For an Egyptian document to be considered unique from the others, it does not have to be spectacularly different, though Facsimile 1 certainly is, it can actually resemble scores of others in almost every particular yet still have a message to convey that is quite different from the others” (Nibley - A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price, Oct. 1968).

It should also be noted that the vignette shows a reclining, or helpless victim on the couch beneath the standing presence of the dagger-wielding priest, while at the same time having raised arms in the act of prayer, showing both aspects of the story taking place—being fastened upon the altar while seeking God’s aid (Abraham 1:15). Thus it is important to make clear that Abraham in this scene has both hands before him for that not only makes this particular lion-couch scene unique, but it also gives the whole drama of the situation.

In fact, if you were to turn the image so Abraham’s feet pointed downward, you would have the Egyptian determinative for prayer. That is, Samuel A.B. Mercer, The Handbook of Egyptian Hieroglyphics, (p 150), shows this image to mean “worship.” And according to E.A. Wallis Budge (An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary, Vol 2, p 825) the hands above the head in prayer means “to pray with pure heart,” and Sir Alan Gardiner (Egyptian Grammar, p 23), claims it means “praise, supplicate.”

In John Baines, Atlas of Ancient Egypt, 1980, p. 169 we see a late Roman depiction of a lion couch scene, but again, it's clearly a mummy. It has no pillars of heaven or a crocodile under it either. There are two figures on either end of the couch as well, hardly the combination in Facsimile 1. On p. 118 of the same text, the lid of the anthropoid coffin of Espamai, with a lion couch on it. But again there are 5 figures either kneeling or standing by. There are 4 canopic jars under the couch, but no pillars of heaven or crocodile. Also the figure on the couch does not show his leg raised nor either of his hands or arms. This is not like Facsimile 1. The lion couch in "The Mastaba of Mereruka", part 1, in the Sakkarah expedition, 1938, is nothing like Facsimile 1. The lion couch scene in Raymond Faulkner's Egyptian Book of the Dead is clearly a mummy, with only a hawk in it, no other figures by either end of the couch, no crocodile, no clothed praying figure. This is nothing like Facsimile 1 either. (plate 17 in the magnificent illustrated book of his edited by Eva Von Dassow). And plate 33 has Anubis bending over a mummy, not a living figure.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VI – Ur of the Chaldees,” for more information on Abraham’s home and his nearly being sacrificed to Elkenah)

The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part V – The Sem Priest

Continuing from the last four posts regarding the Book of Abraham and Joseph Smith’s translation along with the facsimiles used, we now introduce the Sem Priest.

Facsimile 1 from the Book of Abraham. The priest standing over the form of Abraham is bald, and not wearing the jackal mask of Anubis

One of the many criticism levied against the Joseph Smith papyri and especially the Facsimile vignettes, is the fact that the priest standing over Abraham is bald and not wearing the ceremonial headdress of Anubis (vocalized Anapa), the jackal-headed god of the dead typically associated in his funery role with mummification and the afterlife in the ancient Egyptian religion. One of his main roles was to protect the deceased and their tombs.

It is interesting that almost all of this criticism about the priest in the Book of Abraham vignette has to do with him not being represented with the symbolic Anubis jackal mask. However, if we correctly understand the role this “god” played, or was assigned, in the Egyptian pantheon, we have to recognize he would not have been involved in any human sacrifice for his role was the embalmer, the protector of the deceased, and the escorter into the afterlife of the righteous dead. This would not have been the case in Facsimile 1, especially in the case of Abraham, whose sacrifice was one of punishment for speaking out against the act of human sacrifice (Abraham 1:7, 11) and the priests who conducted them.

Anubis, whose distinctive black skin represented the black soil of the Nile valley, symbolizing rebirth, had the responsibility, after the death of the individual, to lead the innocent on to a heavenly existence and abandoned the guilty to the funery goddess Ammit (Ammut), the soul-eater or devourer, depicted as parts lion, hippopotamus and crocodile—the three largest “man-eating” animals known to ancient Egyptians.

The Egyptian goddess Ammit (Ammut) depicted by the figure on the right, as a lion, crocodile and hippotomus, the devourer of souls; the other two figures are wearing the jackal mask as Anubis

So it can be seen that Anubis simply would not have been part of the human sacrifice of Abraham—though Ammit may well have. But the sacrifice was conducted by a priest—in this case, the High Priest or a bald-headed Sem. Consequently, the vignette, which has been so often criticized because Anubis was not the priest standing over Abraham, is shown to be accurate in that detail.

Thus, there are two things about this vignette priest to keep in mind: 1) If the fragment Joseph Smith had from which the drawing was made had been intact at the time of Joseph’s translating the papyri, then it is, without question, accurate; but 2) If the fragment had already been damaged or broken off and it was as we now see it when Joseph translated it, and he drew in the priest as a bald man, then we can add to this scenario that not only is it accurate, but that Joseph was indeed inspired to have drawn a bald-headed priest, a Sem, when no one would have known what that meant, or what that particular priest would have looked like.

Top Left: The original with pieces missing, specifically the head and shoulder of the Priest; Top Right: The Priest’s head and shoulder drawn in as well as the head of the bird and a sliver on the bottom; Bottom: As it appears in the printed Book of Abraham

It is also helpful to know that the purpose of religion in ancient Egypt was to explain the mysteries of the universe, and act as a social glue for the people. The “priesthood” helped preserve old traditions that underpinned Egyptian culture, and its hierarchy helped keep order within society. In this Egyptian structure, the Sem-priest, or High Priest, was at the top of the order and called “The First Prophet of the God.” As such, he certainly would have been involved in punishing those who set about to disrupt or overthrow the Old Order, which Abraham most certainly was attempting to do, as the three virgins he mentioned put to death before him.

We also need to look at the original drawing (above) where the missing pieces have been drawn in. Note the material crossing over the shoulder of the priest. It is depicted with dots on it, which is similar to the drawing below from Neferhotep’s tomb, showing a leopard (panther) skin, which was also symbolic of the Sem (High Priest), and in the vignettes (easiest seen in the Book of Abraham reproduction), the priest is wearing a sash around his waist, which is also symbolic of the Sem. So we have three things in the Book of Abraham Facsimile 1 that are accurate down to the last detail about the priest standing over Abraham: 1) He is bald as the Sem priest in the Neferhotep tomb drawing; 2) He is wearing a leopard skin over his shoulder symbolizing a Sem, and 3) He is wearing the Sem sash.

Who would have known in 1830s that a bald-headed priest was the Sem—the High Priest, and that he wore a leopard skin over his shoulder, and had a ceremonial sash about his waist? Certainly not Joseph Smith, not even those who claimed to be knowledgeable of Egyptian hieroglyphics of his day—and after; not even many modern Egyptologists who claim the priest in Facsimile 1 is wrong because the Priest is not wearing an Anubis mask; yet in the vignettes below taken from Egyptian tombs, the bald-headed High Priest, or Sem, is clearly shown.

The Bald Sem-Priests: Top Left: The description of this scene from the tomb of Neferhotep says "the bald-headed priest with the panther-skin is the Sem (the high priest); the priest holding the mummy is dressed as Anubis." Adolf Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, pp. 320f. Nina M. Davie's article, "Some Representations of Tombs From the Theban Necropolis; Top Right: A Sem Priest as a “shaman-like magician,” from the tomb of Nefer-Ronpet, Valley of the Nobles; Bottom Left: A Sem Priest with a narrow band over his shoulder in Turin, Egyptian Museum; Bottom Center: Sem Priest during libations, tomb of Nefer-Ronpet; Bottom Right: Sem Priest Offering incense, tomb of Naktamun. As can be clearly seen, all are bald-headed and wear no god-style mask

For the priests in Egypt, there was no “ordination to the priesthood,” though some purification rituals for initiation, ablutions and baths as well as other living requirements, like the shaving of the head, which the Abraham vignette correctly shows, were undertaken.

The hierarchy of priests consisted of a milieu of offices and duties. At the top of the hierarchy of priests was the high-priest, also known as the sem-priest. Not only did he serve as political advisor to the pharaoh, but he was also a political leader for the temples to which he belonged, and was in charge of over-seeing magical rites and ceremonies as well as advising the pharaoh. Maintaining a fairly ceremonial position, the many high-priests were often chosen by the pharaoh as an advisor, however, it was not uncommon for a high-priest to have climbed through the ranks to his official status.

Below the high-priest were a number of other priests with many specialized duties. The specialization of these second tier priests ran from "horology" (keeping an accurate count of the hours through the days, extremely important during the time of the sun worshippers, but also for agricultural reasons as well), "astrology" (extremely important as well to the mythology, architectural and calendrical systems) to healing. In addition to the political administration, the priests and priestesses took on both economic and magical functions (Exodus 7:11-12)

Aaron’s staff/snake devours the Pharaoh’s magicians’ staff/snakes in a show of God’s power over that of the Egyptian king

Another level of Egyptian priests were the lay magicians who supplied ther commoners an understanding of Egyptian religion and were the last and final caste of the Egyptian priesthood belonged to a large temple known simply as "The House of Life,” but were by no means less important, as is evidenced by the presence of many magical wands, papyri text, and other archeological evidence excavated from The House of Life temple.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part VI – Ur of the Chaldees,” for more information on Abraham’s home and his nearly being sacrificed to Elkenah)

The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part IV

Continuing from the last three posts, in which was discussed how Joseph Smith obtained the mummies and papyri that led to the Book of Abraham, we showed and answered in the last post several criticisms that have been raised about his translation of the papyri. Here are more:

• Criticism: Abraham's name does not appear anywhere in the papyri or the facsimiles on the fragments available.

Response: The first reaction to this criticism is that, as an author, when writing something about myself, and including a picture of me, etc., I do not identify myself in the picture—it is understood who the image is of since it supports the written text involved. On the other hand, such an explanation would not suffice the critics views, so let’s take Facsimile 1 which dates to about the first or second century B.C., showing Abraham laying upon a lion couch.  It is interesting that, according to the highly credentialed and acclaimed professor of Egyptology in the Oriental Institute, Janet H. Johnson, The Demotic Magical Spells of Leiden I 384, there is a lion-couch scene similar to the one in Facsimile 1, and underneath the text reads “Abraham, who upon…” There is a break in the text here, so we do not know what word followed. The point is that an ancient Egyptian document from approximately the same time period as the papyri Joseph Smith had in his possession, associated Abraham with a lion-couch scene.

A lion couch scene appears in Leiden Papyrus I 384 (PGM xii). The outline marks Abraham’s name, written in Greek. These references to Abraham appear in five languages—Demotic, Old Coptic, Coptic, Greek, and Hebrew. After gathering dust for many years in various museums and libraries, several of these old vignettes are now drawing the attention of scholars

According to Francis Llewllyn Griffith and Herbert Thompson, in an Egyptian papyrus of the early Christian period, there is the phrase "Abraham, the pupil of the eye of the Wedjat,” which, according to Richard Lepsius, compares with the 162d chapter of the Book of the Dead, which tells how to make a hypocephalus, in which the Wedjat eye is described, and the hypocephalus itself is called an "eye.” And James H. Charlesworth states that in the Apocalypse of Abraham, a pseudepigraphical text dating from the early Christian era, describes a vision Abraham saw while making a sacrifice to God. In this vision, he is shown the plan of the universe, "what is in the heavens, on the earth, in the sea, in the abyss, and in the lower depths,” which language closely agrees with the phrase found in Facsimile 2 of the Book of Abraham.

The important point is that we find ancient Near Eastern documents that are roughly contemporary with the hypocephalus and the other Egyptian papyri purchased by Joseph Smith that relate the scenes portrayed in facsimiles 1, 2, and 3 with Abraham, just as Joseph Smith said. Significantly, none of these documents had even been discovered during Joseph Smith's lifetime.

• Criticism: The standing figure in Facsimile 1 is not a priest but is, in fact, the Egyptian god Anubis. As represented on the papyrus, the figure is indeed Anubis. However, there are examples from Egypt of priests wearing masks of gods when carrying out their priestly duties. John Gee's book on the Joseph Smith papyri shows an example of an Egyptian priest wearing a mask of Anubis as well as an actual mask of Anubis found by archaeologists.

Left: Priest wearing jackal mask to represent the god Anubis) and holding the ankh in his right hand, symbolizing that he (god) commanded the powers of life and death and was immortal; Center: Pharaoh, holding the ankh in his left hand, symbolizing that he was the spring from which flowed divine virtues and the elixir of immortality; Right: Sem-Priest without mask and without ankh, showing no power with life or death

Response: This refers to John Gee’s Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri, p36. The names of the idolatrous gods mentioned in facsimile 1 provide another example of the validity of the Prophet Joseph's explanations. If Joseph Smith had simply made up the names, the chances of their corresponding to the names of ancient deities would be astronomically small. The name Elkenah, for example, is clearly related to the Hebrew el qanah/qoneh "God has created/the creator." Elkenah is found in the Old Testament as the name of several people, including Samuel's father (see 1 Samuell:1). The name is also found as a divine name in Mesopotamian sources as dIl-gi-na/dIl-ki-na/dEI-ke-na. Libnah may be related to the Hebrew lebanah "moon" (Isaiah 24:23) from the root laban "white." A city captured by Joshua was called libnah (Josuah 10:29). The name Korash is found as a name in Egyptian sources. A connection with Kores the name of the Persian king Cyrus (Isaiah 44:28), is also possible.

• Criticism: The name Elkenah appears twelve times in the Book of Abraham, yet there is no record of a god named Elkenah in the Egyptian pantheon.

Response: In Facsimile 1, Elkenah is represented by the falcon-headed canopic jar of Qebehsenuf, one of the sons of Horus, and reading right to left, Elkenah is mentioned first, suggesting he is the chief or preeminent god of the four or five mentioned. However, there is some question as to whether the name Elkenah refers to a god, or a place, or a person, since Hugh Nibley in An Approach to the Book of Abraham (2009), claims the name could be that of a person or place, rather than of an Egyptian god. On the other hand, since each mention of Elkenah is preceded by “the god of,” “the gods of,” “the priest of,” or “the altar of,” it should be noted by comparison that it is never used in the Old Testament to refer to a human being who has built the altar or owns it in the 23 listings found in Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, Nehemiah and Malachi, such as “the altar of the Lord,” or the “altar of Baal,” etc.

The rising Sun and Bull-Calf, along with the Sycamore trees that provided food and drink in the Afterlife to the righteous dead, were associated with the Egyptian goddesses Nut, Isis and Hathor; but the bronze bull covered in gold leaf found in a Phoenician Temple at Byblos, Phoenicia, was called the Bull-El of the Phoenician, Canaanite, and Syrian god El, which was Mesopotamian. During Yahweh, Elohim's manifestation at Mt. Sinai, which was as a thundercloud, Aaron made the Phoenician-Syrian Golden Calf for Israel to adore   

It should also be noted that the name Elkenah begins with El, the Semitic name for diety (ilu in Akkadian), thus the first syllable element could be interpreted through : 1) Onomastics Theophory, where the name of god (El) is embedded in a personal name, possibly in whose care the individual is entrusted, such as Daniel: “God is my judge;” Theodore: “Gift of God;” Christopher: “Christ-bearer;” Gabriel: “Strong man of God;” or Elizabeth: “My God is abundance;” 2) Appelation Description, or more at a description of God, as in “the god Kenah”; however, the Old Testament El is rarely, if ever, used as the proper name of a non-Israelite deity, since it was from Elohim (name of God appearing 2570 times in the Old Testament, beginning in Genesis 1:1), and was the original name for God whom the ancients worshipped; 3) Sobriquet Name, having the last element, kenah, describe the first element, el, such as “El is Mighty,” “El of Kenah,” etc.; 4) Possessive Description, where the last element, kenah, would be a person’s name, such as “the God of Kenah” (the God of Abraham); 5) Location Description, where the last element, kenah, refers to a place or a populace, such as “the God of Kenah Valley (city, kingdom, etc.)”; 6) Populace Description, where the last element, kenah, refers to a group of people, a populace small or large, such as “the God of the Kenahs” (the God of Irsael).

In addition, Elkenah may not have been either Egyptian or Chaldean, but from elsewhere, such as Canaan, whose name for god was also “el.” A priest could live in one area and still belong to a religious group of another area. After all, the presence of a Canaanite cult (together with some Egyptian beliefs among others, seen in the priest of Elkenah also acting as the priest of Pharaoh) in that area would not be surprising.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part IV” for more of the criticisms about the Book of Abraham and our responses)

The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part III

Continuing from the last two posts, in which was discussed how Joseph Smith obtained the mummies and papyri that led to the Book of Abraham, we show and answer several criticisms that have been raised about his translation of the papyri.

Abraham’s sacrifice being overseen by an angel, depicted in the form of a bird, who steps in to save the future prophet; Right: Joseph translating the hieroglyphics and the scribe writing down what was said

• Criticism: Transliterated text from the recovered papyri and facsimiles published in the Book of Abraham contain no direct references, either historical or textual, to Abraham. Rather, they parallel other texts from the Egyptian Book of the Dead as funery text, and Book of Breathings.

Response: First of all, both the Book of the Dead, and the Book of Breathings (also known as the snsn text, or a breathing permit), are Egyptian texts aimed at providing its owner with the knowledge, power, and transformation necessary to achieve a desired station in the afterlife, and such books were commonly buried with Egyptian mummies. The Book of the Dead is a larger collection and more commonly used.

The text under study was originally owned by a man named Hor (Horus)—a priest from an influential Theban family—in the first or second century B.C., and is contained on three fragments of papyri designated as Joseph Smith as Papyri I, X, and XI, as well as on several small fragments glued next to other portions of the Joseph Smith Papyri. Recently, this Hor book has become known as the Book of Breathings Made by Isis, which is the exact term used by the ancients.

While Books of Breathings have received remarkably little academic attention, the Hor Book of Breathings has received an incongruent amount of scrutiny and translations because of its unique place in a modern-day religion. Since the modern discovery of the Joseph Smith Papyri, the text has been translated by Richard A. Parker, Klaus Baer, Hugh W. Nibley, Robert K. Ritner (twice), and Michael D. Rhodes. As Ritner noted, Baer’s work has served as a basis for all subsequent translations. Yet Baer himself affirmed that his translation was not a definitive edition but a preliminary study.

Four large rolls of papyri found in an Egyptian coffin during archaeologist George A. Reisner’s 1901-1904 dig at Naga ed-Deir near the Upper Nile Valley during the Hearst expedition, dating to 4000 years ago, older by 1000 years than anything previous uncovered. These are similar to the rolls of papyri that were part of those in the mummies of the Joseph Smith collection

As recently as the year 2000, Ritner wrote that a full formal edition of the text had not been published. Unfortunately, he declared this again in 2003, after an announcement of Rhodes's publication had been made in a national meeting and after the publication had actually appeared. The Hor Book of Breathings is incontestably a full formal publication of the text, executed with a precision and scope that rivals the formal edition of any ancient text. It is now the standard publication of these fragments of the Joseph Smith Papyri.

In addition, as of 1998, there were twenty-nine extant examples of the Book of Breathings Made by Isis, of which the Joseph Smith papyri fragment is an example. Of those twenty-nine, eighteen have vignettes associated with them, according to Marc Coenen, and a comparison of the Book of Abraham facsimiles (of vignette, which is a short story that presents a scene or tableau, a “story picture”) with these other documents indicates that the Book of Abraham Facsimile No. 1 is unique in at least two ways: 1) it is the only version of a Book of Breathings Made by Isis, with this particular image, and 2) the position of the legs of the reclining figure, with one raised, is unique.

Finally, all this is significant because even minor differences in the images or content of the missing portions of the papyri could have an effect on interpretation of the images and text and accuracy of Joseph Smith's explanations.

There is no question, however, that different translations by experts in the field vary in content. As an example, the very first line from Book of Breathings Made by Isis, “ka mw.t=f “ was interpreted by Baer as “bull of his mother,” but was first recognized by Jan Quaegebeur as “prophet of Min who massacres his enemies,” and also with Marc Coenen's: “Min who Massacres his Enemies." Thus, the full reading accepted today is, “priest of Amon-Re, king of the gods, priest of Min, who massacres his enemies.” The point is, even Egyptologists disagree with one another on their interpretations, as Klaus Baer did with Prof. Thausing, a professor of Egyptology at Vienna, claiming that "her views on Egyptian religion are not exactly in the mainstream of Egyptian thought." Thausing's views were used by Hugh Nibley in support of his interpretation of the Joseph Smith papyri.

• Criticism: The papyri of Joseph Smith can reliably be dated to somewhere between 220 and 150 B.C. on the basis of the handwriting, the historical period in which the religious writings on these papyri were in use in Egypt and the historical references to at least one of the original owners of the papyri. They cannot possibly date to the period of Abraham, which was about 1600 to 1800 years earlier.

Response: The statement in the introduction to the book of Abraham, that it was “written by his own hand upon papyrus,” does not necessarily mean that the papyrus Joseph Smith was translating was the original written by Abraham. The term “by the hand of” can simply mean that Abraham is the author of the book. As an example, in Hebrew, the word beyad does not always mean “by the hand of,” but can mean “in the hand, possession, power of,” or “by the agency of.” The word can simply designate the agent of an action, generally rendered in English with the preposition by. So while the papyri Joseph Smith had were written almost two thousand years after Abraham, they nevertheless could have contained a copy of the writings of Abraham, of which Abraham was the author.

• Criticism: Modern Egyptologists maintain that the facsimiles do not at all represent what Joseph Smith said they do. The original of Facsimile 1 of the book of Abraham is found at the beginning of the Hor Book of Breathings papyrus, and the hieroglyphic writing on it associates the figure on the couch (figure 1) with Hor, the owner of the papyrus, who is portrayed as being resurrected by the god Anubis, who stands over him. Above and to the right of Anubis, Hor's soul is represented as a human-headed falcon.

Response: As has been shown earlier, Egyptologists do not always agree with one another in their interpretations. Take, for instance, the bird, or falcon, in the upper right hand corner of Facsimile 1.

Left: Image on the papyrus, which some Egyptologists claims is a human-headed falcon which represents Hor’s soul; Right: Drawing in the Book of Abraham, claiming the image represents the Angel of the Lord

It is simply a matter of interpretation. However, the real answer lies in the fact that these “breathings” documents or texts found with mummies are those used for safe passage into the afterlife. What may have happened to the one found in the possession of the Hor mummy was that the maker (seller?), or Hor himself, took the older, original illustrations done by Abraham and modified and adapted them for use by Hor. Such duplication would not have been unknown, since the purpose of the document to its new owner, in this case Hor, would not have mattered—it was simply to assist the deceased in his passage into the afterlife.

In fact, the powers contained in the Breathing Permit, including mobility, sight, speech, hearing, and access to food offerings, are summarized in the term “snsn,” or “breathing,” which refers to the Egyptian expression “t·w n onh,” that is, “breath of life,” the fundamental characteristic that distinguishes the living. The title “so.t n snsn,” literally, “Document of (or ‘for’) Breathing” employs the term for an official document or letter (so.t), so that these “books” serve as formal “permits”—or perhaps more accurately “passports”—to the world of the gods. To be effective, they had to accompany the corpse, and the directions for using the texts declare explicitly that the document must be placed below the mummy’s crossed arms and wrapped within the bandages.

What Joseph Smith did in interpreting the facsimiles is similar to what he did with the Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible—he gave the original meaning of the Abraham illustrations, correcting the changes that had taken place over nearly two millennia, which also holds true for facsimile 2.

In addition, there are numerous examples of Egyptian papyri that have more than one text on them, and thus there could have been a copy of the book of Abraham on the same papyrus as the Hor Book of Breathings. All we have, and all that the Egyptologists who have translated the fragments had, is a small part of the original scrolls that broke off and were not sold by Combs to the museum which, ultimately, were evidently destroyed in the Chicago fire.

(See the next post, “The Book of Abraham and the Facsimile Image-Part IV” for more of the criticisms about the Book of Abraham and our responses)