The Full Text Of The William Albright Letter

[consiglieri]

I am happy to report that, through the courtesy of a well-connected friend of mine, I have obtained a copy of the William Albright letter that initiated another thread, and which many of you have expressed a desire to see in its totality.

I am unhappy to report that, though I now have a digital version of this letter on my computer, I am unable to transfer a copy of same to a post on this message board. I tried everything I could think of and nothing would work. If anybody has any ideas on how to accomplish this, please let me know.

In the meantime, I will transcribe the letter in its entirety below.

The letter is on William F. Albright's letterhead with his name at the top, and underneath that is the address of 100 Gilman Hall, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, 21215(8?). The letter is dated July 25, 1966 and is addressed to Mr. Grant S. Howard, 124 W. 7065 South, Midvale, Utah 84047. The full text of the letter is as follows:

_____________________________________________

Dear Mr. Howard:

Thanks for sending me a copy of the publication of Joseph Smith's Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. There does appear to be evidence that Joseph Smith had studied some Egyptian. For one thing, he undoubtedly spent a great deal of money and effort in trying to master Egyptian, but, as you know, when the Book of Mormon was written, Egyptian had just begun to be deciphered and it is all the more surprising that there are two Egyptian names, Paanch and Pahor(an) which appear together in the Book of Mormon in close connection with a reference to the original language as being "Reformed Egyptian." I read an extremely interesting account by Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History, in chapter 12, in which she deals with Joseph Smith's tremendous efforts to learn languages. There were, however, as yet no Egyptian grammars or dictionaries in existence, so the best he could do was to follow books from the seventeenth and eighteenth centures (including some from the nineteenth) which treated the hieroglyphs very much as Horapollo did about the sixth century A.D.--as pure ideographs. Joseph Smith's translation does not, however, follow the pseudo-Neo-Platonism of Athanasius Kircher in the seventeenth century, but is a kind of quasi-biblical composition. In any case it has nothing whatever to do with the original Egyptian manuscript of a copy of the Book of the Dead.

The supposed digits have nothing whatever to do with the figures. You must remember that our digits go back to India through the Arabs and were not brought to Europe until less than a thousand years ago.

I do not for a moment believe that Joseph Smith was trying to mislead anyone; I accept the point of view of a Jewish friend of mine at the University of Utah, that he was a religious genius and that he was quite honest in believing that he really could decipher these ancient texts. But to insist that he did is really doing a disservice to the cause of a great church and its gifted founder.

Cordially,

(signature)

W. F. Albright

___________________________________________________

Now that I have produced the letter in its entirety, are we able to achieve a consensus that William F. Albright was surprised to see two authentic Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[urroner]

What format is the file?

[urroner]

BTW, for those who don't know, including me, who don't have any idea who William F. Albright is, go here:

Wikipedia - William F. Albright

William Foxwell Albright (May 24, 1891â??September 19/September 20, 1971) was an American Orientalist, pioneer archaeologist, biblical scholar, linguist and expert on ceramics. From the early twentieth century until his death, he was the dean of biblical archaeologists and the universally acknowledged founder of the Biblical archaeology movement. His student, George Ernest Wright, followed in his footsteps as the leader of that movement. Others among his students, notably Frank Moore Cross and David Noel Freedman, became international leaders in the study of the Bible and the ancient Near East, including Northwest Semitic epigraphy and paleography. Albright's religious background was evangelical American Methodist. He was born in Coquimbo, Chile to Protestant missionaries Wilbur Finley and Zephine Viola Foxwell Albright, the eldest of six. He married Dr. Ruth Norton in 1921 in Jerusalem. The couple had four sons.

Albright received his Ph.D. in 1913 from Johns Hopkins University, where he later taught from 1929 to 1959 and was director of the American school of Oriental Research at Johns Hopkins. One of his major achievements was confirming the authenticity of the Dead Sea Scrolls following their discovery.

Albright argued that the Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were real historical figures, and he believed that Joshua's exploits were historical as well. He insisted that "as a whole, the picture in Genesis is historical, and there is no reason to doubt the general accuracy of the biographical details."

In 1923 he made the first significant excavation of a tumulus near Jerusalem--possibly the site where an ancient king of Judah was memorialized. Another noteworthy contribution he made to the field of Biblical archaeology was his study of the LMLK seals and the impact it had on other researchers from 1925-1960 (Grena, 2004, pp. 149-78).

He also excavated a mound named Tell Beit Mirsim near Hebron from 1926 to 1932. He identified this site with the Canaanite city of Debir, mentioned several times in the Hebrew Bible, although this identification has since been challenged. Together with other finds, this seemed to confirm that the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites was historical. Although some have challenged his conclusions, the majority of biblical scholars and archeologists concur with Albright.

He edited the Anchor Bible volumes on Jeremiah, Matthew, and Revelation; his books include Yahweh and the Gods of Canaan, The Archaeology of Palestine: From the Stone Age to Christianity, and The Biblical Period from Abraham to Ezra. Although primarily a biblical archaeologist, Albright also made some contributions to Egyptian archaeology: in a BASOR 130 (1953) paper titled "New Light from Egypt on the Chronology and History of Israel and Judah," the scholar established that Shoshenq I--the Biblical Egyptian king Shishak--came to power somewhere between 945 to 940 BC.

The W. F. Albright institute of Archaeological research, a branch of the American Schools of Oriental Research is located in Jerusalem.

[phaedrus ut]

A very classy letter from a important biblical scholar and archaeologist.

[consiglieri]

What format is the file?

I managed to monkey around with it until I was successful at getting it copied into a Microsoft Word file.

I can use the computer functions to copy and paste it into a new Microsoft Word file, but when I try to copy and paste it into a post on this message board, nothing happens. Any ideas?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "technologically challenged")

[urroner]

What format is the file?

I managed to monkey around with it until I was successful at getting it copied into a Microsoft Word file.

I can use the computer functions to copy and paste it into a new Microsoft Word file, but when I try to copy and paste it into a post on this message board, nothing happens. Any ideas?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "technologically challenged")

What format was the original file? You might be trying to paste a picture instead of text and that can cause problems. Was the original file a pdf file?

[USU78]

A very classy letter from a important biblical scholar and archaeologist.

I quite agree. He shared just enough information to be informative, not too much so as to confuse or discourage an interested but naive correspondent, and he honestly dealt with facts without speculation.

BTW . . . I quite agree with the comment about JSJr: "We can do anything!" would be a perfect summation of his attitude.

Those who impute evil motives to JSJr would do well to consider the unnamed Jewish UofU professor.

[consiglieri]

Dear Urroner,

It is in a jpg file. Does that mean anything to you?

Thanks!

--Consiglieri

[USU78]

Dear Urroner,

It is in a jpg file. Does that mean anything to you?

Thanks!

--Consiglieri

It does to me. If you look at your bar above where you type these posts, you'll notice a button with a tree on it. Press the button, then paste your jpg file where indicated. It should work for you.

[urroner]

Dear Urroner,

It is in a jpg file. Does that mean anything to you?

Thanks!

--Consiglieri

It does to me. If you look at your bar above where you type these posts, you'll notice a button with a tree on it. Press the button, then paste your jpg file where indicated. It should work for you.

Hey, hey, hey, I'm the evil computer genius around here buddy. Casting me in the shadow of your light is not acceptable.

BTW, if the photograph is simply on his computer, it won't show up since the picture has to have a URL or an internet addess. You might be able to load the file onto a server which provides internet services or maybe somebody would volunteer to do so for you. I bet you Krispy Kremes to dollars that Lord Kerry would do so in a heartbeat.

JPG simply means that it a picture or photograph is a certain format. There is no text in the JPG file. It's like a picture taken with a digitial camera.

[USU78]

Dear Urroner, It is in a jpg file. Does that mean anything to you? Thanks!

It does to me. If you look at your bar above where you type these posts, you'll notice a button with a tree on it. Press the button, then paste your jpg file where indicated. It should work for you.

Hey, hey, hey, I'm the evil computer genius around here buddy. Casting me in the shadow of your light is not acceptable. BTW, if the photograph is simply on his computer, it won't show up since the picture has to have a URL or an internet addess. You might be able to load the file onto a server which provides internet services or maybe somebody would volunteer to do so for you. I bet you Krispy Kremes to dollars that Lord Kerry would do so in a heartbeat. JPG simply means that it a picture or photograph is a certain format. There is no text in the JPG file. It's like a picture taken with a digitial camera.

You have humbled me. I'll go back to my dolls and dishes now.

USU "Technopeasant" 78

[William Schryver]

BTW, if the photograph is simply on his computer, it won't show up since the picture has to have a URL or an internet addess. You might be able to load the file onto a server which provides internet services or maybe somebody would volunteer to do so for you. I bet you Krispy Kremes to dollars that Lord Kerry would do so in a heartbeat.

JPG simply means that it a picture or photograph is a certain format. There is no text in the JPG file. It's like a picture taken with a digitial camera.

urroner speaketh the truth.

I would gladly post the image through my site. If you would like me to do that, e-mail the image as an attachment to hardy1879@yahoo.com and I will post it to this thread within a matter of minutes.

[consiglieri]

Having failed at USU ("You know I'd go from dolls to dishes")78's suggestion, and thereafter having read the suggestions from others, I will take up Bill's suggestion and e-mail the file as an an attachment to him; then sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Jaybear]

Nice work in finding the letter.

What a classy gentleman.

[William Schryver]

Having failed at USU ("You know I'd go from dolls to dishes")78's suggestion, and thereafter having read the suggestions from others, I will take up Bill's suggestion and e-mail the file as an an attachment to him; then sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

The .jpg file was 2.7 MB. It looked like it had been scanned at least at 300dpi, probably more. So I resampled it and recompressed it to about 200K.

Rather than post it inline, here's a link to it: Albright Letter

[cksalmon]

Having failed at USU ("You know I'd go from dolls to dishes")78's suggestion, and thereafter having read the suggestions from others, I will take up Bill's suggestion and e-mail the file as an an attachment to him; then sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Hey Consig--

I'm sure the thing with William will work, but for future reference you can always upload the file to PhotoBucket or some other free image hosting site and then copy-and-paste the image URL from there.

Best to you.

CKS

[William Schryver]

Having failed at USU ("You know I'd go from dolls to dishes")78's suggestion, and thereafter having read the suggestions from others, I will take up Bill's suggestion and e-mail the file as an an attachment to him; then sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Hey Consig--

I'm sure the thing with William will work, but for future reference you can always upload the file to PhotoBucket or some other free image hosting site and then copy-and-paste the image URL from there.

Best to you.

CKS

PhotoBucket is great, but there is a size limitation of 1024x768 (unless you pay for their premium service.)

[Gervin]

Quite good sluething, consiglieri! However, there is nothing in the letter that leads me to agree with your position:

"My position is more modest than that.

All I am saying is that the presence of authentically ancient Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon is evidence, to some degree, that the Book of Mormon is ancient."

Albright was surprised by the presence of the two names (I'm surprised by some of the things I read in the book, too). But I see nothing to suggest that he believed (or even entertained the idea that) the Book of Mormon was ancient. The letter seems to focus chiefly on Jos. Smith's translation abilities - abilities for which Albright had some concerns.

As an aside, I wonder why he put "Reformed Egyptian" in quotation marks...

[consiglieri]

Quite good sluething, consiglieri! However, there is nothing in the letter that leads me to agree with your position:

"My position is more modest than that.

All I am saying is that the presence of authentically ancient Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon is evidence, to some degree, that the Book of Mormon is ancient."

Albright was surprised by the presence of the two names (I'm surprised by some of the things I read in the book, too). But I see nothing to suggest that he believed (or even entertained the idea that) the Book of Mormon was ancient. The letter seems to focus chiefly on Jos. Smith's translation abilities - abilities for which Albright had some concerns.

As an aside, I wonder why he put "Reformed Egyptian" in quotation marks...

Thanks for the compliment, Gervin. I do get by . . . with a little help from my friends.

I want to state at the outset that my modest proposition really has nothing to do with whether Albright believed the Book of Mormon was ancient. He does not speak to the issue, and I would not want to impose any such belief upon so gracious and learned a gentleman and scholar (or anybody else, for that matter).

I know there have been a couple of threads on this now, and the last one was rather lengthy, so let me put forward the two propositions that I think we can all agree on, and you let me know if I am wrong:

1. William F. Albright, whose credentials I think we all agree are high, noted the presence in the Book of Mormon of "two Egyptian names, Paanch and Pahor(an)."

2. The presence in the Book of Mormon of "two Egyptian names, Paanch and Pahor(an)" is evidence, to some degree, that the Book of Mormon is ancient.

Please note that I do not presume to say to what degree, but leave that to the individual to ascertain for themselves. I think the Dude in another ongoing thread dealing with NHM concedes as much, saying that he does not list 100% as an option nor 0% as an option. These two Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon, I feel, are similar. They are certainly not proof positive that the Book of Mormon is ancient. On the other hand, I think it hard to say that, in spite of their acknowledged presence, they yield an absolute 0% of evidence for the claim. And so I am hoping to find some agreement that, to some degree, the presence of these Egyptian names is evidence that the Book of Mormon is ancient.

What do you think? Heck, what does everybody think?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

BTW, if the photograph is simply on his computer, it won't show up since the picture has to have a URL or an internet addess. You might be able to load the file onto a server which provides internet services or maybe somebody would volunteer to do so for you. I bet you Krispy Kremes to dollars that Lord Kerry would do so in a heartbeat.

JPG simply means that it a picture or photograph is a certain format. There is no text in the JPG file. It's like a picture taken with a digitial camera.

urroner speaketh the truth.

I would gladly post the image through my site. If you would like me to do that, e-mail the image as an attachment to hardy1879@yahoo.com and I will post it to this thread within a matter of minutes.

I would like to publicly thank Mr. Schryver for his aid in posting a link to the Albright letter. I now hope that, having gone through all the trouble of locating it and posting a link to it, we can generate some discussion as to what precisely this may mean for Book of Mormon studies.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[USU78]

[consiglieri]

Having failed at USU ("You know I'd go from dolls to dishes")78's suggestion, and thereafter having read the suggestions from others, I will take up Bill's suggestion and e-mail the file as an an attachment to him; then sit back and wait for the magic to happen.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Hey Consig--

I'm sure the thing with William will work, but for future reference you can always upload the file to PhotoBucket or some other free image hosting site and then copy-and-paste the image URL from there.

Best to you.

CKS

Dear CKS,

Thanks for your suggestion. Have you had a chance to view the letter itself now? What do you think? Do you find this at all impressive? I ask you this specific question because I know you are an open-minded individual always willing to accomodate new evidence and adjust your views accordingly, if need be.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Dear USU78,

Thanks for posting the photo of the actual letter! You are the best!

Today you are a man, my son. Time to put away your dolls and dishes.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[maklelan]

Albright was surprised by the presence of the two names (I'm surprised by some of the things I read in the book, too). But I see nothing to suggest that he believed (or even entertained the idea that) the Book of Mormon was ancient. The letter seems to focus chiefly on Jos. Smith's translation abilities - abilities for which Albright had some concerns.

I don't think anyone is saying he thought the Book of Mormon was ancient. I think the letter shows the two names did not come from Joseph Smith's imagination, and must therefore be accounted for in some other manner. Albright offers an option or two, but they don't pan out. The question is now, how do you account for two authenticated Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon?

[consiglieri]

Albright was surprised by the presence of the two names (I'm surprised by some of the things I read in the book, too). But I see nothing to suggest that he believed (or even entertained the idea that) the Book of Mormon was ancient. The letter seems to focus chiefly on Jos. Smith's translation abilities - abilities for which Albright had some concerns.

I don't think anyone is saying he thought the Book of Mormon was ancient. I think the letter shows the two names did not come from Joseph Smith's imagination, and must therefore be accounted for in some other manner. Albright offers an option or two, but they don't pan out. The question is now, how do you account for two authenticated Egyptian names in the Book of Mormon?

That is really the point I would like people to address here, so thank you for crystalizing the question, Makelan.

In the other thread, it seemed that a number of people were extremely desirous to see the actual letter. Now that it has been produced, I hope they will admit it truly exists and confront the evidence in a responsible and intellectually honest manner.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[maklelan]

Indeed. I greatly anticipate the evidence that will come forth to show the non-divine provenance of these two names. If none is forthcoming I think we have to conclude that something is going on here that cannot be accounted for by the usual means.

[consiglieri]

Indeed. I greatly anticipate the evidence that will come forth to show the non-divine provenance of these two names. If none is forthcoming I think we have to conclude that something is going on here that cannot be accounted for by the usual means.

Dear Makelan,

I am starting to get the feeling that we are just talking here amongst ourselves.

Where now the masses clamoring for production of the letter? All is silent. Not a word is spoken.

What does it mean when the lady protesteth not at all?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri (Italian for "Shakespeare Butcher")