Olavarria Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 "It is often, and incorrectly, assumed that the 'barbarous names' found in Egyptian and Greco-Egyptian magical texts are meaningless. This may sometimes be the case, but often they are anagrams of divine names which have been 'cut up' or scrambled. Merely because we cannot comprehend them except in terms of some quasi-sociological function does not signify that they are nonsense."283 In the general field of the history of religion, it has been argued that "magical" words are not nonsense.284 No less than Adolf Erman showed that a whole section of what had been thought nonsense was actually Old Coptic.285 More recent work has brought some impressive interpretations of this mumbo-jumbo to light.286 http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=7&num=1&id=171The Anastasi priestly archive has one of the more intriguing parallels to the phenomenon of book of Abraham names. P. Leiden I 395 (=PGM XIII, called the "Eighth Book of Moses") 160 Link to comment
Rincewind Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 I know I saw something related to this recently...ah, yes, here it is. I am currently reading "One Eternal Round" (Nibley/Rhodes) and saw something that seems to fit."Col. 4. Your name is in my mouth, and I will say it: Penhaqahagahar(174) is your name, Iuruiuyaqersainqrubaty(175) is your name,Col. 5. Sapatmaisar(176) is your name. Kharsati(177) is your name. I have praised your name. I am Ihet. Hear my voice this day."(p. 227. The columns in question are from the Book of the Dead, chapter 162.)The footnotes for three of these four names says "Meaningless in Egyptian." (176, or Sapatmaisar, appears to be the only one with meaning.) However, footnote 177 says "All of these names may be just gibberish, or some other language - perhaps Semitic or Nubian. Cf. Naville, "Einleitung," 184; Allen, Book of the Dead, or Going Forth by Day, 157; Yoyotte, "Contribution a l'histoire du chapitre 162 du Livre des Morts," 194-202."It could also be, though, that they are simply re-arranged, as per Gee. Just thought this was an interesting tie-in. Link to comment
William Schryver Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 I am currently of the opinion that they are nonsense. I also am doubtful that they originate with Joseph Smith, but rather with W. W. Phelps. Link to comment
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 I am currently of the opinion that they are nonsense. I also am doubtful that they originate with Joseph Smith, but rather with W. W. Phelps. Will you be sharing the evidence for this. I would like to know more. Link to comment
William Schryver Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 Will you be sharing the evidence for this. I would like to know more.I will not be sharing it via message board, but only via formal publication(s). I would like to promise that a book will be available by the end of the year, but that might be too optimistic. Early 2011 is more likely. There is a good possibility of a summary-level article appearing in print (or via oral presentation) sometime between now and the end of the year. Link to comment
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted March 23, 2010 Share Posted March 23, 2010 I will not be sharing it via message board, but only via formal publication(s). I would like to promise that a book will be available by the end of the year, but that might be too optimistic. Early 2011 is more likely. There is a good possibility of a summary-level article appearing in print (or via oral presentation) sometime between now and the end of the year.Very good. I shall look forward to at least the "summary-level article appearing in print". realising that it is a possibility. Do keep us up to date on what ever you end up doing. This sounds like a great read. Link to comment
Olavarria Posted March 24, 2010 Author Share Posted March 24, 2010 I will not be sharing it via message board, but only via formal publication(s). I would like to promise that a book will be available by the end of the year, but that might be too optimistic. Early 2011 is more likely. There is a good possibility of a summary-level article appearing in print (or via oral presentation) sometime between now and the end of the year.whats the book gonna be about? Are you writing it with anyone?Do you have a table of contents you can share with us? Link to comment
William Schryver Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 whats the book gonna be about? PM me for more details.Are you writing it with anyone?No. I am the sole author.Do you have a table of contents you can share with us?Not at this time. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.