Based on what you see in the enlarged woodcut plate, do you sense that there was a jackal nose originally carved and afterward removed? Which way do you tend to lean knowing what you know right now? On a scale of 1-10: 1 being there is no way there was a nose and 10 being there was most certainly a nose.
abinadi_fire wrote:Paul - did any of the Smiths place names with the mummies that the scrolls accompanied? Certainly not “Hor, justified,” but did he claim the bodies were those of any of the patriarchs?
I've discussed this in detail in other threads. You are welcome to start a new thread if you care to get into details. I will say that the church denied that the mummies were the remains of the patriarchs. Oliver Cowdery made an official statement on this matter in the Messenger and Advocate.
But the question of the mummies is too big for this thread.
I guess where I get a little confused is did they originally make a jackal head on the facsimile 3 printing plate, and if so why? And if they were making a slave, why in the world did they leave the jackal ear intact?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
I guess where I get a little confused is did they originally make a jackal head on the facsimile 3 printing plate, and if so why? And if they were making a slave, why in the world did they leave the jackal ear intact?
- Doc
If there really was a jackal head there to begin with, I think that means Hedlock had finished copying what was on the original Fac #3, Joseph Smith shows up to review it and asks Hedlock to remove the snout and make Anubis look more human. The chiseled revisions are Hedlock's attempt to do that without starting over.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."
I guess where I get a little confused is did they originally make a jackal head on the facsimile 3 printing plate, and if so why? And if they were making a slave, why in the world did they leave the jackal ear intact?
- Doc
Doc, the image in your link fails to materialize.
No need to get confused, Doctor CamNC4Me! It was Joseph Smith that got confused. He was fraudulently attempting to doctor the plates to match his story. I tend to think that a jackal headed person originally carved by Reuben Hedlock was done in good faith as an artist who desired to recreate the original papyrus image into his woodcut. But then came Joseph Smith to examine his work. The only way Smith could have examined the work was to actually print a test sample and see how it looked. Doesn't that make sense? It would have been easy-peasy to apply ink and press it on paper and see how it turned out. Well, Joseph Smith may have had a hard time interpreting what a jackal headed man meant and to avoid complication why not just change the head and call him a slave? After all, he's black, and nobody will dare question that interpretation. Joseph may have figured a black man with a jackal head was someone of importance and the interpretation of being a slave may have seemed too risky.
Oh the tangled web Joseph Smith spun. The man was a spider!
Fence Sitter wrote:If there really was a jackal head there to begin with, I think that means Hedlock had finished copying what was on the original Fac #3, Joseph Smith shows up to review it and asks Hedlock to remove the snout and make Anubis look more human. The chiseled revisions are Hedlock's attempt to do that without starting over.
Exactly. And the ear got left in during all the confusion. Maybe it was a dark day and lighting was poor. Maybe he was working overtime at night and candle power was too dim to catch everything. There was a rush to get it to print! Maybe this and maybe that.
I can imagine that Reuben Hedlock was not happy about making the revision. It's a slap in the face for any artist!
Fence Sitter wrote:If there really was a jackal head there to begin with, I think that means Hedlock had finished copying what was on the original Fac #3, Joseph Smith shows up to review it and asks Hedlock to remove the snout and make Anubis look more human. The chiseled revisions are Hedlock's attempt to do that without starting over.
Exactly. And the ear got left in during all the confusion. Maybe it was a dark day and lighting was poor. Maybe he was working overtime at night and candle power was too dim to catch everything. There was a rush to get it to print! Maybe this and maybe that.
I can imagine that Reuben Hedlock was not happy about making the revision. It's a slap in the face for any artist!
Shulem, in all of the pictures shown in this thread of a jackal head on a human body, there is some sort of cape or back-veil type thing on the shoulders. Even the jackals on dog bodies have a length of ribbon or something ornamentally draping their shoulders. Is it possible the oddly oval head shape and the humped back came out of getting rid of that also? Also, I think if you add a snout and a back-veil, the arms would no longer seem abnormally long.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Dec 05, 2017 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Also, just to play devil's advocate, suppose the cut marks are a normal artifact of carving. Maybe consider comparing the marks around the missing snout area to marks around the heads of other characters to see if there is a clear difference.
Lemmie wrote:Shulem, in all of the pictures shown in this thread of a jackal head on a human body, there is some sort of cape or back-veil type thing on the shoulders. Even the jackals on dog bodies have a length of ribbon or something ornamentally draping their shoulders. Is it possible the oddly oval head shape and the humped back came out of getting rid of that also? Also, I think if you add a snout and a back-veil, the arms would no longer seem abnormally long.
The missing headcloth is a curious concern, I grant that. I don't ever recall seeing Anubis without some kind of headcloth. This certainly deserves attention and further review. I don't think all the answers are going to pop up in a single day.
Lemmie wrote:Shulem, in all of the pictures shown in this thread of a jackal head on a human body, there is some sort of cape or back-veil type thing on the shoulders. Even the jackals on dog bodies have a length of ribbon or something ornamentally draping their shoulders. Is it possible the oddly oval head shape and the humped back came out of getting rid of that also? Also, I think if you add a snout and a back-veil, the arms would no longer seem abnormally long.
The missing headcloth is a curious concern, I grant that. I don't ever recall seeing Anubis without some kind of headcloth. This certainly deserves attention and further review. I don't think all the answers are going to pop up in a single day.
Hence the brainstorming.
A process I love to watch! Thank you for sharing your ongoing analyses with us, it's fascinating to see this unfold.
