A few questions for Shulem

[_Jersey Girl]

After all these years, swear to God, this would be enough to make Jersey show up at Sunstone. It would be pure awesome to see Shulem go completely full circle. How deeply meaningful would that be for both Shulem and Philo Sofee?

Shulem I will take another look at the images when I'm done with stuff here at the house today. Surely Philo Sofee can lend some expertise to your discovery regarding wood cuts

You're right that this is buried in a lengthy thread, however, those who are interested will keep looking in. And, that's what you really want--interested parties to throw in.

ETA: Figure out ways to protect your work--your discovery.

[_Shulem]

ETA: Figure out ways to protect your work--your discovery.

Thank you, everyone, thus far, for the comments addressing the important subject of Facsimile No. 3 which I firmly believe is a thorn in the side of the church. I can't stress enough how important this facet of the Book of Abraham is. I have a gut feeling (I know) that the church is going to have to deal with this explosive find.

Facsimile No. 3 is the flag atop the silver bullet aimed at the church! Everything else about the Book of Abraham is within the bullet itself but No. 3 is the flag or the headlights in front of the deer (sheep).

[_Jersey Girl]

You guys should check in on your PM's.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Holy cow.

http://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/funerary-hanging

- Doc

[_Themis]

Dayum! I have never noticed this before at all! That woodcut definitely has lots of little hack marks where the snout should be. It has all the appearance of being taken out by Hedlock. This is HUGE Shulem! Great detective work amigo. It has never been addressed before, and with your other illustration in this thread of Anubis with the one ear and snout, this is most definitely incriminating evidence. Holy cow amazing! I enlarged the woodcut from the church's site, and I'll be go to heck if it doesn't have all the workings of fraud, being changed deliberately to turn Anubis into something he wasn't. No restoration here, but downright destruction. This needs to be written up somehow and published. A Shulem/Philo paper perhaps for Sunstone next year?

The significance is not about whether Joseph may have had a snout cut out. The papyri was not being hidden and many had already viewed them, so I really doubt he was trying to hide anything here. The significance is the support it gives that the missing head in fac 1 is also a jackal's head as we see in fac 3, and which Egyptology tells us. Given the evidence I have shown it is clear the missing section for fac 1 was missing before Joseph ever saw them. I suspect it was done accidentally while trying to remove them from their initial case. If it can be shown clearly a snout was craved in before removal, it is just another nail in the coffin of Joseph's claims to divine assistance. I think one area ignored by both sides is the missing sections along the papyri matching each other in rolled form.

[_Fence Sitter]

I think one area ignored by both sides is the missing sections along the papyri matching each other in rolled form.

That is what Cook and Smith, as well as others, have used to estimate the length of the Hor scroll, so they are not being ignored.

[_Shulem]

Did Joseph Smith instruct Reuben Hedlock to chisel the jackal snout off the original wood cut of Facsimile No. 3 prior to publication into the Times and Seasons?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

[_Themis]

I think one area ignored by both sides is the missing sections along the papyri matching each other in rolled form.

That is what Cook and Smith, as well as others, have used to estimate the length of the Hor scroll, so they are not being ignored.

I'm aware of some of their work. Have they commented on the missing sections at the top of the papyri and how they became missing and if they match up? I think it may have been one of them that made me aware of the evidence suggesting the missing sections I am talking about were missing before Joseph got the papyri.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_I_and_XI.jpg

[_Shulem]

Nowhere have we in the ancient Egyptian religion ever seen Anubis as anything other than the God Anubis either.

You know I've harped about Smith's ignorance in assuming that Anubis was a slave because of his crude 19th century mentality in associating blacks with slavery (the dude is black ergo he must be a slave). This was totally an uninspired assertion on Smith's part. He made a huge assumption in making this declaration and it's ultimately coming back to bite him in the ass and prove that Mormon revelation regarding Egyptian iconography is total bunk. Joseph Smith spread ignorant lies about black Anubis being a slave! I trust you'll recall this familiar citation with a direct reference and eyewitness account to Fig. 6:

And king Pharaoh, standing behind him, together with a prince -- a principle waiter, and a black slave of the king.

John Gee and Kerry Muhlestein cannot wiggle out of this one and they know it. I've noticed the deathly silence coming from MG's corner. I take it the troll is asleep under his bridge.

[_Shulem]

I suspect the papyri was ripped by those who first removed it from it's original casing well before the papyri was brought to Joseph Smith. This also explains why other parts of the missing section were not recreated correctly. Such as the bird.

I'm aware of some of their work. Have they commented on the missing sections at the top of the papyri and how they became missing and if they match up? I think it may have been one of them that made me aware of the evidence suggesting the missing sections I am talking about were missing before Joseph got the papyri.

The scrolls were damaged prior to Smith's handling. To what extent cannot be fully determined. The papyrus containing the contents of Facsimile No. 1 was no doubt damaged before Kirtland as attested in this reference:

There was found deposited in the arms of the old man referred to above, a book of ancient form and construction, which, to us, was by far the most interesting part of the exhibition. Its leaves were of bark, in length some 10 or 12 inches, and 3 or 4 in width. The ends are somewhat decayed, but at the center the leaves are in a state of perfect preservation. It is the writing of no ordinary penman, probably of the old man near whose heart it was deposited at the embalming. The character are the Egyptian hieroglyphics; but of what it discourses none can tell. That probably, like the name of the author, and of the figure before you, will never be unfolded. There is also another book, more decayed, and much less neatly written - its character and import involved in like mystery.

Joseph Smith fraudulently used the actual papyrus to create his story about Abraham being bound by the priest on the altar prior to the publication of the Book of Abraham. The fragments in question were placed in special glass frames and put on display in Nauvoo. Here is the actual fragment and note the penciling of the priest's human head and uplifted arm with knife in hand which Smith fictitiously included to fabricate his story. You'll please note that Smith's penciled in knife is clutched by the right hand rather than the left as shown later in the Facsimile. The whole concept of the human head and knife in the right hand is a complete blunder!



This (above) is what the eyewitnesses in Nauvoo saw before the Facsimile No. 1 was cut and published! It's quite a story and Joseph Smith made it up and convinced others that it was the real deal. This business about Abraham being bound on the altar is nonsense. There are no cords whatsoever as shown in typical Egyptian scenes where prisoners are bound. Nonetheless, Smith was able to convince his followers that he was interpreting and translating Egyptian correctly. Here is one such example:

Today I paid Br. Joseph a visit . . . . Saw the Rolls of Papyrus and the writings thereon . . . . There are likewise representations of an Altar erected, with a man bound and laid thereon, and a Priest with a knife in his hand, standing at the foot, with a dove over the person bound on the Altar

All of this, of course, is utter and complete nonsense.