A few questions for Shulem

[_Lemmie]

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

Can you sketch in what might have been chiseled out? that might give another perspective as to what was originally there.

[_Lemmie]

.... I've noticed the deathly silence coming from MG's corner. I take it the troll is asleep under his bridge.

You were absolutely masterful in shutting down the troll. A victory there, and a major victory with your new find. I'm fascinated to see how far you can go with this!

[_Philo Sofee]

.... I've noticed the deathly silence coming from MG's corner. I take it the troll is asleep under his bridge.

You were absolutely masterful in shutting down the troll. A victory there, and a major victory with your new find. I'm fascinated to see how far you can go with this!

Here, here!!! And a cool little lesson here is......(wait for it)......... it was done with evidence, not mere faith.

Evidence or shut up I say, and Shulem won't shut up THANK GOD.

[_Jersey Girl]

.... I've noticed the deathly silence coming from MG's corner. I take it the troll is asleep under his bridge.

You were absolutely masterful in shutting down the troll. A victory there, and a major victory with your new find. I'm fascinated to see how far you can go with this!

+ Infinity.

On multiple levels, this thread is poetic justice.

[Guest]

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.

So a few things to consider.

As Shulem posted above, we have a very clear description of the more or less two intact scrolls that arrived in Kirtland with Chandler. A description made prior to their arrival in Kirtland, from this newspaper article below. There were also incomplete parts of two other scrolls which are not mentioned in the article as well as the hypocephalus of Sheshonq. (Facsimile 2)

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.

These two scroll descriptions match very well to the two scrolls as we now have them.

The Ta-sherit-Min scroll, also know as the book of Joseph, fitting the first description, looks like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_II.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_IV.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_V.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_VI.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_VII.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_VIII.jpg



The scroll of Hor, from which Joseph Smith claimed to translate the Book of Abraham,fitting the second description, looks like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_Papyri#/media/File:Joseph_Smith_Papyrus_I_and_XI.jpg
http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/plan-of-the-house-of-the-lord-in-kirtland-ohio-fragments-circa-june-1833/4


Now the interesting thing here, besides the fact that the descriptions match up well with each scroll, is a comparison of damage to each scroll. Clearly the Hor scroll is more damaged but we also see parts of the Ta scroll that are damaged or missing. If we go to Ritner's The Joseph Smith Egyptian Papyri: A Complete Editon at the end is a very interesting section regarding 47 significant loose patches that fell off the scrolls and were kept. Some of these loose patches have even been in the possession of the SLC branch of the church since Nauvoo. The church has had a single sheet of paper since Nauvoo on which loose patches were glued and that sheet is called JSP IX or "The Church's Historian Fragment. It looks like this:
http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/egyptian-papyri-circa-300-bc-ad-50/15#facts

So Ritner takes all these patches and identifies where each patch belongs. In many cases he actually provides photos of the Hor or Ta scrolls and superimposed the loose patch in its correct position. 6 of the loose patches belong on the Hor scroll and the other 43 belong on the Ta scroll. What can we conclude from this?

Well first of all, the damage on the Hor scroll was there before it arrived. If that damage occurred after it had arrived we would expect more loose pieces from that scroll. We can also conclude that the Ta scroll was in even better shape when it arrived in Kirtland then it is now since so many of the patches are from that scroll. This also fits in nicely with the Cleveland Whig description.

The other interesting thing to note, is the fact that there are no patches from any other scrolls than the Hor and Ta scrolls. Gee et al are arguing that large portions of the scrolls were lost in Chicago fire. Gee is even proposing that there are two other lengthy missing scrolls. Well if we are missing so much of the papyri, why are all the extant patches from the two scrolls we still have?

So there is more to this, but I have a habit of loosing long posts before I get to post them, so I am going to post this and continue more on the next post about damage on the Hor scroll and how it is used by Cook and Smith to measure it length.

[_Shulem]

Can you sketch in what might have been chiseled out? that might give another perspective as to what was originally there.

I'm afraid an artistic manipulation of this kind is outside the scope of my ability in presenting something credible or realistic. It would require the work of an artist who is skilled in engraving. But from what I can see in the wood cut there is an ample footprint wherein a proper jackal head was first cut and likely test printed but afterward redesigned under the direct supervision of the prophet himself. The more I look at that wood cut under magnification the more I'm convinced the jackal head was original to the papyrus which is now lost. Why Smith would change this is anyone's guess but we have to consider the evidence and question everything.

One thing is for sure: The person in the papyrus is none other than the jackal headed god, Anubis, as represented by the characters above his head:

Recitation by Anubis, who makes protection(?), foremost of the embalming booth.

[_Philo Sofee]

Fencesitter
The other interesting thing to note, is the fact that there are no patches from any other scrolls than the Hor and Ta scrolls. Gee et al are arguing that the large portion of the scrolls was lost in Chicago fire. Gee is even proposing that there are two other lengthy missing scrolls. Well if we are missing so much of the papyri, why are all the extant patches from the two scrolls we still have?

Excellent, MOST excellent observation...... WHY do we not have anything else from any other rolls except just the two (not four!!!!) that Cowdery and others only ever claimed to have possessed, IF there is anything missing? All the actual evidence shows are items of the two scrolls we have remnants of. Surmising other scrolls is always about ad hoc guessing, postulating, or even declaring stuff without actual physical evidence. The difference from scholarship and apologetics can be summed up in that last sentence.

[_Lemmie]

Can you sketch in what might have been chiseled out? that might give another perspective as to what was originally there.

I'm afraid an artistic manipulation of this kind is outside the scope of my ability in presenting something credible or realistic. It would require the work of an artist who is skilled in engraving. But from what I can see in the wood cut there is an ample footprint wherein a proper jackal head was first cut and likely test printed but afterward redesigned under the direct supervision of the prophet himself. The more I look at that wood cut under magnification the more I'm convinced the jackal head was original to the papyrus which is now lost.

that's what I was heading toward, that the negative space supports the idea that something was there originally. just an idea, but if you could get someone to sketch it--even a couple of different ways-- it might be a good visual to support the presentation of your theory.

I'm sure you've already considered this also, but comparing the rough finish on that section to all other smoothly finished sections also supports the idea of a removal of the snout.

[_Shulem]

So there is more to this, but I have a habit of loosing long posts before I get to post them, so I am going to post this and continue more on the next post about damage on the Hor scroll and how it is used by Cook and Smith to measure it length.

Gee et al are arguing that the large portion of the scrolls was lost in Chicago fire. Gee is even proposing that there are two other lengthy missing scrolls. Well if we are missing so much of the papyri, why are all the extant patches from the two scrolls we still have?

Your contributions are appreciated and enrich the thread. I can only imagine that the missing roll theory is evaporating and no longer carries weight in LDS apologetic circles. The extant papyrus and the Facsimiles demonstrate that Joseph Smith used them to translate and produce his phony interpretations. The fantasized Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar is additional proof to show how Joseph Smith and his comrades pulled off their Egyptological caper.

LDS apologists today are infinitely separated from Joseph Smith and the saints of his day. Today's saints could not go back in time knowing what they know now and live among the early saints. Today's saints fantasize in their faith and are stuck having to learn how to doubt their doubts and wait on the Lord to save them. What a horrible way to live.

[_Philo Sofee]

So there is more to this, but I have a habit of loosing long posts before I get to post them, so I am going to post this and continue more on the next post about damage on the Hor scroll and how it is used by Cook and Smith to measure it length.

Gee et al are arguing that the large portion of the scrolls was lost in Chicago fire. Gee is even proposing that there are two other lengthy missing scrolls. Well if we are missing so much of the papyri, why are all the extant patches from the two scrolls we still have?

Your contributions are appreciated and enrich the thread. I can only imagine that the missing roll theory is evaporating and no longer carries weight in LDS apologetic circles. The extant papyrus and the Facsimiles demonstrate that Joseph Smith used them to translate and produce his phony interpretations. The fantasized Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar is additional proof to show how Joseph Smith and his comrades pulled off their Egyptological caper.

LDS apologists today are infinitely separated from Joseph Smith and the saints of his day. Today's saints could not go back in time knowing what they know now and live among the early saints. Today's saints fantasize in their faith and are stuck having to learn how to doubt their doubts and wait on the Lord to save them. What a horrible way to live.

Yep. I have come around to agreeing that the way to refute the apologists these days on the papyri and Book of Abraham issues is to quote Joseph Smith back at them. It's the entire premise and response of my paper I wrote. See here. No polemics, just the evidence from Joseph Smith himself and the probabilities http://drpepaw.wixsite.com/backyardprof ... e-Evidence