Jump to content

The Cartouches In Fac 3 And Some Speculation


Olavarria

Recommended Posts

fig.3.gif

Fig. 1. Abraham sitting upon Pharaohâ??s throne, by the politeness of the king, with a crown upon his head, representing the Priesthood, as emblematical of the grand Presidency in Heaven; with the scepter of justice and judgment in his hand.

Fig. 2. King Pharaoh, whose name is given in the characters above his head.

Fig. 3. Signifies Abraham in Egypt as given also in Figure 10 of Facsimile No. 1.

Fig. 4. Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand.

Fig. 5. Shulem, one of the kingâ??s principal waiters, as represented by the characters above his hand.

Fig. 6. Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince.

Abraham is reasoning upon the principles of Astronomy, in the kingâ??s court.

Label for Isis (Fig. 2 of Facsimile 3)

(VIII/4)

Link to comment
Your turn to speculate.

I wonder if Smith thought King Pharoah (1) and the prince of Pharoah (4) were cross-dressers since, according to Egyptologists, these figures are female... (Isis and Maat) ?

And how, one wonders, could Smith have thought that the Egyptian god Anubis (6) was really Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince?

Link to comment
I wonder if Smith thought King Pharoah (1) and the prince of Pharoah (4) were cross-dressers since, according to Egyptologists, these figures are female... (Isis and Maat) ?

You need to reread your Bullfinch's Mythology. Don't you recall the incident where Thor was condemned to live as a woman for a time, even bearing a child? And Homer needs a quick refresher as well: Athena appeared in the guise of a man on more than one occasion; even Aphrodite got into the fun at one point.

Fact is, it is not unusual for individuals to be depicted in the form of g-ds in religious iconography. It's a handy way to demonstrate that the individual depicted possesses the qualities of the g-d/g-ddess. Ma'at, for example, the g-ddess of the Golden Mean, might represent judgment, justice, moderation, or even triumph over the flesh, since it is her feather that the soul is measured against at the judgment and she is, for all intents and purposes, the scales.

Let's not let our junior high selves snicker overloud at the beliefs and art of others severed from us by time and distance. Let's, rather, seek to understand what was good and Christian in what they believed. They could teach us all a thing or two.

And how, one wonders, could Smith have thought that the Egyptian god Anubis (6) was really Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince?

You need to think less literally. Like with Ma'at which I discussed above Olimlah, functioning as though her were Anubis, is presenting the initiate, along with Ma'at, at the throne following judgment for induction into G-d's presence. It is a holy moment and should be treated with respect. If the name were Gabriel instead of Anubis/Olimlah, you wouldn't object to such a concept at all.

Link to comment
I wonder if Smith thought King Pharoah (1) and the prince of Pharoah (4) were cross-dressers since, according to Egyptologists, these figures are female... (Isis and Maat) ?

According to egyptologists? According to me!!!! That waist to hip ratio is enviable, even by modern females.

I still have more studying to do in regards to Isis. But the Maat identification is most interesting.

"Maat was almost alaways depicted in fully anthropomorphic form as a goddess wearing a tall feather on her head. The feather alone could represent the goddess, however, as could the hieroglyphic sign also used to write her name which resembled a builder's measure or the plinth upon which statues of the god were placed"(Wilkonson pg 150).

Ok, that is pretty much what we have in facsimilie 3, now to the Qlb(heart) of the matter:

"Theologically, the most important manifestation of the veneration of the goddess was the king's ritual presentation of a small figure of Maat in the temple of the gods"(Wilkinson pg. 152).

"In representations of the king presenting Maat to the gods, the diminutive image of the goddesss is sometimes depicted in such a manner as to form a rebus of the name of the king himself. This is the case when Rameses II presents the goddess holding a 'User' staff and crowned with a solar disk of Ra in addition to her own tall plume in order to spell the king's throne name:User-Maat-Ra"(Wilkinson pg. 150).

http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Gods-Goddes...9594&sr=8-1

Also, I thought it was interesting to find that there was an egyptian prince by the name of Nefer Maat. This name means something like "Beutiful Maat" or "Maat is Beutiful, Maat is good".

http://www.ancient-egypt.org/index.html

What can we learn?

1) At least two Egyptian king(male!) had a Maat name.

2)The example of the doll offering, could be said to be an equation of this particular King Ramses II, whose other name is User-Maat-Ra, with Maat. The doll is Maat, but the doll is also User-Maat-Ra, another name for Ramses II.

So I dont find "Prince of Pharaoh, King of Egypt, as written above the hand" problematic.

And how, one wonders, could Smith have thought that the Egyptian god Anubis (6) was really Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince?

The answer to that questian all depends on what was on the remaining, though currently unavailable, sections of the BoA.

The answer that questian also depends on whether or not this vignette was ever attached to an ancient BoA.

It should be of note that there is no other BoB,made by Isis which has this vignette attached to it. Even in BoB made by Isis, which were onwed by Hor's family members, rather than having fac 3 , they have a vignette of a man worshipping a cow.

This is telling since:

"We can already see evidence of this cavalier attitude toward the text in several places in the Ani Papyrus. Sometimes a chapter can contain many errors, yet the hieroglyphs used in it will be beutifully rendered. More often the predominance of image manifests itself in the misalignment of text and vignette. In the Ani Papyrus, several chapters and parts of chapters seem to have been written under the wrong vignettes, most notably on Plate 32 where the rubric to Chapter 125 occurs under the unmistakable vignette normally associated with Chapter 126. "pg. 147

http://www.amazon.com/Egyptian-Book-Dead-G...3877344-1713733

"The displacement of text and image is an important phenomenon which should not simply be ascribed to careless work done on the cheap, for it occurs in materials of the highest quality. Helmutt Brunner noted in his study of the Divine Birth Legend that even in these royal temple scenes the images do not necessarily relate to the texts accompanying them" pg. 147

http://www.amazon.com/Egyptian-Book-Dead-G...3877344-1713733

Since there is no other BoB made by Isis with Fac 3 or Fac 1 attached, even in BoB made by Isis made for members of Hor's family, and given the ancient egyptian practice of adapting and borrowing vignettes from other texts, we can safely say that fac 1 and 3 dont belong to the BoB made by Isis, but were added as vignettes in Hor's case.

Joseph's explanations are dependant on the vignette's belonging to a BoA, which idea currently untestable.

Since I dont believe that the vignettes were drawn by Abraham, I simply see them as stock vignettes of the day that were used for a variety of texts, like medival manuscript illustrations and are only loosly dendant on the text.

So as for the Olimlah/Anubis connection, Im content to sit and wait.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...