Not Everyone is an Egyptologist - and Neither am I!
Fortunately it is not a requirement to know much about Egyptology to settle the most common criticism of the Book of Abraham, which is that Joseph Smith couldn't have translated all the material in the Book of Abraham from the images and glyphs on an hypocephalus.
An Hypocephalus is a small piece of parchment, usually circular, on which is written a liturgy from the Osiris Cult to assist the dead in his passage through the next life. It is placed beneath the head of the deceased, hence its name that means 'beneath the head.'
Several extremely vocal anti-Mormons were delighted when the hypocephalus from the Book of Abraham was discovered a few years ago in a library, for it was thought that the document had perished more than a century earlier in a fire.
- - -
The hypocephalus was made public by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, following which the anti-Mormon brigade went to work. Pointing to the relatively small document, then referring to the wordage of the Book of Abraham they vented their derision at such a lot of writings coming from so Small a source.
They considered this to be irrefutable evidence that Joseph Smith couild not have translated the Book of Abraham from so small a source document, and thus, they said, it was proof positive that the Prophet of Palmyra was nothing but a pious fraud.
Nothing is more conducive to arriving at the wrong conclusion that attempuing to derive it from false information, and that is precisely where the clamourers erred. Joseph Smith, when referring to thetranslation process of Book of Abraham, did not say that its source was the hypocephalus, but always claimed that the original Book of Abraham was actually a ascroll of parchment with the text of Abraham written thereon.
- - -
The Hypoceophalus? Ah, yes. Well, that is used as an illustration in the printed version of the Book of Abraham, and identified as a 'facsimiile from the Book of Abraham,' but never as the source document for it.