Albert Churchward's opinion about the Star of David

Not Guilty as Charged

An example of a kind of nasty attacks against the Star of David is an article titled "The Six-Pointed Star, The Mark Of The Beast, Part II, History Of The Six-Pointed Star", where the author quotes selectively from "Signs and Symbols of Primordial Man, being an explanation of the Evolution of Religious Doctrines from the Eschatology of the Ancient Egyptians" (1910) By Albert Churchward (1852-1925). 

Quote: "Six Triangles...is the Egyptian hieroglyphic for the ...Land of the Spirits." (Churchward, p. 177)

In the original text the Six Triangles do not comprise a Star of David, as you may have assumed by the title of the article – they are illustrated as 3 pairs of hourglasses. 

3 pairs of hourglasses

Quote:  "Ancient Egyptian Seal of Solomon" (Churchward, p. 188)

The original text is: 

"and has by some been named Seal of Solomon (see origin of triangles. 

The illustration on the left of this sentence is marked as Figure 85. It  shows not a Star of David, or a Seal of Solomon (which is another name for the six pointed star) but a rhomb surrounded by four triangles). 

A rhomb surrounded by four triangles

Quote: "This (6-pointed star) was the first sign or hieroglyphic of Amsu" (p. 65)

The words (6-pointed star) are an addition of the author. The original phrase is:

"This, as far as we can trace, was the first sign or hieroglyphic of Amsu"

More than that: on page 314 Churchward wrote that the shape of the first two triangles mentioned above as 3 pairs of hourglasses "is  much more ancient than the latter" (marked as Fig. 85)

and we can not find any reason for Brother Gould calling it "Solomon's Seal". Solomon was not born when this was first used as a sacred sign, and as far as our researches go we have not been able to trace any facts or reasons to support the assertion that Solomon ever used it as a seal". 

This quote does not appear in the Watch.Pair article mentioned above...