What do the labels in Facsimile 3 say?

Compare the original explanation with the signs and the readings by Ritner and Rhodes. They read Isis, although some signs in the engraving are difficult.

You compare the same label the explanation points to and account for the quality of the surviving print.

Isis has royal associations, so the caption must give the name of a king.

Royal associations can help explain a symbolic use of the image. A reading of the name requires evidence from the signs.

An attested name is enough to identify the figure.

A name can exist without occurring in this inscription. Read the signs over the figure and compare the name in the bottom text.

It tells us the name is plausible. Ritner reads this caption as Hor, and Hor’s name also appears below the scene.

You distinguish the existence of a name from its presence in a particular text.

Yes. Reusing an image could explain different roles. I would still ask why the published explanations refer to the written characters for those names.

You explain what the proposal could account for and where it needs further evidence.

A missing scroll settles the question of what the visible labels say.

A missing scroll could affect the origin of the English narrative. The 1842 print still lets us compare the labels with their explanations.