Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Great Pyramid not built by Khufu?


  • Please log in to reply
279 replies to this topic

#16    blackdogsun

blackdogsun

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2011

Posted 11 September 2012 - 03:17 AM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 11 September 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

. . several deities who cannot even be attested in Dynasty 4 (e.g., Osiris, Isis, Horemakhet [Harmakhis], Haurun).

i read somewhere that while the three Giza pyramids function as tombs for the Pharaoh they were dedicated (at some time) respectively to Osiris, Isis and Horus
could there be any validity to that?


#17    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 11 September 2012 - 12:39 PM

View PostHarte, on 10 September 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

Okay.

Then please explain the Egyptian glyphs that were spotted by the robotic probe sent into the "air shafts" that come out of the Queen's Chamber.

Did Khufu hire a midget?  Did you know these shafts are only about 8 by 81/2 ]inches?

It's obvious to any thinking person that all the Egyptian pyramids were constructed by (ahem) the Egyptians.

Any other thought on the subject is either the folly of pure ignorance or brain maxturbation.

Harte
Clinging to mainstream opinions without substabtial proofs to back them and questioning glaring proofs to a contradictory(to the mainstream) opinion is more like 'maxtrubation'.Also as pointed by someone else can you post a picture of the heiroglyphics that you describe and have they been interpreted.And yes the egyptian pyramids were constructed by egyptians but what i was commenting on is the 'Great pyramids'.Also why would the builders put glyphs inside the air shafts to be only seen by robots of the present Era and not on more obvious or visible locations?.Don't tell me they were markers used for construction material as then similar glyphs should be found on other parts of the pyramids.Are you insinuating that the AE were such retards that they would inscribe on the inner side of an air shaft and not anywhere else on the great pyramid.

Probably Khufu wanted to prove that he built the pyramids and did this misheif by introducing these glyphs in these places along with his cartouche via printing blocks attached to poles.I suggest you use your skeptical accumen to suggest how Khufu could have pulled of this forgery with the same zest you use to argue for khufu building the pyramid and probably you could tell me better ideas of how this was done or is your skeptcism only directed at ideas that contradict mainstreamers?


#18    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 11 September 2012 - 12:58 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 11 September 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:

The mortar extracted for the carbon dating consisted of 40 different samples taken from all over the Great Pyramid. It's beyond reality to suggest that every one of these samples is inconsistent with the age of the pyramid, especially considering that the areas from which nearly all of the samples were taken had been concealed for thousands of years by casing stones that the early Muslims stripped off. And the mean average for these mortar samples has confirmed that the Great Pyramid could not have been built much more than a century before the conventional date of 2500 BCE.

I don't know about all of those pyramids built after Khufu's. What about Khafre's? It's practically the same size. What about the three erected by Sneferu, even before the Great Pyramid? What about Djoser's pyramid, more than a century before Khufu's?
Sesh the questions you put in the end of your post are only in context if you assume that the great pyramids(including the one you think built by Khafre) were built by khufu in 2500/2600 BC so if you wipe this assumption off the rest of your questions are already answered for.
And khufu using mortar to repair the exterior of the whole pyramid is not really an impossible act according to me.What objective proofs exist that it was only the muslim raiders who robbed or removed all the missing casing stones?Even if the pyramids are dated one year before the suspected reign period of Khufu it still could not have been built by him.
Other glaring inconsistencies in your suggested line of builders for the great pyramid is that why are there no ascending chambers passages etc in the so called Khafre pyramid?.Had the custom of building pyramid chambers changed so dramatically.Also why wouldn't khafre built his pyramid bigger then the one built by khufu since he had the advantage of being the second builder.How about radiocarbondating the second pyramid as well to give clues about the timeline of when it was built as this could solve a lot of mysteries surrounding who built/repaired/intruded them and at what time.


#19    The Puzzler

The Puzzler

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,649 posts
  • Joined:23 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Australia

  • I have no special talent. I am only passionately curious. ~ Einstein

Posted 11 September 2012 - 01:07 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 11 September 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

I must admit I myself am not very good at the search function, which is why I try not to chide others for failing to do so. That was one of a series of short-lived discussions I launched to refute some of the stunningly poor information the zany Zecharia Sitchin presented in his book The Stairway to Heaven. It was fun stuff to write.

The Inventory Stela is the darling of numerous fringe authors and quite a few posters of the same bent who've graced our halls at UM (and by this I am not including you, Puzzler). Actually dating it to 1500 BCE is many centuries off, as there is consensus in the Egyptological and wider academic community that it dates to the Saite Period (beginning 664 BCE), otherwise known as Dynasty 26. It was a brief resurgence of political autonomy for the Egyptians in the Late Period—after the Egyptians tossed off the yoke of Assyria and just before the Persians came along and mucked up everything for them. Giza had been more or less abandoned and neglected for a long time, and in the rebirth of their nationalistic zeal, the Egyptians showered it with attention and veneration.

Here is one of the most modern translations of the Inventory Stela (Christiane Zivie-Coche 2002: 85-87):


Live the Horus Medjed, the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Cheops,
given life. He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramids, next to
the house of Haurun, northwest of the house of Osiris, Lord of Rasetau.
He (re)built the pyramid of the king's daughter Henutsen beside this
temple. He made an inventory, carved on a stela, for his mother Isis, the
mother of the god, Hathor, Mistress of the Sky. He restored for her the
divine offerings and (re)built her temple in stone, that which he found
in ruins being renewed, and the gods in their place.

The temenos of Haurun-Harmakhis is south of the temple domain of
Isis, Mistress of the Pyramids, and north of Osiris, Lord of Rasetau. The
writings of the temple of Harmakhis were brought to make the inventory
(bis) of this diving being (?) of the great [. . .] his effigy, its casing
entirely covered with designs [. . .] he made [. . .] which is in gilded stone
of seven cubits [. . .] in the temenos of Harmakhis, in conformity with this
model that is carved [. . .]. He set up an offering table for the vases [. . .].
May he endure. May he live forever and ever, his face turned toward the
east.

So when one reads proper translations of this small monument, it's not really referring to the Great Pyramid at all. It's referring to one of the small queens' pyramids along the east side of the Great Pyramid. The Inventory Stela is mostly about the temple to Isis that had been erected next to this little pyramid, including a list of offerings supplied to the temple. That this temple existed is not in question: it is archaeologically attested. However, it did not exist in Khufu's time. It cannot be dated to any earlier than the Third Intermediate Period (beginning 1064 BCE). That period itself was centuries before Dynasty 26, so the temple to Isis must have seemed very old even by the Saite Period. However, it certainly was not erected in Khufu's time. In fact, when the Isis temple was built next to the little queen's pyramid in the Third Intermediate Period, part a large private mastaba to the immediate east had to be dismantled to accommodate the temple structure. Obviously the mastaba, which dates to Dynasty 4, precedes the Isis temple in chronology.

There isn't really anything about the Inventory Stela that would confirm it as an historical document, as we might understand the term. It was a monument of veneration, both to a very ancient king and to a very important goddess. Close examination of the stela reveals all sorts of historical anachronisms, not the least of which are several deities who cannot even be attested in Dynasty 4 (e.g., Osiris, Isis, Horemakhet [Harmakhis], Haurun). It was common for people who commissioned important monuments (kings included) to hint that they came from ancient records they had found, but that was only to lend importance and legitimacy to the monument. It doesn't mean historical veracity is evident.


It was suggested in the article that the Temple of Isis had been built over a previous Isis Temple, an earlier one. I'd find it hard to think they didn't have some kind of temple for her earlier than 1064BC, when she'd been around for so long.

Most Egyptian deities were first worshipped by very local cults, and they retained those local centres of worship even as their popularity spread, so that most major cities and towns in Egypt were known as the home of a particular deity. The origins of the cult of Isis are uncertain, but it is believed that she was originally an independent and popular deity in predynastic times, prior to 3100 BCE, at Sebennytos in the Nile delta
The first written references to Isis date back to the Fifth dynasty of Egypt. Based on the association of her name with the throne, some early Egyptologists believed that Isis's original function was that of throne-mother.[citation needed] However, more recent scholarship suggests that aspects of that role came later by association. In many African tribes, the throne is known as the mother of the king, and that concept fits well with either theory, possibly giving insight into the thinking of ancient Egyptians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis

Edited by The Puzzler, 11 September 2012 - 01:16 PM.

In an mmm bop it's gone...

#20    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 11 September 2012 - 01:11 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 11 September 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

I must admit I myself am not very good at the search function, which is why I try not to chide others for failing to do so. That was one of a series of short-lived discussions I launched to refute some of the stunningly poor information the zany Zecharia Sitchin presented in his book The Stairway to Heaven. It was fun stuff to write.

The Inventory Stela is the darling of numerous fringe authors and quite a few posters of the same bent who've graced our halls at UM (and by this I am not including you, Puzzler). Actually dating it to 1500 BCE is many centuries off, as there is consensus in the Egyptological and wider academic community that it dates to the Saite Period (beginning 664 BCE), otherwise known as Dynasty 26. It was a brief resurgence of political autonomy for the Egyptians in the Late Period—after the Egyptians tossed off the yoke of Assyria and just before the Persians came along and mucked up everything for them. Giza had been more or less abandoned and neglected for a long time, and in the rebirth of their nationalistic zeal, the Egyptians showered it with attention and veneration.

Here is one of the most modern translations of the Inventory Stela (Christiane Zivie-Coche 2002: 85-87):


Live the Horus Medjed, the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Cheops,
given life. He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramids, next to
the house of Haurun, northwest of the house of Osiris, Lord of Rasetau.
He (re)built the pyramid of the king's daughter Henutsen beside this
temple. He made an inventory, carved on a stela, for his mother Isis, the
mother of the god, Hathor, Mistress of the Sky. He restored for her the
divine offerings and (re)built her temple in stone, that which he found
in ruins being renewed, and the gods in their place.

The temenos of Haurun-Harmakhis is south of the temple domain of
Isis, Mistress of the Pyramids, and north of Osiris, Lord of Rasetau. The
writings of the temple of Harmakhis were brought to make the inventory
(bis) of this diving being (?) of the great [. . .] his effigy, its casing
entirely covered with designs [. . .] he made [. . .] which is in gilded stone
of seven cubits [. . .] in the temenos of Harmakhis, in conformity with this
model that is carved [. . .]. He set up an offering table for the vases [. . .].
May he endure. May he live forever and ever, his face turned toward the
east.

So when one reads proper translations of this small monument, it's not really referring to the Great Pyramid at all. It's referring to one of the small queens' pyramids along the east side of the Great Pyramid. The Inventory Stela is mostly about the temple to Isis that had been erected next to this little pyramid, including a list of offerings supplied to the temple. That this temple existed is not in question: it is archaeologically attested. However, it did not exist in Khufu's time. It cannot be dated to any earlier than the Third Intermediate Period (beginning 1064 BCE). That period itself was centuries before Dynasty 26, so the temple to Isis must have seemed very old even by the Saite Period. However, it certainly was not erected in Khufu's time. In fact, when the Isis temple was built next to the little queen's pyramid in the Third Intermediate Period, part a large private mastaba to the immediate east had to be dismantled to accommodate the temple structure. Obviously the mastaba, which dates to Dynasty 4, precedes the Isis temple in chronology.

There isn't really anything about the Inventory Stela that would confirm it as an historical document, as we might understand the term. It was a monument of veneration, both to a very ancient king and to a very important goddess. Close examination of the stela reveals all sorts of historical anachronisms, not the least of which are several deities who cannot even be attested in Dynasty 4 (e.g., Osiris, Isis, Horemakhet [Harmakhis], Haurun). It was common for people who commissioned important monuments (kings included) to hint that they came from ancient records they had found, but that was only to lend importance and legitimacy to the monument. It doesn't mean historical veracity is evident.

The date of the stele is a supposition.It not reffering to the great pyramids is also a supposition.Why should we not take what is written in the stela literally? Inventing or incorporating new Gods accpeted and worshipped by entire civilization is not a easy or spontaneous task without factual basis.

Personally to many suppositions/assumptions in this argument for me to digest it.


#21    zoser

zoser

    Sapphire

  • Member
  • 10,009 posts
  • Joined:19 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London UK

  • It is later than you think.

Posted 11 September 2012 - 05:26 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 11 September 2012 - 02:43 AM, said:

Come now, L, Bes was a god so you can't count him. (Don't tell him I said that.) But dwarves were indeed part of the ancient population, which should surprise no one, and they often reached high stations in the society. One of my favorite examples was a wealthy man named Seneb, who probably lived in Dynasty 5 (late Old Kingdom) and left this charming statue group of him and his family:

Posted Image

Giants, on the other hand, are not attested. There is no real evidence for them in the archaeological record. Cleverly concocted, Photoshopped photos on the internet do not count, of course. In fact, in an age when the average man grew to be around 5'2", the tallest ancient Egyptian of whom I'm aware is an unidentified New Kingdom fellow designated as Unknown Man E. He was around 5'9" in life—the size of an average Western man today.



No one is certain what the glyphs are, although a convincing theory has been presented that they represent numbers. This would make sense. They had to have been engineering marks of some kind, and supposing that they might have been numerical markings is very reasonable. The point is, however, that they had to have been put there by some individual while the Great Pyramid was being constructed. That much cannot be argued.

On the subject of the Egyptians representing themselves in miniature or Colossal form here is one way to think about it.  It relates to the ancient saying multum in parvo (much in small).  

The famous miniature statue of Khufu compared to the colossi of Rameses says very much, because generally as time proceeded the civilisation of Egypt moved south along the Nile and with it one can trace the gradual degeneration.  Rameses II was for example one of the most sexual of all the Pharaohs  

Now compare the elephant to the ant.  Which is the most efficient?  It is said that the ant carries many times it's own body weight.  The most potent energy of all is locked up in the tiny atom.

So I wonder if the later pharaohs really knew what they were doing portraying themselves as giants?  Also in folklore isn't the giant represented as a cumbersome brute?  Maybe it was the early Kings who knew what they were doing?

Edited by zoser, 11 September 2012 - 05:26 PM.

Posted Image


#22    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,055 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:06 PM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 11 September 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

Clinging to mainstream opinions without substabtial proofs to back them and questioning glaring proofs to a contradictory(to the mainstream) opinion is more like 'maxtrubation'.Also as pointed by someone else can you post a picture of the heiroglyphics that you describe and have they been interpreted.And yes the egyptian pyramids were constructed by egyptians but what i was commenting on is the 'Great pyramids'.Also why would the builders put glyphs inside the air shafts to be only seen by robots of the present Era and not on more obvious or visible locations?.Don't tell me they were markers used for construction material as then similar glyphs should be found on other parts of the pyramids.Are you insinuating that the AE were such retards that they would inscribe on the inner side of an air shaft and not anywhere else on the great pyramid.

Probably Khufu wanted to prove that he built the pyramids and did this misheif by introducing these glyphs in these places along with his cartouche via printing blocks attached to poles.I suggest you use your skeptical accumen to suggest how Khufu could have pulled of this forgery with the same zest you use to argue for khufu building the pyramid and probably you could tell me better ideas of how this was done or is your skeptcism only directed at ideas that contradict mainstreamers?

You ignore the very real fact that there is a kink in the "air passage" that would prevent such a ridiculous thing from even being possible.

Are you aware of anything about the GP?  If so, than tell me, how did Khufu even discover these passages?  The "air shafts" were covered over and the relieving chambers were sealed off by solid rock - not as a door, but completely sealed off due to the construction technique itself.

We got in using black powder.  How did Khufu blow these chambers open and then how did he repair them to a state undetectable from pristine?

Claiming Khufu could do such a thing is no different that claiming Khufu had the thing built in the first place.

You do know, don't you, that the writings in the relieving chambers list some of the names of the work gangs that built the thing, right?  Are you aware that some of these same work gang names have been found in other records?  Are you saying Khufu put those there too?  How would he know to do that?  Just so you could be right 4500 years later?

I swear, it certainly takes all kinds to make a world.

The next earthworm you see might be out to get you.  So step on him.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#23    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:18 PM

Kmt,

This copy of my post from another thread before a minute.

Why is hard to imagine that Giants existed- We have had giants animals in all area of the world. Giant penguins in Antartica for example. Its life adaptation. I think we must look for giant bones in areas that were once hard to found food.  Look at elaphant. His stomach is big because it was hard to him to find good nutrition food so to survive he must eat a lot of low quality food  that his stomach could choose best nutrition from it. So to become Giant we must first asumme that Darwin theory is right and give homo spieces enough time and area with low quality food and you would get Giants.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#24    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,055 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 11 September 2012 - 08:23 PM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 11 September 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

Also why would the builders put glyphs inside the air shafts to be only seen by robots of the present Era and not on more obvious or visible locations?.Don't tell me they were markers used for construction material as then similar glyphs should be found on other parts of the pyramids.
Look:

Quote

Quarry marks are all over the place. In every pyramid complex and on every mastaba field one only has to open his/her eyes to see them. The mark in this picture is on a block on top of Khafres mastaba (Khaf-Khufu, as he was called as prince), and the color has withstood wind and weather for some time. Clear and fresh.
Another example can be visited in Dahschur: during the excavations in the late 1990's many blocks with quarry marks from the Red Pyramid were collected and brought to a spot on the south east side of the pyramid. There are now lying hundreds of testimonies on stone against Sitchins assertion in the sun, for everyone to see.
Source: http://doernenburg.a...ide/pyr05_e.php

Also from that source, the picture referred to in the second sentence of the quote:


Posted Image

So, exactly as you claimed, that "similar glyphs should be found on other parts of the pyramids," thus it is.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#25    Banksy Boy

Banksy Boy

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 96 posts
  • Joined:19 Jan 2011

Posted 11 September 2012 - 08:29 PM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 11 September 2012 - 02:43 AM, said:

No one is certain what the glyphs are, although a convincing theory has been presented that they represent numbers. This would make sense. They had to have been engineering marks of some kind, and supposing that they might have been numerical markings is very reasonable. The point is, however, that they had to have been put there by some individual while the Great Pyramid was being constructed. That much cannot be argued.

Exactly my point kmt, the only thing people can claim about those glyphs is that they had to have been put there by some individual while the Great Pyramid was being constructed and nobody else due to the impossibility of access. To call them Egyptian, or whatever for that matter,  is wrong until at the point they are deciphered or corroborated in one way or another.

Although probably hard to do, would it not be possible scratch off a small sample of the 'paint' to carbon date them. Surely then at least there can be no argument as to when the whole thing was built as it will be in effect a 'clean' sample.

I can't see how they can be some numerical or engineering marks though, as surely there would be many other samples to compare them with. Personally I'd have thought more likely a mason or stone layer putting in a quick 'personal mark' for posterity before anybody notices i.e. painting rather than a chiseling a feature which would take time. Masons do this all the time and is nothing unusual tbh. Mine, my brothers, my mum and the Alfa Romeo embolom is hidden for posterity on many a famous and well known building for people to ponder and hypthesize over for many years to come in the distant future. :tsu: :lol:

Edited to say - have just read Harte's link regarding carbon dating etc which he posted while I was writing this post. Surely if the marks are all over the place then they can work out the meaning then.

Edited by Banksy Boy, 11 September 2012 - 08:37 PM.


#26    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 September 2012 - 09:00 PM

View PostBanksy Boy, on 11 September 2012 - 08:29 PM, said:

Exactly my point kmt, the only thing people can claim about those glyphs is that they had to have been put there by some individual while the Great Pyramid was being constructed and nobody else due to the impossibility of access. To call them Egyptian, or whatever for that matter,  is wrong until at the point they are deciphered or corroborated in one way or another.

Although probably hard to do, would it not be possible scratch off a small sample of the 'paint' to carbon date them. Surely then at least there can be no argument as to when the whole thing was built as it will be in effect a 'clean' sample.

I can't see how they can be some numerical or engineering marks though, as surely there would be many other samples to compare them with. Personally I'd have thought more likely a mason or stone layer putting in a quick 'personal mark' for posterity before anybody notices i.e. painting rather than a chiseling a feature which would take time. Masons do this all the time and is nothing unusual tbh. Mine, my brothers, my mum and the Alfa Romeo embolom is hidden for posterity on many a famous and well known building for people to ponder and hypthesize over for many years to come in the distant future. :tsu: :lol:

Edited to say - have just read Harte's link regarding carbon dating etc which he posted while I was writing this post. Surely if the marks are all over the place then they can work out the meaning then.

Can you gave us link ,photos of it. I never heard of it before. Thanks in advance.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#27    Banksy Boy

Banksy Boy

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 96 posts
  • Joined:19 Jan 2011

Posted 11 September 2012 - 09:30 PM

These are the things which i was referring to.

http://www.sott.net/...-s-Secret-Doors

There are better pics if you have a look about. :)


#28    Swede

Swede

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,404 posts
  • Joined:30 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 September 2012 - 12:46 AM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 11 September 2012 - 12:58 PM, said:

Sesh the questions you put in the end of your post are only in context if you assume that the great pyramids(including the one you think built by Khafre) were built by khufu in 2500/2600 BC so if you wipe this assumption off the rest of your questions are already answered for.
And khufu using mortar to repair the exterior of the whole pyramid is not really an impossible act according to me.What objective proofs exist that it was only the muslim raiders who robbed or removed all the missing casing stones?Even if the pyramids are dated one year before the suspected reign period of Khufu it still could not have been built by him.
Other glaring inconsistencies in your suggested line of builders for the great pyramid is that why are there no ascending chambers passages etc in the so called Khafre pyramid?.Had the custom of building pyramid chambers changed so dramatically.Also why wouldn't khafre built his pyramid bigger then the one built by khufu since he had the advantage of being the second builder.How about radiocarbondating the second pyramid as well to give clues about the timeline of when it was built as this could solve a lot of mysteries surrounding who built/repaired/intruded them and at what time.

Already done, in addition to numerous other early Egyptian structures. Note the consistency of the dates in regards to currently understood timelines. Should you desire assistance in interpreting the data, do not hesitate to request such.

http://www.2dcode-r-...rbonproject.pdf

.


#29    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,653 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 12 September 2012 - 02:00 AM

View PostThe Puzzler, on 11 September 2012 - 01:07 PM, said:

It was suggested in the article that the Temple of Isis had been built over a previous Isis Temple, an earlier one. I'd find it hard to think they didn't have some kind of temple for her earlier than 1064BC, when she'd been around for so long.

Most Egyptian deities were first worshipped by very local cults, and they retained those local centres of worship even as their popularity spread, so that most major cities and towns in Egypt were known as the home of a particular deity. The origins of the cult of Isis are uncertain, but it is believed that she was originally an independent and popular deity in predynastic times, prior to 3100 BCE, at Sebennytos in the Nile delta
The first written references to Isis date back to the Fifth dynasty of Egypt. Based on the association of her name with the throne, some early Egyptologists believed that Isis's original function was that of throne-mother.[citation needed] However, more recent scholarship suggests that aspects of that role came later by association. In many African tribes, the throne is known as the mother of the king, and that concept fits well with either theory, possibly giving insight into the thinking of ancient Egyptians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isis

A fair point, Puzzler. On archaeological grounds (i.e., ceramics, architectural style) the existing temple to Isis dates to the Third Intermediate Period. There is no archaeological basis for supposing an earlier Isis temple occupied that site. Giza was never an important center of the veneration of this goddess. The archaeological ruins underlying the Isis temple do show the presence of a much older temple, but it was the little mortuary temple that had been erected in Dynasty 4 for the queen who had been buried in the small pyramid there (designated G1c).

I am not personally familiar with the Wiki article's reference to Sebennytos, which was near Sais. I can say that the goddess Isis, on Egyptological consensus, cannot be dated with any confidence prior to Dynasty 5. The Wiki article's reference is stating something as fact that is, actually, not a fact at all. There is no evident cult to Isis in Khufu's time.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#30    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,653 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 12 September 2012 - 02:20 AM

View Postzoser, on 11 September 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

On the subject of the Egyptians representing themselves in miniature or Colossal form here is one way to think about it.  It relates to the ancient saying multum in parvo (much in small).  

The famous miniature statue of Khufu compared to the colossi of Rameses says very much, because generally as time proceeded the civilisation of Egypt moved south along the Nile and with it one can trace the gradual degeneration.  Rameses II was for example one of the most sexual of all the Pharaohs  

Now compare the elephant to the ant.  Which is the most efficient?  It is said that the ant carries many times it's own body weight.  The most potent energy of all is locked up in the tiny atom.

So I wonder if the later pharaohs really knew what they were doing portraying themselves as giants?  Also in folklore isn't the giant represented as a cumbersome brute?  Maybe it was the early Kings who knew what they were doing?

I'm not sure why the sexual prowess of Ramesses is relevant. All kings were symbols of virility. It's just that Ramesses preserved the names and images of his sons and daughters in much clearer terms than almost any other king did before or after his time.

As far as that goes, you seem to have the status of the Egyptian state backwards. While Khufu was certainly a powerful and wealthy king, Ramesses II was exponentially more so. Khufu ruled over a stable and prosperous state, while Ramesses II ruled over a vast empire. Ramesses lived toward the end of Egypt's empire period. And that's just Ramesses. If we can backtrack a dynasty and look at some of the kings of Dynasty 18—especially the likes of Amunhotep I, Tuthmosis I, Tuthmosis III, and Amunhotep III—Egypt held the status of an enormous and poweful empire the likes of which Khufu could only fantasize about. In the time of Tuthmosis III, Egypt solidly ruled everything from the fourth cataract of the Nile to northern Syria.

In other words, a thousand years after Khufu, when Egypt was entering its New Kingdom period, Egypt was significantly more powerful and wide-reaching than in Khufu's day.

I'm not demeaning Khufu in writing this stuff. I am merely stating facts. In Khufu's time Egypt was not an empire but a state, ruling all of the Nile Valley and Delta and controlling smaller peripheral areas in Nubia and the Sinai.

Your note on "moving south" is also off base. Yes, Egypt's center of power switched from Memphis in the north in the Old Kingdom to Thebes in the south in the Middle Kingdom. But in the New Kingdom Thebes was the religious capital while Memphis once again became the political capital. And since you brought up Ramesses II, he moved the capital to the city of Per-Ramesses in the Delta, well into the north. Ramesses built this city for this very purpose. Numerous avenues of evidence suggest Ramesses' family line hailed from the north, not the south. And following the New Kingdom, the capital remained in the Delta, switching between sites like Tanis and Sais.

The center of power was located wherever the dynastic ruling family lived, so obviously it tended to move around a lot. It's true Egypt experienced times of degeneration (the intermediate periods), but what can't be argued is that after the Old Kingdom, the more time went on the more powerful Egypt and its rulers became.

On a closing note, pertaining to the reason for showing some figures as very large against others shown very small, I recommend researching the practice of hierarchical scaling. This practice is amply demonstrated in the Giza necropolis of Dynasty 4, in the tombs surrounding Khufu's. The small statue of Khufu found at Abydos is somewhat immaterial when one considers the many large statues of the man which must have once stood in the temples adjacent to his pyramid.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users