I read somewhere that the Egyptian pyramids were buried under sand and rediscovered, ive googled this and cant find any info on it, can anyone verefy this story and if so who was it that excavated the pyramid,
we know Napoleon was the first to start the decyphering of the hyreglyphs, but was it he who rediscovered them or was it before him.
Any ideas.

To the best of my knowledge, the pyramids were never buried under the sand. The Sphynx was buried up to its neck at one point (being that it sits in a niche carved into the plateau) and has been excavated several times during it's history, the first recorded time being by Thutmos IV back in the III Dynasty (?).

The pyramids were never buried. The sphinx was buried, as it resides in a three sided hole. Napoleon had nothing to do with decyphering hieroglyphics aside from the fact that his troops found the Rosetta Stone. The stone itself wasn't translated until the 1820's.

And then the rosetta stone was promptly taken by us, and then we started decyphering the hieroglyphics. Incidently when i was younger at the british museum i put my hand on the rosettta stone, obviously then given a rollicking, but then they closed it off and put a case around it about a week later. (I could almost feel the history)

The Libyan desert, of which the Giza Plateau is a part, is part of the
Sahara desert. There is relatively little area even in the heart of the
Sahara that is sand dune. Most of it is scrub lands and various types
of badlands that averages only about 5" of rain annually. There is no
river draining the vast northern 2/3 of this desert so all this ambient
water either evaporates or comes up in the numerous oases. There
was a river which ran west to east millions of years ago.

There isn't the kind of wind blown sand in the Libyan desert to pile up
to the hundreds of feet required to bury one of the larger pyramids.
Such huge accumulation would bury the Nile Valley in short order as
well since it's only a couple hundred feet lower. Dunes are prevented
not only by the wind blowing sand away but also by the action of rain.

If you look at the satellite pictures of this region of desert between
Lake Moeris and Giza (where the pyramids are located) you'll see that
there is modern as well as ancient usage of this land. There are what
appear to be houses protected on three sides from blowing sand. There
appears to be mining and there are large areas which are irrigated and
farmed. There are roads and utilities. You can also see evidence of
ancient usage including a couple spots that might have ruins underneath.
It doesn't require blowing sand to bury ancient works. There is a ten-
dency in most all areas for older things to be buried under the new be-
cause of natural processes.

Also in the satellite pictures you can see where modern roads and an-
cient ruins appear to have been cleared with bulldozers. I'd guess that
only 20% of most of this area has any significant depth to the sand. This
would mostly be in low places and where wind is funneled and the sand
dropped. If you stood in most of these areas it might seem that it's all
sand but most things that are higher than only several feet are clear of
sand. At least this is what appears in the photos.

No. None of the major pyramids were ever covered with sand when they
stood, but there are a few of these in ruins or never completed which
might have been covered at one time. Remember, too, that all the py-
ramis were constructed on what look like candlewax limestone formations
that are several feet high so they were up off the surrounding terrain ev-
en when they were new.

There are numerous reports that the pyramids were surrounded by water
and ample evidence that this is true. But no, they haven't been under sand.

Herodotus, the Greek "father of history," visited the Pyramids and the later Ptolemaic Greeks knew them, as well as the Romans who came even later. Around the 8th Century AD the Arabs unsuccessfully searched them for hidden treasures, and the great Arab historians (writing in what were early European mediaeval times) were quite familiar with them. The British traveller John Greaves visited the Pyramids and sketcdhed them in the late 17th Century, more than a hundred years before Napoleon.

When exactly were the Pyramids supposed to have been "buried"?

I'm not certain that it's possible to bury things as large as the Pyramids, especially when they're situated on a plateau.

The book said they had been buried by sand blown etc over many many years.
so when the greeks visited it where were the egyptian royalty, or were they visiting each other on friendly terms.

I touched the Rosetta stone at the British Museum too! People never believe me when I tell 'em that. I was there in 1999, at that time it had no case around it. Just some of those portable velvet ropes. I was surprised by how big the stone is.

I don't think the Pyramids were fully buried, but like the Sphinx, the sand built up and concealed a portion of the structures over time. If I am not mistaken, steps were taken (by the british?) in the late 19th, early 20th century to escavate for any hidden treasures, therefore clearing any sand dunes surrounding the pyramids. I could be wrong though.

What book are you talking about?

Herodotus visited Egypt as what we would today call a "tourist," but the record he compiled of his visit became the first great work of Egyptology. (You can find it free online.)

I cant rember correctly. i think it was mysteries of south America. he was talking about the pyramids and wrote a few pages on the Egyptan pyramids, cant rember his name.
so the egyptian people were interacting with visitors from Greece etc. i dident know that

A fairly frisky trade business had been going on between Egypt and Greece since the 8th century BC (that's the 700's BC to those that don't know.)

The Greeks were quite tight with the Egyptians during Herodotus' day (he died around 420 BC.) Egypt was one of the must see travel destinations for Greeks that could afford such things. That's why Solon went there (in the mid 500's BC). You may recall that Plato (in around 360 BC) claimed that Solon got the story of Atlantis from the Egyptians on that trip.

Plato's pupil, Alexander the Great, conquered Egypt around 340 BC, essentially making Egypt a part of Greece. Not a real big deal, though, since Egypt had already been conquered, and was being run by, the Persians at the time. BTW, Alexander kicked the Persian's butts as well.

I should also say that the Persians had taken Egypt from the Nubians and Assyrians in around 530 BC, and they had conquered Egypt in around 650 BC. So, you can see that Egypt wasn't really "Egypt" for almost the entire time that the Greeks knew her.

The Ptolemaic Pharoahs started with Alexander's conquest. The name comes from the first one, the Greek Ptolemy, one of Alexander's captains. The last Ptolemaic Pharoah was Cleopatra.

Essentially, what we think of as "ancient" Egypt came to an end around 650 BC, though they had declined quite a bit by then. This was only shortly after substantial trade contacts between Egypt and Greece began.

Harte

That sounds as though it could be one of two books by the late Harold Tom Wilkins, who wrote on both variant archaeology and UFOlogy. My memory is that the books were titled MYSTERIES OF ANCIENT SOUTH AMERICA and SECRET CITIES OF ANCIENT SOUTH AMERICA, or else the titles were very similar.

i wonder if there are any pyrimeds that are buried and we just havnt found them yet, oh yea if someone finds a large circle buried with symbols around the edges, let me know (stargate) - hey cant hurt to ask

I doubt there are any in egypt but the still discover new structures in South America.

Since pyramids run as much as 300 - 700 feet tall it would take a lot of drifting sand to both bury them and then to keep them buried.

But there probably are the undiscovered foundations and lower levels of crumbled pyramids.

And in fecund areas such as jungles an ancient pyramid is likely to acquire all sorts of vegetation, grass, vines, even trees, and thus be mistaken by much later generations for a hill.