Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Ancient Mysteries


docyabut2

Recommended Posts

The shafts' interiors were originally much more smooth. The continual operation of the water pump eventually wore off all the inner vitrified surface. It's completely logistical.

Harte

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the Great Pyramid is at Sakkara (which was named after Sokar)
-- and since Ptah-Sokar was more ancient than Ptah-Sokar-Osiris
-- and since a Pyramid Text described Sokar using the epithet "the Great God with his two wings opened"....   
 
... the angled-shafts in the Great Pyramid might have a connection to the "two wings of Sokar". 
 
Here is a later (New Kingdom) image of the Great God Sokar with his 2 wings angled generally similar to the shafts in the Great Pyramid. 
 
SokarFrom the Amduat: Sokar in a cave of the underworld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than them being...well, angles...what else is similar between the two?

Something is either angled or perpendicular to something else.  There really is no other way to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, atalante said:
Since the Great Pyramid is at Sakkara (which was named after Sokar)
-- and since Ptah-Sokar was more ancient than Ptah-Sokar-Osiris
-- and since a Pyramid Text described Sokar using the epithet "the Great God with his two wings opened"....   Sokar
 
... the angled-shafts in the Great Pyramid might have a connection to the "two wings of Sokar". 
 
Here is a later (New Kingdom) image of the Great God Sokar with his 2 wings angled generally similar to the shafts in the Great Pyramid. 
 
From the Amduat: Sokar in a cave of the underworld

Try again.

Great Pyramid in Giza.jpg

Since the Great Pyramid is at Giza and not Saqqara your speculations are rather pointless.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, atalante said:
Since the Great Pyramid is at Sakkara (which was named after Sokar)
-- and since Ptah-Sokar was more ancient than Ptah-Sokar-Osiris
-- and since a Pyramid Text described Sokar using the epithet "the Great God with his two wings opened"....   
 
... the angled-shafts in the Great Pyramid might have a connection to the "two wings of Sokar". 
 
Here is a later (New Kingdom) image of the Great God Sokar with his 2 wings angled generally similar to the shafts in the Great Pyramid. 
 
SokarFrom the Amduat: Sokar in a cave of the underworld

Ptah is older than Ptah-Sokar.

 

And the image is from the tomb of Thutmoses III, which is New Kingdom, around 1500 years AFTER the GP.  No pyramids feature the same angle "shafts" so your conclusion is unsupported.

 

IN addition, the Amduat is a late Middle Kingdom (500-800 years after the GP) concept,not an Old Kingdom one.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Ptah is older than Ptah-Sokar.

 

And the image is from the tomb of Thutmoses III, which is New Kingdom, around 1500 years AFTER the GP.  No pyramids feature the same angle "shafts" so your conclusion is unsupported.

 

IN addition, the Amduat is a late Middle Kingdom (500-800 years after the GP) concept,not an Old Kingdom one.

To be fair he did point out the much-later origin of the image in the post, but there are other problems. The origin of the name Saqqara, for instance. That it comes from the ancient god Sokar is indeed one theory, but it's not universally accepted and many disagree. Others believe it derives from the name of a local Berber tribe. In other words, no one is certain how that specific region got its modern name.

But 4,000 years ago it was not called Saqqara. In all likelihood Saqqara, Giza, Abusir, and other nearby burial grounds were originally once considered one vast cemetery—some areas of it used at one point, abandoned later, and perhaps re-established still later. It largely depended on where the king at any one time placed his pyramid complex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/12/2016 at 8:03 PM, kmt_sesh said:

To be fair he did point out the much-later origin of the image in the post, but there are other problems. The origin of the name Saqqara, for instance. That it comes from the ancient god Sokar is indeed one theory, but it's not universally accepted and many disagree. Others believe it derives from the name of a local Berber tribe. In other words, no one is certain how that specific region got its modern name.

But 4,000 years ago it was not called Saqqara. In all likelihood Saqqara, Giza, Abusir, and other nearby burial grounds were originally once considered one vast cemetery—some areas of it used at one point, abandoned later, and perhaps re-established still later. It largely depended on where the king at any one time placed his pyramid complex.

Harte posted a link to an article about shafts in the Great Pyramid (http://www.gizapyramids.org/pdf_library/sakovich_jarce_42_2005-6.pdf ) that includes a review of what very early Egyptian beliefs might have been -- before Egypt adopted dominating themes about Osiris (which start in 5th dynasty).
 
Harte's link proposes that the shafts in the Great Pyramid were connected (at least symbolically) to part of the upper sky.  The Pyramid Texts call this sky region the Great Waterway.
 
 
According to Harte's link, one side of shafts in the Great Pyramid was trying (at least symbolically) to pump part of the upper sky down into a chamber in the Great Pyramid.  And shafts on the opposite side of the Great Pyramid were functioning (at least symbolically) as an exhaust mechanism, to pump this portion of the sky back up into the upper atmosphere. 
 
Harte's link concludes by proposing that the shafts in the Great Pyramid were exhibiting "sympathetic magic".  The shafts were a "model" of a sky-pump; and the model served as a substitute for whatever would be needed to pump the sky. 
 
My previous post built upon Harte's link.
 
The New Kingdom image that I posted for Sokar can be explained using similar symbolism.  The falcon-head of Sokar is positioned up in the sky where a river of moisture is flowing.  From this viewpoint, the closed loop that is depicted around Sokar symbolizes what modern people call the hydrological cycle -- where water evaporates and goes up into the atmosphere; but rain-and-dew condense, and come down out of the atmosphere.
 
 
Any mummy is basically a "dehydrated" body.  Thus adding magic-water to a mummy's chamber in the Great Pyramid would be a way (at least ritually or symbolically) to re-hydrate the mummy, symbolically  aiming to revive life for the mummy.   
 
In the time of Khnum-Khufu, the mythical function Khnum (as a potter god) was respected.   The god Khnum  mythically combined water and clay for 2 reasons:  not only to make pottery; but also to make the original human people come to life.  
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, atalante said:
Harte posted a link to an article about shafts in the Great Pyramid (http://www.gizapyramids.org/pdf_library/sakovich_jarce_42_2005-6.pdf ) that includes a review of what very early Egyptian beliefs might have been -- before Egypt adopted dominating themes about Osiris (which start in 5th dynasty).
 
Harte's link proposes that the shafts in the Great Pyramid were connected (at least symbolically) to part of the upper sky.  The Pyramid Texts call this sky region the Great Waterway.
 
 
According to Harte's link, one side of shafts in the Great Pyramid was trying (at least symbolically) to pump part of the upper sky down into a chamber in the Great Pyramid.  And shafts on the opposite side of the Great Pyramid were functioning (at least symbolically) as an exhaust mechanism, to pump this portion of the sky back up into the upper atmosphere. 
 
Harte's link concludes by proposing that the shafts in the Great Pyramid were exhibiting "sympathetic magic".  The shafts were a "model" of a sky-pump; and the model served as a substitute for whatever would be needed to pump the sky. 
 
My previous post built upon Harte's link.

That's not in the conclusion of the link I posted (which, as I said, was actually posted earlier by someone else.) Here's the conclusion:

Quote

The shafts in Khufu's pyramid are not star shafts, sun shafts, spirit shafts, nor are they ventilation shafts. These shafts serve as one single canal linking the southern end of the Great Waterway, through Khufu's sepulchral chamber, to the northern end of the same celestial counterpart of the Nile. They were a mandatory part of a rich, deep and complex system of magic and religion. This kind of  "sympathetic magic," in which models could serve just as capably as the actual object they were modeling, allowed the king to divert the waters that were essential for his revivification, while still allowing him to move his body upward  into the body of the pyramid thus enabling him to be joined with, and in fact become, the god Re himself, in the afterlife.

There's no pumping. It's part of the waterway. If the Egyptians knew anything at all, it was how to divert water and that water doesn't flow uphill.

Quote

Definition of sympathetic magic

  1. :  magic based on the assumption that a person or thing can be supernaturally affected through its name or an object representing it

 

 

Harte

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct, Harte. The canal shafts simply worked like any other canal in ancient Egypt: it diverted the waters through the chamber, allowing for the necessary inundation of the sarcophagus, which represented the Primeval Mound.

Thank you for so eloquently conveying the concepts.

(I'm attaching one of the original graphics I used in my ARCE presentation in New York several years ago. The only thing I would do to modify it now is to make sure the northern and southern ends of the Great Waterway aligned with the actual Nile, it's earthly counterpart.)

waterwayfinal.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anthony, could you give any thoughts you might have on why, per Gantenbrink's CAD drawings of same, the northern shaft of the Queen's chamber extends primarily at a diagonal angle, but ends with the last section/s reverting to a horizontal/nearly horizontal direction? While I don't believe this in any way hinders your article "Explaining the Shafts in Khufu's Pyramid at Giza", I do find the change in direction rather strange if the shafts were meant to follow the Great Waterway. Perhaps there's something I'm missing. Thanks in advance.

cormac

UPUAUT Project view looking from above - southwest to northeast - shafts from Kings  and Queens Chamber.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

Anthony, could you give any thoughts you might have on why, per Gantenbrink's CAD drawings of same, the northern shaft of the Queen's chamber extends primarily at a diagonal angle, but ends with the last section/s reverting to a horizontal/nearly horizontal direction? While I don't believe this in any way hinders your article "Explaining the Shafts in Khufu's Pyramid at Giza", I do find the change in direction rather strange if the shafts were meant to follow the Great Waterway. Perhaps there's something I'm missing.

If you can get hold of a copy, you might find J. Wall, The Star Alignment Hypothesis for the Great Pyramid Shafts, Journal for the History of Astronomy May 2007 38199-206, to be of some interest on this.  (Gantenbrink's objection about bends in the shafts is mentioned on pg 199).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Anthony, could you give any thoughts you might have on why, per Gantenbrink's CAD drawings of same, the northern shaft of the Queen's chamber extends primarily at a diagonal angle, but ends with the last section/s reverting to a horizontal/nearly horizontal direction? While I don't believe this in any way hinders your article "Explaining the Shafts in Khufu's Pyramid at Giza", I do find the change in direction rather strange if the shafts were meant to follow the Great Waterway. Perhaps there's something I'm missing. Thanks in advance.

 

First, I want to preface this with two caveats:

  1. I have taken a hiatus from my Egyptological studies, so my knowledge might be a bit rusty, or even out of date on some details.
  2. Although I discussed many of these issues, some with Rudolph Gantenbrink, Kent Weeks and James Allen themselves, the Gods of Microsoft decided I had too many "old emails" in my account one day and decided they needed to delete 16,000 of them. I lost all my correspondence with some of the best and most knowledgeable experts on Giza that are known... all in the time it took Bill Gates to drink a latte. 

So, having said that, I have a dim recollection that I broached this topic with Rudolph about ten years ago, and I was left with the impression that the "flattening" of the canals was just his being a good scientist. He didn't make the assumption that they continued at the same angle once they hit the casing stones. The missing casing stones could have had the shafts run off in any direction, so he decided to play it safe and just have them exit horizontally from that point out. If you look at the diagram you posted, you'll see that angle shift occurs exactly where the blue casing stones begin. 

Now, I may be completely wrong, and I only THOUGHT I had this conversation with Rudolph, but I feel pretty solid on the theoretical content, anyway.

Naturally, without the casing stones, there is no way to know which way the shafts went. Did they stop? Odds are, probably not. Why bring them all the way up to the edge of the pyramid and then cover them over. Yes, there was a good reason to do that in the Queen's Chamber, as it no longer needed to serve the purpose of a contingency burial chamber, but they probably had some kind of cover to keep the rain out of the shafts, while still leaving them open to the Winding Waterway above.

Does that make sense?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Windowpane said:

If you can get hold of a copy, you might find J. Wall, The Star Alignment Hypothesis for the Great Pyramid Shafts, Journal for the History of Astronomy May 2007 38199-206, to be of some interest on this.  (Gantenbrink's objection about bends in the shafts is mentioned on pg 199).

I'll bet I have an original unedited copy around here somewhere. John and I are old friends.  He actually was one of my beta readers on my original work, and was the person who most strongly encouraged me to submit my "Counting the Stones" article to KMT.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anthony Sakovich said:

First, I want to preface this with two caveats:

  1. I have taken a hiatus from my Egyptological studies, so my knowledge might be a bit rusty, or even out of date on some details.
  2. Although I discussed many of these issues, some with Rudolph Gantenbrink, Kent Weeks and James Allen themselves, the Gods of Microsoft decided I had too many "old emails" in my account one day and decided they needed to delete 16,000 of them. I lost all my correspondence with some of the best and most knowledgeable experts on Giza that are known... all in the time it took Bill Gates to drink a latte. 

So, having said that, I have a dim recollection that I broached this topic with Rudolph about ten years ago, and I was left with the impression that the "flattening" of the canals was just his being a good scientist. He didn't make the assumption that they continued at the same angle once they hit the casing stones. The missing casing stones could have had the shafts run off in any direction, so he decided to play it safe and just have them exit horizontally from that point out. If you look at the diagram you posted, you'll see that angle shift occurs exactly where the blue casing stones begin. 

Now, I may be completely wrong, and I only THOUGHT I had this conversation with Rudolph, but I feel pretty solid on the theoretical content, anyway.

Naturally, without the casing stones, there is no way to know which way the shafts went. Did they stop? Odds are, probably not. Why bring them all the way up to the edge of the pyramid and then cover them over. Yes, there was a good reason to do that in the Queen's Chamber, as it no longer needed to serve the purpose of a contingency burial chamber, but they probably had some kind of cover to keep the rain out of the shafts, while still leaving them open to the Winding Waterway above.

Does that make sense?

What 'blue' casing stones? I was under the impression that the casing stones were of fine white Tura limestone.

Assuming for sake of argument the above is true concerning Gentenbrink's perspective I think it adds more questions than answers, but won't put you on the spot as I don't expect you to have been in Gantenbrinks head. :lol:

Sidenote:  Does anyone with Windows 10 know how I can regain access to Gantenbrink's site 'cheops.org'? Unfortunately the pictures I saved were from back when I was using XP and I'd really like to have more perspective shots.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
Added Sidenote.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Does anyone with Windows 10 know how I can regain access to Gantenbrink's site 'cheops.org'?

Try www.cheops.org.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Windowpane said:

Try www.cheops.org.

Been there, tried that. The problem with Windows 10 and its browsers is that it is not JAVA capable/compliant like the older systems, therefore I can't get access to the CAD Drawings.

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear about this.

Unfortunately, I'm not too clued-up about the problem.

I found this on the site.  I don't know if it would help:

CYBER DRAWINGS 
  
 

Study the original CAD computer drawings of the UPUAUT PROJECT online

The technology connecting you directly to the UPUAUT database 
is brought to you by

 CADViewer 
  
  
 

 


PLEASE NOTE !

When you load a drawing for the first time you will get a 
JAVA WARNING. 
This message appears because your computer needs to load 
some temporary files in order to run the CADViewer. 
 MORE INFO

Please read the  instructions  below if you are 
not already familiar with the 
CADviewer toolbar.

 



 


  
 

 CHEOPS SHAFTS

This drawing shows all the data gathered during the UPUAUT missions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really since in order to get a Java Warning in the first place the browser/s have to be Java capable/compliant to begin with. But thanks for trying.

cormac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

What 'blue' casing stones? I was under the impression that the casing stones were of fine white Tura limestone.

Assuming for sake of argument the above is true concerning Gentenbrink's perspective I think it adds more questions than answers, but won't put you on the spot as I don't expect you to have been in Gantenbrinks head. :lol:

Sidenote:  Does anyone with Windows 10 know how I can regain access to Gantenbrink's site 'cheops.org'? Unfortunately the pictures I saved were from back when I was using XP and I'd really like to have more perspective shots.

cormac

Yes, the casing stones were white, but in Gant's drawings they are represented by the blue wireframe lines.

I'm not sure why it adds any more questions. It just wouldn't be appropriate to show them going anywhere except out at an angle that probably wasn't correct. Now, if indeed they did flatten out towards the end (which I don't recall reading or seeing anywhere), I would say that was an adaptation made to deflect rainwater. And I appreciate your stating that it wouldn't actually affect the validity of the canal theory, as the canal was still "there", all the way down to the horizon.

 

And I have the same problem with Windows 10. Thank goodness my trusty old Toshiba laptop is still on 7.  (Everything else I have is Mac).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anthony Sakovich said:

Yes, the casing stones were white, but in Gant's drawings they are represented by the blue wireframe lines.

I'm not sure why it adds any more questions. It just wouldn't be appropriate to show them going anywhere except out at an angle that probably wasn't correct. Now, if indeed they did flatten out towards the end (which I don't recall reading or seeing anywhere), I would say that was an adaptation made to deflect rainwater. And I appreciate your stating that it wouldn't actually affect the validity of the canal theory, as the canal was still "there", all the way down to the horizon.

 

And I have the same problem with Windows 10. Thank goodness my trusty old Toshiba laptop is still on 7.  (Everything else I have is Mac).

Ok, then I missed something as the only pictures I remember being blue in Gantenbrink's CAD drawings were those delineating the Grand Gallery which happens to be in my picture. 

To the second point, why show a shafts continuance at all if one is unsure what angle change, if any, was made after the shaft 'doors' were reached when it would have been better IMO to just stop the drawing at those 'doors' and specify having done so in the text? Secondly, why assume that the shaft angle/s would change at all unless there is reason to believe they may have? As I don't remember seeing such (going from memory here), why aren't the ends of the other three shafts done the very same way if it all hinges on where they met the casing stones. Seems to me it should be an all-or-nothing deal.

cormac

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Anthony Sakovich said:

You are correct, Harte. The canal shafts simply worked like any other canal in ancient Egypt: it diverted the waters through the chamber, allowing for the necessary inundation of the sarcophagus, which represented the Primeval Mound.

Thank you for so eloquently conveying the concepts.

(I'm attaching one of the original graphics I used in my ARCE presentation in New York several years ago. The only thing I would do to modify it now is to make sure the northern and southern ends of the Great Waterway aligned with the actual Nile, it's earthly counterpart.)

waterwayfinal.jpg

You `d think if it was a symbolic water way, the  shafts would lead to the boat that carried the king to the heavens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khufu_ship

 

Edited by docyabut2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um Docy ... when we have a 'canal leading to a boat', it is usually because the boat is in the canal.  And the reason the boat is in the canal is,  it is going to use the canal to 'boat' somewhere. 

That is like saying  a road leads to a car that is on it . 

In any case , to use a boat ... one does not always have to have it in the water , does one ? 

 

Image result for boatshed river

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether or not this was the reason for the design ....   I like it.  And it makes some sense  in that I have observed a similar analogy here.   Although there is no 'great river'  here, that runs pretty much north south through a 'desert' country, we have similar dynamics with 'smaller' river systems. 

A central creation motif here  is  Wallenganda , the black snake, the 'Milky Way'.  Actually, the dark part in the Milky Way. The 'big river in the sky.  All the stars around the dark spaces are considered to be campfires of sky people camped along the banks of the great river. 

A large part of their indigenous astronomy  is about  the reflection of  events on earth in the sky, and visa versa . 

Although it does seem, in this case,  that 'events' on earth were projected up into the sky, and than brought  back down to earth in symbolic architecture . 

And removes all my questions and challenges to those that claim they align to specific stars .

 

So ....   I am imagining the 'central part' of the 'waterway' - the design of the pyramid interior ( 'Kings chamber' ) is representative of certain 'adventures'  undertaken in the   'postmortem journey' ? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

Ok, then I missed something as the only pictures I remember being blue in Gantenbrink's CAD drawings were those delineating the Grand Gallery which happens to be in my picture. 

To the second point, why show a shafts continuance at all if one is unsure what angle change, if any, was made after the shaft 'doors' were reached when it would have been better IMO to just stop the drawing at those 'doors' and specify having done so in the text? Secondly, why assume that the shaft angle/s would change at all unless there is reason to believe they may have? As I don't remember seeing such (going from memory here), why aren't the ends of the other three shafts done the very same way if it all hinges on where they met the casing stones. Seems to me it should be an all-or-nothing deal.

cormac

No, I missed something. As I said, it has been ten years, and one of the other major changes has been the failing of my eyesight. Thank you for your patience.

The "flattening" of the shafts is for the QC shafts, not the actual burial canals in the KC. I'm going to try to resurrect what I can from my records, and using my old laptop pull up the Gant CADs again. You are absolutely correct about the blue lines being the GG. 

 

Now, to your second point...

I agree.

Back soon. Thank you for your diligence, and again, I apologize for my rustiness. It's been about eight years since I seriously discussed this material with anyone. I appreciate your indulgence while I ramp back up.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

You `d think if it was a symbolic water way, the  shafts would lead to the boat that carried the king to the heavens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khufu_ship

 

Before the king can take a boat anywhere, he must first be revivified, don't you think?

And in order to understand that process, we have to study the archeological record of the revivification process, which almost uniformly spans all of Egyptian history. I'm not talking about the afterlife journey, but the first step... revivification... where the body returns to life, just as the plants return after the Inundation. 

Edited by Anthony Sakovich
Because quippy one liners don't actually get the point across.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.