Update on Scan Pyramid project Oct 2016

[kmt_sesh]

4 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Ha!  Now I get to steal a march on YOU, oh wise one!  (It's not very often I can do that!)

This particular ring is not Khufu's it's Neferibre's.  He was a priest of Isis and lived about 2,000 years after Khufu.

https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/4094

Aw, gees,that's what I get for seeing a pretty picture and not paying attention to the text on the web page. All I really saw was the cartouche with the atef. I didn't even notice Isis' name on there till just now. Obviously it comes from later. Big "duh" on my part.

Thanks for pointing that out. I am flawed.

[Kenemet]

5 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

Aw, gees,that's what I get for seeing a pretty picture and not paying attention to the text on the web page. All I really saw was the cartouche with the atef. I didn't even notice Isis' name on there till just now. Obviously it comes from later. Big "duh" on my part.

Thanks for pointing that out. I am flawed.

In truth, what clued me in that it wasn't Khufu's was the presence of Anubis which kind of hinted it was post-mortem.  Once I see the explanation, I can pick out the pieces, including poor Neferibre's name as sort of an afterthought on the left.

Edited November 24, 2017 by Kenemet

[Kenemet]

57 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

It is not my fault that demonic feline worshipping cults need explicit instructions written out and illustrations given in order to complete simple tasks...

It's so our canine minions will know where to dig.

[Kenemet]

17 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

Now, I am not saying either that the locations of these pyramids present a point-for-point perfect match but the general outline IS there. But regardless of whether this pyramid-Osiris correlation was intended or not, the PTs DO tell us the pyramid is the body of Osiris and that this 'body' (i.e. the 16 pyramid body) was drowned.And neither am I saying the builders designed this 'Osiris plan'. It stands to reason that the construction locations of these 16 or so pyramids would have been determined first and foremost by the proximity of good limestone quarries. The locations of these are, naturally, entirely random. That a random distribution of quarry sites could form a stick-man outline of Osiris is highly unlikely. This is to say that the AE builders of these 16 pyramids did not commence their pyramid-building project with this Osiris figurine as the template for the location/distribution of these pyramids. Rather, the Osiris figurine arose much later from the scattered arrangement of these first pyramids. 

They'd need a really good map, otherwise they wouldn't be able to tell what sort of pattern existed.  I don't see any evidence of mapmaking.

 

Quote

The AEs perhaps long regarded the first 16 or so pyramids of ancient Egypt as the dismembered body of Osiris. One day, perhaps even as late as the 19th dynasty, someone may have had the idea of making an Osiris figurine based upon the distribution of those first, giant pyramids, the first pyramid 'body parts' of Osiris. And perhaps that is the reason today why I am able to 'reverse-engineer' this figurine and create this Osiris 'asterism' from those 16 pyramid locations. And, as I said above, this is why later historians give a higher figure for the Osiris dismembered body parts because by then there were more pyramds. More pyramids = more dismembered body parts of Osiris.

* the image of mummiform Osiris was common before the 19th dynasty; one example is herein the Tomb of Seti I - early 19th Dynasty(note: no atef crown) 

Mumiform deities including Osiris also appear on the magical knives of the Middle Kingdom... so the idea of a mummiform deity was not original to the 19th dynasty.

Finally, your concept of "they had the pyramids and they were making them into Osiris' body" requires that they know how the pyramids were arranged on the land and that they ignore many of the existing pyramids.  This means they had to have good maps otherwise they couldn't have seen the "asterism".  So you'll have to turn up a map to prove this.

 

[kmt_sesh]

This page says the atef dates to as early as the reign of Sahure (Dynasty 5), but unfortunately no corroborating details are provided. To be honest this is not something I've ever researched—or if I've read about it, I don't remember any longer. It might be worth my time to dig into this, if just for my own edification.

But I see now that the crown on the earlier Khufu cartouche I posted is probably not the atef but the swty (two feathers); see my link at the start of this post.

[Scott Creighton]

12 hours ago, Kenemet said:

 

Well, first of all, I noticed two of the numbers in my earlier diagram  (1 & 10) were transposed. Here's the corrected image:

Kenemet: * that's an awfully selective set of pyramids and includes pyramids that don't have the Pyramid Texts and ignores many that do have the Pyramid Texts.  It includes unfinished pyramids.  If it was so important, they should have finished them.

SC: The pyramids selected are all among the first pyramids built by the AEs - 16 finished and 3 unfinished. As far as I am aware, none of these pyramids have any PTs as they are all either 3rd or 4th dynasty. The PTs only began appearing in pyramids from the 5th dynasty. What we see today as unfinished might not have been the case in ancient times. But even if these three were unfinished in ancient times there could have been any number of reasons. The point is, these pyramid would have been part of the overall plan as per my hypothesis. That the myth of Isis and Osiris tells us that the body of Osiris was cut into 14 pieces (Diodorus states 16 pieces) may simply be a recognition that three of the original plan for 19 pyramids were never completed, hence 16 pyramids being cited by Diodorus. The difference between 14 and 16 may be a recognition that two of the pyramids at Giza (the so-called 'cult pyramids' of Khafre and Khufu) had no internal chambers and, as such, were not considered as storage vaults (they did have a function - but that's another story).

 Kenemet: * Osiris is wearing the Atef crown, there.  That wasn't something they had during the Old Kingdom.  And he wasn't an important national deity until late in the 5th Dynasty.

SC: The PTs of the 5th dynasty state that Isis was a goddess and Osiris a god. Deification doesn't occur overnight. But in any case, go back and read what I said earlier. I am not arguing that the builders in implementing this plan were knowingly creating an image of the god Osiris on the ground. For all we know the plan for the construction of these 16/19 pyramids could have been drawn up by the AE equivalent of 'Minister for Agriculture & Regeneration'. His name might even have been Osiris. He would likely have been an ordinary person who, nevertheless, had an important role in ensuring the Pyramid Plan (the 'Project Osiris') was carefully drawn up and implemented. He certainly would not have been a god when the plan was first devised.  This would only occur in much later dynasties as religious ideas around the pyramids as 'instruments of rebirth' (initially for the kingdom) developed and would later become the 'instrument of rebirth' for the king himself - imv. So, given the plan (i.e. just the locations of the first 16/19 pyramids), someone, perhaps even as late as the 19th dynasty when this type of Atef crown is attested, saw how these pyramid sites formed the outline of a person and quite literally the outline grew arms and legs. I am NOT saying the plan started as Osiris. The original plan, over many dynasties, GREW TO BECOME the classic Osiris figure we now recognise.

What I also find curious is that the Giza pyramids, in my proposition, represent the Atef crown of Osiris with G2 symbolising the Hedjet and G1 & G3 representing the two red ostrich feathers. Is it just a coincidence that G3 has red granite casing on its lower courses and the lower courses of G1 is also known to have once been painted red (reported by Pochan and Vyse).

Kenemet: * In the Pyramid Texts there is no mention of Osiris being cut up.  On the other hand, in  Pepi's pyramid it actually says "Osiris Pepi, I have gotten for you the one who killed you, cut up in three pieces" - in other words, the murderer was the one cut into pieces. 

SC: The PTs tell us that "...The Pyramid is Osiris..." and "...the construction [of the pyramids] is Osiris..." I have connected this to Plutarch's myth of Isis and Osiris where we are told Osiris was drowned and cut into 14/16 pieces. That is the myth Plutarch relates in Moralia and is the basis for the proposition I am making. I simply connected these two disparate pieces of information. And given that, over time, the number of pyramids in ancient Egypt increased so we find also that the dismembered pieces of Osiris increases from 14/16 pieces to 26 pieces and then to 42 pieces.

Kenemet: * In the Pyramid Texts, only the pyramid  texts of Teti mentions Osiris' limbs being gathered and rejoined.  The number of pieces are not given -AND- in the Pyramid Texts, it's Horus... not Isis... who gathers up the limbs.  This is a major departure from the Herodotus version where it's Isis gathering the limbs and fabricating a phallus.  So believing that Herodotus had the version that was unchanged from the beginning is clearly false.

SC: With respect, given the great age of these 'myths', I do not think anyone can make categorical statements declaring what is true and what is false. And yes, I include myself in that. I present merely a proposition and totally accept that I am way off mainstream views here and that my proposition could be entirely wrong.

BUT - it might be right too.

SC

 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Scott Creighton

[Scott Creighton]

12 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Also, I don't see any evidence that the Egyptians constructed maps until much later.  If you can't make maps, how do you know that you're making a picture of Osiris if you can't even see the endpoints?

We don't see evidence of building plans for any of these pyramids either - and yet there they stand. Did the AEs build these pyramids without any plans? I seriously doubt it. We simply have to accept that there is much missing and we may never find it.

But in any case - this would not have been an insurmountable problem to plot these pyramid locations. Begin at Abu Roash - the highest elevated of all these pyramids and the tip of the Atef Crown in my proposition - and look south. You can easily see the Giza pyramids from there. So you plot Abu Roash as your starting point. You observe Giza and plot those three points relative to the first point you made. Now walk to Giza. From Giza you can, in the distance, see the pyramids at Saqqara. You plot these relative to the three points you previously made for the Gizamids. You go to Saqqara. From there you can easily see the pyramids at Dashur and so on. It really isn't very difficult at all.

Over and above which, one of the mainstream theories of the Gizamid SW/NE diagonal alignment (not that I agree with it) is that they were designed to align with the ancient temple at Heliopolis, about 8 miles from Giza. If true, how did they achieve that?

SC

Edited November 24, 2017 by Scott Creighton

[Scott Creighton]

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

They'd need a really good map, otherwise they wouldn't be able to tell what sort of pattern existed.  I don't see any evidence of mapmaking.

 

* the image of mummiform Osiris was common before the 19th dynasty; one example is herein the Tomb of Seti I - early 19th Dynasty(note: no atef crown) 

Mumiform deities including Osiris also appear on the magical knives of the Middle Kingdom... so the idea of a mummiform deity was not original to the 19th dynasty.

Finally, your concept of "they had the pyramids and they were making them into Osiris' body" requires that they know how the pyramids were arranged on the land and that they ignore many of the existing pyramids.  This means they had to have good maps otherwise they couldn't have seen the "asterism". 

 

See my post here and here.

The AEs would have a pretty good idea of their own history, including the order the pyramids were constructed. They may even have had a plan of the locations relative to each other hand down to them from the builders, a plan that quite literally, over time, grew arms and legs into what we observe today as Osiris.

Will we ever find an ancient plan that plots just these first pyramids? Probably not. Perhaps it was lost along with the construction plans for the pyramids?

Kenemet: So you'll have to turn up a map to prove this.

SC: No, I don't. It's a hypothesis. Egyptology has still to turn up an original, in-situ mummified king from these pyramids. They have declared these structures as tombs without that primary evidence. I will not be held to a higher standard of proof than Egyptology however much you may wish to impose that bar upon me.

SC

Edited November 24, 2017 by Scott Creighton

[Scott Creighton]

9 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Why not? As a biliteral the crested ibis represents the sound Ax (akh). The addition of the t (bread loaf) to the immediate left of the bird forms the word Axt (akhet). That's the fun of hieroglyphs: many words can be spelled in different ways. Now, akhet could be read in different ways, one of which might be "female akh (soul)." But obviously that doesn't make sense here, given the context, which is everything. The town glyph indicates a place, and the cartouche assigns it to a specific king. Of course another common rendering for akhet is "horizon," so altogether Akhet-Khufu refers to a place called "Khufu's Horizon."

Indeed. But why SPECIFICALLY the use of the crested Ibis? As well as giving the phonetic Ax (akh), what does the crested Ibis symbolise? 

SC

[stereologist]

5 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

 

Now, I am not saying either that the locations of these pyramids present a point-for-point perfect match but the general outline IS there. But regardless of whether this pyramid-Osiris correlation was intended or not, the PTs DO tell us the pyramid is the body of Osiris and that this 'body' (i.e. the 16 pyramid body) was drowned.

And neither am I saying the builders designed this 'Osiris plan'. It stands to reason that the construction locations of these 16 or so pyramids would have been determined first and foremost by the proximity of good limestone quarries. The locations of these are, naturally, entirely random. That a random distribution of quarry sites could form a stick-man outline of Osiris is highly unlikely. This is to say that the AE builders of these 16 pyramids did not commence their pyramid-building project with this Osiris figurine as the template for the location/distribution of these pyramids. Rather, the Osiris figurine arose much later from the scattered arrangement of these first pyramids. This is not unlike star asterisms. The stars are randomly scattered across our heavens and have been there long before mankind ever existed. When man came along we decided to join these random points of light into recognisable human or animal forms. The point I am making is that we created these recognisable human/animal forms long after the stars were born. 

The AEs perhaps long regarded the first 16 or so pyramids of ancient Egypt as the dismembered body of Osiris. One day, perhaps even as late as the 19th dynasty, someone may have had the idea of making an Osiris figurine based upon the distribution of those first, giant pyramids, the first pyramid 'body parts' of Osiris. And perhaps that is the reason today why I am able to 'reverse-engineer' this figurine and create this Osiris 'asterism' from those 16 pyramid locations. And, as I said above, this is why later historians give a higher figure for the Osiris dismembered body parts because by then there were more pyramds. More pyramids = more dismembered body parts of Osiris.

SC

 

These statements are as unfounded as the very odd notion of a recovery vault built in a low lying area.

The so-called general outline is based on picking spots on a drawing. I certainly would not pick those spots if I were to pick spots on the drawing. This is just more of the forced connectivity being done to promote a bad idea. It's simply a forced set of dots arbitrarily  chosen by someone with a preconceived idea.

The next ridiculous step is to claim that the quarry sites are random. That is nonsense. Outcroppings of rock are not random. They are a function of the distribution of the bedrock and forces exposing the bedrock. Just because bedrock  is exposed does not make it suitable for construction. The force exposing the bedrock is the river. The outcroppings are not random. The quarry sites re not random.  Suggesting the stars are randomly distributed is another example of not understanding what is meant by random.

What we have here is a distribution of sites. These sites which are not random were roughly laid out over another image. Points on the second image were assigned to pretend that there is some sort of relation between two unrelated things. It doesn't get much lamer than that.

 

[Piney]

23 minutes ago, stereologist said:

The next ridiculous step is to claim that the quarry sites are random.

Among the Paleo and Archaic people of North America quarry sites are not even random. They look for a specific density of materials and lack of flaws (cracks, veins, contamination from other materials).

[stereologist]

Here is how Osiris properly looks when dots are placed over the image.  Instead of avoiding the obvious features in a person, we go with the features so that the stick figure looks like a stick figure of the image.

 

In looking for the image of Osiris I noticed that most of the online pictures were of a seated Osiris. Was there cherry picking in choosing the image of Osiris as well as cherry picking points on the image of Osiris to force a connection where there is none?

Edited November 24, 2017 by stereologist

[Harte]

41 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Here is how Osiris properly looks when dots are placed over the image.  Instead of avoiding the obvious features in a person, we go with the features so that the stick figure looks like a stick figure of the image.

 

Maybe you've just provided a map for Egyptology - places to look for undiscovered pyramids.

Harte

[stereologist]

5 minutes ago, Harte said:

Maybe you've just provided a map for Egyptology - places to look for undiscovered pyramids.

Harte

Interestingly enough, it shows that pyramids that have not been discovered are far from the Nile.

Another possibility is that this god is doing the ankh, a move preceding the dab by millennia.

 

[GoldenWolf]

15 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Of course another common rendering for akhet is "horizon," so altogether Akhet-Khufu refers to a place called "Khufu's Horizon."

God of heaven?

[Jarocal]

15 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Why not? As a biliteral the crested ibis represents the sound Ax (akh). The addition of the t (bread loaf) to the immediate left of the bird forms the word Axt (akhet). That's the fun of hieroglyphs: many words can be spelled in different ways. Now, akhet could be read in different ways, one of which might be "female akh (soul)." But obviously that doesn't make sense here, given the context, which is everything. The town glyph indicates a place, and the cartouche assigns it to a specific king. Of course another common rendering for akhet is "horizon," so altogether Akhet-Khufu refers to a place called "Khufu's Horizon."

Perhaps the context is about Khufu discovering his inner woman.

[GoldenWolf]

14 minutes ago, Mystic Crusader said:

God of heaven?

L.M.A.O.!

[MDagger]

I understand that SC is proposing the Osiris imagery is based on the alignment of the earlier pyramids although although he did state the selected ones are among the earliest ones suggesting some were rejected.  However my question is about orientation.  Couldn't the AE's 'see' them aligned this way?

Or even this way:

Hmm...looking at it this way it would suggest this imagery:

(A lying basset hound side glancing a ham).

MDagger

[Hanslune]

7 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

We don't see evidence of building plans for any of these pyramids either - and yet there they stand. Did the AEs build these pyramids without any plans? I seriously doubt it.

 

There were probably weren't any. Written plans are a more modern invention. I've seen 200 ton dhows built entirely by sight and expertise provided by the mind of a master builder. You might want to look at what the Romans said about plans and building.

 

[Hanslune]

7 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

BUT - it might be right too.

SC

 

You idea might have a better chance of being accepted if you had not refused to include pyramids because they didn't fit your preconceived idea. Leaving out pyramid location without providing a clear set of parameters and criteria for inclusion or exclusion. Your dots look just like you cherry picked them to fit your idea. After that you make up the idea that it would have been important to the AE to place these so they can see an image on a map, a map that you agree probably never existed.

[Scott Creighton]

18 hours ago, Kenemet said:

* the image of mummiform Osiris was common before the 19th dynasty; one example is herein the Tomb of Seti I - early 19th  Dynasty (note: no atef crown) 

 

 

 

 

Tomb of Sennedjem, servant in the Place of Truth - Seti I, 19th Dynasty. (Note: Atef Crown):

 

Edited November 24, 2017 by Scott Creighton

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

19 hours ago, Kenemet said:

They'd need a really good map, otherwise they wouldn't be able to tell what sort of pattern existed.  I don't see any evidence of mapmaking.

 

* the image of mummiform Osiris was common before the 19th dynasty; one example is herein the Tomb of Seti I - early 19th Dynasty(note: no atef crown) 

Mumiform deities including Osiris also appear on the magical knives of the Middle Kingdom... so the idea of a mummiform deity was not original to the 19th dynasty.

Finally, your concept of "they had the pyramids and they were making them into Osiris' body" requires that they know how the pyramids were arranged on the land and that they ignore many of the existing pyramids.  This means they had to have good maps otherwise they couldn't have seen the "asterism".  So you'll have to turn up a map to prove this.

 

Speaking from a purely Layman perspective, it’s an interesting hypothesis, albeit one that raises a lot of ancillary questions.

4 hours ago, MDagger said:

I understand that SC is proposing the Osiris imagery is based on the alignment of the earlier pyramids although although he did state the selected ones are among the earliest ones suggesting some were rejected.  However my question is about orientation.  Couldn't the AE's 'see' them aligned this way?

Or even this way:

Hmm...looking at it this way it would suggest this imagery:

(A lying basset hound side glancing a ham).

MDagger

I see another adherent to the Basset Heresy has slunk out from under their bridge. What you call a “ham” is actually the tip of the Felis Regis’ tail, 1 their sacred purr hub, and 8 a mouse.

[Hanslune]

2 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Speaking from a purely Layman perspective, it’s an interesting hypothesis, albeit one that raises a lot of ancillary questions.

Yes I was wondering if it would be more logical for the AE to view things as oriented S to N, perhaps K or KS could speak to that

[kmt_sesh]

14 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Yes I was wondering if it would be more logical for the AE to view things as oriented S to N, perhaps K or KS could speak to that

KS here. South is south of north, and north is north of south. Is that what you're looking for?

[kmt_sesh]

14 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

Indeed. But why SPECIFICALLY the use of the crested Ibis? As well as giving the phonetic Ax (akh), what does the crested Ibis symbolise? 

SC

Why specifically, I don't know. But as I'm sure you know, the crested ibis (Ax) was a common way to designate the part of the soul that dwelled in the Duat. There's no real translation for it but it's often rendered "transfigure spirit."