Let's talk history

[Hanslune]

How accurate is this image still? I mean its 3 yeas old....

[Thanos5150]

Genome sequences of 36,000- to 37,000-year-old modern humans at Buran-Kaya III in Crimea

Populations genetically related to present-day Europeans first appeared in Europe at some point after 38,000–40,000 years ago, following a cold period of severe climatic disruption. These new migrants would eventually replace the pre-existing modern human ancestries in Europe, but initial interactions between these groups are unclear due to the lack of genomic evidence from the earliest periods of the migration. Here we describe the genomes of two 36,000–37,000-year-old individuals from Buran-Kaya III in Crimea as belonging to this newer migration. Both genomes share the highest similarity to Gravettian-associated individuals found several thousand years later in southwestern Europe. These genomes also revealed that the population turnover in Europe after 40,000 years ago was accompanied by admixture with pre-existing modern human populations. European ancestry before 40,000 years ago persisted not only at Buran-Kaya III but is also found in later Gravettian-associated populations of western Europe and Mesolithic Caucasus populations.

 

Edited December 16, 2023 by Thanos5150

[Hanslune]

Edited December 18, 2023 by Hanslune

[Abramelin]

Megalithic monuments of the Azores

Here we present selected parts from two publications on the Megalithic monuments of the Azores.

1) “Early Atlantic Navigation: Pre-Portuguese Presence in the Azores Islands“, by António Félix Rodrigues, Nuno O. Martins, Nuno Ribeiro, Anabela Joaquinito.

“The Azores are nine islands situated in the North Atlantic, divided in three different groups: the Eastern group (constituted by the Island of São Miguel and the Island of Santa Maria), the Central Group (constituted by the Islands of Terceira, São Jorge, Pico, Faial and Graciosa), and the Western Group (constituted by the Islands of Flores and Corvo).

Clearly, discussions concerning who first navigated to the Azores are surrounded by much controversy. These discussions must also be undertaken with a willingness to face the evidence, including new evidence that arises and may challenge, or help interpreting, previous historiography. Here we will provide another piece of evidence, which supports the hypothesis that the Azores, or at least Terceira island, were indeed inhabited long before the Portuguese arrived. This piece of evidence was found near the Grota do Medo (Posto Santo), discovered by Rodrigues (2013), a grove, which contains many elements that possess striking similarities with several as-pects from ancient cultures, including man-made rock basins, arrangements of large stones which resemble megalithic constructions, and inscriptions in stones which resemble ancient petroglyphs engraves (Rodrigues, 2015).

https://novoscriptorium.com/2019/05/01/megalithic-monuments-of-the-azores/

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Another-example-of-Rock-Art-at-Grota-do-Medo-site_fig9_276500015

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276500015_Megalithic_Constructions_Discovered_in_the_Azores_Portugal

[Abramelin]

On 12/18/2023 at 7:33 AM, Hanslune said:

Those who created this map should have used more colors.

[Thanos5150]

The [Lost] Pyramid of Athribis:

The pyramid of Athribis was a small mudbrick pyramid located at Athribis (Tell Atrib) in the southern Nile Delta, northeast of the modern city of Banha. It was located the furthest north of all the pyramids in ancient Egypt and the only known pyramid to have been built in the Delta.

Discovery and loss

The structure was first noted by scholarship during Napoleon's Egyptian Expedition (1798-1801). No real investigation was undertaken, however, aside from an engraving of the pyramid and a map of the ruins of Athribis which includes the pyramid, both of which were first published in the Description de l’Égypte in 1822.[1] After that, for a long time, the pyramid was forgotten.

The pyramid was first relocated in 1938 by a team from Liverpool University led by Alan Rowe. In the meanwhile the superstructure had been almost entirely destroyed. Time constraints prevented Rowe from undertaking close investigation and as a result his report was extremely short and contained no information beyond what had already been reported by the French expedition.[2]

The most recent attempt to locate the pyramid was undertaken in 1993 by the Polish Egyptologist Andrzej Ćwiek. By this time, however, Athribis had been almost entirely covered over by the modern city of Banha, the pyramid had been completely destroyed and its exact location could no longer be determined.

Structure

The dimensions of the pyramid were never exactly determined, so they can only be estimated from the information in the Description de l'Egypte. On the basis of mastabas appearing in the map, Ćwiek calculated that the pyramid measured about 20 m (66 ft) on each side. He estimated that the incline was less than 50°. This would imply a height of less than 16 m (52 ft).

Age and purpose

Map of Athribis from the Description de l'Egypte (1823). The pyramid is at the centre of the ruins, in the upper left corner of crossroads.

It is only possible to speculate about the age and purpose of the pyramid, owing to the extremely sparse datable material. The Egyptologist Nabil Swelim[3][4] and the former director of the DAI in Cairo Rainer Stadelmann[5][6] connect it with a group of seven small step pyramids (Elephantine, Edfu South, el-Kula, Naqada, Saujet el-Meitin [de], Seila and Sinki [de]) which were built at the end of the 3rd Dynasty (reigned c. 2686-c. 2613 BCE) or the start of the 4th (reigned ca. 2613 –ca. 2494 BC).

Stadelmann sees these structures as local instantiations of royal power, comparable to the Kaiserpfalz-system of the Holy Roman Empire, while Swelim instead suggests a religious purpose. However, the inclusion of the pyramid of Athribis within this group is not firmly demonstrated by either scholar. In fact it derives only from the fact that the hypothetical dimensions of the pyramid are similar to those of the other seven pyramids, while there are major factors arguing against the identification: firstly, the engraving in the Description depicts the Pyramid as a true pyramid, not a step pyramid like the other seven; secondly, the other seven pyramids are built of stone, while the pyramid of Athribis was made of brick. On account of this last point in particular, Ćwiek criticised Swelim and Stadelmann's inclusion of this pyramid in that group. He further considered it unlikely that a brick structure would have survived in such good condition from the Old Kingdom until the beginning of the 19th century. In his opinion, therefore, it was probably a pyramid from the 13th Dynasty (reigned 1803–1649 BC), if not the Late Period (c. 664 BC – 332 BC).[7]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Petrie did excavations at Athribis but does not mention the pyramid. What he does say is that within a block of 4th-6th Dynasty rock cut tombs at nearby Hagaresh, the 4th/5th Dynasty tomb of "Ka-cm-nofer" seem to model the internal structure of G1 at Giza. Petrie: 

The passages to these funeral chambers are peculiar, and the position of the coffins higher than the tomb chapels is also strange. The whole system seems to have been an imitation of the pyramid of Khufu, as we notice below....

The descending passage is common enough in tombs; but there is no example of the subsequent ascent, the only prototype of which is in the passages of the pyramid of Khufu. There are also details curiously like those in the pyramid. In the southern tomb the slope upward begins with a vertical face like the Grand Gallery; and the slope has a bench or ramp along both sides, like the gallery. In the northern tomb, though the slope merely has a vertical end, there is a groove on either wall, sloping down and up again, implying a passage sloping both ways, and reminding us of the groove cut in the wall of the Grand Gallery. The resemblance in apparently unimportant detail, and in the general idea of the passages and the square-cut massive coffins, connects these tombs so closely with the pyramid of Khufu, and with no other structure, that we must suppose Ka-em-nofer to have been familiar with that building, and to belong to that reign. This would agree well enough with the fine and bold style of the inscriptions.

Edited January 16 by Thanos5150

[Thanos5150]

23 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

The [Lost] Pyramid of Athribis:

The pyramid of Athribis was a small mudbrick pyramid located at Athribis (Tell Atrib) in the southern Nile Delta, northeast of the modern city of Banha. It was located the furthest north of all the pyramids in ancient Egypt and the only known pyramid to have been built in the Delta.

Discovery and loss

The structure was first noted by scholarship during Napoleon's Egyptian Expedition (1798-1801). No real investigation was undertaken, however, aside from an engraving of the pyramid and a map of the ruins of Athribis which includes the pyramid, both of which were first published in the Description de l’Égypte in 1822.[1] After that, for a long time, the pyramid was forgotten.

The pyramid was first relocated in 1938 by a team from Liverpool University led by Alan Rowe. In the meanwhile the superstructure had been almost entirely destroyed. Time constraints prevented Rowe from undertaking close investigation and as a result his report was extremely short and contained no information beyond what had already been reported by the French expedition.[2]

The most recent attempt to locate the pyramid was undertaken in 1993 by the Polish Egyptologist Andrzej Ćwiek. By this time, however, Athribis had been almost entirely covered over by the modern city of Banha, the pyramid had been completely destroyed and its exact location could no longer be determined.

Structure

The dimensions of the pyramid were never exactly determined, so they can only be estimated from the information in the Description de l'Egypte. On the basis of mastabas appearing in the map, Ćwiek calculated that the pyramid measured about 20 m (66 ft) on each side. He estimated that the incline was less than 50°. This would imply a height of less than 16 m (52 ft).

Age and purpose

Map of Athribis from the Description de l'Egypte (1823). The pyramid is at the centre of the ruins, in the upper left corner of crossroads.

It is only possible to speculate about the age and purpose of the pyramid, owing to the extremely sparse datable material. The Egyptologist Nabil Swelim[3][4] and the former director of the DAI in Cairo Rainer Stadelmann[5][6] connect it with a group of seven small step pyramids (Elephantine, Edfu South, el-Kula, Naqada, Saujet el-Meitin [de], Seila and Sinki [de]) which were built at the end of the 3rd Dynasty (reigned c. 2686-c. 2613 BCE) or the start of the 4th (reigned ca. 2613 –ca. 2494 BC).

Stadelmann sees these structures as local instantiations of royal power, comparable to the Kaiserpfalz-system of the Holy Roman Empire, while Swelim instead suggests a religious purpose. However, the inclusion of the pyramid of Athribis within this group is not firmly demonstrated by either scholar. In fact it derives only from the fact that the hypothetical dimensions of the pyramid are similar to those of the other seven pyramids, while there are major factors arguing against the identification: firstly, the engraving in the Description depicts the Pyramid as a true pyramid, not a step pyramid like the other seven; secondly, the other seven pyramids are built of stone, while the pyramid of Athribis was made of brick. On account of this last point in particular, Ćwiek criticised Swelim and Stadelmann's inclusion of this pyramid in that group. He further considered it unlikely that a brick structure would have survived in such good condition from the Old Kingdom until the beginning of the 19th century. In his opinion, therefore, it was probably a pyramid from the 13th Dynasty (reigned 1803–1649 BC), if not the Late Period (c. 664 BC – 332 BC).[7]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Petrie did excavations at Athribis but does not mention the pyramid. What he does say is that within a block of 4th-6th Dynasty rock cut tombs at nearby Hagaresh, the 4th/5th Dynasty tomb of "Ka-cm-nofer" seem to model the internal structure of G1 at Giza. Petrie: 

The passages to these funeral chambers are peculiar, and the position of the coffins higher than the tomb chapels is also strange. The whole system seems to have been an imitation of the pyramid of Khufu, as we notice below....

The descending passage is common enough in tombs; but there is no example of the subsequent ascent, the only prototype of which is in the passages of the pyramid of Khufu. There are also details curiously like those in the pyramid. In the southern tomb the slope upward begins with a vertical face like the Grand Gallery; and the slope has a bench or ramp along both sides, like the gallery. In the northern tomb, though the slope merely has a vertical end, there is a groove on either wall, sloping down and up again, implying a passage sloping both ways, and reminding us of the groove cut in the wall of the Grand Gallery. The resemblance in apparently unimportant detail, and in the general idea of the passages and the square-cut massive coffins, connects these tombs so closely with the pyramid of Khufu, and with no other structure, that we must suppose Ka-em-nofer to have been familiar with that building, and to belong to that reign. This would agree well enough with the fine and bold style of the inscriptions.

Description de'Egypte, Volume 31, Planche 27 |Date=1823|

 

[Abramelin]

Hyksos, Habiru, and the Hebrews

A summary of the facts

 

[Thanos5150]

7,000-YEAR-OLD CIRCULAR STONE DWELLINGS EXCAVATED IN SAUDI ARABIA

ALULA, SAUDI ARABIA—Live Science reports that eight of 345 stone circles identified through aerial surveys of Saudi Arabia’s Harrat ‘Uwayrid lava field have been excavated by researchers from the University of Western Australia and the University of Sydney. The 7,000-year-old structures consist of stone walls measuring between 13 and 26 feet across, have at least one doorway, and have at least one standing stone in the center. Researchers suggest that the structures would have had been roofed and served as dwellings. “Globally, early domestic architecture was always round, and rectangular houses only appear in the later Neolithic,” said Jane McMahon of the University of Western Australia. The bones of sheep, goats, and cows were also recovered at the sites, along with seashells, which suggest that trade networks extended to the Red Sea about 75 miles away. The residents also likely gathered wild plants, perhaps manipulating the landscape to increase their yield, she added. Read the original scholarly article about this research in Levant. To read about stone structures found in Saudi Arabia's now-inactive lava mounds of Harrat Khaybar, go to "Hot Property."

And when we go to Hot Property:

Archaeologists working with aerial and satellite technology have discovered nearly 400 stone structures in a sparsely populated region of Saudi Arabia called Harrat Khaybar, dominated by now-inactive lava mounds. They estimate that the structures, which they call gates, date to the Middle Neolithic period, roughly 7,000 years ago. David Kennedy of the University of Western Australia explains that while the landscape now appears forbidding, the area has supported human communities in periods between eruptions. “The most recent eruption, as visible from the lava flow, was quite limited in its direct impact,” he says. “People lived there before recent times.” Kennedy has not been able to determine the function of the structures from satellite images alone. “I usually look for a simple solution,” he says. “In this case I would prefer an explanation related to everyday concerns such as food and water.”

 

[Thanos5150]

Neolithic Mass Grave Mystery

A team of archaeologists from Kiel University and the Institute of Archaeology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences unearthed an unusual mass grave at the Neolithic site of Vráble in Slovakia. Vráble was inhabited from about 5250 to 4950 B.C. by people belonging to what scholars call the Linear Pottery culture. At its peak, the site consisted of three neighboring settlements of around 80 houses in all, making it especially large for the time. The team discovered 37 skeletons missing their skulls in a ditch surrounding one of the villages. Mass graves have been found in ditches at other Linear Pottery sites, but none excavated thus far have contained decapitated bodies. Evidence of large-scale massacres at other mass graves suggests the Linear Pottery people entered a period of crisis around 5100 B.C. The headless burials at Vráble may have been part of a response to this upheaval. “The ritual depositions could be some kind of social coping mechanism of a magical or religious nature that people performed to get back control in a time when things seemed to be falling apart,” says archaeologist Martin Furholt. Excavation and dating of other settlements in the area show that they were being abandoned around the time the headless bodies were buried. Meanwhile, the population at Vráble was growing, perhaps a result of newcomers seeking security in an increasingly unstable world.

[Piney]

On 9/5/2024 at 6:19 PM, Thanos5150 said:

Neolithic Mass Grave Mystery

A team of archaeologists from Kiel University and the Institute of Archaeology of the Slovak Academy of Sciences unearthed an unusual mass grave at the Neolithic site of Vráble in Slovakia. Vráble was inhabited from about 5250 to 4950 B.C. by people belonging to what scholars call the Linear Pottery culture. At its peak, the site consisted of three neighboring settlements of around 80 houses in all, making it especially large for the time. The team discovered 37 skeletons missing their skulls in a ditch surrounding one of the villages. Mass graves have been found in ditches at other Linear Pottery sites, but none excavated thus far have contained decapitated bodies. Evidence of large-scale massacres at other mass graves suggests the Linear Pottery people entered a period of crisis around 5100 B.C. The headless burials at Vráble may have been part of a response to this upheaval. “The ritual depositions could be some kind of social coping mechanism of a magical or religious nature that people performed to get back control in a time when things seemed to be falling apart,” says archaeologist Martin Furholt. Excavation and dating of other settlements in the area show that they were being abandoned around the time the headless bodies were buried. Meanwhile, the population at Vráble was growing, perhaps a result of newcomers seeking security in an increasingly unstable world.

The Danubian Cultures got slightly axe happy when they needed fresh soil because all they did was burn it up. 

[Thanos5150]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

The Danubian Cultures got slightly axe happy when they needed fresh soil because all they did was burn it up. 

You are saying they chopped people up with axes to use as fertilizer because theirs was bad from burning it? 

[Piney]

2 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

You are saying they chopped people up with axes to use as fertilizer because theirs was bad from burning it? 

They invented Soylent Green fertilizer. 

[Thanos5150]

New Kingdom army barracks and food stores unearthed at Tel Al-Abqain site in Beheira

An Egyptian archaeological mission led by archaeologist Ahmed Said El-Kharadly from the Supreme Council of Antiquities unearthed military barracks, weapon stores, and other provisions dating back to the New Kingdom era at the Tel Al-Abqain archaeological site in Beheira governorate.

[Antigonos]

35 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

New Kingdom army barracks and food stores unearthed at Tel Al-Abqain site in Beheira

An Egyptian archaeological mission led by archaeologist Ahmed Said El-Kharadly from the Supreme Council of Antiquities unearthed military barracks, weapon stores, and other provisions dating back to the New Kingdom era at the Tel Al-Abqain archaeological site in Beheira governorate.

Every fact about this excavation is really interesting. For me personally what stands out the most is one, how much light it sheds on aspects of daily life in the barracks. And second, the strategic importance of the site during the early nineteenth dynasty to guard against Sea Peoples and Libyan invasions.

The article calls the discovery of the bronze sword with Ramesses II’s cartouche on it “remarkable”, but I think “unique” would be a better description, unless others have been found before and I didn’t know. Were these standard issue or given only to commanders as status symbols or marks of royal favor? Very cool.

Another thing that stands out is the use of mudbrick as late as the New Kingdom for every structure not royal or of a religious nature for which only stone was used. Even the military was ultimately less important than the royal and religious   institutions.

Edited September 11 by Antigonos

[Piney]

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

New Kingdom army barracks and food stores unearthed at Tel Al-Abqain site in Beheira

An Egyptian archaeological mission led by archaeologist Ahmed Said El-Kharadly from the Supreme Council of Antiquities unearthed military barracks, weapon stores, and other provisions dating back to the New Kingdom era at the Tel Al-Abqain archaeological site in Beheira governorate.

So this was where the Egyptian Army stayed when Moses was a general? 

[Thanos5150]

On 9/11/2024 at 9:33 AM, Antigonos said:

Another thing that stands out is the use of mudbrick as late as the New Kingdom for every structure not royal or of a religious nature for which only stone was used. Even the military was ultimately less important than the royal and religious   institutions.

There is a practical and economic side to it that given the application mud brick is far superior. Mud brick was also used extensively in royal/religious structures ancillary to the main stone components. The Egyptians never stopped building with mud brick and still continues today. I went to my cab drivers house in Cairo for lunch and he was the 2nd generation to live in their two story mud brick home they built themselves which had the craziest roof top view of Giza. Right there. He said when he was a kid and his dad would get mad at him he would sneak out and climb to the top of G1 and smoke cigarettes.     

MUD-BRICK

Made from a mixture of silt, clay, sand, and straw formed into regular molded units, unfired mudbricks were the primary construction material employed in ancient Egypt—being quite literally the most basic of building blocks for all levels of domestic structures, from simple one-room buildings to lavishly decorated palace complexes, as well as administrative and storage structures, and even early phases of temples. Modern methods of mud-brick fabrication accord with ancient evidence, suggesting that the production of unfired mud-brick has remained a stable technology through the millennia. Ancient evidence concerning mud-brick not only illuminates mud-brick production organization, but also highlights the symbolic significance of bricks in religious contexts, especially relating to birth and death.

Bonus:

UNDULATING MUD BRICK WALLS IN ANCIENT PHARAONIC EGYPT

Edited September 13 by Thanos5150

[Wepwawet]

This new video from History for Granite provides many talking points, not least his opinion on the sealed but empty sarcophagus of Sekhemkhet. He proposes that the early pyramids, before Unas generally, were tombs, but not permanent, with the king's mummy being removed after an indeterminate period of time, an interesting middle ground in the "pyramids not tombs" debate. So while there is information here that both sides in that debate can use, I think that we are confronted with more questions than answers.

 

[Djedi]

20 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

This new video from History for Granite provides many talking points, not least his opinion on the sealed but empty sarcophagus of Sekhemkhet. He proposes that the early pyramids, before Unas generally, were tombs, but not permanent, with the king's mummy being removed after an indeterminate period of time, an interesting middle ground in the "pyramids not tombs" debate. So while there is information here that both sides in that debate can use, I think that we are confronted with more questions than answers.

 

Around the 1:09 mark it is claimed that the pyramids evolved from small territory markers (pictures of the so-called "Provincial Step Pyramids" are shown), but these are from the late 3rd dyn at the earliest; never heard about a theory that claims these pyramids could pre-date the Step Pyramid.

Around the 22:56 mark the maker of the video claims it is unclear how Khafre's sarcophagus was opened given it's good condition. The video however shows the sarcophagus with it's reconstructed lid, originally when Belzoni entered the chamber the lid was found in two pieces; I suspect the maker of the video is unaware of this.

Just before around the 22:38 mark it is claimed that the coffers from the Giza pyramids survived "intact" and that this has been "overlooked"; does Khufu's look intact (big chunk missing in a corner)??? Even if it was "intact" the lid is missing as was the case with Menkaure's; why would tomb robbers waste time smashing the whole coffer when smashing the lid suffices? I'm afraid the maker of the video isn't immune to the "Giza special pleading virus"...

Most smashed coffers from later pyramids are a result of stone robbing rather than tomb robbing; many pyramids where stripped not only from their outer casing blocks but also the Tura limestone and granite blocks used in the interior chambers. The 5th dyn Abusir necropolis is a good example of this, where often only fragments of the royal sarcophagi survive.

The Sekhemkhet case remains a mysterious one, and many "solutions" have been proposed, imho the two following are the most likely ones:

1) Sekhemkhet was never buried in his unfinished tomb and the sarcophagus was ritually sealed (similar to the sealed and empty sarcophagus found buried in the unfinished pyramid of Baka in Zawyet el-Aryan; unfortunately not even mentioned in the video)

2) Sekhemkhet's mummy was robbed and the sealed and empty sarcophagus is the result of a restoration burial (possibly similar to the Hetepheres I case)

[The Puzzler]

49 minutes ago, Djedi said:

Around the 1:09 mark it is claimed that the pyramids evolved from small territory markers (pictures of the so-called "Provincial Step Pyramids" are shown), but these are from the late 3rd dyn at the earliest; never heard about a theory that claims these pyramids could pre-date the Step Pyramid.

Around the 22:56 mark the maker of the video claims it is unclear how Khafre's sarcophagus was opened given it's good condition. The video however shows the sarcophagus with it's reconstructed lid, originally when Belzoni entered the chamber the lid was found in two pieces; I suspect the maker of the video is unaware of this.

Just before around the 22:38 mark it is claimed that the coffers from the Giza pyramids survived "intact" and that this has been "overlooked"; does Khufu's look intact (big chunk missing in a corner)??? Even if it was "intact" the lid is missing as was the case with Menkaure's; why would tomb robbers waste time smashing the whole coffer when smashing the lid suffices? I'm afraid the maker of the video isn't immune to the "Giza special pleading virus"...

Most smashed coffers from later pyramids are a result of stone robbing rather than tomb robbing; many pyramids where stripped not only from their outer casing blocks but also the Tura limestone and granite blocks used in the interior chambers. The 5th dyn Abusir necropolis is a good example of this, where often only fragments of the royal sarcophagi survive.

The Sekhemkhet case remains a mysterious one, and many "solutions" have been proposed, imho the two following are the most likely ones:

1) Sekhemkhet was never buried in his unfinished tomb and the sarcophagus was ritually sealed (similar to the sealed and empty sarcophagus found buried in the unfinished pyramid of Baka in Zawyet el-Aryan; unfortunately not even mentioned in the video)

2) Sekhemkhet's mummy was robbed and the sealed and empty sarcophagus is the result of a restoration burial (possibly similar to the Hetepheres I case)

Seriously, I could do a better YouTube than that nonsense.

A reconstructed lid…

[Wepwawet]

2 hours ago, Djedi said:

Around the 1:09 mark it is claimed that the pyramids evolved from small territory markers (pictures of the so-called "Provincial Step Pyramids" are shown), but these are from the late 3rd dyn at the earliest; never heard about a theory that claims these pyramids could pre-date the Step Pyramid.

I don't agree with him on this at all.

2 hours ago, Djedi said:

Around the 22:56 mark the maker of the video claims it is unclear how Khafre's sarcophagus was opened given it's good condition. The video however shows the sarcophagus with it's reconstructed lid, originally when Belzoni entered the chamber the lid was found in two pieces; I suspect the maker of the video is unaware of this.

Noted. I also don't agree with him on a "two phase re-sealing" when he says that robbers only made small holes. I suspect he gets this from KV62 which was in fact the case, but is hardly an example for everything.

2 hours ago, Djedi said:

Most smashed coffers from later pyramids are a result of stone robbing rather than tomb robbing; many pyramids where stripped not only from their outer casing blocks but also the Tura limestone and granite blocks used in the interior chambers. The 5th dyn Abusir necropolis is a good example of this, where often only fragments of the royal sarcophagi survive.

Recycling in action, the AE were "greens".

2 hours ago, Djedi said:

The Sekhemkhet case remains a mysterious one

I really cannot make head nor tail of this, nothing makes sense, to us.

Overall I cannot agree with his suggestion that the pyramids, at least before Unas, were only temporary tombs. I would like to see his workings on this, for instance any evidence that the AE carried out this practise, something I have never heard of except in the case of reburials in exceptional circumstances, Amarna and the two royal mummy caches.

[Antigonos]

On 9/13/2024 at 11:49 AM, Thanos5150 said:

There is a practical and economic side to it that given the application mud brick is far superior. Mud brick was also used extensively in royal/religious structures ancillary to the main stone components. The Egyptians never stopped building with mud brick and still continues today. I went to my cab drivers house in Cairo for lunch and he was the 2nd generation to live in their two story mud brick home they built themselves which had the craziest roof top view of Giza. Right there. He said when he was a kid and his dad would get mad at him he would sneak out and climb to the top of G1 and smoke cigarettes.     

MUD-BRICK

Made from a mixture of silt, clay, sand, and straw formed into regular molded units, unfired mudbricks were the primary construction material employed in ancient Egypt—being quite literally the most basic of building blocks for all levels of domestic structures, from simple one-room buildings to lavishly decorated palace complexes, as well as administrative and storage structures, and even early phases of temples. Modern methods of mud-brick fabrication accord with ancient evidence, suggesting that the production of unfired mud-brick has remained a stable technology through the millennia. Ancient evidence concerning mud-brick not only illuminates mud-brick production organization, but also highlights the symbolic significance of bricks in religious contexts, especially relating to birth and death.

Bonus:

UNDULATING MUD BRICK WALLS IN ANCIENT PHARAONIC EGYPT

Lots of great stuff here. I like when you share your personal travel experiences. I remember when you said how surprised you first were when you saw the corbel vaulting in the Red Pyramid same as in G1. Or when you paid a guide to get a close look at a site, (Abu Roash?) can’t exactly remember. 

I had no idea mud-brick was still being used in construction even today,  I tend to associate it in my head strictly with the ancients. But of course it makes a ton of sense. It’s proven to be a reliable medium in the environment for literally millennia, you can do it yourself, and I’m sure it’s cheaper than buying an already constructed house. Is “unfired” brick similar to the “sun dried” (ie non baked) method used in Mesopotamia? 
EDIT: Just looked it up. They’re the same. I think I already knew it but I’m just getting old.

The information in the linked article is fantastic.

Thanks, Lee. Always appreciated.

 

Edited September 15 by Antigonos

[The Puzzler]

59 minutes ago, Antigonos said:

Lots of great stuff here. I like when you share your personal travel experiences. I remember when you said how surprised you first were when you saw the corbel vaulting in the Red Pyramid same as in G1. Or when you paid a guide to get a close look at a site, (Abu Roash?) can’t exactly remember. 

I had no idea mud-brick was still being used in construction even today,  I tend to associate it in my head strictly with the ancients. But of course it makes a ton of sense. It’s proven to be a reliable medium in the environment for literally millennia, you can do it yourself, and I’m sure it’s cheaper than buying an already constructed house. Is “unfired” brick similar to the “sun dried” (ie non baked) method used in Mesopotamia? 
EDIT: Just looked it up. They’re the same. I think I already knew it but I’m just getting old.

The information in the linked article is fantastic.

Thanks, Lee. Always appreciated.

 

Lee…..he’s Thanos like in the Marvel movies…

But you can call me Vanessa if you insist.

[Spiros]

On 1/17/2024 at 11:34 AM, Thanos5150 said:

Description de'Egypte, Volume 31, Planche 27 |Date=1823|

 

Very interesting. I don't know when the Athribis pyramid was built but I find it interesting that it relates to Jerusalem just like the Medium pyramid does. The next pyramid to the South was the Lepsius I pyramid at Abu Rowash which was also built of mud brick. It might be noted that the Amphion pyramid in Thebes was also built of mud brick.   

[The Puzzler]

2 minutes ago, Spiros said:

Very interesting. I don't know when the Athribis pyramid was built but I find it interesting that it relates to Jerusalem just like the Medium pyramid does. The next pyramid to the South was the Lepsius I pyramid at Abu Rowash which was also built of mud brick. It might be noted that the Amphion pyramid in Thebes was also built of mud brick.   

Of course it does. It is very interesting.

None of it Egyptians knew without influence from other cultures, especially trade ones.

No one goes anywhere without that influx.

Why are indigenous Australians or South American cultures immune to civilisation???

Because they never got there.

All civilisation IMO certainly derive from other civilisations showing them or trading with them.

Its not so crazy Egypt also succumbed to this.