If Pyramids not tombs where are the pharaohs?

[Trelane]

10 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

If you want some fun ask the folks who think G1 was 'something' else to provide the evidence for that - but they are restricted to putting forth only evidence of G1 being that AND not denying evidence it was a tomb.

I'll wait.

 

That's what is starting to irritate me. There's this back and forth on whether or not G1(again apparently only G1) was a tomb. My question is what the hell was it then and where is there anything to support an alternative answer?.

Luckily you, @cormac mac airt, @Wepwawet, and @Harte have provided more than sufficient information. I'll also state I'm not nearly as studied in the topic as you all are, and you have taught me quite bit I did not know. Thanks!

Edited April 26, 2020 by Trelane

[cormac mac airt]

2 minutes ago, Trelane said:

That's what is starting to irritate me. There's this back and forth on whether or not G1(again apparently only G1) was a tomb. My question is what the hell was it then and where is there anything to support an alternative answer?.

Luckily you, @cormac mac airt, @Wepwawet, and @Harte have provided more than sufficient information. I'll also state I'm not nearly as studied in the topic as you all are, and you have taught me quite bit I did not know. Thanks!

I’d still like to know why anyone would even entertain the idea that the worlds largest ancient structure was a cenotaph, itself having its own mortuary temple and surrounded by the dead family and court of the king? That’s completely unevidenced in the entirety of AE civilization. 
 

cormac

[cladking]

34 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

I’d still like to know why anyone would even entertain the idea that the worlds largest ancient structure was a cenotaph, itself having its own mortuary temple and surrounded by the dead family and court of the king? That’s completely unevidenced in the entirety of AE civilization. 
 

 

But then claiming it's a gnomen, seed bank, or mnemonic is all off topic just like ALL OF THE EVIDENCE it's a gnomen, seed bank, or mnemonic.  

Many possibilities are not excluded by the ACTUAL EVIDENCE.  We get it all wrapped up with a nice little bow.  It's a tomb because it's always been assumed to be a tomb ever since Herodotus said Khufu was buried nearby.  Once you assume it's a tomb you are stuck with dead bodies and graves despite all the physical and cultural evidence to the contrary.  

[cladking]

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

 

I'll put it this way. If the pyramid is not the burial place for the mortal remains of a king, why is there a mortuary temple alongside the pyramid and not where the king is actually buried.

What exactly makes you believe there is or was a "mortuary temple" alongside any great pyramid?   

[Hanslune]

56 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

I’d still like to know why anyone would even entertain the idea that the worlds largest ancient structure was a cenotaph, itself having its own mortuary temple and surrounded by the dead family and court of the king? That’s completely unevidenced in the entirety of AE civilization. 
 

cormac

..because....reasons.....

[Hanslune]

25 minutes ago, cladking said:

But then claiming it's a gnomen, seed bank, or mnemonic is all off topic just like ALL OF THE EVIDENCE it's a gnomen, seed bank, or mnemonic.  

Many possibilities are not excluded by the ACTUAL EVIDENCE.  We get it all wrapped up with a nice little bow.  It's a tomb because it's always been assumed to be a tomb ever since Herodotus said Khufu was buried nearby.  Once you assume it's a tomb you are stuck with dead bodies and graves despite all the physical and cultural evidence to the contrary.  

Please then show us the evidence, that isn't denial of a tomb*, for it being one of those then? What is holding you back? I mean you claimed it was used to make canned goods...........or that the AE use to BBQ somewhere around it and it was a memorial of his life.

So where's the evidence of that?

*Example: Don't say, "the lack of inscriptions in the King's chamber shows it wasn't a tomb", instead "the lack of inscriptions in the King's chamber shows it was used to make Nitric acid  etc., etc. and was a part of the Atlantean manufacturing infrastructure.

 

Quote

Many possibilities are not excluded by the ACTUAL EVIDENCE

Wow how profound; yep all possibilities are possible: it could have been an early kosher butcher shop, a misplaced Japanese Shinto temple, a time traveling Belgian flower shop or a Lemurian sand brothel. Now what is plausible and probable is what you don't want to deal with - now is it?

Edited April 26, 2020 by Hanslune

[Hanslune]

21 minutes ago, cladking said:

What exactly makes you believe there is or was a "mortuary temple" alongside any great pyramid?   

The fact you don't believe there is one.

[Wepwawet]

24 minutes ago, cladking said:

What exactly makes you believe there is or was a "mortuary temple" alongside any great pyramid?   

Because if you look at many pyramids, great, medium and small, you will see on the central east side of the pyramid a structure. In the better preserved examples, not least G2, without doubt a "great pyramid", it can be seen that these structures are mortuary temples. G3 has one, so does G1, allthough it is so badly degraded that only the pavement remains, but it is clear there was a structure there, and as a structure at that particular place indicates a mortuary temple, it is safe to say that G1 had a mortuary temple. As of course there are always annomalies, an odd man out, some pyramids have their mortuary temple on the north side, but most are on the east.

The proof of this is the shear weight of evidence that you can examine, if not in person, at least by looking in the relevant publications or online. Any "controversy" about this would need the weight of evidence for a mortuary temple to be overturned by an even greater weight of evidence against there being a mortuary temple. As yet, there is zero evidence against, and not even any "controversy".

Edited April 26, 2020 by Wepwawet

[Hanslune]

2 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Because if you look at many pyramids, great, medium and small, you will see on the central east side of the pyramid a structure. In the better preserved examples, not least G2, without doubt a "great pyramid", it can be seen that these structures are mortuary temples. G3 has one, so does G1, allthough it is so badly degraded that only the pavement remains, but it is clear there was a structure there, and as a structure at that particular place indicates a mortuary temple, it is safe to say that G1 had a mortuary temple. As of course there are always annomalies, an odd man out, some pyramids have their mortuary temple on the north side, but most are on the east.

I believe Cladking had the supervisor of the goofy geyser located there directing the kite(s) that were lifting the multi-ton water tank funicular from the bottom of the cliff to the NE...or something.

[Wepwawet]

3 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

I believe Cladking had the supervisor of the goofy geyser located there directing the kite(s) that were lifting the multi-ton water tank funicular from the bottom of the cliff to the NE...or something.

I wonder how that would work on G2, which seems neglected here once again, or was there a geyser under that pyramid as well...

[Hanslune]

4 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

I wonder how that would work on G2, which seems neglected here once again, or was there a geyser under that pyramid as well...

G2: Cladking always ran screaming from topographical maps of Giza because while you can make up a convoluted and work making way for the Funiculars to run for G1 they wouldn't work at all at G2 without kilometer(s) long ropes.

He was never able to come up with any way to power funiculars for all the other major pyramids after he failed to find any evidence for G1's goofy geyser. One reason he never wrote up any of this. We can thank Jammer from HoM for that I believe.

[Windowpane]

32 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Cladking ... was never able to come up with any way to power funiculars for all the other major pyramids after he failed to find any evidence for G1's goofy geyser. One reason he never wrote up any of this. We can thank Jammer from HoM for that I believe.

On the whole, there was little support for the theory of geysers at Giza ...

[Windowpane]

The Great Pyramid as tomb ...

[Wepwawet]

44 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

G2: Cladking always ran screaming from topographical maps of Giza because while you can make up a convoluted and work making way for the Funiculars to run for G1 they wouldn't work at all at G2 without kilometer(s) long ropes.

He was never able to come up with any way to power funiculars for all the other major pyramids after he failed to find any evidence for G1's goofy geyser. One reason he never wrote up any of this. We can thank Jammer from HoM for that I believe.

Ha ha, yes, and I know exactly why you bemoaned the lack of attention to G2 as it really is the elephant in the room for the fantasies.

[Wepwawet]

4 minutes ago, Windowpane said:

The Great Pyramid as tomb ...

And I'll quote this line from that article which fits in nicely here right now.

Quote

One of the chief problems with the fringe position is the tendency to pull the Great Pyramid out of context, as though it somehow stands alone, unrelated, in the span and breadth of pharaonic Egypt. This dooms the fringe stance from the start.

And I'll add, and I'm sure you all know this, that such is the monomania seen with fringe ideas that they, at least the great majority, know next to nothing about the actual culture and history of Ancient Egypt, and at times, quite a few times, are contemptuous of the AE. Present them with some 101 material, let alone advanced, and they try and shout you down or just run for cover. Anybody for another dose of the Solar-Osirian Unity

[Piney]

 

3 hours ago, Hanslune said:

funicular

It always sounds like it has something to do with a anus. 

 

..........Oh wait! 

 

[Harte]

4 hours ago, Trelane said:

That's what is starting to irritate me. There's this back and forth on whether or not G1(again apparently only G1) was a tomb. My question is what the hell was it then and where is there anything to support an alternative answer?.

Luckily you, @cormac mac airt, @Wepwawet, and @Harte have provided more than sufficient information. I'll also state I'm not nearly as studied in the topic as you all are, and you have taught me quite bit I did not know. Thanks!

Me?

All I've added to the thread is the trivia about mummia - that people used to eat mummies.

Hell, they still probably do, for all I know. Just not as many of them.

I've snorted some dust in my time, but I think I'll pass on old Imhotep, thankyouveddymuch.

Harte

 

[Harte]

2 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

And I'll quote this line from that article which fits in nicely here right now.

And I'll add, and I'm sure you all know this, that such is the monomania seen with fringe ideas that they, at least the great majority, know next to nothing about the actual culture and history of Ancient Egypt, and at times, quite a few times, are contemptuous of the AE. Present them with some 101 material, let alone advanced, and they try and shout you down or just run for cover. Anybody for another dose of the Solar-Osirian Unity

From kmt_sesh's blog.

Where is kmt_sesh?

Harte

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

43 minutes ago, Harte said:

From kmt_sesh's blog.

Where is kmt_sesh?

Harte

More to the point, how is kmt_sesh?

[cladking]

4 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Because if you look at many pyramids, great, medium and small, you will see on the central east side of the pyramid a structure. In the better preserved examples, not least G2, without doubt a "great pyramid", it can be seen that these structures are mortuary temples. G3 has one, so does G1, allthough it is so badly degraded that only the pavement remains, but it is clear there was a structure there, and as a structure at that particular place indicates a mortuary temple, it is safe to say that G1 had a mortuary temple. As of course there are always annomalies, an odd man out, some pyramids have their mortuary temple on the north side, but most are on the east.

The proof of this is the shear weight of evidence that you can examine, if not in person, at least by looking in the relevant publications or online. Any "controversy" about this would need the weight of evidence for a mortuary temple to be overturned by an even greater weight of evidence against there being a mortuary temple. As yet, there is zero evidence against, and not even any "controversy".

There's no reason to believe that the piles of rubble or anything at all from later times have any bearing whatsoever on the great pyramids.  Just because this rubble is called "pyramids" doesn't make them tombs or not tombs and the word "pyramid" doesn't make the real pyramids tombs or not tombs.  "Pyramid" is just a word.  This same thing applies to "mortuary temple"; just words.   A building that no longer stands next to a great pyramid can't be positively identified as a "mortuary temple".   Of course there's evidence that the rubble piles had a "mortuary temple" but they came later and all we know is that there had been a building east of most great pyramids.   That there was a building of unknown function  next to a pyramid doesn't make the pyramid a tomb.  I doubt ALL the piles of rubble were tombs but I doubt any of the pyramids were tombs.   The little tiny "pyramids" were mere imitations of the great pyramids. From a distance it would have been difficult to tell a real pyramid from an imitation.  Maybe this is why they built the little pyramids; they wanted their tombs to look like actual pyramids just as some of the workers tombs at Giza looked like pyramids.  

None of this makes any pyramid a tomb.  

There is no "controversy" about the pyramids being tombs because it's a widely held assumption. But there is still no direct evidence any great pyramid was a tomb.  There's no direct evidence that the building next to G1 was a "mortuary temple".  There is no direct evidence that G1 was intended or used as a tomb.  None of these structures were called "tombs" or "graves" by the builders.  They never said there was a body in any of them and they did say the tomb of the king was in the sky and he ascended on smoke.  The assumption seems sound but it is not backed by any evidence at all other than very limited circumstantial evidence.   In light of the extensive cultural context and physical evidence this must be considered a serious blow to the assumption they were tombs.  

 

It seems to me that in light of the fact the "mortuary temple" is at the end of a long ramp leading up from a port on the river it would make an ideal location for a facility to handle, size, and transport stone for use on the pyramid.  Of course there are myriad possibilities for its function but being on a ramp certainly has implications and none of those implications support a mortuary complex.  

[cladking]

3 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

And I'll quote this line from that article which fits in nicely here right now.

And I'll add, and I'm sure you all know this, that such is the monomania seen with fringe ideas that they, at least the great majority, know next to nothing about the actual culture and history of Ancient Egypt, and at times, quite a few times, are contemptuous of the AE. Present them with some 101 material, let alone advanced, and they try and shout you down or just run for cover. Anybody for another dose of the Solar-Osirian Unity

Do you think Thanos5150 is unfamiliar with real "Egyptology"?   

Do you really think Scott Creighton and other alts have not looked into the evidence?   

 

People look at the evidence and see it does not support the assumptions.  Maybe 150 years ago it kindda did but many new things have been found and learned and  the assumptions are no longer being supported.  News and new findings should dovetail with theory but instead new mysteries are forever emerging.     

Edited April 27, 2020 by cladking

[Trelane]

4 minutes ago, cladking said:

Do you think Thanos5150 is unfamiliar with real "Egyptology"?   

Do you really think Scott Creighton and other alts have not looked into the evidence?   

 

People look at the evidence and see it does not support the assumptions.  Maybe 150 years ago it kindda did but many new things have been found and learned and  the assumptions are no longer being supported.  News and new findings should dovetail with theory but instead new mysteries are forever emerging.     

Ok then, what do you propose the pyramids were built for then? This includes all others, not G1 exclusively. Thanks.

[Harte]

They were all built as a joke.

However, "modern" Man isn't far enough along vibrationally speaking to get it - yet.

Harte

[Piney]

2 hours ago, Harte said:

Where is kmt_sesh?

 

1 hour ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

More to the point, how is kmt_sesh?

I've seen him on here reading. I should of PMed him..... 

....I hope he's ok.....

[Piney]

Just now, Harte said:

They were all built as a joke.

That's really funicular!!!!!