If Pyramids not tombs where are the pharaohs?

[Thanos5150]

20 hours ago, cladking said:

There ARE NO MORTUARY TEMPLES at Giza.  

Again, the explanation given for pyramids being empty of reliefs or decoration in their interiors, again a relatively "new" idea in that until reliefs were found in the BP valley temple in the 1950's it was thought the 4th Dynasty kings did not decorate their temples, is that they are meant to be found in the mortuary temple instead as mirrored in private tombs where the burial chamber is empty with the reliefs being found in the "chapel". As noted earlier in this thread, one of the reasons this obviously this would not apply as there are much in the interiors of pyramids that are not the burial chamber leaving no explanation for them being bare. For example G3 which actually does have some decoration in its interior: 

 

As we can see in not only see contemporary private tombs, but royal and private tombs throughout Dynastic history, funerary dedication, i.e. relief and decoration, nothing could be more important. This of course would be no different for the pharaoh which as Egyptologists tell us we would find this dedication in the mortuary temple. Here's the rub:

Medium: no mortuary temple. Unfinished "valley temple", a chapel, with no reliefs and two large blank stela.  

BP: a small chapel where later mortuary temples would come to be-no reliefs or decoration. Valley temple found with lavish reliefs and decoration. Which is odd because the BP is thought at the very least by most not to have been the tomb of Sneferu.    

RP: small "mortuary temple" of poor construction, perhaps unfinished. Though little remains a fragment was found showing Sneferu though whether or not it is from the temple or a stela is debatable. Valley temple not yet excavated with no evidence of a causeway leading to it. 

G1: all that remains of mortuary temple is black basalt pavement though some granite temple and limestone fragments were found. Numerous scrap/repurposed reliefs attributed to Khufu, presumed and definitive, found in and around the eastern cemetery, mostly the 7000 block, with some found as far away as Lisht. Unknown where they originally belonged though is likely much of it was part of the mortuary temple and/or causeway. Valley temple unexcavated. 

Abu Roash: no mortuary temple as yet found though an intesting possible candidate is in the area on the north side, a typical feature of the 3rd Dynasty, not the 4th who placed the temple on the east side. On the east, however, a curious mud brick structure is  found suggested by some to have been a hastily built mortuary temple though it differs significantly from any OK examples.This structure is worthy of further discussion but regardless, no reliefs.  

G2: Mortuary temple in reality two structures merged as one: the earlier megalithic phase made of massive blocks, and the later mortuary temple. No reliefs or evidence there ever was.

   

 

As an aside, this is of note as the megalithic phase clearly belongs in the same context as the G2 valley temple and early phase of the G3 mortuary temple which evidence suggest the G2 valley temple was built before the Sphinx Temple and Sphinx. A story for another time perhaps. Of note as well is that fact G1's mortuary temple is completely gone it stands to reason it was not made of megalithic blocks as the rest. 

G2 valley temple-no reliefs nor was there ever though many statues found in proximity which would ahve been installed in the VT. Sphinx temple-no reliefs. 

G3: again, mortuary temple constructed in phases-one megalithic and the rest not with the latter of very poor construction built largely by Menkaure's predecessor Shepseskaf. No reliefs or evidence there ever was. Valley temple of poor construction-completed in mud brick by Shepseskaf and built up again even later by likely Pepi I in the 6th Dynasty. No reliefs, though again many magnificent statues found associated with VT.  

Mastabat al-Fir'aun (Saqarra): attributed to Menkaure's successor Shepseskaf. Some Interior details similar to G3, but no reliefs. A small "mortuary temple" was found as part of complex which differed significantly from previous examples, but again no evidence of reliefs. No evidence of a valley temple. Evidence of attribution to Shepseskaf is scarce. 

Userkaf: lavishly decorated mortuary temple with reliefs of exceptional quality. 

Sahure: lavishly decorated mortuary temple-estimated over 100,000ft of reliefs and decoration-a wonder of the ancient world. 

To recap-funerary dedication of a tomb was no doubt the the most important aspect of the DE belief in the afterlife which to have none is abhorrent not only to their religion but the archaeological context of the whole. Yet despite the fact we are told the reason the interiors of pyramids are bare is because the decoration was placed on the mortuary temples instead, we find a glaring gap and inconsistency in this theory in that nearly all of the pyramids prior to the 5th Dynasty had no dedications in their mortuary temples either.  Medium: none. BP: mortuary temple none-found instead at valley temple. RP: none. G1: mortuary temple is completely gone suggesting not built to same standard (time?) as G2 and G3, but it appears to almost certainly have had reliefs like those found at BP valley temple. G2: none. G3: none. Shepseskaf's mastaba, unlike other mastabas of the period: none. Userkaf and Sahure-amazing display of reliefs on a scale previously unknown in the ancient world of which as an aside there are several other curiosities as well like the introduction of previously unknown fully developed stone columns architecture.  

So prior to Userkaf, the 1st pharaoh of the 5th Dynasty, of the 5 great pyramids only the BP valley temple has reliefs with apparently the mortuary temple of G1 as well. This leaves Medium, the RP, G2 and G3 without the required funerary dedication leaving the question if not in these temples then where as they most certainly had to be somewhere? 

 

 

 

[Wepwawet]

Further questions raised will be, what decoration/spells were considered as even a bare minimum in any part of the tomb or it's wider complex before we see the PT with Unas. For while I said that the PT do not emerge from a vacuum, they emerged from texts written on papyrus rolls, and so long gone as evidence.

We know with certainty that this "roadmap to eternity" was of crucial importance from Unas, but we do not find anything like this before Unas. It seems to me that what was important, as a bare minimum, is the sah, the mummified wrapped body and it's coffin or coffins, including the stone one we refer to as the sarcophagus, the serdab and a statue of the king to house his ka.

The presence of the serekh facade indicates that here we have a king in his "palace of the dead", but this is not loaded with the same religious beliefs we see in the PT, far from it. I would see the serekh as being the symbol of the king and the state, and while religion is everywhere in ancient Egypt, it is more akin to the emblems of statehood we have today, an eagle or lion are typical, and in the UK along with it's three lions, a depiction of a portculis to represent parliament. So I wonder if Horus, or another animal, on the serekh is much different, and that the king's Horus name simply says that this is the head of state.

So, when we look at a royal tomb before Unas, what should we expect to see in the way of crucial decoration, decoration with an important religious ritual function. My point being that while we do not find the remnants of decoration with the mortuary temple of G2, should we actually expect there to be anything substantial anyway. That's a real question, not a statement of fact

Lehner raises questions about the role of the mortuary temple during the burial of a king, but I'll deal with that later when I see how this posts plays.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Wepwawet

[cladking]

17 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

 What about all the evidence from many other sources that inform us about AE culture. 

There is virtually no written record of anything from the great pyramid building era. All these sources post-date it.  The Palermo Stone post-dates it as well since it was written centuries later and refers to the construction of G3 which is NOT a great pyramid.  

If it were true that there is lots of evidence then why not a source that says a pyramid was a tomb or some king was buried in one?  Why not anything that says they were tombs and why does the one source keep saying the pyramid is a tomb and the king's grave is in the sky; in "nut"?   

That the kings are not in evidence is a fact.  That there is scant evidence they ever were in the pyramids is a fact.   Cut marks  in the "mortuary temple" and words carved in stones are concrete facts.  That our understanding of those words is only approximate is a fact.   That translators disagree on meaning is a fact.   That there are words that appear in the oldest sources that are translated and interpreted to mean the same thing as the "book of the dead" is a fact.  

I love the Coffin Texts and am becoming familiar with it.  I also read ALL of the relevant source material but I do not consider the "book of the dead" to be relevant.  

[Alchopwn]

On 5/16/2020 at 11:45 PM, cladking said:

There is no direct evidence any great pyramid was built, intended, or used as a tomb.  While a wide array and variety of evidence might have survived there is none.  

The writing repeats over and over that the pyramids were not tombs and were actually the king himself but we don't believe it.

1932 (Nt. 763). He, he is a pyramid, he protects;

We take nothing they said literally.   

The words are are a virtual soup of meaning as metaphor and each translator takes a different meaning.  People want to force these words to agree with the "book of the dead" so every single translator finds the same superstitions that exist in a book written 1000 years later.   Maybe the people who wrote the "book of the dead" didn't understand the ancient writing any better than we do.   Maybe they made the exact same errors in parsing the text that we do.   Maybe something changed over the 1000 years.

Reread the post.  They found a royal mummy in the step pyramid, ergo, tomb.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Alchopwn

[M. Williams]

23 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Aside from your childish snide comment about a "wiki-retort", would you care to provide some evidence that the Eye of Horus "describes a pyramid remodel". It's easy to just say things, it's another matter to bring some evidence to the table. What do you have.

All I can do is show you " the way". You must walk "the path" on your own, right ?  (eye roll) 

 

I think the large pyramids were remodeled in a ceremonial way. At times this remodel ,for lack of a better word, resembled eyes due to the shape of the ramps on the exterior. The opening of the trench in which the chambers are constructed is where Seth is defeated and the new King emerges as the new Horus King, etc...

 

When I say the PT clearly describe a remodel of a pyramid this is what I speak of, an intrusive burial, the restoration of the tomb and the 'Eye' and the coronation of a new king all in one act which will be repeated when he passes. 

 

The evidence in the form of ramps and access trenches is difficult to talk about with someone who isn't a construction expert. Are you a construction expert of some sort ? Or can you give me a reason im wrong ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Trelane]

19 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

The language they used was Old Egyptian, that is a fact acknowledged worldwide without dispute, and one person on the internet denying this does not count in any way as dispute.

I went through the bother of providing good resources, I properly referenced those parts of the PT that I mentioned so that anybody, even without Allen's 2015 edition, can easily find the texts and read them in context. I even provided links to the hieroglyphs. You use Mercer's badly outdated translation and do not clearly reference, let alone cross reference, your quotes, which are presented in isolation to avoid context. And now you still fail to present any evidence, only your opinion in the form of fiction.

"Crowds at the king's ascension ceremonies", really, and where is the evidence for these crowds. We have crowds at the funerals and crowning of monarchs or swearing in ceremonies of presidents, did they? Who was present at these rituals and were they held in open spaces or enclosed ones, hint, look at temple architecture and ritual, of which we do in fact have reasonable knowledge. The "Window of Appearance", yes, a public appearance by the king, but not his enthronement, and certainly not his funeral.

At Giza I do not doubt that may people would have lined the banks of the Nile to see the royal barque with the king's mummy, and they would have the journey from where ever it left the west bank to when it arrived at the Valley Temple. But what after that? well that's the last they would have seen. There would be rituals inside the temple, then the mummy carried up the covered causeway to the mortuary temple, more ritaul, then the interment carried out with yet more ritual. We cannot prove this is so, but such a reconstruction is well within the bounds of what we do know, and common sense.

Show evidence that the bodies were burnt, that means a forensic dissection of the PT explaining each element that leads you to believe they practised cremation, not just you coming out with a load of guff about how we cannot understand them, but, miraculously, you can.

 

Ok, could you distill your answer down to basic terms? I'm not very well versed on AE and just want to know what YOU think they are specifically. Thanks.

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, cladking said:

There is virtually no written record of anything from the great pyramid building era. All these sources post-date it.  The Palermo Stone post-dates it as well since it was written centuries later and refers to the construction of G3 which is NOT a great pyramid.  

Yet Cladking YOU state over and over again that if a word doesn't exist in that - as you admit above - limited amount of written material - that which it describes doesn't exist. Sounds pretty foolish doesn't it. So now that you've contradicted yourself you will....oh wait you'll just keep contradicting yourself - what was I thinking? LOL

 

 

Quote

If it were true that there is lots of evidence then why not a source that says a pyramid was a tomb or some king was buried in one?  Why not anything that says they were tombs and why does the one source keep saying the pyramid is a tomb and the king's grave is in the sky; in "nut"?   

You are just repeating the same claims. Again where is the source that tells us what the pyramid is? You get all upset over it not being mentioned as tomb but skip over it also isn't referred to whatever you think it is.

 

Quote

I love the Coffin Texts and am becoming familiar with it.  I also read ALL of the relevant source material but I do not consider the "book of the dead" to be relevant.  

I'm sure everyone is glad that after 14 years you got around to reading about the culture you've been telling lies about all this time. However, while you get kudos for actually reading something - your opinion on the Book of Dead is meaningless.

 

By the way Cladking please don't fall into your usual pattern of just repeating over and over the same claims. It gets boring real fast and I will report you if you do it.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Hanslune

[Wepwawet]

1 hour ago, M. Williams said:

All I can do is show you " the way". You must walk "the path" on your own, right ?  (eye roll) 

 

I think the large pyramids were remodeled in a ceremonial way. At times this remodel ,for lack of a better word, resembled eyes due to the shape of the ramps on the exterior. The opening of the trench in which the chambers are constructed is where Seth is defeated and the new King emerges as the new Horus King, etc...

 

When I say the PT clearly describe a remodel of a pyramid this is what I speak of, an intrusive burial, the restoration of the tomb and the 'Eye' and the coronation of a new king all in one act which will be repeated when he passes. 

 

The evidence in the form of ramps and access trenches is difficult to talk about with someone who isn't a construction expert. Are you a construction expert of some sort ? Or can you give me a reason im wrong ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your post is mostly incoherent and gives no real evidence to be refuted.

 

Edited May 17, 2020 by Wepwawet

[Hanslune]

Oops missed a part of Cladking's message:

 

Quote

That the kings are not in evidence is a fact.  That there is scant evidence they ever were in the pyramids is a fact.   Cut marks  in the "mortuary temple" and words carved in stones are concrete facts.  That our understanding of those words is only approximate is a fact.   That translators disagree on meaning is a fact.   That there are words that appear in the oldest sources that are translated and interpreted to mean the same thing as the "book of the dead" is a fact.  

Cladking try this experiment: Build a large obvious structure in a place with lots of people with an internal structure and make sure everyone knows its valuable. Put something valuable in it. Wait 4,500 years what are the chances that valuable thing will still be there?

"Scant" means evidence exists that you don't like more evidence than imaginary geysers and that is a fact

Cut marks are found all over any AE construction site....and that is a fact

Word understandings - yet you proclaim your translations of a language you cannot read are accurate and when this has been tested your attempts don't make sense - and that is a fact

Translator disagree, welcome to real world Cladking but they have one thing they DO agree on. To make a translation you have to be able to read the language - which you cannot read - and that is a fact

We use words today from Old and Shakespearean English that still have the same meaning and that is a fact.

 

 

[Hanslune]

5 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Your post is mostly incoherent and gives no real evidence to be refuted.

Yes, I have the poor fellow on ignore. He often use to post unintelligible and passive aggressive posts. I sometime thought he was talking to himself.

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, Alchopwn said:

Reread the post.  They found a royal mummy in the step pyramid, ergo, tomb.

Howdy Alchopwn

They found a foot and haven't been able to associate that with the Pharaoh.

There was one 'Royal' pyramid that wasn't robbed but it was waterlogged

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread419469/pg1 the pyramid with a "mummy" in it, neferu-ptah

http://pyramidengeheimnisse.de/index.php?top=pyr_e&page=empty

 

 

[Jarocal]

3 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Cut marks are found all over any AE construction site....and that is a fact

Dunn, Childress, Graham, etc. do not dispute this. The technologies utilized to achieve the shaping of the stone are the contentious points for them.

Shame my new phone doesn't have the "it was aliens" meme on it yet...

[Jarocal]

15 minutes ago, Wepwawet said:

Your post is mostly incoherent and gives no real evidence to be refuted.

Half a dozen doubles of Crown Royal improve the coherency of his pontificating, well not really but it greatly enhances the entertainment value.

[Wepwawet]

4 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Half a dozen doubles of Crown Royal improve the coherency of his pontificating, well not really but it greatly enhances the entertainment value.

I rewrote the reply, but maybe should have left it as it was.

Dang, and then I changed it back again. I wasn't 100% sure of this poster as I'm a noob and all, but now I know to ignore...

Edited May 17, 2020 by Wepwawet

[Hanslune]

12 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Dunn, Childress, Graham, etc. do not dispute this. The technologies utilized to achieve the shaping of the stone are the contentious points for them.

Shame my new phone doesn't have the "it was aliens" meme on it yet...

Cladking lives in a world where distorting evidence, and ignoring huge chunks of it, along with science and reality, are a big part of his failed 14 year campaign to be deemed irrelevant and a poor quality comedy sketch.

[Hanslune]

10 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Half a dozen doubles of Crown Royal improve the coherency of his pontificating, well not really but it greatly enhances the entertainment value.

Has his entertaining value gone up? Would it be worthwhile to take him off ignore - or are you just teasing me?

[Hanslune]

16 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Dunn, Childress, Graham, etc. do not dispute this. The technologies utilized to achieve the shaping of the stone are the contentious points for them.

Shame my new phone doesn't have the "it was aliens" meme on it yet...

Absolutely, Cladking has achieved a double whammy. He is against orthodoxy and he alienates many of the fringe by holding a position that the AE built the pyramid and didn't use high tech, no Atlanteans or aliens - well besides a geyser power and magical funicular.

[Wepwawet]

54 minutes ago, Trelane said:

Ok, could you distill your answer down to basic terms? I'm not very well versed on AE and just want to know what YOU think they are specifically. Thanks.

I'm not sure what it is you want me to make a clarification on, the PT or the pyramids or the mortuary temples. I guess it wouldn't be the PT, therefore I believe that a pyramid is a tomb, bar any without a burial chamber, and where, for instance with Amenemhat III, we have two pyramids, both are tombs, though he was of course in the Hawara pyramid. The three for Sneferu I'll admit are a puzzle.

I cannot see the structures abutting pyramids as anything except mortuary temples. The pyramid is a necropolis feature, so they cannot be the temple to a god as they don't belong in the necropolis, however, the dead king is now a god, but then his worship when dead is what a mortuary temple is for, and a place to lay offerings.

[Jarocal]

1 minute ago, Hanslune said:

Has his entertaining value gone up? Would it be worthwhile to take him off ignore - or are you just teasing me?

Entertainment value is directly correlated to the amount of alcohol imbibed. Levels which impede most rational thought are required to truly enhance the value of his postings. I recommend having at least two 750ml bottles of whiskey or single malts scotch at hand before embarking of a reexamination of Clad's ideas. Doesn't mean that he is right, but it does transform the excruciating monotony of his exclamations into an amusing diversion from reality. 

[Hanslune]

1 minute ago, Jarocal said:

Entertainment value is directly correlated to the amount of alcohol imbibed. Levels which impede most rational thought are required to truly enhance the value of his postings. I recommend having at least two 750ml bottles of whiskey or single malts scotch at hand before embarking of a reexamination of Clad's ideas. Doesn't mean that he is right, but it does transform the excruciating monotony of his exclamations into an amusing diversion from reality. 

Ah too bad I don't drink can't stand the stuff. Could I get the same affect by having large folks batter my head with cricket bats?

[Jarocal]

7 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Absolutely, Cladking has achieved a double whammy. He is against orthodoxy and he alienates many of the fringe by holding a position that the AE built the pyramid and didn't use high tech, no Atlanteans or aliens - well besides a geyser power and magical funicular.

I almost dug up his retort ages ago asking why a interstellar species would use stone as a building material. I may have a counterpoint to it. Well at least one that makes sense when I am in the proper mind state to evaluate his arguments. 

[Jarocal]

2 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Ah too bad I don't drink can't stand the stuff. Could I get the same affect by having large folks batter my head with cricket bats?

Would not recommend the cricket bat method but there are some naturally occuring mushrooms often found in cow pastures that may provide an adequate substitute. Those or a few grams of weed and a couple bags of Doritos...

[M. Williams]

 

 

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

Your post is mostly incoherent and gives no real evidence to be refuted.

 

Or, does your ignorance leave you incapable of refuting anything to begin with. Reread it if it's too complicated for you.

[Hanslune]

45 minutes ago, Jarocal said:

Would not recommend the cricket bat method but there are some naturally occuring mushrooms often found in cow pastures that may provide an adequate substitute. Those or a few grams of weed and a couple bags of Doritos...

...thanks but I grew up in the 60's!

[M. Williams]

You should try Facebook Hans. Its a great place to talk about things unrelated to pyramids. You know, the subject of the thread you're on ?

Edited May 17, 2020 by M. Williams