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

If Pyramids not tombs where are the pharaohs?


Thanos5150

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, cladking said:

  Even with a chimney an oven gets hot.  

Another of your brilliant observations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Oniomancer said:

1. light fire

2. go outside

3. Profit?

No!

The fire will start going cold before you've burned a couple cubic feet of fuel.  You need oxygen and the fire needs oxygen.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, cladking said:

No!

The fire will start going cold before you've burned a couple cubic feet of fuel.  You need oxygen and the fire needs oxygen.  

Be still you inane drone. Stop derailing the thread with stupid ****.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cladking said:

Physics and math are not "handwaving".  

Perhaps the later little piles of rubble that were probably used as tombs had air channels through them allowing fires inside. Mostly you just need an air source and a chimney.   Maybe the papyri saying they made bonfires inside the pyramids are fiction.  

There are a lot of maybes here but the fact is you can not build a fire to roast mummies for their gold inside most tombs.  And if you could you might destroy any gems and you might miss the silver.  My guess is just as the referent for "pyramids" is being misinterpreted the means some robbers used in some instances is being misinterpreted.  

And still there is no evidence any great pyramid was used or intended as a tomb. 

I'd like to see that physics and math (including how long it takes for a mummy to burn and how hot these fires would get.)  Also we're not talking "most tombs"...the manuscripts specifically address looting pyramids.

Now... these of course would be smaller than the GP, which rather undoes your claim.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Kenemet said:

I'd like to see that physics and math (including how long it takes for a mummy to burn and how hot these fires would get.)  Also we're not talking "most tombs"...the manuscripts specifically address looting pyramids.

Now... these of course would be smaller than the GP, which rather undoes your claim.

It's easy enough to calculate. A cubic foot of air weighs .08 lbs and 1/5 of it is oxygen. 

It does not specify what pyramids and there is still no evidence that great pyramids were used as tombs. Even if they had been used as tombs nobody ever melted the gold in a king's mummy inside of them.  These papyri constitute very very weak evidence that the body of any king was scattered as dust inside his pyramid.  We need to keep looking for them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2024 at 2:31 PM, Kenemet said:

Actual records of the trials of grave robbers from ancient Egypt show that they did burn mummies to retrieve the gold and gems and that they didn't bother taking the bodies out of the tombs first.  https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1095/tomb-robbing-in-ancient-egypt/  (one article out of many.  There's several trial transcripts that are along the same time. 

Astounding. No, that's not what it says. 

We opened their sarcophagi and their coffins, and found the noble mummy of the king equipped with a sword. There were a large number of amulets and jewels of gold on his neck and he wore a headpiece of gold. The noble mummy of the king was completely covered in gold and his coffins were decorated with gold and with silver inside and out and inlaid with precious stones. We collected the gold that we found on the mummy of the god including the amulets and jewels which were on his neck. We set fire to their coffins.

It doesn't say they burned the body to retrieve the loot it says they collected the gold, amulets, and jewels off the body and then set the coffin on fire. You said there are many other articles and several trial transcripts of the same-so please provide one that actually supports your claim. And if this were such a common thing explain how it is we have all of these robbed tombs with no burned mummies?  

Quote

Note that the papyri mentions kings (in this article, one specific king) being found in pyramids.

Once again, no this is not what it says, it says "pyramid tomb", which as already discussed with you towards the beginning of this thread are not actual "pyramids". HERE.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Kenemet said:

I'd like to see that physics and math (including how long it takes for a mummy to burn and how hot these fires would get.)  Also we're not talking "most tombs"...the manuscripts specifically address looting pyramids.

Again, No they don't. You are not being honest when you say this as you well know the "pyramid tombs" of the NK and pyramids are not one and the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2024 at 10:29 AM, Kenemet said:

More likely IMHO (taking information from the trial manuscripts) the robbers simply burned the bodies to get at the gold (which would have been somewhat melted into "obscure gold bits" by the fire) and there aren't any mummies or treasures to be had.

The one you claimed said this did not so please provide an actual trial manuscript that says they burned the bodies to get at the gold. 

And burning mummies would melt gold into "obscure bits...? Good grief. The melting point of gold is 1,948 degrees. There is no amount of mummy burning that is going to do anything to the gold. It required a process and effort to create heat high enough to smelt any metal let alone gold:

Smelting-of-Gold.jpg?w=800&ssl=1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2024 at 8:29 AM, Thanos5150 said:

Astounding. No, that's not what it says. 

We opened their sarcophagi and their coffins, and found the noble mummy of the king equipped with a sword. There were a large number of amulets and jewels of gold on his neck and he wore a headpiece of gold. The noble mummy of the king was completely covered in gold and his coffins were decorated with gold and with silver inside and out and inlaid with precious stones. We collected the gold that we found on the mummy of the god including the amulets and jewels which were on his neck. We set fire to their coffins.

It doesn't say they burned the body to retrieve the loot it says they collected the gold, amulets, and jewels off the body and then set the coffin on fire. You said there are many other articles and several trial transcripts of the same-so please provide one that actually supports your claim. And if this were such a common thing explain how it is we have all of these robbed tombs with no burned mummies?  

Once again, no this is not what it says, it says "pyramid tomb", which as already discussed with you towards the beginning of this thread are not actual "pyramids". HERE.

Previously Kenemet said this of another source: 

Here (from archive.org) is the text of the tomb robbery manuscripts (multiple) and a search for "fire" will turn up references to them burning the mummies in the tomb and none to taking them apart and retrieving resins and unguents: https://archive.org/stream/THEGREATTOMBROBBERIESOFTHETWENTIETHEGYPTIANDYNASTY/THE GREAT TOMB ROBBERIES - OF T H E-TWENTIETH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY_djvu.txt

Ok, so if we search for fire and read it it will give us references to burning mummies in the tomb. Fair enough-let's see what it says. 

[We] found the burial-place of the royal wifeNub- 
khaas his royal wife in the place.. .its (2) side. 3 It was protected and ••••ed 
with plaster and covered with.. . 4 We forced it open 5 also and we found her 
(3) lying there likewise. We opened their outer coffins and their inner 
coffins in which they lay. We found this (4) noble mummy of this king 
equipped like a warrior (?). 6 A large number of sacred-eye amulets and 
ornaments of gold was at his neck, (5) and his headpiece 7 of gold was on 
him. The noble mummy of this king was all covered with gold, and his 
inner coffins (6) were bedizened 8 with gold and silver inside and outside 
with inlays 9 of all kinds of precious stones. We appropriated 10 the gold 
(7) which we found on this noble mummy of this god and on 11 his eye 
amulets and his ornaments which were at his neck and on the inner coffins 

in which he lay. (8) [We] found the royal wife just (?) likewise 12 
and we appropriated all that we found on her too. We set fire to their 
inner (9) coffins. We stole their outfit which we found with them, con¬ 
sisting of objects of gold, silver, and bronze, and divided (10) them up 
among ourselves. We made this gold which we found on these two gods 
and on their mummies, their eye amulets and ornaments and their inner 
coffins into eight [parts ].

Huh. So no burned mummies with this one. Setting fire to the coffin is the last thing they do which we need to keep in mind the coffins have gold on them as well which we will see is the only thing they are actually burning.   

We opened it, and we brought out his inner coffins, 
and we took his mummy, (5) and left it there in a comer [sp] in his tomb. 
We took his inner coffins to this boat, along with (6) the rest, to the 
Island (?) of Amenope. 6 We set fire to them in the night. And we made 
away with 7 the gold which we found (7) on them, and 4 kite of gold fell to 
the lot 8 of each man: the five («'c) men, each one 4, total 1 deben and 6 kite 
of gold. 

We went once again (8) to the quarter of Nefer-— [life, prosperity] 
and health 9 and entered a tomb. We opened it and brought out an inner 
coffin (9) from it, and up to its neck was covered with gold. We stripped 10 
it <with) a chisel (?) ri of copper. We took it (10) [and we] set fire to it 
there in the tomb. And we found a laver of bronze and two nw- vases of 
bronze.

Hmm. Nope. Not here either. They remove the coffin and take it to a boat and light it on fire later, but left the mummy in the tomb. They come back again to another tomb and first they say they brought out the inner coffin then took it again [back inside?] and set fire to it in the tomb. Regardless, its just the coffin, not the bodies they light on fire. 

We brought away the (9) silver and the gold which we 
had found there in the tombs and the offering vessel which we had found 
in them, carrying 15 (10) my chisels of copper in our hands and opening 15 
the outer coffins with the chisels of copper which were in our hands. And 
we (11) brought away the inner coffins on which there was gold, and we 
broke them up and set fire to them by night inside the tombs. (12) And 
we made away with the gold and silver which we found on them and took 
it and divided it up among ourselves. 

That sucks. They don't even mention mummies in this one. But instead, again, its the inner coffin they light on fire. It is interesting though because once again they say they "brought away" the inner coffin implying or in some cases stating it was removed from the tomb, then apparently brought back later to the tomb just to set on fire. In this case they even broke up the coffins beforehand. They don't have to bring it back and they clearly remove most of the gold without lighting them on fire which if anything after bringing it back and burning it they are only able to get out the last few bits and pieces.

Yeah, there is a practical side to burning it if needed, but bringing it back and burning it in the tomb is not necessary which implies the actual purpose of this was superstition to ensure the dead didn't come back and find them take retribution. Without a coffin the dead can't get past their tombs from the afterlife.      

Now after some days the priest Hori and the priest Tuti went by 
night and entered the House of Gold and stripped off a piece of gold 
<from> the door-jambs. But we seized them and handed them over to the 
scribe Sedi. (17) He took them (sic) and had it melted down, and he gave 
it to Peminu. (18) He said, The priest Tuti and the priest Nesamun went 
to the Doors of Heaven, 17 and they set fire to it and removed its gold and 
stole it along with the scribe Sedi. 

Not a tomb robbing but relevant as they tell us like the coffins to remove the gold from the wood doors they light it on fire. 

So lets recap:

"More likely IMHO (taking information from the trial manuscripts) the robbers simply burned the bodies to get at the gold (which would have been somewhat melted into "obscure gold bits" by the fire) and there aren't any mummies or treasures to be had."

And:

"Actual records of the trials of grave robbers from ancient Egypt show that they did burn mummies to retrieve the gold and gems and that they didn't bother taking the bodies out of the tombs first.  https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1095/tomb-robbing-in-ancient-egypt/  (one article out of many.  There's several trial transcripts that are along the same time."

And:

"Here (from archive.org) is the text of the tomb robbery manuscripts (multiple) and a search for "fire" will turn up references to them burning the mummies in the tomb and none to taking them apart and retrieving resins and unguents: https://archive.org/stream/THEGREATTOMBROBBERIESOFTHETWENTIETHEGYPTIANDYNASTY/THE GREAT TOMB ROBBERIES - OF T H E-TWENTIETH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY_djvu.txt"

And yet between both of the sources provided in reality when we read it for ourselves there is not one instance that tells us they burned the bodies for any reason let alone to remove the gold. No, its just the coffins they burn. 

This is yet another claim of "fact" uncritically repeated from others that the reason there are no bodies in pyramids is because the robbers burnt the bodies to get to the treasure. And yet not only is there no systematic archeological evidence of this if only to the contrary, for every robbed noble tomb we'd expect to find burnt mummies which is obviously not the case, this is not what they actually say either and instead are just burning the inner wood coffins which even then appears to have been for another reason than just getting the gold if at all in some cases.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/19/2024 at 5:08 PM, Thanos5150 said:

Previously Kenemet said this of another source: 

Here (from archive.org) is the text of the tomb robbery manuscripts (multiple) and a search for "fire" will turn up references to them burning the mummies in the tomb and none to taking them apart and retrieving resins and unguents: https://archive.org/stream/THEGREATTOMBROBBERIESOFTHETWENTIETHEGYPTIANDYNASTY/THE GREAT TOMB ROBBERIES - OF T H E-TWENTIETH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY_djvu.txt

 

It was Amenenhat I was thinking of (https://hannahfielding.net/tomb-robbing/#:~:text=The men who built the,tomb%2C they burned Amenemhat's mummy.) ... and I'll find a scholarly reference tomorrow.  This'll do as a placeholder.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

It was Amenenhat I was thinking of (https://hannahfielding.net/tomb-robbing/#:~:text=The men who built the,tomb%2C they burned Amenemhat's mummy.) ... and I'll find a scholarly reference tomorrow.  This'll do as a placeholder.

I remember seeing a documentary about the robbery of an MK pyramid, probably by NatGeo, about 20 years ago. Don't remember which king, but I do remember that the inside of the sarcophagus was said to be charred by burning. Had a flick through "Complete Pyramids", but didn't see anything that quite fits, though I don't have the time right now to read through it all word by word.

Edited by Wepwawet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

I remember seeing a documentary about the robbery of an MK pyramid, probably by NatGeo, about 20 years ago. Don't remember which king, but I do remember that the inside of the sarcophagus was said to be charred by burning. Had a flick through "Complete Pyramids", but didn't see anything that quite fits, though I don't have the time right now to read through it all word by word.

Well ...  This wasn't what you were looking for (and is only a couple of years old), but it does go into some detail about the grisly fate of one Amenpanufer (poor chap) who was caught robbing tombs in the NK ...

I couldn't find anything in Compl. Pyr. .... but that doesn't necessarily mean that there's nothing there.

But I have just come across this:

Quote

...  with the pyramid of Teti, the first ruler of the 6th dynasty, we come across evidence of looting involving the use of fire to access precious metals hidden under the wrappings of the mummified king. Under the rubble in the burial chamber the burnt remains of the king's arm and shoulder were discovered. The significance of burning cannot be understated. Intrusive burials generally would not warrant such dedicated attention from thieves and as such the presence of isolated charred human remains should indicate a royal burial.

 

Edited by Windowpane
add another link
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Windowpane said:

Well ...  This wasn't what you were looking for (and is only a couple of years old), but it does go into some detail about the grisly fate of one Amenpanufer (poor chap) who was caught robbing tombs in the NK ...

I couldn't find anything in Compl. Pyr. .... but that doesn't necessarily mean that there's nothing there.

But I have just come across this:

 

I've been looking through Waggy's Guides, but cannot find it as yet. I do remember that the nature of the robbery strongly suggested that some of the builders were also the robbers, no suprise there though, as the burial chamber was very well hidden and they needed to move a huge mega ton block in a tight space. Again, this is not much to go on without knowing the name of the tomb owner, they did give a name in the documentary I'm sure, so it's there somewhere in the literature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Kenemet said:

It was Amenenhat I was thinking of (https://hannahfielding.net/tomb-robbing/#:~:text=The men who built the,tomb%2C they burned Amenemhat's mummy.) ... and I'll find a scholarly reference tomorrow.  This'll do as a placeholder.

You cannot be serious. And again I'd really appreciate if you'd stop purposefully editing my posts that you respond to change their meaning. See HERE.

Again:

So lets recap:

"More likely IMHO (taking information from the trial manuscripts) the robbers simply burned the bodies to get at the gold (which would have been somewhat melted into "obscure gold bits" by the fire) and there aren't any mummies or treasures to be had."

And:

"Actual records of the trials of grave robbers from ancient Egypt show that they did burn mummies to retrieve the gold and gems and that they didn't bother taking the bodies out of the tombs first.  https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1095/tomb-robbing-in-ancient-egypt/  (one article out of many.  There's several trial transcripts that are along the same time."

And:

"Here (from archive.org) is the text of the tomb robbery manuscripts (multiple) and a search for "fire" will turn up references to them burning the mummies in the tomb and none to taking them apart and retrieving resins and unguents: https://archive.org/stream/THEGREATTOMBROBBERIESOFTHETWENTIETHEGYPTIANDYNASTY/THE GREAT TOMB ROBBERIES - OF T H E-TWENTIETH EGYPTIAN DYNASTY_djvu.txt"

And yet between both of the sources provided in reality when we read it for ourselves there is not one instance that tells us they burned the bodies for any reason let alone to remove the gold. No, its just the coffins they burn. 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So you are trying to tell us the reason you got it completely wrong this time is because you were actually "mistaken" and thinking of Amenemhat I...? Wow. We're right here. There is no universe this makes any sense and by your own words is obviously not true. And if it couldn't get any more bizarre you cite "award-winning romance novelist Hannah Fielding"...? Research for her book:

Song-of-the-Nile-300.jpg

Yay-you found someone on the internet who said something. Sweet Christmas-are you f-ing kidding me? Oh, but there's more-she says:

The men who built the pyramid had to enter each day in a blindfold, so that only the pharaoh knew the exact layout. Even then, his tomb was robbed, and the robbers were so unimpressed with the hard work they’d had to put in to find the tomb, they burned Amenemhat’s mummy.

So even according to Fielding, the-source-you-just-cited, they did not burn the mummy to get to the gold, but rather because they were being spiteful for the hard work he put them through to find the tomb. Absolutely astounding. To get yourself out of yet another mess of you making false claims and misrepresenting sources you use another source and then misrepresent that...? 

And I bet even that isn't going to check out as we know this was their motivation to burn the mummy how? Or how about, was there really the remains of a burnt mummy found in the tomb and if so did they actually belong to Amenemhat I or were they from a later intrusive burial? I am sure that scholarly source will be coming any moment now. 

Oh, and let's not forget this nonsense as well HERE and HERE. I really hope readers have been paying attention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Windowpane said:

Well ...  This wasn't what you were looking for (and is only a couple of years old), but it does go into some detail about the grisly fate of one Amenpanufer (poor chap) who was caught robbing tombs in the NK ...

I couldn't find anything in Compl. Pyr. .... but that doesn't necessarily mean that there's nothing there.

But I have just come across this:

 

That matches a lot of what I remembered.   

I wonder when robbers finally entered the GP - if it was still during the time when there were cult priests at the site or if the priests were somehow involved in the robbery or if the robberies were toward the end of the 6th dynasty or even the chaotic First Intermediate Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kenemet said:

That matches a lot of what I remembered.   

I wonder when robbers finally entered the GP - if it was still during the time when there were cult priests at the site or if the priests were somehow involved in the robbery or if the robberies were toward the end of the 6th dynasty or even the chaotic First Intermediate Period.

There is no evidence any great pyramid was intended or used as a tomb.  

There was a burned mummy leg found in the red Pyramid that for many years was believed to be the leg of the king based on little more than the way it was wrapped.  The evidence was reinterpreted a short while back and it is no longer considered to be the "original owner".  

Many believe the probable finder of the "Emerald Tablets of Thot", Al Mamuum, was the first to breach G1 and he reported finding no human body according to most reports.  

No grave goods have been reported in any great pyramids and no physical evidence for a burial.  There apparently are slots for canopic jars in Djoser's Pyramid and, of course, some stone boxes.  It should be noted that no pre-5th dynasty internments have been found with anything in the canopic jars.  These could well be merely ritualistic, symbolic, or religious rather than functional.  With nothing but circumstantial evidence to support the pyramid tomb theory , it's a wonder how tightly it is embraced by the main stream.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cladking said:

There is no evidence any great pyramid was intended or used as a tomb.  

There was a burned mummy leg found in the red Pyramid that for many years was believed to be the leg of the king based on little more than the way it was wrapped.  The evidence was reinterpreted a short while back and it is no longer considered to be the "original owner".  

Many believe the probable finder of the "Emerald Tablets of Thot", Al Mamuum, was the first to breach G1 and he reported finding no human body according to most reports.  

No grave goods have been reported in any great pyramids and no physical evidence for a burial.  There apparently are slots for canopic jars in Djoser's Pyramid and, of course, some stone boxes.  It should be noted that no pre-5th dynasty internments have been found with anything in the canopic jars.  These could well be merely ritualistic, symbolic, or religious rather than functional.  With nothing but circumstantial evidence to support the pyramid tomb theory , it's a wonder how tightly it is embraced by the main stream.  

I don't think there's any evidence for the "Emerald Tablets of Thoth" existing... so I'd doubt that account.

And I believe that people have already listed what's been found in pyramids, including body fragments (and then there's the papyri of the tomb robber trials which (if I'm not mistaken) mention invading pyramids to find the bodies of the kings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Kenemet said:

I don't think there's any evidence for the "Emerald Tablets of Thoth" existing... so I'd doubt that account.

https://sacred-texts.com/alc/emerald.htm

These are very interesting!!!

13 hours ago, Kenemet said:

And I believe that people have already listed what's been found in pyramids, including body fragments (and then there's the papyri of the tomb robber trials which (if I'm not mistaken) mention invading pyramids to find the bodies of the kings.

No parts of kings singed or otherwise have ever been found in any great pyramid.  There is no evidence any robber was known to have robbed any great pyramid of bodies or grave goods.  

The tiny little piles of rubble that we call "pyramids" and constructed long after the great pyramids may well have been used as tombs. Things change.  There is no evidence that supports mainstream opinion that religion, culture, language, and beliefs didn't change after the great pyramids were constructed.  You believe pyramids were tombs and the bodies destroyed but you have no direct evidence, whatsoever.  The builders of the great pyramids never once called any great pyramid a "tomb" nor did they suggest a dead king was in one.  Ignoring what they said doesn't turn a 6 1/2 million ton structure into a tomb and it can't make the Emerald Tablets disappear. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, cladking said:

https://sacred-texts.com/alc/emerald.htm

These are very interesting!!!

No parts of kings singed or otherwise have ever been found in any great pyramid.  There is no evidence any robber was known to have robbed any great pyramid of bodies or grave goods.  

The tiny little piles of rubble that we call "pyramids" and constructed long after the great pyramids may well have been used as tombs. Things change.  There is no evidence that supports mainstream opinion that religion, culture, language, and beliefs didn't change after the great pyramids were constructed.  You believe pyramids were tombs and the bodies destroyed but you have no direct evidence, whatsoever.  The builders of the great pyramids never once called any great pyramid a "tomb" nor did they suggest a dead king was in one.  Ignoring what they said doesn't turn a 6 1/2 million ton structure into a tomb and it can't make the Emerald Tablets disappear. 

The Emerald Tablet is a short hermetic text.

The Emerald Tablets of Thoth are a Theosophical hoax.

Your usual standard of “evidence” rears its brain addled head once again.

Edited by Antigonos
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Antigonos said:

The Emerald Tablets are a hoax invented by a Theosophist.

Quote

A similar account can be found in the Latin text known as Tabula Chemica by Senior Zadith, the latinised name of the alchemist Ibn Umail, in which a stone table rests on the knees of Hermes Trismegistus in the secret chamber of a pyramid. Here, the table is not inscribed with text but with "hieroglyphic" symbols.[17]

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

This is fascinating stuff but if you read nothing but mainstream opinion unsupported by fact or evidence you can't see that everything goes back to the pyramids. If you know beyond certainty that the pyramids were tombs and the kings were all burned you will not see the evidence that does exist.  

It is the very nature of our species to not see what's before our eyes because we are focused only on what we believe.  Egyptologists believe in highly ignorant and superstitious people building tombs and then having robbed them of their grave goods. The lack of technology, bodies, and substantiation is not at all visible.  There is no need to even look for substantiation or dead kings because they already have the answers and the bodies were destroyed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, cladking said:

...

Egyptologists believe in highly ignorant and superstitious people building tombs and then having robbed them of their grave goods. The lack of technology, bodies, and substantiation is not at all visible.  There is no need to even look for substantiation or dead kings because they already have the answers and the bodies were destroyed.  

Excuse you? They were Avant Garde and for a long time the leading superpower setting the standards, there is a lot of technology that can be deduced from what is found like fire to soften up the stone to be quarried, they had drills, that was all high-tech for the time the opposite of lack of technology.

And you can't accuse Egyptologist of not having major disputes about pretty much everything, so your 'mainstream' obviously only means 'where the most outrageous fringe claims have been cut'.

They're also working on building a data base to indentify the mummies but it is really difficult.

With all the spells and prayers on the wall even if the body would have always only been supposed in there for a limited time, which flies in the face of the surrounding mortuary temples which were meant to worship the deceased Pharao (god king, like the Julians later also did) for as long as he was remembered, it was clearly meant as 'machine' to keep the 'spirit' strong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sorry

Edited by MrsGently
internet is messing with me
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MrsGently said:

They were Avant Garde and for a long time the leading superpower setting the standards, there is a lot of technology that can be deduced from what is found like fire to soften up the stone to be quarried, they had drills, that was all high-tech for the time the opposite of lack of technology.

Yet, Nobody has a clue how they lifted 6 1/2 million tons to 120' or made perfect vases out of hard stone.  That they did such things is a simple fact but that they did it with primitive means and the tools are all known is simple nonsense.  Of course having technology thousands of years before their neighbors made them powerful.  But these facts do not say ANYTHING about the nature of this technology or how they were able to invent it without any experimental science and with deep and widespread superstition.  Then they had to somehow manage to eliminate all traces of the technology so we'd be in the dark.  

Fire to soften stone is relatively useless "technology" if fuel for the fires is exceedingly scarce.  There was very little rainfall in Egypt when these so called tombs were being built. It was only about double what it is today which is very arid/ desert like conditions. 

24 minutes ago, MrsGently said:

And you can't accuse Egyptologist of not having major disputes about pretty much everything, so your 'mainstream' obviously only means 'where the most outrageous fringe claims have been cut'.

They do not dispute the underlying assumptions that the pyramids are tombs dragged up ramps by highly superstitious and ignorant people who were just like the authors of the "book of the dead" and Egyptologists.  I believe ALL of these assumptions are false and THIS IS WHY we don't have evidence to support mainstream beliefs and the existing "technology" is wholly unknown.

24 minutes ago, MrsGently said:

They're also working on building a data base to indentify the mummies but it is really difficult.

This is irrelevant since there are no remains from the great pyramids.  They can't find dead kings from great pyramids when no remains exist from the great pyramids other than obviously intrusive burials.

24 minutes ago, MrsGently said:

With all the spells and prayers on the wall even if the body would have always only been supposed in there for a limited time,

There are no inscriptions in any great pyramids.  

24 minutes ago, MrsGently said:

which flies in the face of the surrounding mortuary temples which were meant to worship the deceased Pharao (god king, like the Julians later also did) for as long as he was remembered, it was clearly meant as 'machine' to keep the 'spirit' strong.

Are these the "mortuary temples" on the east sides of the great pyramids connected by a gigantic ramp to a port on the river?  

Are these the mortuary temples that couldn't possibly be infrastructure for construction because superstition was more important than a means to build pyramids?  

There is no evidence any great pyramid was intended or used as a tomb.  Looking for dead kings in the great pyramids is a dead end of biblical proportions. 

Edited by cladking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@cladking so what is your suggestion what they were? Meditation halls? Grain storage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.