The G1 Quarry Conundrum

[Thanos5150]

The G1 quarry is located south of the G2 causeway which as can be see below respects the G2 causeway despite the fact it would not supposedly have been built until the reign of Khafre:  

Quoting Colin Reader (Khufu Knew the Sphinx):

Quote

Under the conventional sequence of development, "Khafre's" causeway (and the Sphinx), were undeveloped at the time of Khufu's quarrying. If this sequence is correct, why should the extent of the quarrying have been limited by a feature (the causeway) that was not developed until sometime after Khufu's reign? The conventional sequence of development requires us to accept that Khufu's workmen went to the trouble of opening up a second quarry to the south of the causeway, rather than remove a linear body of rock which, at the time, served no apparent purpose. The common alignment of the causeway and the southern Sphinx exposure indicates that, like the excavation of the Sphinx and the construction of the Sphinx temple, the alignment of "Khafre's" causeway was established some time before the construction of Khufu's mortuary complex. Under this revised sequence of development, interpretation of the spatial relationship between the causeway and Khufu's quarries becomes quite straightforward - with the causeway limiting the extent of the later quarrying works.

I would add to this that if Khufu supposedly had a clean slate when he came to the Giza plateau (which there is evidence to suggest he did not), not only could he have built his pyramid anywhere he liked, he could have also quarried anywhere he liked with the logical choice being the location of G2:

Except for the western and eastern cemeteries, it was closer than the site he choose with the added benefit of allowing for transport along mostly level ground if not potentially slightly downhill. Instead, however, he choose an area over 1/2 mile away which only got farther as the project went on which was also downhill from G1 meaning he would have to move blocks uphill to the G1 site. All of which respected a causeway that supposedly did not exist until some time later.

Therefore we are left with the question of not only why did Khufu's quarry respect a causeway that was supposedly not there, but also why did he also forgo a more suitable quarry located where G2 supposedly would eventually be if there was nothing already there and/or no intention of building another pyramid at the site? The leads us to yet another question in that for reasons unknown, and despite being active at the very least in the completion of the G1 complex, why did Khufu's predecessor Djedefre choose not to build his pyramid at Giza, with the G2 area again being the logical choice, but rather several miles away at the early Dynastic site of Abu Roash? 

We are all familiar with the arguments that the Sphinx predates the 4th Dynasty which the evidence also shows the Valley Temple was built before the Sphinx Temple with the latter probably having been built from the Member II blocks taken from the Sphinx enclosure suggesting that the Valley Temple predates both (with the exception at the very least of the yardang that makes up the Sphinx's head). Of particular note is that the Valley Temple had been completed for a long enough period of time that part of its northern wall was removed and recycled to form part of the "new" Sphinx Temple southern wall. It makes little sense in the span of a single pharaoh they would complete one temple only to pillage a section of it to use in a "new" temple built right next to it. The limestone component of the Valley Temple is built of a unique megalithic style that is mirrored by the lower half of the G2 Mortuary Temple (and also the lower part of the G3 Mortuary Temple), a structure that was clearly built in two phases:

 

 

Which the causeway leads from one megalithic structure to the other:

 

Given the massive size of these blocks, and the fact they are completely gone from Khufu's mortuary temple, this implies Khufu's temple was not built from the same style of megalithic blocks. 

Despite the implication there was, though I cannot find any evidence as of yet to include a component of G2 itself in this group, at the very least- while the story goes that Khufu built G1 then Khafre built G2, its causeway, the Valley Temple, the Sphinx and Sphinx Temple, and the harbor leading to the Valley Temple-there is evidence to suggest this in fact may have not been the case with at the very least the VT (megalithic limestone component), causeway, Mortuary Temple, and some form of the Sphinx (which I taken up the argument was originally Anubis) attributed to Khafre having been already in existence hence why Khufu quarried around them.  

Edited July 26, 2020 by Thanos5150

[seasmith]

23 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

The G1 quarry is located south of the G2 causeway which as can be see below respects the G2 causeway despite the fact it would not supposedly have been built until the reign of Khafre:  

Quoting Colin Reader (Khufu Knew the Sphinx):

I would add to this that if Khufu supposedly had a clean slate when he came to the Giza plateau (which there is evidence to suggest he did not), not only could he have built his pyramid anywhere he liked, he could have also quarried anywhere he liked with the logical choice being the location of G2:

Except for the western and eastern cemeteries, it was closer than the site he choose with the added benefit of allowing for transport along mostly level ground if not potentially slightly downhill. Instead, however, he choose an area over 1/2 mile away which only got farther as the project went on which was also downhill from G1 meaning he would have to move blocks uphill to the G1 site. All of which respected a causeway that supposedly did not exist until some time later.

Therefore we are left with the question of not only why did Khufu's quarry respect a causeway that was supposedly not there, but also why did he also forgo a more suitable quarry located where G2 supposedly would eventually be if there was nothing already there and/or no intention of building another pyramid at the site? The leads us to yet another question in that for reasons unknown, and despite being active at the very least in the completion of the G1 complex, why did Khufu's predecessor Djedefre choose not to build his pyramid at Giza, with the G2 area again being the logical choice, but rather several miles away at the early Dynastic site of Abu Roash? 

We are all familiar with the arguments that the Sphinx predates the 4th Dynasty which the evidence also shows the Valley Temple was built before the Sphinx Temple with the latter probably having been built from the Member II blocks taken from the Sphinx enclosure suggesting that the Valley Temple predates both (with the exception at the very least of the yardang that makes up the Sphinx's head). Of particular note is that the Valley Temple had been completed for a long enough period of time that part of its northern wall was removed and recycled to form part of the "new" Sphinx Temple southern wall. It makes little sense in the span of a single pharaoh they would complete one temple only to pillage a section of it to use in a "new" temple built right next to it. The limestone component of the Valley Temple is built of a unique megalithic style that is mirrored by the lower half of the G2 Mortuary Temple (and also the lower part of the G3 Mortuary Temple), a structure that was clearly built in two phases:

 

 

Which the causeway leads from one megalithic structure to the other:

 

Given the massive size of these blocks, and the fact they are completely gone from Khufu's mortuary temple, this implies Khufu's temple was not built from the same style of megalithic blocks. 

Despite the implication there was, though I cannot find any evidence as of yet to include a component of G2 itself in this group, at the very least- while the story goes that Khufu built G1 then Khafre built G2, its causeway, the Valley Temple, the Sphinx and Sphinx Temple, and the harbor leading to the Valley Temple-there is evidence to suggest this in fact may have not been the case with at the very least the VT (megalithic limestone component), causeway, Mortuary Temple, and some form of the Sphinx (which I taken up the argument was originally Anubis) attributed to Khafre having been already in existence hence why Khufu quarried around them.  

>>>

 

 

      What is reckoned to be the oldest man-made feature of the Plateau ?

Are there any natural springs or caverns ? The larger complex seems to have been in planning for a very long time 

...

 

 

[Thanos5150]

19 minutes ago, seasmith said:

What is reckoned to be the oldest man-made feature of the Plateau ?

Hello Seasmith. 

The oldest in proximity to the plateau would be the 1st-3rd Dynasty mastabas/tombs found in the South Field, notably the large palace facade 1st Dynasty mastaba V:

Also: On the Early History of Giza: The “Lost” Wadi Cemetery (Giza Archives Gleanings: III). p116:

Quote

If Reisner is correct, and the evidence is not simply indicative of a natural process of wadi erosion, we may note two important features here: first, the existence of the Wadi cemetery prior to Khufu's better known Western Cemetery constructions, and second, the presence of pre-Khufu tombs up on the plateau proper, that were removed for Khufu's ambitious construction project. The massive core of mastaba G 2000(=Lespius 23) occupies an area of roughly 100 x 45 meters. This footprint may already have been filled with minor mastabas when Khufu, his son, or whoever built G 2000, selected the area in the Fourth Dynasty.

Reisner believed the proof for his contentions lay in the presence of small mud brick and fieldstone mastabas that survived the Old Kingdom up on the plateau proper, which are visable in an early (1904) image in fig 14. These tombs remained intact because they did not obstruct anyone's later construction plans; otherwise they too would have been removed and ended up dismantled remains thrown northwards over the already existing Wadi Cemetery below. The later Third of early Fourth Dynasty (reign) of Sneferu) may thus have been a time when Giza was occupied and already in use as a Memphite necropolis of secondary status to Saqqara, Medidum, and/or Dahshur. Perhaps we should add portions of the Western Cemetery to the list of other known structures predating Khufu.

Quoting myself commenting on this quote:

Quote

 

A bit of a head scratcher to think the Wadi Cemetery and whatever was cleared away from the Western Cemetery dated to even the early reign of Sneferu and not distinctly the 3rd Dynasty and older. This is what is seen in the Southern Cemetery and one would think if these were built at any point in the reign of Sneferu, Khufu's father, they would not be unceremoniously leveled and/or buried by his own son as some of those people and/or relatives would have still been alive and serving under Khufu. Not impossible, or without (later) examples of the very same, but all things considered a 3rd Dynasty and earlier provenance seems likely. Sneferu had no claim to Giza and his subject buried elsewhere even at the beginnings of his reign.

An interesting paper regarding pre-4th Dynasty activity at/near Giza (Southern Cemetery):
"Covington’s Tomb” and Related Early Monuments at Giza

At least one of these tombs is noted for its palace facade architecture. 

As an aside to the Wadi Cemetery, none of these are noted to belong to the early 4th Dynasty, but rather the 3rd and before (some after the 4th). 

The author says: 

Quote

The last word should be given to Petrie: “It is a new view of Gizeh to see that it did not become occupied first by the Pyramid kings, but that it had a continuous history as a cemetery from the beginning of the 1st Dynasty" 40

Gizeh and Rifeh

Beginning P2 "1st Dynasty. Gizeh". Petrie speaks at length of a large 1st Dynasty "panelled" (palace facade) mastaba located "...in the plain about a mile and a half SSE. of the Great Pyramid". One thing that strikes me right away, if we recall earlier in the thread, I noted that many of the 1st Dynasty palace facade mastabas at Saqqara suffered extensively from fire. Petrie notes this tomb also suffered the same fate, to the point of verification in some areas, though unlike those at Saqqara apparently was not restored in the decades after. 

He says of this mastaba (unaware fully at the time of the great mastabas at Saqqara):

Quote

The panelled brickwork is of the same plan as that of the tomb of the queen of Mena [Niethhotep] at Naqada, and the great mastaba on the top of the hill at Gizeh shown in P1. VII. The faces of the brickwork were all coated with white plaster, and the floors of the bays likewise whited.

He continues to note the lines of surrounding subsidiary graves common at other 1st Dynasty royal sites. He continues on P7 with "The IInd and IIrd Dynasties at Gizeh" which would be the Southern Cemetery.

It has also been suggested a few of the Eastern Cemetery tombs date to the 3rd Dynasty. The tombs of Khentkawes and Kai have also been argued to predate the 4th Dynasty and of course the South Field has tombs dating from the 1st-3rd (and later).

 

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Thanos5150

[seasmith]

Geomorphological Aspects at the Giza Plateau in Egypt

during the Age of Pyramid Building

 

re Water sources at the Giza Plateau ~ 5-6 kya, I suspect that given the geology of that special area, there were perhaps subterranean springs or upwellings that are no longer obvious today. We know the significance  the AEs placed on these type water sources (and in Dilmun mastabas fields as well) with their Osireons, reflecting pools and the like; and the sacred nature attributed to them.

The Giza Plateau is geographically noteworthy in that is the remains of an Eocene era reef, shore and lagoon complex; a limestone configuration that is know for artesian wells and cenotes around the world today.

 

"" 

I．Introduction

　The Giza Plateau is located on the west bank of

the river Nile（ Fig. 1）, approximately 12 km to the

southwest of central Cairo, where the three large

pyramids, Great Sphinx, temples, and mastabas1）

were built during the Old Kingdom （2575–2134

BCE2））. The plateau during this period was an

area with an abundance of lush vegetation which

was remarkably different from today’s landscape.

King Khufu, his second reigning son Khafre, and

Menkaure each built three pyramids （one for

each） for their tombs. Constructing these megalithic

structures were huge architectural landscape

projects. As the Giza plateau was arguably

one of the largest limestone quarries in the ancient

world, the local geology and geomorphology

affected the overall framework and design of the

site. Studies by Aigner （1982） and Lehner and

Wetterstrom （2007） revealed a geographical history

of Giza Plateau. Around 50 million years ago

（the Eocene, a pre-existing shallow sea retreated

to leave an embankment that became the northwest

part of the Giza Plateau. ""

 

A nice cross-sectional view of the complex is also provided in the link below:

 

https://www.academia.edu/1479874/Geomorphological_Aspects_at_the_Giza_Plateau_in_Egypt_during_the_Age_of_Pyramid_Building

Yukinori KAWAE＊ and Hiroyuki KAMEI＊＊

[Wepwawet]

6 hours ago, seasmith said:

We know the significance  the AEs placed on these type water sources (and in Dilmun mastabas fields as well) with their Osireons, reflecting pools and the like; and the sacred nature attributed to them.

"Osireons" in plural ? There may have been two Serapeums, but there is only one Osireon, at Abydos.

"Reflecting pools"  Are there any examples of these, either a photo of an actual one, or even what sign is used. There are signs for pools, though these are water features with vegetation, not quite the thing for reflecting stars. There are signs for canals, irrigation ditches, wells and lakes. There is the general sign for water or liquid per se, and one to represent "N", but I cannot find any reference for something physical or in writing to indicate they had "reflecting pools". Where does this term come from in regard to Ancient Egypt.

Edited July 29, 2020 by Wepwawet

[seasmith]

2 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

"Osireons" in plural ? There may have been two Serapeums, but there is only one Osireon, at Abydos.

"Reflecting pools"  Are there any examples of these, either a photo of an actual one, or even what sign is used. There are signs for pools, though these are water features with vegetation, not quite the thing for reflecting stars. There are signs for canals, irrigation ditches, wells and lakes. There is the general sign for water or liquid per se, and one to represent "N", but I cannot find any reference for something physical or in writing to indicate they had "reflecting pools". Where does this term come from in regard to Ancient Egypt.

 

 

re Geology:

https://www.academia.edu/43727596/The_Subterranean_Complex_of_Senwosret_III_at_Abydos_A_laymans_guide

 

Wep wa wet,
An "Osireon"  (without the 's',  thank you very much for the correction, is a rather later feature in AE temple design).
Are you familiar with the vast Dilmun mastaba 'grave yards', and the ancient upwelling fresh water sources there, still present in modern times ?

 

Ancient Greeks, and others, also had  deities responsible for Water coming from the Ground.

 

 

• One shouldn't get hung up on solely  "AE" "terms", when looking back from a larger perspective ...

[Hanslune]

7 minutes ago, seasmith said:

Are you familiar with the vast Dilmun mastaba 'grave yards', and the ancient upwelling fresh water sources there, still present in modern times ?

Do you mean the ones in Bahrain? If so yes i use to live among them.

[jaylemurph]

31 minutes ago, seasmith said:

One shouldn't get hung up on solely  "AE" "terms", when looking back from a larger perspective ...

What you’re really saying is one shouldn’t get hung up on historical accuracy when making an historical point. 

...maybe not the most thought-out historiographic dictum. 

—Jaylemurph 

[cladking]

31 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

What you’re really saying is one shouldn’t get hung up on historical accuracy when making an historical point. 

...maybe not the most thought-out historiographic dictum. 

 

Maybe he means no matter how many gods you believe in or how hard you practice magic you still always have to obey the laws of nature.   

When Petrie said there was water erosion in canals leading away from the pyramid we  can be sure it wasn't caused by beliefs, terms, or incantations.

Quote

From this remarkable forking, it [p. 50] is evident that the trench cannot have been made with any ideas of sighting along it, or of its marking out a direction or azimuth; and, starting as it does, from the basalt pavement (or from any building which stood there), and running with a steady fall to the nearest point of the cliff edge, it seems exactly as if intended for a drain; the more so as there is plainly a good deal of water-weanng at a point where it falls sharply, at its enlargement. The forking of the inner end is not cut in the rock, but in a large block of limestone.

http://www.ronaldbirdsall.com/gizeh/petrie/index.htm

[seasmith]

   59 minutes ago,  seasmith said: 

One shouldn't get hung up on solely  "AE" "terms", when looking back from a larger perspective ...

47 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

What you’re really saying is one shouldn’t get hung up on historical accuracy when making an historical point. 

...

—Jaylemurph 

 

No, and Thank You for the comment Jeylemurph.  This thread, judging by the OP title, is referring to a 'geological perspective' of the Giza Plateau,
hence the larger perspective. 

Please forgive me if I've misread the OP.

 

The G1 Quarry Conundrum

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by seasmith
typo

[Hanslune]

19 minutes ago, cladking said:

Maybe he means no matter how many gods you believe in or how hard you practice magic you still always have to obey the laws of nature.   

When Petrie said there was water erosion in canals leading away from the pyramid we  can be sure it wasn't caused by beliefs, terms, or incantations.

http://www.ronaldbirdsall.com/gizeh/petrie/index.htm

..and when you say you believe you know what the AE were actually thinking and what they were saying, and can translate a language you cannot read we know that you are wrong due to the facts and evidence.

[Wepwawet]

6 hours ago, seasmith said:

 

 

re Geology:

https://www.academia.edu/43727596/The_Subterranean_Complex_of_Senwosret_III_at_Abydos_A_laymans_guide

 

Wep wa wet,
An "Osireon"  (without the 's',  thank you very much for the correction, is a rather later feature in AE temple design).
Are you familiar with the vast Dilmun mastaba 'grave yards', and the ancient upwelling fresh water sources there, still present in modern times ?

 

Ancient Greeks, and others, also had  deities responsible for Water coming from the Ground.

 

 

• One shouldn't get hung up on solely  "AE" "terms", when looking back from a larger perspective ...

Not sure why you link to one of "waggy's guides", which is, as all of them, excellent. As you don't make a quote to illustrate a point I presume you are referencing it being posited that chamber C and D form a type of proto "Osiris tomb" along with one at Dashur. This is conjecture, and I don't really see it. Perhaps it is something that leads eventually to the Osireion, but given the gap between Senwosret III and Seti I, with no other similar structures in between, there probably isn't a connection. Fortunately for me I read his guides as soon as they are published, and had already read this one, but anybody reading your post would have to read the entire guide to know what point you, presumably, are making, a little unfair on them perhaps, so I'll say that they need to read page 31, and the entire guide as well of course.

Your reply does not address the issue of "reflecting pools". Water coming from the ground does not one of these pools make, nor explain why I can find no reference to them in the published works I have access to, or even an online search, which throws up one piece of nonsense about the junction of the descending and ascending passages in G1.

Edited July 30, 2020 by Wepwawet

[Oniomancer]

(Mentioning water and Giza together in the same post on UM)

[Thanos5150]

7 hours ago, Wepwawet said:

Not sure why you link to one of "waggy's guides", which is, as all of them, excellent. As you don't make a quote to illustrate a point I presume you are referencing it being posited that chamber C and D form a type of proto "Osiris tomb" along with one at Dashur. This is conjecture, and I don't really see it. Perhaps it is something that leads eventually to the Osireion, but given the gap between Senwosret III and Seti I, with no other similar structures in between, there probably isn't a connection. Fortunately for me I read his guides as soon as they are published, and had already read this one, but anybody reading your post would have to read the entire guide to know what point you, presumably, are making, a little unfair on them perhaps, so I'll say that they need to read page 31, and the entire guide as well of course.

Your reply does not address the issue of "reflecting pools". Water coming from the ground does not one of these pools make, nor explain why I can find no reference to them in the published works I have access to, or even an online search, which throws up one piece of nonsense about the junction of the descending and ascending passages in G1.

Sheyoot-you really got this feller cornered now. The mobs a circlin' Wepwawet-whatcha all gonna do to this one? Hang 'im? Draw and quarter 'im? He's new around these parts-maybe just a tar and featherin as a warnin? Careful now though -y'all got that freakshow Cladking feller come cattin' around too. Y'all don't get on that boy in a jiffy he gonna make a mess 'o this place right quick. 

[Wepwawet]

50 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

Sheyoot-you really got this feller cornered now. The mobs a circlin' Wepwawet-whatcha all gonna do to this one? Hang 'im? Draw and quarter 'im? He's new around these parts-maybe just a tar and featherin as a warnin? Careful now though -y'all got that freakshow Cladking feller come cattin' around too. Y'all don't get on that boy in a jiffy he gonna make a mess 'o this place right quick. 

You seem to have mistaken me for something I am not. I'm here to discuss Ancient Egypt, not play shallow ego games.

[Thanos5150]

1 hour ago, Wepwawet said:

You seem to have mistaken me for something I am not. I'm here to discuss Ancient Egypt, not play shallow ego games.

Uhh....I have no idea how what I said could be construed as having anything to do with "shallow ego games", but despite the contradiction that you would need to say such a thing I'll take your word for it.  

[jaylemurph]

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

Uhh....I have no idea how what I said could be construed as having anything to do with "shallow ego games", but despite the contradiction that you would need to say such a thing I'll take your word for it.  

So you don’t find quoting yourself at length, against the TOS, even a little egotistical? You’d be in the minority, then. 

—Jaylemurph 

[Thanos5150]

1 hour ago, jaylemurph said:

So you don’t find quoting yourself at length, against the TOS, even a little egotistical? You’d be in the minority, then. 

—Jaylemurph 

I am quoting myself from another website as appropriate, but how TF is it "egotistical" to not want to type the same thing over again just so I don't have to offend your delicate sensibilities to note that I am quoting myself? There is definitely some ego problems here but it ain't me. 

[jaylemurph]

46 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

I am quoting myself from another website as appropriate, but how TF is it "egotistical" to not want to type the same thing over again just so I don't have to offend your delicate sensibilities to note that I am quoting myself? There is definitely some ego problems here but it ain't me. 

Because you could quote two lines and provide a link to the rest of the rant rather than taking pages and posting the whole lot here.

As I say, you already agreed to do so in accepting the TOS. Ignoring rules you don't happen to like is also pretty egotistical.

--Jaylemurph

[Thanos5150]

10 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

Because you could quote two lines and provide a link to the rest of the rant rather than taking pages and posting the whole lot here.

As I say, you already agreed to do so in accepting the TOS. Ignoring rules you don't happen to like is also pretty egotistical.

--Jaylemurph

Ah- now we are calling sourced information "rants" are we? Probably hard for you to tell considering you didn't even read and/or understand it. And now my "ego" is such I "ignore rules I don't like". Lol-WTF? I'd recommend laying off the crack pipe for a while there Bluto and invest in some Tucks to help with that mystery butt hurt of yours.  

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Thanos5150

[seasmith]

8 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

Because you could quote two lines and provide a link to the rest of the rant rather than taking pages and posting the whole lot here.

--Jaylemurph

 

 

    You apparently don't read the  links anyway.

You're not just one of those 'serial posters',
are you ?

[jaylemurph]

2 hours ago, seasmith said:

 

 

    You apparently don't read the  links anyway.

You're not just one of those 'serial posters',
are you ?

No, I’m the Short-term, interim Speaker on behalf of the real powers that be here, of whom it is taboo to speak with anyone who decides they know more than historians. 

But people here know that. 

—Jaylemurph

[jaylemurph]

2 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

Ah- now we are calling sourced information "rants" are we? Probably hard for you to tell considering you didn't even read and/or understand it. And now my "ego" is such I "ignore rules I don't like". Lol-WTF? I'd recommend laying off the crack pipe for a while there Bluto and invest in some Tucks to help with that mystery butt hurt of yours.  

 

Yep. Unpublished/self-published dreck is imminently suitable to be referred to as a rant.

You might want to read those TOS of service you agreed to without reading. It’s a basic adulting to know your responsibilities. You might have signed away something significant. 

—Jaylemurph 

[seasmith]

8 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

2 hours ago, seasmith said:

 

 

    You apparently don't read the  links anyway.

You're not just one of those 'serial posters',
are you ?

No, I’m the Short-term, interim Speaker on behalf of the real powers that be here, of whom it is taboo to speak with anyone who decides they know more than historians. 

But people here know that. 

—Jaylemurph

 

>>>

 

Oooh... 

E
G
O

 

But again, thank you for your revealing comments.

See  you  Jayle

 

 

[jaylemurph]

18 minutes ago, seasmith said:

>>>

 

Oooh... 

E
G
O

 

But again, thank you for your revealing comments.

See  you  Jayle

 

 

No ego involved. I didn’t /choose/ to be the mouthpiece of the gods. It was the result of a series of unlikely coincidences, poor choices, divine foresight, and ham dinners.

—Jaylemurph