Page 28 of 57
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:00 pm
by Minimalist
Beagle wrote:Yeah, and it had cobwebs on it.
You've probably read Colin Readers article on the Sphinx. He makes a very good argument that the causeway at Giza is as old as the Sphinx, meaning that the structure that leads to the pyramid - is older than the pyramid!!
I wonder what it was leading to, if not to Khafres' pyramid?
Perhaps it was still leading to "Khafre's pyramid"....and the whole complex is as old as the sphinx?
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:07 pm
by Beagle
Yeah right.
Even Schoch agrees with the dating of the age of the pyramids as being 4th dynasty, or at least the
outer stones and casing.
But then, FOTG was written before some of these new studies. I wonder what Hancock thinks about it now?
In any event, I've gotten a good taste of GH and if we have another book discussion, I'd like to do one of Schochs' books.
Languages
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:18 pm
by Cognito
What languages do you speak?
Beags, I speak French (school) and Spanish (work), read German (genealogy) and converse in English on occasion (American English, that is). Oh yeah, I can swear a little in Hungarian too, thanks to grandma.
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:29 pm
by Beagle
Very cool Cogs. You ought to be able plead innocent to the cops in most of the world.
I don't know if you've read this book by Hancock but join right in.
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:21 pm
by Minimalist
Let us not forget that the Inventory Stele says that Khufu "restored" part of the complex....not that he built it.
Of course, the Club spits bloody venom about the Inventory Stele...but suppose it is right and the Club is wrong?
One of the few written references to Khufu is contained in the 'inventory stele', discovered at Giza in the 1850s. It commemorates the restoration by Khufu of a small temple near the Pyramid, and indicates that the Sphinx, the Sphinx Temple, and possibly the Great Pyramid itself, were already in existence in Khufu's day. The stele is written in a later style of writing and some Egyptologists initially regarded it as a copy of a 4th dynasty original. Nowadays, however, it is dismissed as a piece of fiction as it contradicts current dogmas.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... yramid.htm
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 10:38 pm
by Beagle
Hmmm....nice link.
You don't hear a lot about the Inventory Stele. In fact I never heard of it until I read FOTG. (I've read too much mainstream stuff). But, If the Stele had said the pyramid of Khufu and the Sphinx were both built at the same time by Cheops, then it would be in every article about Egyptology.
BTW, Schoch theorizes that several pyramids have been built over "existing structures"
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:29 pm
by Minimalist
But, If the Stele had said the pyramid of Khufu and the Sphinx were both built at the same time by Cheops, then it would be in every article about Egyptology.
I couldn't agree more.
Did you reach the part about the attribution of the Osirion to Seti I.
Another fine example of minimal evidence being required for Club-approved theories.
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:29 pm
by Beagle
BTW - there is a school of thought that thinks the Inventory stele was copied much later than the original papyrus it was written on. That would account for the more "modern" language that was used on it.
I've had it - tomorrow.
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:33 pm
by Beagle
Did you reach the part about the attribution of the Osirion to Seti I.
Glad I caught your post there Min.
No - I'm familiar with it and have read some really interesting things about it, but not by Hancock.
That will be fun.
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:44 pm
by Minimalist
I thought you were turning in?
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:36 am
by DougWeller
Hancock thinks Khufu built the Great Pyramid.
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:50 am
by Digit
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:02 am
by Minimalist
Oh, no....don't start the whole "Israel in Egypt" controversy again.
Israel in Egypt
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:32 am
by Cognito
Oh, no....don't start the whole "Israel in Egypt" controversy again.
Archie's not here ... we're safe, but that was a close one.
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:40 am
by Digit
I'm not using the name Digit for nothing you know!