Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So you think the location it's found among all the
> other tombs directly around it that point to the
> 4th Dynasty is "irrelevant" as to its provenance?
> Did you ever look to see the artifacts they found
> inside of it as well, or the architecture, which
> maybe is part of all that stylistic "mumbo-jumbo"
> Flentye was talking about? Of course, this is
> meaningless.

> > YOU brought it up as evidence for such. Now you
> > say it's irrelevant. Make up your mind.
>
> No Audrey. Even Origyptian understands the minutia
> of his familial ties to Khufu is irrelevant
> regarding the provenance of the Merrer diary.

YOU said ....
Quote
Thanos
As you already know, these are not the "only" reasons the papyri are dated to the 4th Dynasty, the least of which is Khufu's half brother is also mentioned in detail as an administrator. Again(8-16):

YOU brought it up as one of the reasons why the "papyri are dated to the 4th Dynasty". I didn't focus on his family ties, you have. I haven't stressed his family ties, you have.

Quote
Thanos
...the papyri notes Ankhhaf,half-brother of Khufu, was the administrator of the project who is well attested at Giza:

Still waiting for how he is "well attested at Giza". Looks like he was well attested at Giza by Reisner, based on the location of his tomb. You aren't coming up with thing else that 'attests' him. In other words you are going by what Reisner thought was the lay out of the tombs.

> Not really. The only reason you are taking this
> tack is to support Origyptian's argument,

That's really too bad you think so. Your vision is not clear and may be clouded by your anger. No matter how emphatically I deny your assumption, you won't believe it, so it's a waste of time to try to change your mind.

> as usual, that the Merrer diary doesn't belong to the
> 4th Dynasty and contradict any argument against
> it. The lot of you didn't even know who Ankh-haf
> was or his significance in Merrer's diary until I
> brought it up months ago (ignored then), yet now
> all of a sudden you are all over it trying to deny
> Ankh-haf even belongs to the 4th Dynasty?

Because YOU used Ankh-haf as one factor dating the diary.

> > I think the dating of Wadi al-Jarf is
> > circumstantial, not a drop of science to
> support
> > it. It's dated by the Khufu cartouche, period.
>
> What does the dating of Wadi al-Jarf have to do
> with the dating of the papyri?

Ask Tallet & Marouard, who for some reason title their papers with "Wadi al-Jarf", naming the site where the objects were found.

> So you omitted all the rest, which would be
> all the rest, that directly contradicts
> your opinion on purpose? My bad.

For some strange reason you think I should have posted the whole article. I gave the links so everyone could read it for themselves. Why on earth would I make unnecessary long posts when I made the articles available?
There is no need to post an entire article when the link is given. Then others can find within an article what they think are points to be discussed. If you don't like this technique, that's really your problem.

> You mean like the 700+ samples taken from the
> predynastic through the OK which clearly place
> their provenance in the 4th-3rd millenniums?
> Again, good to know the whole "science" thing is
> finally catching up with you.

They found 700+ samples at Wadi al-Jarf? We have been talking about that site, have you now gone sideways into a different subject?

> > A house of cards waiting for a breeze.
>
> Whatever you say Cladking.

I'm pretty sure that was my comment that I posted and not Cladkings. Unless ck can edit my posts.

> So I guess this means the tombs must date to the
> NK then. Good work Audrey.

You believe what the Egyptologists say, I'll make up my own mind, if it doesn't upset you too much

> > Now if they only had some proof of who Khufu
> was.
> > And don't give me that 'context' crap. The
> context
> > was gathered after the fact to bolster
> > their guesses.
>
> Oyyy... Not this again.

It will be "this again" for some time to come. You thought the subject would go away because you & Stower spit on it?

> If this is all you think it is I can't help you.
> No one is claiming the KFC across the street was
> built in the 4th Dynasty-why do you think that is?

Why do you think that's a good analogy?

> The difference is that all it is these
> "others" know (if that) is that it sits next door
> and otherwise know nothing else about what
> connects them. Bravo-got me there. And these
> "others" would include the dynamic duo of who-you
> and Origyptian? Well, hot damn. That may be
> good enough for you, but sure as hell not
> enough for me nor anyone else not named Jon or
> Cladking here I suspect.

Yet you fail to mention anything else that connects Ankh-haf to the 4th dyn.

> Audrey, the new champion of "science". And if RCD
> said it dated to the 3rd millennium then rest
> assured your narrative would only be something
> else to naysay the provenance.

Not at all. I haven't expressed my opinion on when Ankh-haf lived. But evidently we will never know because Egyptology doesn't like to RCD

> Audrey, you cite multiple papers to contradict the
> opinion Ankh-haf is related to Khufu in some way

I DID NOT cite those papers to contradict his family ties. I cited them to show how Egyptology has placed him in the 4th dyn.

> yet ignore the fact not one word of it contradicts
> your greater point that you believe he does not
> date to the 4th Dynasty. You cherry pick-quotes to
> serve your narrative

I DID NOT cherry pick. I know this is one of the frequent complaints you use to invalidate the poster, but I was just the messenger. The articles were made available for everyone to read. I am not about to post the entire article just so you & Stower won't scream cherry picking.

> then ignore the rest in that
> otherwise there is no discrepancy as to the
> 4th Dynasty date of Ankh-haf. But please, quote
> one of your sources that supports this idea.

Why should I? The point is Egyptology says he is 4th dyn. It's not my job to disprove it. I'm only showing that the reason they say so is not based on good evidence let alone science. Why can't you guys understand the difference? It's that same old mindset of - no one can disagree unless they have a better idea.

> So I am to thank you for reciting papers written
> by Egyptologists you cherry pick from out of
> context to support your otherwise unsubstantiated
> beliefs,

Nope, no need to be grateful. And no need to insult the messenger who just happened to not post the articles in a way that would be pleasing to YOU.

> yet if I were to quote them myself to
> support the opposing view then it is I that is
> somehow the lesser for it?

No at all and do not see why you would come to this conclusion. Boy, you're really pissed that I didn't post the entire article.

> I believe that's called
> "irony" among other things, but rest assured we
> can at least count on me to quote them accurately
> and honestly if and when I do.

Yes, Thanos the Savior. How quickly you worked yourself up to that status

> The simple truth is that you are not worth my time
> to write an expose regarding the context of the
> eastern cemetery and interconnectedness of the
> artifacts and architecture that no doubt you will
> surely not understand anyways and argue with me
> about it all the same. I'd say once in a week is
> enough. But since you are the one with such
> doubts, please tell us why the eastern cemetery
> and/or the people found in it do not belong to the
> 4th Dynasty.

Because there is nothing to say they do except location.

> Hint-the big one at the bottom labelled G7510
> would be Ankh-haf's.

I gave the tomb number G7510 in a previous post, but thanks for the help.

> Some quip to follow how it is I who am not
> worth your time? You'd be right.

I don't think like that, so I wouldn't say it. But if that imaginary conversation makes you feel good, go for it.

> Its funny to me though how the lot of you decry
> anything that dates the great pyrmaids to the
> Dynastic period, yet by the same token you equally
> deny anything that dates the 4th Dynasty to, well,
> the 4th Dynasty, as if this period was just a void
> in time. If the likes of Ankh-haf do not belong to
> the 4th Dynasty then I am curious-who did?
> No one? If not then where and who do you think
> they are?

The answer to that is too long to put in a post. It would require a book to answer.

> > There really isn't anything about you that is
> alt.

> If the measure of such is the likes of yourself,
> Origyptian, Cladking et al, then I take that as a
> high compliment.

You're welcome

> Origpytian's attack parrot says what? If by
> "status quo" you mean the truth then yes, I agree.
> Wow, two compliments in one day. Your insults by
> way of saying the opposite of what you know is the
> truth because you think that's what will get under
> the other person's skin the most is quite tired at
> this point.

That's just silly. You're pseudo pyscho babble is what's tiring.

> Though you feel it clever, to the rest
> of us it's just plain dishonest which is a
> reflection of your character, not ours.

You use the word "dishonest" frequently yet how you use it is puzzling. Why call someone "dishonest" if they are posting what they truly believe?

> I fail to see how calling out belligerent
> intellectual frauds for what they are is an
> "insult".

WHO is being belligerent?

> The real insult is that the rest of us
> have to suffer it in the first place.

You don't have to "suffer" anything. You're not a victim. You choose to read and post here. If it's too much to bear, then don't do it. Your choice, no one's forcing you.

> And given
> these are the people you have cast your lot with
> and defend like a rabid dog every day, despite the
> fact I know you know they are full of shit- what
> does this say about you?

I cast my lot with those I share interests with. Unfortunately I did not consult Oracle Thanos for his approval first, who knows all truths and therefore knows who is full of shit.

I don't cast my lot with those who think they know everything.

> It's ok to be
> willfully ignorant intellectual frauds because
> they are on your "team"? Sounds like some of these
> "higher standards" we've heard so much about.

Brother, you're really pissed about nothing. I don't think tirades will further you points, but I could be wrong. Maybe less judgmental emotion and more objectivity would be better for a forum.

This is what I call... stupid; going back and forth trying to reason point by point with one of your tirades. It's got to be boring for the readers. Insult me, call me what your wish, I will not engage in anymore of your tantrums. And I will continue to form my own opinions outside of Egyptology. You can't stop that.

If you want to talk about the subjects, that's great. But the subject isn't ME. The subject WAS Ankh-haf and Wadi al-Jarf, which I think you have now effectively buried

He who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions - Confucius

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Imhotep 3599 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 565 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 683 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 706 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 562 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 520 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 478 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 584 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 430 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 502 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 484 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 437 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 416 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 451 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 538 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 541 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 454 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 456 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 394 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 319 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 355 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 375 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 490 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 581 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 484 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 462 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 374 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 484 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 371 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 496 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 511 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 431 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 466 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 547 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 471 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 510 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 435 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 411 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 381 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 499 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 472 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 382 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 421 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 399 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 483 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 508 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 451 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 560 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 432 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 465 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 541 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 437 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 382 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 465 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 462 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 365 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 363 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 487 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 426 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 452 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 482 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 461 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 327 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 361 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 463 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 440 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 496 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 450 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 383 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 414 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 500 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 423 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 386 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 472 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 462 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 352 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 508 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 393 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 425 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 365 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 397 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 471 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 477 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 451 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 614 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 505 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 411 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 370 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 394 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 419 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 317 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 381 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 446 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 313 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 329 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 505 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 495 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 388 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 403 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 390 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 306 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 409 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 518 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 562 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 478 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 435 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 632 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 549 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 423 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 323 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 578 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 348 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 440 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 557 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 403 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 444 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 578 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 468 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 468 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 566 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 399 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 374 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 474 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 304 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 316 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 462 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 444 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 365 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 371 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 347 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 707 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 434 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 454 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 470 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 399 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 509 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 457 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 461 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 428 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 505 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 421 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 489 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 524 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 300 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 544 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 372 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 476 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 332 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 359 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 301 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 410 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 412 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 408 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 618 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 445 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 444 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 403 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 347 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 539 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 323 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 412 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 464 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 384 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 477 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 383 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 429 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 461 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 396 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 365 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 300 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 386 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 295 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 414 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 485 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 546 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 430 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 338 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 383 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 483 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 322 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 287 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 388 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 349 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 348 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 329 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 340 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 387 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 410 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 316 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 409 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 320 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 317 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 336 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 408 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 324 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 339 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 383 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 386 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 373 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 356 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 336 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 355 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 341 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 376 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 277 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 383 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 387 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 364 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 304 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 407 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 316 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 413 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 394 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 355 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 326 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 367 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 377 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 365 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 359 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 490 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 361 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 353 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 364 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 361 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 480 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 322 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 281 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 270 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 313 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 322 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 251 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 316 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 203 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 340 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 243 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 370 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 351 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 253 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 410 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 286 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 187 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 262 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 297 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 163 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 321 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 305 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 184 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 324 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 182 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 266 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 234 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 216 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 362 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 388 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 261 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 205 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 346 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 157 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 289 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 339 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 285 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 220 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 247 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 230 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 207 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 275 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 249 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 205 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 306 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 452 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 361 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 285 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 314 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 329 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 358 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 155 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 198 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 256 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 198 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 222 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 267 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 276 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 279 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 200 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 360 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 182 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 258 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 283 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 198 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 230 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 174 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 326 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 162 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 293 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 166 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 244 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 370 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 173 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 228 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 233 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 305 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 184 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 270 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 186 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 338 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 284 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 367 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 366 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 375 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 342 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 368 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 331 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 427 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 285 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 246 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 254 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 181 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 215 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 229 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 286 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 194 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 267 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 292 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 204 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 333 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 221 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 339 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 284 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 160 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 216 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 329 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 156 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 359 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33