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 3353 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 434 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 573 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 576 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 445 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 407 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 353 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 436 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 329 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 391 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 371 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 341 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 326 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 356 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 431 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 437 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 337 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 341 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 288 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 241 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 261 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 265 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 369 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 492 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 370 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 350 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 273 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 376 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 281 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 373 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 385 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 350 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 347 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 437 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 345 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 380 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 326 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 304 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 272 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 386 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 365 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 280 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 301 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 290 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 378 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 407 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 339 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 454 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 331 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 350 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 410 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 338 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 261 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 351 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 346 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 255 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 252 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 361 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 327 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 325 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 344 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 381 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 244 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 282 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 369 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 323 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 375 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 347 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 296 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 313 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 391 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 327 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 275 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 359 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 364 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 230 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 398 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 267 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 299 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 264 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 289 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 363 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 366 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 351 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 484 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 398 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 315 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 264 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 292 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 297 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 209 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 276 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 342 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 235 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 218 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 349 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 382 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 273 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 295 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 294 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 209 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 284 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 354 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 444 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 353 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 324 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 499 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 407 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 315 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 209 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 456 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 244 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 312 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 406 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 304 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 333 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 410 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 360 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 357 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 430 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 322 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 297 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 337 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 222 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 224 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 347 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 318 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 275 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 285 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 261 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 497 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 297 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 316 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 358 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 289 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 401 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 357 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 368 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 349 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 385 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 331 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 400 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 411 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 224 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 451 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 288 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 381 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 249 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 279 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 208 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 312 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 319 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 328 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 456 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 327 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 328 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 306 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 246 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 409 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 232 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 310 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 328 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 274 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 329 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 286 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 322 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 389 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 321 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 297 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 228 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 293 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 212 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 312 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 364 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 406 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 350 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 250 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 290 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 388 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 224 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 213 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 271 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 274 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 259 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 241 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 237 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 291 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 323 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 254 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 303 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 229 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 228 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 241 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 314 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 240 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 261 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 302 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 291 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 287 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 243 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 245 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 270 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 243 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 282 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 181 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 285 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 318 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 269 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 229 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 302 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 228 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 309 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 317 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 271 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 256 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 280 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 305 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 297 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 289 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 392 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 277 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 280 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 288 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 301 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 366 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 266 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 199 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 195 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 237 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 228 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 160 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 238 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 126 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 254 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 178 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 280 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 286 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 190 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 312 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 214 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 122 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 187 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 213 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 106 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 241 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 224 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 120 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 246 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 116 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 184 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 159 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 159 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 269 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 316 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 197 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 147 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 271 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 108 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 206 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 223 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 208 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 130 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 173 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 137 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 142 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 184 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 176 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 138 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 224 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 337 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 276 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 189 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 234 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 245 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 285 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 83 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 115 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 186 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 116 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 129 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 174 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 202 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 204 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 132 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 295 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 107 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 191 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 211 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 123 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 149 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 101 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 245 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 80 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 231 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 99 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 154 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 273 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 107 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 151 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 167 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 227 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 119 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 215 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 98 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 247 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 221 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 306 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 302 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 303 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 243 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 267 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 250 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 319 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 208 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 181 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 187 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 115 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 137 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 152 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 203 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 109 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 160 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 226 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 131 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 244 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 153 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 271 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 214 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 86 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 145 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 247 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 87 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 278 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33
I will give you one last chance