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 3505 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 524 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 640 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 675 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 503 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 478 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 402 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 529 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 389 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 455 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 436 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 408 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 370 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 409 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 489 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 494 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 395 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 403 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 344 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 281 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 311 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 314 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 430 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 541 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 435 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 404 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 323 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 436 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 326 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 435 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 450 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 402 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 415 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 498 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 401 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 452 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 380 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 367 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 335 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 455 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 420 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 335 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 373 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 356 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 434 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 463 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 397 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 513 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 387 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 415 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 466 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 387 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 321 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 407 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 403 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 309 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 315 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 433 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 386 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 393 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 412 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 438 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 286 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 336 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 416 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 391 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 429 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 403 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 344 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 369 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 444 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 391 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 339 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 427 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 418 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 299 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 457 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 330 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 361 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 320 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 353 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 421 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 421 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 408 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 560 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 451 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 366 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 322 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 350 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 366 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 268 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 348 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 387 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 285 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 275 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 433 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 453 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 326 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 354 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 346 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 261 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 361 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 454 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 519 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 422 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 379 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 563 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 490 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 374 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 275 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 532 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 301 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 400 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 497 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 360 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 397 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 497 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 409 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 414 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 493 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 377 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 353 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 417 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 272 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 285 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 427 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 375 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 323 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 341 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 315 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 630 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 374 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 382 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 417 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 348 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 460 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 426 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 427 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 406 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 455 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 390 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 455 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 479 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 272 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 517 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 346 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 441 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 302 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 332 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 270 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 370 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 377 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 384 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 559 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 404 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 394 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 367 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 307 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 486 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 291 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 364 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 408 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 341 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 412 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 342 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 389 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 437 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 369 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 343 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 269 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 351 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 266 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 376 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 427 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 470 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 403 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 298 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 350 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 445 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 291 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 258 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 329 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 322 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 315 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 302 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 298 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 345 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 379 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 290 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 377 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 293 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 288 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 304 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 367 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 294 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 311 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 358 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 351 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 343 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 308 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 297 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 327 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 295 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 341 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 246 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 349 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 366 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 321 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 274 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 354 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 294 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 375 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 370 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 326 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 304 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 333 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 350 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 341 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 336 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 453 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 330 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 327 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 346 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 344 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 443 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 301 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 247 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 235 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 288 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 278 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 221 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 293 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 177 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 309 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 222 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 347 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 330 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 230 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 371 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 264 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 162 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 234 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 274 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 136 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 297 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 275 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 164 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 295 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 159 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 225 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 208 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 199 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 340 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 361 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 241 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 187 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 317 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 129 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 268 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 309 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 247 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 182 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 222 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 186 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 187 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 238 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 223 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 186 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 282 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 419 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 322 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 256 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 288 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 298 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 330 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 127 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 173 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 234 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 170 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 178 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 221 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 240 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 244 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 178 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 336 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 149 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 244 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 258 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 171 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 201 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 151 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 308 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 116 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 272 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 142 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 218 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 343 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 149 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 201 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 208 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 285 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 165 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 256 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 141 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 301 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 261 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 347 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 341 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 348 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 295 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 329 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 291 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 381 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 252 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 220 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 231 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 151 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 181 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 204 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 268 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 164 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 229 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 271 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 178 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 296 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 199 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 313 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 258 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 132 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 190 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 294 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 131 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 328 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33
I will give you one last chanc