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 3318 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 419 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 557 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 558 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 431 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 392 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 338 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 416 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 320 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 376 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 356 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 325 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 311 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 339 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 417 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 421 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 327 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 326 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 275 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 233 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 251 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 257 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 352 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 483 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 351 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 343 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 260 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 360 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 274 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 357 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 372 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 339 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 331 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 421 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 329 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 360 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 314 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 290 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 258 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 368 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 353 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 273 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 284 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 275 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 362 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 392 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 322 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 436 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 315 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 335 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 399 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 327 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 246 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 336 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 337 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 243 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 236 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 350 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 312 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 310 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 328 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 366 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 232 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 263 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 357 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 309 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 361 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 333 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 282 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 299 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 380 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 314 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 261 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 340 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 349 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 218 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 381 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 253 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 281 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 244 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 276 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 347 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 351 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 337 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 463 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 383 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 302 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 252 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 281 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 286 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 198 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 263 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 331 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 223 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 204 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 324 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 365 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 262 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 283 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 282 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 200 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 270 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 331 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 428 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 335 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 312 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 485 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 379 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 298 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 200 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 444 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 231 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 291 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 385 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 288 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 318 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 392 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 342 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 345 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 416 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 310 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 288 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 311 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 209 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 210 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 332 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 302 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 260 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 271 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 252 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 472 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 287 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 304 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 340 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 276 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 382 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 340 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 353 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 336 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 367 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 315 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 385 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 396 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 214 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 437 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 274 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 362 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 239 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 267 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 192 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 297 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 303 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 311 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 432 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 308 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 309 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 294 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 236 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 385 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 208 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 297 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 308 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 262 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 309 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 271 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 307 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 369 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 314 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 284 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 221 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 282 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 202 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 303 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 352 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 392 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 334 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 237 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 276 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 374 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 208 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 207 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 254 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 262 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 245 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 225 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 227 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 278 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 312 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 247 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 286 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 218 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 216 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 230 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 297 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 228 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 245 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 283 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 274 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 276 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 232 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 232 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 253 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 233 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 266 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 171 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 273 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 303 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 257 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 219 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 287 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 215 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 298 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 305 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 262 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 247 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 264 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 294 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 287 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 274 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 368 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 263 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 269 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 276 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 283 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 350 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 256 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 187 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 186 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 221 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 214 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 147 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 227 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 115 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 239 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 160 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 268 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 271 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 174 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 294 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 205 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 116 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 174 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 202 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 96 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 228 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 203 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 108 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 234 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 105 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 174 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 149 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 148 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 251 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 301 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 184 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 138 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 253 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 106 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 189 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 206 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 197 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 118 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 161 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 120 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 126 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 175 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 164 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 122 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 208 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 318 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 256 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 170 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 223 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 230 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 275 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 77 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 104 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 174 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 100 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 113 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 160 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 192 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 188 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 123 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 282 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 98 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 180 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 190 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 108 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 143 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 91 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 227 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 71 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 218 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 93 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 138 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 254 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 100 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 132 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 160 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 210 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 108 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 200 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 88 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 234 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 206 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 290 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 288 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 288 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 225 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 252 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 236 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 297 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 199 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 172 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 173 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 104 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 118 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 140 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 190 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 102 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 145 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 214 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 123 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 235 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 135 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 255 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 199 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 78 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 130 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 235 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 76 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 266 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33
I will give you one last chance