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 3449 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 508 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 621 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 658 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 488 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 451 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 392 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 512 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 370 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 444 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 415 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 384 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 360 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 399 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 478 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 479 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 381 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 388 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 327 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 268 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 296 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 304 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 416 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 526 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 418 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 393 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 311 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 421 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 314 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 422 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 434 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 386 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 392 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 485 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 390 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 432 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 365 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 350 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 319 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 438 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 408 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 313 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 355 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 339 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 421 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 448 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 382 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 497 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 377 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 400 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 456 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 378 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 311 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 394 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 385 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 292 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 300 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 409 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 378 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 378 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 397 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 425 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 277 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 325 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 403 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 376 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 420 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 391 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 337 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 357 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 429 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 376 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 322 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 419 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 408 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 276 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 444 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 314 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 347 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 309 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 328 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 412 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 409 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 387 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 547 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 439 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 351 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 306 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 336 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 340 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 250 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 323 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 378 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 273 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 256 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 407 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 436 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 310 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 332 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 333 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 247 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 335 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 418 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 501 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 408 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 363 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 545 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 473 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 362 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 252 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 502 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 287 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 374 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 468 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 346 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 379 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 475 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 401 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 399 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 474 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 365 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 339 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 401 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 263 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 274 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 409 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 360 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 309 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 328 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 291 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 594 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 355 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 364 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 400 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 337 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 446 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 407 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 409 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 392 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 442 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 377 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 441 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 465 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 257 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 503 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 333 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 424 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 291 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 316 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 253 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 357 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 362 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 374 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 532 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 393 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 381 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 346 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 293 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 469 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 274 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 348 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 392 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 325 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 389 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 329 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 372 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 425 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 354 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 334 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 259 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 341 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 247 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 364 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 411 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 453 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 390 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 283 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 339 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 432 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 273 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 248 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 315 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 309 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 299 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 277 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 283 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 331 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 363 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 285 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 350 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 277 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 273 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 283 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 356 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 282 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 302 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 343 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 339 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 330 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 289 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 285 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 312 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 281 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 324 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 227 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 331 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 351 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 311 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 256 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 340 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 278 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 350 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 360 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 310 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 297 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 324 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 344 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 334 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 331 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 442 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 316 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 315 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 331 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 340 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 423 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 295 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 237 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 228 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 276 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 263 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 206 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 284 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 166 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 296 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 217 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 330 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 319 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 223 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 355 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 248 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 154 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 215 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 264 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 131 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 286 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 265 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 153 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 289 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 153 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 217 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 200 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 190 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 317 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 354 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 232 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 183 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 307 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 124 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 252 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 278 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 239 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 169 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 206 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 176 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 178 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 226 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 210 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 180 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 270 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 401 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 315 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 237 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 281 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 281 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 322 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 119 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 150 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 222 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 152 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 169 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 204 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 232 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 236 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 164 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 331 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 142 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 227 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 249 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 160 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 187 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 133 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 303 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 106 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 266 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 126 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 205 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 329 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 142 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 182 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 201 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 279 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 149 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 248 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 136 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 288 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 255 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 344 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 333 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 342 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 284 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 306 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 285 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 370 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 241 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 215 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 221 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 144 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 166 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 190 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 239 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 146 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 196 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 266 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 160 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 285 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 192 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 309 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 252 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 115 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 183 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 290 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 122 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 312 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33