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 3379 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 454 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 585 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 599 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 458 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 417 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 362 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 455 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 340 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 407 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 382 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 355 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 332 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 367 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 445 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 448 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 350 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 355 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 300 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 248 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 269 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 275 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 381 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 500 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 384 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 361 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 282 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 388 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 288 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 389 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 394 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 359 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 359 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 448 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 358 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 394 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 336 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 318 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 285 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 400 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 375 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 285 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 315 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 303 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 388 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 417 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 350 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 469 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 344 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 361 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 423 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 349 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 276 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 360 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 355 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 267 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 263 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 375 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 340 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 341 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 360 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 395 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 250 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 294 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 375 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 335 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 388 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 358 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 308 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 325 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 400 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 342 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 286 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 378 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 376 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 243 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 411 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 277 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 312 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 274 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 300 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 376 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 377 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 361 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 503 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 409 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 322 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 276 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 304 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 307 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 220 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 291 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 348 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 244 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 229 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 363 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 401 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 281 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 305 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 305 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 216 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 295 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 373 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 461 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 369 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 332 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 510 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 428 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 329 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 218 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 469 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 258 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 335 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 421 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 314 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 344 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 429 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 370 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 367 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 440 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 335 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 306 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 354 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 234 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 241 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 364 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 330 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 282 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 300 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 269 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 533 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 315 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 331 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 366 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 299 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 415 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 371 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 379 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 360 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 401 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 346 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 408 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 429 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 236 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 459 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 302 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 394 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 258 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 291 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 220 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 326 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 334 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 346 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 482 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 339 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 345 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 314 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 260 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 431 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 241 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 320 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 354 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 289 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 348 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 296 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 332 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 400 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 327 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 309 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 234 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 305 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 222 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 325 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 378 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 423 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 363 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 258 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 304 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 399 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 236 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 220 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 285 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 283 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 270 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 250 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 247 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 304 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 335 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 263 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 313 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 244 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 242 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 255 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 324 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 250 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 273 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 313 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 306 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 298 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 256 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 261 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 283 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 256 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 294 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 193 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 299 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 326 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 281 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 235 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 312 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 242 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 319 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 331 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 283 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 272 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 295 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 320 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 308 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 302 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 407 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 289 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 292 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 302 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 313 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 383 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 273 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 212 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 204 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 251 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 237 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 173 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 252 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 138 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 267 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 187 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 293 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 293 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 202 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 324 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 222 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 127 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 196 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 227 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 112 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 255 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 239 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 130 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 262 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 127 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 196 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 174 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 170 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 282 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 325 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 213 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 158 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 281 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 109 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 219 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 238 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 217 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 144 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 185 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 149 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 155 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 195 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 186 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 151 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 238 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 356 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 291 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 204 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 248 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 257 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 297 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 94 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 127 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 197 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 128 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 146 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 184 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 208 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 214 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 144 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 305 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 118 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 206 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 224 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 135 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 159 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 110 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 263 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 88 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 240 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 105 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 169 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 293 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 116 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 160 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 173 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 245 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 129 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 226 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 109 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 255 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 232 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 315 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 310 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 316 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 254 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 279 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 262 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 333 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 217 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 192 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 198 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 124 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 145 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 163 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 218 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 119 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 170 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 240 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 143 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 253 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 163 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 283 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 226 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 94 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 162 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 258 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 95 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 291 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33