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 3413 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 486 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 606 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 635 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 475 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 437 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 378 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 489 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 356 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 429 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 401 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 371 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 347 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 385 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 462 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 465 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 368 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 372 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 317 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 261 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 285 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 293 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 402 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 515 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 405 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 379 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 299 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 408 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 302 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 409 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 416 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 373 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 377 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 470 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 374 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 417 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 354 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 338 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 305 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 421 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 397 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 298 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 337 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 325 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 410 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 437 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 369 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 486 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 365 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 383 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 441 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 365 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 298 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 380 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 371 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 281 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 283 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 393 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 363 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 360 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 377 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 414 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 266 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 313 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 391 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 358 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 407 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 379 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 325 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 343 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 414 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 361 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 306 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 401 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 393 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 260 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 431 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 292 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 335 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 293 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 316 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 400 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 397 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 376 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 531 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 426 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 338 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 293 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 321 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 325 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 237 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 307 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 364 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 260 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 243 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 387 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 424 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 296 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 319 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 321 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 230 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 317 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 395 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 485 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 386 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 349 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 533 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 451 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 347 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 235 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 491 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 273 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 355 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 453 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 333 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 364 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 455 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 388 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 385 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 460 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 353 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 321 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 387 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 253 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 260 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 391 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 347 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 299 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 315 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 282 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 567 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 339 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 350 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 383 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 320 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 436 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 392 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 395 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 381 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 420 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 365 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 428 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 449 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 249 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 484 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 321 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 409 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 276 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 305 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 238 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 346 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 348 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 363 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 513 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 358 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 368 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 333 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 278 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 453 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 260 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 335 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 378 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 309 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 369 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 313 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 351 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 416 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 341 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 325 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 249 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 325 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 239 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 347 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 398 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 441 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 380 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 271 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 322 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 417 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 259 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 235 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 305 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 297 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 287 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 266 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 264 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 324 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 351 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 278 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 326 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 263 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 261 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 273 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 341 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 270 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 290 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 332 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 324 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 319 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 272 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 273 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 298 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 272 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 315 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 210 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 318 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 340 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 297 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 248 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 327 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 260 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 335 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 348 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 301 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 289 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 310 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 335 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 326 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 322 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 434 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 306 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 308 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 319 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 331 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 401 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 288 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 229 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 217 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 267 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 250 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 191 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 271 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 153 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 285 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 201 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 319 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 311 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 216 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 344 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 237 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 143 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 209 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 247 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 123 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 274 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 257 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 145 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 279 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 142 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 210 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 189 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 184 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 300 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 340 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 225 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 174 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 297 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 117 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 237 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 257 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 230 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 163 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 197 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 165 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 170 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 213 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 197 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 170 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 257 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 386 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 308 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 225 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 270 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 274 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 314 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 112 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 143 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 216 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 144 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 160 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 198 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 222 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 231 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 159 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 321 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 134 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 219 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 239 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 152 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 173 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 127 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 287 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 101 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 259 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 117 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 187 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 317 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 133 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 176 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 190 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 267 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 144 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 243 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 128 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 271 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 245 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 334 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 326 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 333 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 277 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 297 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 277 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 355 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 231 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 208 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 211 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 138 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 160 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 180 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 233 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 134 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 185 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 258 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 155 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 274 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 183 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 303 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 244 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 109 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 177 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 278 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 113 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 304 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33