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:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Origyptian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > I never claimed that it's not from the 4th
> > Dynasty. I said I'm looking for evidence
> > supporting the claim that it was from the
> > 4th Dynasty in the first place.
>
> We've already been through this with you. This is
> what you "say", but obviously not what you mean.

Yes, we've been through this before: stop trying to divine what I'm thinking and take my words on their own merit. If that's what I meant, why wouldn't I just say it? It's silly to keep pushing this "I can read your mind" contrivance.



> > It might be, but I
> > have trouble reconciling some of the physical
> > evidence with various assertions.
>
> Why might it not be?

Because it hasn't yet been proven TO be!

The silliness in these discussions is getting out of control.



> You just said you never said
> it wasn't from the 4th Dynasty yet in the next
> sentence by direct inference suggest it "might not
> be".

You don't seem to understand the basic and important difference between "is not" and "might not". In my opinion, this business about confusing a tentative possibility with a definite fact is what has gotten Egyptology into the mess it's in today.



> And what do the "various assertions"
> regarding the physical evidence have to do with
> the provenance of the diary itself? Again, where
> does the dairy say the stone was being used in the
> construction of G1?

And again, the diary doesn't say that. Tallet does. He's made "various assertions" about what's in those payri, but from what I've seen in his publications so far, the papyri don't actually say that. How many times do we need to go through this same distinction?



> We know Khufu was a 4th
> Dynasty pharaoh and that his stank is in and
> around G1 so what is the problem with
> acknowledgement of his involvement at the site
> when we know in one way or another he was?

I'm not as convinced as you are about the traditional Khufu narrative.

But Khufu aside, I've already stated many times that those blocks may have simply been sent to Giza to make repairs, restorations, or for ancillary building projects and that there is nothing about those papyri that mention any specific construction, original or otherwise.



> And let's be honest, the trouble you have
> "reconciling" this evidence is a means to an end
> to confirm your bias having nothing to do with the
> actual state of the evidence itself.

Ugh, I'm done tracking the number of times you guys are claiming to be clairvoyant or that I'm not being honest and have some kind of dark, doubt mongering agenda.

I have no preconcieved notions here other than the notion that scrutiny definitely needs to be applied whenever someone cites as evidence an unverified claim, especially a claim that originated by an early investigator who applied a different standard of proof. I just don't understand why anyone would have a problem with such a simple concept.



> Doubt for doubts sake for no other purpose...
> than to cast even further doubt on the provenance of
> the diary and hieroglyphs...

...and that's your characterization, not mine. Sure, doubt is often a byproduct of the unverified until the claim has been verified. But we (or at least I) have no reason to simply "trust" such a claim without verifying that it's based on solid evidence. Even Einstein wasn't accepted (but was he "doubted"?) until his formulas were vindicated with real independent verification decades after he proposed them. This notion about simply accepting a claim as fact without verifying its validity may have served to keep the traditional narrative self-consistent for the past few centuries, but it's useless when trying to actually determine what's true.



> Given the otherwise crude
> stoneworking of the site, if the diary and
> hieroglyphs weren't found there you wouldn't give
> it a second thought, but the fact they are then up
> is down black is white and anything could mean
> anything. Whatever it takes to doubt monger the
> 4th Dynasty provenance of the diary and glyphs.

Again, that's your characterization, not mine.

And again with your self-proclaimed clairvoyance.

The diary is not the problem. For the umpteenth time, the problem is that Tallet's claims about what those papyri say doesn't seem to be what the papyri actually say.

I hope this long post finally gets that point across.

Meanwhile, some members here claim to be able to read the glyphs. There have been some significant segments of papyri published, so what do they say? Can anyone translate them? Or shall we wait until June and see what the author has to say about it?



> > > ...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? How many
> > > times have we seen this before. But if you do have
> > > an original thought of your own, please, go on....
>
> > I don't understand your perspective. Are you
> > saying that you don't think anyone should be
> > allowed to scrutinize a claim by taking a look at
> > the evidence before accepting it as true?
>
> Where does what I said even remotely state or imply this?

Then why mention it at all if you have no problem with some of us investigating the evidence about Ankh-haf? The fact that you don't question a 4th Dynasty provenance combined with your complaint that we are "all over" Ankh-haf suggested to me that you object to any additional scrutiny. And why invoke "original thought" here, other than the fact that we seem to be investigating Tallet's (and for that matter, Reisner's) "original thought"?



> I doubt you are actually confused by
> what I meant. The problem with some of you, the
> point, is that your motivations for "scrutinizing
> a claim" in the first place is again nothing more
> than a means to an end, as if we are not 100% sure
> of something therefore it could mean anything
> which in turn "invalidates" any counter argument
> to your beliefs. If Ankh-haf wasn't mentioned by
> Merrer the lot of you would pay it no mind, but
> the fact he is means just like clock work the
> scurrying begins to cast doubt on him.

More self-proclaimed clairvoyance.

And this is an odd time for you to get into self-aggrandizement; I assume you already know that I'm on record as having a problem with Tallet's el-Jarf claims long before you mentioned anything about Ankh-haf in the context of that "harbor" facility (which is located 5 km inland from the shoreline). But as I read up on Ankh-haf, it became clear that Reiser pulled another "Heterpheres' Tomb" presumption, this time on Ankh-haf's provenance.

By the way, I assume you don't believe that each of those mastabas was only claimed by a single owner/occupant/mummy throughout all those millennia.



> At Wadi al-Jarf papyri and hieroglyphs were found
> that name the 4th Dynasty pharaoh Khufu and the
> 4th Dynasty vizier Ankh-haf which gives an
> accounting of stone transport to Giza.

I still don't understand the basis for the claim of provenance. I mean, I realize the traditional timeline puts Khufu and Ankh-haf in the 4th dynasty, but I have a problem with that timeline largely due to its lack of consideration of technology and engineering, and so there still are some tenuous aspects to that provenance, especially as they are revisited in modern times (e.g., Lehner revisting the Tomb of Hetepheres, or Romer revisiting the stress relieving aspect of the RCs, not to mention Assmann revisiting Baalbek, etc.).

Regarding the mention of "Khufu", what's the context? Is it simply the presence of the cartouche in the papyrus or that the papyrus narrative actually cites him as a contemporaneous human (and yet still with no absolute dates)? After all, if you find a note today that simply says "I visited Washington yesterday to have lunch with Martha" do you automatically think the page dates back to ca. 1790 regarding a visit with the First Lady? As I've said many times, it's not clear to me that the mention of "Khufu" on those papyri is a reference to the man himself vs. a location, credential, administration/organization, etc.

I reserve further opinion until the volume of translations comes out in June.



> This implies to some it was for construction of G1.

Sure, it's a possibility.. Just don't claim that's what the papyri actually say (as Tallet did). He seems to have overinterpreted the evidence, and so must be challenged on that, unless, of course, he is basing his claims on evidence he hasn't presented yet, which is one reason I look forward to the translations coming in June.



> What follows is the site itself is doubt mongered
> as not being from the 4th Dynasty to the last
> detail right down to the pottery and boat fragments.
> The papyri itself is doubt mongered as
> not being from the 4th Dynasty and "could have
> been put there at anytime by anyone". The same for
> the hieroglyphs on the exterior blocks- "we have
> no idea who put those there and when". Ankh-haf
> may not have been actually Khufu's half-brother.
> Doesn't matter. So then Ankh-kaf may have not even
> been from the 4th Dynasty. What does the Khufu
> cartouche "really" reffering to i.e. not an actual
> person? On and on it always goes for no reason
> other than doubt for doubt's sake. All for nothing
> as the diary makes no mention of what the stone
> was used for.

Your attempt to give the "doubt monger" meme traction might work for some, but not for everyone.

    "Caution must be exercised..."
          - Greg Marouard

And how many times are we going to agree that the papyri don't indicate what the stones were used for?

______________________________________________________________
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Imhotep 3177 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 358 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 493 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 446 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 376 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 313 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 302 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 312 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 256 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 307 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 288 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 264 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 271 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 272 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 357 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 341 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 278 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 262 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 219 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 202 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 205 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 216 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 292 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 435 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 288 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 307 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 205 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 295 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 225 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 291 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 281 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 278 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 271 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 356 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 261 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 294 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 249 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 238 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 218 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 283 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 290 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 229 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 221 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 217 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 291 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 326 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 254 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 372 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 249 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 270 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 296 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 239 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 197 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 261 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 281 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 192 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 184 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 280 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 248 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 231 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 229 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 299 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 196 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 194 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 305 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 253 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 282 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 276 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 221 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 211 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 318 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 253 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 199 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 280 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 274 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 170 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 328 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 199 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 225 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 193 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 222 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 289 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 252 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 268 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 356 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 315 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 244 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 197 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 218 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 219 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 162 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 180 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 261 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 165 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 163 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 262 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 277 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 201 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 225 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 223 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 167 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 203 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 252 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 345 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 266 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 252 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 415 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 298 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 238 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 154 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 357 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 171 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 230 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 280 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 225 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 243 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 295 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 269 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 277 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 331 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 246 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 246 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 239 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 155 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 166 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 253 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 246 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 206 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 209 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 200 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 362 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 242 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 250 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 259 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 215 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 306 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 287 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 294 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 272 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 289 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 268 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 282 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 314 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 178 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 349 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 221 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 292 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 196 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 204 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 131 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 230 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 241 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 245 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 316 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 222 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 252 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 229 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 178 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 310 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 150 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 234 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 213 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 207 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 231 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 201 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 243 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 307 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 265 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 224 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 185 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 212 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 159 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 240 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 279 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 340 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 274 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 194 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 224 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 303 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 144 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 167 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 190 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 210 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 182 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 178 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 177 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 210 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 250 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 198 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 223 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 179 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 164 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 183 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 235 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 174 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 186 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 226 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 224 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 198 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 179 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 167 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 186 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 174 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 212 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 140 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 201 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 236 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 191 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 176 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 220 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 148 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 225 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 237 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 198 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 177 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 207 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 233 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 223 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 214 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 283 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 197 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 221 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 216 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 214 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 259 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 222 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 156 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 135 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 149 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 160 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 119 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 167 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 77 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 164 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 111 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 194 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 214 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 136 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 224 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 168 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 86 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 121 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 140 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 58 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 165 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 137 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 70 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 171 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 69 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 121 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 97 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 98 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 198 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 242 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 128 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 95 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 192 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 61 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 129 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 148 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 134 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 73 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 108 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 77 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 72 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 121 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 110 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 77 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 138 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 251 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 197 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 116 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 161 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 165 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 213 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 42 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 57 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 123 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 58 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 65 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 98 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 134 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 119 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 85 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 218 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 61 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 122 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 121 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 62 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 102 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 59 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 160 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 46 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 148 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 72 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 75 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 187 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 63 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 61 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 122 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 142 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 57 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 138 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 49 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 164 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 156 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 222 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 234 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 227 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 176 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 180 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 171 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 217 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 151 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 116 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 108 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 66 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 68 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 101 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 124 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 69 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 98 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 153 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 82 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 197 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 95 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 185 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 143 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 49 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 89 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 169 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 47 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 180 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33
I will give you one last chance 63 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:34