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 3379 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 452 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 406 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 447 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 447 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 314 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 348 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 266 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 387 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 377 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 276 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 362 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 509 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 427 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 313 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 363 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 531 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 314 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. 333 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. 287 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 347 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 307 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 398 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 312 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 243 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 241 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 249 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 255 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 255 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 294 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 192 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 298 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 325 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 318 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 307 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 312 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 126 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 195 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 173 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. 143 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 109 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 263 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 87 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 225 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 108 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 309 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 315 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 253 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 279 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 261 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 197 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 225 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 93 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
I will give you one last chance 148 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:34