> My only point is that one reason those original
> words were chosen may be that the writers,
> themselves, didn't understand the principles they
> were writing about and so used what were common
> terms of their time but what seems like nonsense
> characterizations to us. I see it on many drawings
> in ancient tombs where it seems clear to me that
> the artist is rendering what he
> thinks might have happened and not
> what actually did happen, based on his very
> limited knowledge of science and engineering
> during the Dynastic era (e.g., Rekhmire paintings,
> Unas' causeway inscription). The same thing
> happens today with legends such as we find about
> Ezekial, Revelations, halos on angels, Santa
> Claus' and his flying reindeer, etc. Even the
> Mother Hubberd and Mother Goose have been totally
> misinterpreted as cutesy (rather than horrific)
> stories in our own day regarding the most basic
> tales such as 3 blind mice, ring around the rosey,
> pop goes the weasel, etc.
Again, I agree. Our earliest version of the "Rituals of Ascension" mistakenly called the Pyramid Texts is a heavily redacted version of earlier writing. It's entirely possible that the grammar is incorrect as well and that the individual who had it inscribed on the stone walls didn't understand the meaning either. There's simply no telling with certainty when or how the language became confused with the information currently available. There simply is no cultural context in which to understand the pyramids, the people, or the language. Virtually nothing survives other that the pyramid we can't understand and the Pyramid Texts that just looks like superstitious gobbledty gook to Egyptologists.
It's not going to be easy to sort this all out. It will require decades of work by scholars but the fact they've made NO PROGRESS at all in over a century and half proves they are on the wrong track. The fact that they believe it's superstition that made the ancients powerful and wise is simply ludicrous.