I read it. I had to dust off the ol' dictionary to look up 'recrudescence'.Quote
Nice to know you don't actually read anything I write.
I don't always agree with your views, but I nevertheless find your "historical highlights" posts fascinating to read and enjoy them very much.
Hey, I'm getting there. I type slow on this phone, ok? So sue me.Quote
Oh, and by all means no one actually talk about the OP.
That's kinda weird. Do they think he at least started work on a pyramid? He couldn't have completed one in only 5 years, but presumably he didn't know he'd have so short a reign.Quote
The pharaoh who ruled after Menkaure was Shepseskaf who instead of building a pyramid like his predecessor, is credited with build a large mastaba at Saqqara during his short 5yr reign.
More weirdness. Userkaf was the first guy with an obelisk in his cartouche but the obelisk that stood in his Sun Temple was not his, but was put there by a pharaoh 3 or 4 guys(or however many) down the line? Is Userkaf credited with the making of any obelisks?Quote
Archaeologically the Sun Temple of Userkaf is a mess and details are not exactly clear, but it is known to have been built in two phases-first of mud brick which was later rebuilt as stone supposedly a few pharaohs later, likely under the reign of Neferirkare who is also credited with adding the obelisk that once stood there.
(also, "userkaf" for some reason looks like a multiplayer alias you'd see in CounterStrike or something. "You have been sniped by userkaf1337")
This makes me think the pyramid surrounding the chambers could be an addition to an already existing structure.Quote
While the core of Sahure's pyramid is pedestrian as well compared to the 4th Dynasty, the interior of chambers utilize some of the largest stones ever moved in ancient times with some estimated to weigh upwards of 200+ tons.
Pretty sure you don't agree with this, but I think the OK work crews at Giza were engaged in a massive restoration--or perhaps preservation is a better word-- project. They are the source of much of the casing stones, imo. Not the granite/basalt ones though.Quote
As an aside, one thing I have noted many times is that the overwhelming majority of burials at the Giza pyramid cemeteries all date to the 5th and 6th Dynasties. The so-called pyramid workers cemetery does not date the 4th Dynasty, but rather the 5th Dynasty spanning nearly to its end.
I believe the technical term is triangle buttflap.Quote
It is also with the beginning of the 5th Dynasty that we see the emergence of the pyramid kilt...
Interesting. It could be different, of course...those later occupations do not mean we should assume it was always occupied by a foreign power, but still I think it's an interesting idea. Do you have any ideas about who might have been the occupiers during the OK, etc.?Quote
From the MK to the end of the Dynastic period, part and parcel of Egyptian culture is the occupation by a foreign power-Canaan, Hyksos, Hittites, Phoenicians, Greeks, Romans-why would the OK and archaic Dynastic period be any different?
Another keen observation re: foreign subjugators adopting the culture of the DE rather than forcing their own cultures on the subjugated peoples. I would venture to suggest that this might be an indication of the presence of a powerful cultural influence that belongs neither to the conquerer nor the subjugated...an influence present by way of exceedingly ancient structures and statuary, perhaps? In other words, it isn't that the conquerers adopted the culture of the DE, they were adopting the culture suggested by monumental stonework that was already ancient in their times. It looks like they adopted the DE culture because the DE themselves were engaged in adopting the same culture before they were conquered.Quote
And yet despite this what we see time and again is this foreign subjugator adopting the culture of the DE, not the other way around, yet for some reason we expect the OK and earlier to be different?