> If the pyramids were tombs, why would an ancient
> Egyptian feel any need to say so? Other than in
> talking to children, say. To do so would be
> superfluous, tautologous. An absence of writings
> laboriously stating the obvious is natural,
> normal. This is how contrived and spurious your
> argument is: you complain that something is absent
> whose presence would be the oddity.
So let's see. Let's take the Golden Gate Bridge. Notice its function is specifically stated right in its name. It is also a highway which is a dry wide pavement between two points so we can assume based on this that a "golden gate" that is dry over a bay is a bridge of some type. Most of the time that locals refer to the "Golden Gate" the fact it is a bridge is specifically mentioned or implied by context. Most of what we say about this feature necessarily includes the concept that it is a bridge.
This same applies to most everything and most everything that has existed in the past, "I went to see Hamlet at the Globe Theatre". There is rarely much doubt about the nature of proper nouns. "People who live in Madrid are Spaniards." The roads in Chicago are often congested." "Joe went to Chicago to see the Prudential Building".
But NONE OF THIS applies to the pyramid because what they actually said was "the king is the pyramid". I would presume that if they had specifically stated "Khufu is the pyramid" they probably meant that Khufu was Khufu's Pyramid or it's proper name "Khufu is Khufu's Horizon".
It's just like Egyptologists slaved away for a century to translate the Pyramid Texts and never once bothered to read their own translation.
> Something about priests of pyramids of Seneferu
> being exempt from taxes. We ask why this would be
> and why pyramids would have priests at all—why
> Egyptian kings had priests at all. We look at
> things other than a tendentious idio-reading of
> the Pyramid Texts.
You see stinky footed bumpkins associated with a specific tomb were exempt from taxes but I see the scientists at the pyramid were exempt from the tax.
We all see what we expect.
I believe the ancients were scientists who used funiculars to build pyramids and tend to see most things in this light.
There's a simple solution; wake the Egyptologists up from their centuries long nap and get them to do real science. You are the one who supports this nonsense that all the answers are known and no stinkin' facts are needed. All we are saying is give truth a chance. There is no truth without objectivity and no objectivity in a vacuum. At least religions have the Bible or Koran (et al) to guide them. What does Egyptology have other than mountains of et al?
It's the 3rd millennium and pronouncements from on high no longer carry any weight. Egyptology is full of itself and nothing else.