Manu:...and that physical evidence in the chamber can be explained with an in situ job by pyramid workers.
And I responded:
SC: Oh sure--the ancient Egyptians wrote sideways and upside-down all the time. If you can find examples of such upside-down in-situ writing outwith the GP, I'd be happy to look at it.
So I ask:
1) What evidence do you have that these marks were, as you now claim, "an in-stu job by the pyramid workers"? I only ask this because the view of mainstream has always been that the marks were painted by the quarry gangs either at the quarries or when their work (block) was being transported. Your proposition above seems to want to overturn that mainstream view.
2) If you believe the AEs wrote in-situ marks upside-down, sideways etc, can you explain why that would be easier than writing the marks the right way up?
3) As I asked in my original response, can you provide any other examples of in-situ, upside-down / sideways old hieratic writing?
You subseqently wrote:
Manu: "He built his pyramid" means he built his pyramid.
You may be somewhat surprised to learn that I actually accept that 'Khufu' built the GP--well, kinda accept it. (For example, see my post here). The Arabic scholars state that the GP was built by Saurid. Lehner suggests Saurid may be a corruption of Suphis. And Suphis was later transliterated by Rosellini into Khufu. So yes--kinda accept it. What I have extreme trouble accepting is the chronology and I am much more in line with Schoch's thinking on this (even Bauval still insists on the relatively 'young' date of ca. 2500 BC). Those king's names we observe in the GP were written quite literally by the "FOLLOWERS of Khufu" - just like today, for example, many Christians are sometimes referred to as the "FOLLOWERS of Christ". The king's names we find in the GP all come from a much later time i.e. from those who continued to remember, respect and honour the builder, the "FOLLOWERS of Khufu". This is to say that Vyse found and copied into the GP marks from a much later period made by the "FOLLOWERS or 'FRIENDS' of Khufu" that were found somewhere outside the GP. At least, that is what the evidence suggests to me.
So, if the Sphinx and Gizamids are contemporary structures (and I have very good reason for believing that they are), then if a 4th dynasty King named Khufu repaired the Sphinx then this was not the same Khufu that built the GP but perhaps a "FOLLOWER of Khufu", a 4th dynasty king named in honour of the original. Perhaps.
Manu: It weighs heavier than casting doubt on one mark (or three marks now) inside a chamber sealed until 200 years ago.
Trust me--there are many more than THREE painted marks being disputed here. And you know what, even if it could be proven conclusively, beyond ANY doubt whatsoever that Vyse DID forge just ONE mark (while the rest of the marks remained questionable), that ONE PROVEN FORGED MARK totally poisons the entire well. Even if it has not been proven that the other marks are fake, simply knowing that Vyse DID FAKE something in those chambers would - whether you like it or not, agree with it or not - cast doubt upon the other marks in the minds of most reasonable thinking people. For sure.
Manu: But in any case, let's quit quibbling. Take it to the next level. That's really the message. If you had me sold by now, you should be worried.
I'd be more worried if I hadn't convinced anyone by now of my argument. And trust me--there are plenty that are convinced by it. And yet I know that there are many that are not, thus far, convinced. Such is the way of these things and I don't lose sleep over it. People are allowed to draw their own conclusions. All I ask, as I have said to you before, is that they consider and weigh ALL the evidence I present for the case for these marks having been faked is much, much greater than the sum of its parts.
Manu: I am not going to put words into anyone's mouth only my own...
I wouldn't expect you to do otherwise.
Manu: The best theory to explain all observations by all involved parties to date is that Khufu built his pyramid on a preexisting structure and what I have shown on my own is that the orientation, base, height, angle, indent, king chamber, and north shaft therefrom were all part of a design conceived by Hemiunu, Khufu's vizier. What that means is that substantially most of Khufu Akhet was built by him including the king chamber (courses 50-60) and relieving chambers with the quarry marks.
As I said--I kinda agree with this (except the quarry marks are, imo, fake). And I simply do not accept the mainstream chronology.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09-Jun-18 21:00 by Scott Creighton.