> Hi charly
> charly wrote:
> WRT tombs
> > There is no lack of evidence, the evidence is ignored,
> > dismissed or ridiculed by many "alternatives". There 's
> > modern about sarcophagi constructed in the OK.
> The sarcophagi argument is fallacious in the extreme, it is a
> stone box so what. It could have held anything from water to
> bodies, you choose bodies and call it a sarcophagi. If you
> believe it is for internment where are the bodies? yeah tomb
> robbers, the only thing robbed is the true function of theses
> exquisite structures. Body boxes are found in many places from
> chapels, crematoriums, modern mummification chambers, morgues
> etc..take ya pick oh yes tombs as well. I am open minded are
Typical tactic of pseudo archaeology, take a modern day concept an try to make it seem ancient cultures already had the same concept. Make the evidence fit and in case there's not enough evidence to be distorted make up some more. Oh, yes...almost forgot, any evidence that points to the contrary has to be ignored, dismissed or ridiculed (sarcophagi need to become "stone boxes", etc.)
> > >They may well have had a funerary function or have been a
> lasting legacy of some benign soul but a wasteful tomb is more
> absurd than anything functional. Ck is not even tackling that
> specifically but notes it as a side
> > > issue to the building process and textual refs in the PTs.
> > "wasteful tomb"? And what do you mean by functional?
> The GPs are obviously a huge waste of resources, even the Taj
> Mahal was less costly.
That's a good possibility, maybe that's one of the reasons the fifth dyn kings build smaller pyramids. There are several indications that divine kingship and the power of the royal family did diminish at the end of the 4th dyn. No need for unevidenced dried up geysers.
In a world where resources are
> squandered at the prospect of ones demise, it is unlikely to
> have been useful only as a symbol of power. Later sure, but
> originally I very much doubt it.
> A function that produces tangible benefits for the builders is
> better. If a moghul wished the perfect monument for his/her
> memory wouldn't a machine that helped millions of people be
> more of a legacy than a pile of stones over his head? This
> ethos fits the foundations set up today by Gates, Rockerfeller
> etc.. that have lasting benefits guaranteeing they will be
> regarded well by history. Big pile of stones just means giant
> egotistical idiot lucky enough to be born into the right
> family, don't you think? I know Egyptologists would have us
> thin otherwise, but I prefer to think for myself.
> Under the Jordan solar hypothesis the point was a geyser, it
> was the end point, boilded water is costly to produce in the
> ancient world and the poor communities today. Wood or whatever
> fuel is used soon dries up. Without boiled sanitary water
> people die of diseases the west has long forgotten about. Ever
> tried drinking Nile Water?
Pyramids as giant water cookers? erm...and the title of your post is "Use of common sense obligatory"????????
> > Most AE symbols were in origin probably tangible and usefull,
> > no one is denying that.
> So what was the original tangible use of the greatest symbol of
> the AEs, the pyramid? As ever it is about energy.
The pyramid isn't a symbol like the djed, ankh, was sceptre or heqa sceptre etc.