> It was daubed quickly judging by the representation
> of the glyphs themselves and the paint drips, on a stone
> designated for a chamber which was sealed and to which no-one
> had access until gunpowder was used in the 19th century to
> blast their way in.
So you know it was "daubed quickly", do you? And you are suggesting that in a totally open text stream behind a chick that clearly shows the top and bottom of that text stream, the painter/mason was so sloppy about finding the vertical center of the text stream that he somehow accidentally painted a horizontally linear snake all the way at the top of the text stream because of how fast he had to paint it? Are you suggesting it was painted up there in the rafters with a rotated horizontal format rather than just painting it vertically? All that seems logical to you, huh?
> The placement of the horned viper being "high" is a nonsense
> argument. It is its placement in the word itself which gives it
> meaning, not how high up it is.
I'm sorry you continue to cut the masons short in their level of expertise that they were unable to do a better job estimating the vertical center of a text stream. Bumpkins indeed abounded among the ancients. Please point out all the other extreme positioning errors they made because they were in such a hurry.
> See above for why the positioning of the horned viper glyph as
> "high" (which I dispute) is not a convincing argument. The
> other inscriptions of KHWFW are formal inscriptions, carved in
> raised or sunk relief, which were meant to be viewed.
In no other glyph string do we find any glyph so far out of compliance in its alignment. I assume you prefer to chalk that up to a coincidence. I disagree.
> To which other graffiti inscription of KHWFW do you refer to
> substantiate your argument that positioning of the viper glyph
> is "anomalous" in the Campbell's chamber cartouche? - for that
> is what you claim in your post.
You can't be serious. There is only a small handful of places across the entirety of Egypt where you can find "Khufu" written at all. The vast majority are either "Khfu" or "Khnum-Khfu". If what you say is true, why does virtually every textbook written by a credentialed Egyptologist show it in a lower position? And some even with the dots under it? Show me any current text on glyphs that provide for a text format that allows such high placement of any glyph without the presence of a glyph underneath it.
> Anomalous in comparison to which other graffiti inscription?
No other glyph throughout the Relieving Chambers shows such anomalous positioning.
> For the other CARVED inscriptions of a KHWFW cartouche differ
> in the respect that they were carved and also for PUBLIC
> consumption. The hidden, quickly daubed graffiti in a sealed
> chamber was not, however you try to spin it.
You have ZERO idea how "quickly" those paintings were made. You are simply making it up to fit your self-consistent theory. If they were in that much of a hurry to be so far off from the vertical center when drawing essentially a horizontal line, then there should be many other glyphs with such placement errors, and yet you would be hard pressed to find any other glyph so anomalously place out of compliance.