> The point (I take it) is that the arrangement of
> rooms and passages served to hide and protect
> something and no better candidate than tomb
> has been offered.
> Perhaps you’d like to offer one?
> The design, material and placement of the
> sarcophagi suggest that they were the last line of
> defence for some important content, consistent
> with the other security arrangements found in
> these pyramids. I wonder what that content might
> have been?
I wonder too. It goes without saying the AE believed the pyramids to have a funerary function, but the question for me is "why"? The answer offered, of course, is that pyramids were built as tombs by and for each pharaoh which the pharaoh's subjects buried themselves in surrounding cemeteries to be next their dead king. Looking at the pyramids of Giza in particular, they are in fact equipped with "stone boxes" which given their superficial similarities to known sarcophagi found elsewhere this can only mean to some they too must be sarcophagi. But if they are in fact sarcophagi, were they meant to house the dead body of the pharaoh which for me the answer is no.
I have brought this up many times here, usually ignored, but the reason against pyramids being built as tombs for the pharaoh are the same reasons some claim they are, which is context. As Lehner has said no royal burial has ever been found in any pyramid. This is not just to mean that no "body" has ever been found, but more importantly, regardless of what was "robbed" or not, none of the artistic/literary requirements for burial are present either. What one would expect, as required by AE religious beliefs, is nothing different than what is found in just about any mastaba of any age yet is completely absent from namely the great pyramids of Giza, Dahshur, and Meidum.
Mastabas were literally "houses for the dead", built as dwellings, which all things needed in life would be represented within the mastaba either physically or in written/pictorial form which often, also missing from the great pyramids, included at least some form of reference as to the provenance of the tomb. The pharaoh, above all others, would command the greatest consideration in these regards and yet his is the one tomb which as a rule is completely absent of such things? This makes little sense logically, but is also diametrically the opposite of what is required for AE religious beliefs with such a practice leaving the pharaoh anonymous and destitute in the afterlife, hardly the desired fate of the king and a living god.
The great pyramids, however, have none of these things. Architecturally the pyramid resembles nothing a pharaoh may have inhabited in life, they possess none of the funerary trappings required such as writing and art, and none, not even the sarcophagi, are claimed by the pharaoh who supposedly built them. When the great pyramids are compared to the very funerary context they reside, other than the "sarcophagi" within them, which Meidum, Red and Bent pyramids do not even have them not to mention all 3 are believed to have been built by one pharaoh mind you, there is otherwise no reason to believe they were ever meant as tombs for the pharaoh if only the opposite.
Snefru supposedly built at least 3 of the great pyramids which as said none contain sarcophagi and are devoid of any inscription or art all told leaving some Egyptologists to suggest he was actually buried in Mastaba 17 near Meidum. Herodotus made it clear Khufu was not buried within G1, but rather under the plateau, and Khafre has his own mastaba at Giza. Pyramids were supposedly built to foil robbers yet Egyptologists are certain nearly all pyramids were robbed often within decades after completion. Again and again and again. Yet one after another the pharaohs supposedly kept building these pyramid tombs, from G1 on each less substantial than the last, knowing full well soon after their death they too would be pillaged? I don't recall the later pharaoh, but if I remember correctly there is even evidence of robbers tunnels being excavated while the pyramid was still being constructed. "Who are we to know the minds of the ancients", but this is just plain stupid in any age. And these pharaohs were supposedly "living gods" yet the very people who worshipped them as such just couldn't wait to desecrate their tomb and steal all their stuff effectively dooming the pharaoh in the afterlife? Because you are king and a god we will devote ourselves to building your tomb that rapes our country of its wealth yet as soon as you are done we are going to break in and take your stuff? Yeah. Makes perfect sense.
Regardless of microwave generators, ram pumps, and the like-if pyramids were not built as tombs for pharaohs then we are left with the same questions as what were they for and why did the AE impose a funerary context upon them? Egyptologists have suggested pyramids were essentially "resurrection machines" which AE texts would seem to support this. A thought I have always had, though it does not explain where this idea came from in the first place nor if the great pyramids in particular were built for this function, is that if they were considered "resurrection machines" then they were not for the pharaoh alone, but for all the people, and no one was ever meant to be buried inside them.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10-Feb-16 04:49 by Thanos5150.