Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Thanos5150 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So you think the location it's found among all the
> other tombs directly around it that point to the
> 4th Dynasty is "irrelevant" as to its provenance?
> Did you ever look to see the artifacts they found
> inside of it as well, or the architecture, which
> maybe is part of all that stylistic "mumbo-jumbo"
> Flentye was talking about? Of course, this is
> meaningless.

> > YOU brought it up as evidence for such. Now you
> > say it's irrelevant. Make up your mind.
>
> No Audrey. Even Origyptian understands the minutia
> of his familial ties to Khufu is irrelevant
> regarding the provenance of the Merrer diary.

YOU said ....
Quote
Thanos
As you already know, these are not the "only" reasons the papyri are dated to the 4th Dynasty, the least of which is Khufu's half brother is also mentioned in detail as an administrator. Again(8-16):

YOU brought it up as one of the reasons why the "papyri are dated to the 4th Dynasty". I didn't focus on his family ties, you have. I haven't stressed his family ties, you have.

Quote
Thanos
...the papyri notes Ankhhaf,half-brother of Khufu, was the administrator of the project who is well attested at Giza:

Still waiting for how he is "well attested at Giza". Looks like he was well attested at Giza by Reisner, based on the location of his tomb. You aren't coming up with thing else that 'attests' him. In other words you are going by what Reisner thought was the lay out of the tombs.

> Not really. The only reason you are taking this
> tack is to support Origyptian's argument,

That's really too bad you think so. Your vision is not clear and may be clouded by your anger. No matter how emphatically I deny your assumption, you won't believe it, so it's a waste of time to try to change your mind.

> as usual, that the Merrer diary doesn't belong to the
> 4th Dynasty and contradict any argument against
> it. The lot of you didn't even know who Ankh-haf
> was or his significance in Merrer's diary until I
> brought it up months ago (ignored then), yet now
> all of a sudden you are all over it trying to deny
> Ankh-haf even belongs to the 4th Dynasty?

Because YOU used Ankh-haf as one factor dating the diary.

> > I think the dating of Wadi al-Jarf is
> > circumstantial, not a drop of science to
> support
> > it. It's dated by the Khufu cartouche, period.
>
> What does the dating of Wadi al-Jarf have to do
> with the dating of the papyri?

Ask Tallet & Marouard, who for some reason title their papers with "Wadi al-Jarf", naming the site where the objects were found.

> So you omitted all the rest, which would be
> all the rest, that directly contradicts
> your opinion on purpose? My bad.

For some strange reason you think I should have posted the whole article. I gave the links so everyone could read it for themselves. Why on earth would I make unnecessary long posts when I made the articles available?
There is no need to post an entire article when the link is given. Then others can find within an article what they think are points to be discussed. If you don't like this technique, that's really your problem.

> You mean like the 700+ samples taken from the
> predynastic through the OK which clearly place
> their provenance in the 4th-3rd millenniums?
> Again, good to know the whole "science" thing is
> finally catching up with you.

They found 700+ samples at Wadi al-Jarf? We have been talking about that site, have you now gone sideways into a different subject?

> > A house of cards waiting for a breeze.
>
> Whatever you say Cladking.

I'm pretty sure that was my comment that I posted and not Cladkings. Unless ck can edit my posts.

> So I guess this means the tombs must date to the
> NK then. Good work Audrey.

You believe what the Egyptologists say, I'll make up my own mind, if it doesn't upset you too much

> > Now if they only had some proof of who Khufu
> was.
> > And don't give me that 'context' crap. The
> context
> > was gathered after the fact to bolster
> > their guesses.
>
> Oyyy... Not this again.

It will be "this again" for some time to come. You thought the subject would go away because you & Stower spit on it?

> If this is all you think it is I can't help you.
> No one is claiming the KFC across the street was
> built in the 4th Dynasty-why do you think that is?

Why do you think that's a good analogy?

> The difference is that all it is these
> "others" know (if that) is that it sits next door
> and otherwise know nothing else about what
> connects them. Bravo-got me there. And these
> "others" would include the dynamic duo of who-you
> and Origyptian? Well, hot damn. That may be
> good enough for you, but sure as hell not
> enough for me nor anyone else not named Jon or
> Cladking here I suspect.

Yet you fail to mention anything else that connects Ankh-haf to the 4th dyn.

> Audrey, the new champion of "science". And if RCD
> said it dated to the 3rd millennium then rest
> assured your narrative would only be something
> else to naysay the provenance.

Not at all. I haven't expressed my opinion on when Ankh-haf lived. But evidently we will never know because Egyptology doesn't like to RCD

> Audrey, you cite multiple papers to contradict the
> opinion Ankh-haf is related to Khufu in some way

I DID NOT cite those papers to contradict his family ties. I cited them to show how Egyptology has placed him in the 4th dyn.

> yet ignore the fact not one word of it contradicts
> your greater point that you believe he does not
> date to the 4th Dynasty. You cherry pick-quotes to
> serve your narrative

I DID NOT cherry pick. I know this is one of the frequent complaints you use to invalidate the poster, but I was just the messenger. The articles were made available for everyone to read. I am not about to post the entire article just so you & Stower won't scream cherry picking.

> then ignore the rest in that
> otherwise there is no discrepancy as to the
> 4th Dynasty date of Ankh-haf. But please, quote
> one of your sources that supports this idea.

Why should I? The point is Egyptology says he is 4th dyn. It's not my job to disprove it. I'm only showing that the reason they say so is not based on good evidence let alone science. Why can't you guys understand the difference? It's that same old mindset of - no one can disagree unless they have a better idea.

> So I am to thank you for reciting papers written
> by Egyptologists you cherry pick from out of
> context to support your otherwise unsubstantiated
> beliefs,

Nope, no need to be grateful. And no need to insult the messenger who just happened to not post the articles in a way that would be pleasing to YOU.

> yet if I were to quote them myself to
> support the opposing view then it is I that is
> somehow the lesser for it?

No at all and do not see why you would come to this conclusion. Boy, you're really pissed that I didn't post the entire article.

> I believe that's called
> "irony" among other things, but rest assured we
> can at least count on me to quote them accurately
> and honestly if and when I do.

Yes, Thanos the Savior. How quickly you worked yourself up to that status

> The simple truth is that you are not worth my time
> to write an expose regarding the context of the
> eastern cemetery and interconnectedness of the
> artifacts and architecture that no doubt you will
> surely not understand anyways and argue with me
> about it all the same. I'd say once in a week is
> enough. But since you are the one with such
> doubts, please tell us why the eastern cemetery
> and/or the people found in it do not belong to the
> 4th Dynasty.

Because there is nothing to say they do except location.

> Hint-the big one at the bottom labelled G7510
> would be Ankh-haf's.

I gave the tomb number G7510 in a previous post, but thanks for the help.

> Some quip to follow how it is I who am not
> worth your time? You'd be right.

I don't think like that, so I wouldn't say it. But if that imaginary conversation makes you feel good, go for it.

> Its funny to me though how the lot of you decry
> anything that dates the great pyrmaids to the
> Dynastic period, yet by the same token you equally
> deny anything that dates the 4th Dynasty to, well,
> the 4th Dynasty, as if this period was just a void
> in time. If the likes of Ankh-haf do not belong to
> the 4th Dynasty then I am curious-who did?
> No one? If not then where and who do you think
> they are?

The answer to that is too long to put in a post. It would require a book to answer.

> > There really isn't anything about you that is
> alt.

> If the measure of such is the likes of yourself,
> Origyptian, Cladking et al, then I take that as a
> high compliment.

You're welcome

> Origpytian's attack parrot says what? If by
> "status quo" you mean the truth then yes, I agree.
> Wow, two compliments in one day. Your insults by
> way of saying the opposite of what you know is the
> truth because you think that's what will get under
> the other person's skin the most is quite tired at
> this point.

That's just silly. You're pseudo pyscho babble is what's tiring.

> Though you feel it clever, to the rest
> of us it's just plain dishonest which is a
> reflection of your character, not ours.

You use the word "dishonest" frequently yet how you use it is puzzling. Why call someone "dishonest" if they are posting what they truly believe?

> I fail to see how calling out belligerent
> intellectual frauds for what they are is an
> "insult".

WHO is being belligerent?

> The real insult is that the rest of us
> have to suffer it in the first place.

You don't have to "suffer" anything. You're not a victim. You choose to read and post here. If it's too much to bear, then don't do it. Your choice, no one's forcing you.

> And given
> these are the people you have cast your lot with
> and defend like a rabid dog every day, despite the
> fact I know you know they are full of shit- what
> does this say about you?

I cast my lot with those I share interests with. Unfortunately I did not consult Oracle Thanos for his approval first, who knows all truths and therefore knows who is full of shit.

I don't cast my lot with those who think they know everything.

> It's ok to be
> willfully ignorant intellectual frauds because
> they are on your "team"? Sounds like some of these
> "higher standards" we've heard so much about.

Brother, you're really pissed about nothing. I don't think tirades will further you points, but I could be wrong. Maybe less judgmental emotion and more objectivity would be better for a forum.

This is what I call... stupid; going back and forth trying to reason point by point with one of your tirades. It's got to be boring for the readers. Insult me, call me what your wish, I will not engage in anymore of your tantrums. And I will continue to form my own opinions outside of Egyptology. You can't stop that.

If you want to talk about the subjects, that's great. But the subject isn't ME. The subject WAS Ankh-haf and Wadi al-Jarf, which I think you have now effectively buried

He who knows all the answers has not been asked all the questions - Confucius

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Imhotep 3854 Rofhessa 26-Feb-17 11:39
Re: Imhotep 702 Lee McGiffen 27-Feb-17 12:15
Re: Imhotep 819 Origyptian 27-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 821 Thanos5150 27-Feb-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 673 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 07:53
Re: Imhotep 631 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:34
Re: Imhotep 617 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:26
Re: Imhotep 714 Rofhessa 03-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 541 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 17:04
Re: Imhotep 612 Rofhessa 05-Mar-17 19:14
Re: Imhotep 614 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 19:07
Re: Imhotep 554 Rofhessa 28-Feb-17 10:30
Re: Imhotep 543 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 15:05
Re: Imhotep 563 cladking 28-Feb-17 17:00
Re: Imhotep 649 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:59
Re: Imhotep 663 cladking 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 584 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:46
Re: Imhotep 575 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:08
Re: Imhotep 519 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 21:47
Re: Imhotep 419 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 21:58
Re: Imhotep 465 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:05
Re: Imhotep 481 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:14
Re: Imhotep 602 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:25
Re: Imhotep 682 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:30
Re: Imhotep 590 eyeofhorus33 28-Feb-17 22:52
Re: Imhotep 595 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:58
Re: Imhotep 497 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:23
Re: Imhotep 620 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 474 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:09
Re: Imhotep 627 Corpuscles 28-Feb-17 23:08
Re: Imhotep 655 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:10
Re: Imhotep 543 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 01:56
Re: Imhotep 591 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 04:30
Re: Imhotep 685 Audrey 01-Mar-17 05:03
Re: Imhotep 592 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 06:36
Re: Imhotep 643 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Imhotep 541 Audrey 01-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 554 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 04:13
Re: Imhotep 513 Audrey 01-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Imhotep 626 Thanos5150 28-Feb-17 22:39
Re: Imhotep 634 Origyptian 28-Feb-17 22:55
Re: Imhotep 497 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:43
Re: Imhotep 541 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:07
Re: Imhotep 522 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 601 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 03:20
Re: Imhotep 614 Audrey 01-Mar-17 04:43
Re: Imhotep 555 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 14:13
Re: Imhotep 679 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 14:35
Re: Imhotep 551 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 573 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 15:57
Re: Imhotep 663 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 03:36
Re: Imhotep 537 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:50
Re: Imhotep 506 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:33
Re: Imhotep 567 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 604 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 21:56
Re: Imhotep 485 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:30
The weaselling continues. 474 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:14
Re: The weaselling continues. 592 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 22:26
Re: The weaselling continues. 533 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 22:51
Re: Imhotep 566 cladking 01-Mar-17 15:21
Re: Imhotep 613 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 15:50
Re: Imhotep 588 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Imhotep 446 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 16:11
Re: Imhotep 472 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:30
Re: Imhotep 583 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 561 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 625 sfbey 01-Mar-17 17:57
Re: Imhotep 556 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:31
Re: Imhotep 514 Corpuscles 01-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 523 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:26
Utterance #373 623 cladking 02-Mar-17 01:52
Re: Utterance #373 545 Corpuscles 02-Mar-17 19:23
Re: Utterance #373 502 cladking 02-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 593 cladking 01-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 570 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Imhotep 469 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 622 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 16:26
Re: Imhotep 500 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Imhotep 538 Audrey 01-Mar-17 17:07
Re: Imhotep 480 Origyptian 01-Mar-17 17:23
Re: Imhotep 511 cladking 01-Mar-17 17:42
Re: Imhotep 604 Audrey 01-Mar-17 18:10
Great Post 582 cladking 01-Mar-17 19:45
Re: Imhotep 560 Martin Stower 01-Mar-17 23:05
Re: Imhotep 755 Thanos5150 01-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 622 Audrey 02-Mar-17 06:48
Re: Imhotep 527 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 11:32
Re: Imhotep 484 Audrey 02-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Imhotep 520 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:04
Imhotep's Sandals. 534 cladking 02-Mar-17 17:09
Re: Imhotep 515 Martin Stower 02-Mar-17 18:58
Re: Imhotep 487 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 573 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Imhotep 441 Thanos5150 02-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 431 Origyptian 02-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Imhotep 647 Thanos5150 03-Mar-17 17:48
Re: Imhotep 632 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 497 eyeofhorus33 03-Mar-17 22:28
Re: Imhotep 533 Origyptian 03-Mar-17 22:48
Re: Imhotep 491 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 00:18
Re: Imhotep 420 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 520 Martin Stower 04-Mar-17 03:38
Re: Imhotep 685 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 02:33
Re: Imhotep 700 Origyptian 04-Mar-17 04:34
Re: Imhotep 592 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:55
Re: Imhotep 544 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:28
Re: Imhotep 744 Audrey 04-Mar-17 07:43
Re: Imhotep 692 Thanos5150 04-Mar-17 22:59
Re: Imhotep 529 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 01:05
Re: Imhotep 424 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 02:00
Re: Imhotep 715 Audrey 05-Mar-17 04:56
Re: Imhotep 452 Origyptian 05-Mar-17 05:32
Re: Imhotep 611 Audrey 05-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 675 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 06:23
Re: Imhotep 523 Martin Stower 05-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 548 Thanos5150 05-Mar-17 16:14
Re: Imhotep 711 Audrey 06-Mar-17 02:50
Re: Imhotep 577 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 05:38
Re: Imhotep 580 R Avry Wilson 06-Mar-17 07:06
Re: Imhotep 686 DUNE 06-Mar-17 14:49
Re: Imhotep 523 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 20:33
Re: Imhotep 475 DUNE 06-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Imhotep 620 Origyptian 06-Mar-17 21:38
Re: Imhotep 434 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:17
Re: Imhotep 433 Jon Ellison 06-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 619 Thanos5150 06-Mar-17 23:32
Re: Imhotep 577 DUNE 06-Mar-17 23:56
Re: Imhotep 487 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 00:27
Re: Imhotep 469 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:07
Re: Imhotep 456 Jon Ellison 07-Mar-17 01:16
Re: Imhotep 901 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:40
Re: Imhotep 596 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 01:58
Re: Imhotep 591 DUNE 07-Mar-17 16:49
Re: Imhotep 573 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Imhotep 519 Thanos5150 07-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 629 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 02:23
Re: Imhotep 619 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 04:45
Re: Imhotep 575 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 11:11
Re: Imhotep 534 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 13:16
Re: Imhotep 617 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 15:45
Re: Imhotep 552 Origyptian 07-Mar-17 16:44
Re: Imhotep 611 Martin Stower 07-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 646 Corpuscles 07-Mar-17 21:53
Re: Imhotep 422 cladking 08-Mar-17 15:13
Re: Imhotep 661 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 16:29
Re: Imhotep 497 cladking 08-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Imhotep 593 Audrey 09-Mar-17 01:16
Interpretation vs Communication. 440 cladking 09-Mar-17 14:33
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 499 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 14:55
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 409 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:16
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 519 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 16:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 543 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 15:17
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 527 cladking 09-Mar-17 15:39
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 767 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:04
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 583 cladking 09-Mar-17 16:27
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 558 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 16:47
You Do the Math. 510 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:32
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 464 cladking 09-Mar-17 19:10
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 657 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 20:25
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 432 cladking 09-Mar-17 21:22
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 526 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 22:11
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 587 cladking 10-Mar-17 01:34
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 508 SandyJesse 11-Mar-17 02:15
Re: Interpretation vs Communication. 603 SandyJesse 10-Mar-17 00:31
In order to build the great pyramids... 500 Racho 10-Mar-17 01:14
Re: Imhotep 535 Corpuscles 08-Mar-17 18:18
Re: Imhotep 563 Martin Stower 08-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 531 Origyptian 08-Mar-17 22:53
Re: Imhotep 481 Martin Stower 09-Mar-17 00:33
Re: Imhotep 432 Origyptian 09-Mar-17 03:35
Re: Imhotep 489 Jon Ellison 09-Mar-17 14:53
Re: Imhotep 422 Audrey 10-Mar-17 00:51
Re: Imhotep 529 Jon Ellison 10-Mar-17 03:42
Re: Imhotep 604 Audrey 11-Mar-17 06:22
Re: Imhotep 653 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 11:22
Re: Imhotep 560 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:40
Re: Imhotep 449 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 03:25
Re: Imhotep 495 Audrey 12-Mar-17 04:55
Re: Imhotep 639 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 13:14
Re: Imhotep 449 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:12
Re: Imhotep 399 cladking 12-Mar-17 04:03
Re: Imhotep 528 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 04:07
Re: Imhotep 470 cladking 12-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 475 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:10
Who Knew? 446 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:26
Re: Who Knew? 444 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:05
Re: Imhotep 559 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 16:33
Re: Imhotep 544 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 16:53
Re: Imhotep 408 cladking 12-Mar-17 19:30
Re: Imhotep 506 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 07:03
Re: Imhotep 420 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 15:33
Re: Imhotep 455 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 18:13
Re: Imhotep 446 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 18:53
Re: Imhotep 522 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 19:33
Re: Imhotep 435 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 462 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 23:24
Re: Imhotep 513 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 23:44
Re: Imhotep 538 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 01:21
Re: Imhotep 536 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:26
Re: Imhotep 488 Warwick 13-Mar-17 13:53
Re: Imhotep 490 cladking 13-Mar-17 13:59
Re: Imhotep 499 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:16
Re: Imhotep 466 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:26
Re: Imhotep 513 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 411 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:43
Re: Imhotep 495 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:18
Re: Imhotep 507 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 17:24
Re: Imhotep 477 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:26
Re: Imhotep 436 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:42
Re: Imhotep 536 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 20:39
Re: Imhotep 446 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:39
Re: Imhotep 528 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 14:03
Re: Imhotep 500 Merrell 11-Mar-17 14:29
Re: Imhotep 481 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:03
Re: Imhotep 433 Merrell 11-Mar-17 15:27
Re: Imhotep 475 cladking 11-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 504 Merrell 11-Mar-17 16:15
Re: Imhotep 462 cladking 11-Mar-17 18:52
Re: Imhotep 456 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 15:53
Re: Imhotep 591 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 17:27
Re: Imhotep 481 Warwick 11-Mar-17 17:43
Re: Imhotep 481 Origyptian 11-Mar-17 20:13
Re: Imhotep 559 Warwick 11-Mar-17 20:34
Re: Imhotep 493 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 00:45
Re: Imhotep 621 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 02:49
Re: Funerary Cult 420 Thunderbird 13-Mar-17 05:02
Re: Funerary Cult 402 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:31
Re: Funerary Cult 428 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 22:04
Re: Funerary Cult 466 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:30
Re: Funerary Cult 442 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Funerary Cult 378 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 02:54
Re: Funerary Cult 441 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 09:23
Re: Funerary Cult 330 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 14:01
Re: Funerary Cult 434 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 21:35
Re: Funerary Cult 341 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 23:55
Re: Funerary Cult 471 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 01:24
Re: Funerary Cult 493 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 03:26
Re: Funerary Cult 363 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 13:00
Re: Funerary Cult 526 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 13:34
Re: Funerary Cult 443 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 14:32
Re: Funerary Cult 327 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 15:38
Re: Funerary Cult 399 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 16:06
Re: Funerary Cult 412 Corpuscles 15-Mar-17 16:51
Re: Funerary Cult 265 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 17:08
Re: Funerary Cult 453 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 19:24
Re: Funerary Cult 409 Merrell 15-Mar-17 21:40
Re: Funerary Cult 323 Origyptian 16-Mar-17 00:12
Re: Funerary Cult 441 Martin Stower 16-Mar-17 00:53
Re: Funerary Cult 307 Warwick 15-Mar-17 19:01
Re: Funerary Cult 382 eyeofhorus33 15-Mar-17 18:19
Re: Funerary Cult 394 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:22
Re: Funerary Cult 354 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:27
Re: Funerary Cult 476 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 21:48
Re: Funerary Cult 507 R Avry Wilson 16-Mar-17 02:08
Re: Funerary Cult 388 Warwick 15-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Funerary Cult 323 Origyptian 15-Mar-17 20:19
Re: Funerary Cult 468 Martin Stower 15-Mar-17 20:23
Re: Funerary Cult 254 Warwick 15-Mar-17 21:08
Re: Funerary Cult 412 Audrey 14-Mar-17 02:55
Re: Funerary Cult 548 Thanos5150 14-Mar-17 05:30
Re: Funerary Cult 380 Warwick 14-Mar-17 18:12
Re: Half cartouche. 333 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:14
Re: Half cartouche. 381 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 12:43
Re: Half cartouche. 365 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 12:56
Re: Half cartouche. 335 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 13:37
Re: Half cartouche. 372 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 13:42
Re: Half cartouche. 344 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 15:00
Re: Half cartouche. 311 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 15:52
Re: Half cartouche. 447 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 16:34
Re: Half cartouche. 598 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 17:19
Re: Half cartouche. 474 Martin Stower 14-Mar-17 20:07
Re: Half cartouche. 400 Jon Ellison 14-Mar-17 22:50
Re: Imhotep 467 Warwick 13-Mar-17 14:00
Re: Imhotep 463 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 14:10
Re: Imhotep 485 Merrell 13-Mar-17 15:22
Re: Imhotep 271 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:30
Re: Imhotep 387 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:35
Re: Imhotep 379 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:51
Re: Imhotep 322 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:58
Re: Imhotep 314 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 16:10
Re: Imhotep 369 Merrell 13-Mar-17 18:27
Re: Imhotep 397 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:31
Re: Imhotep 403 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:40
Re: Imhotep 326 Warwick 13-Mar-17 18:48
Re: Imhotep 471 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:17
Re: Imhotep 289 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:50
Re: Imhotep 371 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:57
Re: Imhotep 400 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 18:10
Re: Imhotep 319 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:28
Re: Imhotep 373 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 292 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 15:48
Re: Imhotep 462 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:28
Re: Imhotep 295 Warwick 13-Mar-17 16:40
Re: Imhotep 426 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 19:15
Re: Imhotep 264 Warwick 13-Mar-17 19:22
Re: Imhotep 342 Origyptian 13-Mar-17 20:30
Re: Imhotep 501 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:06
Re: Imhotep 294 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 21:29
Re: Imhotep 355 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 21:34
Re: Imhotep 319 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 22:01
Re: Imhotep 436 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 22:41
Re: Imhotep 301 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 23:43
Re: Imhotep 395 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 12:42
Re: Imhotep 301 Thanos5150 13-Mar-17 16:42
Re: Imhotep 462 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 15:02
Re: Imhotep 412 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 469 Thanos5150 11-Mar-17 21:19
Re: Imhotep 537 Martin Stower 11-Mar-17 22:12
Re: Imhotep 474 Audrey 12-Mar-17 00:24
Re: Imhotep 438 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 00:55
Re: Imhotep 487 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 01:41
Re: Imhotep 444 Audrey 12-Mar-17 02:30
Re: Imhotep 568 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 07:02
Re: Imhotep 391 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 08:49
Re: Imhotep 338 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 16:52
Re: Imhotep 357 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 21:10
Re: Imhotep 293 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:02
Re: Imhotep 332 Origyptian 12-Mar-17 22:16
Re: Imhotep 369 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 23:51
Re: Imhotep 405 Origyptian 14-Mar-17 04:04
Re: Imhotep 312 Audrey 12-Mar-17 19:54
Re: Imhotep 387 Thanos5150 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Imhotep 399 Martin Stower 12-Mar-17 22:37
Re: Imhotep 325 Audrey 12-Mar-17 23:58
Re: Imhotep 435 Martin Stower 13-Mar-17 00:20
Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 340 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 19:58
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 439 cladking 12-Mar-17 20:06
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 382 Corpuscles 12-Mar-17 21:07
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 286 cladking 12-Mar-17 22:32
Re: Papyri Wadi el-Jarf 320 Warwick 13-Mar-17 15:38
...In a Million Years. 445 cladking 13-Mar-17 17:36
Re: ...In a Million Years. 278 Warwick 13-Mar-17 17:57
Re: ...In a Million Years. 501 cladking 13-Mar-17 18:33