MJT: How can you be so sure that this 'nameless edifice' problem, for want of a better term, was around in Khufu's time?
SC: I can't be sure - no one can. But if Egyptologists are correct then it seems more likely than not that the ideas expressed within the Pyramid Texts come from a time long before Khufu & Co.
MJT: In your source material one reads, 'Figure 9. The name (ren) was necessary for the ba to return to the tomb. This is Senuseret I (birth name, left) Kheperkara (throne name, right), of the 12th Dynasty.'
This example postdates the pyramids of Giza by approx. 500 years.
SC: So what. They are not my examples. And it merely goes to show that the author could not find earlier examples to cite. But that does not necessarily mean he could not find them because the religious beliefs were different in Khufu's time; he could not find them because the earlier pyramids were not tombs ergo no names were present. The names of Khufu's kids (at least one of which died before Khufu himself) were inscribed on their sarcophagi and in their mastaba tombs. Think of this as a 'family tradition'. Why then no Khufu inscription on his own supposed sarcophagus and in his own supposed burial chamber when the religion strongly suggests it and the family tradition indicates it? It's not there because this was NOT a sarcophagus of an AE king and the KC is not a burial chamber.
SC: To try and assume that the Pyramid Texts appeared 'out of the blue' in the 5th dynasty as a fully-fledged body of complex funerary ideas is simply preposterous - they would have had much earlier precedent.
MJT: It is fully accepted by mainstream Egyptologists that some parts of the Pyramid Texts predate the pyramids - it is hard to imagine it could be otherwise.
SC: Finally, we're getting somewhere.
MJT: The uncertainty comes in with the question of: which parts were these? Until this is known one cannot say that the abscence of Khufu's name on his sarcophagus is unambiguous evidence for his pyramid not being a tomb.
SC: Well by that standard of "uncertainty" then NEITHER can it be asserted that these structures were intended as tombs. Until more is known about the religious beliefs of this period, it simply cannot be assumed that these structures were built for religious/funerary reasons since there is all this "uncertainty". The names of Khufu's kids were inscribed in THEIR tombs so there is little reason to doubt why this would not also have been done for Khufu.
SC: But then again - perhaps this is all just pure 'fantasy land', eh?
MJT: Well, there's always that possibility, Scott. ;)
SC: You mean there's more than one - possibility?
Post Edited (23-Jun-12 15:05)