Chris Jordan wrote:

> The texts here read like instructions rather than 'orientation'
> almost a manual.
>
> Are you sure they had reeds in the water on the summit?
>
> The current paradigm is slowly eroding, here's a nice article
> by Gigal suggesting more than a few are buying into the
> intrusion tomb hypothesis or as I call it the Idiot Lord
> Intrusion Tomb Theory :)
>
> [www.gigalresearch.com]

Thanks for the link.

I believe that Giza was the most heavily disturbed site on the face of the planet long before anyone ever thought of building a pyramid. There are a couple structures under G1 and if they ever do a gravimetric scan of G2 there will probably be something under it as well. This site may have had countless purposes over the millinea before it was stripped to bedrock and the pyramids built. Relatively little changed after pyramid construction and the cemeteries were filled other than thousands of intrusive burials. Every where there was a gap people shoved in mummies (and daddies). Indeed, the knsti-canal which delivered water to the cliff face counterweights were said to have dozens of burials in them with water erosion under them!

Gigal mentions the hydraulic elevator found by the quarry which apparently utilized the small quantity of water allotted to the quarry for dust supression to lift some of the stones up out of the quarry. They would not have had nearly enough water to lift them all but they wasted nothing. Stones lifted here were probably pulled up to east side of the pyramid with the production from the Sphinx Quarry by the eastern cliff face counterweight. I have it on some authority that this elevator has already been destroyed but getting specific information of what they're doing is nearly as difficult as getting them to do science; an impossibility. There's plenty of money to fill evidence with concrete but no money to do $100 lab experiments.

I've often marveled at why a lake on the pyramid top would be known as "the lake of reeds" colloquially. Scientifically it's the "lake of the jackal". My guess at this point is that they used a fine layer of clay mud (probably what separated out at the bottom of the cliff face) to line all of the stone-work canals.

420a. To say: N., I have trampled the mud of the water-courses. Thot is the protector of N.,
420b. when it is dark, when it is dark.

It appears that one of the few jobs done at night by "human invention" (thot), was to help seal the tiny leaks by stirring up the mud in the canals. Water at altitude was extremely precious and even slight losses would add up. Of course, the lake of reeds would also require this same treatment but it's near the head of the winding watercourse and is the ideal place to add the mud. Putting in the turbulant water nearer the eye of horus would tend to cause the mud to segregate by size and be less effective at plugging leaks.

Reeds propogate with very light windblown seed. I'm thinking that near the end of the season when the gods are most in need of "purification" (an eruption) these reeds would actually sprout in the lake of the jackal. At the beginning of the season they may have had to actually clear a few out.

There are other possibilities and this is hardly solved. One notable possibility is they used capillary action for some process (perhaps a control process) and reeds were the mechanism by which they "sucked up" the water.

1659a. Horus has given the gods to thee; he has caused them to ascend to thee, as (reed)-pens,

There's very little hyperbole in the PT and no compelling reason to believe this isn't meant literally. I believe this is referring to capillary action of the fire-pan (trilobed disc) sucking up the willow tree oil that signals the workers to report to work when it burns.

558a. To say: Bdš.t comes; the fire-pan burns.
558b. Those with (ready) hands stand to give an offering to N.

While this fits in context other possible meanings are not excluded. This is the sole weakness of the ancient language; all the referents had to be known for a statement to make sense. It was wonderful language but it required active listening and familiarity with every single word.

I suppose I'm rambling. Suffice to say I don't know yet why it was called the "marsh of reeds". They certainly had a knack for exaggeration and they seemed to find it humorous to name things accordingly. Of course, part of this might be mistranslation.

Each utterance "paints a picture" or is like a series of verbal pictures. Even those I understand pretty well can be a little elusive as to purpose. I keep saying that they were exactly like us but thought differently but I'm sure we'd find a few of their ways a little strange. Where we have superstition, they had ritual. They had a lot of ritual.

I've noticed that even Egyptologists seem to be feeling the pressure on the paradigm and few will say things like "they mustta used ramps" any longer. I saw a sight the other day that towed the company line quite closely and dared to say that the great pyramids might not have been tombs!!! Things are changing but until the science is actually done these changes don't add up to anything but mere words. Welcome words, yes, but just words.