Hello Anthony,

I wrote, ‘So, having the pharaoh’s mortal remains mummified and placed inside a pyramid was not essential to preparing the pharaoh for his after-life.
Doesn’t this contradict everything the orthos say about the roles of the mummy and its pyramid?’

You reply, ‘Not everything could work exactly as planned. The gods had a major role in how things were carried out, and if a body was not to be had, then that was just another contingency. Ideally, there would be a body to mummify.’

So, once again, you are saying the King’s mummified body was not absolutely necessary.
In which case, if there was no mummified body of the King to bury, the pyramid would have served as a symbolic burial place and not an actual burial place.


You write, ‘It's a constant battle with the gods who have their own designs on our fate.’

‘Our fate’? Don’t you mean the AEs fate?


I wrote, ‘I am referring specifically to the pharaonic pyramids of the 1st to 3rd Dyns.
Are you?’

You reply, ‘Absolutely not.
First, there were no pharaohs in Dynasty 1 through 3.
Secondly, there were no pyramids in Dynasty 1 through 2.
Would you like to rephrase the question?’

Certainly.
I am referring specifically to the Kings’ pyramids of the 3rd Dyns.
Are you?

Happy now…?


You write, 'You're welcome to hunt down those who disagree. I'd be interested in seeing their perspectives on it.'

Do you know of any Egyptologists who disagree?


You write, ‘It is the only logical conclusion that includes ALL the data we currently possess. Again, I welcome a better idea, but that's a pretty tall order.’

Being a ‘logical conclusion’ does not make it right.
And does ‘ALL the data’ include studies of how the pyramids’ interiors were designed?
If not, why not?


You write, ‘No, it doesn't. Again, there is a wealth of textual evidence that predate the Pyramid Texts. You should try reading it some time. Fascinating information.’

But as you pointed out recently, this pre-Unas text evidence is fragmentary and difficult to make sense of.
Have you anything better?


You write, ‘They're not books. They're peer reviewed articles.’

Well, they must be right, then.


In response to my, ‘What complete and utter nonsense!’, you write, ‘Agreed! Just like "a pyramid's sarcophagus wasn't meant to hold a body!’

Yet here you are suggesting that it was not actually necessary for the mummified body of the King to be interred in the sarcophagus inside his pyramid.
Now, if it was not absolutely necessary, it is only a short step to: the pyramid was a symbolic burial place.
I find it mildly interesting that folks such as yourself and Kat (among others) are happy to accept that the AEs were happy to wallow up to their necks in symbolism (a.k.a. mythology and religion), yet baulk at the idea of a pyramid being a symbolic tomb.


You write, ‘Until you provide MORE cultural information, and then assemble it in a better manner, you've got nothing to add.’

I let your comment speak for itself, Anthony.


You write, ‘3. They don't know they understand it correctly. They only know that as of this moment they aren't committing any heinous errors of methodology in accepting what they do.’

Well, there you go. The methodology is okay; and that is all that really matters.
Are you saying that whether their theories are right or not is of secondary concern.


You write, ‘… The arguments you are raising, however, don't even make it to the cocktail parties... let alone the serious symposiums.’

I wasn’t aware I was raising any arguments.
I am questioning the perceived wisdoms.
Always question, question, question…


You write, ‘Most of these "alternative" ideas are blown out in Egyptology 101 courses... by the simple existence of fact and evidence that render them illogical.’

You argue that it was not essential for a King’s mummified body to be buried in a sarcophagus in his pyramid; and you obviously do not see this as an “alternatives” theory.
So, a pyramid could have been sealed up with an empty sarcophagus inside it.
If an empty sarcophagus inside a sealed pyramid is not a symbolic burial, perhaps you can explain what it is.


You write, ‘I don't really care that much about the neurotic obsession of alternative historians to find microscopic chinks in an otherwise impervious armor.’

Nor do I.


You continue, ‘Damaged coffers are just that... damaged coffers. Khufu's pyramid is one in a hundred. Yes, it is unique, and maybe these unique features within it can give us more insight into the cosmologies or cosmographies of ancient Egyptians... but focusing on one to the exclusion of others is a complete waste of time.’

You assert that tomb robbers broke open Khufu’s coffer.
You have no evidence to support this assertion.
The worst of the damage we see in this coffer (the SE corner at the top) was inflicted in the 1800s.
Much of what some see as damage to the coffer is actually the result of poor workmanship.
And it is mostly by comparing this coffer to others that this is known.
It is not a case of ‘focusing on one to the exclusion of others’


I wrote, ‘Read the various books by various 'Pyramidologists' of the mid-18th to early-20th Century and all will be revealed.’

You reply, ‘Sources, please. I have many such books on the shelf, and many more available. If you have something meaningful to demonstrate, then please do so.’

Again, the worst of the damage we see in this coffer (the SE corner at the top) was inflicted in the 1800s.
If the source of the info is not in the books by Piazzi Smyth or the Edgar brothers (of which I have copies to hand and will search through later), then I must ask you to look through your copies of The Great Pyramid. Its Divine Message by D. Davidson and H. Aldersmith, and Pyramidology Vols I to IV by A. Rutherford.
I have yet to read mention of this damage in more recent books, etc., on the GP.


You write, 'They are recorded histories of entry into the pyramid. Of course they must be taken with a sceptical grain of salt, but they are recorded history of the structures in question, nonetheless.'

So, are they or are they not valid evidence for the GP having contained Khufu's mummified remains?

MJ