Greg Reeder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They could have written a note telling us in plain
> old Egyptian.
>
They did. It's in the Pyramid Texts. See Utterance 600:
"This king is Osiris; this pyramid of the king is Osiris; this construction of his is Osiris..."
Then equate this to Utterance 442:
"Behold, he has come as Orion; behold Osiris has come as Orion..."
That' fairly explicit, no?
>
> The possibility that two sets of stars fit makes
> the probability of coincidence stronger.
Not at all. The so-called 'Cygnus Correlation Theory' simply does not work, in spite of the alledged accuracy of the match. You can match three potatoes or tin cans too, without the proper context. The Orion correlation fits well within the context (Pyramid Texts, shafts, Osirian rebirth). For the Cygnus Correlation to work, one has to hop-skip-and-jump from Dwn-nwy in the NK to Sokar in the OK then somehow link them to Cygnus which has not been identified by any Egyptologist or archaeoastronomer in the PT or elsewhere. Ron Wells makes a feeble attempt to link Cygnus to the 'vulva' of Nut, but that too is highly speculative.
> Has Bauval accepted your theory?
No. My view has always been that Giza is a necropolis, but a necropolis with a 'function' to service the high rituals of astral rebirth. It's links to 11,500 BC is explained by the desire of the king to be reborn in the ancestral context of Zep Tepi, which is marked astronomically by the first Sothic Cycle as explained in my book The Egypt Code. I admit that I am not at all sure how they work out the sky image for that remote date; but if the Greeks could do it, I do not see why we cannot attribute the same ability to the ancient Egyptians. Indeed, in my view Eudoxus and later Hipparchus probably plagerised the stellar knowledge from the Egyptian astronomer-priests or their temple archives.
Best
RB