Anthony Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Rick Baudé Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> >
> > At the risk of detonating the "fallacy
> bomb".
> > You're "arguing from silence" on this one.
>
>
> Read further down...
>
> > How do
> > we know the temples were "heavily secured".
>
>
>
> They document rooms were known to be the inner,
> most secured areas of the temples. These
> documents represented the most powerful magic
> available to the Egyptians... it wasn't left
> laying around.
>
>
I agree it wasn't left lying around.

> > What
> > were they armed with? Spears? AK-47's?
>
>
> Worse.... eternal damnation and oblivion.

Can you cite some examples of this in the PT's?
>
>
> > No the
> > first things that would have been looted
> would
> > have been the gold statues, then the copper
> > statues, then any gemstones, then any tools
> > hammers, chisels, next the crowds would have
> > stolen the fine china and any furniture they
> could
> > carry away, but a bunch of illegible texts
> would
> > have been last.
>
>
> That depends upon the cultural requirements of
> those doing the looting, doesn't it? These are
> the things WE would loot first...not necessarily
> ancient Egyptians, whose entire cultural power
> base was founded upon heka, the religious magic of
> the gods. It would be like stealing nuclear
> technology, or the genie in the lamp. Who needs
> gold?
>
Really? Then why was every tomb stripped of every last particle of gold the thieves could get their hands on then?

>
> > AFAIK we have a variety of papyrus
> > fragments, inscribed mastabas, lots of seals
> with
> > various one line messages on them. But no
> PT
> > texts outside of the pyramids. And we have
> four
> > dyansties of pyramids before them and not a
> SINGLE
> > line of any kind of inscription on them.
> Maybe
> > because the PT's hadn't been written yet.
>
>
> If you're arguing for strictly oral traditions, I
> don't see it fitting into what they were doing at
> this time.

I'm not arguing for a strictly oral tradition. I'm wondering why there's virtually a complete absence of religious texts, of course there's a few mentions of gods here and there, but when you go to the main pyramids from Zoser until we hit Unas there's absolutely nothing, a few trivial dedicatory inscriptions and that's all.
>
> The fact of the matter is, there is a probability
> that the texts were included, as they were in the
> New Kingdom, in other forms rather than writing
> them on the walls. We haven't found it because
> the texts were written on biodegradable
> materials.
>
That's an unproven assumption.

> Let me ask you this: How many OTHER places do we
> find these texts DURING or AFTER the Fifth/Sixth
> Dynasties?

You find many of these verses embodied in the CT's and the BOD of course the evolution continued on and were changed dramatically. But they're there.

> There is virtually no more evidence for their
> existence DURING the time they were appearing in
> the tombs than there is before it. The gods
> changed dramatically during these times
> (especially before the texts show up) but the fact
> is, the texts themselves are not found outside of
> these six pyramids.

To which I still say "Why?"
>
>
> >
> > True, but this could have been an inserted
> text
> > such as "to be or not to be" would be an
> inserted
> > phrase from an older text into this message.
> I
> > know that the AE's were good at archaizing
> texts
> > when they wanted too.
>
>
>
> It's more than that. I really can't get into it
> here in this kind of forum,

It seems to me this would be the perfect forum for that kind of discussion.

but if you look a them
> very closely, you'll see what I mean.

And yes I have looked at them very closely and yes I do understand what you mean.
I'll just
> ask that you remember it and think about it, not
> that you accept it just because I said so. Sound
> fair?

I'm not accepting it because you said so, anymore than I accept it because some other Egyptologist said so. I'm just wondering if there was some kind of OK AE editor who took a large variety of texts and edited them down to one corpus of texts. Or if there was a single transcendant egyptian literary genius like Homer, Milton, Shakespeare, etc. who took a large variety of ideas and set them down in a single literary work.
>
>
>
>
>
> > >
> > I don't doubt that once the texts were
> written
> > that they were instantly altered, but I
> still
> > can't help but wonder if the were the result
> of a
> > single author or editor.
>
>
> Based on what I have seen and read, it's a virtual
> impossibility. Still, it's a fascinating
> hypothesis, and I hope you really enjoy
> investigating it. Good luck!
>
> Anthony
>
>
> [www.GizaBuildingProject.com]
>
Quote:"Men are apt to mistake the strength of
> their feeling for the strength of their argument.
> The heated mind resents the chill touch and
> relentless scrutiny of logic." -- William E.
> Gladstone
>
> For magic is so mixed up with the world's history
> that, if the latter is ever to be written at all
> in its completeness, giving the truth and nothing
> but the truth, there seems to be no help for it.
> If Archaeology counts still upon discoveries and
> reports upon hieratic writings that will be free
> from the hateful subject, then HISTORY will never
> be written, we fear.-- H.P. Blavatsky
>