MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Obviously, a chamber with a sarcophagus in it is
> likely to be a burial place.
> However, by adding the proviso that the sacophagus
> would be placed “on the west side of the
> westernmost chamber in the structure” you created
> an ambiguity because in fact the Subterranean
> Chamber is the westernmost chamber in Khufu’s
> pyramid.


I'm sorry for the confusion. I hope I have made myself more clear in the subsequent postings.

The burial chamber was the "heart" of the pyramid. The sarcophagus was the focus of the burial chamber. Everything else radiates out from that point.




>
> However, you argue, ‘Not originally. The western
> side of the SC does not appear to be part of the
> original design. That's why it is still in such
> condition today.’
>
> Now, this leaves us with the eastern side of the
> SC as part of the original design.



Quite possibly so.



> So, in effect you are saying that you know how
> long (east-west) the Subterranean Chamber was
> initially intended to be.


I don't think I said that.



> For your hypothesis to stand up, the SC initially
> had to be less than 20 royal cubits long (the
> length of the King’s Chamber)
> Would you care tell us what that initial
> measurement was?


Yes.

Less than 20 royal cubits long.


What do I win?





>
> BTW, any suggestions as to why the length was, as
> you appear to be saying, lengthened?
> ______________________________




Not today...




>
>

> ______________________________
>
>
> You write, ‘Clearly the burial chamber was the
> first chamber designed.’
>
> Excellent, a direct unambiguous answer at last –
> and one I agree with, although for different
> reasons.





Probably so.




> ______________________________
>
>
> I asked, ‘And what followed it?
> The remaining two Chambers - but in what sequence?
>
> The Descending Passage?
> The Grand Gallery?
> The Antechamber?
>
> You reply, ‘Irrelevant. You are looking at this
> pyramid like it is some kind of radiating
> mathematical equation.’
>
> It may well be irrelevant in terms of the overall
> purpose of this Pyramid but this shouldn’t stop
> you from saying what the design sequence was
> following the King’s Chamber.



I'd rather not answer this directly. Sorry. I did misunderstand what you meant, though, and I was not intentionally evading with my comment about mathematics. My comment was a result of the misunderstanding. Having cleared up the misunderstanding, I now see that i'm not ready to answer the question anyway.




> Perhaps it is a case of your not knowing what the
> sequence was.
> No shame in that, Anthony.
> However, if you do know what the sequence was, why
> not share it with us?



Suffice it to say I have my reasons.




>
> I am looking at this Pyramid as a magnificent
> tomb/monument/cenotaph for or to Khufu.
> Its interior design had to have begun with one
> thing and ended with another.
> I am working on a hypothesis that attempts to show
> what these first and last things could have been.



You should deal with the culture and beliefs that surrounded its construction, though. Dealing with the numbers (in the absence of evidence of intent) will not get you any closer to the reality of the situation.




> Suffice to say that my hypothesis is not only
> consistent with the prevailing orthodox views on
> Khufu’s pyramid in particular and other 4th Dyn.
> Pyramids in general, but also adds to it.
> This is not just my opinion, BTW.




That's fine. I can fully appreciate a lack of sharing on anybody's part. I think there are a number of us trying to make solid contributions to the topic, and this is sort of like a cocktail party with a bunch of R&D people from different companies.

The silence can often be deafening...




> ______________________________
>
>
> I wrote, ‘As for the westernmost chamber, in
> Khufu's case that is the Subterranean Chamber. Any
> thoughts how they were going to get an adequate
> sized coffer in to this Chamber?’
>
> You reply, “The burial chamber was built around
> the sarcohpagus. Had they been forced to use
> another chamber due to the early demise of the
> king, they would have used a different sarcophagus
> (obviously).
>
> I can demonstrate (though not here and now) how
> the dimensions of Khufu’s coffer were derived by
> very simple arithmetical and geometrical means
> from the floor plan of the King’s Chamber and its
> position relative to the Pyramid’s North-South
> axis.



No, in actuality, you can demonstrate a relationship between these features. You cannot demonstrate intent, however. That would require corroborating evidence from outside the pyramid. I don't think there is any, so your argument is teetering.




> In other words the coffer was designed after the
> King’s Chamber.


I won't rule it out. There's little reason to think that symmetry or some kind of aestheticly balanced relationship might have been a part of their design parameters for both features.




> But I do bear in mind, Anthony, that your take on
> this sarcophagus business is based on the
> hypothesis that the King’s Chamber was Khufu’s
> actual burial chamber, whereas I, on the other
> hand, have good reason to believe that it wasn’t.



Whatever "good reason" you have, it has nothing to do with the culture that built the pyramid. Ergo, it's not that good a reason. Numerical coincidences are just that... coincidences. They happen everywhere, all the time. They aren't proof of anything, except that coincidences happen.

For example, here's somebody who has found a LOT of numbers that "can't be a coincidence" in and around the Gizamids: [www.celticnz.co.nz]

Quote

It is preposterous for archaeologists to maintain that these ancient people got so incredibly close to hitting precise codes, which described complex lunar cycles through an 18.613-year period, but were oblivious to the codes. It is absurd to suggest that they had no intricate knowledge of lunar traversals between hemispheres, sufficient to compute their frequency and reoccurrence or that the concept of 3,4,5 triangulation still had to wait several thousand years before discovery. The absurdity continues in the assumption that this mammoth undertaking and commitment to build the pyramids was solely dedicated to providing oversized mausoleums for dead Pharaohs.

He finds pages and pages of coincidences. How can everybody who comes up with these numerological "Eurekas!" be right?


> ______________________________
>
>
> My understanding of your theory is that if Khufu
> had died before the Queen’s Chamber had been
> built, he would have been buried in the
> Subterranean Chamber.
>
> I have pointed out that it is not possible to get
> an adequate size granite coffer into the
> Subterranean Chamber (the Subterranean Passage is
> only 35.5” high,


Do you know the height of Khafre's sarcophagus? From my examination of it (although I didn't actually measure it to my recollection) it is less than 25-30 inches tall, not counting the lid.

Here: [www.egyptarchive.co.uk]

The blocks of granite in which it is submerged are a cubit tall.


> and there is the awkward
> Descending Passage-Subterranean Passage junction
> to contend with) and suggested “Perhaps they
> planned to carve one out of the bedrock... “


Did I say that? I apologize if I did.





>
> You reply, ‘Limestone would not have been adequate
> for the job of holding the body of a king.’
>
> I can believe that.



Then we agree.



> However, if they wouldn’t dare use such ‘poor’
> quality material as limestone, and the Sub Chamber
> is all limestone, what, pray, were the builders
> planning to do in the event of Khufu snuffing it
> before the Queen’s Chamber was built?


Use a granite sarcophogus in the limestone chamber. Perfectly acceptable proposition, and that's not a double standard. They are entirely different situations.



> I wonder if they had a “Flat Pack Self-Assembly
> Granite Coffer Kit” …


No, but if you had suggested it, I'm sure you would have been made a Vizier!

Now, here's your second question answered from your next post:


MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Anthony writes, “The burial chamber was built
> around the sarcohpagus. Had they been forced to
> use another chamber due to the early demise of the
> king, they would have used a different sarcophagus
> (obviously).'
>
> If, as Anthony theorises, the Queen's Chamber was
> (in part?) a contingency burial chamber, then it
> must had a granite sarcophagus (to repeat
> Anthony's assertion: "The burial chamber was built
> around the sarcohpagus".


No, the burial chamber is the King's Chamber. IT was built around a sarcophagus. Therefore, they could not have had the SAME sarcophagus in both chambers simultaneously, nor could they have moved it from one to the other, since it wouldn't fit through the entrances.

Ergo, they MIGHT have had a backup block of granite in the QC, in the eventuality that Khufu had died prior to the completion of the King's Chamber. When he lived long enough, they got out the slab saw and turned the QC block into things like portcullis stones. Of course it would never have been found with the block in it, as the block would have been removed and recyled as soon as it was known that it was no longer needed as a contingency sarcophagus.



>
> Apart from rather dubious Arab (?) tale, there is
> not a shred of evidence that the Queen's Chamber
> ever had a sarcophagus.
>

You might think that. I am forced to disagree.

Have to run. Have a nice evening.

Anthony

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.