MJ Thomas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This makes good sense to me. However, I suggest that the switch from pyramid to
> underground tomb was also influenced by economics. A subterranean tomb (such as those we
> see in the Valley of the Kings) would have cost considerably less than a pyramid to create.

Possibly, MJ, but I don't believe budget was foremost in their plans. I believe pomp & circumstance was primary.

> <Jammer's> question; "What DID they do with the Pharaoh's corpse after death, then?"
> You’d never believe the number of times I’ve wished I knew the answer to this question.
> Despite the fact that there are, so I believe, a number of kings and pharaohs whose tombs have yet to be discovered,
......
> As I see it, there are three possibilities. 1) They were interred in their respective
> pyramids and were removed by tomb robbers. 2) They were buried in an area of Ancient Egypt
> that has yet to be investigated; a sort of early version of the Valley of the Kings, if you
> like. 3) They were interred in their respective pyramids but in burial chambers that have
> yet to be found. Though I consider possibility number 1 to be a perfectly reasonable hypothesis, I am far from convinced that it will one day prove to be a fact.
> I think possibility number 2 most unlikely. With all the archaeology that’s been going on in Egypt for the last 100 years or so you could reasonably expect something to have cropped up. Possibility 3 is currently my hot favourite.

I could logically accept that possibility. But that would mean the "Hide the tomb in the pyramid" plan HAD worked. That would be a point strongly in your favor as to the change to rock-cut tombs being economic driven.

Personally I think the AE THOUGHT the pyramids had failed in protecting their Pharaohs. I think this search for greater security drove the need to go from a clearly visible to an invisible tomb.

INTERESTINGLY, please note both ideas are not mutually exclusive. If the AE of later dynasties thought the pyramids failed because what they could see of the tombs were empty, they could still have been driven by a need for greater secrecy, even if the "real" tomb is still concealed within.

> You continue, ‘There is some documentation the Pharaoh's set up temples to pray to/for them, envisioning the pyramid complex fully staffed with priests and guards eternally.
> It was the failure of this constant site occupation that made the pyramids vulnerable to
> robbery in the first place, so it is reasonably possible to think that IF the Pharaoh's original plans had been carried through in full the sites may have succeeded in their purpose after all. ‘As an example, you could probably go to your local cemetery for a bit of skull-duggery and depending upon solitary remoteness get away with it. Then try it with the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, guarded 24 hours a day.’
>
> Hmmm. Good point.
> Which brings me back to the time factor.
> There had to be a cut-off point where a pyramid
> ceased to be protected and tomb robbers waltzed
> onto the stage to carry out their dastardly
> deeds.

The Pharaohs intended their mortuary temples to be staffed eternally. I believe this wasn't the case due to budget constraints.
But being a Pharaoh would have to be a pretty signifigant kick-up in the ego department.
As in; "why are you wasting your voices in prayer to him-who-was, get over to my temple and sing about "He-who-is".

Jammer