Home of the The Hall of Ma'at on the Internet
Home
Discussion Forums
Papers
Authors
Web Links

April 27, 2024, 2:53 pm UTC    
December 09, 2007 03:43PM
Hello Rick,

Despite having spent nearly thirty years working off-and-on on a theory about the planning of Khufu’s pyramid I do, perhaps somewhat paradoxically, generally agree with your viewpoint here – though you put it a touch more strongly than I think it warrants.
Khufu’s pyramid does receive an inordinate amount of Media publicity.
In recent years even more so because of these enigmatic shafts.

In his book Secrets of the Great Pyramid 1971, Peter Tompkins gives an interesting overview of how this particular pyramid came to be so popular – a lot of the ‘blame’ lies with the 17th Century mathematician and astronomer John Greaves, followed by Sir Isaac Newton, then the so-called Pyramidologists such as Charles Piazzi Smyth.
Then, skipping a few researchers and theorists, we come to the 22nd March, 1993, when Gantenbrink’s robot trundled up the south QC shaft and ‘discovered’ the block with its copper ‘handles’.

I think we can blame the Media circus that followed (and continues to do so) this discovery on the popularity of the Indiana Jones movies and the oft-repeated but highly questionable description of the block as ‘a door’.
If it’s a door, then there has to be a room behind it, and if there is a room behind it, then there must be either written records of The Wisdom of the Ancients (complete with plans for a Doomsday Weapon, of course), or treasure that makes King Tut’s look like the left-overs from a jumble sale. smiling smiley *


You write, ‘… if by some amazing there is another room with more artifacts, I hope we have the presence of mind to leave them alone.’

Hmmm, I agree with the sentiment but I can’t see any Egyptologist resisting the urge to tunnel into such a room from the outside of the Pyramid – though hopefully with more care and respect than Al Mamun’s motley crew managed to muster (come to think of it, Howard Vyse wasn’t much better…).


You write, ‘Djoser's pyramid site is far more interesting and far less documented than Khufu's.’

Broadly, it is because Khufu's is the most well documented pyramid that it attracts the most attention, certainly as far as the Media and public are concerned.
And it is only because it is the most well documented pyramid that it generates the most theories, which in turn generate more interest, and so it goes on.
Perhaps an exhaustive examination a la Petrie of the other major pyramids would break this circle - it would certainly help increase our knowledge and understanding of them.

MJ

*personally, I’d hope for the original plans of the Pyramid – and being able to say to people (in a gloriously smug fashion): there you are, proof they designed it exactly as I theorised smiling smiley
Subject Author Posted

New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Anthony December 06, 2007 10:08AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Warwick L Nixon December 06, 2007 10:37AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Rick Baudé December 08, 2007 02:25PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Anthony December 08, 2007 04:13PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Rick Baudé December 08, 2007 04:23PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

fmetrol December 08, 2007 05:32PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Pistol December 09, 2007 12:36PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

fmetrol December 09, 2007 10:40PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

MJ Thomas December 09, 2007 07:48AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

C Wayne Taylor December 09, 2007 09:36AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

L Cooper December 09, 2007 11:13AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

cladking December 09, 2007 03:23PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Rick Baudé December 09, 2007 12:38PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

MJ Thomas December 09, 2007 03:43PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Greg Reeder December 09, 2007 04:06PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

cladking December 09, 2007 04:51PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Rick Baudé December 09, 2007 05:52PM

The hypothetical scenario

Anthony December 09, 2007 09:07PM

Re: The hypothetical scenario

Rick Baudé December 09, 2007 10:19PM

Respectful disagreement

Anthony December 09, 2007 08:22PM

Re: Respectful disagreement

MJ Thomas December 10, 2007 04:49AM

Re: Respectful disagreement

Pete Clarke December 10, 2007 05:10AM

Re: Respectful disagreement

Anthony December 10, 2007 06:51AM

Re: Respectful disagreement

Hermione December 10, 2007 07:12AM

Re: Respectful disagreement

Anthony December 10, 2007 07:23AM

Re: Respectful disagreement

MJ Thomas December 10, 2007 07:49AM

Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 08:44AM

Re: Invasive Damage

Hermione December 10, 2007 09:30AM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 09:41AM

Re: Invasive Damage

Hermione December 10, 2007 10:37AM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 10:53AM

Re: Invasive Damage

cladking December 10, 2007 12:15PM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 12:30PM

Re: Invasive Damage

MJ Thomas December 10, 2007 03:45PM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 04:28PM

Re: Invasive Damage

Greg Reeder December 10, 2007 10:57AM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 12:26PM

Re: Invasive Damage

cladking December 10, 2007 12:59PM

Re: Invasive Damage

MJ Thomas December 10, 2007 03:53PM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 05:47PM

Re: Invasive Damage

MJ Thomas December 10, 2007 03:33PM

Re: Invasive Damage

Hermione December 10, 2007 03:47PM

Re: Invasive Damage

MJ Thomas December 10, 2007 06:33PM

Re: Invasive Damage

Anthony December 10, 2007 06:43PM

Re: Invasive Damage

cladking December 10, 2007 07:14PM

Re: Invasive Damage

MJ Thomas December 11, 2007 05:09AM

Re: Invasive Damage

Jammer December 11, 2007 02:26PM

Re: Invasive Damage

cladking December 11, 2007 05:10PM

Re: Invasive Damage

cladking December 11, 2007 05:05PM

Re: Respectful disagreement

cladking December 10, 2007 12:03PM

Re: Respectful disagreement

Pete Clarke December 10, 2007 08:41AM

The one person consensus

Anthony December 10, 2007 09:48AM

Re: The one person consensus

Pete Clarke December 10, 2007 11:20AM

Re: The one person consensus

Anthony December 10, 2007 01:25PM

Re: The one person consensus

Pete Clarke December 11, 2007 09:41AM

Re: The one person consensus

MJ Thomas December 11, 2007 11:35AM

Re: The one person consensus

Pete Clarke December 11, 2007 04:32PM

Re: The one person consensus

Tommi Huhtamaki December 11, 2007 05:16PM

Re: The one person consensus

Anthony December 11, 2007 08:02PM

Re: The one person consensus

Tommi Huhtamaki December 11, 2007 11:57PM

Preserving the evidence

Anthony December 12, 2007 06:06PM

Re: details on north block

MJ Thomas December 12, 2007 08:58PM

Reference

Anthony December 12, 2007 09:20PM

Re: The one person consensus

Pete Clarke December 12, 2007 03:21AM

Re: The one person consensus

MJ Thomas December 12, 2007 05:35AM

Re: The one person consensus

Tommi Huhtamaki December 12, 2007 06:46AM

Re: The one person consensus

Rick Baudé December 13, 2007 12:18AM

Thumpers

Anthony December 13, 2007 10:11AM

Re: Thumpers

Rick Baudé December 13, 2007 09:47PM

Re: Thumpers

C Wayne Taylor December 14, 2007 05:45AM

Proceeding from speculation

Anthony December 14, 2007 09:21AM

Re: Thumpers

Jammer December 14, 2007 10:12AM

Well said.

Anthony December 14, 2007 10:19AM

Re: Thumpers

C Wayne Taylor December 14, 2007 11:52AM

Re: Thumpers

cladking December 14, 2007 12:01PM

Re: Thumpers

Warwick L Nixon December 14, 2007 12:13PM

Re: Thumpers

C Wayne Taylor December 14, 2007 06:43PM

Re: The one person consensus

Anthony December 11, 2007 05:31PM

Re: The one person consensus

Doug Weller December 10, 2007 12:54PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Hermione December 10, 2007 06:40AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

IanM December 09, 2007 03:44PM

Respect as a driving force

Anthony December 14, 2007 09:55AM

Re: Respect as a driving force

Warwick L Nixon December 14, 2007 10:30AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

MJ Thomas December 09, 2007 05:36PM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Joe_S December 11, 2007 04:18AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

C Wayne Taylor December 12, 2007 08:14AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Pete Clarke December 12, 2007 08:39AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

MJ Thomas December 12, 2007 10:56AM

Re: New exploration of the Shafts announced (actually, old news)

Greg Reeder December 12, 2007 12:14PM

The last artifacts....

Anthony December 12, 2007 06:21PM

Re: The last artifacts....

lobo-hotei December 12, 2007 10:18PM

Re: The last artifacts....

Anthony December 13, 2007 10:04AM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login