Kat,

If I recall, I offered earlier in the posts that the 'so-called' tomb robbers may have had authority to dig up the goods and remains by the state, I shouldered this by suggesting that since none of the kings from the first six dynasties have been found in their tombs it may fit that they were collectively placed together in one very secret location out of fear of the unthinkable, this concept is not unlike the much later practice found in the New Kingdom within the valley of the Kings where all the royals where intombed collectively in one valley location.

Warwick did not challenge the idea in fact he said "armoured car robberies are NOT outside jobs", mistakenly I misread his meaning and challenged him, eventually understanding my mistake. so, reading those posts literally will confuse the reader as to what's going on in our discourse.

I apologized to Warwick and inserted my view that robbing a kings tomb in the 1st-6th dynasty was tantamount to digging up the gravesite of the "Unknown soldier". I believe this is when you engaged in the conversation and said "the difference is there is no gold in the tomb of the unknown soldier" and that greed and poverty will drive people to do the unthinkable, to which I replied (in so many words) it was not about the gold or grave goods but about the insult to the dead king if the tombs were robbed, which on the face is a different conversation, since the initial offer was about collective gathering of the dead kings rather than grave robbers. I was not twisting your words, sorry if you think so, I was merely trying to pose that no amount of money (in my view) would suffice to do the unthinkable and rob a kings grave during that period and is of course my opinion to have.

I was not playing a game, and I hope in the future you engage in the conversations.

Best Regards,

B.A. Hokom