cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The problem is remarkably simple and obvious. So
> long as the PT is only magic and incantation it is
> simply impossible to know whether our
> interpretations are correct or not. If any
> interpretation made prediction then this would be
> untrue.
>
> Any correspondence between the PT and later
> writing could be coincidental or caused by unknown
> procsses.


You are I hope aware of those parts of the PT which do not find their way into the published translations? These are the instructions to repeat various incantations, and yes, that is what they are, multiple times, the sort of thing you do in religious incantations as repetition strengthens the spell. If the PT were detailing how G1 was built, then there would be no need to have instructions to "Repeat 3 times" before some lines of text. This indicates that the texts were to be recited, and indicates that they come from papyrus scrolls used by lector priests, they are almost like bullet points to remind him of exactly what he has to recite and how, all of which are superfluous if we are looking at "plans to build G1", and why on earth would Sixth Dynasty kings need "instructions" to build G1 in the burial chambers of their tombs, yet one of many massive flaws in your arguments, like why is there not even any mention of a pyramid in Unas.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2023 02:46AM by Corvidius.