It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The 'Pyramid of Man' of Ancient Egypt- *A Must See* The Human Form in the Great Pyramid

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Aero
I was thinking, they never found human remains in the GP did they?

But they did in the others. The GP appears to be unfinished... the walls weren't plastered and the sarcophagus isn't carved.

You might enjoy reading the pages on pyramids at TourEgypt. There's a lot of neat cultural stuff there, particularly when they get into the "book of the dead". The paintings on the walls were arranged to "lead" the deceased onward and apparently had to be put in a certain order.

posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 05:12 PM
reply to post by Byrd

Do you really believe pyramids were built just as tombs?

I think there is a lot more to it than just that.

Who even built them I want to know?


[edit on 1-3-2009 by watchZEITGEISTnow]

posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 07:58 PM
I found this strange footnote in Maspero's History of Egypt:

* Professor Petrie thinks that the pyramids of Gîzeh were
rifled, and the mummies which they contained destroyed
during the long civil wars which raged in the interval
between the VIth and XIIth dynasties. If this be true, it
will be necessary to admit that the kings of one of the
subsequent dynasties must have restored what had been
damaged, for the workmen of the Caliph Al-Mamoun brought
from the sepulchral chamber of the "Horizon" "a stone
trough, in which lay a stone statue in human form, enclosing
a man who had on his breast a golden pectoral, adorned with
precious stones, and a sword of inestimable value, and on
his head a carbuncle of the size of an egg, brilliant as the
sun, having characters which no man can read."
All the Arab
authors, whose accounts have been collected by Jomard,
relate in general the same story; one can easily recognize
from this description the sarcophagus still in its place, a
stone case in human shape, and the mummy of Kheops loaded
with jewels and arms, like the body of Queen Âhhotpû I.

So Maspero apparently believed that the workmen found more than just an empty box.

TourEgypt mentions it briefly:

However, legends exist, which were recounted by Diodorus Siculus, that Khufu ultimately was not even buried in his pyramid. Medieval Arab historians mention the existence of a mummy-shaped coffin and the king's body, but do not say where they lay. However, this really means very little, as traditions can certainly become distorted over time and one wonders how the Medieval Arabs might have known it to be Khufu's remains.

I'm curious as to what made Egyptologists change their mind.

[edit on 1-3-2009 by Eleleth]

posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 12:56 AM

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
reply to post by Byrd

Do you really believe pyramids were built just as tombs?

I think there is a lot more to it than just that.

Who even built them I want to know?

I do, particularly since pharaoh's mummies are found in some, the passages of the Book of the Dead are written in others, the temples outside refer to the funeral cults of the dead pharaohs, the names of the pyramids reflect this, they are found in graveyards with other royal and noble tombs. Sons, daughters, granddaughters, priests are all buried around ... AND many of them have pyramids of their own (like the nine Queens' pyramids right around the three pyramids at Giza.) In addition there's all sorts of other stuff.

posted on Mar, 2 2009 @ 08:44 PM

Originally posted by Byrd
Actually, the Egyptians were good architects and built many failed pyramids before coming up with the Giza ones. The chambers are to lighten the weight of the pyramid and keep it from collapsing.

I've actually read some theories that the other failed pyramids were attempts to copy the great pyramid, not the other way around. The whole idea of Khufu having built the great pyramid was based on what essentially could have been an ancient form of graffiti, or even a hoax, and there are questions about the actual hieroglyph having an incorrect syntax.

Plus there's the absence of other hieroglyphs or ornamentation in the great pyramid, which seems rather unEgyptian.

So it's interesting to see this post - yet another mystery, another clue perhaps. Perhaps all the other images are based on whatever this internal structure is meant to represent.

Just some thoughts

Good thread!

posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 11:03 PM

Originally posted by Byrd
They're similar, though, and show that some sort of master idea with variations was used throughout time.

Maybe so, but the variation in the GP can be considered an anomaly when compared to all the others...

No, Khaferkhaure's does (I think). Disclaimer: I don't have diagrams of the interiors of ALL the 100+ pyramids (including Queen's Pyramids and satellite pyramids.).


But the only other pyramids that would be able to house as an extensive a chamber system such as seen in the GP would have to be almost as large no? So the Red Pyramid, Khafre's pyramid, The Bent Pyramid (I guess), Menkaure's Pyramid ( I guess) and maybe Zosers pyramid... As far as I know none of these have a chamber system that can compare to the GP.

The queens pyramids and the like would be too small to have chambers like those seen in the GP so I'm not sure they're even worth mentioning in this case...

Because they would have referenced it in other ways as well -- particularly in the name of the building. Alas, though, the name of the pyramid (known since before the time of Heroditus) is "Khufu's Ahket" and not "Khufu's Djed." And you see the Djed from only one angle. If it was a Djed, they would have made a correct one... not something resembling a Djed from only one angle (and it wasn't an angle they could view.)

I'll just have to take your word for it until I do a little more reading up on it all.

I have a 3 year old granddaughter, and she can certainly stack a pyramid with her blocks..

haha- ok well i guess I won't argue with that then

No, it's one of the seven wonders of the ancient world and a well-loved and respected one. But oftentimes it's treated as though it is an impossible feat and that we had all the intelligence and engineering ability of hyperactive chimpanzees. No one bothers to look at the older temples and see how complex Egyptian engineering was long before the pyramids... and everyone tends to think of Giza as the "be all and end all" and ignore the other staggeringly beautiful and complex things that were done elsewhere and elsewhen in Egypt..

I for one am really fascinated by the Osirion. That's one of my favorites.

I guess what may get people so caught up with the GP and the rest of Giza is that it was built with such enormity and precision using only rudimentary tools and materials, And done long before some of the other "staggeringly beautiful and complex things were done elsewhere and elsewhen in Egypt" with superior tools and materials I might add.

posted on Mar, 5 2009 @ 11:46 PM
i dunno about this one. i don't think any self respecting pharoah would've made his "wood" a lot bigger than that.

posted on Mar, 8 2009 @ 02:52 PM
reply to post by Mozzy

They certainly thought of everything didn't they...

Not sure about the scale but it definitely seems to be anatomically correct in its location...

[edit on 8-3-2009 by PhotonEffect]

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in