Why do we never hear about the two other Giza pyramids?

coredrill
Omg!

Not again scott.

Not your silly osiris pyramid ark silo theory.

Plugging in your pet sick theory into every thread about egypt (even if it were about a modern egypt) is indeed sick!

you already have a thread on the topic. why hijack and assassinate another thread which is not even connected to your silly theory???

Hello Spartan,

The title of this thread is “Why do we never hear about the two other Giza pyramids?” My posts here have specifically discussed the evidence discovered in G2 (Khafre) and G3 (Menkaure) at Giza—entirely relevant to this thread.

Now, I know that the evidence discovered in these pyramids which I present makes many an Egypt-apologist here on ATS and elsewhere uncomfortable—and so it should. But that is no reason to avoid this troubling evidence by trying to stifle and shut down discussion of it with silly claims of hijacking threads. As I said, my posts in this thread have specifically discussed the evidence discovered in G2 (Khafre) and G3 (Menkaure), the other two main pyramids at Giza—entirely relevant to this thread. Do you want to tell Byrd to stop discussing these issues with me? Good luck with that one.

Now, I know that the evidence discovered in these pyramids makes many an Egypt-apologist uncomfortable—and so it should. But that is no reason to avoid this troubling evidence by attempting to stifle and shut down discussion of it with silly claims of hijacking threads. But then again, I suppose part of the reason why we "...never hear about the two other Giza pyramids...” is simply because the evidence these two pyramids at Giza present is just too problematic for Egyptology and its apologists and they simply do not wish to discuss it--like yourself, for example. Best just ignore it all, eh?

Now, if you actually have anything constructive to add to the discussion about the other Giza pyramids, that would be good.

Regards,

SC

Scott Creighton

SC: And your point is? When I use the term ‘Osiris Bed’ or ‘Osiris Brick’ or ‘Corn Mummy’ I am merely using the term that modern Egyptology uses to describe these stone containers. The AEs of the early pyramid-building age probably called such stone containers ‘neb-ankh’.

You've missed the point.

You're trying to connect Osiris with Giza.

There was no deity named Osiris at that time, nor was there a deity with a similar function and sarcophagi of that time period were not referred to as "neb-ankh".

When Osiris rose to prominence the later AEs might have referred to these containers also as ‘neb-ankh’ but by now were also placing within them images of Osiris pressed into the earth within the container. Just because modern Egyptologists call these later containers ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris/Bricks’ doesn’t mean the AEs themselves called them such.

Actually, modern Egyptologists call them by the names used by the Egyptians. However, since you used the term "Osiris bed" in conversation, I will call them whatever you wish to call them so we can discuss it.

SC: Which merely proves that pyramids were used as tombs for clear intrusive burials. The anthropoid coffin found in G3 is not consistent with the vaulted wooden coffins of the 4th dynasty and is consistent with that of the Saite Period (25th or 26th dynasty) – but I am sure you must know this. You said yourself that Osiris was not attested in written form until the 5th dynasty and yet this 4th dynasty coffin supposedly of Menkaure bears the name of Osiris (see below). Not only is the coffin anachronistic but the supposed remains that some Egyptologists believed were those of Menkaure have been dated to early AD. Clearly an intrusive burial (or burials).

Yes, I know they're intrusive burials, but there was other material there as well. And I see you agree with my point:

SC: As stated, pyramids were clearly used as tombs

Yes.

It remains my view that—in accordance with the Pyramid Texts—these structures represented the allegorical ‘body of Osiris’.

An allegory created two hundred years before the deity existed??? I have trouble believing that.

Why the first 16 or so? Because Plutarch’s Myth of Isis and Osiris tells us that the body of Osiris was divided into 16 parts.

The concept changed since the beginning. Plutarch was not Egyptian -- earlier Egyptian sources put the number at 14, depending on source. This legend does NOT date from the time of the construction of the pyramids, but is a later addition to the myth of Osiris.

Indeed, when we take an overview of the first 16 pyramids completed by the AEs we find something quite remarkable:

What needs to be remarked upon is that the Egyptians weren't able to draw a map like that (and in fact, maps didn't exist at that time.) They had no way of laying anything like that out or determining distances like that.

Also, the atef crown shown there that so conveniently matches things did not exist during that time, and the "pyramid points" don't correspond to the places where the body parts of Osiris were found according to the AE. Furthermore, the locations of the pyramid do not correspond to the place where Osiris' body washed ashore in the oldest version of the myth (Mendes). That place, prominently featured in the worship of Osiris, is in the Nile delta and does not have any pyramids.

SC:...this points to the use of this stone box as a neb-ankh or 'Osiris Bed' and NOT a sarcophagus. But the Egyptologists simply ignore the evidence they actually found in G2, imagine instead that the king's body musta been in the stone box, got nicked and someone came by later to fill the stone box with earth and stones. They imagine all of this rather than simply accept that the earth filled stone box they found in G2 was actually an 'Osiris Bed' and was the original content of the pyramid. This evidence (neb-ankh/'Osiris Bed') proves, beyond doubt, that the stone boxes in these first pyramids were NOT sarcophagi, ergo they were NOT for burial of a king, ergo the first pyramids were NOT conceived as tombs for kings.

And how do you know WHEN the earth and stones were placed in the box? (I will admit that I don't know because i haven't looked at the evidence. But someone will know.)

Byrd: I find it hard to believe they were making artifacts to a deity that wouldn't be worshiped for another 150 years or so.

SC: If the pyramid represents the ‘body of Osiris’ then the earth-filled neb-ankh found in G2 was the ‘container of life’ designed to hold the ‘soul of Osiris’ within the ‘pyramid body of Osiris’.

You missed the point. Osiris as a deity didn't exist.

They couldn't be making artifacts about a deity that wasn't known until a century later.

If you know your AE hieroglyphs you will know that the bull is the sign used for ‘soul’.

Yes, I do know my hieroglyphs.

"Ka" for "bull" and "Ka" for "life force" are NOT the same words (just as "read" (present tense, reading a text) and "read" (past tense -- I read a book yesterday) are not the same words. The "soul" is not a single thing but five things to them.

The placement of the ‘soul’ within the ‘body’ was part of a deep, chthonic ritual to ensure the recovery/rebirth of the Earth (the AE kingdom) after its destruction in a coming deluge. As I said this was a chthonic ritual that would later become identified with Osiris and the success of which would ensure the rise of Osiris to greater prominence in later dynasties.

This... is not anything that the Egyptians wrote about. As far as they were concerned, Egypt was and is and always would be and they had no sense of a "coming deluge."

If you have a link to texts with hieroglyphs (so I can study the original better) that shows them referring to these concepts, I would appreciate the link. However, based on what I am learning to read and the texts I have access to, I have never found any link where the Egyptians themselves state that they thought these things or held these beliefs or practices.

When i had asked you a lot of questions regarding your silly osiris ark project, which you conveniety skirted around giving vague answers, i might still keep at it, unless...you are willing to provide proper answers..as well.

btw i dont buy trash books.

SC: And your point is? When I use the term ‘Osiris Bed’ or ‘Osiris Brick’ or ‘Corn Mummy’ I am merely using the term that modern Egyptology uses to describe these stone containers. The AEs of the early pyramid-building age probably called such stone containers ‘neb-ankh’.

Byrd: You've missed the point. You're trying to connect Osiris with Giza. There was no deity named Osiris at that time, nor was there a deity with a similar function ….

SC: In the Pyramid Texts we are told that Osiris was, by this time in the 5th dynasty, being referred to as a ‘god’. Now gods do not materialize overnight. It is safe to assume then that Osiris and his cult were extant long before he was first attested in the Pyramid Texts. Indeed, a number of eminent Egyptologists are of that view:

"While there is every likelihood that the Osirian material in the Pyramid Texts derives in part from a much earlier date, so far it has not proved possible to track down the god or his symbols tangibly to the First or Second dynasty." (Emphasis mine). - John G. Griffiths, The Origins of Osiris and His Cult, p.44

"Although there is a strong likelihood that the cult of Osiris began in or before the First Dynasty in connection with the Royal funerals at Abydos, archaeological evidence hitherto does not tangibly date the cult to an era before the Fifth Dynasty." (Emphasis mine). - Ibid.

"The myth of Osiris seems to be an echo of long forgotten events which actually took place." - Walter B. Emery, Archaic Egypt, p.122-23

"Much points to the conclusion that Osiris’s story was cloaked in a veil of distant antiquity even at this [Fifth Dynasty] early date. The discovery at Helwan of a very early Djed symbol and the ‘girdle of Isis’ (Isis being his female counterpart) shows that during the Archaic Period (Dynasty 1 and 2) Osiris’s cult already existed." (Emphasis mine). - Jane B. Sellers, The Death of Gods in Ancient Egypt, p.6

“It is, however, well known that the position of Osiris as the god-man was well established in the minds of the Egyptians at the beginning of the Dynastic Period, and that he was even at this remote time regarded as the head of a small company of five gods, each of whom was endued by his worshipers with human attributes. (Emphasis mine). - E. A. Wallis Budge , Osiris and the Egyptian Resurrection, p.28

Byrd:…and sarcophagi of that time period were not referred to as "neb-ankh".

SC: I didn’t say they were. I am saying that neb-ankh were stone containers filled with earth (what Egyptologists today call ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris Bricks’) and that sarcophagi were stone containers used for the burial of human remains. Sarcophagi are generally easily identified with their owner’s name and titles inscribed onto them. Even Khufu’s children had their own sarcophagus inscribed in this way. Neb-ankh (what Egyptologists today refer to as ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris Bricks’ were not inscribed with any king’s name as they were not sarcophagi of any king). One of the many names of Osiris was Asar Neb-Ankh.

SC: When Osiris rose to prominence the later AEs might have referred to these containers also as ‘neb-ankh’ but by now were also placing within them images of Osiris pressed into the earth within the container. Just because modern Egyptologists call these later containers ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris/Bricks’ doesn’t mean the AEs themselves called them such.

Byrd: Actually, modern Egyptologists call them by the names used by the Egyptians. However, since you used the term "Osiris bed" in conversation, I will call them whatever you wish to call them so we can discuss it.

SC: It is difficult to define these artifacts by a single name since there are different types of such artifacts that developed over time but all of which were related to the same Osirian rebirth ritual and which were used, at various times, during the Osirian Festival of Khoiak. There are ‘Osiris Bricks’ which were made out of wood or pottery. There are ‘Osiris Beds’ which were larger and again there were different types (some that were actual large stone containers filled with earth used by the temple priests during the Festival and later ones of linen stretched over a wooden frame and scattered with earth) but essentially they were part of the same religious ‘rite’, symbolizing rebirth through the agency of Osiris. And then there were ‘Corn Mummies’ of which, again over time, these took slightly different forms. All of these different artifacts would be buried, usually in the desert with a large boulder placed on top symbolizing the primeval mound, ergo symbolic also of the pyramid. My contention is that the earth-filled granite stone box found in G2 was the archetype, the original, of these later ‘manifestations’ we find used in the Festival of Khoiak. I contend that the earth-filled container found in G2 by Belzoni in 1818 was the ‘inspiration’ for the later Osirian rebirth ritual.

SC: Which merely proves that pyramids were used as tombs for clear intrusive burials. The anthropoid coffin found in G3 is not consistent with the vaulted wooden coffins of the 4th dynasty and is consistent with that of the Saite Period (25th or 26th dynasty) – but I am sure you must know this. You said yourself that Osiris was not attested in written form until the 5th dynasty and yet this 4th dynasty coffin supposedly of Menkaure bears the name of Osiris (see below). Not only is the coffin anachronistic but the supposed remains that some Egyptologists believed were those of Menkaure have been dated to early AD. Clearly an intrusive burial (or burials).

Byrd: Yes, I know they're intrusive burials, but there was other material there as well.

SC: Well why wouldn’t there be? If someone appropriated a pyramid as their tomb, there would naturally be all manner of “other material there”.

Byrd: And I see you agree with my point:

SC: As stated, pyramids were clearly used as tombs

Byrd: Yes.

SC: Do not take my agreement out of context. Intrusive burials have been found in pyramids. No one can dispute that. But that does not make the pyramid the preferred or actual burial place of AE kings. Nor should it imply that the pyramid was conceived for such a purpose.

SC: It remains my view that—in accordance with the Pyramid Texts—these structures represented the allegorical ‘body of Osiris’.

Byrd: An allegory created two hundred years before the deity existed??? I have trouble believing that.

SC: Only because you have trouble accepting that a god does not appear overnight and that he must have existed long before ever being attested in writing. And Osiris was also attested as a god on the Inventory Stela but that’s a discussion for another time.

Continued.........

Continued from previous...........

SC: Why the first 16 or so? Because Plutarch’s Myth of Isis and Osiris tells us that the body of Osiris was divided into 16 parts.

Byrd: The concept changed since the beginning. Plutarch was not Egyptian -- earlier Egyptian sources put the number at 14, depending on source.

SC: Indeed. And there may be a perfectly plausible and simple explanation why there appears this confusion between 16 or 14 parts. As you know, I contend that these structures were for the storage of all manner of recovery goods that would assist in the revivication of the kingdom. As such each pyramid would require storage vaults. The two small so-called ‘cult pyramids’ at Giza which I include in the total do not have any chambers for any storage. Perhaps this is why some legends say 14 parts whilst other version say Osiris was divided into 16 parts. Speculation of course.

Byrd: This legend does NOT date from the time of the construction of the pyramids, but is a later addition to the myth of Osiris.

SC: So. Clearly there was a reason for including the information. Sources that are no longer available to us but that were perhaps available to Plutrarch.

SC: Indeed, when we take an overview of the first 16 pyramids completed by the AEs we find something quite remarkable:




Byrd: What needs to be remarked upon is that the Egyptians weren't able to draw a map like that (and in fact, maps didn't exist at that time.) They had no way of laying anything like that out or determining distances like that.

SC: Nonsense. All they required was the ability to determine true north/south and to use a simple grid on a sheet of papyrus. And they most certainly could determine true north/south.

Byrd: Also, the atef crown shown there that so conveniently matches things did not exist during that time…

SC: The atef crown was specific to Osiris. This crown may only have been first attested in the 5th dynasty along with the name of Osiris but it is fairly clear that Osiris existed before the 5th dynasty. You do not appear as a god in the 5th dynasty Pyramid Texts overnight.

Byrd:… and the "pyramid points" don't correspond to the places where the body parts of Osiris were found according to the AE. Furthermore, the locations of the pyramid do not correspond to the place where Osiris' body washed ashore in the oldest version of the myth (Mendes). That place, prominently featured in the worship of Osiris, is in the Nile delta and does not have any pyramids.

SC: The pyramid was a defense against a coming deluge. They would need to be built on high ground, not in the low ground of the Delta. From Frank Cole Babbit’s interpretation of Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris:

"The traditional result of Osiris's dismemberment is that there are many so-called tombs of Osiris in Egypt; for Isis held a funeral for each part when she had found it ... all of them called the tomb of Osiris."

SC:...this points to the use of this stone box as a neb-ankh or 'Osiris Bed' and NOT a sarcophagus. But the Egyptologists simply ignore the evidence they actually found in G2, imagine instead that the king's body musta been in the stone box, got nicked and someone came by later to fill the stone box with earth and stones. They imagine all of this rather than simply accept that the earth filled stone box they found in G2 was actually an 'Osiris Bed' and was the original content of the pyramid. This evidence (neb-ankh/'Osiris Bed') proves, beyond doubt, that the stone boxes in these first pyramids were NOT sarcophagi, ergo they were NOT for burial of a king, ergo the first pyramids were NOT conceived as tombs for kings.

Byrd: And how do you know WHEN the earth and stones were placed in the box? (I will admit that I don't know because i haven't looked at the evidence. But someone will know.)

SC: I can’t imagine upon discovering the king’s body had gone missing that someone would go to very considerable trouble to haul piles of earth and stones with which to fill the granite box in G2. More likely a ka statue of the king would have been placed therein. The only reason this earth and stones was still found in-tact in the granite container of G2 is because the container is set into the floor and, unlike the container in G1, cannot be tipped over and emptied. Belzoni and every antiquarian and Egyptologist who came after him all jumped to the conclusion that the king’s body was stolen so someone thought to fill the container with earth and stones instead. Not one of them stopped to consider the possibility that there might in fact be a cultural explanation for such evidence, that it was in fact part of a deep chthonic ritual relating to the recovery of the earth; that these stone containers contained the soul within the body of Osiris.

Byrd: I find it hard to believe they were making artifacts to a deity that wouldn't be worshiped for another 150 years or so.

SC: If the pyramid represents the ‘body of Osiris’ then the earth-filled neb-ankh found in G2 was the ‘container of life’ designed to hold the ‘soul of Osiris’ within the ‘pyramid body of Osiris’.

Byrd: You missed the point. Osiris as a deity didn't exist. They couldn't be making artifacts about a deity that wasn't known until a century later.

SC: See above. Osiris, testified as being a god in the 5th dynasty PTs simply could not have achieved such exalted status overnight. It stands to reason, however much it irks you to accept it, that he must have existed for some considerable time prior to becoming deified. That’s plain old common sense.

SC: If you know your AE hieroglyphs you will know that the bull is the sign used for ‘soul’.

Byrd: Yes, I do know my hieroglyphs.

"Ka" for "bull" and "Ka" for "life force" are NOT the same words (just as "read" (present tense, reading a text) and "read" (past tense -- I read a book yesterday) are not the same words. The "soul" is not a single thing but five things to them.

SC: I was thinking more of the use of the upraised arms (Ka) alongside the bull symbol. The word ‘bull’ can be represented by the bull logogram on its own. Which begs the question why it is represented with the upraised arms logogram for Ka (soul):



Continued.........

Continued from previous.......

SC: The placement of the ‘soul’ within the ‘body’ was part of a deep, chthonic ritual to ensure the recovery/rebirth of the Earth (the AE kingdom) after its destruction in a coming deluge. As I said this was a chthonic ritual that would later become identified with Osiris and the success of which would ensure the rise of Osiris to greater prominence in later dynasties.

Byrd: This... is not anything that the Egyptians wrote about. As far as they were concerned, Egypt was and is and always would be and they had no sense of a "coming deluge."

If you have a link to texts with hieroglyphs (so I can study the original better) that shows them referring to these concepts, I would appreciate the link. However, based on what I am learning to read and the texts I have access to, I have never found any link where the Egyptians themselves state that they thought these things or held these beliefs or practices.

SC: We have already discussed much of this before in previous threads. See here.

Regards,

SC

Scott Creighton
SC: I was thinking more of the use of the upraised arms (Ka) alongside the bull symbol. The word ‘bull’ can be represented by the bull logogram on its own.
Which begs the question why it is represented with the upraised arms logogram for Ka (soul):

The first thought that came to my mind is the boringly usual one of a pronunciation aid.

As you know (but other lurkers reading this thread may not), ancient egyptians would often place a letter in front of the character representing a word... like the letter C in front of a picture of a Computer (as a modern example).
Bread is another one. It is "t", but the character can also be found with a letter "t" in front of it.

Edit - wikipedia gives another example for the casual lurker reading this thread, where is shows they may stick an extra superfluous "r" at the end of the word pr(y)...

pr(y) like this: "Word that sounds like a word for house which ends in an r

So to find a "ka" pronounced word with another common "ka" in front of it as a variation isnt at all surprising. To me, anyway.

alfa1

Scott Creighton
SC: I was thinking more of the use of the upraised arms (Ka) alongside the bull symbol. The word ‘bull’ can be represented by the bull logogram on its own.
Which begs the question why it is represented with the upraised arms logogram for Ka (soul):

So to find a "ka" pronounced word with another common "ka" in front of it as a variation isnt at all surprising. To me, anyway.

edit on 18-10-2013 by alfa1 because: (no reason given)

Hi Alfa1,

SC: Yes, you are quite right in what you say. The Ancient Egyptians used ‘phonetic compliments’ in their writing. For those out there who may be reading this, here is an explanation:

"A phonetic complement is a phonetic symbol used to disambiguate word characters (logograms) that have multiple readings, in mixed logographic-phonetic scripts such as Egyptian hieroglyphs... Often they reinforce the communication of the ideogram by repeating the first or last syllable in the term." – Source

SC: What I would add, however, is that the bull sign (Gardiner E1) is a biliteral sign just like the D28 upraised arms sign. Biliteral signs are usually followed (or sometimes preceded) by one or more uniliteral signs as the phonetic compliments and not another biliteral sign. So why the use of a biliteral sign (E1) as the phonetic compliment to another bilateral sign (D28)? And why the need for the D28 sign at all when the E1 bull sign when used as an ideogram (with vertical stroke) symbolizes the word ‘bull’ all on its own? I suspect a more nuanced meaning is intended with the use of the D28 sign than simply the AE word 'bull'.

Regards,

SC

coredrill
When i had asked you a lot of questions regarding your silly osiris ark project, which you conveniety skirted around giving vague answers, i might still keep at it, unless...you are willing to provide proper answers..as well.

What questions might they be Coredrill?

Scott Creighton

Now, I know that the evidence discovered in these pyramids which I present makes many an Egypt-apologist here on ATS and elsewhere uncomfortable—and so it should.

So you're now labeling anyone who disagrees with you by that name? Does that mean you are a fringe-apologist? You also seem very unwilling to address the many other alternative and fringe theories out there - I mean instead of beating your head against the mainstream, which ignores you why not try and sell your ideas to them? I mean they have already demonstrated a willingness to except nonsense as fact. Wouldn't it be better to face the mainstream with a united fringe and alternative scenario than your having one fringe theory amonst scores and scores of others?

But that is no reason to avoid this troubling evidence by trying to stifle and shut down discussion of it with silly claims of hijacking threads.

Which is exactly what you did then changed subjects to your own theory. You were asked to start a new thread but.....you just cannot bring yourself to do that, why is that Scott is your ego just to big to allow you to do it or is there another reason? Why the the inability to start threads?

One other sad note I have seen your writing slowly changing from a distinct Scott Creighton style into one more and more like Cladking. You might want to avoid doing that.....

reply to post by BABYBULL24


Why don't you go a start your own thread about that instead of hijacking this one.

reply to post by Pixiefyre


The Great Pyramid was damaged in WWII when a Greman fighter crashed into it after being shot down. Just a little side note, debris from that crash is what damaged the Sphynx.

reply to post by Byrd


The Egyptians had steel so they had smelting. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that smelting is a modern discovery, its not.
But did they have broadcast energy technology? Not unless you count redirecting sunlight with mirrors. Which I don't.

Crazy1
reply to post by Byrd

 

The Egyptians had steel so they had smelting. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that smelting is a modern discovery, its not.
But did they have broadcast energy technology? Not unless you count redirecting sunlight with mirrors. Which I don't.

Hi Crazy1,

Can you present any evidence that proves the AEs "...had steel..."?

Thanks.

SC

reply to post by Hanslune

Hans: So you're now labeling anyone who disagrees with you by that name?

SC: An Egypt-apologist? No - not everyone. Only those who uncritically and unthinkingly accept what they are spoonfed as gospel by Egyptologists and certainly not those who do not apply critical thinking in what Egpytologists assert as 'truth'. For when you look at the arguments they present in support of their 'Pyramid Tomb Theory' (PTT), it is easy to see where they have become misguided. Start with Belzoni in 1818.

Hans: Does that mean you are a fringe-apologist?

SC: Aren't you a wit - not.

Here in Scotland we have a thing called the 'International Edinburgh Festival' - you may have heard of it. A mainstream arts festival that is - well - all very arty and, I have to confess, somewhat boring (though I am certain there are some who will disagree with my sentiment). However, there is another, wholly different side to the mainstream festival called the Edinburgh 'Fringe Festival'. This 'edge festival' is a wholly different kettle of fish from the run-of-the-mill, mainstream malarky. 'The Fringe' (as it is called) is where all the real action is.

Now, you use the term 'fringe' as though it is a bad thing, something to 'belittle'. Get a life, bub. Get over here to Scotland and I will show you what 'fringe' really means.

Kind regards,

SC

Byrd: You've missed the point. You're trying to connect Osiris with Giza. There was no deity named Osiris at that time, nor was there a deity with a similar function ….

SC: In the Pyramid Texts we are told that Osiris was, by this time in the 5th dynasty, being referred to as a ‘god’.

In the Pyramid Texts of Unis, yes, and no, he didn't emerge overnight. But there are no temples or objects relating to Osiris 150 years previously. Was he the deity of a small group of Egyptians? Possibly. The Egyptians are also known for combining deities to create a new one, and he could be created from two older deities. We don't know.

We do know that no one could have been making a "map of Osiris" at the time of the Giza pyramids because there was no Osiris.

I am saying that neb-ankh were stone containers filled with earth (what Egyptologists today call ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris Bricks’) and that sarcophagi were stone containers used for the burial of human remains. Sarcophagi are generally easily identified with their owner’s name and titles inscribed onto them.

Not always inscribed. In a number of cases, the information was painted on them.

‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris Bricks’ were not inscribed with any king’s name as they were not sarcophagi of any king). One of the many names of Osiris was Asar Neb-Ankh.

Corn mummies are not found in tombs and in other funerary contexts. They ARE found in agricultural contexts. The sarcophagus is found in a funerary context (the chapel outside, boat pits, etc) and not agricultural context (in the middle of the fields.) They also did not exist at the time of the pyramids -- they first appear during the 18th dynasty, 1,200 years later. (ref: Taylor, John H. Death and the afterlife in ancient Egypt. University of Chicago Press, 2001. p 212, also see Teeter, Emily. Religion and ritual in ancient Egypt. Cambridge University Press, 2011. p 62 and Griffiths, J. Gwyn. The origins of Osiris and his cult. Vol. 40. Brill, 1980. -- Griffiths is a bit outdated but still good.)

There are ‘Osiris Beds’ which were larger and again there were different types (some that were actual large stone containers filled with earth used by the temple priests during the Festival and later ones of linen stretched over a wooden frame and scattered with earth) but essentially they were part of the same religious ‘rite’, symbolizing rebirth through the agency of Osiris. And then there were ‘Corn Mummies’ of which, again over time, these took slightly different forms. All of these different artifacts would be buried, usually in the desert with a large boulder placed on top symbolizing the primeval mound, ergo symbolic also of the pyramid.

I think you're mixing the Osirian mysteries with the funerary rites. They were different.

My contention is that the earth-filled granite stone box found in G2 was the archetype, the original, of these later ‘manifestations’ we find used in the Festival of Khoiak. I contend that the earth-filled container found in G2 by Belzoni in 1818 was the ‘inspiration’ for the later Osirian rebirth ritual.

It would be possible to argue that IF this was the only sarcophagus ever made. Furthermore, the report by Belzoni is pretty incomplete, isn't it? How do we know these are really "bull bones" (and how do you tell the difference between the bones of a bull and the bones of a cow without DNA analysis)? I've seen people who did not study anatomy misidentify all sorts of bones. And how do we know what it was he called "dirt"? Was it coffin fragments? Papyrus fragments? Linen mixed with human remains?

Unless you can find Belzoni's bones and dirt and prove that it's cattle and dirt and not something else, this argument doesn't hold up.

SC: It remains my view that—in accordance with the Pyramid Texts—these structures represented the allegorical ‘body of Osiris’.

The texts you quote come from only one version of the Pyramid Texts (the ones found in the pyramid of Meryenre) and are not found in other Pyramid texts.

So --

I find it hard to believe that the locations of the pyramids represents a map of the figure of Osiris...
... a deity that did not exist at the time of the first pyramids
... an image of the deity that is mixing elements of posture and dress from several different areas and times and wearing a crown that would not exist until 150 years later-- see Griffiths, J. Gwyn. The origins of Osiris and his cult. Vol. 40. Brill, 1980, Chapter 3 for more details)
... a deity whose oldest temple was built more than 200 years after the first pyramid

...and these Pyramids which supposedly represent the body of Osiris
... are not (except for one) placed in any city important to his worship
... are not in locations where his body was found
... do not reference Osiris in their names (though several reference Horus)
... were supposedly located on a map made by people who didn't have maps of their country

...and that the sarcophagus represents an object (Osiris bed)
... a type of artifact not known until after the 11th dynasty
... that are actually smaller than 2 feet in length
... which are common in the Ptolmaic period (2,000 years later)
... because of "no hieroglyphs" on the box (which is damaged and missing its lid
...because it reportedly contained bull bones and dirt

...and the supporting evidence (linking Osiris and the Pyramid and the King) comes from a version of the Pyramid Texts of Merenrye, written in 2200 BC, a full 400 years after Khufu
... lines that appear in only one (not all) of the six Pyramid Texts. (ref: Allen, James Peter, and Peter Der Manuelian, eds. The ancient Egyptian pyramid texts. No. 23. Brill, 2005.)

...etc.

One of those might be explained away. An inconsistency of fifty years or so would be understandable if all the evidence arose in that time frame. But the tie-in to multiple coincidences in objects and phrases that come into being hundreds (and in one case over a thousand) years after the pyramids and the lack of reference to Osiris in the pyramid names and the overlooking of sites important to the worship of Osiris with this map schema isn't convincing.

Hi Byrd,

Thank you for your comprehensive response. It is nice to see a post here that actually deals with the issue of the Giza pyramids in a constructive manner and without any of the invective cast around by some others in this thread.

SC: In the Pyramid Texts we are told that Osiris was, by this time in the 5th dynasty, being referred to as a ‘god’.

Byrd: In the Pyramid Texts of Unis, yes, and no, he didn't emerge overnight. But there are no temples or objects relating to Osiris 150 years previously. Was he the deity of a small group of Egyptians? Possibly. The Egyptians are also known for combining deities to create a new one, and he could be created from two older deities. We don't know.

SC: No, we don’t know. And why would you necessarily expect there to be “…temples or objects relating to Osiris 150 years previously…”? What we know is that by the 5th dynasty Osiris was deified. We do not know when, how or why he became deified. Indeed, we do not even know with any certainty who or what Osiris actually was, if he ever existed as a person (a king) or was entirely mythical and allegorical. In my view Osiris was the first 16 pyramids, or rather, Osiris BECAME the first 16 pyramids, allegorically speaking, of course. And that is what the Pyramid Texts tell us – the pyramid becomes personified AS Osiris.

Byrd: We do know that no one could have been making a "map of Osiris" at the time of the Giza pyramids because there was no Osiris.

SC: The pyramid WAS Osiris. That the AEs laid out 16 or so pyramids in a particular fashion utilizing the high plateaus along the Nile was not done to represent the figure of Osiris – it was the other way around. This layout BECAME Osiris i.e. the 16 part dismembered ‘body of Osiris’. In essence, in the construction of the first 16 pyramid recovery vaults this is where Osiris was born.

Did there once exist an actual individual called Osiris who sought out and identified all the locations where each pyramid recovery vault was to be built? Perhaps, but we will never know. Over time the pyramid recovery vaults (as the means that would ensure the recovery of the kingdom) would become religious icons and would become the personification of a new god, ‘Osiris’, a god that would rise in importance, taking on many of the attributes of other gods whilst fully usurping others.

SC: I am saying that neb-ankh were stone containers filled with earth (what Egyptologists today call ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris Bricks’) and that sarcophagi were stone containers used for the burial of human remains. Sarcophagi are generally easily identified with their owner’s name and titles inscribed onto them.

Byrd: Not always inscribed. In a number of cases, the information was painted on them.

SC: Indeed. The point being, however, that the stone containers found in the first 16 pyramids were entirely anonymous just as Osiris Bricks / Beds were anonymous.

SC: ‘Osiris Beds’ or ‘Osiris Bricks’ were not inscribed with any king’s name as they were not sarcophagi of any king). One of the many names of Osiris was Asar Neb-Ankh.

Byrd: Corn mummies are not found in tombs and in other funerary contexts. They ARE found in agricultural contexts.

SC: I disagree. Part of the Festival of Khoiak presented the religious Passion Play re-enacting the death and resurrection of Osiris and the growing of the grain in the Osiris Brick/Bed during the two-week festival was used as a powerful metaphor for the recovery of the god. The Festival of Khoiak was essentially a chthonic festival that celebrated the rebirth and fecundity of the Earth through the agency of Osiris. This was not a simple agricultural festival. Its roots went all the way back to the first 16 pyramids that was the first ‘body of Osiris’ packed full of seeds (and other recovery items) just as the Osiris corn mummy effigies were packed full of seed in remembrance of the original ‘body of Osiris’ that ensured the recovery of the kingdom.

Byrd: The sarcophagus is found in a funerary context (the chapel outside, boat pits, etc) and not agricultural context (in the middle of the fields.)

SC: Indeed and this is not disputed. But the earth-filled granite box is not a sarcophagus but the archetype ‘Osiris Bed’.

Byrd: They also did not exist at the time of the pyramids -- they first appear during the 18th dynasty, 1,200 years later. (ref: Taylor, John H. Death and the afterlife in ancient Egypt. University of Chicago Press, 2001. p 212, also see Teeter, Emily. Religion and ritual in ancient Egypt. Cambridge University Press, 2011. p 62 and Griffiths, J. Gwyn. The origins of Osiris and his cult. Vol. 40. Brill, 1980. -- Griffiths is a bit outdated but still good.)

SC: I am assuming you are referring to Osiris Bricks / Beds and Corn Mummies. So what. Chocolate Easter eggs didn’t arrive until around 2,000 years after the events they commemorate.

SC: There are ‘Osiris Beds’ which were larger and again there were different types (some that were actual large stone containers filled with earth used by the temple priests during the Festival and later ones of linen stretched over a wooden frame and scattered with earth) but essentially they were part of the same religious ‘rite’, symbolizing rebirth through the agency of Osiris. And then there were ‘Corn Mummies’ of which, again over time, these took slightly different forms. All of these different artifacts would be buried, usually in the desert with a large boulder placed on top symbolizing the primeval mound, ergo symbolic also of the pyramid.

Byrd: I think you're mixing the Osirian mysteries with the funerary rites. They were different.

SC: The Osirian funerary rites (of kings) came from the ‘Osirian Mysteries’. In this regard, your friend and mine, J. G. Griffiths writes:

"If Osiris and his cult cannot be claimed to have originated the belief in life after death, it may properly be asked whether his cult made any distinctive contribution to Egyptian thought on the matter. The three passages quoted above make it clear that there was something different in the Osirian conception of immortality. First, it was a corporeal conception. Whereas the other religious systems involved the ascent of the deceased to heaven or his temporary transformation into another form, the Osirian system is clearly concerned with the body of the dead king and desiderates continued life for his body. Death indeed is not usually admitted. As Osiris, the tired god, was able to revive from his sleep, so the king will awake and stand… Death is really only a sleep, then, a phase of tiredness; and the firm denial of it in other references shows that it is denied both as a state and as an occurrence.”

"O king, thou hast not gone away dead; though hast gone away alive. Sit on the throne of Osiris." (Pyr. 134a)

Here then is a doctrine of continued life rather than of resurrection or resuscitation after death. In view of the pretence or euphemism involved one should possibly not object to the common use of the term resurrection as a description of the doctrine, although it is not precisely correct; it is the non-Osirian doctrine, in various forms, which amounts to a belief in resurrection [i.e. a spiritual life after a corporeal death].

J. G. Griffiths , The Origins of Osiris and His Cult, p.66-67

Contd....

Cont'd from previous.....

SC: Here then we are told that the AE religion changed with the introduction of the Osirian doctrine. The king would no longer be ‘resurrected’ from death in a metaphysical manner in the netherworld but would, in fact, now simply re-awaken (recover from sleep) fully corporeally in THIS same earthly realm. Where would such an idea come from? Perhaps from the pyramids as recovery vaults ensuring the Earth recovered or was ‘re-awakened’ from its ‘sleep’. It was not imagined that the Earth after its coming ‘death’ would have a metaphysical resurrection in the netherworld but would recover or re-awaken in this same realm—the Osirian doctrine of ‘continued life’.

SC: My contention is that the earth-filled granite stone box found in G2 was the archetype, the original, of these later ‘manifestations’ we find used in the Festival of Khoiak. I contend that the earth-filled container found in G2 by Belzoni in 1818 was the ‘inspiration’ for the later Osirian rebirth ritual.

Byrd: It would be possible to argue that IF this was the only sarcophagus ever made.

SC: Why do you assume the granite container in G2 to be a sarcophagus? Sarcophagi generally have a body in them (usually inside a coffer) and have the name and titles of the deceased on the sarcophagus. Osiris Beds / Bricks are filled with earth and have no such markings of any king and that is what was found in G2. The evidence strongly points to the stone box in G2 being an ‘Osiris Bed’ (the archetype) and NOT a sarcophagus.

Byrd: Furthermore, the report by Belzoni is pretty incomplete, isn't it? How do we know these are really "bull bones" (and how do you tell the difference between the bones of a bull and the bones of a cow without DNA analysis)? I've seen people who did not study anatomy misidentify all sorts of bones. And how do we know what it was he called "dirt"? Was it coffin fragments? Papyrus fragments? Linen mixed with human remains?

SC: From Howard-Vyse’s published ‘Operations’:

”The sarcophagus [in G2] was of granite and without any inscription, and was eight feet long, three feet six inches wide, and two feet three inches deep in the inside. "The lid had been broken off at the side, so that the sarcophagus was half open; within were some earth and stones…” ‘The Pyramids of Giza’ 1837 (Vol II), pp 296-297.

And from Belzoni:

Byrd: Unless you can find Belzoni's bones and dirt and prove that it's cattle and dirt and not something else, this argument doesn't hold up.

SC: I think Belzoni knew what earth and stones look like. And he sent the bones for analysis in London—they were the bones of a bull. (I write more about this in my new, forthcoming book, ‘The Secret Chamber of Osiris’). So, as stated above, I think the evidence is highly compelling that the earth-filled granite container in G2 was the archetype ‘Osiris Bed’ and NOT a sarcophagus as conventional Egyptology asserts.

SC: It remains my view that—in accordance with the Pyramid Texts—these structures represented the allegorical ‘body of Osiris’.

Byrd: The texts you quote come from only one version of the Pyramid Texts (the ones found in the pyramid of Meryenre) and are not found in other Pyramid texts.

SC: And all the Pyramid Texts come from a corpus of earlier writings and traditions long since lost. Fortunately for us, one set of PTs preserved this particular text that tells us, “…the pyramid… is Osiris…” You cannot dismiss what it tells us simply because it is found in only one set of texts.

Byrd: So --

I find it hard to believe that the locations of the pyramids represents a map of the figure of Osiris...

SC: The pyramid locations BECAME Osiris—not the other way round.

Byrd: ... a deity that did not exist at the time of the first pyramids

SC: Osiris didn’t have to exist as a deity at the time of the first pyramids.

Byrd: ... an image of the deity that is mixing elements of posture and dress from several different areas and times and wearing a crown that would not exist until 150 years later-- see Griffiths, J. Gwyn. The origins of Osiris and his cult. Vol. 40. Brill, 1980, Chapter 3 for more details)

SC: See above. Osiris didn’t have to be a deity when the pyramids were built. Osiris and the Atef Crown appear at the same time, or rather, they are first attested at the same time in writing and in art.

... a deity whose oldest temple was built more than 200 years after the first pyramid

SC: Which is perfectly understandable as the importance of Osiris grew.

Byrd: ...and these Pyramids which supposedly represent the body of Osiris
... are not (except for one) placed in any city important to his worship

SC: The pyramid recovery vaults were likely built before Osiris was important or became a deity.

Byrd: ... are not in locations where his body was found …

SC: As pyramid recovery vaults they would be required to be built on the high plateaus (anticipating the deluge). The myth of Isis and Osiris is allegorical. Just about everywhere in Egypt (and even beyond) would claim to have a part of Osiris, several with his head, several with legs and arms (more than he was ‘born’ with) and other parts of his body.

Byrd:... do not reference Osiris in their names (though several reference Horus)

SC: Osiris – the name that must not be spoken.

Byrd: ... were supposedly located on a map made by people who didn't have maps of their country

SC: And yet knew how to navigate their country (and beyond).

Byrd: ...and that the sarcophagus represents an object (Osiris bed)

SC: No. Sarcophagi and Osiris Beds although they may look similar had quite different functions. Sarcophagi were interring the dead. Osiris Beds were for containing the ‘life-spark’ symbolized by seeds growing out of the earth; the ‘possessor/container of life’ – the neb-ankh.

Byrd: ... a type of artifact not known until after the 11th dynasty

SC: At around the time the cult of Osiris really began to flourish.

Byrd: ... that are actually smaller than 2 feet in length

SC: Small replicas of the original used in festivals. That’s to be expected. And some actually were quite large, those used by the temple priests during the festival.

Byrd: ... which are common in the Ptolmaic period (2,000 years later) …

SC: Easter eggs are common 2,000 years after the event they commemorate.

Byrd: ... because of "no hieroglyphs" on the box (which is damaged and missing its lid….

SC: The lid was partly broken, not missing. And yes, there are no hieroglyphs on a neb-ankh as they were not for burial of a person. Hieroglyphs (names/titles) were placed on sarcophagi (see the sarcophagi of Khufu’s children for examples).

Byrd:...because it reportedly contained bull bones and dirt

SC: That’s what Belzoni tells us he found.

Byrd: ...and the supporting evidence (linking Osiris and the Pyramid and the King) comes from a version of the Pyramid Texts of Merenrye, written in 2200 BC, a full 400 years after Khufu

SC: Just as well someone had the presence of mind to document such a fact otherwise it might have been lost to us entirely.

Cont'd......

Cont'd from previous....

Byrd: ... lines that appear in only one (not all) of the six Pyramid Texts. (ref: Allen, James Peter, and Peter Der Manuelian, eds. The ancient Egyptian pyramid texts. No. 23. Brill, 2005.)

SC: So, when we actually have physical, written evidence that states something quite explicitly, it is to be doubted because it is not said often enough but, on the other hand, when there is not a single piece of primary evidence of any king having ever been interred in any of these pyramids, we are to accept that these structures were their tombs? You have a very peculiar way of dealing with evidence.

Byrd: One of those might be explained away. An inconsistency of fifty years or so would be understandable if all the evidence arose in that time frame. But the tie-in to multiple coincidences in objects and phrases that come into being hundreds (and in one case over a thousand) years after the pyramids and the lack of reference to Osiris in the pyramid names and the overlooking of sites important to the worship of Osiris with this map schema isn't convincing.

SC: It’s about joining the dots. When seeking the truth of something you do not press your nose so close to an object as to see nothing else but only the object in front of you. You have to stand back and consider the entire picture across the entire history of the culture in question, to pull together what seem like disconnected fragments into a cohesive narrative. These fragments won’t all exist in nice orderly packages in a nice set time-frame. It’s more like a jigsaw puzzle and one where many of the pieces are missing.

In closing this post I will say this – Egyptology was sent in a wrong direction in 1818 when Belzoni dismissed the granite box of earth and bull bones he found in G2 as a joke. But in his time, in his defense, he had no idea of Osiris Bricks / Beds that were part of another cultural narrative that had little to do with the burial of kings but rather to do with a deep chthonic ritual concerning the recovery of the kingdom. If Belzoni had known of Osiris Bricks/Beds (and Corn Mummies), I rather suspect that he would not have been so quick to denounce his discovery as a prank. And because of his short-comings, Belzoni has sent us all down the wrong path ever since.

Regards,

SC

reply to post by Scott Creighton


Yep fringe apologist

I find it interesting that you have not stated why all the other alternative and fringe theories are wrong. I mean they have to be if yours is right....lol.

We look forward to your clear statement on that matter.

How come you don't mention the ancients or do feel that the 'tomb theory' was created 200 years ago?


Oh, also on another board I asked you and you never answered -what happens when you have an image of 'O' that faces the other way?