The Giza Labyrinth

I stumbled across this video today. Its references historical figures and thier recordings of the Giza plateau, the labyrinth, and its surrounding temples. The video contains a lot of good information and references to the past. It touches on the potential tomb of Harmakhis below the sphinx, the massive tunnel system below the pyramids, along with first hand accounts of those who explored it hundreds, if not a thousand years ago.

Regardless of the authenticity, or plausibility of the narrators opinions. Some of the images, documents, and writings are worth seeing.

Enjoy~



.

Thanks for posting new sub for me on you Tube. That guy knows his stuff and presents it well indeed.

a reply to: Triton1128

I'm a fan of his stuff. Some of the theories that he has I'm not quite convinced about, for sure, but his presentation and use of historic imagery is great.

a reply to: Triton1128

There is a "labyrinth" (actually two that I know of) but they are not at Giza. The one associated with a pyramid is NEAR Giza at Saqqara; the tomb of King Djoser. It does indeed have an underground system of corridors that stretch around 6 km and is entered by a colonnaded area much like Herodotus tried to describe (Wikipedia on Djoser's underground chambers)

There's nothing inside the Sphinx. Parts of it have had to be repaired over the thousands of years that it's been around and someone would have found that hall rather easily. (The drawing gives a rather absurd interpretation of its size and proportions)

"Harmakis" is not the name of anyone in Egypt -- it's not an Egyptian name or phrase. It's Greek for the Egyptian phrase "Horus of the Horizon". Greek, as a language, did not exist until more than a thousand years after the pyramids were built. Horus was not known as "Horus of the Horizon" at the time of the building of the pyramids. That's a later title and the whole story comes from the Roman author Pliny, who writes some 3,000 years after the pyramids were built and is repeating what he's been told by tour guides (the tour guides of that era made up a lot of stories.)

The film (I gave up on it after all that bad research) is basically repeating information from this site. It's a lot of medieval legends and tales heard fourth-and-fifth hand.

...and can be pretty much knocked into a hat (as countless people have found) by simply visiting Egypt and reading the original hieroglyphs that said what the people who lived at the same time as the Sphinx and pyramids said.

The speculation about the "Dendera light bulb" etc can again be dismissed by simply reading the hieroglyphs around the objects that describe what they are (ritual objects) and how they're used. People ignore the writing, though, and simply look at and the misinterpret the pictures.

Good flick

I didn't know about the underground city

That's not Noah's ark though. My family mover to the US in 1910 from Mount Ararat in Turkey. I have inside family information.

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: Triton1128

There is a "labyrinth" (actually two that I know of) but they are not at Giza. The one associated with a pyramid is NEAR Giza at Saqqara; the tomb of King Djoser. It does indeed have an underground system of corridors that stretch around 6 km and is entered by a colonnaded area much like Herodotus tried to describe (Wikipedia on Djoser's underground chambers)

There's nothing inside the Sphinx. Parts of it have had to be repaired over the thousands of years that it's been around and someone would have found that hall rather easily. (The drawing gives a rather absurd interpretation of its size and proportions)

"Harmakis" is not the name of anyone in Egypt -- it's not an Egyptian name or phrase. It's Greek for the Egyptian phrase "Horus of the Horizon". Greek, as a language, did not exist until more than a thousand years after the pyramids were built. Horus was not known as "Horus of the Horizon" at the time of the building of the pyramids. That's a later title and the whole story comes from the Roman author Pliny, who writes some 3,000 years after the pyramids were built and is repeating what he's been told by tour guides (the tour guides of that era made up a lot of stories.)

The film (I gave up on it after all that bad research) is basically repeating information from this site. It's a lot of medieval legends and tales heard fourth-and-fifth hand.

...and can be pretty much knocked into a hat (as countless people have found) by simply visiting Egypt and reading the original hieroglyphs that said what the people who lived at the same time as the Sphinx and pyramids said.

The speculation about the "Dendera light bulb" etc can again be dismissed by simply reading the hieroglyphs around the objects that describe what they are (ritual objects) and how they're used. People ignore the writing, though, and simply look at and the misinterpret the pictures.

And would you day the head of the Sphynx is the same age as the body?

a reply to: Triton1128

Marking

a reply to: visitedbythem

I’m in the camp that thinks the head was redone at a later period. Not the relatively recent restoration work but the whole head. I have a feeling much of the relics were re-purposed as well.

a reply to: surfer_soul

I have a feeling that many things were repurposed and built upon and claimed to the product of a civilization that it was not.

But that's the beauty of stone monuments and artifacts--we can't date the stone, so we can just date the artifacts surrounding them (which can come from much civilizations who laid claim to already-extant sites), inscriptions (which can be added well after initial construction) and styles (which can be copied and mimicked, if not added to or altered). It's an educated guessing game, but it still relies on faith, even if the faith is rational and based on the best evidence at the time.

That can't always take into account when something was actually produced, though.

I would argue that anyone who argues that the head on the Sphinx is original to the total monument is willfully ignoring evidence to the contrary. (I'm sure that might spark some lively debate by a few on here)

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: surfer_soul

I have a feeling that many things were repurposed and built upon and claimed to the product of a civilization that it was not.

But that's the beauty of stone monuments and artifacts--we can't date the stone, so we can just date the artifacts and inscriptions and styles.

That can't always take into account when something was actually produced, though, even if it's rational to take that approach.

I would argue that anyone who argues that the head on the Sphinx is original to the total monument is willfully ignoring evidence to the contrary. (I'm sure that might spark some lively debate by a few on here)

Now this is why I started coming to this site years ago. Good thing I still periodically check in.
Thanks for posting.

a reply to: Arouet

Already sub to CFapps, although I'm not 100% convinced that it was originally Anubis, but it was definitely a dog or a cat, and the proportions do certainly lend themselves better to a dog's body than a lion's, at least as compared to lion depictions from AE.

Yes I am fascinated by those labyrinth accounts at Saqqara. However, unless it was destroyed in ancient times then why hasn’t it been found or explored in current times? As you say, in ancient times many authors spoke of it.
a reply to: Byrd

This is the same guy who claimed in another one of his videos that Carter and Carnarvon faked Tutankhamen's tomb.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Arouet

Already sub to CFapps, although I'm not 100% convinced that it was originally Anubis, but it was definitely a dog or a cat, and the proportions do certainly lend themselves better to a dog's body than a lion's, at least as compared to lion depictions from AE.

Cfapps, great channel. You might like Robin Morgan's channel. He does CAD layouts of tombs and pyramids.

Here's my favorite rendering of his, KV5 -

And "Khufu's" pyramid, in keeping with the thread theme -

a reply to: Spruce

Hey, thanks a lot for posting those -- I very much enjoyed them. Love this subject

originally posted by: Fowlerstoad
a reply to: Spruce

Hey, thanks a lot for posting those -- I very much enjoyed them. Love this subject

You're very welcome. I'm a student of Ancient Egypt and happy to spread the wealth.

a reply to: Spruce

Yeah, thanks for giving me a heads up on that channel. I use Google SketchUp to create a lot of plans for things that I build, so I like that kind of stuff.

originally posted by: visitedbythem

And would you day the head of the Sphynx is the same age as the body?

Yes. You have to know that it was NOT designed to be seen from afar (as we see it today); it was surrounded by a wall that forced your perspective. Seen up close, the smaller head makes the size of the statue seem even larger than it really is. It only looks poorly proportioned if you are above it and at some distance away and are not standing in front or beside it. With the wall in place, all you might see of it is simply the head.

The idea that it was another head simply doesn't wash (though they may have recarved it AS they worked the statue given the flaky nature of the stone. The body is not the body of a jackal (Anubis) -- they have slim legs and slim haunches and the "knee" of the haunch rises above the level of the hind body and the tail never curls around the body. You can't "recarve" Anubis to be a lion with its massively wider and thicker paws and it's chubbier haunches. Any attempt to do a long-nosed jackal would fail... the limestone's tensile strength isn't that good and the nose would fall off before you got it finished.

a reply to: Byrd

I would argue that even if the head was originally more or less the same shape the dream stele suggests the site was renovated at least once, this 'could' have included re-carving but of course that is something which can not be proven either way.