Go to the Egyptian Dreams shop
Egyptian Dreams
Ancient Egypt Discussion Board
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Nefertiti
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khazarkhum wrote:
Lutz et al

I did indeed read the C14 report, albeit in translation. It raises far more questions than answers. ...

But seemingly not with the necessary attention, my dear Ms. Martinez-Byrne.

khazarkhum wrote:
... According to the story, a chemist from the museum, Schultz, decided to pry the pupil out of the inlaid eye to run tests on it. ...

At first, the name of the "chemist" was Friedrich Rathgen, the namesake for the still today working research laboratory for physico chemical analysis of ancient artifacts, set up by the Foundation Preussischer Kulturbesitz.
And second, following the linked article in magazin "Der Spiegel" (20/1997, p.211) he did not "pry the pubil out of the inlaid eye". He partially scraped off some of the black wax of the right pupil and did not replaced it after his investigation of the bust.

khazarkhum wrote:
... Some 70 years later, this adhesive wax was located in a bag, just in time for the C 14 tests. ...

Of course just in time. Around 1920 C14 analyses was, as far as I know, unknown in science. Or do you have also here other "informations"?

khazarkhum wrote:
... light on the Museum. Why would a chemist decide to dismantle a priceless work of art in secret? We won't even go into the 'what-ifs' on that one. Why do it? By the 1920-30s ancient Egyptian methods of adhesion were well known; nothing would be gained from this, and potentially a great deal lost. ...

I do not quite understand how you come to the claim that it was done secretly, I mean without knowing of the direction of the museum (to Mr. Mansoor : No, it was not Prof. Wildung in that time). Studies of this kind were Rathgens job in the Museum. I do not know but I suppose a material analysis was carried out, with the possibilities of the time.

khazarkhum wrote:
... That the wax then went into a bag, only to be located right when needed for a C14 test, demands some serious answers, not the least of which was how it survived WWII. ...

It was not lacated right when needed, it was found by Krauss by accidental, during research in the magazine. And of course they used it for an in our times possible C14 dating. What would people like you make of it if the museum had acted not this way with the wax?

khazarkhum wrote:
... At best it looks like gross incompetence by the Museum staff. At worst it looks like a desperate attempt to create a cover story if the adhesives on the eye were found to be modern. And since they conveniently didn't have to remove any part of that eye, this would not be an issue. ...

I find your rating about which was quite aktzeptabel and usual respected practices in dealing with ancient artifacts in museums at that time quite arrogant. Of course, we beat today together the hands over the head. At that time, something like that was just common practice. Like Petrie said: "A museum can be a dangerous place for a work of art.".

khazarkhum wrote:
... Oh, Lutz: Cameras were commonly in use at excavations from at least the 1890s, when simple box cameras made by George Eastman were widely available. After all, Davis et al managed to photograph KV55, under very difficult circumstances.

Also here I can not follow the way you think. As mentioned several times and as to see in the reports by Borchardt in the "Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft" there was a camera at the dig and there are also pictures from there work. And their quality is compared with other excavations around that time quite above average.
The whole thing is completely absurd if you expect photography at the unveiling of a single piece in situ by Borchardt. This was definitely before Carter / Tutankhamun not the rule. The by you installed KV 55 shows this explicitly. The photos emerged days after the opening and entering of the tomb. In the meantime, probably even pieces from the tomb surfaced on the antik market in Luxor. Their quality is lousy. They document practically not really they are better touri snap shots, far from in-situ standart from our time. By the way, where are this kind of ducumentations from the later digs at Amarna, done by the EES? Are their individual findings now also, following your logic, just fakes?

I can only once again strongly advice that you are have to deal with the real sources for the object. Own to impersonate any abstruse theories from dubious books isn't enough, at least if you expect to be taken seriously here.
A few searches for modern storage and exhibition history of the object seems also appropriate. The object was shown to the public in 1924. Before that it was stored in a separate non-public room. This was also the place for the investigation as well as for the earliest documented 1:1 copy of the bust by an artist. So, your funny little cleaning-ladies-storie should be as well done with this...

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To Mr. Mansoor ...

Many, many, many words forming many, many, many sentences ... But in my view no single one gives an real serious argument that the bust woud be a fake. All just unproven / not to prove allegations, conjecture, insinuations, transferred with the obligatory Wildung-baiting. I've been really pity with the bank account of the family Mansoor but therefore to make responsible for all the misfortune of this world Prof. Wildung? This is then probably something too far and is simply boring. "Taken dogs howled." - No Arabic, but a German proverb...

The theme complex Stierlin / Wildung I'll comment as soon as the book in the original is in front of me and I have read the relevant sections. I prefer to know what I am talking about...

Facts are the following :

The bust comes from a known place and a official allowed and documentet dig. Their discovery is documented in words and drawing. These documents were published after the dig and are also today every interested accessable. There were numerous witnesses on the ground at the discovery. No one told anywhere later only the slightest doubt.

The bust was part of a complex from pieces, others lay over, next to and under the bust. It is in my view only because of this special situation totaly absurd to take a fake only into consideration.

All in modern times so far possible and made investigations confirm the authenticity of the bust. They show no evidence or the slightest reference to a possible forgery. On the contrary. Modern chemical analyses of the stucco show his very special composition, usual and known to us only for the Amarna period. Borchardt was not aware of this special feature of Amarna stucco. And he was also not in the possition with the possibilitys of his time, to gain this knowledge. Only in modern times this discovery has been made. The C14 dating of the material sample from the eye of the bust confirmed her age.

All verifiable facts, not innuendo / opinions / views / guesses.

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Edgard Mansoor
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 29 Sep 2012
Posts: 9
Location: Los Angeles, California

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Following are four interesting links. I'll say what each link is about after
each link.

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=%22Dietrich+Wildung%22&hl=en&biw=1366&bih=604&tbm\
=isch&tbnid=FMCUEP8y3G-ijM:&imgrefurl=http://www.egyptian-museum-berlin.com/e01s\
tory.php%3Fnews_id%3D52&imgurl=http://www.egyptian-museum-berlin.com/bilder/g_d_\
eroeffnung_nm_okt_2010_11.jpg&w=800&h=547&ei=WwdCUPz1FOe66wG7nIGYDg&zoom=1&iact=\
hc&vpx=675&vpy=295&dur=708&hovh=157&hovw=221&tx=119&ty=89&sig=110572549417451671\
769&page=1&tbnh=130&tbnw=173&start=0&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:11,s:0,i:106

The above link shows our "Prima Donna" Prof. Dr. Dietrich Wildung transmitting a
voiceless message through his usual "jovial smile" to Dr. Friederike Seifried,
Director of the New "Berlin Egyptian Museum", inviting her: "Come Join mein
kampf". perhaps he thought "a toast and a small present would do the trick.


The next link below <<was>> of "Heritage-key.com" website, in which I had posted
3 long dissertations, the first titled: "Why the Nefertiti bust of the Berlin
Egyptian Museum ~IS NOT AND CANNOT~ be authentic"; the second titled: "Why the
Mansoor Amarna Collection is authentic beyond ~ANY AND ALL~ reasonable doubts",
and the third titled: " The ~Shameful Sabotage~ by Dietrich Wildung, of the
"Mansoor Amarna Collection Exhibit" in Rome. The "Heritage-key website" was a
website that published an excellent interview with Dr. Matthias Wemhoff and Dr.
Friederike Seyfried, Directors of the New Berlin Egyptian Museum, in which Dr.
Seyfried admitted to the interviewer of "Heritage-key that "the most famous
pieces in the Museum are the Nefertiti bust and the so-called "Berlin Green
Head", <<BUT>> that her <favorite object> is the "seated quartzite statue" of
Chertihotep". That was her Feelings about the "Chertihotep" just like Wildung's
feeling about the Nefertiti bust is that it "does not have a shred of Amarna
style".

Because of my 3 detrimental postings about Wildung and about the Nefertiti bust
being in the same site of the interview with the Directors of the New Museum,
and especially because of Dr. Seyfried's feelings about the ChertihotepP,the
Board of Trustees managed to convince the owner/moderator of the "Heritage-key"
website to close the site entirely, but at the cost of What?

http://rezzable.com/world/interview-directors-matthias-wemhoff-and-friederike-se\
yfried-historic-re-opening-berlin%E2%80%99s-neue/#comment-5706


And the next link is one that shows the Nefertiti bust entering the scanner. It
show the two pegs the Museum had to insert in the base of the bust which in turn
would be inserted in a wider support for the bust in order to make it stable so
that it does not fall at the slightest movement and does not swivel. It looks
like the sculptor/forger who made the bust was not intelligent enough to figure
out how wide the base had to be in order that it could stand straight on its
own.

http://www.itnonline.com/article/siemens-ct-scanner-reveals-mysteries-inside-egy\
ptian-relic


The fourth and last link below is of the Akhenaten head with a large fish bone
or piece of sea shell on the right cheek of the king. Click on the picture once
to enlarge it, and look at it with a hand magnifier if need be to see well the
effect of natural weathering that the late Dr. Harold Plenderleith noticed on
the pieces he looked at in 1961. His conviction about the authenticity of the
collection compelled him to write a report in the hope that it would convince
the pessimists, BUT TO NO AVAIL.

Prof. Claude Vandersleyen examined the remaining 33 pieces of the Mansoor
collection and said there are some masterpieces, but one amateur Egyptologist, a
certain "Mr. Tim Reid" concluded that the Mansoor pieces are Vacant". Isn't that
something!

http://www.mansooramarnacollection.com/macgallery/largeimages/amarnano08-LG-01.j\
pg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Edgard Mansoor
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 29 Sep 2012
Posts: 9
Location: Los Angeles, California

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 6:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.google.com/imgres?q=%22Dietrich+Wildung%22&hl=en&biw=1366&bih=604&tbm=isch&tbnid=FMCUEP8y3G-ijM:&imgrefurl=http://www.egyptian-museum-berlin.com/e01story.php%3Fnews_id%3D52&imgurl=http://www.egyptian-museum-berlin.com/bilder/g_d_eroeffnung_nm_okt_2010_11.jpg&w=800&h=547&ei=WwdCUPz1FOe66wG7nIGYDg&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=675&vpy=295&dur=708&hovh=157&hovw=221&tx=119&ty=89&sig=110572549417451671769&page=1&tbnh=130&tbnw=173&start=0&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:11,s:0,i:106


http://rezzable.com/world/interview-directors-matthias-wemhoff-and-friederike-seyfried-historic-re-opening-berlin%E2%80%99s-neue/#comment-5706


http://www.mansooramarnacollection.com/macgallery/largeimages/amarnano08-LG-01.jpg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
khazarkhum
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Posts: 82

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lutz wrote:
To Mr. Mansoor ...


Facts are the following :

The bust comes from a known place and a official allowed and documentet dig. Their discovery is documented in words and drawing. These documents were published after the dig and are also today every interested accessable. There were numerous witnesses on the ground at the discovery. No one told anywhere later only the slightest doubt.


I'll answer as many of your issues here as I can. I do not understand some of what you wrote; I suspect the language barrier is too great.

If all that was removed from the eye was a tiny amount from the setting of the pupil, as you state, there would not be enough for C 14 dating.

If it was taken by removing the pupil, scraping it off, and then re-adhering the pupil, there would be enough material for the relatively crude chemical tests of the 1920s, plus possibly enough material for the later tests.

Of course, that begs the question of what may have been done to any wax chemically, and how that will affect a later test. That is, of course, assuming the story about the chemist & the wax is real. It also assumes that the wax, which conveniently reappeared when it was needed for tests, actually came from the bust.

Quote:

The bust was part of a complex from pieces, others lay over, next to and under the bust. It is in my view only because of this special situation totaly absurd to take a fake only into consideration.


I am not quite sure what you are saying here. There is a limestone core; the eye is inlaid. It is coated with plaster, and then painted. I'm not disputing these things. I am only questioning when they were actually done.

Quote:


All in modern times so far possible and made investigations confirm the authenticity of the bust. They show no evidence or the slightest reference to a possible forgery. On the contrary. Modern chemical analyses of the stucco show his very special composition, usual and known to us only for the Amarna period. Borchardt was not aware of this special feature of Amarna stucco.


This is where it becomes necessary to understand the forger.

A forger will only use what was available at the time the work should have been made. This is why they routinely buy inferior pieces so that they can get at the authentic wood or canvas, for example. Many people do not understand this, which leads to confusion and consternation.

Forgers are very good at what they do.

Borchardt wasn't going to have plaster delivered, not when he had a bunch right there in the workshop. It would be what the ancients used, and would therefore pass muster with the tests of the time.

Borchardt wasn't stupid. He knew that he had to be careful, because the methods of detection were always becoming more sophisticated. So, once again, he did what the good forger does, and simply used what had been available.

As for images, publications, drawing et al--everything appears after the bust was exhibited for the first time in 1923.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

khazarkhum wrote:
Lutz wrote:
To Mr. Mansoor ...


Facts are the following :

The bust comes from a known place and a official allowed and documentet dig. Their discovery is documented in words and drawing. These documents were published after the dig and are also today every interested accessable. There were numerous witnesses on the ground at the discovery. No one told anywhere later only the slightest doubt.


I'll answer as many of your issues here as I can. I do not understand some of what you wrote; I suspect the language barrier is too great.

If all that was removed from the eye was a tiny amount from the setting of the pupil, as you state, there would not be enough for C 14 dating. ...

Says who? Do you have the official scientific report from the C14 analyses? What was removed is to seen on the before / after pictures in the pdf-version of the article from "Der Spiegel" on the page I linked.

khazarkhum wrote:
... If it was taken by removing the pupil, scraping it off, and then re-adhering the pupil, ...

In the article there is no single word that the pupil was removed. Read again... It is a statement from you that you can prove with nothing.

khazarkhum wrote:
... It also assumes that the wax, which conveniently reappeared when it was needed for tests, actually came from the bust ...

It not reappeared when it was needed for tests. It was found by Krauss and so came the idea of the test. You twist the facts.

khazarkhum wrote:
Lutz wrote:
...The bust was part of a complex from pieces, others lay over, next to and under the bust. It is in my view only because of this special situation totaly absurd to take a fake only into consideration.


I am not quite sure what you are saying here. ...

I describe the place and the situation in which the bust was found. What's there now is not to be understood?

khazarkhum wrote:
... A forger will only use what was available at the time the work should have been made. This is why they routinely buy inferior pieces so that they can get at the authentic wood or canvas, for example. ...

But 100 years ago it was not possible to buy the know how of today. It was also not possible, I think, to buy for example water from the time of Akhenaton, that would be needed for working the way you presume for Borchardt.

khazarkhum wrote:
... As for images, publications, drawing et al--everything appears after the bust was exhibited for the first time in 1923.

No my dear, the prelimanary reports starts in 1911, I think in number 46 of the "Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orientgesellschaft". And the bust was officially shown to the public in 1924 for the first time. Before just to single selected individuals, when it still was in the house of Mr. Simon for example to the last German Emperor.

Once again, read the sources. Write off at Stierlin and pretend as if it is your own "knowledge" is not enough.

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edgard Mansoor wrote:
http:// ... Dietrich Wildung ...

As I said: BORING.

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is one question that has long employed me: How do you "fake believers" exactly think like the whole thing was in real time done by Borchardt? I mean, how could he produce a forgery of this quality on location at the dig and under the then and there prevailing conditions, unnoticed by colleagues and dozens of Egyptian workers? And how could he integrate it unnoticed by all of them into an ancient fund situation? And, not at last, why did he waste his time with archaeological research when he was such a gifted artist?

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ankhetmaatre
Scribe
Scribe


Joined: 03 Apr 2012
Posts: 212
Location: District of Columbia, USA

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread has become a dead horse that no amount of flogging or circuitous logic can revive. Conjecture and tenuous associations are not evidence, no matter how many times they are repeated, but if it helps you sleep at night then knock yourself out. I dare say an expensive vault full of objects no one will buy leads to a certain amount of insomnia.

Quote:
This is where it becomes necessary to understand the forger


Indeed. Historically forgers have had, with almost no exceptions, one overriding motivation; money.

Those who deliberately forge a work of art with the expressed intension of deceiving collectors and curators invariably do so with the end goal of making money. Borchardt, however, made little more than the cost of the excavation and James Simon gave the piece to the museum on permanent loan. So what you claim to have is a crime without a motive, one that involves sculpting a masterwork secretly while on an archeological excavation with everyone watching and yet no one seeing or reporting, the conterfit supposedly carried out by a man who technically and stylistically could not have created the piece (according to Henri Stierlin one Gerhard Marcks and not Borchardt), then going through the trouble to forge a stela in order to trade for the fake bust and then sneaking it put of the country in order let it sit quietly in a private collection before donating it to a national museum along with many other pieces from the same excavation.

Seems pretty contrived. Especially in light of the scientific studies, peer reviewed documents and photos supporting the bust's authenticity that were offered earlier in this thread (before the walls of text above). But in the end this issue will not be decided here. The museum community, the scientific world and the art history world aren't ready swallow this convoluted story without more tangible evidence. I'll be interested to see if the upcoming exhibit offers more insight into the whole scenario, though I doubt they are all that concerned with Stierlin's accusations.
_________________
Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured
~Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Edgard Mansoor
Citizen
Citizen


Joined: 29 Sep 2012
Posts: 9
Location: Los Angeles, California

PostPosted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To all whom it may concern:

No matter who says what, as long as the bust was <not supposed> to be covered with plaster, as I proved it <clearly and logically> in a previous posting, yet has been covered with plaster, it will always be a fake for the only reason that no sculptor <in his right mind> would ever carve a large statue and cover it with plaster.

If I was a sculptor and carved a statue of the size of the Nefertiti bust, then cover it with plaster, people will say this man <MUST BE A FOOL>. They would wonder: "why didn't he save time and energy" and make the sculpture entirely of plaster or just put a limestone core, not carved, then fashion it in the shape of a human being or animal, or whatever he likes.

Maybe Wildung would do it, but not me. In fact I don't think Wildung would like to call Tuthmose a fool. Therefore, the forger who made it <IS A FOOL>. This is COMMON SENSE.

As far as the Mansoor collection is concerned, Mr.Lutz, I see that you have been influenced by Mister Wildung, and I'm not surprised since you're not the first nor last one to be influenced by him. Wildung is a smart man, not an intelligent man. If he was intelligent, he would have told the Administration of the Museum before he was hired to run the Museum that the Nefertiti bust is a fake as he had made it very clear to Mr Stierlin in his "Historical/Stylistic Analyses of the bust".

Alas! he blue it. He stumbled like Prof. Dr. Protsch, and he didn't know that one mistake, "ONLY ONE", can cause a lifelong regret. Unfortunately, he made that mistake, and he hasn't been begged to remain another six months, ONLY SIX more months as Director of the Museum that would have been <the best six months in his life>. You know what I mean. Of course he'll say he doesn't care. The question is: Can you recognize a hypocrite by his smile? Just look at his picture smiling and toasting Dr. Seifried and you'll know what's in his mind, and the way she's smiling at him, she's telling him: Don't try with me what you did to others.

Prof. Robert Compton of Stanford University said that no matter who says what, the Mansoor collection will always be recognized as authentic by intelligent and honest Scholars and Scientists such as Drioton and Plenderleith.

Wildung has been branded an "Intellectually dishonest man" by a Judge of the Superior Court of the State of California. That's the reason why he cannot admit that the Mansoor collection is authentic. He's neither honest nor intelligent enough to understand scientific reports or artistic evaluations by Egyptologists more intelligent than him, and especially more honest than him such as Dr. Andreina Colonna or Madame Des Roches Noblecour. If we the Mansoors are profiteer dealers in the real meaning of the word as Prof. Vandersleyen says he heard someone say that about the Mansoors, then he must be the biggest liar that has ever held the position of Director in one of the greatest Museums in the World.

With my regrets,
Edgard
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 4:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's okay, we understand. If you would write an article about the quality of school food in southern China there would in it at one point also turn up the inevitable Wildung baiting. Already clear...

I know him in fact personally. Not as good as I'd like to but good enough to reject your outrageous allegations and insults. The work of Prof. Wildung and his contribution to the international and the German Egyptology are undisputed. Alone his services when multiple moving the Egyptian collections here in Berlin after the wall came down, and his contributions to the planning and construction of the New Museum, a jewel of the museum architecture, is enormous and not be overstated.

How I could experience especially in this phase at close range, he was often at the limits of physical function. Family life virtually no longer occurs. "Besides" he teached at the Free University of Berlin and worked on the excavations in northern Sudan (Naga) to save for the mankind irreplaceable relics there. And then the crazy Hawass still regularly beat his stupid claims for restitution to ... And yet he always remained calm, friendly and accessible to everyone.

So you do not tell me what I have to think of him. Have you ever seen more of him than a picture or a movie? In my view ultimately it is, as I said, apparently only to the bank account of the "company" Mansoor you are interested in.

For everyone who is interested in information about the so called "Mansoor - Collection" I refer to

Sylvia Hochfield : The Mansoor Collection - An Insoluble Controversy?. - In: Art News New York - 77-6. - Summer 1978. - pp. 50-57

as a good starting point.

The history of the review of the pieces is shown until 1978 relatively objective. The name Wildung, by the way, appears not. I have a copy of the article as PDF (4,1 MB). Interested members of this forum please send me an e-mail address via Private Message (PM)...

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kylejustin
Vizier
Vizier


Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 1231
Location: victoria, australia

PostPosted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 5:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i cannot remember the key words to find it on googling, but there is a picture of the bust being held by the men at the dig, just after it came out of the ground.

something that irks me immensly, is the assumption that the plain of amarna is not deep. the foundations and rubble of these buildings are not shallow at all. and fromw hat i remember reading, it is thought the bust, and everything else int he workshop was left on shelves and sealed up, house intact, in case the city would be inhabited again.

ergo, the house was either dismantled by a succeeding pharaoh (which appears unlikely) or it was just dilapilated, and filled with sand. over the centuries, the ground level will have risen, and since the bust was already buried in a walled room, there is not going to be any erosion, because the sand is not moving constantly, in fact not moving at all since the bust is ont he ground of the amarna house, and the house is filled up with sand.

another example from amarna of pristine plaster and probably more open to errosion than the house, is the fresco of the princesses from the royal palace.

but the non believers will ignore my posts as they always do. is that because they know they're opinions are wrong or they never read them?
_________________
heaven won't take me.......hell's afraid i'll take over.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Forget it, kylejustin. Everything from your post was still mention here in this tread. Also a link to a page with the photo has been posted already (the photo is several times online and also published in various publications about Amarna).

Since then come so rich answers such as: "Yes, but Borchardt is not on it!" (so what?) or: "But there are none of the bust as it is peeled from the sand!" and so on. If man / woman do not know further, the ability of the opposite to see is doubted. Uncomfortable questions are simply ignored.
Each individual "argument" of Ms. Martinez-Byrne, written off at Stierlin, was refuted and rejected. Thus, I think the thing is done...

Believers and conspiracy theorists are not to impress through logic and science. All counterfeits, all counterfeiters.

Greetings, Lutz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lutz
Pharaoh
Pharaoh


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 4053
Location: Berlin, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And by the way, the fine and so friendly here occurring Mr. Mansoor is slendering on "Thoth-Scribe-Forum" not only Prof. Wildung. "Egyptian Dreams" and the operator Kevin are also pelted with dirt diligently. He is accusing him without evidence of censorship. The relevant posts I have in copy. I would not have the slightest problem to make them public, if desired - Mr. Mansoor cites on Thot-Scribe also word by word from my posts here on "Egyptian Dreams". I can not remember that he asked me for permission...

Lutz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Meretseger
Priest
Priest


Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 588

PostPosted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edgar, even *I* can see the problems with the Mansoor collection. Insoluble my eye! The late Mr. Mansoor was taken in. You don't have to be an expert to realize it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Egyptian Dreams Forum Index -> Evidence from Amarna All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 10 of 11

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group