"That large an allocation of economic resources for the purpose of a monument to the king does not make much sense."
Pete, I totally agree with you. I can only assume that the pyramids were built at a time when the theology of kingship made sense to all involved and seemed to justify such expenditures.
In his latest tutorial, Charles argues that the story of the tower of babel represents a revolt in the empire. In a sense, do you think we could see the Tower of Babylon as substitute pyramid, a veritable 'declaration of independence' from Egyptian control?
Once Narmer/Nimrod's empire began to split apart, maybe it was at that point that they could no longer afford indulgences like the pyramids. But they still built pretty good after that! Consider Hatsephut's temple and the temples at Karnak!
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.