Internal Ramps at Giza

[Minimalist]

It could be the only way.

[Digit]

And let's not forget the water pump idea either Min, once you've cracked the problem of making water flow up hill you've got it made!

Roy.

[Frank Harrist]

The truth is out there!

[Frank Harrist]

The counterweight thing could work. You'd have to make a few pulls. Ok, here's how;
you'd have several smaller sized and lighter cradles which nest together and roll down the track against one another , each weighing a portion of the total wieght needed. they all go down together as one great weight, but are pulled up one at a time. then nested together like atrain again for the next lift. This machine could lift these stones and then still be used with pulleys and ropes to lift other stone as well...anywhere on the pyramid. Does this make sense at all. I'm going to bed.

[Minimalist]

I suppose it could work...if two things could be worked out.


1 - each cradle would take up some room on the track in the gallery thus shortening the length of each pull....which would not be so bad if,

2- There was any indication that they had a winch-type device or pulleys to pull it back.


Since I rather doubt that a 70+ton weight could be pulled up a 28-degree slope by hand at all, the idea makes sense. But each trip down the gradient would be followed by several hours worth of pulling the individual cradles back up the slope. With that one stone every two minutes pace going on around them it would seem like it would quickly outpace the ability of these crews to raise the granite blocks. Of course, they could always stop placing stones while working on the granite but what does that then do to the time factor?

[Digit]

The Egyptians were well acquainted with cranes, see Shaduf, lifting in stages would have been simply a matter of a strong enough beam. No need for ramps, sleds, the whole works.
Twenty year build. Possible if enough people were there to cut, ferry and lift stones with enough cranes around the the site.
But how do we arrive at the twenty year scenario? That was the supposed length of the reign of the supposed builder.
But how do we know who the builder was? Some graffiti in one of the relieving chambers in the roof.
If the Great Pyramid were to be constructed today by an absolute ruler their name would be emblazoned all over it in flashing lights, and the Pharaohs appear not to have been very reticent in that line either, so why no supporting inscriptions?
The graffiti. The day the new Pharaoh was named probably resulted in every male child born soon after receiving the same name, think how many Mohameds or similar today.
Even if the graffiti was named for the Pharaoh that is not evidence that he was still alive!
Orion's Belt!
The similarity between the site and Orion's belt is striking, and knowing the stated relevance of the Belt in the religion it cannot be discounted. The 'misalignment' of the pyramids may indeed represent the belt, it may also be as a result of the geology of the site. The ground beneath the misaligned pyramid may have been deemed unsuitable for the weight that would be imposed upon it.
If the 'Belt' scenario is correct then the site must be considered as a whole, not as individual structures. This moves the construction out of the control of a single Pharaoh and makes it a state enterprise that would presumably have been under the auspices of the priests.
Hence no inscriptions, no need for a twenty year dead line and no evidence of their use for burials.
The existence of funerary chapels on the site is then no different to a Christian church in London.
Sorry about the length of the post but it is my attempt to put the whole exercise into perspective within what Egyptologists tell me. It could all be completely wrong, but it fits what is claimed to be known and moves the Klingons off site!

Roy.

[Minimalist]

The Egyptians were well acquainted with cranes, see Shaduf, lifting in stages would have been simply a matter of a strong enough beam. No need for ramps, sleds, the whole works.

Yes, but we have no indication that they ever built a shadouf large enough to lift a 2 1/2 ton stone. Also, Brier made a pretty good case that such a crane could not be anchored on the side of the pyramid. There simply wasn't enough room on the ledges.


Twenty year build. Possible if enough people were there to cut, ferry and lift stones with enough cranes around the the site.

As you got closer to the top a lot of people would be getting in each other's way. Again, the cranes....if they had them and could deploy them....make sense for the stones. How did the crews get up and down the pyramid?


But how do we arrive at the twenty year scenario? That was the supposed length of the reign of the supposed builder.

Yeah...they backed into it by assuming that these were built as tombs and tombs only. Lose that idea and the insistence on 20 years goes out the window with it.

But how do we know who the builder was? Some graffiti in one of the relieving chambers in the roof.

We don't even have that for the other two pyramids.

If the Great Pyramid were to be constructed today by an absolute ruler their name would be emblazoned all over it in flashing lights, and the Pharaohs appear not to have been very reticent in that line either, so why no supporting inscriptions?

Agreed but there is Zahi the Great who can maintain that position while standing next to an inscription for the guy who he claims was the foreman on the site!

The graffiti. The day the new Pharaoh was named probably resulted in every male child born soon after receiving the same name, think how many Mohameds or similar today.
Even if the graffiti was named for the Pharaoh that is not evidence that he was still alive!

But the graffiti speaks of "Khnum Khufu" which is translated as "Khnum protects us." I get the same impression here as when some christian finds the word "christos" in a Greek inscription. Even though the word only means "the anointed one" he jumps to the conclusion that it is referring to 'his' Christ. Khnum was one of the earliest Egyptian gods. And if they are so certain, why not chip off a piece of that graffiti and C14 test it for a date.

Orion's Belt!
The similarity between the site and Orion's belt is striking, and knowing the stated relevance of the Belt in the religion it cannot be discounted. The 'misalignment' of the pyramids may indeed represent the belt, it may also be as a result of the geology of the site. The ground beneath the misaligned pyramid may have been deemed unsuitable for the weight that would be imposed upon it.
If the 'Belt' scenario is correct then the site must be considered as a whole, not as individual structures. This moves the construction out of the control of a single Pharaoh and makes it a state enterprise that would presumably have been under the auspices of the priests.

The third pyramid is much smaller than the others... even if the geology was radically different it raises the whole other question of how would the ancient Egyptians....with their copper chisel technology...have known that? Bauval's idea about the alignment makes sense. His idea about the "air shafts" is less compelling.

Hence no inscriptions, no need for a twenty year dead line and no evidence of their use for burials. The existence of funerary chapels on the site is then no different to a Christian church in London.

The idea of a cenotaph...especially for the later ones which have fallen down comes to mind. A monument to a king... but not a rich tomb which virtually says "ROB ME."

Sorry about the length of the post but it is my attempt to put the whole exercise into perspective within what Egyptologists tell me. It could all be completely wrong, but it fits what is claimed to be known and moves the Klingons off site!

Roy.

[Digit]

Yes, but we have no indication that they ever built a shadouf large enough to lift a 2 1/2 ton stone. Also, Brier made a pretty good case that such a crane could not be anchored on the side of the pyramid. There simply wasn't enough room on the ledges.

The problem here Min is that we have arches attempting to solve engineering problems. Similar to that which happened with the first bones of HSN.

we have no indication that they ever built a shadouf large enough to lift a 2 1/2 ton stone.

Agreed! Do we have any proof that they constructed ramps or sleds capable of carrying that weight?
The answer is no, so the balance of proof is equal. I would also point out that you will not find any cranes around the base of the Empire State Building.
The constructing of Shadufs capable of such performance would not have been difficult, vastly simpler in fact than ramps, sleds etc.

Also, Brier made a pretty good case that such a crane could not be anchored on the side of the pyramid. There simply wasn't enough room on the ledges.

Not seen his argument but I would tend to disagree. My reasons are thus...
Lift the first row into place and finally position by hand.
Leave gaps in the outer row to stand the Shaduf in.
Erect fresh Shaduf on top of base row with extra legs standing on the ground, stable platform now exists.
Lift blocks onto base row.
Leave gaps in this row where Shaduf stands.
Erect new Shaduf on top of latest row with legs extended down to previous row as before to give stable platform.
When the top is reached you have a Shaduf staircase for adding cladding and filling in gaps where Shadufs stood as you descend.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

From Lisht....a Middle-Kingdom site.



Plus there are tomb paintings of such sleds being used to move stones. None of the paintings relate to building a pyramid, however, which seems damned curious.

[Minimalist]

That's an awful lot of wood to make shadoufs for a country which was never heavily forested. Each one would need to be strong enough to lift a large stone....would itself need a large stone as a counterweight and would need a crew to operate it.

Possible? Sure. Can't see it meeting the time-frame though.


Secondly, there is evidence of some ramps at low levels...although this doesn't help the scenario along very well. I'll look for some photos.

[Digit]

Point by point Min. They had to get the stone close to the site. Ox drawn sleds would be my obvious choice. Short ramps, I'll go with that.

Timber...the Egyptions imported materials far more costly than timber. Think Lapis for example..
Time scale... there isn't a single shred of evidence that any time scale was worked to. The recent discovery of the worker's village suggests a permanent work force, not seasonable labour.

Size of blocks... every time the 2-5 ton weight is mentioned people tend to panic, so let's get one thing staright. It is not a great deal of weight! To equate it to something people are more familiar with, it is two cubic metres of dry sand! You've probably shovelled more than that Min.
A Shaduf lifts on an arc so I would have counterbalanced the block with Ox skins of sand, a commodity not in short supply. This would permit a gentle lift and lower.
The size of the blocks may well be impressive but you can see from the above they are not that impressive. All over the world people were moving stone far in excess of those weights.
So why 2.5 tons?...because they were easy to move, and if you reduce the size you increase the work of the mason.
eg a block 6ft cube has a surface area of 216 sq ft, halve those dimensions and you now have to dress 432 sq ft.
You will build with the largest blocks you can handle with ease.
Please note Min that none of this would have been rocket science from their point of view, nothing in my scenario was new technology at that time.
To me the most impressive feat is the logistics, not the building.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

Something about the shadouf concept bugged me and I had to go looking around.

http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/timelines ... ulture.htm

The distribution of water between the periods of flooding was everybody's own business. Until the shadouf came into use in the 16th century BCE heavy earthen buckets were used.

If Nefertiti is right, then the pyramids were already ancient by the time the shadouf was invented.

I agree about the logistics. Fortunately, for Giza, the quarries seem to be right there so there is no problem with the limestone. The granite....from 500 miles away at Aswan...and the Tura limestone for the casing from the other side of the Nile is a different story.

Pulling a colossal statue on a sledge from the stone quarries of Hatnub. From a wall painting in the tomb of Djehutiotep (Djehuti-Hetep or Djehuty-hotep) at Deir El Bersheh (El Bersha).

Again a Middle Kingdom pharaoh who did build pyramids as well as statues....yet we have no art depicting how the pyramids were built...at any time frame. I find this curious. Add in the fact that the later pyramids were smaller and more importantly, made of small stones and it seems that we are seeing that Egypt had lost the ability to move lots of large stones....if they ever had it. Your point about moving stones which are easy for you to move makes sense, even Hancock made a similar suggestion,

Still....2 and a half tons is heavy. I don't care if it is 2 and 1/2 tons of feathers. Lifting it is not easy but it can be done.

It is the time pressure which the Egyptologists put on themselves because of their insistence that these were tombs for one man. Until that idea is overthrown I don't see how we are going to move forward.

[Digit]

Short of having a hard road and a suitable prime mover moving a statue as you showed would still have to be moved that way Min.
The Shaduf has to be at least as old as Egyptian agriculture as it was the only way they would have had to lift water for irrigation during low water levels.
Egypt is the 'Gift of the Nile', it is also the product of the Shaduf Min.
As you say, Egyptology is wedded to the twenty year time scale and set in concrete, it will pass.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

I don't know....this website claims the Amarna period as the time for invention of the shadouf.



http://server.egypt.com/egypt/historyen ... ure-Part-I

Thus, when the Egyptians invented tools to lift water, such as the shaduf, they were able to cultivate two crops per year, which was considered a great advance in the field of irrigation. The shaduf was invented in the Amarna period and is a simple tool which needs two to four men to operate. The shaduf consists of a long, suspended pole weighted at one end and a bucket tied at the other end. It can lift about 100 cubic meters (100,000 liters) in 12 hours, which is enough for irrigating a little over a third of an acre.

This would be even later, c 1450 BC. Who knows?

We can be reasonably certain that the Egyptians were not big on building roads. That leaves the Nile as the prime transport system.

And, of course, that means we are back to BOATS!

[Minimalist]

s you say, Egyptology is wedded to the twenty year time scale and set in concrete, it will pass.

I fear it will have to be pried out of their cold dead hands.