Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The Pyramid and the Yard

great pyramid

  • Please log in to reply
149 replies to this topic

#106    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,708 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 29 June 2013 - 05:18 AM

View PostRayGday, on 28 June 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

The Greeks didn't create the Zodiac.

...

I'll skip commenting in detail on your citations since the first is from Blavatsky, who was something of a nut-job occultist with little understanding of history; the second is Herodotus, whose Histories is fascinating and entertaining to read but is riddled with obvious errors borne of Greek bias; and the last two seem to be related to astrology, which is not a legitimate branch of historical enquiry.

You'd be much better off to search out legitimate professional historians who could guide you toward lots of useful and reliable answers.

You're correct that the Greeks didn't invent the zodiac. Nevertheless, the zodiac in your image represents a purely Greek adaptation of it. This zodiac has nothing to do with ancient Egypt, where an entirely different comprehension of the heavens was known. In point of fact we don't see anything truly in the nature of a zodiac in dynastic Egypt prior to the Greek period. What we see are star charts, and there are quite a few of those—often depicted in tombs.

The oldest and one of the most famous is the star chart in TT353 at Deir el Bahri, which belonged to the great steward Senenmut of Dynasty 18 and was probably a cenotaph for him, given that he had another tomb. Click here for an image of it. Senenmut and his cenotaph with the star chart date to the mid-fifteenth century BCE. The next notable example comes from KV17, the tomb of Seti I in Dynasty 19. Click here for a line-art representation of part of the chart. Seti I and his tomb date to the early thirteenth century BCE.

There are numerous other examples down through the dynastic period, but you get the idea. At least I hope you do. As you can see, there is no realistic concordance with the Greek-style zodiac. That is not evident in Egypt until well into the Greek period, such as the well-known example from Dendera. This does resemble the Greek-style zodiac, but results only from several centuries of intensive interaction with Greeks; as you can see the Dendera zodiac is a mixture of the Egyptian and the Greek. It dates to around 50 BCE, as I recall.

In other words, your zodiac image has nothing to do with dynastic Egypt, nor would the Egyptians have cared about or understood it till the end of their history—and only then from interactions with the Greeks.

Quote

Homer, Solon, Thales, Pythagorus, Democritus, Anaxagoras, Eudoxes, Plato, Euclid, Pericles, Aristyllus, Timocharis, Aristarchus, Archimedes, Eratosthenes, Apollonius, Hipparchus, Aristotle, Strabo and Diodorus all recieved their knowledge of Geometry, Mathematics, Philosophy and Astronomy from Egyptian tutors.

I am left wondering where you get your sources from. I mean, Homer? Historians still debate whether this was even a real man or a Greek synthesis of ancient bards. Practically nothing substantial is known of his life. Solon? He might very well have travelled to Egypt but only late in his life and only to escape the tumult he caused in Athens due to his constitutional reforms.

I don't have time to comment on all of your list, but in fact there's no reason to. While it's true the Archaic Greeks were inspired and influenced by Egypt, the folks in your list lived long after that time and were the beneficiaries of centuries of Greek improvements on the original Egyptian models (mathematics, architecture, art, et cetera). On the face of it, it is well understood historically that the Egyptians did not practice any sort of developed philosophy—at least nothing like the philosophies of Greece with which we're familiar.

What are your sources?

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#107    cladking

cladking

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,942 posts
  • Joined:06 Nov 2006
  • Location:Indiana

  • Tempus fugit.

Posted 29 June 2013 - 09:59 PM

View PostRoybat, on 29 June 2013 - 12:20 AM, said:

Pyramidiots

I normally avoid responding to such posts but it seems to me you might be missing a great deal
about the reality to respond in this manner.  There is an implication that the facts are known and
some people won't accept them.  Have you ever asked yourself why don't the powers that be simply
run the scientific tests that would positively answer the various theories including their own? Have
you ever asked yourself why orthodoxy can't undermine mostof the "pyramidiots" out there?  Yes,
some of these theories are extremely weak and are severely undermined by facts but most can't be
because orthodoxy refuses to gather the evidence that would prove or disprove the various ideas.

What are they so afraid of?  If these people are so stupid as to delude themselves then a few facts
should destroy many of their theories.  If orthodoxy is so golden then having a fact or two to support
their ideas should be quite welcome. Instead it goes on year after endless year with the same old
head in the sand attitude and calling names instead of seeking facts.  They spend millions looking
for treasure and troweling for ramps but won't even allow science that is quite inexpensive and would
cost them nothing at all.

What terrifies them so?

Men fear the pyramid, time fears man.

#108    monk 56

monk 56

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,012 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2012

Posted 30 June 2013 - 08:45 AM

Hi Kmt_sesh,

I would not argue with you that H.P. Blavatsky was involved in Pseudo Science, but she had huge influence on Annie Besant and Alice Bailey of Lucis Trust Fame, i have sympathy for Annie Besant who tried to get independence for India and knew Gandhi, and was involved in the Fabian Society that was the origin of the UK Labour Party, so pseudoscience does effect politics throughout the ages!

Please note in 1890's many thought Communism may work before the Soviet Union, so wasn't a dirty word then!

All of the above believed in ascended masters and a Great White Brotherhood on Sirius!

http://www.esoteric-...st-av-disc.html

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Annie_Besant

Alice Bailey is connected to Lucis Trust, that was recognized by the U.N.

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Alice_Bailey

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Lucis_Trust

A fuller report on the origins of the UK Labour Party can be seen below, three pages, however it is an old report by me so don't expect all links to work that i gave then:-

http://www.mauricefe...&t=1940&start=0


#109    RayGday

RayGday

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 26 posts
  • Joined:12 Jun 2013

Posted 05 July 2013 - 06:03 PM

The origin of the British Yard is unknown and thought to be created about 1000 years ago.

But...

Yardstick was a common word 2500 years ago.

Quote

"Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure." - Leviticus 19:35, Old Testament.


Meteyard - a yard staff, or rod, used as a measure. A yardstick.

Is this evidence that the yard is at least 1500 years older than previously thought?


Archaeologists believe Egyptians and Mesopotamians used the cubit and the Greeks and Romans favoured the foot.

The Cubit was 18 inches or 1⁄2 yard. ("a Foot and a half" - Isaac Newton.)

A Foot is 12 inches or 1⁄3 yard.

The perimeter of the Great Pyramid is 1000 yards, exactly as designed.

#110    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,627 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 05 July 2013 - 08:48 PM

View PostRayGday, on 05 July 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

The origin of the British Yard is unknown and thought to be created about 1000 years ago.

But...

Yardstick was a common word 2500 years ago.




Meteyard - a yard staff, or rod, used as a measure. A yardstick.

Is this evidence that the yard is at least 1500 years older than previously thought?


Archaeologists believe Egyptians and Mesopotamians used the cubit and the Greeks and Romans favoured the foot.

The Cubit was 18 inches or 1⁄2 yard. ("a Foot and a half" - Isaac Newton.)

A Foot is 12 inches or 1⁄3 yard.

Not hardly.

No, this is evidence that you shouldn't be relying solely on a translation of the Greek originally used into the English of the time of King James, which is 1611. In the original Greek as well as English translations of the Jewish Tanakh and Septuagint there is no evidence of the use of the word "meteyard", the word actually used translates as "measures". What is further irrelevant is the fact that the short cubit is not evidenced as having been known, let alone used, during the period the GP was being constructed. Also, since the short cubit was 17.68 inches and you've decided to round it off to 18 inches then you're effectively making the facts fit your "theory" (and I use that word lightly) instead of the theory fitting the facts. Which is just one more reason not to take it seriously.

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#111    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,611 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 05 July 2013 - 09:27 PM

To add, and to end this crap once and for all: the word yard comes from the proto-germanic gard (the g sounds like the English y), and that means stick and not meter. In fact, the word Meter was not used until after the French revolution when measurement systems were unified... and the Greek verb ἐμμετρέω, (to measure by) was used as word to define the new measurement.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#112    RayGday

RayGday

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 26 posts
  • Joined:12 Jun 2013

Posted 06 July 2013 - 05:43 AM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 05 July 2013 - 08:48 PM, said:

the word actually used translates as "measures".

Appreciate your reply but I doubt meteyard translates as "measures" because the word measure is already used.

Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure."

Look up dictionary definitions of the word "meteyard"
Posted Image

View Postcormac mac airt, on 05 July 2013 - 08:48 PM, said:

What is further irrelevant is the fact that the short cubit is not evidenced as having been known, let alone used, during the period the GP was being constructed. Also, since the short cubit was 17.68 inches and you've decided to round it off to 18 inches then you're effectively making the facts fit your "theory" (and I use that word lightly) instead of the theory fitting the facts. Which is just one more reason not to take it seriously.

The pyramid builders using a 17.6 inch cubit is a theory too.

Posted Image
http://en.wikipedia....i/English_units

Posted Image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yard


There are more references to a 18 inch cubit than a 17.68 inch cubit.
http://www.worldwideflood.com/ark/noahs_cubit/cubit_references.htm

The perimeter of the Great Pyramid is 1000 yards, exactly as designed.

#113    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,627 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 06 July 2013 - 07:00 AM

View PostRayGday, on 06 July 2013 - 05:43 AM, said:

Appreciate your reply but I doubt meteyard translates as "measures" because the word measure is already used.

Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in weight, or in measure."

Look up dictionary definitions of the word "meteyard"
Posted Image



The pyramid builders using a 17.6 inch cubit is a theory too.

Posted Image
http://en.wikipedia....i/English_units

Posted Image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yard


There are more references to a 18 inch cubit than a 17.68 inch cubit.
http://www.worldwideflood.com/ark/noahs_cubit/cubit_references.htm

I didn't say 'meteyard' translates as measure, as it is found NOWHERE in the original Greek of the Bible. It only appears in the 1611 King James Version. In short, it was a word added to the text. The actual text, in Greek, reads as follows:

Quote

35. οὐ ποιήσετε ἄδικον ἐν κρίσει ἐν μέτροις καὶ ἐν σταθμίοις καὶ ἐν ζυγοῖς

http://www.sacred-te.../sep/lev019.htm

The highlighted word above means "measure" and had nothing to do with "meteyard". The latter of which (again) is nowhere in the text. Therefore your argument is based on a non-existant word.

A 17.68 inch short cubit is based on the available evidence of measuring rods from Ancient Egypt as described by Flinders Petrie in his book "Ancient Weights and Measures, Illustrated by the Egyptian Collection in University College, London" dated 1926. None of which are either 18 inches in length or date to the Old Kingdom, which makes your Wiki link meaningless.

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#114    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,708 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 07 July 2013 - 02:49 AM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 06 July 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

...

A 17.68 inch short cubit is based on the available evidence of measuring rods from Ancient Egypt as described by Flinders Petrie in his book "Ancient Weights and Measures, Illustrated by the Egyptian Collection in University College, London" dated 1926. None of which are either 18 inches in length or date to the Old Kingdom, which makes your Wiki link meaningless.

cormac

Thank you, cormac, for this welcomed reminder of reality. I get a bit impatient with folks who profess things to be true even in the face of no tangible evidence. Anachronisms always lead one astray and should be avoided at all times.

I'm not even certain why we should fuss over biblical quotes considering no passage in the Bible, Old Testament or New, pertains in any way to the Great Pyramid or any other Egyptian pyramid. This is especially true for Greek renderings of the Old Testament, all of which derive from the original Septuagint commissioned early in the Ptolemaic Period of Egypt—2,000 years after the building of the Great Pyramid. In any case, also important to remember is that the Hebrew cubit and Egyptian cubit were not the same. Close, but not the same. "Close" isn't really good enough when erecting colossal monuments that required something akin to precise fittings of masonry blocks (be it the Great Pyramid or the Temple of Jerusalem).

To RayGDay I would ask: where is your evidence? By this I mean not your opinions or assumptions based on coincidences between ancient forms of measurement and modern. I mean actual physical evidence produced from the material record through archaeology of the Nile Valley. How can you support your claim in this manner? This is what matters.

You stated that the 17.6-inch equivalent in cubits is a theory, too. Well, no, it isn't. It's fact. Cormac mentioned measuring rods. These exist. Quite a few have been found in archaeological excavations in Egypt. While I'm not aware of cubit rods surviving from the Old Kingdom, it's evident that the Egyptian cubit changed little if any down through pharaonic history. Cubit rods are well evidenced. For example:

Posted Image

Posted Image

A close-up of the second cubit rod:

Posted Image

A rod like this was divided into cubits and from there subdivided into palms. While no one to this day can definitively identify how the cubit came to be or which civilization in the ancient Near East first developed it for purposes of measurement, how it was used in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Judah, and elsewhere is well attested. The closeup photo above shows the subdivisions representing palms, along the beveled edge. Anyone with a passing familiarity with hieroglyphs can read this. Each single slash represents "one," while each horseshoe-shaped glyph represents "ten." Therefore, from left we have 16 subdivisions, 15, 14, and 13.

The Egyptian cubit comes out to be 17.6 inches. The Hebrew cubit is 17.5 inches. The Old Babylonian cubit is 19.69 inches. The Greek cubit, 18.68 inches. These are basic facts, and well represented archaeologically and textually.

So, I ask yet again, where is your evidence? Physical, archaeological, textual evidence—not pareidolia.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#115    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,708 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:03 AM

I forgot to mention something so I'll throw it into this post.

Obviously a cubit rod would not be terribly useful in establishing long-distance measurements, such as the 750 feet on each side of the Great Pyramid. For this purpose the Egyptians used measuring ropes. These long ropes were knotted at even intervals for the purposes of measurement. This includes not just structures like the Great Pyramid but land surveys for the purposes of taxation. A good example is seen in the tomb of Menna, from the New Kingdom:

Posted Image

All right, now I'm finished.

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!

#116    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,627 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:32 AM

View Postkmt_sesh, on 07 July 2013 - 02:49 AM, said:

Thank you, cormac, for this welcomed reminder of reality. I get a bit impatient with folks who profess things to be true even in the face of no tangible evidence. Anachronisms always lead one astray and should be avoided at all times.

I'm not even certain why we should fuss over biblical quotes considering no passage in the Bible, Old Testament or New, pertains in any way to the Great Pyramid or any other Egyptian pyramid. This is especially true for Greek renderings of the Old Testament, all of which derive from the original Septuagint commissioned early in the Ptolemaic Period of Egypt—2,000 years after the building of the Great Pyramid. In any case, also important to remember is that the Hebrew cubit and Egyptian cubit were not the same. Close, but not the same. "Close" isn't really good enough when erecting colossal monuments that required something akin to precise fittings of masonry blocks (be it the Great Pyramid or the Temple of Jerusalem).

To RayGDay I would ask: where is your evidence? By this I mean not your opinions or assumptions based on coincidences between ancient forms of measurement and modern. I mean actual physical evidence produced from the material record through archaeology of the Nile Valley. How can you support your claim in this manner? This is what matters.

You stated that the 17.6-inch equivalent in cubits is a theory, too. Well, no, it isn't. It's fact. Cormac mentioned measuring rods. These exist. Quite a few have been found in archaeological excavations in Egypt. While I'm not aware of cubit rods surviving from the Old Kingdom, it's evident that the Egyptian cubit changed little if any down through pharaonic history. Cubit rods are well evidenced. For example:

Posted Image

Posted Image

A close-up of the second cubit rod:

Posted Image

A rod like this was divided into cubits and from there subdivided into palms. While no one to this day can definitively identify how the cubit came to be or which civilization in the ancient Near East first developed it for purposes of measurement, how it was used in Egypt, Mesopotamia, Judah, and elsewhere is well attested. The closeup photo above shows the subdivisions representing palms, along the beveled edge. Anyone with a passing familiarity with hieroglyphs can read this. Each single slash represents "one," while each horseshoe-shaped glyph represents "ten." Therefore, from left we have 16 subdivisions, 15, 14, and 13.

The Egyptian cubit comes out to be 17.6 inches. The Hebrew cubit is 17.5 inches. The Old Babylonian cubit is 19.69 inches. The Greek cubit, 18.68 inches. These are basic facts, and well represented archaeologically and textually.

So, I ask yet again, where is your evidence? Physical, archaeological, textual evidence—not pareidolia.

Just for the sake of clarity the Egyptian cubit kmt_sesh is referring to is the short cubit and should not be confused with the Royal Cubit of 52.4 centimeters/20.63 inches.

cormac

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#117    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,101 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:32 AM

The graduations on the rod in your pic which are numerically marked are fingers, I believe.

Four of those made a palm, with seven plams in a cubit.

Just sayin' :w00t:

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#118    cormac mac airt

cormac mac airt

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,627 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tennessee, USA

Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:35 AM

View PostHarte, on 07 July 2013 - 03:32 AM, said:

The graduations on the rod in your pic which are numerically marked are fingers, I believe.

Four of those made a palm, with seven plams in a cubit.

Just sayin' :w00t:

Harte

And you know what you've got if you have 7 palms, right? Three and a half people.  :lol:

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt, 07 July 2013 - 03:37 AM.

The city and citizens, which you yesterday described to us in fiction, we will now transfer to the world of reality. It shall be the ancient city of Athens, and we will suppose that the citizens whom you imagined, were our veritable ancestors, of whom the priest spoke; they will perfectly harmonise, and there will be no inconsistency in saying that the citizens of your republic are these ancient Athenians. --  Plato's Timaeus

#119    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,101 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 07 July 2013 - 03:42 AM

View Postcormac mac airt, on 07 July 2013 - 03:35 AM, said:

And you know what you've got if you have 7 palms, right?
cormac
Four politicians, only three of which are completely in your pocket.

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#120    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,708 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 07 July 2013 - 04:51 AM

View PostHarte, on 07 July 2013 - 03:42 AM, said:

Four politicians, only three of which are completely in your pocket.

Harte

Zing!

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!





Also tagged with great pyramid

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users