[Qoais]

Really - I agree lakeview - A quick little trip to the spot, a few pictures and a report - all witnessed of course. Hawass wouldn't even have to go himself- surely he's got someone he trusts to do a good job of taking a look see.

[kmt_sesh]

cladking, on 11 November 2009 - 09:56 PM, said:

How is it possible that everyone keeps forgetting all the
caves in plain sight at Giza?

Which caves are these? Caves, or tombs whose subterranean chambers have been opened to the sky?

Quote

There are fissures mentioned in the literature.

Fissures are not caves. They're small cracks, like the one at the bottom of the Osiris shaft in the uncompleted tunnel.

Quote

Hawass was ACTUALLY EXPLORING A CAVE UNDER GIZA BEFORE HE CAME
UP TO ANNOUNCE THERE ARE NO CAVES UNDER GIZA.

Which cave was this? Specifically? Are you sure it wasn't a burial chamber or tunnel leading into one? Or the tunnel that dead-ends inside the rump of the Sphinx?

Quote

There simply is no question that there are caves under here
and egyptology has never bothered to explore them for one rea-
son or another.

If there were caves and the caves were known, Egyptologists most certainly would've explored, charted, and mapped them long ago. If you don't believe so, you may not understand the basics of archaeology. Anything that has the potential to show human presence at Giza would most definitely be explored. If a cave exists but its entrance is unknown at the present time, we can hardly blame archaeologists for not entering it.

Quote

Here it's been weeks since the caves were announced and there's
still no word from the establishment.

That should be very telling to you, shouldn't it? This is what I've been saying all along.

Quote

All we have is Hawass'
shot from the hip that there are no caves under Giza made while
he was still covered in the mud from a cave under Giza.

It's not just Hawass, though, is it? More importantly, no comment from the GPMP or anyone else who is actively and currently engaged in archaeology at the Plateau, which is even more telling. Perhaps indeed there is nothing to report.

Quote

Are they hiding something or is it really impossible to walk
over to the tomb of the birds and look? Is it a conspiracy or
are they incompetent?

This area beyond the western mastaba field is very well known. The tomb Collins calls the "tomb of the birds" has been excavated, which is how we know it was used into the Ptolemaic Period at least. No one is hiding anything. Suggesting that archaeologists and researchers are trying to hide something is not representative of reality in the first place. Trust me, these people are not given to hiding things. Their entire motivation is to explore, analyze, and report. Archaeology 101, you know.

Quote

It is entirely unreasonable to suggest there is no
network of caves as you suggest later in the post.
The Nile did flow by here at almost every depth from
-100' to -800' over the milinea. This would have formed
caves.

I have always concurred the likelihood of little caves and voids. I am stressing that at present there is no evidence for vast caverns and complex networks of tunnels. These are found on fringe websites, not at Giza. If and when actual evidence of them is found, we can then say they exist. Prior to that, all there is is idle speculation. Show me a single excavation or geological report that provides plans or other proof for such thing, and I will believe you.

The Nile itself has not flowed alongside Giza at any time in known history. Perhaps long before prehistory, but even that's highly debatable. In recorded history the Egyptians brought the Nile to the Plateau via canals, the evidence for which has been archaeologically established. The flood plain may well have contributed to saturation in the area, but that's another matter. Natural caves are more likely to have been carved long before 10,000 years ago, when the entire region experienced prolonged wet periods.

[cladking]

kmt_sesh, on 12 November 2009 - 08:27 PM, said:

Which caves are these? Caves, or tombs whose subterranean chambers have been opened to the sky?



Fissures are not caves. They're small cracks, like the one at the bottom of the Osiris shaft in the uncompleted tunnel.



Which cave was this? Specifically? Are you sure it wasn't a burial chamber or tunnel leading into one? Or the tunnel that dead-ends inside the rump of the Sphinx?



If there were caves and the caves were known, Egyptologists most certainly would've explored, charted, and mapped them long ago. If you don't believe so, you may not understand the basics of archaeology. Anything that has the potential to show human presence at Giza would most definitely be explored. If a cave exists but its entrance is unknown at the present time, we can hardly blame archaeologists for not entering it.



That should be very telling to you, shouldn't it? This is what I've been saying all along.



It's not just Hawass, though, is it? More importantly, no comment from the GPMP or anyone else who is actively and currently engaged in archaeology at the Plateau, which is even more telling. Perhaps indeed there is nothing to report.



This area beyond the western mastaba field is very well known. The tomb Collins calls the "tomb of the birds" has been excavated, which is how we know it was used into the Ptolemaic Period at least. No one is hiding anything. Suggesting that archaeologists and researchers are trying to hide something is not representative of reality in the first place. Trust me, these people are not given to hiding things. Their entire motivation is to explore, analyze, and report. Archaeology 101, you know.



I have always concurred the likelihood of little caves and voids. I am stressing that at present there is no evidence for vast caverns and complex networks of tunnels. These are found on fringe websites, not at Giza. If and when actual evidence of them is found, we can then say they exist. Prior to that, all there is is idle speculation. Show me a single excavation or geological report that provides plans or other proof for such thing, and I will believe you.

The Nile itself has not flowed alongside Giza at any time in known history. Perhaps long before prehistory, but even that's highly debatable. In recorded history the Egyptians brought the Nile to the Plateau via canals, the evidence for which has been archaeologically established. The flood plain may well have contributed to saturation in the area, but that's another matter. Natural caves are more likely to have been carved long before 10,000 years ago, when the entire region experienced prolonged wet periods.

Yes. The caves were opened to the sky by the builders of G1.
They tunneled right down to it and maintained a sightline all
the way to the exterior of the pyramid.

Hawass called the natural cavern he was excavating at the bottom
of the Osiris shaft a "cave" before announcing there were no caves
at Giza.

People walk through some of these caves nearly every day when they
tour G1.

It seems a lot of the physical evidence gets pretty little attention
from the professionals. Remember the canal leading from G1 that Pe-
trie couldn't even bring himself to call a ditch. He had to say it
had the properties of a drainage system. Remember all those lines on
the pyramids that still aren't getting talked about?

So there you have it. Hawass explores a cave and then says there are
no caves. If there is never any further word from him it could only
mean he's a liar or incompetent. I really don't believe he's either
but the fact remains it's been many weeks now with no further word. Are
the caves there as reported or are they not? This is a pretty simple
question that deserves a pretty simple answer. If the answer is yes
then they need to be explored and the results announced.

I'll admit the possibility that they are working on this in as reason-
ably efficient way as they deem appropriate but grows increasinly dif-
ficult to fathom a reason that there remains no simple answer.

The Nile has occupied the entire flood plain over geologic time. Al-
most every square inch of the flood plain has had the river flow over
it many many times. This is what rivers do; change course. Sometimes
they do it gradually and sometimes suddenly but they are constantly and
eternally changing their course untyil they are no more.

[lakeview rud]

In Temple's book there are old maps indicating ruins of two causeways that go to the Giza plateau. One is completely gone (went to area near P1) while the second went to near P3. There are still remnants of that one visible. Why would the AE's build causeways to the plateau if the Nile didn't reach to the plateau at flood stage?

[kmt_sesh]

cladking, on 12 November 2009 - 09:25 PM, said:

Yes. The caves were opened to the sky by the builders of G1.
They tunneled right down to it and maintained a sightline all
the way to the exterior of the pyramid.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. What I think of by your comment is the unfinished chamber below the Great Pyramid. Correct me if I'm wrong. This chamber, however, is not a natural cavern. The walls, ceiling, and floor bear extensive tool marks, showing how it was cut by man. At most it may have been a small void, but the Egyptians' reaching it would've been pure coincidence. It was never open to human presence prior to the building of the Great Pyramid. They could not have known a void or pocket was there, if it existed at all. Given what's there now, there is only evidence for human action.

Quote

Hawass called the natural cavern he was excavating at the bottom
of the Osiris shaft a "cave" before announcing there were no caves
at Giza.

LOL So because Hawass referred to the bottom of the Osiris shaft as a cave, you have him spelunking all over the Plateau? I don't doubt that he may have referred to it as such on occasion, but in his written material he refers to it as a chamber (at least all of the material I've read). That's because it was a chamber.

We're back to what may have been there before humans came along, as with the GP's unfinished subterranean chamber. Perhaps there was a small pocket or void, but reaching it would've been pure coincidence. There is no other access to the chamber other than the shaft descending to it, so whatever was there prior to humans, humans had no way of knowing. This is obvious. What's also obvious is the abundance of tool marks all over the surfaces, as with the GP's unfinished chamber. The Osiris shaft's main chamber was more thoroughly worked, however. A channel was carved into the rock of the floor to create an elevated central portion, near each corner of which was a pillar cut out of the living stone. The platform received a basalt sarcophagus, the remains of which are still there (somewhat fragmented). The bottom-most chamber of the Osiris shaft was clearly cut by man.

Quote

Remember the canal leading from G1 that Pe-
trie couldn't even bring himself to call a ditch. He had to say it
had the properties of a drainage system. Remember all those lines on
the pyramids that still aren't getting talked about?

I don't know of any canal leading away from the Great Pyramid. There would not have been a purpose for any sizable canal, which would've interfered with ritual activity. All I can think of is the causeway, which was in fragments even in Petrie's day. The foundations are the best preserved portion (around which later excavators found remains of the inscribed limestone walls). Petrie had yet to obtain a real understanding of pyramid complexes and the rituals once enacted there when he was originally surveying Giza, in his early years. The attendant features of the Great Pyramid would not become clear in function until George Reisner started to conduct arguably the first professional archaeology there. It's possible Petrie was pondering what the causeway may have been and didn't understand its purpose. I have not read his writings on this particular matter, however, so I can't go into any more detail. All I can say is I've never read of any sizable canal connected to the Great Pyramid.

In truth I don't buy into your line argument. What you may see or may not see of lines on low-resolution, internet photos of the Great Pyramid neither proves nor disproves ramps.

Quote

So there you have it. Hawass explores a cave and then says there are
no caves. If there is never any further word from him it could only
mean he's a liar or incompetent.

Hawass says some truly odd things but is neither a liar nor incompetent. To suggest such a thing means you're not familiar with his body of work and what he's contributed to Egyptology. I'm not crazy about the guy but I know there is no cause to call his professionalism into doubt. To be sure, whether he uses the word "cave" or the word "chamber" is no reason to condemn him!

Quote

I really don't believe he's either
but the fact remains it's been many weeks now with no further word. Are
the caves there as reported or are they not? This is a pretty simple
question that deserves a pretty simple answer. If the answer is yes
then they need to be explored and the results announced.

Do you mean Andrew Collins's caves? Hawass has already clearly stated his position, and that area west of the western mastaba field is one he knows very well, so I wouldn't expect him to say much of anything further--if anything at all. Even more relevant would be a statement by Mark Lehner or somebody else from the GPMP, but they have seen fit to say nothing, either. This tells me there's probably nothing to say. I've met Egyptologists who've spent many years pouring over the tombs all over Giza, including Ann Macy Roth, and none of them have made a single comment, either. This to me is highly significant. I'm being told I should not trust professionals who've explored every inch of Giza but should trust a guy with a book to sell.

Quote

The Nile has occupied the entire flood plain over geologic time. Al-
most every square inch of the flood plain has had the river flow over
it many many times. This is what rivers do; change course. Sometimes
they do it gradually and sometimes suddenly but they are constantly and
eternally changing their course untyil they are no more.

You're right, of course. But with the Nile, excepting certain times when its course has appeared to be briefly erratic, it has been creeping eastward for the past million years, not westward. It's been moving steadily away from Giza.

[kmt_sesh]

lakeview rud, on 13 November 2009 - 07:44 PM, said:

In Temple's book there are old maps indicating ruins of two causeways that go to the Giza plateau. One is completely gone (went to area near P1) while the second went to near P3. There are still remnants of that one visible. Why would the AE's build causeways to the plateau if the Nile didn't reach to the plateau at flood stage?

Pyramid causeways had nothing to do with water. They were important ritual processional ways connecting the valley temple to the mortuary temple. Many remains of causeways, including the one once attached to the Great Pyramid, have yielded inscribed material from the walls that indicates their ritual purpose.

As I mentioned earlier to cladking, the Egyptians of Dynasty 4 carved a large canal between the Nile off to the east and the foot of the Plateau. They brought the river to Giza. Quays were carved at the bases of the valley temples so that incoming boats could offload passengers there, for ceremonies and rituals pertaining to the cult of the king. Of course, during construction stages, these quays permitted barges to offload construction materials such as the granite and basalt quarried far away.

In over twenty years of researching Egypt, I have never come across archaeological evidence for more than one causeway at Khufu's pyramid complex. The small queens' pyramids each did have a little temple out front, akin to Khufu's mortuary temple on the east side of his main pyramid, and there may have been established processional ways to these small pyramids, but nothing like the causeways I've described. Now, there are the remains of a ramp going from south to north in the direction of one of the small pyramids, so maybe that's where Temple is getting it from.

[cladking]

Kmt_Sesh;

We've been over much of this ground a million times before and I won it.

Let's start with a misunderstanding. You say that the Nile has been
creeping east for a million years. It actually moves much more quickly
than this. I don't know how old the Nile is but it's easy enough to
look up. A million years is a blink of the eye in geologic time anyway.

My understanding is that a segment of the descending passage is a nat-
ural cave but even if I'm wrong on this point part of the well shaft is
a natural cave. There is most definitely a cave at the bottom of the
Osiris Shaft. This is a simple fact. It's not in question. There is
also clear moving water at the bottom. This is also not in question.
Hawass has been sending remotely operated robots into the cave at the
bottom and complaining about all the mud in it. Again, this is not open
to question unless you believe in conspiracies and want to call Hawass
a liar. I believe that thje Osiris Shaft was probably a cave system but
there is no way to prove or disprove this with current technology. It
is merely my belief. It is based on the simple fact that carving stones
out underground and removing them is infinitely easier is the stone is
riddled with caves and on the fact there "should" have been caves here.

[cladking]

I don't understand how you can believe it's reasonable to
say nothing under the current conditions. Hawass said there
are no caves, nothing he doesn't understand, and cited inap-
propriate evidence to defend his position. THERE IS PHOTO_
GRAPHIC EVIDENCE and first hand accounts to say he is
wrong. His own words proves he is wrong. You can not pos-
sibly be correct to say you are exploring a cave under Giza
and then say there are no caves under Giza.

HE IS IN ERROR. THERE IS NO QUESTION OF THIS. It's up
to him to let us know on which point he is in error. He
also can not possibly be correct that he knows everything
about Giza but many people live a lifetime and never not-
ice they are wrong about things like this.

[cladking]

...cont.

You're really going to hurt my feelings pretty soon.

I just posted about this the other day. There was a means to transport
water to the north face where it was used in counterweights to pull stones
up to the pyramid almost exactly 300' at a time. This is pretty interesting
since Manetho said stones moved up to the pyramid 300' at a time.

I suspect this mechanism also was used to "pump" air out of the pyramid or
to move Osiris' efflux (CO2) to an area it would be better dispersed by the
prevailing winds or to fall down the cliff face on windless days. The evi-
dence is there and it really doesn't matter if any egyptologist ever acknow-
ledges it or not. It really doesn't matter one whit what any individual or
any group chooses to admit. The facts are the facts and normally it's only
the facts which lead to thje truth.

Everyone ius more than welcome to ignore the lines on the pyramid which are
in plain sight. They can ignore the "billows of the winding watercourse" as
well;

"The N.N.E. trench was traced by excavations along the whole length of 2,840 inches, up to where it is covered by the enclosure wall of the kiosk. It is fairly straight, varying from the mean axis 2.1, on an average of five points fixed along it. The depth varies from 14 to 20 inches below the general surface. It is 38, 40, 39.2, and 36 in width, from the outer end up to a point 740 along it from the basalt pavement; here it contracts roughly and irregularly, and reaches a narrow part 18.2 wide at 644 from the pavement. The sides are built about here, and deeply covered with broken stones. Hence it runs on, till, close to the edge of the basalt pavement, it branches in two, and narrows yet more; one line runs W., and another turning nearly due S., emerges on the pavement edge at 629.8 to 633.4 from the N.E. corner of the pavement, being there only 3.6 wide. From this remarkable forking, it [p. 50] is evident that the trench cannot have been made with any ideas of sighting along it, or of its marking out a direction or azimuth; and, starting as it does, from the basalt pavement (or from any building which stood there), and running with a steady fall to the nearest point of the cliff edge, it seems exactly as if intended for a drain; the more so as there is plainly a good deal of water-weanng at a point where it falls sharply, at its enlargement. The forking of the inner end is not cut in the rock, but in a large block of limestone."

http://www.ronaldbir...gizeh/index.htm

[cladking]

...cont.

Please reread what I originally wrote. I did not say or imply that
Mr Hawass is either a liar or incompetent. I merely pointed out that
his last words on the subject are contradictory.

[lakeview rud]

Cladking, there is a new thread (Mystery of the GP solved! by Dimension X) which may hold something of interest for you. A French architect proposes that the Grand Gallery was used to haul large granite slabs up with the use of counterweghts. Pretty interesting stuff in that the theory answers some unique details/questions in there. Your water as a counterweight idea might hold some (water heh-heh).
One of the five videos I couldn't get to run but the rest was interesting. I don't know whether I would immediately buy the idea of an internal ramp without more proof.
kmt; I've got to get that book back (I returned it to owner) but when I do I can give you specific location of whats considered a second causeway. Granted the P1 causeway was important to the ritual but why not just have a ritual pathway? It did approach the plateau at a fairly steep cliff edge so its likely you're correct in that it was not intended to keep people's feet dry; just get them as directly as possible to P1..

[cladking]

Thank you.

I'm pretty familiar with Houdin's ideas and find them interesting,
plausible, and relatively consistent with the evidence. I don't be-
lieve internal ramps were used though. While they are far easier to
construct and use they remain just as inefficient as any other ramp.

It's surprising to me that ramp proponents don't jump aboard this
idea since at least it's not denied by the evidence. You wouldn't
expect sloped lines on the pyrammid faces with internal ramps and
sight lines can be maintained. It also solves the problem of how
massive ramp technology can spring into existence overnight since
the size of the structure is irrelevent to this method. He tied it
all up with a nice ribbon and gave them something plausible and now
they won't even let him run the simple experiments that will prove
his theory. Remarkable.

When ramps are finally accepted as being disproven history will frown
broadly on the current thinking on this subject. It's a shame this
has persisted into the 21st century.