Calling a granite box with a corner busted out a sarcophagus doesn't
prove there was ever a body in it. The Egyptians made some extremely
large versions of these as well.

Even the graffitti hardly proves it was a tomb. Its existence might lead
one to believe that the pyramid was associated with Khufu however.

The name of the pyramid was "Khufu's Horizon" to the ancients. It's
within the realm of reason that the horizon being referenced was the
top of the structure rather than the chamber or any shaft entrances.
This concept seems, to me, to be in keeping with a literal reading of
the Pyramid Texts.

Sure.


But the men have to walk (and pull) on the surface as well and they would
have had more limited means of making one thing slide and others stick than
we do today.

The means they used on ramps might have taken this into account since men
could use the stones to gain some traction while the load slid along on the top.

Still steep ramps aren't climable by people pulling heavy loads. So long as
the load had low friction they couldn't even stop to rest since constant force
would need to be maintained.

no im sure it was the casing box for their interstellar comms unit. or computer array.

so how do you interpret 'horizon' in this context?

is it possible that the whole structure (rather than any single part of it) was the horizon?

or is 'horizon' here referring to a concept of transition?
what was significant about the horizon to the egyptians?

lol That was Stargate wasn't it?

I'll post these links, but I'm sure they won't be
read all the way thru because they're so loooong

http://anth507.tripod.com/pyramids.htm




Try any on this list for info on Al Mamun breaking into the pyramid:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=Al...ramid&meta=

Don't worry. It's coming. But not quite yet. Soon though.

what? so that it? thats how you came to the conclusions you have?

this does not contradict the process of evolution that led up to the great pyramids at giza. (they were not the first)
im sure you must have heard about mastabas
You must know about Saqqara

they did not come to this knowledge overnight.

"Horizon" in English refers to the line in the distance which can be seen
from a place with an unimpeded view. If you're looking at the sun coming
up over an intervening mountain it is already past sunrise since the moun-
tain doesn't lie on this line.

My guess is that this word meant exactly the same thing to the Egyptians.
They lived most of the time down in the Nile valley and couldn't see the hor-
izon. When they climbed up to Giza there was the horizon. Of course the
higher up one goes the more horizon one can see usually. The Earth curves
away 16' for every five miles so in most places you can get high enough to
see the complete horizon.

The Pyramid Texts imply that the king rose to heaven in or from the horizon.
Rather than kings commishioning pyramids in which they were later interred
it appears that the Egyptians just built pyramids and when the king dies it was
used in his "ascension". This was an extremely complicated ceremony which
may have started with king's less than timely death and ended eight days la-
ter with his mummy spirited away by the priests and his viscera launched in-
to the Marsh of Reeds after descending the pyramid with Osiris (in his name of
Seker) in the []nw-boat.

Attacks of the Asiatics would come from the horizon literally but it appears
there was a more specific horizon as well. This was the Land of Horus to the
west of the Nile between Giza and the Fayuum Depression. This was the land
of rainbows and the Gods of the Earthly ennead. It was where Osiris (Lord of
Caverns) ruled over the D[].t and was carried on the back of his brother Set
who swam beneath him. This was the land that was cut off by a great canyon
which formed millions of years ago and was carved with hundreds of caverns
and caves. It is the land where early man went to dig more caves yet after
inventing the drill. The pyramids in the land of the horizon are parts of Geb,
the Earth God, and there are dozens of different Eyes of Horus throughout. It
is these eyes through which comes the "flood which stands on the bank" or the
"tossing of the inundation". It is this flood or inundation which "unites the water-
holes" and causes herbs to grow on the hill. It was this flood which necessitated
the invention of the djed pillar.

The horizon was critical to the ancients because this was the only place crops
could grow while the valley was under water in the summer. This is the implica-
tion of a literal reading of the Pyramid Texts. The king was never buried in the
pyramid (instrument of ascension) but did achieve heaven through it. The struc-
ture had a practical purpose as well.

Its this 'achieving of heaven' as you put it that i was hinting at. crossing the horizon between life and death.
Im quite happy to go on thinking that this was in keeping with its function as a tomb,
if you have reliable proof otherwise im open to persuasion.

Ahhh. But if you knew how the pyramid were built then it might follow
that even its function as a tomb was merely incidental.

I merely maintain that the bulk of the historical, physical, cultural and
geological evidence all suggest that these were built with the weight of
water. This changes everything including their function. The real reason
they were built has little to do with the life or death of the king. The real
reason these instruments of ascension were built was practical and the
primary thing they were lifting or causing to ascend were the stones of
which they were comprised.

some evidence would be nice.

are you saying mastabas were'nt tombs either?

I've made these links many times.

http://www.hallofmaat.com/read.php?6,46071...0717#msg-460717 -layers.

http://www.catchpenny.org/concave.html -grooves

http://www.wyldwytch.com/weavings/reading_...ypt/pyramid.htm -pyramid texts (check out the other stuff as well. There are lots of little tidbits like how the ancients believed water came up froim the ground.)

http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/Articles/Eg...lisationP1.html efflux sealed

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...howtopic=112448 -the djed pillar

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/secretchambers2.htm -hidden chambers

http://www.ronaldbirdsall.com/gizeh/index.htm -petrie

http://www.egyptarchive.co.uk/his_html/edgar_38.html -great pyramid picts

There are many more of course and most of it comes from the interpretation of well known
facts so it's really a matter of reading the threads or just reading the source material and
accepting that it was meant literally. The Egyptian Gods were very much alive before they
failed and then the way of life and their relationship to their Gods changed.

Remember that there are some monkey wrenches thrown into this. The biggie is that the
oldest version of the Pyramid Texts was transcribed hundreds of years after the water pres-
sure failed and was not understood at that time. These texts were changed a little with each
retelling.

Most, if not all, of the mastabas were tombs. If any were not then they were later converted
to use as tombs.

No, that's not IT Gremlin, but I'm not about to paste two and a half years of research in this forum. You asked for links for 2 items, I gave you links for those two items. Cladking has posted links to some of the information I've researched, so there's no point in posting them twice.

...honestly I haven't the slightest clue...yet. It is funny though.. I gather the "tomb" robbers not only cleared out the riches, they washed and buffed the walls of all the art and kindly removed the lid of the sarcophagus as well...yeah, there's a box there with no trace of anyone ever using it? That boxs sure puts the nail in the coffin, hold on a moment I forgot, they used what sand as an abbrasive to help carve out that sarcophagus (well they say so on TV it's gotta be correct, specially on the history channel:) and with all that skill couldn't even carve one title of who the supposed tomb belong to anywhere inside the great pyramid. What was I thinking, theres a box there a red granite one at that, what else could it mean....gotta be a tomb, how silly of me to think other wise.

the whynsos just waking up to how high it can be

...man the sarcasm here is really getting out of hand...LOL. "gets tiresome after a while doncha think..." apparently not so now it's obvious when ya find an empty box in a bare room to say, " tomb"...forget about today, what was they teaching yesteryears?

the whynsos with a blank look to capture an artist impression

...actually I am saying aside from graffiti, heres a thought, if while a construction worker was paving a new side walk decided to spell someones name in it in an obscure place out of site that that some how translated to mean officially that's who built it, should later generations take that as conclusive? Evidence of course, conclusive, lots of laughs from a bowl of hash no, ya build such an elegant "tomb" and all that remains are some workers restless or daring artwork, and I wonder and am curious, have they ever tested the paint to see just how old it is (is that possible to radio carbon that?)? I would think that would definitely give some weight to this discussion....

the whynsos...ok here's one, meaning there lost

...really, the first one I thought sucked, the whole pyramid under the ice thingy, at least the second one to me seem more action packed and watchable...I didn't understand the ending though was that like a prelude to another AVP?

the whynsos don't ya know when times go we have to stop to watch it....

And the step pyramid of Djoser at Saqqara? not an elaboration on the mastaba?

Just out of curiosity what do these 'whynsos' messages mean?

...nothing personally directed at anyone more of just me mentally foolin with words, like: here's one meaning there lost or if someone or something "won" (a game challenge what have you) here (the place of winning) then obviously whereever "there" is they lost. Its a personal challenge I enjoy that for me and anyone who attempts to ponder their meaning adds a nonsequitor flavor to each post.

The whynsos when thoughts arise cut the string...they ain't kites

^ ...s***
i still dont get it

LOL, its just a play on words, some of them have meaning others don't, in the example I use, orginally I didn't have a signature there and then I came back and edited it and said Ok heres one, ( I got a signature) then added meaning they lost, well, it's like poems some I get alot I don't...

the whynsos jibberish is just that, yet put it to rhythm and suddenly we say "hmmm"...

yeah so I'm really bored, wanna step out side this forum...

aaaah i gotcha.
i was just confused. every time id read it, i kept thinking it said something like "why no s.o.s." basically

hi cladking, you must have missed my previous post,
is the step pyramid of Djoser an elaborate mastaba?

I'm not sure how to answer or exactly the question.

I believe you're asking if I believe that the Step Pyramid is a direct outgrowth
of previous mastaba building.

I don't have a strong opinion on the subject and have not studied this pyramid
in great detail. I suspect it is, indeed, an outgrowth of mastaba building; a sort
of an elaboration. My understanding is that the mastabas tend to have a lot of
empty space in them while pyramids don't. The connection could be primarily
aesthetic.

I believe all the giant pyramids were built using the weight of water to lift the mat-
erial. It's entirely possible that the height of each step in this pyramid represents
the height to which the pressure would lift the water. After lifting the stones to the
first level they'd simply shorten the ropes and lift them higher yet. Eventually they
developed technology and expertise to fill in the the side and even place the casing.

I blelieve that the 'official' line is that it is an elaboration on the mastaba, another layer was apparently added to make it stand our above those of the nobility...and things went from there.

Im interested in this water theory, on the face of it i dont see how it would actually work. could you explain it to me....in the meantime ill have a recap of the thread to see if i can get any more on it. So far im assuming that you have to start with an outer layer of stones, and pump water inside somehow....but then youd have to get the stones inside for them to be raised by the water, in which case they're already raised.....its making my head hurt.
if youve got diagrams etc. that would be great....nothing like a good visual aid.

Ok ive just seen the word 'counterweights' and so im getting a better idea of what you mean.......as far as i can see they could use both stone and water for the counterweight, the water just tipping the balance...

what sort of arrangement did you consider? Again diagrams would be good.

This is kind of hard to draw but easy to picture.

After you level the site you place the stones for the first layer. You might even build a ramp to put in a few layers to save the trouble of resetting the counterweight often.

When it's time you build a "boat" on the quarry side which is probably just a large box which is set firmly on a tree trunk used as a single runner. There would be two smaller runners a few feet away set back far enough they don't contact the groove in the side of the pyramid. These runners are just to provide more stability and prevent it tipping sideways. This thing is sufficient robust to hold about eight of the average sized stones. This "boat" lies upright against the side of the pyramid at a small loading station. There is a heavy rope attached to the front of the tree trunk which goes up the side, over the top, and is attached to the []nw-boat at the top of the other side. This is a very similar contraption except that it's built to hold water. When the stones are loaded on the other side they communicate with polished copper mirrors that they are ready and the men stand clear. The operator at the top fills the counterweight until it starts moving down and pulling the stones up the other side.

The ascending sled is pulled right up on top of the pyramids where several crews pull the stones off to the locations being built. With a combination of ramps leading down to the areas the stones are needed and small maneuvering counterweights on the east and west sides these crews are mostly the masons required to set the stones rather than labor to move them. The sled is quickly rerighted and a small bladder is filled in the front with water to cause it to fall back down to be reloaded while the now empty counterweight is pulled back up to be reset.

I believe on the Great Pyramid that there were two primary lifters; one on the south and one on the east. There were also two secondary lifters on the south side each of which were midway between the center and edge. These secondary lifters were used primarily to pull trains of stones up out of the quarry to the loading area. There were also vast amounts of supplies, men, and material lifted to the top. Apparently it was the west secondary lifter which transported most of the men. These secondaries were more finely tuned and had much less power. Both the ascender and the counterweight ran on wooden tracks to reduce friction on the western secondary.

The top of the pyramid would be a beehive of activity when they were working. Each man would know his job so there'd be little trouble with people being in the wrong place and serious injuries. The quarry, too, would be a very busy place. Trains of stones would be maneuvered into position on the gently sloping ground with brute strenght and sufficient man power. Each stone would have a rope go around it twice and end in a cinch around a peg in the hole of a "proto-pulley" near the bottom of the stone. This would be cinched to a higher spot on the stone in front. As the secondary counterweight got heavy enough it would put stress on the stones one at a time starting with the lead stone as the "pully" tilted forward. This would reduce rope wear and keep the stones in line after being pulled up the limit of the counterweight movement. Manetho said the stones moved up to the pyramid 300' at a time. Trains of stones were limited primarily by rope strenght in front. They usually were probably ten stones. The "proto-pulleys" would be reused over and over but if the peg broke it could be thrown a great distance and lost.

There are a few more subtleties but I'm not sure I'm ready to state them yet.

A very different system was used on the Djoser pyramid. This moght be it here in utterance #473;

926a. To say: The two reed-floats of heaven are placed by the morning-boat for Rē‘,

926b. that Rē‘ may ferry over on them to Horus who inhabits the horizon, to the horizon.

926c. The two reed-floats of heaven are placed by the evening-boat for Horus who inhabits the horizon,

926d. that Horus who inhabits the horizon may ferry over on them to Rē‘, to the horizon.

927a. The two reed-floats of heaven are caused to descend for N. by the morning-boat,

927b. that N. may mount on them to Rē‘, to the horizon.

927c. The two reed-floats of heaven are caused to descend for N. by the evening-boat,

927d. that N. may mount on them to Horus, who inhabits the horizon, to the horizon.

928a. N. mounts on high on this eastern side of heaven where the gods are born;

Hey, lil gremlin. I know I'm not cladking but the Step Pyramid is one of my favorite monuments in Egypt, so maybe I can toss in a few words.

This monument is one of those that's intact enough to be still standing after almost 5,000 years, but just weathered enough for scientists to look into its crumbled parts and understand how it was built. It does indeed seem to have begun as a mastaba, as you can see in this illustration. Sorry, it's not the greatest but it's all I could find after perusing the Web a bit. There are much better graphical depictions in many of the books I have on pyramids, but this will suffice.

At bottom of this illustration you can see the low construct that was the original mastaba. Cladking mentioned that this kind of tomb tends to have a lot of empty spaces inside, and that is true but particularly of later mastabas. Many if not most earlier mastabas, from Dynasty 1 through Dynasty 3, are fairly solid throughout, with perhaps a small niche or room accessible as an offering chapel. The original construct of Djoser's pyramid, from Dynasty 3, seems to follow this plan. In any case, the second phase of construction and enlargement involved a four-stepped pyramid, essentially mastabas atop mastabas, and the third stage caused the monument to be enlarged to the six-stepped pyramid. In all of this time the pyramid grew both vertically and horizontally.

I hope that helps.

It's hard to believe I've contributed so little to this particular thread. It's about pyramids, after all. LOL I guess I'm not in a particularly argumentative mood these days.

THanks Kmt_Sesh nice post....i was aware of the step pyramid's root in the mastaba, i was wondering with my question if Cladking agreed with the archaeological community.
The illustration is simple but adequately demonstrates the phases of growth that Djosser's tomb underwent.....and how the pyramid came to be.

Cladking has provided an interesting proposition which appears on paper to solve the lifting of the stones up the sides of the pyramid, what do you think of the idea?
I think it could be made to work, whether it was how the task was achieved or not is another matter.....it certainly seems to be one of the easiest solutions, and they are usually the best.

The step pyramid and the others at saqqara are great. They prove to the Aliens folk that they were made as tombs, and by Egyptians.

The transition from mastaba to pyramid demonstrates that it was not an overnight thing, mastabas were originally made from brick, but at saqqara we see later ones made from stone. Even at Giza there are a large number of mastabas for the nobilities, setting the site firmly as one of tombs.


are there any indications from Saqqara of construction methods?

Sorry I almost missed your reply, lil gremlin. I never got an e-mail notification and just happened to stop by to see if anything else had developed in this thread.



It is an intriguing idea but I'll be honest and say I don't agree. As boring as it might sound, I've been studying ancient Egypt for twenty years and am comfortable with accepting the orthodox view of monument building. Many at UM disagree but in my opinion the scholars, scientists, and historians who've delved so deeply into this subject have answered most questions to my own satisfaction. Does that mean all questions have been answered? No, of course not. That mysteries remain is one of the chief appeals of the study of ancient Egypt and rest of the Near East.

That being said I must say I respect cladking. I may not agree, but clearly he has put an enormous amount of thought into his theories, and has done considerable research to try to back it up. That's the mark of an intelligent mind. There is certainly nothing wrong with questioning science and history, and in fact it's vital we do so, but cladking and I fundamentally disagree. One thing with which cladking has impressed me is his careful studies of the Pyramid Texts, which is a highly complex subject that would be too daunting for most people, I'm willing to bet. The Pyramid Texts are a favorite study of mine, too, but cladking and I view them in much different ways. My chief argument would be to remind the reader that the "Pyramid Texts" is nothing but a modern designation for this huge collection of spells--we don't even know for certain what the ancients called them, if anything. What we do know with reasonable certainty is that they far predate nearly all of the pyramids with the possible exception of Djoser's, at Saqqara. The language in which they were written was pretty outdated even by Dynasty 5 standards, and the generous fluctuations and alterations with pronouns and other vocabulary reveal that they were probably spells of a funerary nature used for the interments of royals and nobles probably even before Djoser's time.



Many here might debate you about that! I, however, am in full agreement.



A very astute comment, lil gremlin. I think it was around the transition between Dynasty 3 and Dynasty 4 that we see the more regular emergence of stone-masonry mastabas. Mudbrick was the original material. We still cannot be certain exactly how the superstructures of the Abydos tombs of the very first kings looked because little trace of them survives, but mastabas of nobles and officials have been excavated and dated all the way back to Dynasty 1, so it's not a stretch to say these first royal superstructures were mound-like mastabas. Those who carefully study royal Egyptian tomb architecture can see the natural progression these tombs took before the arrival of the great masonry pyramids of Dynasty 4.

Your reminder of the contemporary mastabas of Giza is a point I've repeatedly tried to make at UM, to little effect. To me it's critical to understand this. People who propose an alternative theory for the Great Pyramid are trying to remove it from its logical and proper context, and so their arguments fall flat immediately.



I assume you're asking about the Step Pyramid in particular. Historians have been able to determine the stages in which it was built, as I mentioned in my previous post, but I can't think of any spectacular evidence of actual construction methods--any more than we have at Giza. What's well understood is the usage and development of the whole Saqqara necropolis, from the Early Dynastic Period all the way into Christian times.

Saqqara happens to be my own favorite Egyptian necropolis.

Thanks for the kind words but most of the credit should go to google. I never
was sharp enough to keep all this stuff in mind and notice all these connections.
It would take me a hundred years to get this confused on my own.



Of course if you read these literally and accept that they had geysers these al-
terrations in pronouns disappear. Indeed, they might be an intentional clue to
what they're talking about.

The Eye of Horus in my interpretation is feminine because it's a fissure. Horus
himself is male, of course. It just appears they're changing pronouns while in
actuality they're trying to be true to the language. It's the same with Isis; she's
the name of a geyser but geysers are male (obviously).

I haven't looked at this in great depth yet but have noticed most of these do dis-
appear when taken literally.

All the older religions seem to place tremendous weight on clarity
of speech, language, and thought as well as in honesty and to a
lesser extent; precision. Even in the Bible, Jesus is the word. This
had a literal meaning as well and was apparently borrowed from
the Egyptians.

Some might notice that I usually refer to generic gods in non-cap-
ital letters regardless of their number. But when referring to crea-
tor Gods or the actions of Gods then I capitalize it. This is the same
sort of problem that the Egyptians ran into; it gets exceedingly com-
plicated. If they are referring to the Eye of Horus then they'd use a
masculine pronoun but if to the "eye of horus" a feminine one. In a
few cases it becomes a bit of a toss-up since they might be referring
to both or really neither; the concept of a geyser opening.

Sometimes I just try to get gods in at the start of a sentence so it's not
so much work. They didn't have that luxury and, it would seem, did
not capitalize or punctuate. Here, too, there are a few errors in the PT;
the punctuation in the translation is wrong.

Thanks for the reply Kmt_Sesh, Has the 'ramp' theory been successfully challenged? I realize that there is some debate on how the ramps were oriented to the pyramids but was under the impression that there was enough evidence for the old 'sled & oxen (or human team) means of transporting the blocks from the quarries to the building site, then up the ramps for final placing and fitting' theory for it to be atleast the primary means of getting the blocks lifted (at least on the lower levels).
I know at some sites that what appears to be 'ramps', or the remains of ramps have been found, has this interpretation changed?

Its great to have both yours and Cladking's brains to pick on the subject, and a nice change from the droning ET themed posts on the subject.

the great pyramid is perfectly aligned with teh north star. They would have needed mathimatical formulas that didn't exsist for centuries. Astronomically and mathimatically it doesn't add up

really?

perhaps they had some 'instruction' eh?

Understatement of the millenium, IMO.

haha for DS ^ good call
but i just find it odd that All these cultures build the Same structures. and without meeting or sharing knowledge (im pretty sure). they were thousands of miles away from each other. i find just that interesting. and the fact they documented their lives, but Not their great (or Greatest) accomplishments. like How they did it.
almost reminds me of a Much earlier version of 'close encounters' basically. they all start building the same things, for something Up Above

Have you looked at any evidence outside of an "ET's were the Gods" website? or Pseudo-Historical book?

PS. ooooooeeeeeooooooo ......strange but true......all these structures were not the same, they just had similar outward shapes, which was the best way to 'build big'.

also...How stupid would a pharoah be to leave a blue-print to his tomb and treasure lying around? and after going to all that trouble to thwart grave-robbers too.....

Soon...

the ancient egyptians were always good at writing about there history and all what they did and built. but apperently theres not alot of writing by the egyptians about the building of the pyramids. i tend to go with the alien theory that they built them and taught them great knowledge.

What is the basis for the Alien theory ? other than Zacharia Sitchin and Eric von Daniken, proponents of the ancient astronaut theory. Quite a few blocks within the Great pyramid were marked with the Hieroglyph, Khufu. Not only on the outer surface within the Chambers, which Sitchin and Daniken say are forgeries, but also noticable in gaps in the Masonry, where it would have been impossible for anyone other than those who laid the block to have written.

look how huge the pyramids are espeically giza. no machinery no ladders ,scaffolding just pure man power its physically impossible. huge concrete blocks. were did they come from?? we would struggle to build something like that today with all our technology, talk about then. im in the buliding trade so i have a good idea and well whoever built the pyramids it wasnt the humans.

This thought just occured to me (as thoughts sometimes do). There must be people on UM with experience in architecture, engineering, masonry and knitting. Could you come up with plans and a cost estimate for building the great pyramid today? I'm very curious as to what it would cost.

Here is an interresting article written in the 1970's about how much the construction, materials, managment, man power and equipment etc. would cost today the grand total was theorised as being $1,130,390,000. Thats 1 billion, 130 million, 390 thousand dollars (in the 70's)
source http://ldolphin.org/pyramid.html

So we just need an economics genius on here to translate that into modern day prices.

Ok, so that is what it would cost in the 70's. Let's take into consideration that a Pharaoh wouldn't really have to pay for most of that would he? Materials? Probably not. The Pharaoh WAS everything. Man power? From what I understand, slaves weren't really used so I guess there would be some type of payment.

I don't think it would really cost all that much.

HN

OK, I'll give you that if you can explain why there's no drawings or descriptions
for how they were built. They drew everything else, why not building the pyramids?

What possible reason is there to hide ramps from everybody and the future?

I'm not sure about the blueprints or drawings, I thought I read something about there being "writing" about the building of a few of the pyramids. I will go a-googling.

Why would they be "hiding" ramps from everybody and the future? If the building is done, the ramps would be removed. We don't keep the scaffolding around a completed building. They must have done the same thing. I just painted my livingroom but there are no ladders.

HN