It is pretty well proven now that the flood as recorded in nearly all religious records from around the world, did happen, but did the ancient egyptians still bear a physical memory of it?
Look at the shape of the pyramid. Imagine that structure to be sitting in the middle of a fast moving stream, water pushing against its sides.
The shape of the pyramid is perfectly designed to resist the pressure and ingress of water.
I took a look at ancient egyptian mythology and guess what I found?....an heiroglyph representing a stepped pyramid the ancient egyptians called the "Primordial Hill "

The Egyptians believed that during creation this hill rose out of the sea of chaos to create dry land. The idea of this hill rising had a profound effect on the egyptians, being used as every thing from temple layouts to the possible inspiration behind the pyramids.

So the question is: could the great pyramids be a lot older than we believe?

Are you kidding me? You already *had* a thread like this. Just add to it...

That's true.


could the great pyramids be a lot older than we believe?

No, interesting theory but wild guesses.

Despite this thread already existing, I didn't answer this before.

Wouldn't a round or triangular object be better in water? A round structure would offer very little resistance and a triangle is the strongest architectural shape as it passes energy exerted on one point to the other two. The pyramids are NOT triangular, they only have triangular sides, which, when oriented as they are, would be completely useless in a flow of water, that is, unless the water suddenly fell in one lump out of the sky and onto the top of a pyramid.

As for the 'Primordial Hill', depending upon the date of the hieroglyph, it may have been invented after the stepped pyramid at Saqqara had been built, or indeed after the Great Pyramids were built. If not that, then take into consideration that ancient creation myths often involve such things; The Hindus base their creation story on a giant egg; Certain Native American tribes believe that the world was supported by a woman named Stone ribs; She lay under the ground with a huge pole balanced on her chest, and at the top of the pole a large quilt or blanket rotated, causing the 'rotating' nature of the stars, which of course is actually the rotation of the Earth.

I don't fully understand what you're trying to say about the pyramid hieroglyph, but my point is that ancient mythology is fantasy and nothing more. There is no Cosmic Egg, no Primordial Hill, and no Stone Ribs. It's make-believe.

which raises the obvious question....why do you come into a forum like this if you think we are all talking crap?

yes and despite posing the question twice AND giving some evidence for it I havent had ONE intelligent response. I was going to post the ground radar plots for the chambers beneath the sphinx but doing so would merely serve to infuriate you further.

Your referring of this to THE Flood suggests the popular misconception of a flood that covered the whole including (which geologists say there is no proof and is impossible). And if it did happen, we must accept the absurdity that every animal species including dinosaurs (since the same fundies believe these are the "dragons" described in the bible that dwelled on the earth AFTER Noah and the flood.

Hebrew linguists have proven that the Biblical flood may have only referred to "Noah's Land" not the world, and proof of this could be the great Black Sea flood that fits closely into the Biblical timeline for Noah's Flood. The Bible is full of misinterpetations, which is why the Mesopotamian dragon-servant seraphim in Isaiah are now swan-winged humanoid "angels" of pagan greco-roman myth.

Every culture had flood stories because floods are traumatic, well remembered events, as anyone from the gulf states of the U.S. will confirm after Hurriacane Katrina.

Wrong....you have immediately jumped to the conclusion that I am attempting to support the christian biblical flood myth.
What has shocked me more than anything is the obvious lack of education being displayed in this forum. You have no problem mumbling about vampires,atlantis and the loch ness monstor where you can base all your debate on conjecture without actually researching the subject, but as soon as a topic is raised that requires some knowledge of history and informed speculation you get confused and angry.
Keep takin the meds children and lay off the video games.....

Is there a mention of a time when there were no pyramids?

Some geologists believe that quite dramatic, greater than normal flooding of rivers in the distant past might have influenced the myths. One of the latest, and quite controversial, theories of this type is the Ryan-Pitman Theory, which argues for a catastrophic deluge about 5600 BC from the Mediterranean Sea into the Black Sea.

Most biblical archeologists consider the story of Noah's flood to be legend or myth.

Genesis myth is actually a later version of the story, which was based upon earlier Mesopotamian myths (one of which is related in the Epic of Gilgamesh).

Experts point out that early civilized cultures lived in the fertile flood plains along river basins such as the Nile in Egypt and the Tigris-Euphrates river basin of Mesopotamia (in present day Iraq). It is not unusual that such peoples would have deep memories of floods and have developed mythologies surrounding floods as it was an integral part of their lives.

To these ancient groups, a flood that covered the world as they knew it could simply be what is considered minor local flooding these days instead of literally the entire planet.

The scholars point out that most cultures that lived in areas where flooding is less likely to occur did not have any flood myths of their own.

These facts, added to the natural human tendency to make stories more dramatic than they originally started as, are all the points most mythology scholars feel is necessary to explain how myths of world-destroying cataclysmatic floods evolved.

Deluge (mythology)

so, uh, sorry if i'm stating the obvious, but if there was a flood, wouldn't the structures in the area show signs of flooding? things like, i dunno, foreign silts and sediments embedded in the pyramids? a halite residue in the cracks between blocks? signs of water damage?

besides, structurally, they are not that well designed to withstand massive flooding. if they were, the best design would be one that reduces surface area, and therefore friction and pressure, which would help prevent structural damage.

"It is not unusual that such peoples would have deep memories of floods and have developed mythologies surrounding floods as it was an integral part of their lives"

no this is wrong completely wrong. Flooding along the tigris/euphrates would have been a regular and expected event and not one that would have inspired flood legends. Numerous cultures around the world live in flood prone regions but their mythology speaks of inundations that covered the entire land and beyond. People have lived in Bangladesh for millennia and have lived with flooding on a vast scale but they learned to live with it and expect it....their mythology doesnt even mention it.

Okay, I got it. If we don't agree with you, or don't get poorly worded questions, we are uneducated, medicated, video game playing children.

Thanks. I'll keep that in mind as I gently press the "Ignore" button next to your name.

I don't think anybody is talking crap. I don't even think you are. I'm just offering my views on your theories, which are just that, THEORIES. My conjecture is as valid as yours. You're free to discuss your ideas and thoughts, but don't freak out when somebody disagrees with you. To prove a scientific hypothesis, you first try to tear it down and find it's faults; If it survives that, THEN you have proof. The same thing goes for your theories.

And you still didn't answer me: Wouldn't a round or triangular object survive the flow of water better?

Ancient Egyptians certainly were familiar with floods, considering the fact that the Nile River at that time flooded 2-3 times a year. However, 'The Flood,' as in a flood so large and devastating that it was remembered as a single event, does not correspond to anything from Egyptian records.

A tear-shaped object would survive the flow of water much better than either. Water pressure would hit the flat sides of the pyramid, causing it to tumble and would cause a round object to roll. A tear-shape would allow the water to flow smoothly around the object, much as a similar shape allows air to flow around it (called aerodynamics).

Is true, nothing even similar was recorded, now was any interruption to their culture recorded. TA

Excellent point, that's why an aircraft wing is roughly teardrop shaped. I'm wondering, though, how well it would resist water pressure if the flow hit the sides rather than the front or back. The builders would have to have a rough idea where the water would come from in order to orient the teardrop in such a way. This is why I suggested a triangle, or if I can be more specific, a tetrahedron, which is a pyramid with only three sides. It wouldn't be as ideal as a teardrop, but it would be more successful than a regular pyramid at withstanding water no matter where the water came from.

Now that I'm thinking, a half-sphere would also be excellent. Arches are particularly known for strength; That's why the Inuit construct their igloos in such fashion. A larger, stone model would maintain the smoothness of a teardrop while remaining indifferent to where the water came from. The Egyptians must have had a very limited knowledge of geometric shapes, if they constructed the pyramids to resist a flood.

Seriously, though, the pyramids were just made that way because it was easiest. If you drop a bunch of rocks in the same place, eventually they'll form a pile which looks suspiciously like a pyramid. The Egyptians just refined that concept.

then I suggest you take a look at this:
http://members.aol.com/egyptart/symlst.html#am

scroll down the page until you reach the egyptian heiroglyph that represents a stepped pyramid and read the legend associated with it.

I wasnt actually going to answer this but you appear to be insisting so you asked for it.
"A tear shaped object would resist water flow better than a pyramid shaped object"

the egyptians were unfamiliar with the concept of aerodynamics as they hadnt developed a working aircraft (so far as we know) but they would have understood the basic aquadynamics governing a boat's movement thru the water but the two sciences are very different.
Building a tear shaped object from blocks of stone would have been a considerable feat of engineering as the stress factors of such an object are entirely different from a pyramidial shape and far more difficult to control. The ancient egyptians certainly wouldnt have understood them or been able to work them out.
Finally....you are missing one very important point: unless that tear shaped object was placed on a revolving base or the builders knew from which direction the water was going to come from and the direction of its flow, their efforts would have been a total waste of time.

In the sense that they record lots of different floods at different times in different places, yes. In any other sense most certainly no.

What is the point in a thread asking whether the pyramids were built to withstand a flood when we all know that such a flood has never occurred?

The fact that the Egyptians have a creation myth in which dry land rose from the waters of chaos does not mean that there was a flood. Any more than the fact that we have a myth about King Arthur sleeping under a hill with 100 knights means that when England reaches it's darkest hour King Arthur will emerge to save the day.

We have to remember that pyramidal shaped buildings are found in other ancient civilisations as well. This suggests that the far more likely reason for building such structures was that they formed a focal point to the sky, and therefore to the gods. It's highly likely that Egyptians were wary of floods given how the Nile floods every year, but that doesn't mean we should associate this with the Biblical flood. Besides, having a building with three sheer sides would actually generally increase the water friction on the building, as opposed to a building with more sides - where water would be diverted into more directions, thereby reducing the water pressure on any given point. That is, unless the pryamid was facing with one its points towards the direction of the floods. But for that to work, you'd have to prove that all pyramids were faced in such a way. Besides, is there any evidence to suggest that the Egyptians water-proofed the pyramids?

Exactly, especially since the Egyptians, possessing for much of their history a written language, kept records.

Certainly they could have been familiar with the idea of a half-sphere, and indeed been capable of constructing it. The Inuit are, or at least were, FAR behind the rest of the world in terms of culture, and they managed to figure it out. Even the dung beetle is familiar with spheres.

It's almost as if, gasp, the Egyptians just made the pyramids because they were easiest! As much as I'd like to believe your theory, you're just not presenting enough evidence. A pyramid would, simply put, be terrible at surviving a flood. The only thing that would perform worse is a giant cube.

Uh, no, aerodynamics and so-called "aqua dynamics" are not all that different, the principles governing both are the same, hence the real term fluid dynamics used to describe it. I love these fools that read one shady book, and suddenly becomes a super geniuses knowing all history, sciences, engineering and ancient translation, then bless the boards with their omnipotent knowledge and understanding while looking down upon the lowly peons that read their threads.
No, the pyramids are not much older than science has determined, the shape would not be the best shape to withstand a flood, not to mention the material used to make the pyramids would be decimated in a real Biblical style flood. Also, the pyramids are all but solid, with only a few rooms and passages, where the hell do you suppose the people hoping to withstand this flood would camp out? Crowd into the small rooms? Maybe stand at the pinnacle?
It may be true that many early civilizations lived around flood zones and may have been used to the seasonal floods they undoubtedly endured, but I am positive that the flood myths mark particularly severe flood, analogous to the Mississippi’s 100 year flood, or the flooding of the Black Sea.
Oh, and the best shape of a building created with ancient technologies to survive a flood would be a dome.

thats so funny - you said "wouldnt a triangular object survive the flow of water better"?
so what shape is a pyramid? lololol

It is believed that the ice sheets covering the northern hemisphere melted around 11-10,000 bce. Its likely that this event , which was quite rapid, resulted in an inundation of northern egypt probably further south than the Giza plateau. We do know that it created a humid cool climate over the sahara region which created a foliant rich region stretching from southern morocco to the dead sea. The desertification of this region is recent and still advancing.
11 - 10,000 years bce would have been within cultural memory of the people that lived in that region and later moved east ,west and north to Egypt.

the egyptian creation myth states quite clearly life emerging from a primordial ocean.

and the fact that nearly every other religion and culture around the world share the flood legend doesnt mean anything?

yes. They faced the great pyramid with polished limestone and filled the descending passage with rubble to seal it. They then sealed the main entrances with 2-ton blocks of stone and faced them over with polished limestone. The great pyramid was not only watertight but airtight.

yes they did keep keep written records but thanks to successive waves of european grave robbers who destroyed most of the papyrus documents we will probably never know.

yes. when the bases of the great pyramids were being cleared a layer of silt was found which was about 4 feet deep and filled with sea shells and the skeletal remains of some kind of sea dwelling creature.

you may find this little piece interesting:

The controversy raised by John Anthony West and Robert Schoch concerning the true age of the Great Sphinx is now beginning to overcast the other famous monuments which share space on the Giza plateau—namely, the three pyramids that were supposedly built by Pharaohs Khufu, Khafre and Menkhare in the Fourth Dynasty. Were these Pyramids constructed only 4,300 years ago, or—like the Sphinx—is there evidence they could be far older, dating instead to perhaps 12,000 years ago?

Let’s begin first with looking at the age of the Great Pyramid. The conservative historians’ entire case for dating the Great Pyramid to the Fourth Dynasty rests upon two major pieces of evidence. The first is the story of Herodotus, who in 443 B.C. visited Egypt and recounted how Pharaoh Cheops (the Greek name for Khufu) built the Great Pyramid during his reign with 100,000 men in 20 years. However, we now know this story is highly questionable. Even his contemporaries called Herodotus the "Father of Lies." Not only do the construction estimates he gave not work, but Herodotus, as an Initiate in the Egyptian Mystery Schools, was sworn to secrecy regarding the true nature of the Pyramid, and he more than likely copied a fictitious tale about the monument that was then in circulation among the common masses. The Greek historian’s account stands in sharp contrast to most other Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek, Roman, Hermetic, Coptic and medieval Arabic scholarly sources which agree that the Great Pyramid was not constructed during the time frame of Pharaoh Khufu or Dynastic Egypt, but was the product of the "Age of the Gods" thousands of years earlier.

The second piece of evidence is the existence of painted hieroglyphic inscriptions found in the air space chambers above the King’s Chamber, which include the name of Pharaoh Khufu. They were supposedly discovered by Col. Richard Howard-Vyse in 1837, when he forced his way up to these chambers using gunpowder. But there are certain facts showing these inscriptions were in actuality forgeries.

[...]

Actually, we have the testament of Pharaoh Khufu himself that he only did repair work on the Great Pyramid. The Inventory Stele, found in 1857 by Auguste Mariette just to the east of the Pyramid, dates to about 1500 B.C., but according to Maspero and other experts, shows evidence of having been copied from a far older stele contemporaneous with the Fourth Dynasty. In the Stele, Khufu himself tells of his discoveries made while clearing away the sands from the Pyramid and Sphinx. He dedicated the account to Isis, who he called the "Mistress of the Western Mountain," "Mistress of the Pyramid," and identified the Pyramid itself as the "House of Isis."

The Stele describes how Pharaoh Khufu, "gave to her (Isis) an offering anew, and he built again (to restore, renovate, reconstruct) her temple of stone." From there, the Pharaoh inspected the Sphinx, according to the text, and related the story of how in his time both the monument and a nearby sycamore tree had been struck by lightning. The bolt had knocked off part of the headdress of the Sphinx, which Khufu carefully restored. Egyptologist Selim Hassan, who dug out the Sphinx from the surrounding sands in the 1930's, observed there is indeed evidence that portions of the Sphinx were damaged by lightning, and the mark of ancient repairs is very apparent. Also, he noted, sycamore trees once grew to the south of the monument, which had been dated to a great age.

The Stele then ends with the story of how Khufu built small pyramids for himself and his daughters, wife and family, next to the Great Pyramid. Today, the ruins of three small pyramids are indeed situated on the east side of the monument. Archaeologists have found independent evidence that the southernmost of the three small pyramids flanking the Great Pyramid was in fact dedicated to Henutsen, a wife of Khufu. Everything in the inscription thus matches the known facts. If these facts can be believed as true, then the additional information that Khufu was only a restorer of the Great Pyramid and not its builder, must also be treated as historically true.

ANCIENT LEGENDS AND MODERN RESEARCH CONFIRM EACH OTHER
When we look at mythic history for the story of the origins of the Great Pyramid, we discover that the monument was not attributed to any Pharaoh, but was the product of the genius and higher learning of the Gods of Old. Time and time again, from the Roman Marcellinus to the Coptic Al Masudi and the Arab Ibn Abd Alhokim, the recounters of the ancient legends tell how the Pyramid was built to preserve the knowledge of a magnificent civilization from destruction by a Flood, and that it was this Flood which brought the Age of the Gods to its tragic end. The various Chronologies of Legendary Rulers place a minimum date for the Age of the Gods as circa 10,000 B.C. This is the time frame Plato, in his Timaeus and Critias, ascribed the destruction of Atlantis. And it is also this date, as can be proven in modern scientific studies, which was highlighted by major climatic, geologic and geomagnetic disturbances, accompanied by massive paleo-biological extinctions in the planet, marking the division point between the Ice Age and the Present Era.

In Egypt, geologists examining the fossil record have found that the combined effect of melting glaciers in the Mountains of the Moon, plus a sharp rise in precipitation levels in Central Africa, caused the Nile river circa 10,000 B.C. to swell in size a thousandfold, eroding away cliff walls miles from its present banks, and washing out its entire valley throughout the length of Egypt. At the same time, as the Mediterranean Sea began to fill and rise due to higher ocean levels from melting northern glaciers, its waters for a brief period also flooded the lower Nile valley.



These, geologists are certain, are the last major flood events in Egypt’s fossil history, before the sea retreated and the Nile settled down to today’s relatively peaceful, winding flow. Yet, knowing this, geologists are hard pressed to explain why there existed a fourteen-foot layer of silt sediment around the base of the Pyramid, a layer which also contained many seashells, and the fossil of a sea cow, all of which were dated by radiocarbon methods to 11,600 B.P. (Before Present) plus or minus 300 years.

Legends and records likewise speak of the fact that, before the Arabs removed the Pyramid’s outer casing stones, one could see water marks on the stones halfway up the Pyramid’s height, in about the 240-foot level, which would be 400 feet above the present Nile level. The medieval Arab historian Al Biruni, writing in his treatise The Chronology of Ancient Nations, noted: "The Persians and the great mass of Magians relate that the inhabitants of the west, when they were warned by their sages, constructed buildings of the King and the Giza Pyramids. The traces of the water of the Deluge and the effects of the waves are still visible on these pyramids halfway up, above which the water did not rise." Add to this the observation made when the Pyramid was first opened, that incrustations of salt an inch thick were found inside. Most of this salt is natural exudation from the chambered rock wall, but chemical analysis also shows some of the salt has a mineral content consistent with salt from the sea. Thus, during the prehistoric Flood, when waters surrounded the Great Pyramid, the known and unknown entrances leaked, allowing seawater into the interior, which later evaporated and left the salts behind. The locations where the salts are found are consistent with the monument having been submerged half-way up its height.

If the floodings of 10,000 B.C. were the last major catastrophic water events in Egypt, and the Pyramid exhibits signs of having been subjected to them, it means the Pyramid must date from a period before the flooding occurred.

Though most Egyptologists today have yet to accept such a necessary "radical" revision of their dating of the Pyramid, there have been other discoveries that have forced them to at least realize that their preconceived theories of any early Dynastic age for the structure is no longer tenable.

In 1983 and 1984, prehistorian Robert J. Wenke from the University of Washington, and president of the American Research Center in Egypt, was given permission to collect mortar samples from various ancient construction sites, including the Great Pyramid and the Sphinx Temple. The mortar contained particles of charcoal, insect matter, pollen, and other organic materials which could be subjected for carbon-14 dating analysis. Using two different radiocarbon dating laboratories—the Institute for the Study of Man at Southern Methodist University, and the Institute of Medium Energy Physics in Zurich—the samples revealed a number of curiosities. For the Great Pyramid samples, the tests performed at the two labs initially gave very different clusterings of dates, off by several thousands of years. When certain "adjustments" in the data were applied, the resulting time frame narrowed to 3100 B.C. to 2850 B.C.—which is still 400 years earlier than when most Egyptologists believe the Great Pyramid was built. Even more anomalous, the dates obtained from mortar used near the top of the Pyramid were a thousand years older than those obtained from mortar nearer the Pyramid base. The researchers, if they were to fully believe these findings, would have to propose that the Pyramid had somehow been built from the top down.

What makes the datings further unacceptable is that all of them were taken from areas of previously exposed surfaces. We know from such sources as the Inventory Stele that the Giza monuments were time and time again subjected to many reconstructions and repair work, inside and out. Therefore the radiocarbon dates can only give us clues as to when the time frame was for the repair work, not the actual construction of the Great Pyramid. If the dates are to be believed at all, they at least tell us that reconstruction work was done on the monument in a time period long before the "accepted" building was done, which means the Pyramid itself must be from an even earlier period, farther distant in the past.

WERE THE THREE GIZA PYRAMIDS MODELS FOR EGYPT’S "PYRAMID AGE"?
Expanding our sphere of inquiry to now include all three of the Giza Pyramids, we find that an interesting historical conundrum arises regarding their "accepted" construction. If, as conservative scholars surmise, the three Giza Pyramids were built in the Fourth Dynasty by the succession of three Pharaohs—Khufu, Khafre and Menkhare— what we find regarding the sizes of the three pyramids in association with the three reigns is inconsistent with what we would have expected to have happened.

First, Khufu ruled and supposedly constructed the Great Pyramid. Khafre followed Khufu, and in order to be politically and religiously "correct," we would have expected him to have erected a pyramid larger than Khufu’s. To do otherwise would have seriously reflected on his being inferior to his predecessor. Generally speaking, a ruler could not afford for his people to think that their Pharaoh was weaker in power and less blessed by the gods and goddesses than the ruler before him.

After Khafre, Menkhare next took the throne of Egypt, and in order to be in continued good political and religious form, we would have expected him to build the largest pyramid of all, dwarfing those of Khufu and Khafre in order to make sure he was not to be outshone by either of his predecessors.

Yet what we find at Giza is exactly opposite the expected scenario: Supposedly Khufu constructed the largest pyramid, Khafre built his slightly smaller than Khufu’s, and Menkhare erected a pyramid only a third the size of the other two.

If what actually happened contradicts what should have happened if the three Giza pyramids were built in the Fourth Dynasty, then this can only mean that something is fundamentally wrong with the accepted scenario.

Instead of the three Pharaohs building the three Giza pyramids, what if the pyramids were already present, old with age, and in the Fourth Dynasty the three succeeding rulers simply claimed possession of the structures, doing repair work on them, and building only the minor subsidiary pyramids around them for themselves and their families—just as the Inventory Stele describes Khufu did. What would we expect would have happened?

Khufu, first on the scene, would naturally have laid claim to the largest pyramid for himself, or the Great Pyramid. His successor, Khafre, now left with only two pyramids to choose from, would have taken possession of the second largest. Menkhare, the last to reign, would have had to be content with the last pyramid available, the smallest of the three.

Such a scenario best fits the actual facts, for this is exactly the succession of pyramids the Pharaoh had jurisdiction over, each in their turn. Clearly, what this suggests is the Giza pyramids came first, then the Pharaohs ruled, not the other way around.

According to conservative scholars, the Giza Three were supposed to represent the "height of accomplishment" in the Egyptian age of pyramid building, from the Third to the Thirteenth Dynasties, 2700 to 1800 B.C. But if the Giza Pyramids are in reality 12,000 years old, then they instead must have served as the models the Dynastic Egyptians repeatedly tried to copy and emulate. If we recognize this greater antiquity for the Giza Three, then many mysteries surrounding the design and construction of Egypt’s other pyramids find their solutions.

The conservative view purports that the early pyramids along the Nile developed by stages of "evolution." Initially, in the First and Second Dynasties, from circa 3200 to 2800 B.C., the Pharaohs were buried in mastabas, which were rectangular-shaped structures with walls sloping inward, built over underground vaults. What has baffled archaeologists is that each of the first kings of Egypt had not one but two such mastabas, at Abydos, and at Saqqara. One of these served as a cenotaph, or an empty tomb in honor of the royal person. The reason for this early practice is still a puzzle to scholars, not yet solved.

However, we know from ancient records that the peoples of the ancient world at one time had knowledge of the existence of the known entrance to the Great Pyramid, and they left evidence, in the form of torch soot and graffiti on the walls, that they penetrated as far as the Descending Passage and Pit Chamber. The Second and Third Pyramids also possess passages and empty chambers deep beneath their foundations. Did the early Pharaohs, in studying the design of the Giza Pyramids standing silently before them on the Nile, imitate the empty Pyramid chambers in the building of their second royal tombs, believing the empty chambers had a special spiritual significance they wished to emulate?

In the Third Dynasty, beginning about 2780 B.C., Pharaoh Zoser undertook to build a mastaba for himself as had his predecessors, but then decided to go several steps further. Two more mastaba structures were constructed on top of the first in step fashion, and finally, these in turn were incorporated as one side of a six-tiered pyramid. The development of this curious structure—today called the Step Pyramid, and located at Saqqara—indicates that Zoser was attempting to copy or duplicate a particular image. The pyramid does resemble a Sumerian ziggurat, or "holy mountain," except that unlike the ziggurat Zoser’s structure possessed no sanctuary at its apex, and had a system of internal tunnels and chambers. The only structures which come close to being models for Zoser’s work are the Giza Pyramids.

Significantly—and again in imitation of the Giza monuments—Zoser was not buried in his Step Pyramid. The foot of a mummy thought to have belonged to Zoser was found in one chamber, but the wrappings proved to be from a period much later than the Third Dynasty. All in all, a total of sixty mummies were found in and around the Step Pyramid, but these have been dated to the Saitic or Late Period, in the first millennium B.C. Zoser’s tomb has been identified as located at Bet Khalaif, and no pyramid structure was found associated with it.

Following Zoser, his successor, Pharaoh Sekhemket, attempted to build a pyramid, but it appears never to have been completed, and today is only a mass of rubble. However, archaeologists did find at the bottom of a shaft below the structure a sealed alabaster sarcophagus. When the sarcophagus was opened, it was found to be completely empty, mirroring the state the Stone Box was found in, in the Great Pyramid.

The one ruler who by far was the most ambitious pyramid builder of the Third Dynasty was Pharaoh Senefru. He constructed three monuments, and there is every reason to believe he attempted to duplicate the feat of the three Giza Pyramids. He came close, for his pyramids contained two-thirds as much stone, covered 90 percent as much area, and were built with comparable speed as the Giza structures. The one obvious difference is their building design and masonry were very crude, when examined alongside the work done in the Giza area.

It is in the period immediately following Senefru, at the beginning of the Fourth Dynasty, that we are supposed to believe that Egyptian architects somehow miraculously overcame all their construction shortcomings, and developed the quantum leap of techniques for advanced building that went into the making of the Giza Pyramids. But the Giza monuments, however, stand out above all the rest of the pyramids in Egypt in many unique ways, clearly showing they were not related to the other Egyptian pyramids in time or construction.

First, only the Great Pyramid and (from what is known from legend and esoteric literature) the other two Giza Pyramids have chambers in their upper interior—all the rest possess only a lower chamber or chambers near the foundation. These are copies of the pit chambers in the Giza Pyramids. The Dynastic Egyptians, not knowing of the secret chambers higher up, had no precedent for including these in their own pyramids.

Second, only the Giza Three are accurately aligned to true north, which is indicative of a very sophisticated science of Earth measurement and construction—elements exhibited in no other pyramid.

Third, only the Giza monuments were built with a high degree of accuracy—this precision, coupled with the apparent mastery of large, multi-ton stone construction, is what allowed the Giza Pyramids to reach their gigantic size, the largest in Egypt. In the Second and Third Pyramids the construction blocks are often not as massive or as finely positioned as they are seen in the Great Pyramid, but they are precise enough to place them in an entirely different category from all other structures along the Nile.

Fourth, the Giza monuments were built using construction designs totally alien to any other pyramid form. As William R. Fix, in Pyramid Odyssey observed: "Because the other pyramids consist of much smaller blocks, they were built as a series of shells with multiple internal retaining walls to give cohesiveness. The three large Giza Pyramids do not have these internal casings. The very size of the blocks produces the necessary stability. This characteristic reveals a general excellence of workmanship and also imply a much higher technological capability than that employed anywhere else..

And fifth, unlike any pyramid supposedly built either before or after the Giza Three, none of the Giza monuments contain religious symbols or pictures in any of their inner chambers.

According to conservative scholars, the Giza Pyramids were built by the Fourth Dynasty Pharaohs Khufu, Khafre and Menkhare, as tombs. Yet not one of their bodies was found in any of them. The King’s Chamber in the Great Pyramid was discovered to be completely empty upon its opening, its Stone Box sealed but vacant. In the Belzoni Chamber, beneath the Second Pyramid, a stone box was found like the one in the Great Pyramid, but it too contained no corpse. In 1878, a sarcophagus with a mummy inside was brought to light in the Third Pyramid. Though both the sarcophagus and mummy were lost at sea during their transport to the British Museum, samples had been taken from them, and when later analyzed by radiocarbon dating techniques, they were found to be from a fairly late date, only 2,000 to 2,500 years ago.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the three Pharaohs who are thought to have built the Giza Pyramids instead simply claimed the monuments as their own, having given up on the idea of attempting to duplicate the structures, as Senefru had tried but failed to do before them. There are several subsidiary pyramids around the Giza Three which were probably built by the Pharaohs, and today are almost in total ruins because of their greatly inferior construction. According to ancient stelae and legends, the Pharaohs also made repairs on the Pyramids—but had nothing to do with their actual construction.

With Menkhare came the end of the Fourth Dynasty, and at the beginning of the Fifth Dynasty we are supposed to believe, according to the historians, that the Egyptians suddenly reverted back to the same old methods of design and greatly inferior construction techniques as seen in the pyramids prior to the Fourth Dynasty. The first Pharaoh, Shepeskaf, actually built nothing more than a mastaba for his burial place. He was then followed by Userkaf, whose pyramid was so badly made it today is only a heap of debris. Sahure, Nieswerre and Neferirkare came next, and between them at Abu Sir they attempted to erect three pyramids (again duplicating Giza), but these in no way approached the size or grandeur of the Giza Three, and today are nothing more than broken piles. The same can be said for the monuments of the Sixth through the Thirteenth Dynasties, after which pyramid building for the most part came to an end. In all, 23 major pyramids were erected following the Fourth Dynasty and in each single case, the work on them was done hastily, with little care of precision, and using blocks that were no more than roughly squared boulders. We may well ask, if the Giza Pyramids, in all their excellence, were supposedly built in the Fourth Dynasty, what happened to the advanced knowledge seen in their design and construction—why was it never used again, in not a single later pyramid?

Author William R. Fix concluded: "The many fundamental differences between the major Giza monuments and the rest of Egypt’s pyramids indicates that they do not fit into the contended chronology for dynastic Egypt. But if they do not belong to dynastic Egypt, there is only one direction in which they can be moved-not forward, but back into the past."

In truth, the Giza Pyramids were not an integral part of the evolutionary development of the Egyptian pyramids. Instead, they were there from the very beginning, the motivation and influence which spurred the building of the Dynastic pyramids along the Nile.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The source of the above article by Joseph Robert Jochmans is available at
http://www.atlantisrising.com/issue8/ar8pyramids.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edgar Cayce - Great Pyramid and Sphinx Reading from 1932



READING 5748-6. This Reading given by Edgar Cayce July 1st 1932.

1. EC: Much has been written respecting that represented in the Great Pyramid, and the record that may be read by those who would seek to know more concerning the relationships that have existed, that may exist, that do exist, between those of the Creative Forces that are manifest in the material world. As indicated, there were periods when a much closer relationship existed, or rather should it be said, there was a much better understanding OF the relationship that EXISTS between the creature and the Creator.

2. In those conditions that are signified in the way through the pyramid, as of periods through which the world has passed and is passing, as related to the religious or the spiritual experiences of man - the period of the present is represented by the low passage or depression showing a downward tendency, as indicated by the variations in the character of stone used. This might be termed in the present as the Cruciatarian Age, or that in which preparations are being made for the beginning of a new sub-race, or a change, which - as indicated from the astronomical or numerical conditions - dates from the latter portion or middle portion of the present fall [1932]. In October there will be a period in which the benevolent influences of Jupiter and Uranus will be stronger, which - from an astrological viewpoint - will bring a greater interest in occult or mystic influences.

3. At the correct time accurate imaginary lines can be drawn from the opening of the great Pyramid to the second star in the Great Dipper, called Polaris or the North Star. This indicates it is the system toward which the soul takes it flight after having completed its sojourn through this solar system. In October there will be seen the first variation in the position of the polar star in relation to the lines from the Great Pyramid. The dipper is gradually changing, and when this change becomes noticeable - as might be calculated from the Pyramid - there will be the beginning of the change in the races. There will come a greater influx of souls from the Atlantean, Lemurian, La, Ur or Da civilizations. These conditions are indicated in this turn in the journey through the pyramid. 4. How was this begun? Who was given that this should be a record of man's experiences in this root race? for that is the period covered by the prophecies in the pyramid. This was given to Ra and Hermes in that period during the reign of Araaraart when there were many who sought to bring to man a better understanding of the close relationship between the Creative Forces and that created, between man and man, and man and his Maker.

5. Only those who have been called may truly understand. Who then has been called? Whosoever will make himself a channel may be raised to that of a blessing that is all that entity-body is able to comprehend. Who, having his whole measure full, would desire more does so to his own undoing.

6. (Q) What are the correct interpretations of the indications in the Great Pyramid regarding the time when the present depression will end?
(A) The changes as indicated and outlined are for the latter part of the present year [1932]. As far as depression is concerned, this is not - as in the minds of many - because fear has arisen, but rather that, when fear has arisen in the hearts of the created, SIN lieth at the door. Then, the change will occur - or that seeking will make the definite change - in the latter portion of the present year. Not that times financially will be better, but the minds of the people will be fitted to the conditions better.

7. (Q) What was the date of the actual beginning and ending of the construction of the Great Pyramid?
(A) Was one hundred years in construction. Begun and completed in the period of Araaraart's time, with Hermes and Ra.

8. (Q) What was the date B.C. of that period?
(A) 10,490 to 10,390 before the Prince entered into Egypt.

9. (Q) What definite details are indicated as to what will happen after we enter the period of the King's Chamber?
(A) When the bridegroom is at hand, all do rejoice. When we enter that understanding of being in the King's presence, with that of the mental seeking, the joy, the buoyancy, the new understanding, the new life, through the period.

10. (Q) What is the significance of the empty sarcophagus?
(A) That there will be no more death. Don't misunderstand or misinterpret! but the INTERPRETATION of death will be made plain.

11. (Q) If the Armageddon is foretold in the Great Pyramid, please give a description of it and the date of its beginning and ending.
(A) Not in what is left there. It will be as a thousand years, with the fighting in the air, and - as has been - between those returning to and those leaving the earth.

12. (Q) What will be the type and extent of the upheaval in '36?
(A) The wars, the upheavals in the interior of the earth, and the shifting of same by the differentiation in the axis as respecting the positions from the Polaris center.

13. (Q) Is there not a verse of scripture in Isaiah mentioning the rock on which the great pyramid is builded?
(A) Not as we find; rather the rock on which John VIEWED the New Jerusalem - that is, as of the entering in the King's Chamber in the Pyramid.

14. (Q) What is the date, as recorded by the Pyramid, of entering in the King's Chamber?
(A) '38 to '58.

15. (Q) If the Passion of Jesus is recorded in the Great Pyramid, please give the date according to our present system of recording time?
(A) This has already been presented in a fair and equitable manner through those students of same, and these descriptions have been presented as to their authenticity.

16. (Q) How was this particular Great Pyramid of Gizeh built?
(A) By the use of those forces in nature as make for iron to swim. Stone floats in the air in the same manner. This will be discovered in '58.

17. (Q) What is the significance of the character of the figure of the Sphinx, mentioned above?
(A) In this particular period of Araaraart and of the priest (that began those understandings - and passed through those of the hell in the misinterpretation of same), there was even then the seeking through those channels that are today called archaeological research.

In those periods when the first change had come in the position of the land, there had been an egress of peoples - or THINGS, as would be called today - from the Atlantean land, when the Nile (of Nole, then) emptied into what is now the Atlantic Ocean, on the Congo end of the country. What is now as the Sahara was a fertile land, a city that was builded in the edge of the land, a city of those that worshipped the sun - for the use of its rays were used for supplying from the elements that which is required in the present to be grown through a season; or the abilities to use both those of introgression and retrogression - and mostly retrograded, as we are in the present.

The beginnings of these mounds were as an interpretation of that which was crustating in the land. (See, most of the people had tails then!) In those beginnings these were left. When there was the entrance of Arart and Araaraart, they begin to build upon those mounds which were discovered through research. With the storehouse, or record house (where the records are still to be uncovered), there is a chamber or passage from the right forepaw to this entrance of the record chamber, or record tomb. This may not be entered without an understanding, for those that were left as guards may NOT be passed until after a period of their regeneration in the Mount, or the fifth root race begins. In the building of the pyramid, and that which is now called the Mystery of Mysteries [the Sphinx], this was intended to be a MEMORIAL - as would be termed today - to that counsellor who ruled or governed, or who acted in the capacity of the director in the MATERIAL things in the land.

With the return of the priest (as it had been stopped), this was later - by Isis, the queen, or the daughter of Ra - turned so as to present to those peoples in that land the relationships of man and the animal or carnal world with those changes that fade or fall away in their various effect. These may be seen in a different manner presented in many of the various sphinxes, as called, in other portions of the land - as the lion with the man, the various forms of wing, or characterizations in their various developments. These were as presentations of those projections that had been handed down in their various developments of that which becomes man - as in the present.

to read the rest go to this site: http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_2_4.htm

wrong.for one thing the ancient egyptians didnt understand the engineering principle of the arch or dome.
But as you enjoy pure science I suggest you read this.

"Investigation of the Flow and Pressure Characteristics Around

a Pyramidal Shape Building"

M. Ikhwan & B. Ruck
Laboratory of Building- and Environmental Aerodynamics

Institute for Hydromechanics, University of Karlsruhe,

Kaiserstr.12, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany

http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:W0uI_rp...&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

A pyramid has a square base. As I later clarified, I was referring to a tetrahedron, which is composed entirely of triangles.

A pyramid is pyramid shaped, oddly enough. It is not triangular.

I can't speak for any of the others on this thread but your accusations and insults only prove that you not only lack basic manners and common respect for others but that you lack the maturity to accept the fact that others may disagree with you. I sincerely doubt that you are capable of having "knowledge of history" or of making an "informed speculation." If so, you would well know that the Epic of Gilgamesh is generally considered to be the source of the Noah tale (although his main character was not called Noah) and that overwhelming evidence exists that the flood was regional, not global. The most fundamental logic proves that there is not enough water in the hydro-system of the planet to cover it with water.

Beyond all that, I would like to remind you that any member of UM has the right to enjoy and participate in any thread of their choice but you DO NOT have the right to insult them, criticize them or even evaluate their tastes.

Pure conjecture, unsupported by any geological evidence Even during the Flabdrain Trangression, c6kya when sea levels reasched their highest post-ice age position, the Mediterranean did not expand up the Nile Valley to Giza.



The African Humid Period to which you refer was a consequent of a northward shift of the Inter Tropical Convergence Zone, bringing Monsoon rains to N Africa. This lasted roughly from 10kya to 6kya. It did not cause flooding any more so that that which occurs elsewhere in the world today on a regular basis. The ITCZ moved southwards from around 6,000 years ago as a complex consequence of change to northern hemisphere insolation and subsequent shifts in ocean currents.

There is no evidence for major flooding in Egypt in modern geological times other than the annual Nile floods. And the Giza plateau stands above the Nile floodplain.

yes its interesting that the bulders of the pyramids built them well above sea level.

now explain how the black sea was created in circa 6,000bce and why so many ancient towns and cities became submerged all along the north african and european mediterranean coasts. The island of Pharos at Alexandria is now under 50 feet of water.
The Mediterranean Basin is a sea surrounded by continents. It is a flooded valley. Rising sea level in the Mediterranean had more effect on the humans living in that confined valley than it had on people living on the North American continent. The rising Mediterranean flooded millions of acres of coastal plains that were the grazing lands of vast herds of herbivores and home to numerous other species, including humans.



Firstly I suggest you read this: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/clihis10k.html

egyptian creation myth: ."In the beginning there was only water, a chaos of churning, bubbling water," this the Egyptians called Nu or Nun. It was out of Nu that everything began. As with the Nile, each year the inundation no doubt caused chaos to all creatures living on the land, so this represents Nu. eventually the floods would recede and out of the chaos of water would emerge a hill of dry land, one at first, then more. On this first dry hilltop, on the first day came the first sunrise."

Do the pyramids represent those first primordial hills that rose from the receding flood waters?

no - the problem here is your knee jerk reaction to a simple question. I merely asked if the ancient egyptians built the pyramids to withstand flood, based on their memory of a previous flood. You and from what I can see, nearly every one else, jumped to the conclusion that I was trying to support the biblical flood legend ergo I must be an evangelist come to this form in order to convert you non believers. lololol

for your information this is a tetrahedron lolololol:

http://polyhedra.mathmos.net/image/tetrahedron.gif

Yes, and as you can see it is composed entirely of triangles. I don't understand your point or why it's worthy of so many 'lol's. You're just helping prove my point.

You don't seem to be understanding this. When we're discussing incoming flood waters, the vertical dimension of the structure doesn't matter as much as the horizontal aspect, i.e. the shape of the base; The shape that the water is flowing around is what matters.

Imagine looking at a pyramid from an aerial perspective. As you know, it appears square. Imagine the water flowing against it; Not very efficient.

Now, envision a teardrop shaped structure from the same perspective. Assume it is oriented properly to the flow of the water; The water smoothly flows past it. I mention this only for illustrative purposes because as has already been established, a tear-drop shaped structure would be unfeasible.

Finally, envision a tetrahedron; From the aerial perspective it appears as a triangle. Imagine the water flowing towards it. No matter where the water flow comes from, the triangle will channel the water roughly similar to the way a teardrop would.

So, now tell me, which is closer to the shape of a teardrop: a square or a triangle?

Oh joyous days.

a sphere is the most structually secure shape in nature, why not build that?

They share A flood legend, not THE flood legend. Details tend to differ greatly. That's not surprising, though, since most of the big early civilizations arose around great rivers, particularly rivers like the Yangtze and Nile, which flood annually.

Regardless, Fantazum, the above is irrelevant, because there is NO geological and archaeological evidence of a BIG Flood. All we have is the expansion of the Black Sea 7,000 years ago.

As for PLO's question, a sphere may be a structurally stable form, but it is very difficult to build with the kind of technology that the ancient Egyptians had, especially on a large scale.

Quite true, scientists believe that this occurrance is the inspiration for the flood. What would be fascinating is wether other cultures on the other side of the globe share this event...

Good post.

Dont take there creation story literaly, symbolism and all. Ofcourse the popular belief is the symbols created the story, but a few like to think of it as the story created the symbols.

You haven't received an intelligent response simply because of the nature of the question. Pyramids were designed to withstand a great flood and so forth.

There was no great flood. The Genesis story was written down by Jewish priests during the Babylonian exile in the 6th century. It is based on the Epic of Gilgamesh and the even older flood story of Athura Mazda [sp]. Both predate the Noah story by centuries and were very popular, well-known. These stories may have been based on a massive local flood, not a global deluge. They were heavily embellished as they were told and retold over the centuries, meant to be taken as allegory--particularly by the Hebrews.

As for the Egyptians ... They recorded nothing with regards to a global flood. And the pyramid design was for religious purposes.

The number of flood stories around the world are numerous. Why? Because local flood events are numerous. Every culture has experienced a/many catastrophic flood event[s]. That is why such stories persist, are quite popular.