Since the middle of the Stone Age a professional specialization of people can be found. That means (as a rule) that no one person had the complete knowledge of a civilization. That also is true for Egypt. There were farmers, masons, carpenters, shoe makers, poison mixer and you name it. Most people would never leave their little village unless called to participate in a communal task, such as building a pyramid. That does not mean that the people were interchangeable. Those hauling rocks from one part to the next were most probably never called to form the blocks.

Just take chisel and try to form a block from a boulder and you will see what I mean.

Obtaining materials was not really a problem, the more we are capable of detailed analysis the more we discover in awe that "troglodytes" from Germany were actually trading furs for oranges with those living in Italy.

In the Bronze age, which is after all the time we are interested in here, organized trade spanned all of the Middle East and Asia Minor with India, Arabia and Southern Europe.

The late stone age is what finally gave humans the chance to actually increases their knowledge beyond that needed for immediate survival, but it takes many millions of times to have 4 times 4 oranges for someone to establish a rule and apply it to all ten natural numbers...

By the time of the (pyramid building) Egyptians the knowledge of multiplication had led to elemental geometry... based on the triangle for some weird reason. That implied that the next mathematical level had to achieved: the square root.

Even the building of the pyramids led to new knowledge in civil engineering ... especially in static calculations.

Just as today, the total knowledge multiplied by two in ever shorter times.

And that just means that only the total knowledge was less, all other circumstances equal.

First let me say Have great friends that work at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo and at The Alexandria National Museum as curators and they have been doing a lot of work at The Great pyramid of Khufu at Giza. It's 756 feet long on each side, 450 high and is composed of 2,300,000 blocks of stone, each averaging 2 1/2 tons in weight.
It was orientated by using shadows cast by the sun to give them the angle of the base. With the use of laser measure they have found where some of the stones was mined from the quarry and floated down the Nile. But the latest thing that they are studying is they used large kites made from sails to help move the stones, with modern kites they have moved stones up to 1.8 tonne but due to Occupation and health rules (yes even in the desert they have them) they are not allowed to use anything bigger, but they have proven they can move a 1.8 tonne stone 1 mile in 80 minutes with 35 men.
All the stone including the lime stone casing that was placed on the face to make a clean smooth base to paint, yes they were all painted in bright colours with gold tops.
They can prove the stones was mined as large blocks and the finely clean completed on site, they have even found large workers camps with records of how many tools was signed out. The idea of the pyramids made of cement just dose not work from a engineers point and this cement has to be so strong to handle the weight why are we not using it today in construction.

most of us know that, and I suspect that some of those writing books saying otherwise too... but fact books are hard to sell.

The peoples of Easter Island did just that. They cut down their trees to move the giant heads and eventually their civilization fell due to lack of food. Those trees were palms also and so it can be done. There is no question of that


I would if my God-King told me I would go to Heaven for doing so. I think the current information shows that the people who worked on the pyramids were actually treated very well and honored by their society.

I've been re-reading this thread since I posted it. I'm still not convinced either way that this man's research has been debunked. Mind finding these people's research for me? Who exactly are these "geologists" that have debunked the work? I'd love to read what they have to say.

I don't know if you've read his blog, but here Michael explains away the reasons I've heard so far in this thread why his hypothesis is false.

http://pyramids.blog.com/

Edit:

And after reading more about what Michael has done, here is his presentation on the subject which basically answers all of the questions presented in this thread:
http://www.mse.drexel.edu/max/pdf%20refere...Pyramids-Lo.pdf

I'd like to point out that they are not hypothesizing that the entire great pyramid was cast. They only believe 20% or less was cast. It is nearly impossible for them to do any further study without more samples. And to say that they wouldn't know that there have been repairs on the pyramids over the years is ridiculous. Of course they would take this into account, these aren't researchers on Crystal links, these are scientists.

The Pyramids of Egypt are mainly constructed of limestone and granite. Some of this is of high quality when needed for finish, such as the outside cladding which is white Tura limestone. Red granite was used to line the internal chambers as a special feature. The quarries where this material was quarried can be seen today along with many blocks that were not used. Limestone is not difficult to quarry, but granite offers a challenge.

The Egyptian engineers did not used ramps to build their Pyramids, but used a special kind of pulley which has been lost, but now re-discovered by me, on 27 August 2006.

This wooden pulley is a real ancient artefact and hundreds have been excavated in component form. As a mechanical engineering tradesperson it dawned on me what these components are, so I wrote a book with the hope of educating the world about this. By the way, my work supports the HISTORIES of HERODOTUS (Book 2, sections 124-125) one hundred percent. Herodotus wrote what the Egyptian priests told him and these priests were also the custodians of Egyptian and local history ... they knew what they were talking about and I have proved them absolutely honest and correct in what they told Herodotus.

Read RAISING STONE 1 : Paul Hai's racks & pinions theory. Type <haitheory> into any internet search engine for links.
My website is at www.haitheory.com
(Mount Isa, Queensland, Australia). Click to view attachmentClick to view attachment

Paul Hai;

I'm sure we're all interested in an overall view of the theory. The
website only mentions rack and pinion.

Thankyou for your interest and I will do my best to explain the basics. Please think carefully how a three wheel step-trolley operates on climbing up and over steps. The wooden components which have been excavated and are known as 'rockers' are in fact the components of a very simple yet effective pulley.

Four of these components are required and these are placed around the block of stone to be hoisted. How the pulley is fitted is all explained in the book. These components, and four are required for a complete pulley, I term 'pinion-pulley lobe quadrants'. These quadrants have several cross-pegs and when the quadrants are fitted the cross pegs now form a complete rope-drum. How the blocks were hoisted is all in the book.

I state my work is not a five-minute theory and it is important to read the book normally because it is necessary to go over some mechanical terminology which is dealt with in the first chapter. This work covers the hoisting operation and the use of 'bearing stones' which are used to cradle the hoisting ropes. The Egyptian were first class rope makers - rope was no problem for them. In fact the rope used on the Pyramids was of small diameter. Much heavier ropes were used in the Egyptian shipping industry. We know the diameter of the ropes via measuring the rope cradles; the 'bearing stones'.

The short planks of timber which Herodotus is told of, or perhaps even shown by the Egyptian priests, are the lobed sideboards of the pulley components; there are two lobed planks per quadrant. These were no longer than the side length of a Pyramid block which is about one metre. The timber is Lebanese cedar and was brought into Egypt under orders of Pharaoh Sneferu, who was the father of Khufu. One pinion-pulley lobe quadrant is easily carried by one man, thus is portable, being passed down the Pyramid steps by a chain gang of men to be used yet again as part of a complete pulley for another block, another hoisting. No ramps were used at all as no ramps were needed. The Egyptians have 'out-foxed' us all, but I discovered how they built their Pyramids when researching a university assignment in August of 2006, and it 'blew me over' - I was shaking for half an hour. When I calmed down I began to write, think and produced the book - RAISING STONE 1.

This pulley is different to what we understand a pulley to be today. This ancient pulley surrounds its load and has a mechanical advantage of 2.8 which is very useful. The calculation was done by the University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia and is all documented. This pulley operates on the CLASS TWO lever principle which is the same as the modern style wheelbarrow, with a forward wheel (PIVOT/FULCRUM) - The wheelbarrow pan has the LOAD - The handles are where EFFORT is applied. In view of this I often call this ancient pulley, the 'Egyptain Wheelbarrow'.
I hope this has been of some insight for everyone.

Regards,
Paul

Very interesting, perhaps I will get the Book.

Die Checker,

there is one free book waiting for you in Australia. All you need to do is write me a letter the old fashioned way and please remember to print your mailing address very clearly. I see you are from Portland, Oregon, USA.

When you have read Raising Stone 1 you will be an expert on Egyptian Pyramid construction and will be able to inform others.
The book will be airmailed to you.

Your interest is much appreciated,
Regards,
Paul

Hello cladking,

there is one free book waiting for you in Australia. All you need to do is write me a letter the old fashioned way and please remember to print your mailing address very clearly.

When you understand haitheory in Raising Stone 1 you will be an expert on Egyptian Pyramid construction and will be able to inform others and have some interesting discussions with diechecker.
Inform your friends, teachers and local newsmedia. A copy was posted out to Italy today, purchased on Ebay ... the message is getting around.
Now, I must thank the owners of this site who are very helpful ... thankyou, one and all.
The book will be airmailed to you.

Your interest is much appreciated,
Regards,
Paul

As wonderful a read as The Histories is, including Book 2, one must be very wary of citing Herodotus as a source for pyramid construction, considering the pyramids about which he wrote had been built over 2,000 years before his time. The Egyptians living in his time had no more practical knowledge of it than do you or I. They spoke authoritatively and Herodotus probably felt he had little reason to doubt them, but from the modern age we know how questionable his sources in Egypt could be. Things such as Khufu as brutal tyrant are not supported by any evidence, and we know the Egyptians with whom he spoke at Giza couldn't even translate hieroglyphs any more than Herodotus could. Given that The Histories is primarily about the wars between Persia and Greece and that Book 2 appears to be an ethnographic sidestep to help explain the distant lands that influenced the Greeks, Herodotus' notes on Egypt cannot stand as a modern researcher's primary source material.

LOL Herodotus also writes of the wondrous creatures of Egypt, such as flying snakes and phoenixes, and of course the hippopotamus with its tail, mane, and neigh of a horse. I don't see anyone citing Herodotus on these critters.

It's also tricky to say the Egyptians didn't use ramps in pyramid construction when the physical remains of them have been excavated, including at Giza. I can't figure out the look and context of the component parts of the pulley you mention, Paul Hai. The links in your earlier post don't clarify these questions. Are you basing your argument on the Dixon artifacts that were found long ago inside one of the "air shafts" of the Great Pyramid? I have seen people try to propose that those were the parts to some sort of machinery.

kmt_sesh,
Glad to see you around here again.

What, do you only visit once in a while? Or you been posting in another area?

Harte

Hey, Harte.

I know, I should come around more. I'm the Moderator of one Egyptian forum and the Admin of another, so I'm too damn busy. But you know me: usually, if it's about Egypt or the Near East, I'll stick my nose into it.

In due course, if DieChecker and cladking take up my offer, these people will be able to answer your questions. I am not a forum person as I have much history research work to do with the university of New England at Armidale, here in Australia. Be assured that the mystery of Egyptian pyramid construction has been solved. Someone asked about the wooden machinery ... okay, I will answer this. The component is called a 'rocker', and one of these was on display for years in the MMA; The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. The curator has a copy of my book, his name is or was Dieter Arnold. The 'rocker' is also known as the 'Petrie rocker', as William Matthew Flinders Petrie bought some to London, England about 1900 AD from Egypt.

Raising Stone 1 has 121 pages, with many color illustrations, photographs and engineering drawings and it would be impossible to explain things here. In 2006, I published at great expense, and I do not spend my hard earned money on rubbish or waste my time on rubbish. Some people here think Herodotus a joke, well how about sand ramps that are nearly five hundred feet high ... is this not the BIGGEST joke of all. Come on now, sand behaves as a fluid ... kindergarten kids know this from playing in their sand-pits ... ancient peoples were not idiots! ... address this point first ... then you can progress.

Regards,
Paul

Regards

I would never consider Herodotus a joke. He's clearly incorrect on many points, but that's only because he did not possess the understanding of science, historical research, philology, linguistics, and other disciplines we take for granted today. In fact I find him to have been a highly intelligent man with a keen mind.

The core of what I'm arguing is that one cannot use Herodotus as a primary source for research. The man was too far removed from the time of the Giza pyramids, as were the Egyptians from whom he collected information. Because of modern science and archaeology, we people living today certainly possess a more solid understanding of pyramid construction than did the Egyptians living in the fifth century BCE. That's understandable. There would've been no practical reason for the Egyptians living in the fifth century BCE to have an understanding of pyramid construction.

And that is that. I'll wager that no vetted Egyptologist in the world would describe the ramps as sand. They were not sand. The remains of ramps that have been excavated reveal that they were, for the most part, tightly compacted gravel and stone rubble. Point addressed.

I'm impressed by the fact that the Egyptians described and depicted almost everything but there's hardly a word or drawing on pyramid building. Of course, that is unless the Pyramid Texts are taken literally.

You can PM me the address. Or, you can tell me if it is on your website and I'll send out a letter.

It's on the web site near the bottom.