Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Paul Hai

Giza Pyramid construction

1,175 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

DieChecker

They could also have used the step they were going up and the step below, if rigged up right. Would have taken a tremendous amount of wood and sweat and risk. But, I think they could have done it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oniomancer

They could also have used the step they were going up and the step below, if rigged up right. Would have taken a tremendous amount of wood and sweat and risk. But, I think they could have done it.

That was a point I hinted at to clad but never got around to making. Depending on how the building progressed, they potentially had the entire side of the pyramid to put men on and easily the whole top surface. Enough room even for animals permanently stationed during the lower courses. The people don't even have to walk, just pull. Everyone focuses on the ramps to the exclusion of the rest of the available surface area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakeview rud

Thanks for the encouragement, guys. The more I think about this the better it looks. For instance, I first thought that you would have to provide force on both ends of the "rocker" but if you had a decent amount of force on the outboard side of the rocker(away from the pyramid) you could do all the necessary work from there with ropes and only need to provide the proper planking between 'rocks' to get a very stable structure.

I'd ask kmt sesh about when the water moving device called the "shadouf" was first used as the motion involved might be very similar.

The other thinng I found quite interesting was in one of the other threads Cladking quotes some AE text (pyramid text?) as having "the eye of horus" being used to ascend to the heavens. If you take a side view of a rocker and compare it to the "eye of horus" glyph there's quite a similarity. If you make the rocker sides symetrical it darn well would look like an eye and even the symetrical idea might make sense as you would be able to get more use out of the piece of equipment (by flipping it over) as the wood would have been hard to come by.

I'd still like to see someone do a half scale or even full scale experiment.

More comments welcomed....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakeview rud

More on the "Eye of Horus" idea. The extension off to the right of the "eye", if added to the "Petrie's Rocker", would almost double the mechanical advantage (leverage) for rocking the stone in its cradle. In addition the extension allows for the rope attachments to be directly above the workers using their body weights to rock the stone, thus maximizing their force.

In light of this I'm going to stop calling it "Petrie's Rocker" and start calling it the "Eye of Horus" Rocker.

This also might account for no mention of rockers in the AE's writings; perhaps we should look for the "Eye of Horus" in this context and see what can be found.

One last comment. If a stone were to not only be raised up but also placed into its final position, a method would be needed to get it off its rocker. I'll suggest that a sling or net of ropes was placed on the outboard side of the block and then the ropes or main rope was passed thru a hole on each side(rounded edges like on a ship's mooring) at the pyramid side up fairly high on the rocker. An eyebolt would be placed near the bottom of the rocker so that the ropes were fed thru and hung over the edge of the pyramid. These ropes could then be pulled to roll or force the stone off the rocker. This would further add to the image of the "Eye of Horus" as shown in the glyph as these ropes would look a bit like that curved line at the bottom. In any event there's enough here to look into it further.

Comments welcome.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh

Thanks for the encouragement, guys. The more I think about this the better it looks. For instance, I first thought that you would have to provide force on both ends of the "rocker" but if you had a decent amount of force on the outboard side of the rocker(away from the pyramid) you could do all the necessary work from there with ropes and only need to provide the proper planking between 'rocks' to get a very stable structure.

I'd ask kmt sesh about when the water moving device called the "shadouf" was first used as the motion involved might be very similar.

The other thinng I found quite interesting was in one of the other threads Cladking quotes some AE text (pyramid text?) as having "the eye of horus" being used to ascend to the heavens. If you take a side view of a rocker and compare it to the "eye of horus" glyph there's quite a similarity. If you make the rocker sides symetrical it darn well would look like an eye and even the symetrical idea might make sense as you would be able to get more use out of the piece of equipment (by flipping it over) as the wood would have been hard to come by.

I'd still like to see someone do a half scale or even full scale experiment.

More comments welcomed....

The shaduff first appears some time in the third millennium BCE as depictions on cylinder seals in Mesopotamia. The first time shaduffs appear in Egypt is during the Amarna Period, in the reign of Akhenaten, in the mid-second millennium BCE. There are depictions of one or two on the wall of one of the tombs of Akhenaten's officials at Amarna. It's been argued that the shaduff may have come to Egypt as early as Dynasty 17, around 1600 BCE, and while this is certainly possible, there is no sure evidence to corroborate it.

The point is, there is no evidence for the shaduff in Egypt in the period of Dynasty 4, which was a thousand years before the time of Akhenaten. While it might be tempting to see them as devices used to help build pyramids, the idea cannot be supported by extant evidence. Moreover, the shaduff as understood in antiquity, and as still used in some places in Egypt today, would not have worked at the site of pyramids. Remember that the shaduff is little more than a pole with a bucket at one end and a large rock or other weight at the other, the latter of which worked as a counterweight to help lift the bucket. Practically speaking, this means that if the shaduff was used on the Great Pyramid, and given that the average block of masonry weighs around 2.5 tons, the counterweight would've needed to be in excess of 2.5 tons for the device to have worked. In other words, it's not terribly realistic.

You have the same problem with both the rocker and the shaduff: neither can be attributed to the Old Kingdom, and neither are suited for work on colossal pyramids.

As for the posts of cladking you came across, be warned. I don't like bringing this up because cladking is not around to provide a counterargument of his own, but cladking's interpretations of the Pyramid Texts are entirely fictional and cannot be supported in any way by real-world evidence. This was proved beyond doubt in countless debates against him through the years. Cladking sees the Pyramid Texts as something akin to science put into poetry, or as a sort of mystical instructional manual for building pyramids, but that is not at all what the Pyramid Texts were for. No evidence supports the idea, so I would not wed yourself to cladking's theme. Any of it, for that matter. More information can be supplied on the Pyramid Texts, if you desire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blackdogsun

Practically speaking, this means that if the shaduff was used on the Great Pyramid, and given that the average block of masonry weighs around 2.5 tons, the counterweight would've needed to be in excess of 2.5 tons for the device to have worked.

hi kmt_sesh

there's a saying i believe that goes something like "give me a fulcrum and i'll move maintains" (not sure though i may have made it up). my point is depending on where the fulcrum or lifting point is on the shaduff, let's say closer to the block to be lifted, the less counterweight needed to lift it (?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh

hi kmt_sesh

there's a saying i believe that goes something like "give me a fulcrum and i'll move maintains" (not sure though i may have made it up). my point is depending on where the fulcrum or lifting point is on the shaduff, let's say closer to the block to be lifted, the less counterweight needed to lift it (?)

You could be right, blackdogsun. I'm hardly an engineer. I would question the strength of the pole itself, however, and how large the timber would have to be to support a lot of weight over and over and over. Of course, if the timber used for the pole is large, we're back to the minimal movement such a device would be permitted in pyramid construction. This is the main failing of the rocker, too.

Herodotus attempts to describe some sort of device in Book II of The Histories, but its clear from his own account that he himself was not certain about what it may have been. He visited Egypt some 2,000 years after the Great Pyramid had been constructed, so his confusion is understandable. What I personally can see is some sort of A-frame device perhaps at the corners, to help maneuver blocks of masonry around the tight spacing there. However, I do not see all sorts of rockers or shaduff-like devices all over the faces of the pyramid as it was being built. Simply not enough room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blackdogsun

ah .. Archimedes - “Give me a fulcrum,and a place to stand—and I will move the world.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
devilmaycare

It is ludicrous to think that by manual labor many many thousands of years ago giza was built. Even today we could not duplicate that. And that is the real mystery and a giant clue all at once. With the size of many of the blocks along with the precision there is absolutely nothing to say they may as well have done it in one solid piece, except for the simple fact it would have been too great a mystery when in fact the purpose is the mystery and not the actual structure itself.

Edited by devilmaycare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blackdogsun

we humans are incredibly smart and resourceful creatures

although in today's world i suspect the majority of us don't exercise our brains nearly as much as they would have 5000yrs ago

back then they didn't have the distractions of high technology we have today and so were able to devote their minds to more practical pursuits in observations of the natural world such as astronomy and practical physics

there are many things that the AE new in construction using simple weights and counter balances and other things we've long forgotten

so i don't find it ludicrous at all that they were able to accomplish the incredible feats of engineering that baffles us today

i suspect we'll eventually find that their methods were that simple the real mystery will be why we today took so long to realize it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
devilmaycare

And therein is your personal conundrum which is of your own making. They were much smarter than that. What you have to consider is that they were thousands of years more advanced but in our past. Imagine that.

Edited by devilmaycare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blackdogsun

they were certainly smarter than we are in construction and we are smarter than they in another sense but that is simply in experience and knowledge in different areas .. neither are more intelligent than the other, so no conundrum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
devilmaycare

Personally? I can practically taste the truth on the tip of my cosciousness. And believe you me it won't take thousands more years until we know exactly how they did it. Not maybe, not theory, no guessing and no bs tricky construction sites either. Exactly how and why and the purposes behind it. Like I said. THAT is the mystery, not how. That will be the easy part. Plus your thinking that you are somehow equal to the intelligence behind it is so typical yet so naive. I suggest you let the real scientists figure it out and stop muddling in your legoland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aus Der Box Skeptisch

Devil if you feel like insulting people please do it somewhere else. I'm being polite. Usually I am not in such an amiable mood when I see that type of condescension.

Also you made this comment... Exactly how and why and the purposes behind it. Like I said. THAT is the mystery, not how.

Kinda contradicts itself ...

And I might add that homo sapien sapien as classified as such has been equal in development from beginning to today. What I am saying is they were just as intellectually capable as we are and vice versa we are just as intellectually capable as them. Different knowledge but still as intelligent. Good day

Edited by Aus Der Box Skeptisch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakeview rud

kmt-sesh; my mistake, I thought the shadouf was something operated by foot power (using Mr. gravity and the weight of the user) to do the work. Cladking's strange or inventive interpretations of the writings of AE's aside; there is nothing scientifically or practically speaking that would prevent the AE's from raising large quantities of blocks quickly using this very simple technique which would qualify as a "machine" or "device" as far as the Greek dude who spoke to the Egyptian priests so long ago. Would the dude have called a ramp a "device"? Perhaps, but more likely would have called it a road.

As far as the "Eye of Horus" goes its quite a coincidence that Cladking's interpretation suggests it was used to ascend to the heavens. Perhaps you could secure the text in question and give me your own interpretation.

As far as my interpretation of how a rocker which is based on the "Eye of Horus" glyph in side view (which is the way the AE's did their glyphs) it's a very simple yet elegant machine that would require very little effort to rock and therefor would be pratical for a small team of men to operate.

So to summarize.

1. Simple technology readily available.

2. Pre-supposes a supply of wood available

3. Use of relatively short ropes needed.

4. Teams could be spread along the entire perimeter of the GP (How many? unknown but decreases with height of GP)

5. Small team size would mean manpower not a problem

6. No work stoppages due to reworking the ramp (would have to be done on a regular basis-more intnsive with height)

7. Odd or different block size of layers not a problem

8. With good planning even perimeter blocks could be laid this way.

As I've stated before, a simple experiment at full scale would answer the basic questions...How many men needed? How fast would the lift go? How much difficulty in sliding the device to the next level or sliding the stone off the device?

Comments welcomed......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakeview rud

I looked up "Eye of Horus" on Wikipedia, and while that's not necessarily a definitive resource, they say that two other meanings of the 'eye' are "to make or do" or "one who does". I would suggest as a 21st century alternative the phrase "Get-R-done!" and that would fit the building of the GP to a 'T'!

They also note that the "Eye of Horus" was often placed in amulet form with the mummy or in the tomb at burials. If you take my contention that the 'eye' was the AE's equivalent of a "stairway to heaven" then you can see why it was important to provide the dead with this handy device.

If you say that there were no period references to 'rockers' I can dig it, but if you substitute the phrase "Eye of Horus" I think there would be so many as to be ubiquitous.

As for finding no examples of 'rockers' in period tombs, I will make the argument that for as great a Pharoah as Khufu was, there exists only one small statue of him today. By the way it bears no resemblance to the face on the Sphinx but thats another story. So not having a wooden representation of the Horus Rocker around today is no biggie. As the one writer suggested, firewood is often hard to come by. Also, if I had been a laborer for 20 years shlepping two ton stones up a mountain I would have celebrated its completion by grabbing a few dozen "Dos Equuis" or perhaps the AE equivalent "Dos Donquies" and proceed to sit around guzzling beer in front of the biggest honkin' bonfire ever!

Finally, I re-read Paul Hai's initial post and didn't realize that the Egyptian priests had told Herodotus that "wooden machines were used to raise the blocks stepwise up the pyramid". I think that ramp theories developed as a default theory because there were no alternatives that fit Herodotus' description eventually leading it to be dismissed as a fabrication or totally erroneous. Indeed, if this device can be re-created , you might be able to say that Herodotus got his facts right after all.

Comments always welcome....Rud

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Finally, I re-read Paul Hai's initial post and didn't realize that the Egyptian priests had told Herodotus that "wooden machines were used to raise the blocks stepwise up the pyramid". I think that ramp theories developed as a default theory because there were no alternatives that fit Herodotus' description eventually leading it to be dismissed as a fabrication or totally erroneous. Indeed, if this device can be re-created , you might be able to say that Herodotus got his facts right after all.

Also ramps are a theory, because they have found ramps. Some still in position.

I personnally believe that the priests told Herodotus about their most modern methods of building, or maybe the methods used to build the last pyramids. I believe they would have had 0 (zero) record of how the Great Pyramid at Giza was built. The smaller post Old Kingdom pyramids could easily have been built using rockers, levers and scaffolding.

Let's also remember these are the same priests in roughly the same time period that told Solon about Atlantis.

Edited by DieChecker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt

Also ramps are a theory, because they have found ramps. Some still in position.

I personnally believe that the priests told Herodotus about their most modern methods of building, or maybe the methods used to build the last pyramids. I believe they would have had 0 (zero) record of how the Great Pyramid at Giza was built. The smaller post Old Kingdom pyramids could easily have been built using rockers, levers and scaffolding.

Let's also remember these are the same priests in roughly the same time period that told Solon about Atlantis.

Yeah, and we all know how 'accurate' that was. :lol:

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakeview rud

Diechecker, Cormac....true enough that Herodotus' writing could all be hearsay, or have been from a much later part of Egyptian history and Atlantis is most likely a myth but if someone had told you a few years ago that a sophisticated people had built a temple complex 12,000 years ago (Gobekli Tepe) you would likely have scoffed in a similar manner.

All I'm asking is to consider the possibility of such a device and, if it proves to be a plausible alternative, then compare the work building the GP that way with the work necessary to erect the GP with ramps.

If someone out there can build a replica, please step forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
Diechecker, Cormac....true enough that Herodotus' writing could all be hearsay, or have been from a much later part of Egyptian history and Atlantis is most likely a myth but if someone had told you a few years ago that a sophisticated people had built a temple complex 12,000 years ago (Gobekli Tepe) you would likely have scoffed in a similar manner.

While I can't speak for DieChecker, I wasn't as flabber-gasted upon reading about Gobekli Tepe for the first time as you seem to think everyone must have been. While it was fantastic to read about a temple complex of its magnitude, the timeframe wasn't exactly devoid of other interesting sites, such as those of Mureybet and Tell Qaramel in Syria.

All I'm asking is to consider the possibility of such a device and, if it proves to be a plausible alternative, then compare the work building the GP that way with the work necessary to erect the GP with ramps.

I usually weigh the pros and cons of most possibilities. But if you invoke "geysers" we're going to have a problem. :lol:

cormac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

Diechecker, Cormac....true enough that Herodotus' writing could all be hearsay, or have been from a much later part of Egyptian history and Atlantis is most likely a myth but if someone had told you a few years ago that a sophisticated people had built a temple complex 12,000 years ago (Gobekli Tepe) you would likely have scoffed in a similar manner.

All I'm asking is to consider the possibility of such a device and, if it proves to be a plausible alternative, then compare the work building the GP that way with the work necessary to erect the GP with ramps.

If someone out there can build a replica, please step forward.

I would still be scoffing if I heard about it and did not see any proof. They've dated Gobekli Tepe, but they are not suggesting that it was built with tools that date from 2000 years later. They'd only suggest it was built with tools they found In Situ, otherwise it is just conjecture.

I'll admit I was surprised by Gobekli Tepe and did some looking around to see if it was a Bosnian Pyramid or a real pre-historic marvel. And luckly it turned out to be a true marvel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kmt_sesh

I looked up "Eye of Horus" on Wikipedia, and while that's not necessarily a definitive resource, they say that two other meanings of the 'eye' are "to make or do" or "one who does". I would suggest as a 21st century alternative the phrase "Get-R-done!" and that would fit the building of the GP to a 'T'!

They also note that the "Eye of Horus" was often placed in amulet form with the mummy or in the tomb at burials. If you take my contention that the 'eye' was the AE's equivalent of a "stairway to heaven" then you can see why it was important to provide the dead with this handy device.

I'm not familiar with the Wiki source on the Eye of Horus. While Wikipedia can be useful, you're best off fact-checking most things you read in its articles. Often the information is pretty good, yet often it is quite wrong. The Eye of Horus, for instance, is not the same as the eyeball glyph so commonly used to express action, doing, producing, and the like. The two are categorized and recognized as two different glyphs. The Eye of Horus is designated D1 according to the standard Gardiner system, while the other eye glyph is D4. The Eye of Horus represents the eyeball and markings of an actual hawk native to North Africa, while D4 represents a human eye. The D4 glyph is in fact extremely common in hieroglyphic writing for verbs of action and is transliterated ir.

The Eye of Horus was called wDAt ("wedjat"), a word meaning "sound" or "whole." It was such a common amulet for mummies because it was thought the Horus Eye would help to keep the body whole. It was not, however, considered a stairway to heaven. There was actually another, less common amulet in the form of stairs.

In mathematical papyri the Egyptians recorded how the Eye of Horus was also used to stand for fractions, but that's about as functional as the symbol got. At no time was it a tool for any sort of building. You can refer to cladking's posts if you want, but trust me, you do so at your own risk.

If you say that there were no period references to 'rockers' I can dig it, but if you substitute the phrase "Eye of Horus" I think there would be so many as to be ubiquitous.

As for finding no examples of 'rockers' in period tombs, I will make the argument that for as great a Pharoah as Khufu was, there exists only one small statue of him today. By the way it bears no resemblance to the face on the Sphinx but thats another story. So not having a wooden representation of the Horus Rocker around today is no biggie. As the one writer suggested, firewood is often hard to come by. Also, if I had been a laborer for 20 years shlepping two ton stones up a mountain I would have celebrated its completion by grabbing a few dozen "Dos Equuis" or perhaps the AE equivalent "Dos Donquies" and proceed to sit around guzzling beer in front of the biggest honkin' bonfire ever!

Finally, I re-read Paul Hai's initial post and didn't realize that the Egyptian priests had told Herodotus that "wooden machines were used to raise the blocks stepwise up the pyramid". I think that ramp theories developed as a default theory because there were no alternatives that fit Herodotus' description eventually leading it to be dismissed as a fabrication or totally erroneous. Indeed, if this device can be re-created , you might be able to say that Herodotus got his facts right after all.

Comments always welcome....Rud

I can't force you to accept an argument one way or another, nor is it my place to. All I can do is present known evidence and our understanding of the culture and its achievements based on orthodox research. This research represents the sum total of two centuries of concerted effort, which is of course still ongoing, so this is why I stand behind it with confidence. What you believe is up to you. I will leave this post with the note that ramp theories have been adopted not because there are no alternatives but because of the extensive physical evidence for ramps from all quarters of the Nile Valley and from all periods of pharaonic history. This includes Giza, which contains one of the best-preserved remains of a ramp yet found, just beyond the east face of the Great Pyramid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lakeview rud

kmt sesh; thanks for the reply. I have always stated that the AE's were intelligent and creative enough to use whatever they could to get the job done. Ramps to the lower levels are certainly possible and plausible especially if they got some of the internal works and large stones in that way. The eastern side of the GP is now covered with auxillary tombs and mastabas so I cannot see a definitive way of determining a ramp there unless its associated with the causeway which now dives off the cliff to the East. Yet there is no way a straight ramp on that side would be long enough with the correct slope (5 degrees?) to reach anywhere near the top since it would fall off the plateau long before reaching the upper levels. A single ramp on the east seems unlikely. Multiple ramps on all sides also seems unlikely as they would get in the way of keeping the GP square and level. I think the anomoly at that one corner high up is typical of a surveying station or whatever they would call it where the AE engineers made sure things were kept straight and level. There's an interesting article about rope rolls or roll ropes (Loehner's Theory on how the stones went up the side) listed under Building the Great Pyramid on the internet but that also has problems. The same article points out some drawbacks to ramp theories.

There's no need to convince me one way or the other; I simply don't know how the GP was built. I do know that a device like the one I am proposing would quite possibly be within the AE's capability (but no direct evidence of that) and that there are no technical reasons why it would not work. Perhaps someone with crazy computer skills could make up a mathematical model to test this out without having to do a real replica.

Sometimes some of the coincidences do get me going. The Wiki site showed an Egyptian alphabet with not one but two lenses (eyes, rockers whatever) in it. Looks like they were different colors. One stood for the letter 'r' and the other for the letter 'l'. Could that mean "raise and lower"? Just kidding............ Best just to grab a couple of "Dos Equuis" and move on.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abramelin

I posted about it in the "Hydrogen balloons" thread about lifting megaliths:

Never thought of that one, but the AE might have been able to use kites to lift their stones.

On June 23, Mory Gharib and his team raised a 6,900-pound (3132.6 kg), 15-foot (3.0 m) obelisk into vertical position in the desert near Palmdale by using only a kite, a pulley system, and a support frame. Although the blustery winds were gusting up to 22 miles (35.4 km) per hour, the team set the obelisk upright on their second attempt.

Despite the lack of a steady breeze, the team raised the obelisk in about 25 seconds—so quickly that the concrete-and-rebar object was lifted off the ground and swung free for a few seconds. Once the motion had stabilized, the team lowered the obelisk into an upright

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/06/0628_caltechobelisk.html

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jules99

I posted about it in the "Hydrogen balloons" thread about lifting megaliths:

Never thought of that one, but the AE might have been able to use kites to lift their stones.

On June 23, Mory Gharib and his team raised a 6,900-pound (3132.6 kg), 15-foot (3.0 m) obelisk into vertical position in the desert near Palmdale by using only a kite, a pulley system, and a support frame. Although the blustery winds were gusting up to 22 miles (35.4 km) per hour, the team set the obelisk upright on their second attempt.

Despite the lack of a steady breeze, the team raised the obelisk in about 25 seconds—so quickly that the concrete-and-rebar object was lifted off the ground and swung free for a few seconds. Once the motion had stabilized, the team lowered the obelisk into an upright

.

Thats an incredible idea.... thanks for sharing. I suspect if no one had previously tried and proven this method of lifting you would have a hard time winning people over to the thought..

Cheers.

Edited by jules99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.