Imagine coming all the way to a planet light years away and making them awe inspiring monuments just for them to say ‘yeah that’s easy we could do that, in fact we did! We made this!’
Honestly though their fault for using their galaxy age tech to build something about as complex as your average bronze age civ…
[Jesus people, this is a joke as made obvious by the punchline about them building to a bronze age level - you guys really need to work on reading comprehension, it’s such an important life skill]
Yeah I don’t think anyone believed that for a while now, that was just what people trying to base their world view on the Bible wanted to be true… exodus didn’t happen either and Egypt doesn’t seem to have had many Jewish slaves.
Egypt will never allow it. They want their cashcow to be in status quo forever so they can milk them dry. They’re not even allowing research into other, currently unknown chambers (which were found to be there, just never opened)
They banned destrucive research for new rooms, because some researcher decade ago, enthusiastically drilled a bunch of holes to nowhere in order to do find them.
They still allowed the non destructive muon imaging a few year ago that heavily hinted to an unfound room.
it could be kind of disrespectful towards the culture that built them. I dont think we can restore them in such a way it respects the beliefs and culture of those who built them, so best thing to do would be to make sure they dont decay further. Also, restoring them just so tourists can have something to gawk at would be a kin to showing middle finger to those who built and revered them. And i doubt anyone would be interested in doing anything without monetary gain from it.
20 - 30, since they needed to be done for a specific person during their lifetime, and people died young then. The biggest one even has a backup chamber that was to be used if the pharaoh kicked the bucket too early and they couldn’t finish it.
The Great Pyramid isn’t a tomb, though. It has none of the hallmarks of a tomb. Even the Pharoah’s name is suspected to be 18th Century graffiti, and it was in a hidden room on the ceiling in the back where they kept the cleaning supplies or something.
As the oldest of the seven wonders of the ancient world, this majestic structure is perhaps the most fascinating of them all. But why Khufu? And why do Egyptologists think it is a tomb? The answer may be rather simple. Based on a mark found in an interior chamber of the pyramid, some experts believe the symbol refers to the fourth-dynasty Egyptian pharaoh Khufu.
That is the only mark that has ever been found in the pyramid. No other marks reference Khufu, nor do any other symbols suggest the pyramid was his eternal resting place meant to protect him in his journey to the afterlife. Given that lonely and ‘miserable symbol, Egyptologists argue that the Great Pyramid of Giza was thus built as a tomb over a 10- to 20-year period concluding around 2560 BC. But no discovery other than that symbol suggests Khufu’s mummy was ever inside the pyramid.
The mummified remains of King Khufu have never been found and are presumed to have been stolen from the Great Pyramid. But that’s just a theory. His mummified remains may very well remain hidden in a burial chamber in a different part of Egypt.
The Great Pyramid’s burial chambers lack inscriptions and decorations, the norm for Egyptian tombs of the fourth to late fifth dynasty, apart from work-gang graffiti that include Khufu’s names.[19] Constructed around 2600 BC, it predates the custom of inscribing pyramids with text by over 200 years.[20][3]
The most intact papyri describe several months of work with the transportation of limestone from quarries Tura North and Tura South to Giza in the 27th year of the reign of pharaoh Khufu.[8][9]Though the diary does not specify where the stones were to be used or for what purpose, given the diary may date to what is widely considered the very end of Khufu’s reign, Tallet believes they were most likely for cladding the outside of the Great Pyramid. About every ten days, two or three round trips were done, shipping perhaps 30 blocks of 2–3 tonnes each, amounting to 200 blocks per month.[10][11] About forty boatmen worked under him. The period covered in the papyri extends from July to November.[8]
(Emphasis added) it’s not exactly very specific. Every 10 days a few blocks wouldn’t match the expected construction rate, and there’s no reasoning why they think it was for the Great Pyramid (other than the belief that it’s Khufu’s tomb?)
Every 10 days a few blocks wouldn’t match the expected construction rate, and there’s no reasoning why they think it was for the Great Pyramid
Unless there were other crews, like there almost always is in any construction. The journal also specifically names the pyramid, it’d be odd for the stone they’re moving to go to the site of the Pyramid of Khufu, mention the name of the pyramid of Khufu, and then not be used for the pyramid of Khufu.
Yeah it does say they were likely transporting cladding, which is also interesting. If, as I’m buying into, the pyramid pre-dated Khufu, work on it to ‘claim’ it would make sense, and “trimming” would be the perfect thing.
I don’t know of course, but in the current of speculations that’s one I prefer. The great pyramid is just different to the others in interesting ways.
The Great Pyramid differs in its internal arrangement from the other pyramids in the area. The greater number of passages and chambers, the high finish of parts of the work, and the accuracy of construction all distinguish it. The walls throughout the pyramid are totally bare and uninscribed, but there are inscriptions—to be more precise, graffiti—believed to have been made by the workers on the stones before they were assembled. The most famous inscription is one of the few that mentions the name of Khufu; it says “year 17 of Khufu’s reign.”
The results from the two ameteurs’ “research” cast doubt on the construction date of the great pyramid and consequently the pharaoh for which it was built. The results suggest that the pyramid was built in an era preceding Khufu’s reign.
“This is totally false and nonsensical,” said Ahmed Saeed, professor of ancient Egyptian civilisation at Cairo University. He explains that accurate scientific research dates the cartouche within an era after the reign of Khufu.
He elaborates on the writing of the king’s name in graffiti, maintaining it could have been written by the pyramid builders after construction, which might also explain why the king’s short name and not his official title is inscribed. Alternatively, he suggests the cartouche could have been written during the Middle Kingdom era, due to the style of writing used.
If it was the guy’s tomb, why isn’t his name anywhere? All the other tombs are positively lousy with art. But not this one. The one - graffiti, not official, not sanctioned - name is hidden in the equivalent of a closet and that is in shorthand even?
If it was the guy’s tomb, why isn’t his name anywhere? All the other tombs are positively lousy with art. But not this one. The one - graffiti, not official, not sanctioned - name is hidden in the equivalent of a closet and that is in shorthand even?
I don’t know a ton about Khufu, but us it possible that he just didn’t want as much iconography? I know it’s been common for several other cultures (some of Byzantine and Islamic) to not what to have icons or representations of people. Definitely odd, and I’m not sure why almost all of the other pyramids would be tombs and then his wouldn’t be.
I mean, just on the face of it he wanted The Great Pyramid to be his tomb but didn’t want his full name prominently displayed? I guess that’s possible, it just seems unlikely.
Yeah idk it certainly is confusing, I have multiple ideas from him wanting it to be more dedicated to the gods than just him, to the inscriptions not having the time to be finished before he died. Just seems weird to me that we have a bunch of Tomb pyramids, and then one that isn’t so tomb like but still has a Pharoah inside.
Hopefully this is one of the things we’ll find an answer to.
Scientists may have solved the mystery behind transporting some of the materials to the pyramid site: a dried-up a river
Fixed the title for you.
The construction of the Giza pyramids is still baffling. Some of the stones are purported to weigh 80 tons. That’s four or five times more weight than what modern trucks can pull on paved roads.
It’s not so farfetched to presume that this ancient civilization employed technology that is lost to time. I’m not talking about aliens and laser beams, but good ol’ fashioned mathematics. They could have exploited a principle of leverage and incline that we simply don’t understand or recognize. Or perhaps something entirely different from our six simple machines…
The problem with this theory, of course, is that we like to believe that humanity is always progressing and that we are superior to our forebears by default. That is ultimately a subjective opinion.
Yes. I’m familiar with this image. Some scientists claim that when just the right amount of water is poured over sand it reduces the friction by about 30%.
Some also claim that there were not hundreds of thousands of laborers at the Giza pyramids, based on evidence discovered in the work camps near the site.
I’m 38 years old and I think I’ve read about a new theory every year of my life…
Can’t go doing that m8, that’d suggest they might have known what they were talking about, and they talked about a lot of stuff that’s very unpopular these days
“The study was done by Christian Wagner and colleagues at Saarland University in Germany, along with researchers in the Netherlands, Iran and France. The team was inspired by an ancient Egyptian wall painting showing a huge statue being hauled across the sand on a sledge in about 1800 BC. The painting has a detail that has long puzzled Egyptologists: a worker who appears to be pouring water onto the sand in front of the sledge while others appear to be carrying water to replenish his supply.”
I notice you don’t post the names of any of the scientists who believe only a small workforce built the pyramids. Why is that? That’s really the one I was curious about.
Because, again, it’s kind of hard to argue against what they literally carved into a rock.
Because, again, it’s kind of hard to argue against what they literally carved into a rock.
Not arguing with you here, cuz I have no dog in this fight, but you’re seemingly ignoring the possibility of the emperor bragging about crowd size the number of slaves workers utilized?
I mean, he could lie about it, but is there really any doubt a pharaoh could conscript a few hundred guys?
It’s just an easy, obvious solution, and probably the one they used because they weren’t dumb. We also have a lot of surviving paperwork from the organisation of pyramid building, including things like worker’s comp.
So you’re saying that they used some unknown means of pulling big stones over rocks, but rather bragged about one they didn’t use even though it would have worked?
I’m not saying they didn’t have a lot of slaves, just thinking that they might be exaggerating slave count (as a metric of how powerful they were) while using something like this river (something innocuous that they wouldn’t need to brag about) to augment the bodies in use.
You are making the mistake that slaves built Egyptian religious monuments. They did not. Egyptians did it, not their slaves. They did it out of religious obligation.
Which makes sense. You don’t want slaves building your sacred places when slaves can sabotage things.
Again, there are hundreds of articles about the adjacent work camps. Please look at the publications of Zahi Hawass, chief archeologist of Egypt, and Amihai Mazar, a professor of archeology in Jerusalem.
Most claim that there could have been up to ten thousand workers. Some claim that the number of workers was as low as 1600.
I’m not sure why you think 1600 workers mean they couldn’t just drag large stones over land on sledges using a significant number of those 1600 workers. I’m not even sure why you think ten thousand workers would have been necessary. Can you explain please?
I mean, it’s probably both. They would have used a bunch of guys, and maybe oxen, because that was their source of mechanical energy for nearly everything. To make is easier, they would add the cleverest engineering you can do with no formal science and bronze age materials.
They also depict gods with the heads of jackals and birds, beings from other planets, their conception of the afterlife, pornography, and obviously exaggerated claims about the power and influence of the Pharoahs.
I’m saying that we should be skeptical. dubitante omnibus, as Descartes would say…
But why would the carving be a lie? What would the benefit be about lying about a lot of people dragging huge pieces of stone on a sledge when a lot of people dragging huge pieces of stone on a sledge would work?
You’re caught up in the argument and not paying attention to what the other person is saying.
Think of it this way, that carving might be totally accurate snd still not represent the whole story. It doesn’t even really show that many people, I’ve worked jobs where for a few days there are hundreds of people it’s very impressive and the photos always end up somewhere. This could just be intended to capture one key stage or big event, if it could be combining lots of things into one image to show ‘there was a huge workforce’ it’s not a lie or deception but it’s also not the whole story.
Brute force was part of how they did it but it certainly wasn’t all of it, and most people who’ve never pulled a big rope don’t really think about how hard it is - plus we take it for granted now but having rope that a hundred men can pull on is a feat of engineering in itself.
We know they used boats to transport them most the way, we know they used complex pullies and levers to get them into position, we know they used work teams and various other methods but none of those really solve all the questions which is why it’s such an interesting subject to think about.
And yes I know people get silly and talk about aliens or magic acoustic whistles or whatever but that’s not what the person you were talking to was doing, things like wet sand and forgotten infrastructure are realistic and logical ideas.
It’s impressive is year 2024, we sent robots to other planets and so many other technological achievements … and still dont know exactly how the the Giza piramids have been done .
We know several ways it could have been done, and we could do it ourselves for a sliver of the cost. It’s a matter of historical preservation that we’re not sure which they chose.
Yeah, I remember this guy. He claimed that Stonehenge in England could have been built like this. The pyramids of Giza are much more complex, of course. Still, I think it’s entirely possible that the pyramids were built using very clever engineering principles that were forgotten and that we don’t need because we have cranes and power tools and hydraulics, etc.
For the record we do understand how they built it.
They used log rollers, ropes and lots and lots of people hauling. They brute forced it… which, the reason our trucks can’t haul that much has far more to do with the weight on the suspension and fuel efficiency. They said fuck-all to efficiency and literally threw bodies at it.
It’s a fairly common solution- the Moai heads on Rapa Nui (easter island) and stone henge also come to mind. In the case of Egypt, they used a sled (or sled and rollers.)
For getting it up the face, they used packed earth ramps that they later removed. Actually, we still use this technique in construction today. (Specifically to get vehicle access up otherwise too-steep slopes)(and again, threw bodies at it. Lots and lots of bodies.)
There’s really only a few things that are impressive about the pyramids. The first is the sheer ego it took to order it built. Then there is the celestial alignment between all of them. And finally the sheer scale of the project and vast amounts of human labor that went into it.
What they determined is that the river allowed the blocks to be floated much closer than previously thought (even today barges are superior to trains, never mind trucking.)
I don’t know any specifics, but a bunch of ropes divides the force on each one. A bunch of ropes, plus people pushing from behind, would probably be enough force to overcome static friction without exceeding tensile limits on any one rope.
Yeah people really forget how recent an invention good rope is, It’s not like they could just order a few hundred meters on ebay. Making all that rope would probably be more effort and expense than a lot of the stuff that people write of as too complex for them to have considered, like temporary canals or raise and drop sledding.
Rope braiding is pretty fast. Especially if you’re an ancient Egyptian woman who’s done it full time for decades. They had hemp, which is the same stuff that rigged up the giant sailing ships of later on in history.
So, each rope only needs to be too strong for the individual worker to snap. Obviously, that’s pretty easy, even with the worst natural fiber cordage - fibers are strong. Then they meet in some way, and ultimately attach to the wooden sled. The exact math for that is not straightforward, and we don’t really know how they tied it off, but it’s not an unusual amount of load for a large wooden structure. Assuming the sled measured 100 meters^2^ (80 tons was a special block worthy of an oversize sled), that works out to less than a ton per square meter, and a tree with 1m^2^ cross section at the trunk can weigh several tons without even considering the wind load on the foliage, which will be larger yet for most species.
80 tons is a lot, but it’s not a lot a lot. Thousands of tons are pretty common if you’re talking about ships, for example. Even the wooden ones; honestly wood is an underrated material.
There's a new theory that the ramps were actually internal. I like it because it means they don't need to bring a lot of extra material and manpower to the site just for the ramps since they're built into the structure of the same material.
I’ve also heard of this. It seems to me that this theory should be easy to confirm with some sort x-ray or radar or lidar or something, so that we can see the shape of the structure beneath the superficial layers…
I lot of people look at this and say its just too much material for it to have happened.
But we know of projects that have used more man power. The London to Birmingham railway line took 5 years to build and moved more material than the great pyramid and we know exactly how that was done. The size of individual pieces does add complication, but the absolute quantity and manpower is not unexplainable.
I wonder if there’s a bit of not wanting to believe what people can accomplish if a massive number of us all teamed up to do something.
Because then they’d feel guilty for not getting up out of their armchair and going to support whatever cause they claim they’re supporting from the comfort of home.
So it’s not just me. Maybe the discovery here was just the exact and complete layout, and the BBC misunderstood it the way journalists usually do with science stories?
Add comment