No, I also defined them by function - they are monumental both in scale and purpose.
The Greeks?
The teocalli is also a temple. But like Mississippian mounds, they were sometimes both.
Just like cathedrals and train stations!
OK, I see you’re not taking this seriously, so I’m just going to stop responding to you, thanks.
I am taking this at least semi-seriously - as much as such an irrelevant subject demands.
And I would argue that both cathedrals and train stations - which, as noted, have basically the same shape - are very much “monumental” structures, whose very size is intended to impress the populace and the world by displaying the wealth and power of those who had them built.
But if the train station was built by ancient astronauts …
And finally back to the original subject!
Maybe a wizard did it, so look for Platform 9¾ at King Cross…
You don’t need to define buildings solely by shape to have some particular categories that are defined by shape. Sure, train stations and cathedrals aren’t defined by shape at all. But what about a tower? Defensive towers, air traffic control towers, radio towers and water towers don’t have much in common, other than the fact that they’re all tall and narrow. I don’t see why the term “pyramid” can’t also refer to a category that’s defined by shape instead of purpose.
Since pyramids developed from earlier structures if ziggurat-like design, I think we can declare that cladistically pyramids are ziggurats.
(And Mesoamerican pyramids are of an enitely separate lineage and so are not true pyramids at all).
If they interbreed, will the hybrids be fertile or sterile?
Grades 5-12+.
Sounds fishy, to me.
@Alessan , would you say that the Taj Mahal is a pyramid? I wouldn’t, because “pyramid” is a word for a certain kind of geometric shape, and the Taj Mahal isn’t that shape.
Only one way to find out! You should petition your local university for a grant to travel to Iraq and to Egypt, capture wild Pyramids and Ziggurats, transport them to a wide plot of land in Texas, and see what happens.
But is there an established way to sex them before putting them together to breed?
Not as juveniles, and even with adults it’s hard to tell outside of mating season. Typically want to get around 6-12 juveniles and raise them together until a dominant couple pairs up and establishes a territory, at which point you remove the others.
Well, if we examine this proposal with the theory presented in post 102 and the documentary evidence presented in post 103, it’s between microscopic and about 2 feet high.
I believe I have a case of the vapors.
Convergent evolution?
With luck you could wind up with several breeding pairs, then. How much territory would each incipient pack need, do you think?
Gotta beware of the effects of inbreeding, though.
Unless you decided to breed deliberately for such characteridtics and charge a premium for the offspring, like Munchkin cats.
ETA: Oh, jeez, there’s even a hairless version: The Bambino cat,