It’s an old very descriptive term. In '69 the Apollo astronauts used the term to apply to very light fluffy dust that almost flowed like water. This is the same description of the dust which sits on top of the carbonated water in the Osiuris Shaft. I believe it is partially composed of insects that have undergone anaerobic decomposition after being killed by the CO2 in the water. The dust holds a lot of the CO2. Of course this is one of the tests they won’t bother to do.
If the dust got thick enough its weight would push it into the water and it would get wet, no doubt.
I have no doubt some ramps were used, but they could not have been very large without creating a new engineering problem. I don’t know exactly what cladking is talking about, nor does it matter. Lifting with simple levers is easy to do. Individuals have lifted large rocks using levers, lifting them a few inches at a time and putting supports beneath them at each increment. It is the simplest technology to use for such a project, there is no indication the ancient Egyptians had pulleys, and levers are a very simple way to multiply force obviating the need for huge crews pulling on ropes. None of us can know exactly what was done based on the evidence available, but as far as I’m concerned now they used levers to lift the rocks up the stepped sides of the Great Pyramid, and possibly log rollers to move them into position once they were raised to the proper level. I’ll be perfectly willing to change my mind in the face of evidence to the contrary, but I don’t see the need for anything more complex than that.
In essence his idea is that water was used to move the stones up to the upper levels of the pyramid, the complexity that adds to the mix is never a problem for him, nor it is a problem that no evidence has been found and his cites do not offer that either.
Then then discussion also jumped to the basics of what science is.
Oh, and there is also an element of ‘I’m Not Saying It Was Aliens. But, It Was Aliens’.
What I have seen in the documentaries is that (for the great pyramid) there was no stepped structure (that eventually ended inside the pyramid to use), the problems for the machines you talk about is that they also have the same problem that many of the ramps around the pyramid theories have, that there was not enough space.
BTW as it was pointed before all the current experts in the field that I have looked at agree that a big single ramp was not the solution, the one most plausible theory that is being looked at recently talks about smaller internal ramps and does include the use of simple machines with counterweights and lifts.
I’d need more details about the construction to comment. I don’t mean to sound like there was only one simple way this was done either, but my interest here is knowing that a simple solution was employed, and this was never a job requiring the aid of aliens or any advanced mechanism. There are certainly good historic and engineering reasons to be curious about what was actually done, but the subject is littered with speculation from people who don’t understand that there were obvious means the ancient Egyptians could have used. Their logistics for the amount of men necessary, the process of cutting and transporting stones, and the manufacture of even the simplest tools they used seems far more interesting than how they lifted big rocks.
I was not clear there, sorry, I was not supposed to say technology, but the simplest solution. The lifts in the Houdin theory are simpler and there was less of an effort to use them than the ones proposed to be outside the pyramid and over it.
This comparison is not entirely fair. The Egyptian priesthood of Herodotos’ days would have had access to a, more or less, uninterrupted well of historical books dating far back.
If I remember Herodotos correctly, the Egyptian priests scoffed at his historical ambitions and boasted that their histories went back 3000 years.
It is quite fair. The notion that Egypt was eternal and unchanging was a motif that the Egyptians themselves held dear - but there is no reason for us to take it seriously, or to fail to note that things like construction techniques changed considerably over 2K+ years.
To give but one example, Middle Kingdom pyramids were built using quite different techniques from the Great Pyramid of Giza (which explains why they largely did not last intact). Of course, by the New Kingdom, pyramids were out and underground tombs were in.
As for Egyptians having a long “history” - what they undoubtedly meant was that they had what they considered “history”, which contained stuff like king lists - not necessarily construction manuals. To complete the paralell, we have in the Old Testament a history of the Jews that goes back 5000 years - but much of it is hardly reliable archaeological evidence.
But to get back to Herodotus - he was a very clever recorder of what he was told in his travels, but some of what he was told was provably inaccurate - particularly about Egypt. For example, he had this to say about what was written on the pyramids, in the very next sentence after he desribes the construction techniques:
It is clear his informant is pulling his leg - there isn’t an inscription boasting of the amount of money spend on radishes on the side of the pyramid, and it is highly unlikely there ever was.
In short, with Herodotus one must read critically and remember how he was getting his information. He’s very good on stuff he knew himself and usually scrupulous about saying where he heard stuff - which is often very informative, especially things he didn’t believe (for example, he was told that the rising of the Nile derived from mountain snowmelt, which he refused to believe because Africa is very hot; however, it happens to be true).
Where he is least reliable, is where he is relating stuff he was told about ancient history. This is not a critique - he apparently only read Greek (he certainly did not read Egyptian - he says as much) - so he was getting everything through interpreters, resulting in a certain amount of broken-telephoning going on - as in pyramid texts about radishes.
That said, it is possible the priests had construction manuals concerning old kingdom pyramid-building - but it seems more likely he was just getting the “tourist talk” from the local guides. How accurate such talk was after more than 2K years, is anyone’s guess - judging by the “radishes” talk, I’d opt for ‘not very reliable’.
It’s possible, but I’m not convinced anything is simpler than levers. I wouldn’t be surprised if they implemented some ingenious shortcuts to aid the process, but I’m satisfied that there is no great mystery here. I have seen enough information that the pyramid building process evolved over time as they learned more about construction techniques, and very importantly learned more about building foundations. I just don’t see insurmountable problems in lifting the stones. Manpower was their great resource, and there’s no question there was plenty of that or the pyramids wouldn’t exist. As for ramps, apparently no one disputes that their use would have been limited to the lower portion of the pyramid if used, so once again no mystery. As for Herodotus, I assume he reported what he was told, no need to blame him for any inaccuracies in the account, nor any reason to rely on his report either.
It should probably be noted that there is no reason to believe that the priests understood the ancient writing. They had access to it but then provided things like a king’s list that had some kings living for centuries. There’s no known “science” in the days Herodotus visited so there’s no known way that they could have the primitive technology that existed.
There isn’t now, but the pyramids used to have a glacis outer layer.
It’s not unlikely that it would have had some writing, boasting by the builders, “for the tourists” (as you say).
Was the glacis still intact at the time of Herodotos?
I think we are more in agreement here than what it seems, if you look carefully the smaller lifts that we are talking about, that were likely used for the internal ramp theory, **are **levers.
Certainly they had manpower but they lacked the resources to waste vast amounts of it. Men have to eat and it’s established fact that the builders village had as many women and children as men. The technology to store food was primitive and inefficient by modern standards and large numbers of people in a tiny area is an invitation to cholera and disease. This work was in the middle of peak growing season and there was no crop in the ground. It was a dangerous time to waste vast resources building a tomb for a dead god who lived eternally.
It was a bad time to use resources for any purpose.
Levers do not reduce the amount of work required. Indeed, they tremendously increase the amount of work because the pry bar must be lifted and suitable accomodations must be made. Any fulcrum available would be subject to excessive wear.
IU agree that levers are a little more efficienrt than ramps but even very high efficiency systems might not solve the problem of how they lifted 6 1/2 million tons to an avewrage 140’. Ramps might be 10% efficient at best and levers about 20%. It’s still far too much work in the blinding heat in the middle of the desert summer.
