Building the Pyramids

There's an interesting theory that the blocks were cast in situ.

The Pyramids at Giza have more than 5 million blocks of limestone, until now believed to be CARVED stones, new evidences shows they were CAST with agglomerated limestone concrete.

https://www.geopolymer.org/archaeology/pyramids/are-pyramids-made-out-of-concrete-1/

That recipe for concrete would be one heck of a durable form for building... lost to time?

I offered this same idea a few years ago,and it was dismissed out of hand.

As evidence,I indicated the difference of the distribution of aggregate in the blocks,versus the distribution in the quarry.

In the quarry,the shells are laid down in layers,due to natural sedimentary settling.

In the blocks,the shells are uniformly distributed.

To me that indicated a concrete mixture was used to make the blocks.

I agree the pyramids were constructed for more that one reason.

What better way to avoid unemployment that to have a project spanning many generations?

I was watching a couple of state workers as I filled my car with gas,and one of the guys was digging a hole,and the other was going right behind and filling the hole up.

After fill up,I asked them what were they doing.

They replied"Well,this is a 3 man job,me,Fred and Joe.Joe is the one supposed to put the signs in the hole,and he is out sick today,but that does not mean we can't work."

Silly as it sounds,it has merits.

It did not really matter if the sign was put in the hole or not.

(For the purposes of this mental construct,the message on the signs is not the important part,lest someone argue the safety,etc. importance of the signs))

If the diggers and fillers were miles apart and working at the same speed,the work could go on forever.

Nothing really accomplished,but everybody busy.(Sound familiar?)

Need to put more people to work?; Start another set of diggers right behind the fillers,and so on and so on.

And end to unemployment that would accomplish more than the government is now doing for the people.

Money is like electricity,it has to circulate to accomplish anything.

I offered this same idea a few years ago, and it was dismissed out of hand.

Now that you mention it, I believe your old post was where I first heard of the idea. As well as the stones are reported to fit together, it seems very likely that they were cast.

I wonder if there's a test one could perform to see if those ancient Egyptians ate a lot of shellfish? The concretion construction technique might have been developed to utilize a waste product.

That’s a lot of shell fish...

im not sure what the population of Egypt was in the day,... but at one point it was 1 million,... but that was the time of Alexander the Great,...

I didn't say that all of the cast limestone calcium carbonate material came from human consumption of shellfish. Even with the five centuries of the Egyptian Old Kingdom when the pyramids and Sphinx were made, that would be absurd. However, coping with shellfish waste combined with somebody's keen observational mind might have lead to a now lost but very productive concretion building material.

Wait a minute, the chemical compound found in limestone and shellfish shells is calcium carbonate. Carbon dating might be possible to differentiate if a pyramid block would contain newer and older regions of calcium carbonate!

Phooey. The uncertainty of limestone radiocarbon dating is too great by an order of magnitude to be useful. It was an interesting thought.

"Phooey. The uncertainty of limestone radiocarbon dating is too great by an order of magnitude to be useful. It was an interesting thought. "

In addition, it is impossible to radiocarbon date anything that was on the surface of the planet during the period of the late 1930's to about the mid 1950's, due to the "contamination" from the nuclear bomb testing at the time. Anything made after that time can't be accurately carbon dated either, since it won't trend with the historical baseline values.

(sarcastic) Thanks a lot Oppenhinmer. (/sarcastic)

Well I think that common sense would say it would be easier to cast the blocks in place, and then cover them with a hard attractive tile face... but, if the project was dual purposed, such that it was mostly intended to build an industrious society that encompassed virtually every profession and skill including engineers, artists and laborers, and also to build a way of life and add structure to society, then the adherence to the common sense approach takes on a different meaning...you are not just building a tomb, you are building a foundation for improving life going forward, and a labor pool that can build and maintain the infrastructure of a modern society...In this case you might make it as difficult as possible starting out, and then allow improvements in methodology to be made over time....this would teach innovation, expose the best thinkers, build motivation and sustain momentum...No, if I was pharaoh, I would use the tomb as a practice project, a proving ground, a vehicle to start a great society...It would only be the first of many great structures that the people could be proud of and enjoy...the easiest way is not always the best way...

It is sad that with all the resources at his disposal all they ended with was a pile of rocks. Neatly piled to be sure, but of no practical use.

Tourism plays a major role in Egypt, so these "piles of rocks" still have a great deal of value....

..."Tourism in Egypt. Tourism is one of the leading sources of income, crucial to Egypt's economy. At its peak in 2010 the sector employed about 12% of Egypt's workforce serving approximately 14.7 million visitors Egypt, and providing revenues of nearly $12.5 billion."...

They definitely get a lot of tourists - it just took about 2000 years for them to show up. The Erie Canal in the United States was a project of similar magnitude. It paid for itself in 9 years.

My understanding is they killed the architects and engineers upon completion. Charlton Heston was lucky to get out alive

So my guess is they weren't in any hurry...haha

Sure we'll help to build the Pyramid boss....

Well, then this is all wrong?

The following tools and techniques are generally thought to have been used by builders during the old Kingdom: copper chisels, transporting causeways, ramps, sledges, roller, mud brick construction embankments, levers, plumb rules, set squares, ropes, saws, dolorite pounders, tubular drills, and wooden molds. Of all these tools, only one plumb rule, one square, and a number of dolorite pounders have actually been found. However, there is visible evidence on some of the stones and statues of the use of saws, tube drills and lathes. (See: www.theglobaleducationproject.org

Coarse limestone, used for the core masonry, appears to have been quarried from the immediate vicinity of each pyramid. Quarries have been located at Giza around the Sphinx, southeast of the Pyramid of Menkaure, and south-east of the Pyramid of Khafre. Fine limestone, used for the exterior casing stones, and for lining the passages and chambers, appears to have mainly come from the region around Tura, southeast of Cairo. However, there are no direct references to this quarry until the Middle Kingdom. Alabaster appears as flooring in the Pyramid and Valley Temple of the Pyramid of Khafre.

Granite was used in the interiors of all three of the pyramids of Giza, most notably in the King�s Chamber in the Great Pyramid. Granite also lines the Valley Temple of Khafre, makes up the casing stones of the first sixteen courses of the of the Pyramid of Menkaure, and the lower courses of the Pyramid of Khafre. Red granite also lines the north corridor of the Pyramid Temple of Menkaure. Nearly all of the granite apparently came from the area around Aswan and Elephantine Island, a distance of 500 miles. Each of the red granite blocks used in the King's Chamber ceiling and the chambers above it are estimated to weigh 50 tons—as much as a locomotive.

I agree that to move such massive stones is mind boggling, considering the tools of the times.

Somewhat surprisingly, there is disagreement as to when the Egyptians first put pulleys to work building the Pyramids, in part evidenced by the lack of pulleys in the barges simultaneously used for stone transportation along the Nile River...

The computed estimate of how many stones were placed per year implies that the rate was relatively quite rapid, and difficult to rationalise using only the generally assumed crude methodologies of that era...

Similarly, the question remains as to when they first had wheels, such as precursors to those used on chariots, which became a primary means by which they conducted warfare in that general time-frame (i.e.: chariot wheels were found in the tomb of Tutankhamen (sp?))...

Also, little mention has been made of exactly how the inclined level of the (main?) ramp was raised as the horizontal working surface rose higher with each layer (i.e.: the volume of stone in the ramp may have more than the volume of stone in the pyramid), which gives creedence to the theory that there was an internal ramp that was covered up as the final surfacing stones were placed, progressing backwards down that internal scaffolding-type ramp...

Even so, that does not clearly explain how the very top stone (pyramidion) of the pyramid was placed at the very peak of the pyramids as the very last step of the construction (i.e.: how did they get it up there if the sides were already completed as the pyramid went up?), unless it was relatively smaller than the one that was actually found, near the base of the pyramid...

I can understand the disagreements...

What I’ve understand, the former Minister of State for Antiquities Affairs for Egypt, Zahi Hawass, he would withhold or obstruct any information that may disprove or is detrimental to Egypt’s history as it stands. Not to mention the corruption (I can post the info of the infighting, but it really gets to be a tangled web)

An example, Robert Schoch (a professor of Geology? at Boston University, he holds multiple degrees) is one of the first people who believes the Sphinx is a lot older then originally thought. And when his findings start to disprove Egypt’s current beliefs of its history, Zahi Harass stepped in and basically made it near impossible for Schott to carry on.

The reason Mr Schott's idea was rejected is because he claimed the erosion of the Sphinx was due to water,not wind,and there has not been water there for over 10,000 years.No sign of civilization older than 5000 years has ever been found in the area.

If the idea of water erosion was accepted,many scientists would have to eat crow.

Just like the brontosaurus had the wrong head for over 50 years,everyone was afraid to challenge it till the old school died out.

Ego Equity builds on unchallenged ideas to the detriment of progress.

Sphinx was due to water,not wind,and there has not been water there for over 10,000 years.

actually that is why Schott claims it to be over 10,000 years old... I believe he claims 12,000 maybe more.

and it’s how the rock has been eroded.

as far as no signs has Ever been found there over older then 5,000 years old... unless his claims are true about the Sphinx there will be.

(Egytian Leadership) is also smart enough to understand enough to manage the (release of) new discoveries, theories, etc., and therefore, to maintain the rate of high tourist-dollar-income-volume to the Egyptian economy (i.e.: to ''mine'' the wallets/purses of tourists in Egypt...)...

That is why the known chamber, some 30 (feet?) below, and slightly offset from, the centerline of the front of the Sphinx will probably not be accessed in our lifetimes...

Also, the (Egyptian Goverment) has been found to be conducting their own private explorations and testing programs within the larger pyramids...

Also, the (Egyptian Goverment) has been found to be conducting their own private explorations and testing programs within the larger pyramids...

yes, its all about control, and that why its difficult to get a license for any archeology investigations in Egypt.

Temporarily getting back to the ramp, the typical slope of today's long road grades is 6%, maximum, as a compromise as to generably be easy enough for cars and pickups, but tolerably hard and safe enough for fully-loaded semi-truck & trailer rigs, while 8%, maximum, is considered tolerably hard for cars and light trucks... In comparison, the typical estimate of the pyramid ramp is about 7%, which is right within the same ranges as vehicle ramp traffic today...

Another question is whether or not the ramp was wide enough to simultaneously handle both ascending and descending traffic to what height of the finished pyramid?...

Such questions tend to support the idea of inclusion of an internal ramp that exited the pyramid at, say, a quarter of the total pyramid height to a smaller external ramp of lesser, but constant, side-entry height outside of the pyramid?...

Thus, I am convinced that the engineer(s) had some sort of a physical model (of at least significant portions) of the finished pyramid, as opposed to only drawings on papyrus...

This is without a doubt delving into my most frustratingly favorite subject.

~~~ Esoteric Engineering ~~~

On topic. I do like the idea of sand counterweights to move large blocks. There is a a guy on utube showing how to raise large blocks vertically by rocking them back and forth with a weight on the end and placing small shims (towards the bottom center) between each rocking action. This is no way to move 2,500,000 of anything, but is a good example of a basic, but immensely useful principal.

After much .coming, orging, utubering etc. I have become quite familiar with many ancient stone monuments. Many that were once considered to be stone show obvious signs that they have been cast in place.

I've seen just about every theory on how the pyramids were constructed and they are only outnumbered by the questions of by whom, why and when?

I've spent a large amount of time speculating on the function of the nubs found on the face of megalithic structures the world over.

A word of caution.. The subject can send you deep down the rabbit hole.

I've been meaning to start a post about the subject; however, previous prods has yielded very little interest in the topic.

If you're still not interested, either check your pulse or maybe you clicked on the wrong website!?

I have my own theories, but they are as always in flux.

I encourage you to speculate.. please!

Those were knotholes in the wooden frames used to pour the concrete mix....

...or maybe expansion holes....

They tend to be low.. drainage for a wet slurry has come to mind.

I certainly agree that it makes a lot of sense to try to use a counterweight to (help) lift a heavy stone up an incline..

However, the question is: What was the exact technique accomplish such a heavy lift?...

Once a heavy block is moved into a starting position at a lower elevation, one (or more?) haul-line could be connected to said load and run up and over some (rounded fulcrum?) down a short distance on the other side. So far, so good...

At that point, the question arises as to whether or not the counter weight was increased incrementally (with numerous smaller blocks, or one large block?) enough to push and/or pull the the load block up high enough to be stayed-in-place, and then moved horizontally towards it's intended destination....

At that point, would the counter-weight(s?) be returned to the lower level, and the process repeated as often as necessary?...

Or, would the load-block be relayed directly up the pyramid's side, without a ramp, by a succession lesser crane-lifts?...

I was thinking more along the lines of a bucket brigade (of sorts) bringing a continuous stream of sand bags/buckets to the top. (for use as a counterweight)

Given the water of the Nile they may have been able to pump large quantities of water uphill for use as a counterweight.

...No offense Archimedes

A bucket or basket of sand could be a viable alternative, if too much sand did not work it's way out during each trip up the ramp (which may have also had some sort of horizontal movable landing area in order to avoid moving the large single stones from an inclined orientation to a level one, before moving them horizontally to their final positions...)

A group of (a hundred?) workers could probably move more weight of solid stone on a sled, say, than an equal number of workers could move an equal weight of granular sand in (bags/buckets/baskets) due to less air voids per trip...

Also, solid (sand-?) stone would weigh something between 125 to 160 lbs per-cubic-foot, while sand might weigh 75 to 110 pcf, and water would weigh about 62.4 pcf, and would be less efficient to move, per person, than solid stone...

Just the haul-lines must have been an engineering feat, unto themselves, as well...

I recently saw a drawing of a cross-section of the pyramid. The inner blocks were laid sloping inwards, so earthquakes would wiggle them tighter, rather than looser. Some really smart engineering went into the pyramids. From the bent pyramid, we can see they learned from mistakes as they went along. To get that many people to work continuously on a project like that must been as much a religious experience as a WPA kind of thing.

I read somewhere that the Egyptians built the pyramids.

I also read somewhere that the Egyptians were heavy cannabis users.

Must be really true.

How else can you explain thousands of workers toiling in the sun for several hundred years to build a tomb for some long ago dead guy.

The Prime Occupant wasn't dead while they were building the pyramid, the tomb was commissioned basically on Inauguration Day, and the Contractor/Engineer in charge was working under a strict, if mostly undefined deadline.

I didn't mean the guy was dead, while they were working on it. And wasn't it true that all of the pharoah's servants " went " with him. Would that include the engineers also ?

I have seen many documentaries on these Egyptian rulers but there isn't much information on the workers, engineers, suppliers,,etc

His personal retainers may have been sent with him to "retain" him in the afterlife, but the Engineers, like the Priests, were generally considered "servants of Egypt and the gods" instead of "servants of the current Pharaoh."

Besides, if you killed all the skilled workers, the civilization would collapse rather quickly.

Also, have we ever FOUND any mass graves of servants in/near the pyramids? I think the "took followers into the grave with him" it is more myth than anything else. After all, they were buried with those mini statues of themselves, who could jump up and answer the call for the pharoah when he was summoned to perform a task for the gods.

I think you are not right when saying that ancient Egyptians werre familiar with pulleys, crane and other mechanical devices. Greeks were, and egyptian architecture changed a lot with Ptolemeians, importing greek technologies, especially cranes, in egypt.

Another unexplored technology is the way we(Redneks) used to clear land without heavy equipment,pulling large stumps for instance.

We would loop a rope around the stump,which had been cut tall,and around a large tree at the base of the tree.

A rod was inserted between the center of the loop,and twisted.

After many turns all of the slack had been removed and the rope started knotting up on itself and the amount of leverage using this method was incredible,and a large stump could be removed by a single man.When he became tired,he simply rested the long end of the rod on the ground and came back later,after a meal for instance.

No pulleys,cranes,winches,motors, just simple man and brain power.

I am sure the Egyptians and Easter Islanders were just a smart as a Rednek.

"No pulleys,cranes,winches,motors, just simple man and brain power."

Hate to break it to you, but that twisting rope *IS* a winch of sorts, and going by the math involved to describe the energy transfer, it could be considered a screw-powered winch, since you are adding Torque to the system to generate the Tension force.

And the tall-cut stump/base of tree "anchor points" are simply an understanding of Leverage.

It only seems a mystery because you Rednecks only use that method when we Carpetbaggers aren't around to see; which is itself a bit of Cunning Strategy. After all, why give away a trade secret when you can get something of value for it instead?

I remember seeing a quarryman demonstrating a simple rig of four rounded skids that wrapped around a quarried block. The rounded skids made a four lobbed object that wouldn't roll freely down an incline but was certainly easier to move than sliding.

That looks like mult ton rocks being moved by a dozen men up an incline?

I once had a job moving a rock well over (a measly) 3000 lb and I had nearly as many men on hand to do so. .. Plus winches, steel rollers, wood boards etc. Moving a few inches at a time we got it into place. I took serious effort.

I can spin the weight of a bus on a sturdy pebble but I can drag it up a hill on a roller with a rope over my shoulder.

Hey these guys still do it.....the old way

https://www.cryptoanthropologist.com/2018/02/nias-island-surviving-megalithic-culture.html

That's a good piece. I'm not questioning the methods of moving blocks. Given time and resources a lot can be accomplished.

There is a lot more going on that I find interesting.

That's doing it the old-fashioned way. They're ''earning'' it...

Excellent graphics, if a bit over-simplified...

This is too cool....

That's the guy I was referring to.

Welcome to the rabbit hole. What's interesting is how easily a solution works for one head scratcher, but fails when applied to another.

There is some measure of incomprehensibility that is constant in the mind of man such that even after having done some large project it still appears impossible even after you have done it....I have witnessed this myself on several occasions....this I think is why great things can only be accomplished one step at a time...

Well said. And what a load of wonderfully incomprehensible works we have inherited.

Makes the mind wobble.