| Author | Message | ||
     J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 132 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.171 |
Hi All, Helmut and Charlie, thank you for your contributions. Maybe we can non lay this ridiculous ventilation theory to rest and start discussing the other possibilities ? Rick, on the statuette, I asked some time ago whether the scratches had been found in the lower part of the twisted shafts also. In other words, had the putative statuette (or other object having slid up and down? in the shafts) needed to pass the bends ? Another aspect is that the Egyptians may not have expected the settling of the core to have caused irregularities in the alignment of the shafts' walls, such as the one that caused the "tank trap" etc. I'm posting a figure of the Hölscher lifting system, a metal version of which may have caused similar damages to the shaft segments ?  Janine, since a falcon is mentioned in the exit spells of Unas' pyramid, but since the QC is also at an early stage of the regeneration ritual, a falcon in its latent phase, still wrapped in a shroud, would be my best bet for the QC shafts. But there are of course several other possibilities... JD | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 22 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
J.D. I'm sorry I didn't answer your question, but my total knowledge of "scratches" on the interior of the shaft is restricted to the one picture that was posted. And to me they look like nothing more than quarrying marks, there's nothing exceptional about any of the scratches marks or dings on any of the rocks. If there were any heirgolyphs that said "stones for the shaft to drag the statuette up..." or something like that. I would instantly concede that you, Ritva and Stadelman were right and congratulate all of you for your penetrating insight into this ongoing problem. And feel sorry for myself that I'm on the losing team. But until that happens I will remain defiantly in the airshaft camp. In addition I saw the original upuaut video a couple of years ago and was amazed at the tremendous difficulty that Gantenbrink had getting his robot up that shaft just to wind up at the block. Like you and everybody else I was convinced there was something on the other side of that block. I won't repeat all the reasons we already know them...But then as the years passed by and I read the ten million shaft posts and studied the cad/cam drawings I became convinced it was simply an air shaft that had been plugged. But now that we've drilled through it was there a statuette there? No. Just a blank space and another wall. Frankly I think they should send another robot up there with an extension drill and keep drilling until it pops out one of the exterior walls of the pyramid. With today's technology that's entirely possible. In addition from one armchair archeologist to another we know from that one papyrus (sorry don't feel like looking it up now.) that dragging a statue was a complex proceedure requiring many men, sleds, oil, etc. The same principles would apply only on a smaller scale in the shafts. BTW did you try my little experiment of dragging a vaccuum cleaner around your house by the hose or chord and seeing what it hangs up on? I tried it, again yesterday, and again it get's hung up on the corners. Gotta love those laws of physics. Finally, you're the one proposing that there's a statue in the shaft somewhere. So until you can show me evidence that there is a statue, I think this will end my participation in this particular string. We're running around in circles again repeating the same arguments with no new light being cast on the subject, however the heat is beginning to rise. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 136 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.140.63 |
Rick, How can you go on with the ventilation theory when the lower shaft has never been perforated (as confirmed by Charlie) ? I'm not saying that there's a statuette in the shaft, but that one may have been let down the shaft then pulled out again (not without difficulty), to simulate the movement of the king's soul that was supposed to happen in the shafts : a model of the king for a simulated getting out of the QC through model shafts. In the same manner as no sarcophagus is found near the portcullises at the exit of a pyramid, I never expected to find a statue near the upper end of the shafts. For those who may think that the bA-soul of a king didn't need a shaft and could fly out at will, here's a pic from the papyrus of Nebqed in the Louvre :  The representation is New Kingdom, but for the Old Kingdom you can go and look up the pyramid text from Unas' exit passage which I quoted in the original string, and which states that the king as Horus gets out through the exit corridor, that a door is opened, then closed for him, etc. So the soul used corridors, which strengthens STADELMANN's hypothesis of the shafts being model passages. JD | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 333 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
JD, the "shaft" pictured here, makes me think more of the GG than the shafts. Rick, Your comment on miniatyre sled-dragging in the shafts has got a rub: where would they have gotten men small enough to fit the shafts? Happy vacuuming!  | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 138 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.134.91 |
Ritva, It's a tomb pit or shaft, actually. JD | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 335 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Hmm, ok change to plan B,then. Imagine the mummy in the picture in the subterranean chamber, Ba flies up through the shaft (or is it called a well?) to the QC, where there is means of ascension (seen on your picture too). The corbelled niche + the GG? | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 40 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.94 |
All, The QC walls: "For a starting point in measurement, the general floor is hopelessly irregular, consisting plainly of rough core masonry: and furthermore, it is built over with a similar rough masonry, which was afterward stripped down TO INSERT THE CHAMBER WALLS. This is proved by there being no fewer than eight edges of sunken spaces upon it, (according to the universal habit of pyramid builders) to let in the inequalities of the upper course into the surface of the course below it. These sunken edges are well seen in other parts of the core masonry, and their meaning here is unequivocal. But all round the chamber, and the lower part of the passage leading to it, is a footing of fine stone, at the rough floor level; this projects 1 to 4 inches from the base of the walls, apparently as if intended as a support for the flooring blocks, which never have never been introduced." (W. M. F. Petrie, THE PYRAMIDS AND TEMPLES OF GIZEH, 1990 edition, p.23) Petrie's infomation--that has always been available for anyone that wanted to check it--answers all the questions about why the lower few inches of the QC air shafts were never opened. | ||
| Charlie Rigano Senior Member Username: charlie Post Number: 497 Registered: 06-1999 Posted From: 65.57.42.143 |
George, I have read both the Petrie's 1990 version, which is really a reprint of his 1885 version and the more detailed 1883 version. I don't see the point you are making. This finished space around the floor near the walls has always been intrepted to support a floor - personally I have never understood that. Of course the floor is laid between the walls - that is standard. While the floor is rough and both Petrie and M&R say iit is core masonry, this is unlikely. In the hole behind the niche M&R found well squared and dressed limestone blocks for 6-7 metres byond which were roughly dressed core masonry. This indicates that the QC is surrounded by a thick shell of finished stone. Likely this included the floor. As an aside, in both versions of the book Petrie mentions that the "channels" leading from the QC are exactly like the air channels in the KC. In his text on the KC, he says they are air channels as if he never considered any other possibility. There are other possibilities. Charlie | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 139 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.8 |
OK, George, data at last ! Let's look them over point after point, and try and separate the data from the conclusions drawn from them. "For a starting point in measurement, the general floor is hopelessly irregular, consisting plainly of rough core masonry" I guess we all agree on that. "and furthermore, it is built over with a similar rough masonry ...This is proved by there being no fewer than eight edges of sunken spaces upon it, (according to the universal habit of pyramid builders) to let in the inequalities of the upper course into the surface of the course below it. These sunken edges are well seen in other parts of the core masonry, and their meaning here is unequivocal." Here I took out a conclusion ("which was afterward stripped down to insert the chamber walls"), which IMHO may have been slightly premature. What does PETRIE state here ? That there had been a layer of masonry above what is now called the floor of the QC. I have been posting this all along on this BB, even proving the point with a picture, and everybody has always said this wasn't true, that PETRIE hadn't seen these imprints on the present "floor" ! So what do you think this vanished stone layer is ? Looking at the sudden drop of the floor in the horizontal passage, I'd say the layer equals the ancient floor. But PETRIE calls it " a similar rough masonry". Why ? 1. Because of the irregular outline of the slabs that composed it ? Then he's wrong, since most OK temple floors I've seen are irregular and mosaic-like, so why not inside pyramids ? 2. Or is it this : "But all round the chamber, and the lower part of the passage leading to it, is a footing of fine stone, at the rough floor level; this projects 1 to 4 inches from the base of the walls, apparently as if intended as a support for the flooring blocks, which never have never been introduced." I'm not certain I understand what he means here. You have probably been in the GP much more often than my 5 times, so you may know. Does he mean that all around the room, at the same level as the present "floor", one sees, between the rough blocks making up this "floor" and the base of the walls, a narrow strip of fine limestone ? Because if this is the case, I don't understand his conclusion, and would rather see things the following way : -in Old Kingdom structures the floor is generally inserted between the walls, i.e. the walls don't rest on the floor (for the GP, we have the example of the KC). -in Old Kingdom structures the wall blocks are put into place with their visible face left rough (see casing of pyramids, a good example inside Khafre's Valley Temple, etc.). From which one can deduce *that the QC walls were placed with their visible face left rough (and as Tura limestone was easier to obtain and to work than granite, the good limestone walls start at some depth relative to the final floor level, contrasting with what we see in the KC). *that they were trimmed and polished before the floor was placed. *that the ledge of fine limestone at the base of the walls marks this thickness of stone having been trimmed off. *that the traces visible on the present "floor" are the incrustations of the floor slabs placed on this rough supporting masonry and on the narrow strip of Tura limestone remaining from the polishing of the walls. Or have I misunderstood PETRIE's statement ? JD  | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 24 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Rick, "How can you go on with the ventilation theory when the lower shaft has never been perforated (as confirmed by Charlie) ?" Well I don't know about you but I've lost count of the buildings, structures etc, that took a sudden change in direction when the engineers on the project changed their mind, or funds ran out, or jobs were cancelled or somebody got sued or something. I imagine the unperforated shaft falls somewhere in this vast categories of SNAFU's that is the trademark of all human activity. The only thing remarkable about them is the fact that everybody makes such a big deal about them... | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 142 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.8 |
Rick, If there had been a short stump of a shaft in the walls, one could have said that. But they were built up to the level of the KC's gable vault ! So taking this into account, what's the precise scenario you have in mind ? When would these shafts have been opened to ventilate which activity ? Why weren't they opened from the onset if their role was simply a technical one, to ventilate ? The fact that nothing on the wall revealed their location pleads against the idea that they would have been opened later. Etc. JD | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 336 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Rick, If the QC project was abandoned during the construction in favour of a chamber higher up in the pyramid, then how do you explain, that the GG starts at the same level with the QC? Or are you suggesting, that Khufu just wanted a corbelled gallery leading... nowhere? If the QC was abandoned, then why continue building the "airshafts", especially with the technical problems due to their orientation and the GG? But most of all, seen the evolution of pyramids and their layouts during Snefru, one could safely assume, that since both the Red and the Bent have three chambers and magnificent corbelled ceilings, Khufu knew exactly where he was going with his project!! In other words, if building layer by layer, after the QC one would expect at least one more chamber and a corbelled ceiling of some sort. Where's the change in the plans? | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 26 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
J.D. and Ritva the only way I can answer your question is by drawing on a personal example. Years ago I was sitting in the dentist chair absent mindedly starting at a construction site outside the window, something was wrong with it but I couldn't quite figure it out until I had an "aha" experience. They were installing the ventilation system first and then framing the building around it instead of vice versa. The dentist had been watching this in dismay along with his assistants and now one of his patients. The end of the story is that it was a govt. building that when the mistake was "discovered" it cost millions to fix. This is so common that there's even a law of construction called "Cheops Law" Everything's overbudget, behind schedule and built with the cheapest materials. If you're genuinely trying to tell me that one of the largest construction projects in the history of the world went on without a hitch, or that everything about it must have a reason, or that there were no collosal screw ups while they were building it then you are sadly mistaken. | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 41 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.219 |
It appears fairly obvious that the stone plates on the air shaft wall openings were never broken through because the QC was left unfinished by the workmen. Was that because at that stage the upper shafts had been sealed and so there was no purpose in opening the lower plate. We don't know. But we do know when the work moved to the KC the shafts were opened through the wall. Sorry, but I do not understand the fuzzy logic here that although the QC shafts, except for being plugged when they were no longer useful, are not the same as the KC shafts. Or are you also proposing the were also used for hauling up falcon statues on a string. There is no theory in the suppositions that have been piled up on this sting supposing that the QC shafts were for some imaginary theological purpose of pulling a statue of a bird up a shaft and then sealing the shaft, or why this important religious rite happened in only one pyramid--and the only evidence so far found are scratches on the walls of some blocks. Sorry, that isn't archaeological evidence. If you believe you have sufficient evidence to support such a theory, write a paper, send it to ARCE, the EES or other recognized journal for publication as an alternative to the airshaft theory. Posting suppositions is easy, the proof is in getting published in an archaeological journal for review by the community of Egyptologists. | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 338 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
George, There might not be any archaeological evidence for JD's suggestion to the function of the shafts (or mine, for that matter). But what archaeological evidence do you have to support the shafts having been for ventilation? If you believe you have sufficient evidence to support such a theory, write a paper, send it to ARCE, the EES or other recognized journal for publication as an alternative to the airshaft theory. Posting suppositions is easy, the proof is in getting published in an archaeological journal for review by the community of Egyptologists. I thought a discussion board would be the place for people "with no credentials" to air their ideas. Maybe I was mistaken. | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 339 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Rick, It's thoughtful of you to share your dentist experience with us.  Since you seem quite sure, that anybody not adding to the "change of plan" scenario is sadly mistaken, I'd be interested to see your comments/explanations to the points raised by me, in my posting above yours. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 143 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.134.117 |
George, >It appears fairly obvious that the stone plates on the air shaft wall openings were never broken through because the QC was left unfinished by the workmen.< It appears fairly obvious to you, but on what grounds ? Since you only want to use technical explanations for features, what could be the reason for not completing the "gutters" in the wall blocks to start with (then to plug the orifice if they wanted it to be closed for some technical reason, until it was needed for ventilation purposes)*. And on what grounds can you state that the QC remained unfinished ? The small torus at the angle of the door ? To me the walls look as nicely polished as elsewhere. I see traces which I interpret as those of a floor which was later broken up. The floor in the horizontal passage appears rough, but could have been damaged, for example when debris from the QC were carried out of the pyramid. >Was that because at that stage the upper shafts had been sealed and so there was no purpose in opening the lower plate. We don't know.< So then, in your mind, the QC initially had to be ventilated at the end of works (polishing ? but the polishing was done and the shafts remained sealed !)? Or during the burial ceremony ? Doesn't sound convincing at all ! Were other pyramid rooms ventilated at this stage ? >But we do know when the work moved to the KC the shafts were opened through the wall. Sorry, but I do not understand the fuzzy logic here that although the QC shafts, except for being plugged when they were no longer useful, are not the same as the KC shafts.< Pardon me, but I defended the opinion that all shafts had the same purpose (well, nearly the same, the QC ones serving for the exit, the KC ones for the entrance of the king's soul, IMHO). So the features of one shaft can be deduced from the details of the others: the lack of a lower perforation in the QC can be reconstructed as meaning the presence of a plug in the KC shafts. I'm a bit astonished that a practical man such as you would suggest that the QC shafts would have had to be opened later on, when nothing on the wall indicated their position ! Or were the QC shafts "forgotten" ? Nor did you address the question of the location of the shafts, where they interfered with the GG (ventilation ducts could have been built further west). Whereas if they had the symbolic meaning of passages, they may have needed to be associated with these, by building them as close to the normal corridors as possible. The reason why the KC shafts weren't carved the same way as the QC ones could be the different materials, granite in the KC, soft limestone in the QC. It was easier to make a kind of gutter in the upper surface of the granite, using one of the large suspended saws used by the builders of the GP, then to cut away the granite between the two saw cuts. In any case, your model doesn't rest on any evidence at all, whereas the STADELMANN hypothesis, of which my ideas are but a variant, provides a simple, straightforward explanation, provable through the identity of structures between the shafts and normal exit passages, without calling nicely finished rooms "unfinished", without "forgotten" shafts, without any change of mind of the builders. But as I said, the exact religious meaning remains open to discussion, even though the PT quotations I provided, plus the Nebqed picture, seem rather clear to me. I also note that you didn't respond to my questions about how to understand your PETRIE quotation. >Or are you also proposing the were also used for hauling up falcon statues on a string.< I'm not saying that this is the goal of the shafts, but that if they possessed a religious role, this is the kind of ritual one could expect, among others. The PT spells linked with the normal passage mention offerings, and also the Horus falcon leaving the pyramid through the corridor, the doors of which are even mentioned. And once again I note that your post concentrates on demeaning remarks, whereas I'd like more facts to support your ideas ! JD *I once wondered whether opening the shafts couldn't have been part of the ceremony of the "opening of the mouth and eyes" of the pyramid. But since this is also a religious hypothesis, you won't accept it either... | ||
| Joel Augustus Laird Junior Member Username: joel Post Number: 88 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 217.33.154.197 |
It seems to me that the ventilation theory only has some weight behind it because it's the oldest theory. Unfortunately this sort of thing happens a lot in science. Alterations to the original idea can be very difficult to proceed with until some definite proof is forthcoming stating otherwise. However, we do now know that the QC shafts reach quite some considerable height in the pyramid (they are as long as the shafts from the KC). Also their construction continued after the KC shafts had been started. If there had been a 'change of plan' then why continue building these obsolete 'air-shafts' when the new ones had already been started? Why build a shaft on both the north and south sides when one would suffice? Why go to all the difficulty of constructing the shafts at an angle? Why, in particular for the QC southern shaft, dress most of the blocks properly and then use a higher quality limestone near its upper end? Why terminate them with a thin block with metal fittings instead of an ordinary slab of core masonry? Would ventilation really have been necessary whilst the pyramid was being built and the chamber roofs were open to the air? Do we have any evidence for ventilation shafts in other pyramids? What exactly is it about the ventilation theory that makes it any more reasonable or likely than that of shafts as model passageways? Regards the scratches, I asked Rudolf about the depth of these a while ago and he said that they were just hairline scratches. They could be caused by something with a sharp edge gently scraping along the side. They continue along the majority of the shaft at the same height above the floor and on both sides. This is obviously caused either by something being dragged up the shaft or being pushed up it; perhaps a result of the explorations by John and Morton Edgar? Does anyone have/read their odd book: "The Great Pyramid Passages and Chambers," by John and Morton Edgar (Glasgow: Bone & Hulley, 1923, Vol. 1-3)? Does this explain exactly what they did and whether or not they could have caused the scratches? | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 27 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva-As George has pointed out, repeatedly, the AE's had invented that revolutionary device, "The False Door" for the spirit to enter and exit at will. On the earlier question of the shafts "zigzagging" around believe it or not (and I know you'll doubt it.) but plumbing and ventilation systems give you the most leeway in any part of a construction project. (i.e. you can run a gas pipe either under the house, if you're stupid, or through the attic, but you can't put the flood on the ceiling.) The zigzagging makes perfect sense too me. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 28 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
oops that should say "The floor on the ceiling." | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 22 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 12.4.169.51 |
Ritva, Looking at Dynasty III and IV pyramids, I don't consider the 3 chamber argument to be on firm ground. Yes, the Red and the Great each have three defined separate chambers. The Bent does not have such a 3 chamber layout. Nor does Meidum. From what I've seen at Abu Roash, no (pending publication). Khafre, no. Menkaure, no. Djoser, no. I could go on. Sure, one may manipulate data to conform to "3 chambers", but that, IMHO, introduces a result-oriented bias. If one may read a religious interpretation into things, why not come up for a religious reason for the Bent and Khafre having two entrances? If the logic which argues a religious based rationale for 3 chambers based upon the Red & Great is valid in the face of so many exceptions, then the same logic must also support a religion-based rationale for two entrances in these two pyramids in the face of so many exceptions. The mathematicians claim facts to support their positions, also. If valid scientifically, a predictive nature must yield from the theory. I wonder where the predictive value of the religious or mathematician theories are though, since I haven't seen either theory predict anything which was not already established. No new rooms, etc. Rather, both seem to "interpret" that which is already known, a technique not unknown also to followers of Nostradumus and Cayce. It is perhaps easier for the "technical" school in this regard since a core of that approach is that unilateral changes and pyramid uniqueness is to be anticipated - as it is found. Before the defenders of the religion school feel the need to defend, let me say that I don't rule out religion and do assume an involvement of religion in many facets of pyramid-building. I do, however, recognize the scientific limitations of assumptions and find the case so far put forth here far from convincing. That isn't meant to denigrate anyone or anyone's beliefs, just to acknowledge a difference in beliefs and approaches. Regards, Brent | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 15 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.93.49.10 |
All, Does anybody know: - if the QC shafts were plugged, meaning they were closed after having been open, or if the last centimeters/inches of the blocks forming part of the QC wall(s) just were left uncut? - what the prevailing wind/air movement direction is on the Giza plateau? (I would guess from the west due to air mass exchange between the Meditteranean sea and land) It would have been much more efficient for ventilation to build the shafts horizontally without any twists and bends, which actually hinder airflow. Joel, You need two openings to have proper ventilation, the same as you open two windows on opposing sides of your house, when you want a draught. | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 16 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.93.49.10 |
Rick, Are you seriously suggesting that the masons forgot to cut some centimeters of the u-shape in TWO blocks which then were placed in the TWO spots were later the shafts would start? I know about Murphy's law, but I think this is taking it a bit far. '. . .there's even a law of construction called "Cheops Law"'. Could you let us know wht this 'law' says? Regards, Helmut | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 42 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.130 |
Ritva, "There might not be any archaeological evidence for JD's suggestion to the function of the shafts (or mine, for that matter). But what archaeological evidence do you have to support the shafts having been for ventilation?" 1.}The airshaft theory is not my theory. It was established long before I became interested in the study of pyramids. If you can prove the airshafts were not airshafts fine. But you cannot simply proclaim the airshaft theory is wrong. Scientific method does not work that way. "I thought a discussion board would be the place for people "with no credentials" to air their ideas. Maybe I was mistaken." 2. You will need to discuss that point with the moderator. But in past discussions with the moderator I understand this board, unlike many others, was founded for the purpose of knowledgable, fact-based discussion of the science of Egyptology. If your above statement is correct, then the people with ideas about the connection between AE and Atlantis, pyramids on Mars, the GP is a water pump and the AE invented the light bulb have as many valid credentials to post here as we do. But as I say, that thought is between you and the moderator to decide. | ||
| Janine Williams Junior Member Username: janine Post Number: 86 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Helmut: On the net were two quotes that seem to indicate a prevailing north wind. They said: "the extremes of both the hot and cool seasons are moderated by the prevailing northern winds."...and there is a model boat with sails, "to sail south with the prevailing winds." Janine | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 29 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Helmut I'm sorry but I simply don't understand your question at all. But if you're seriously suggesting that a couple of cm here or there in a structure composed of millions of blocks of varying sizes constructed by over 20,000 people over a 20 year period and that has been sitting around for 5,000 years actually has some deep and meaningful significance, then there's simply no point in continuing this discussion. Cheops law is posted above. | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 43 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.168 |
JD, You continue to refer to what you think I believe and my model. The theory of airshafts isnt my theory, but it is the only theory there is. I have no beliefs about the shafts. My training is to have no preconceptions and follow the evidence to where ever it leads. If it leads to your idea, fine. I have agreed with most of you ideas in the past, but I do not agree with your suppositions about the shafts and I discuss these points frankly with you as I discuss them with colleagues in the field. You wont find much sugar-coating in debates among Egyptologists. You continue to refer to in my mind or my suggestions. These are not my opinions. I am following the chain of evidence beginning with the first science-based report by Vyse and Perring published in 1837, continuing through all subsequent scholarly examinations of the GP. These are the basis for the theory of airshafts in the GP. If you have the evidence to publish a new theory, please do so, and it will be accepted or rejected based on its merits. One last point: There are three chambers in the GP, the subterranean chamber, the QC and the KC. All three have shafts that could have provided ventilation during construction phases of the GP. In two cases, the KC and the SC they are providing ventilation today. To deny ventilation when it exists is to ignore the obvious facts. Of the three chambers, the subterranean chamber is considered unfinished, and I quoted Petries observations about unfinished areas of the QC. As you know there are many examples of unfinished work in AE tombs to an extent that it appears to be the rule rather the exception. When you-- based solely on your opinion--disputed my remarks about the method of constructing the QC you misunderstood that this information is not an opinion of mine, but is documented in a recent excavation of a pyramid at Saqqara, not yet published. This evidence suggests the upper QC shafts were sealed when they reached the level of the KC roof beams. At that time work in the QC had stopped and the lower shaft ends, cut to within a few inches of the QC inner walls no longer needed to be opened. Your idea does not explain why these shafts--that obviously could have been used for ventilation by the AE--and are in fact now being used to ventilate the SC and KC--appear in the only pyramid that needed ventilation--and why if they were intended for religious purposes they were never used in any other pyramid. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 146 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.191 |
Brent, I'm amazed by some of your statements about the three room system. -the 3d dyn. step pyramids are hard to use, because the fusion of structures into three rooms hasn't happened yet, or they're unfinished. -Meidum : the three rooms are there, but they're unexpectedly small : two definite widenings in the horizontal passage, plus the burial chamber at the top of some kind of chimney. If you look at the plan (not the section) of the Red Pyramid, it's very similar (imagine the two lower chambers with a flat roof, level with that of the passage connecting them). -Djedefre : I was planning to do a posting on the new data from Abu Rawash, then thought it would be nice to write a complete one on the site, but I couldn't find some crucial literature (CHASSINAT, BISSON DE LA ROQUE). The three room system is very possible there. -Menkaure : the large room reached through the DP-offering chamber-portcullises room lies on the E-W axis. Then one has the two lower chambers (niches & sarcophagus room), so : 3 chambers ! Where's the problem ? -all other pyramids have the three rooms. So the only two exceptions are the Bent and Khafre. The exterior shape of the Bent isn't the one that was planned. How do we know ? Because as early as Snefru's reign (stela of Netjer-aper-ef), the determinative of its name is a "normal" pyramid, which it will remain until at least the end of the OK (exemption stela from the reign of Pepy II). this strengthens the idea that the layout of this building has indeed been changed during its building, as most people think. Yet in all honesty I must cite a case where the determinative of a building doesn't correspond with its shape : on the Annal Stone, the name of the Mastaba Faraun is determined with a pyramid. As to the discussion with George and Rick, you guys don't seem compelled to respond point after point to the impressive list of clues against the airshaft theory, presented by others and myself. Just restating your opinion based on no clues at all (except that in their damaged state the shafts now ventilate the pyramid...), so there's nothing more we can say and each reader will have to decide for himself. JD | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 147 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.191 |
George, We seem to have cross-posted. The BB has been very sluggish for the last 12 hours. Would you agree to go through the building stages of the GP, step by step, and see whether the air shaft theory fits in ? JD | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 340 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
To all and everybody, Well, since my postings haven't been deleted until now, I gather, that Andrew doesn't consider them as too fringe. After all, I'm just disagreeing with Petrie's old theory about the shafts having been constructed for ventilation. I haven't mentioned Martians, Atlantians or even water pumps. Why? Because I don't believe in those. I just simply suggested, that maybe the QC shafts were meant to be exactly as they are. I haven't even imagined the Egyptians dragging statues in the shafts. My suggestion was, that the layout of the GP was that of the Duat (shafts and all), and was thusly constructed to symbolize (to ease?) Khufu's voyage to the afterworld. Nothing more. Yes, I know this goes against Petrie's idea. But then again, Petrie (as respectable as he is) did not have all the data available we have today. He had no idea about the plugs with their copper fittings, much less about the blocking stones behind them. Had he known, he might have come up with another explanation, who knows? And yet, even if he hadn't, I somehow naively imagine, that a discussion board is for discussing the different possibilities, because if it wasn't, all we'd have here is two-post-strings: one posting for Petrie's theory and another saying "I agree"! I have tried to get answers to the points, which I personally find controversial to the airshaft theory. No answers so far, just half-nasty personal remarks, nitpicking and going around the pot! Now, I'll pose those questions once more, and hope I'll get clear answers this time. 1. If the shafts were for ventilation, and were abandoned with the project of QC, then why were their construction continued to such a height? 2. If they were for ventilation, why not orient them differently (especially those of the QC), to avoid the trouble of twisting and turning around the GG? 3. If the shafts were for ventilation and were actually "shut down" after the termination of works in QC, then why were they blocked with a polished plug with copper fittings and a blocking stone behind? Why not just block them, period.? 4. Why was ventilation needed in the QC, if the pyramid was constructed layer by layer? 5. What kind of archaeological evidence do we have for these shafts having been constructed for ventilation? If these questions cannot be answered, then IMO the theory of airshafts should be reconsidered, since it has too many weak links and questions unanswered, and does in no way stand for "scientific" approach of building up a theory in the first place. But since Petrie in his time did not have all data available we have today, it's up to us to continue from where he left. After all, there are other possibilities. Thank you. | ||
| Joel Augustus Laird Junior Member Username: joel Post Number: 89 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 217.33.154.197 |
Of course these shafts now ventilate the GP, but do they really '...appear in the only pyramid that needed ventilation...'? Don't most of the pyramids open to the public have modern ventilation installed - and so these all required ventilation? So, if they were used for ventilation then why weren't they used in any other pyramid? To me, the fact that they are unique neither supports nor refutes any theory. In all these scholarly examinations of the GP, starting from 1837, what exactly did they find to present a compelling case for air-shafts, or had the notion just become dogma after someone had briefly mentioned it in the past? What about the scholarly examinations by the likes of I.E.S. Edwards and M. Lehner who claim the shafts had a religious role? I don't think one can ignore these more recent works that have up to date information regarding the shafts' construction. Sorry Ritva, I had my message window open for quite some time and hadn't noticed your post. I wouldn't have posted mine otherwise! (Message edited by joel on October 08, 2002) | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 31 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva-I've read your postings on the possibility of the shafts being a model of the am duat, and simply haven't known how to respond to them. Except and I know mythology isn't my area at all. But I thought the amduat was all underground, sort of like Disneyland's Pirates of the Carribean. While the OK afterworld, as shown by the pyramid texts was clealy a stellar journey. But that's just my uninformed opinion on the idea. | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 342 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Rick, the Duat is not underground. The entry is among the Imperishables in the northern sky, rather low in the horizon, seen from Egypt! (I am not sure they recognized the northern celestial pole as such, just the groups of stars spinning around it and never vanishing from the view). The idea of Duat being underground comes from the fact, that netherworld in western cultures is considered as being "underground", and therefore some translations give it so. Same thing applies with "east" and "west" etc. The translations have changed their meaning interpreting them according to the western tradition, whereas in reality the Egyptians used the words "left" and "right". And as I have tried to explain before, the Egyptian directionality and especially cardinality has nothing in common with the western one. Most errors and misunderstandings occur, when one is made to match the other. Hope this helps. | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 44 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.52 |
JD, No, I do not agree to put any more time into this subject. I do have other obligations besides doing contra-research for long strings of suppositions. I gladly take my leave of this discussion with a few final remarks: You have failed to note my posts were not intended to be personally critical of you--since I have clearly stated many times--to you--of your contribution to the board. I also have no problem with your idea--anyone may propose any ideas they wish. The problem is your method of presentation of this idea as accepted fact. You have presented imaginative scenarios as evidence without qualifying them or mentioning any alternate possibilities, this is not Egyptology it is science fiction. The less informed that come to this board need to know that the idea you present is not a theory, is not accepted as a model and is only conjecture--and the airshaft theory is still alive and well. It is the responsibility of those that support a theological purpose of the shafts to do the science and produce an evidence based theory that a will be judged by the community of Egyptologists on its merits. You have not done so. | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 17 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.93.49.10 |
Rick, (post number 29) These blocks were not just any two blocks out of several million, they were purpose built with a u-shape and were supposed to be part of the shaft 'system' (otherwise they wouldn't have had the 'channel' chiseled out).Nobody realised that two blocks were going in with the channel unfinished, nobody realised that there two holes in the QC walls missing which should have been there? | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 24 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 12.4.169.51 |
JD, we'll have to agree to disagree. I think it is a stretch to argue that a widening of a shaft at Meidum equates to a separate and distinct chamber arrangement such as found in the GP. Why not consider the Grand Gallery a chamber? How about the areas directly antecedent to the SC, the QC or the KC? Separate chambers? What of the niches in Menkaure? They are present in Khentkawes and at the Mastabat Fara'un. Why not in the GP? Indeed, one may count no less than 4 chambers, not 3, in Menkaure's final design. Indeed, I note that originally Menkaure's design appears to have contemplated only one chamber. Where is the third distinct chamber in Khafre? Are we to assume that a curtain of some sort was erected in the burial chamber to separate the room and that this is a separate and distinct room? If the 3 room theory is accurate, I would expect to see evidence of it apparent in the initial phases of Abu Roash, Khafre and Menkaure (these pyramids coming directly after the Great and the Red) since the evidence currently shows these pyramid to have subterranean chambers only (one of the first things to be done in a pyramid) and since such a then-established religious requirement would have been in place since Sneferu. Such chambers would necessarily have needed to be on the design board at the earliest phases of building. Yet, neither the upper entrance to Khafre nor the original entrance to Menkaure accommodates such a theory. In view of this, am I simply to presume that widenings in a passage at Meidum constitute separate chambers? I think that such a conclusion too easily derives from a result-oriented bias to see something which isn't there in view of the what the actual facts on serial examination of pyramids reveal. Looked at in series, beginning with Meidum since I think you would agree that the Dynasty III pyramids do not provide support for your contention, that each of the pyramids have its own distinct internal layout. Two have more than one entrance, with one having an abandoned second entrance (Bent, Khafre and Menkaure). Two have three distinct and separate chambers (Red and Great - noting that the Red's progress from one to the other and the Great's do not). Most used portculli of some sort. Some have ascending passages. Most do not. Two have distinct final chambers on the north south axis (Bent and Menkaure; noting that the Red's first two chambers are on the n-s axis). Most, but not all, have northern entrances (Bent - an upper western entrance; Khentekawes - southern). One pyramid only has "air" shafts (Great). One pyramid only has a chamber high in the body of the pyramid (Great). Several pyramids show distinct evidence of an abandonment of internal design during construction in favor of an alternative design. This is especially true with Menkaure, and may be argued with Khafre and the Bent. Indeed, one may argue that the Great shows abandonment of an internal design. I am typing this away from my books, so forgive me if I've missed some things. Nevertheless, when viewed in serial fashion, the Dynasty IV pyramids do not show a design favoring 3 separate and distinct chambers in their construction. Indeed, arguably the two pyramids which are most strongly urged to show such a pattern have 3 chambers quite different from each other. The Red's are in line, connected to each other, with 2 on the north-south axis. The Great's are not connected, one has a niche, one is subterranean and definitely unfinished, and one is high in the body of the pyramid. The only similarity is in the number of chambers and that the final chamber is on the e-w axis and higher than the other two chambers. This hardly suffices to establish a theory. JD, we must agree to disagree. For me, when I view the Dynasty III and IV pyramids in serial fashion, I see exceptions to patterns, not patterns - and definitely not the types of patterns I would expect to see in an established religious context. The facts simply aren't sufficient, IMO, for your theory. Therefore, I can only go so far as to believe that religion may have had a role in the internal layout of these pyramids, but whatever that role was remains speculative in view of the current facts. I agree with George. The case remains unproven. Regards, Brent | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 33 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva-As you can see I'm a complete mythfit when it comes to spiritual things. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 34 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Helmut-I still don't understand your question. Is there a picture or URL that shows me what you're talking about? | ||
| Andrew Moderator Username: guardian Post Number: 521 Registered: 01-1997 Posted From: 216.78.251.141  |
I, for one, am enjoying this thread and appreciate this kind of dialog and discussion. Good post Brent. Andrew | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 45 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.234 |
Rick, MYTHFIT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have added a wonderfully descriptive new word to the Guardians lexicon. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 36 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Thanks George | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 148 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.187 |
Brent, Nice posting indeed ! But of course I disagree ! On the Meidum pyramid : I had always seen the structures in the horizontal corridor described as "niches". But when I went inside I rather had the impression that they were small rooms (and this was before reading STADELMANN's Three Room Theory : it isn't mine as you wrote !). Your comparison with the niches in one of Menkaure' rooms doesn't work : when you look at these or the one in the QC, you can see that they're niches, each one a deepening of the wall, with a separate ceiling. Whereas each "widening of the passage" at Meidum has the same ceiling height as the corridor, and above it its individual relieving space. The one test these small rooms fail to pass is that of the E-W axis, which passes between the second one and the burial chamber. But of course I'll easily explain this away by stating that this was a step pyramid to start with, and that we're in a transitional stage... In any case, the use and meaning of the corridor widenings / chambers appears easily if one accepts their being rooms, but what could it have been if they were niches ? Do I remember explanations that they were to store plugs to block the entrance to the burial room ? Also, the distinction between rooms and niches is an academic one. To understand this, one must look at the features of "funerary temples" : the five chapels of Khafre's temple become five small niches in a room in 5th dyn. ones. As to Menkaure's pyramid, like you I've always read that the large upper chamber was the burial chamber of a first construction stage, with a sarcophagus niche at its western end. But STADELMANN considers the upper DP as a technical passage for the granite blocks used to build the roof of the sarcophagus room. At first I found this strange, until I discussed this by e-mail with one of my distinguished correspondents, Cristina WADDINGTON, who pointed out that in chambers excavated from the bedrock work was started with the ceiling (see GP sub room, burial chamber of GIII c...). If you extrapolate this to the Menkaure room, it would have been much too low for its height (unless the DP entered it at a considerable height in the N wall). So I guess STADELMANN is right. And we indeed have three rooms here, whose structures render their identification certain : the upper one on the EW axis, the lower niched room as in all later OK pyramids, the sarcophagus chamber. As to Khufu's subterranean chamber, I wonder whether it hadn't actually been finished as a smaller room, the base of whose west wall could be the kind of regular bench still seen there. One would then have started on a enlargement program of this room (near the end of the reign ?), which was to receive annexes to the south (and possibly to the west), and which has / had a small antechamber in the horizontal passage. But IMHO pyramid rooms result from the simplification of ritual structures, the same ones we see in a less simplified manner in the temples, so a niche here and a small supplementary room there don't basically change the interpretation of features. A good example is the QC niche, which we don't find in other similar rooms, showing that features could be added if the king wanted to attribute the necessary material means. As to the GG, I indeed consider it as a chamber, the equivalent of the offering room near the portcullises, as seen in Menkaure's pyramid and all later ones. Of course it was also used to store the AP plugs. Thus the design sometimes incorporates a fourth chamber, but its position allows one not to confuse it with many others. I'll reserve my comments about Abu Rawash for a distinct posting. Maybe STADELMANN's Dreikammerhypothese should be renamed "Three Main Room Hypothesis"... In contrast with Brent's excellent text, there's George's... George, if you had spent your time giving us clues supporting PETRIE's ventilation hypothesis, instead of distributing grades (as if we were your students) and generally beating about the bush, this discussion may actually have led us somewhere. All you provided was a quote from PETRIE, and you haven't even responded to my request to explain what you, as one strongly adhering to his theory, thought he meant. Now that I propose to go to the bottom of things, to mentally build the QC, step by step, as we once did in the nice QC niche string, and see whether the ventilation theory is tenable, you chicken out. Thank you, George ! JD | ||
| Martin Eder Member Username: pope Post Number: 2 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 217.230.68.241 |
(I'm with Andrew! I've enjoyed reading this string. Keep up the good work, all!) | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 346 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Nice posting Brent! When I wrote, that Khufu's pyramid followed the line of evolution in pyramids with the three chambers I did not mean, that all and every pyramid before and after him should have three chambers, let alone corbelled ceilings. But... There's something we should not forget. Khufu's pyramid is the summum of know how in building techniques WITH funds to realize such a plan! In other words, if the pyramids BEFORE Khufu do not display all features found in his pyramid, it's because they were only refining the techniques and trying out new ones. Whereas those AFTER Khufu's pyramid, might have mastered the techniques to perfection, but after the reigns of Snefru and Khufu, Egypt was running out of funds for such projects. In Snefru's building projects there is very clearly the testing of techniques and possibilities to be seen. His architects try out solutions, and yet right from the beginning there is a trend to build corbelled ceilings, several rooms, descending and ascending passages, a certain degree of inclination etc. And Snefru did, quite unexplainably build THREE pyramids. Why? One could understand maybe two: one missed, second one secured for a burial place. But no, he had to build three. Why? What if (oh lá lá, I can hear some sigh!) Snefru with his architects (and sons) Rahotep and Nefermaat had a vision to realize? Like the layout of Duat? They would know from the very beginning what they wanted, but not necessarily know how to realize such and such a feature in stone. But they learn, not only the pure techniques in stabilizing such a building, but also the general organisation of such a project: how to cut, transport and haul stone with lesser effort etc. When Khufu enters the scene, the building techniques are au point and he, being not only the son of Snefru, but also the brother of Rahotep and Nefermaat, is aware of these plans. And goes through it! A nice touch of continuity is also the precense of Hemiunu (Nefermaat's son?), who by the by is a Heliopolitan priest, and therefore has an insight not only to the plans but also their meaning. Of course the pyramids after Khufu's could not be similar! More so, since the Gizamids seem to complete eachother in a wider plan. By the 6th dynasty they had probably realized, that it was faster and cheaper to carve the message on the walls using glyphs, since they could not have topped the Giza enterprise (Family Inc.), and by that time the beliefs of afterlife had in some aspects changed, and other points needed underlining. To give way little by little to simple paintings on the tomb walls and writings on papyri, we today call the Book of Dead or Am Duat. | ||
| Charlie Rigano Senior Member Username: charlie Post Number: 498 Registered: 06-1999 Posted From: 65.57.47.176 |
On the air shafts. I have read all the early explorers. They made a presumption the shafts were for air without providing any evidence of this purpose. And outside of that air does pass through open shafts, there is no evidence of the original intent. Heck, I can climb through windows in my house, but their purpose was not to provide entrance/exit. If anything, the evidence leads us away from their purpose being for air movement. Their location and construction certainly lead us away. The unopened QC shafts definiatly lead us away. While we are led away from air movement, we are not led definitely to another purpose. I could guess, but I could not support. Charlie | ||
| Charlie Rigano Senior Member Username: charlie Post Number: 499 Registered: 06-1999 Posted From: 65.57.47.176 |
On how many rooms a pyramid is intended to have - the current arguement is over whether they are all suppose to have 3. Well I chose, I could make a case for two room pyramids: Meidum - burial chamber plus the two spaces counted as one room, they are really the same space Bent - two chambers Red - two lower chambers, the burial chamber was an after-thought change in plan Khufu - original plan was the Sub Chamber plus another chamber at the end of the unfinished passage leading south. Plan revised to the QC and KC planned as a unit. Djedefre - Cannot tell by what is left Khafre - 2 chambers Baufre - Cannot tell by what is left Menkaure - 2 chambers planned initially - the chamber at the bottom of the DP and the initial burial chamber. But I'm not making this case, because I'm not sure it leads me anyplace. Charlie | ||
| Janine Williams Junior Member Username: janine Post Number: 97 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Charlie: Don't your windows provide both light and air when you open them in the summer? True, I don't guess they are intended as an entrance/exit...but if you are a burglar, or have to beat a hasty retreat, they might be handy. Janine | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 49 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.207 |
JD, I have misjudged you, you obviously do believe you are infallible. Out of hundreds of posts you have contributed to this board you make one that I dispute and you have a fit like a spoiled child, mount your charger with spear in hand and rush to slay the dragon. I have had dozens of ideas that had to go in the trash can for lack of evidence and you P & M about one. You may have time to spend hours posting on the internet, I do not. As well as teaching, I have continuous publication deadlines and I do not have the time to do research just to prove a point that is only important to you, not to me. JD, I tell you frankly you have turned this into a typical fringe discussion using the same tactics that one of the greatest posters of obscure fringe, Don Barone, used to post here in the old days. Post after post full of postulations and no evidence, trying to prove points for which there are not yet any proofs. Your "chicken out" statement is beneath you and marks you at last as only a self-fullfilling vindictive amateur trapped in the tar pits of theology when I had believed that you were interested in truth no matter where it led. So, without apology, I leave you with a snide remark in return for yours: What have you published lately? | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 26 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 12.4.169.51 |
Charlie, excellent. You prove the point: the view determines the result. One can read any number of things into the pyramids. Ritva, gizamids? Heh! Heh! Heh!  | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 353 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Brent, unfortunately I can't take the credit for the word. I have mopped it up somewhere (possibly The Hall of Ma'at)...  | ||
| Steve Brabin New member Username: steve_b Post Number: 33 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 62.7.110.154 |
Conjecture, ideas and supposition all make for fascinating discussion, but in order to work out the purpose of the shafts in the Great Pyramid the best approach is to look at the shafts, analyse their construction and deduce if there is any rational in that construction. If there is no explicable design principle, then the religious significance of the shafts should be looked at in full. But, if after simple analysis the shafts do show obvious design principles, then their purpose can be quite quickly be narrowed down to being practical. The first step therefore is an analysis of the construction, and to facilitate that the Egyptian Authorities have spent considerable sums of cash sending robots up the shafts as we all know. From that analysis, we can add the details of the shafts onto any previously studied details of the measurements of the monument and then STUDY the final diagram :  If you then extend the shaft lines down to the level of their entrance into the main chamber, the ends of the shafts end up an EXACT number of cubits apart, namely 17.00 cubits. Since the cubit is the unit of measure in which the pyramid was built, this measurement is neither playing with numbers nor coincidental. Further proof of the design is shown in the fact that the southern shaft end is 2 and one third cubits from the chamber, and the northern shaft end twice that distance, measurements being down to 1/10th of an inch.Impossibly coincidental.  It is quite clear from the study that has been undertaken by the Egyptian authorities that the shafts are NOT randomly constructed, but are accurately built in order to display the layout previously shown based on the cubit. They can therefore not have a purpose which is not directly connected to their deliberate construction, ruling out 'air shafts' 'soul shafts' 'water shafts' 'star shafts' to name but a few. The poignant questions should surely be related to the 17 cubits gap. Is there any religious significance to this number ? Did Osiris have any extra bit on his body of which we are not aware? Only after the facts have been carefully studied can an informed debate on the shafts even commence. Steve B | ||
| Janine Williams Junior Member Username: janine Post Number: 98 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Charlie: No need to respond to my last post. I know what you meant...just couldn't resist kidding you. If it isn't quacking airshaft or a relgious channel, it won't be the first time that something in Egypt turned out to be entirely different from what we thought it was. An odd impression of AE's, formed several years ago: "When there is ONLY ONE way to do a thing...they did it the 'other' way." | ||
| Janine Williams Junior Member Username: janine Post Number: 99 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Steve: Don't think there is a religious significance in a 17 cubit gap. Be sure the cubit is defined. Half the reports I've read lately all use different cubits. One used 'rubber-band cubits' in the same report. (20.1" in one place and 20.6" in another.) Good luck with it. Janine | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 354 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Steve, Only after the facts have been carefully studied can an informed debate on the shafts even commence. In that case shouldn't you have presented the numbers for QC shafts also?  | ||
| Steve Brabin New member Username: steve_b Post Number: 34 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 213.1.60.67 |
Janine, The 17 cubit gap IS the definition of the cubit 20.636133inches (approximately!) - thats the purpose of the shafts! Ritva, When Messers Z.Hawass and N.Geographic care to publish their findings, then the facts will be presented and the study can begin of the lower chamber shafts. Until then lets keep quessing - its fun. Steve B | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 355 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Steve, what I meant was, are the the shafts 17 cubits apart in the QC also? But yes, let's keep guessing, that way even I can master in something *LOL* | ||
| Steve Brabin New member Username: steve_b Post Number: 35 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 62.7.115.44 |
Ritva, I would love to answer the question, and that is what I thought you meant, but the problem is that the red lines are extensions of the straight parts of the upper shaft. We know the angle of the straight part of the lower southern but not of the lower northern. All we have is the Upuaut report of between 33 and 41ş - so all one can do is wait. I am presuming that the lower northern will have a few sections of varying angle bricks, and then will stabilise out into a stright run, and it is the exact angle and position of the straight run that are crutial. The answer for sure will be very close to 17 cubits, as that ends of the horizontal sections of the lower chamber shafts are 17.39 cubits apart. Rgds Steve p.s. will someone put me out of my misery and explain the LOL buzzword - Laughed Out Loud ? Lots Of Love ? Living Outside London ? | ||
| Ken Member Username: ken Post Number: 19 Registered: 06-2000 Posted From: 12.93.50.216  |
laugh out loud | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 51 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.149 |
Steve, Yes, Osiris did have an "extra bit on his body of which we are not aware" because it was lost. But, even considering the legendary stories told about the procreative abilities of Ramesses the Great by modern Egyptian workmen, I doubt if it extended to 17 cubits. Another idea is that the GP shafts represent the goddesses of the Ennead, Isis and Nephthys. The QC shafts represent them as virgins before their marriages to Osiris and Seth. The KC shafts represent them after the birth of Horus when both became goddesses of the Osirian traditions. So the KC shafts represent the birth canal intended for the rebirth of the king. | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 27 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 24.159.123.67 |
Ahem. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 150 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.125 |
George, Sometimes ugliness is in the eye of the beholder, and for the sake of this board, that's all I'm going to answer you. Charlie, Interesting mind experiment, but : -one can hardly consider the Meidum "niches" as one room ! -that the burial chamber at the Red is original is shown by the fact that its position lies above that of the other two rooms, as in Meidum and as far as one can tell, at the Bent, and in the GP. Besides, nothing indicates plan changes here, something one couldn't say about the Bent and Khafre's. -the long accepted change of plans theory at Menkaure's has now been challenged by STADELMANN, and IMHO he's right. Take a pic of the large upper room seen from the east, and imagine the room with only the upper DP : it would be way too low for its width and depth. I know you only wrote your posting to show that other interpretations were possible, but if one were to take it seriously and compare the merits of STADELMANN's three room theory and of the two-room one you posted, I think that the former would be more probable. The only exceptions to it are the two pyramids that were already considered problematic and "abnormal" before the three-chamber theory was published : the Bent and Khafre's. Also, isn't it easier to consider the 4th dyn. pyramids as early stages of the three room system (constant in later pyramids !) than to consider a transition between a 2- and 3-room system at the end of the 4th dyn. ? JD | ||
| Brent Benjamin Senior Member Username: brent Post Number: 28 Registered: 04-2000 Posted From: 24.159.123.67 |
JD, Stadelmann has also challenged the Sphinx attribution - without much, if any, support. It remains factually accurate, the only two pyramids of Dynasty IV to show three distinct and separate rooms are the Red and the Great - and these specific three room patterns are dissimilar when compared to each other both in location within the pyramid, location to each other, axis location, completeness, and resultant form. There is no ascending passage in the Red. No Grand Gallery. No middle chamber niche. No known camoflaging attempt to hide and set off the middle chamber. No subterranean chamber. And so on. The Bent's upper E-W passage shows a widening. That hardly qualifies it to be a separate chamber. It is not legitimate to simply dismiss the Bent and Khafre as "problematic" and "abnormal." If the 3-chamber pattern is valid, it should stand on its merits. However, there is no established pattern of three separate and distinct chambers in the following Dynasty III & IV pyramids: Step (Saqqara), Sekhemkhet (Saqqara), Khaba's Layer (Zawiyet el Aryan), Meidum, Bent (Dahshur), Abu Roash, Khafre (Giza), Unfinished at Zawiyet el Aryan, Mastabat el Fara'un (South Saqqara), and Khentekawes (Giza). Indeed, all such pyramids, and the Red and Great, confound any attempt to show such a pattern. Brent | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 152 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.117 |
Dear Brent, I'm not using the authority argument when quoting STADELMANN, just mentioning who published the soul shaft hypothesis in the first place. Nor do I agree with his Sphinx attribution (although he could be right). About Meidum, when you entered the pyramid, did you feel that the broadenings of the corridor were niches ? They look more like small rooms to me (the burial chamber is small too). Abu Rawash and Zawiyet el-Aryan are so destroyed that they're no witnesses either way. Mastaba Faraun does have three rooms ! But what at Menkaure's is a room with niches looks more like a corridor with niches / long narrow rooms here (the similarity is sufficient not to warrant a different identification). Khentkawes is no royal monument and should be excluded from the list. If we exclude Meidum (early stage) and the two "fishy" pyramids, there's a room on the E-W axis, later underneath the apex, as STADELMANN has shown, in Dahchur N, GP, Djedefre, plausibly Neferka, Menkaure, all pyramids from Userkaf on. There is indeed an interesting variation in the position of the burial chamber : high in Snefru's pyramids & the GP, deep in Djedefre's and Zawiyet al-Aryan, shallow in Khafre's, deep in Menkaure's, shallow in all other pyramids. There may be religious reasons for this (solar as opposed to Sokarian beliefs ?). JD | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 357 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Brent, I'm sorry but I can't understand your reasoning in this. To see a pattern do you really need all of the pyramids to be identic to each other? Does not a steady evolution count as evidence? The human mind is not static, and therefore neither are the results of that mind in action. Remember when Maspero found the pyramid of Pepi I and told Mariette about it. The answer he got was: "In thirty years of Egyptian excavations I have never seen a pyramid whose underground rooms had hieroglyphs written on their walls." But there they were all the same. And after the 6th dynasty those texts disappeared again to never come back. Things change, times change and the human mind changes. As do the religious customs. The problem with spiritual beiefs is, that they do not leave tangible archaeological evidence, since they are inside the human mind.... | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 53 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.238 |
Andrew and JD, I regret that this string has descended into a battle over nothing. Have you noticed that there is no discussion of the shaft plugs among professional Egyptologists. It is only on chat boards where the want-to-be experts post string after string of conjecture, false assumptions and preconceptions. The professionals wait for the evidence to be published before starting to propose theories. It is obviously still not understood outside the profession that archaeology is one of the "soft" sciences because we are dealing only with that small part of the information from ancient cultures that has survived distruction--and of that limited information, only that small part which, mostly by lucky accident, has been found. Anyone that believes they can reconstruct minute details of why and how the AE built every specific feature of a building based on this information is a fiction writer not a a science based student of archaeology. It is fine for internet posters to have fun proposing complex ideas for the doors and writing complex religious concepts to explain the purpose of the "door" and the shafts so long as they do not take themselves seriously. The science of Egyptology moves slowly because new evidence comes slowly, and when it is found usually presents more new questions that it solves old ones. Only the amateurs believe there are answers where there are no answers. Now, instant Egyptology has been discovered by TV, offering instant gratification for the armchair experts. I can't wait until the next phase of popular science arrives and everyone can be their own brain surgeon. | ||
| Daniel Gerardo Advanced Member Username: daniel Post Number: 11 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 207.3.125.138 |
I ´m agree George, but I am not optimistic about new elements of judgment or new scientific opinions that can explain this. The accidental discoveries are not possible in the pyramids and the only tool to guide the researches is the theoretical speculation. Daniel | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 54 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.43 |
Daniel, Theoretical speculation is not a tool and it is not theory, it it only speculation. All that has been posted on this subject is only speculation. At the present time there are no explanations and endless conjectures will not produce anything but more endless speculations. | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 360 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
George, what lifts Pertie's suggestion of "airshafts" to the level of a theory? The fact, that it was, totally without archaeological evidence, accepted by other Egyptologists? | ||
| Steve Brabin New member Username: steve_b Post Number: 37 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 62.7.111.214 |
George, You're views on speculation against theory and proof are reasonably sound, with one small exception in my opinion. It is often through what seems like mindless speculation and wild ideas that some of the greatest leaps forward have been taken, and I believe that the modern business world now calls this concept 'brain storming'. The current state of the modern business world lays testement to the fact that the process produces 99.99% useless conversation and occasionaly a flash of briliance from which great progress can be made. In 194? a British engineer had the idea that if you filled an oil drum with high explosives, spun it on its axis and then skimmed it across water that it would make a highly effective way of destoying a damm. Imagine the reaction that he got on first proposing the idea - quoted from the film 'when you first came to me with the idea I would have said that it would be more likely that pink elephants would fly'. The difference between Sir Barnes Wallis and some of the speculation on the Pyramids is that he continued to back up the wild ideas with substantive factual information, based on the original proposition. Eventually all the speculation will have exhausted the posibilities for these shafts, and we will eventually end up with their true purpose. Until that time is it not a vital part of the 'brain storming' process to allow the ideas to flow, and in the process is the speculation not contributing to the eventual solution through default? I for one have gained great insight over my short time on this board into how little is actaully known about Ancient Egypt, which has provided considerable motivation for finding out more. Steve B | ||
| Janine Williams Junior Member Username: janine Post Number: 100 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Ritva: Interesting perceptive post on 'change'. ALL: Speculation on anything is still nothing but speculation, just that! BUT: When a there is a difficult problem to solve, doesn't the solution still begin with, "Well... what if?"... If proved, good... If not, well...wrong view. Janine | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 41 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva-The fact that there's virtually no discerable pattern in the pyramids is one of the strongest arguments against their being any spiritual significance to the shafts. As Brent and George have bothe pointed out the design and layout of the pyramids varies widely. In fact the incredible variety of pyramids is one of the things that cnvinces me that the shafts weren't for statues or the ba escaping. The airshaft theory at least makes sense because they do provide air inside the pyramid even today. A place for the spirit to depart makes no sense at all. Why would they block up the shafts then? How was the "ba" supposed to get out? It's like building a house and nailing the door shut while you're in it. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 42 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva- you wrote: "Rick, Your comment on miniatyre sled-dragging in the shafts has got a rub: where would they have gotten men small enough to fit the shafts?" Don't you remember Pepi II letter instructing his ships captain to take care of the pygmy that he was bringing home? That is why pygmy's were in such hot demand back then.... | ||
| Andrew Moderator Username: guardian Post Number: 524 Registered: 01-1997 Posted From: 216.78.250.76 |
Although I do not allow fringe and otherwise wild speculation on this board, I see no reason to not allow intelligent speculation and a little bit of brainstorming. Nobody here has mentioned aliens, Atlantis, or radical rethinking of the chronology. While it may be true that there seems to be "no discussion of the shaft plugs among professional Egyptologists", I think that aside from Michel's fanciful diagrams, this discussion is interesting and within the boundaries of intelligent supposition. There has to be some place to hash this out, and although I will not let the entire board be overrun, I can see the value of this type of discourse in its place. Not to mention it's a good outlet for this extremely enigmatic feature of the Great Pyramid. Andrew | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 365 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Rick, The fact that there's virtually no discerable pattern in the pyramids is one of the strongest arguments against their being any spiritual significance to the shafts. As Brent and George have bothe pointed out the design and layout of the pyramids varies widely. In fact the incredible variety of pyramids is one of the things that cnvinces me that the shafts weren't for statues or the ba escaping. I don't think there could be a pattern in the pyramids, for the reasons I wrote in my posting 346. Think about how many real pyramids where there before Khufu? How long did it take to build one with structures above the ground level? And when the techniques were finally mastered, how long did Egypt have the funds to keep this kind of projects going? Isn't it clear, that even Khafre could not top the GP. And what is the reason for the 6th dyn building modest pyramids with elaborate texts on the walls? Moreover, even if the afterlife beliefs do have a clear pattern of evolution, there must be allowance personal preferences, as long as we are dealing with humans. One would highlight one detail, whereas another would find something else even more important. Look at the NK tombs. The outlays match to the 3-room system, but the decorations differ. What I'm proposing for the GP is the building itself functioning as the decoration i.e. different outlays equal to different decorations or passages of texts. Luckily the 6th dyn ran out of money and had to find an easier way! The airshaft theory at least makes sense because they do provide air inside the pyramid even today. Yes, today they have fans installed inside! But Rick, if the airshaft theory makes sense, why do you not answer the questions in my posting 340? I still have not received one answer to those questions, just a lot of beating around the bush. I'm tempted to draw the conclusion, that you guys do not have answers. And frankly, if those questions cannot be answered, the theory of "airshafts" stands on rather flimsy gounds, and is based purely on personal preference of the possible function of those shafts. A place for the spirit to depart makes no sense at all. Why would they block up the shafts then? How was the "ba" supposed to get out? It's like building a house and nailing the door shut while you're in it. I personally never suggested the shafts to be "soul shafts". But to answer your question, the Ba would get out because it is a Ba and not a person! That was the idea with the false door in the first place, to denote the capability of the spirit and only the spirit passing, with no human interference. Note the word false! In other words, if the shafts were considered as "soulshafts" for the Ba, then blocking them would underline them being uniquely for the use of the Ba. | ||
| Joel Augustus Laird Junior Member Username: joel Post Number: 90 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 217.33.154.197 |
Thank you Andrew for allowing all of us to present our ideas here. In the case of the shafts the amateur has as much information available as the expert, and so their function is anybody's guess! Besides, it makes interesting discussion as has been pointed out before. No one has suggested that their ideas are nothing more than speculation. George and others are right, however, that for now they are accepted as airshafts. To propose theories requires some proof either way. Unfortunately there isn't much proof there for anything, so before speculating further I'd rather find something first that disproves the airshaft theory. Myself and others have suggested features that point away from an airshaft purpose but all of these are still possible within this theory although they complicate it a bit. Since the discovery of the lower shafts the airshaft scenario has but one possible story: As we know the lower shafts continue for quite some distance within the pyramid (they finish above the KC) and so the QC must have been part of the design. The shafts were to be knocked through to the chamber, to provide ventilation, when work to dress the interior of the QC was required. For some reason, perhaps due to other priorities, this work was delayed again and again until eventually it was decided that it would never be done. At this moment the KC was just being completed. It's even possible that they were so impressed with the shafts' construction that they decided to finish their ends carefully with properly dressed stone. As this was the first time airshafts were incorporated into a pyramid (for they must have deemed them necessary) they may not have realized that they needn't build them on an incline. The problems they encountered trying to negotiate the GG may have been an oversight. Who knows what methods they used to construct them that may have caused long scratches on the inside? If this were the case then there is one feature of the shafts that is odd and, for me, is the strongest disproof of a ventilation function: why did they leave a few inches of stone to be knocked through into the QC? This doesn't make any sense. Even if this was the intention then there must have been some markings left to indicate their position (as someone pointed out earlier in this string), but surely then the shafts would have been opened a long, long time ago? The evidence suggests to me that the shafts were not for ventilation. We don't know for sure whether ot not the KC shafts were originally blocked at both ends. The exterior of the pyramid is too badly damaged to know for certain and perhaps the difficulty of working with granite forced them to block the lower ends with a plug rather than try to cut to within a few inches of the surface. Other than a spiritual function surely they were totally redundant? Rick, Ritva is right, the Ba would have been quite capable of passing through stone. The Egyptians have shown us this with their false doors and other pyramids that have blocked passages. Joel. | ||
| Martin Eder Member Username: pope Post Number: 3 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 217.230.74.155 |
(Since I cannot contribute any relevant information to this discussion, I sure would like to thank Andrew for his statement and add another perspective: this board is a safe-haven for people with a genuine objective to learn. For people with detailed knowledge some discussions may seem strenuous, time-consuming, scientifically useless and/or even foolish. When presenting ideas, most of us amateurs will gladly take methodological critique and factual counter-evidence from the many better informed. But I do not think it is anybody's right - except Andrew's - to question our motives. Everyone here is dedicated to the search for the truth - even if there is little information at hand. Once mis-information and mis-interpretation have been ruled out, we are all equally entitled to an opinion. And entitled to present it, even in the absence of evidence. Of course George will then respond: what separates people like me from the "fringe"? In contrast to the "fringe", I use a ceteris paribus approach. I try to question one detail at a time, leaving everything else undisturbed. I haven't come to witness the revolution, I'm here for the questions, that are left unanswered when I turn off the t.v. or finish a book. I hope, I do not only speak for myself. Please continue.) Pope | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 45 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva-In order to answer your questions we'd have to have a detailed knowledge of EVERYTHING that was going on during the day to day building of the great pyramid. Since we don't have that, we can't answer any of your questions with any intelligence. However the inability to answer your questions does not invalidate the proposal that the tunnels are airshafts. In fact the very fact that the shafts are so haphazard and restricted to this pyramid only strongly suggests that the AE's were making major changes in the pyramid to accomodate the whim of the king and they needed plenty of air to do it. On the other hand, however, when it comes to tap dancing on the head of a pin and waltzing past inconsistency's the size of Mount Everest, the "spiritual" gang makes Nijinsky look like he was in a wheel chair. | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 55 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.143 |
All, For some reason my attempts to post the views of the majority of Egyptologists that the shafts in the GP are airshafts seem to have been taken by many on this string to indicate it is my theory or Petrie's theory. That is not correct. It is THE theory. AFASIK there is no consensus among Egyptologist's for any religious purpose for the shafts. But of course, all the armchair experts are always free to make whatever speculations they please. | ||
| Frederick Lundberg Member Username: fredl Post Number: 5 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 195.92.67.66 |
Hi George, Whilst I agree with you have you any idea, A,why they bothered to plug them considering an outer casing? B,why they seemed to have plugged twice? Best regards, Fred Lundberg | ||
| Joel Augustus Laird Junior Member Username: joel Post Number: 91 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 217.33.154.197 |
But you both do accept, amongst others, the airshaft theory; despite the fact that the lower ends of the QC shafts were apparently never intended to be opened to the interior? Otherwise, why would they leave about 10cm uncut when they'd only have to knock through it later? What do you think is the simplest answer? | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 46 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
To all the "airshaft doubters". Of course it's possible to deluge the board with a thousand "Yes, but why did the AE's change the tunnel design at this precise point, why did they block one shaft and open another, why was one plugged and another unplugged, why did they use copper handles on one block, why was there a gap between the Upuat door and the block behind it, how do you explain the scratch marks here? And the dings in the wall over there? and on and on. To quote the old adage about Hollywood, it's like being nibbled to death by ducks. But for those who can't understand the concept of SNAFU (Situation Normal All Fouled Up.), and the incredible power of Murphy's law as applied to the human experience, here's a couple of examples from today's paper of how things can go drastically wrong by people who should know better: "Bridge Collapses kills worker injures 10", "Thieves taking a shine to cars' high intensity xeenon headlights", "3 Marines hurt in explosion on Kuwaiti training range." And that's just today! Why did that bridge collapse? I just doesn't make any sense; After all they had a boatload of engineers working on it's design, experienced construction workers who knew what they were doing, probably the best material that money could buy, government inspectors approving the various aspects of the bridges construction. How could it possibly collapse, it just doesn't make any sense? But collapse it did. How could those marines be hurt? They're all experts in the handling of explosives they know every screw, nut and spring of that mine, how could something go wrong? Onto the xenon headlights didn't the engieers know that these bright beams would attract the attention of thieves? Why didn't they build in an electronic shocker that would zap anybody trying to steal them? Why not implant microchips within them hooked up to a GPS system so that we can monitor where these headlight are going after they're stolen. It just doesn't make any sense.... So what do we know so far? Well the airshafts do provide some ventilation. Not a hurricane force but enough fresh air to keep workers comfortable. What is there for the "spiritual interpretation"? Nothing, but an evershifting mountain of speculations, conjectures, and fantasies. BTW Ritva I still haven't gotten an answer to how do you get a statue around the corners of the various airshafts without jamming up the shaft or tipping it over? This is where spirtuality meets physics and so far physics has won. | ||
| Joel Augustus Laird Junior Member Username: joel Post Number: 92 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 217.33.154.197 |
Heh-heh. I think you misspelled one of the words in 'SNAFU'  . Seriously, though, we're all aware of Murphy's Law and the things that can go wrong. But from this side it looks as though the "airshaft interpretation" is also 'an evershifting mountain of speculations, conjectures, and fantasies.' When there were two shafts the theory seemed fine... then the Dixon brothers found two more that were left unopened and so a bit more had to be added to the theory... then it was discovered how long these closed shafts are and the theory begins to look dodgy again... All the '...dings in the wall...' may be like rabid ducks but they don't have much in common with airshafts. | ||
| Daniel Gerardo Advanced Member Username: daniel Post Number: 12 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 207.3.125.138 |
I ´m agree and you will be in agreement with me that all theory first was simple theoretical speculation. Conventional theories were unconventional before and can be unconventional afterwards, because the science is dynamic. Egyptology as all science has a context determined because there are theories confirmed by centuries of research and is not possible think right out this context. There are some situations in the limit of this context (because the science is dynamic) that can be analyzed but there is a very well determined context. But Egyptology as all science also has to be very rigorous to accept theories and to explain which are theories and which are confirmed realities. We could be optimistic or pessimist about this but always we have to be rigorous and very rationales. To understand the shafts first is necessary to understand very well the design of the pyramids and is not possible to analyze this without revising some basic hypothesis. For example if there are not shaft in another pyramids why to think that they were to ventilate the interior of the pyramid? If the shaft of the Kings chamber are different that the shaft of the Queens chamber why to think that all they fulfill identical function? Daniel | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 56 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.71 |
Fred, Joel and others, That you insist in putting me in the position of defining the evidence upon which a majority of Egyptologists base their views, in opposition to strings of various and almost endless conjectures astounds me. You are in fact asking me to review the entire corpus of science based publications of pyramid construction, list the indications and conta-indications for ventilation purposes of the shafts in the GP, as opposed to a suggested religious purpose, then offer analysis and conclusions. How many months of research do you suppose that would take? Archaeology is my profession, not a hobby, and as I continue to work in my profession, teaching, writing books and articles and making field and financial contributions to archaeological expeditions and organizations, you can imagine it leaves me with only a limited amount of free time to do research for those that, for what ever reasons, do not wish to do their own homework. I leave you with two clues that should help you with your own research about the shafts: 1. Why did the QC shafts rise to the area of the roof beams of the KC before they were sealed? 2. What are the details of the construction methods the AE use to place chambers in pyramids? Sorry, I have now spent more time on this string than my deadlines allow and I can not respond to any further posts. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 155 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.134.184 |
George, There is no such thing as THE air shaft theory (unless the Vatican has taken over Egyptology). Whereas MARAGIOGLIO & RINALDI, 1963, p. 130 were in favor of the ventilation hypothesis, they admit that a ritual function (but not watching stars !) is possible for those of the QC : "... The air channels of the "queen's chamber" alone could have had a ritual or liturgic scope..." The same thing in I.E.S. EDWARDS, Pyr Eg, 1992, p. 136 of my French edition : "One doesn't know exactly what their use was. Was it the ventilation of the room, or some religious goal that remains conjectural ?" I'm not going to quote the well-known articles that favored a religious / ritual interpretation as early as the 1960s. But if we look at recent authors : James ALLEN, Compl Pyr, 1997, p. 114, states : "A symbolic function should also be attributed to the so-called 'air-shafts', which had nothing to do with conducting air. No other pyramid contains chambers and passages so high in the body of the masonry as Khufu's and so the builders provided the King's Chamber with small model passages to allow the king's spirit to ascend to the stars". And R. STADELMANN, Äg Pyr, 1997, p. 282 : "... daß alle Schächte blockiert und durch die Pyramidenverkleidung verschlossen waren. Damit wird die alte, schon längst umstrittene Erklärung dieser Schächte als Luftkanäle entscheidend widerlegt..." ["... that all the shafts were blocked and closed off by the pyramid's casing. Thus the old explanation of these shafts as air channels, which had been contested for quite some time, is disproved in a decisive manner..."] I don't have VERNER's book, so maybe somebody who has it may want to check what he has to say. JD | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 47 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Joel, no there isn't an evershifting mountain of speculations. Just the same thing repeated in a number of different ways. They're air shafts, and that's all that they are. And once you factor in those other great engineering laws consisting of "Murphy's Law", "Finagles variable constant", "Fudge factors", it all makes sense. The subterranean chamber was cut and abandoned, the queens chamber was left unfinished. The air shafts go here there and everywhere for no reason that we can discern, and then the king died and had to be buried before these goof ups could be corrected; all in all the GP was just a normal construction project. BTW, what is the correct spelling for "fouled" anyhow? And on this happy faced note, I shall take leave of this string too. Archeology is my hobby, but I too have other things to attend to... | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 366 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
George, "flood" the QC with sand? | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 367 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Rick, BTW Ritva I still haven't gotten an answer to how do you get a statue around the corners of the various airshafts without jamming up the shaft or tipping it over? This is where spirtuality meets physics and so far physics has won. Where have I suggested, that the AEs dragged statues in the shafts? | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 368 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Of course, that's it. They flooded the QC with sand, in order to get the ceiling put in place. The work probably lasted till the construction of KC. The layer of stones at the level of the roof beams in the KC blocked the shafts to the QC. (Having previously stopped the rubble from entering the shafts with the famous "doors". Gees, the copper fittings are the backside of the handle!!) Same system used in the KC, only due to the relieving chambers, the work took longer to finish and the shafts continued all the way out! Airshafts indeed!! | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 369 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
And JD, you were right. They did drag something in the shafts: the limestone slabs with the handles! | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 48 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva-Sorry, that should have been for J.D. | ||
| Frederick Lundberg Member Username: fredl Post Number: 6 Registered: 07-2000 Posted From: 195.92.67.67 |
Sorry George, This was my first post on this & I just wanted a professional opinion to my two questions to better my private contemplation. | ||
| Ken Member Username: ken Post Number: 21 Registered: 06-2000 Posted From: 12.93.51.248 |
Talk about being in the "Tar Pits Bar & Brasserie" . | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 159 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.15 |
Hi Ritva, Not so fast ! >They flooded the QC with sand, in order to get the ceiling put in place.< Plausible ! >The work probably lasted till the construction of KC.< Which work ? I don't suppose you mean the placing of the roof ? So do you mean polishing the QC walls, then placing the floor ? Wouldn't this have been the stage when ventilation was needed ? Yet the shafts were never perforated. >The layer of stones at the level of the roof beams in the KC blocked the shafts to the QC.< And ultimately closed (whether the QC had been polished or not at this stage : why were the shafts considered useless, when so much care had been taken to build them ? But IMHO the QC was finished. I still can't understand why the QC is said to be unfinished. The walls look smooth to me (they may have looked rougher and fooled older observers before the salt crust which covered them had been removed ; in any case they don't look like the unfinished walls I have seen in Egypt). The traces of the now vanished floor slabs can still be seen on the present surface, so the floor had no doubt been placed. The only trace that could indicate that the QC wasn't finished is the small torus on the edge of its entrance, but the KC also has a few such traces on its walls and this just isn't enough to state that either room hadn't been finished. >Having previously stopped the rubble from entering the shafts with the famous "doors".< The section of the widening at the upper end of the KC-S shaft shows that the vanished slab there was slightly broader than the shaft, and fitted in a narrow broadening of the shaft, in the manner of portcullises. So the "doors" couldn't have been pulled inside the shafts, plus being thin they would have been unstable ; and even if they had had the same section as that of the shaft, they would have gotten stuck at the first bad joint between shaft segments (contrary to a statuette, which could be smaller than the shaft section). >Same system used in the KC, only due to the relieving chambers, the work took longer to finish and the shafts continued all the way out! < The shafts are about the same length as those of the QC, but the latter start deeper. You seem to link the shafts' length with the duration of the work : why ? Do you think they ventilated the KC while it was being polished ? But then why weren't the QC shafts opened when this room was finished ? Either I don't understand what you mean, or there's something wrong with your idea. JD | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 370 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
JD, They built the QC, filled it with sand pouring in through the shafts, and used the sand to keep the ceiling blocks up, while easing them to their places and securing them. They removed the sand from the chamber and the shafts, and lowered a plug into the shaft to evite rubble falling down. Once the sand was gone, they put up the final walls and did the polishing. The shafts never were for ventilation, but getting the sand in, maybe even water to clean after, who knows. But in any case, they were supposed to be left invisible behind the final walls. Same procedure for the KC. The shafts go all the way out, because there was more work to do with the relieving chambers. The shafts being open in the KC can be explained by the fact, that the floor, the coffin and the walls had to be eased in place before letting the sand in, since they would not have fitted through the door! The KC shafts very probably were closed also with similar slabs and handles, but the blocks have been ripped out in the antiquity. Anyways the lengths of the shafts tell us some of the time it took to build those chambers!! (Is the board extremely slow, or is it my machine?) | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 49 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
It's your machine Ritva. Finally, a proposal for something besides an "airshaft" that actually makes sense. | ||
| Janine Williams Member Username: janine Post Number: 103 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Rick: Have very well heard of SNAFU, being ex-military. Murphy's Law, what's that? Regarding the bends in the shaft: Like skiing downhill among a few trees, you plan it ahead of time but, enroute, still might decide 'this way is better than that'. (This was quite an engineering job.) It's not that even the best scientists don't make mistakes, they do...but they usually catch them! Apparently the bridge builder didn't. I have a healthy respect for whoever built this structure. Probably the only person who truly knows how it was built, and why it was built in that way, is the architect. Janine | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 374 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235  |
*sigh* Well, actually my little sandy plan has got a rub in it, almost as huge as the GP itself. The outlets to the shafts are too low in the chamber. They only would let half the chamber be filled with sand  | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 51 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Janine; For more on Murphy's Law and it's corrolaries: http://www.edwards.af.mil/history/docs_html/tidbits/murphy's_law.html http://dmawww.epfl.ch/roso.mosaic/dm/murphy.html | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 18 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.93.49.10 |
George, You have worked in Egypt for 25 years, you have read a lot of books, but have you or the Egyptologists you call on for the 'air' shaft theory any engineering background? I have and I can tell you that the layout of the shafts does not, as in DEFINITELY NOT, make them suitable for producing an effective airflow (especially, of course, the QC shafts with at least one if not both ends closed). If you want to ventilate a room/chamber etc. the easiest and most efficient way to do it is to create an opening of opposing ends of the area you want to ventilate. And, please, don't say "this is looking at it from a 21st century perspective". I'm pretty sure it was common knowledge even 4500 years ago. To provide these openings in the case of the GP, two opposing shafts horizontally outwards would have been sufficiently effective. Why would the builders of the GP have gone to the trouble of building these bendind and twisting shafts if it were for ventilation only? Over to you and Rick and all other 'ventilationists'. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 52 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Ritva- They could have placed boards or logs along one side of the Q.C. like a miniature dam and slowly but surely filled the room up with sand lowered the beams on top. After that they just removed the sand and logs or boards to be used someplace else. | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 19 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.93.49.10 |
Furthermore, today the KC shafts are open to the outside, the QC shafts are open at the lower end. Plenty of airflow, right? Why, then, did Gantenbrink have to install ventilators? I'm sure a number of Egyptians working to build the GP produced a lot more humidity than the tourists visiting it. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 53 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Firtz-That argument has been proposed before, and you're absolutely right, that is the most efficent way to ventilate any structure. However, I'm a provisional "ventilationist". It's the proposal that answers the most questions with the fewest speculations. I agree wholeheartedly that all the twists and turns make it inefficent, but at the same I've seen modern duct work with just as many twists and turns in it. Just because it's the most efficent design doesn't mean that it's the best system. However I find Ritva's idea that they were pouring sand down it equally interesting and not at all implausible. However with your engineering background what do you think the purpose of the shafts are? | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 54 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
Oops I meant Fritz, sorry. | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 55 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
One more time Helmut, Jeez, the brain is shutting down prematurely today. | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 375 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Rick, Ritva- They could have placed boards or logs along one side of the Q.C. like a miniature dam and slowly but surely filled the room up with sand lowered the beams on top. After that they just removed the sand and logs or boards to be used someplace else. I'm convinced they used sand to hold the beams on position, but they could as well have poured the sand from above! There was no ceiling!!! Anyways, the shafts are free from sand! Ps. Does your brain have a "regular" shutting down time, since it's dimming earlier that expected today (gone to get the tin hat...) Helmut, I'm sure a number of Egyptians working to build the GP produced a lot more humidity than the tourists visiting it. I don't think so. Remember that most of the teams were working outside the chambers! There are just so many you can cram into chambers of that size! | ||
| Rick Baudé Senior Member Username: rjb Post Number: 56 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 24.25.206.24 |
I've been sick yesterday and today, so the brain is shutting down early from lack of oxygen due to coughing so much. | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 20 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.93.49.10 |
Rick, Yes, today you see air conditioning shafts twist and turn, but this is because the air in them is forced through. This would not have been the case in the GP, where airflow would not have been helped by machines. As far as a theory about the shafts is concerned, I'm sorry, but being an engineer doesn't help at all in this. I can't see any technical reason for them being there. I could agree to the KC shafts being 'soul' shafts, but as to the QC shafts, I'm at a total loss. Ritva, But the guys building/polishing etc. certainly used more energy and therefore produced more humidity (sweat) than your average group of tourists. I don't know how many workers there were or even how many there are in a tourist group, but all in all, I still think working requires more effort and therefore produces more humidity. | ||
| Ritva Advanced Member Username: ritva Post Number: 376 Registered: 09-1999 Posted From: 212.246.56.235 |
Well guys, it seems we are not the only ones puzzled: http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2002/607/her1.htm | ||
| Janine Williams Member Username: janine Post Number: 108 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
Rick: Got a kick out of the corollaries to Murphy's Law. Thanks, Janine | ||
| Christian Koussiounelos New member Username: cck97 Post Number: 38 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 217.39.92.81 |
Rick, An engineer will tell you what the shafts are NOT for... however, you'd be hard put to find one that'll tell you what they ARE for! As for the sand idea, I have a couple of 'issues' with it. 1) Ritva, you spotted this one yourself but, they ARE too low in the wall. There's no reason for them to have been placed that low if their purpose was to fill the chamber with sand. 2) A roofless chamber can be filled with sand from... yep, you guessed it... the OPEN roof!!! 3) They WERE initially closed on the bottom end (I don't understand this argument of placing the walls last; doesn't make sense to me... and, you can't place the walls AFTER placing the roof, right? I may be missing something in this argument!) 4) The 'plugs'/'doors'/'strange blocking stones' are rather solid so movement down the shaft seems to be out of the question. Also, after they reached the level they're at, they would no longer need 'plungers'. They could've been closed off with a masonry block. 5) This is rather lame but, for a civilization that managed to lift the roof blocks of the middle chamber to the level they are now, I don't think it would've been much of an issue to put them in place without the help of a sand-filled room. I hope I've provided enough 'food for thought'! What I'd really like to see though, seeing as we've gone so far already, is the reverse side of our 'blocking stones' - where the copper fittings go to; if there's anything else there that may be of interest/shed some light; etc. And, of course, and this is probably the umptieth time I ask this, but, if anyone hears/sees anything about the exploration of the north shaft, please share! Keep the good ideas coming! Faithfully, Christian | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 160 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.88 |
Ritva, Another rub with your idea is that it doesn't explain why the QC shafts would have been continued inside the room's walls -but only partly through- when these were build, and the shafts would have been obsolete. This feature shows that the need for shafts persisted after the walls were built. The only moment when ventilation was needed, from an engineering point of view, was when the walls were being dressed, as Helmut pointed out. Now, the walls were dressed, and the shafts aren't open ! None of the "flow" theories could work (air, water, sand, light), since the lower ends were never perforated. Hidden as they are, they're compatible with the religious explanation, without demanding a supplementary hypothesis such as : "they were simply forgotten", "shoddy workmanship" etc. As to Rick's position : 1. they WERE for ventilation 2. their structure wouldn't allow this 3. so this is an example of shoddy workmanship is the usual example of a conclusion not deriving from available facts but from an initial belief. Nor do I see why ventilation would be needed here and not in other pyramids (the QC could be polished before the horizontal passage was built, so that the air intake would have been at the room's entrance ; the situation doesn't appear, to me at least, to have been more favorable in other pyramids). So, as recent authors seem to consider, the technical explanations that have been offered fail to explain the details that can be observed. Unless another such explanation can be produced, I'll vouch for the religious hypothesis, which I find quite satisfactory for the time being : -the shafts share most of their features with normal passages : *lower horizontal part *thin slab with copper incrustations = model "door" at upper end *small chamber at upper end *two more "doors" or beginning of plugging *maybe even a pit for miniature offerings in the small chamber *maybe traces of an object lowered into the shafts and pulled out again to symbolize the movements of the king's body and soul... -textual and iconographic evidence shows that the bA was supposed to use normal passages (exit passage of pyramid in PTs ; tomb shaft or stairs in New Kingdom tomb of Nebqed). -the fact that the shafts would have been open or closed at either end would always be compatible with the religious hypothesis. -the fact that the shafts were placed as close as possible to the normal passages, although this greatly increased the difficulty of building them, points to their being assimilated with corridors, not simple piping. -the fact that the upper end wasn't simply blocked with a larger transversal stone (to move pressures to the neighboring masonry rather than on the fragile shaft) also pleads against the pipe theory. -I provided a possible explanation of the shafts' presence, linking it with the main characteristic distinguishing the GP from all other pyramids : the abnormal length of the plugged passages (AP plus may be DP or part of it), so that the exit portcullises (which had to be between the rooms and the plugged part) were now situated deep inside the pyramid, causing problems with the "religious circulation" inside. This had to happen within the theological space provided by the pyramid, i.e. behind the exit "doors of the sky" (I could quote the PT specialist Wolfgang SPIEGEL on this point, but as it isn't going to convince the sceptics, I won't bother looking up the exact page for the time being). The shafts provided a passage via the outside world or maybe via the sky (explaining their oblique position). BTW Nebqed's vignette shows that the bA could fly down a shaft. JD | ||
| Christian Koussiounelos New member Username: cck97 Post Number: 39 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 217.39.92.81 |
Heh! I was typing away when you figured out the ceiling problem Ritva! I just read that article in the link above and found this bit quite interesting: "They ascertained that both shafts were similar in terms of dimension and surface, which is lined with mortar and covered in salt crystals". Where did they get that from anyway? If it's true, it makes me wonder what the salt crystals were doing in there...(?) /ck | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 162 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.88 |
Christian, The QC walls and those of the end of the horizontal passage were covered with large such crystals : now that the GP's casing has been removed, the rain infiltrates the core masonry and dissolves the gypsum and sodium chloride in the abundant mortar. Then the water evaporates off the walls, leaving a salt crust. Apparently the same thing happened in the shafts. JD | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 164 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.88 |
As Ritva said, this thread is getting too long, so I created a new one for your convenience... JD | ||
| Janine Williams Member Username: janine Post Number: 113 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.164 |
All: Wondered when the salt crytals were going to come up...Salt was encrusted ~l/2 inch thick on the QC walls up to a height of about 3 or 4 feet. The coffer of Chefren was also encrusted with salt. (If a flood - must have been some flood!) - Actually, from the graph, a very high sea level period did occur around 2700 BP (Moerner). This would also directly affect the level of the Nile. It's also in the neighborhood of the 2nd I.P. - Can hardly wait for Butzer and Lehner to finish their geological exploration at the Wall of the Crow. Stand by! - New information coming. | ||
| Tibor Hoffmann New member Username: tibor Post Number: 1 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.56.251.45 |
Just an idea (inspired by JD "model shaft" theory); As far as I know, all religions have a basic principle: the three part of human beeing, Spirit (upper world, "BA") Soul (our world, "KA") Body (underworld, "CHAT") Imagine the GP as a model of these parts: KC 2 shafts as "open" way (the Spirit can leave the state of existence) QC 2 shafts as "closed" way (the Soul can't...) SubC with "blind" shafts as no way out (death of the Body, destruction, etc.) ? May be the GGallery shows the different stages of the way of Spirit ? May be the Subterrain Chamber is finished | ||
| George B. Johnson Senior Member Username: george Post Number: 65 Registered: 09-1998 Posted From: 63.149.20.45 |
Tibor, I suggest you read Andrew's past posts describing his proposal for the reason the QC shafts were closed. One of Dr. Verner's suggestions about the QC that was recently posted on this string supports Andrew's practical proposal for the purpose of shafts. | ||
| Helmut Fritz New member Username: helmut Post Number: 26 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.232.52.17 |
George (although you never have bothered to answer any of my posts), This refers to post #41; "It appears fairly obvious that the stone plates on the air shaft wall openings were never broken through because the QC was left unfinished by the workmen." ". . .although the QC shafts, except for being plugged when they were no longer useful" Isn't there a difference between 'broken trough' and 'plugged'. I understand 'plugged' to mean closing an existing opening (see also your ". . .no longer useful"). Furthermore, Gantenbrink's website shows the shafts being constructed by putting a block with a chiseled-out u-channel on top or under a normal block. Would it not have attracted the attention of somebody that the channel of two blocks, and the two exact blocks which went in first, was unfinished? ". . .the KC the shafts were opened through the wall." Do you mean to say, they were originally closed an opened later? |
