| Author | Message | ||
     Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 10 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.67 |
The following is an illustration from "The Great Pyramid Decoded' by E. Raymond Capt M.A., A.I.A., F.S.A., SCOT:  I'm interested in the feature marked as 'Petrie's Granite Block' in the descending passage. Here's a close up detail: I can't find anything in Petrie's 'The Pyramids and Temple of Gizeh' that mentions it, though I might have missed it. I not sure if the diagram in Petrie's book shows it or not as there is no label but there does appear to be something in the same position: I can't help feeling that I've read something about it somewhere but I can't find it. Anyone know more about 'Petrie's Granite Block'? Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 11 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.72 |
Sorry about the above. I actually thought I'd cancelled the post when I had trouble with the illustrations so I was surprised to see it appear. I've also now found the section in Petrie I was looking for so the whole thing was a bit of a waste of time on my part. Apologies again. Jon B | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 252 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.150.5 |
Jon, Do you think these perforated blocks are pieces of the KC portcullises ? JD | ||
| Charlie Rigano Senior Member Username: charlie Post Number: 503 Registered: 06-1999 Posted From: 192.83.248.11 |
Jon, Jon, Just to give you more of a history on this block. It was discovered by Petrie in 1881 in the Descending Passage just below the intersection with the Ascending Passage. In the early 1900s Covington placed an iron gate on top, blocking access below this point. The Edgar brothers in 1910 found the block in-place and in 1926, Morton Edgar moved it further up the passage. Maragioglio and Rinaldi in the early 1960s found the block still in the passage. Sometime later, some unknown person moved the block to its current position outside the entrance. It has two holes completely cut through and a third hole which is broken along it's length. I have pictures if anyone is interested. JD, this block and three others still spread around the GP interior (Sub Chamber pit, recess before the Sub Chamber, Grotto) are all very likely parts of the portcullis. They don't exceed the required dimensions, the thickness is correct, and where there are holes the spacing fits the groves on the south wall of the Ante Chamber. There was a fifth granite block which was found just beyond Petrie's block. In 1910 when the Edgar brothers were cleaning the passage, the block became dislodged and slid 200' down the Ascending Passage hitting a laarger granite block which was sitting just above the Well Shaft entrance. Both slid to the bottom, blocking access to the Horizontal Passage. Morton Edgar moved both blocks slightly up the passage, then in 1926 he moved them into the Subterranean Chamber. The small granite block has since disappeared, but an Edgar photograph shows the shape of the block which was sitting above the Well Shaft entrance matches the block now located on the ledge in the Subterranean Chamber pit. | ||
| michel michel New member Username: michel Post Number: 31 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 193.250.255.252  |
Hi Charlie I am very interested by your pictures. Could you send me them please ? Also, what are your references about all this story ? Great work Charlie. | ||
| michel michel New member Username: michel Post Number: 32 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 193.250.255.252 |
Hi Charlie I am very interested by your pictures. Could you send me them please ? Also, what are your references about all this story ? Great work Charlie. | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 255 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.61 |
Thank you, Charlie ! You should post the excellent picture of the portcullis now placed near the entrance, which you once showed me. One still notices copper oxyde in the perforations, showing that granite was worked using copper tube-drills and, supposedly, sand (or powdered dolerite ?) as an abrasive. JD | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 12 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.71 |
Hi Charlie Yes please I would love to see a photograph. I've been investigating further since my abortive post and have been wondering what happened to the stone. I found the description in Petrie but not much more. Jon B | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 13 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.71 |
If Petrie discovered the block in 1881 is it thought that it had been there since the time of el-Mamun etc? Caviglia cleared the descending passage of the limestone refuse from the plugs smashed by al-Mamun so I wonder why he didn't remove a block that would have severely restricted access down the passage and one that would have made getting the limestone pieces out difficult. Did Vyse mention it? Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 14 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.65 |
Just for completeness I'll try posting again two of the diagrams that show the position of the block as Petrie found it.   Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Charlie Rigano Senior Member Username: charlie Post Number: 505 Registered: 06-1999 Posted From: 65.57.42.67 |
I haven't figured out how to put pictures in a post - I failed three times. Since JD has mastered it, I will send three pictures to JD and ask him to post. I guess Petrie gets credit for the block since he was the first to write about it. I don't recall Vyse or anyone else earlier saying anything about it. As to where I got the information - a number of sources - two of the Edgar Brothers books, Petrie, Lepre, and M&R. Nothing comes easy. If I can ever get my book published, you can find it all in one place. Charlie | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 261 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 213.177.133.70 |
Charlie's pictures : 1. Block now lying outside the entrance (1' black ruler on top):  2. Block in niche of lower horizontal passage :  2. Block lying in pit of subterranean chamber :  | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 15 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.72 |
Thanks Charlie and JD. Fascinating photos. I've never been able to get into the lower passages of the Great Pyramid but I must have missed that block outside dozens of times. Thanks again Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| J.D. Degreef Senior Member Username: jd_degreef Post Number: 265 Registered: 02-2000 Posted From: 80.236.134.176 |
A side view of the block, showing dark copper remains in the fractured drilled hole :  JD | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 17 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.67 |
Thanks JD Here's the passage in Petrie that I was looking for when I started this thread: "But the granite was not only tough, but interesting, and I would not let the skilful hammer-man cleave it up slice by slice as he longed to do; it was therefore blocked up in its place, with a stout board across the passage, to prevent it being started into a downward rush. It was a slab 20.6 thick, worked on both faces, and one end, but rough broken around the other three sides ; and as it lay flat on the floor, it left us 27 inches of height to pass down the passage over it. Where it came from is a complete puzzle ; no granite is known in the Pyramid, except the King's Chamber, the Antechamber, and the plug blocks in the ascending passage. Of these sites the Antechamber seems to be the only place whence it could have come; and Maillet mentions having seen a large block (6 feet by 4) lying in the Antechamber, which is not to be found there now. This slab is 32 inches wide to the broken sides, 45 long to a broken end, and 20.6 thick; and, strangely, on one side edge is part of a drill hole, which ran through the 20.6 thickness, and the side of which is 27.3 from the worked end. This might be said to be a modern hole, made for smashing it up, wherever it was in situ ; but it is such a hole as none but an ancient Egyptian would have made, drilled out with a jewelled tubular drill in the regular style of the 4th dynasty; and to attribute it to any mere smashers and looters of any period is inadmissible. What if it came out. of the grooves in the Antechamber, and was placed like the granite leaf across that chamber? The grooves are an inch wider, it is true; but then the groove of the leaf is an inch wider than the leaf. If it was then in this least unlikely place, what could be the use of a 4-inch hole right through the slab? It shows that something has been destroyed, of which we have, at present, no idea." I'm a little puzzled though as the description doesn't seem to fit the block in the photo. Do the two holes go all the way through? If they don't is it possible that Petrie saw this stone the other way up? I can't see why Petrie would fail to mention two drilled holes when he does mention one that was split by the broken edge. Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 245 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.217 |
Jon: What is the source of your entrance shaft drawings on your post of 11-10-01 at 12:14pm ? I am curious about where mid-plane of the pyramid intersects it. From the drawing, it looks like it intersects at the N wall of the subterranean chamber. Is this correct? Thanks, Janine | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 20 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.72 |
Hi Janine The top diagram is from a book called "The Great Pyramid Decoded" by E Raymond Capt 1971(totally dotty). The diagram is obviously older though and is dated 1909 so I don't know its original source. The second diagram is a detail from a larger drawing in Petrie's "The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh" 1885. Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 248 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.217 |
Thankyou, Jon. I did a little rooting in P&T of Giza, and found that Petrie states that the end of the entrance tunnel, measured from the opening to the bend where it becomes horizontal, is 345 ft, and ends 25.5 ft north of the center-plane. So centered, it isn't.(P. 59, PP2. line 4: "306 inches N of mid-plane") Couldn't find the second diagram by Petrie in the URL...how do I get to it? Thanks, again Janine | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 21 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.65 |
Hi Janine If you are looking for the Petrie diagram on the Web version of his book you wont find it I'm afraid. The one I posted is a scan from my own copy of his book which is an enlargement of a section of one of the diagrams. If you are interested there is another diagram in the Capt book that has some relevance to the centering of the chambers. I'll post it later. Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 251 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.217 |
Thanks Jon, that's OK. I have the book and will scan it too. Good idea. (Now why didn't I think of that?) Janine | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 22 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.67 |
Here's a diagram from Capt's book that may or may not add something to understanding the centering of the various chambers. Ignore the measurements in inches as they are Capt's own Pyramid inch which serve to support his theories concerning predictions of future events. I think the relative values and offsets etc are probably accurate though.  Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Samuel Laboy Member Username: samuellaboy Post Number: 21 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 209.91.200.162 |
Janine, Since you are interested in the measurements of the descending passage, and horizontal corridor to the subterranean chamber’s length, I think there is a trick in those readings. We have to know at the point where the surveyor ends his horizontal corridor’s length.  From the pict-sketch, you can see that the junction is angled. Therefore, there is one distance from the pyramid’s plane to the end of the corridor (same level), but there is another from the same plane to the end of the descending passage, which is located below. The difference is due to the slanted front of the entrance to the corridor. If the vertical drop is 12” and the angle is 45°, the missing length would be 12” = 1.00 ft. This, added to the horizontal length, would make it 26.5 ft, instead of 25.5 ft. Just as information only, my pyramid's model, probably you have read about, shows 345 ft for the descending passage, and 26.79 for the corridor. I am not implying that I am right, but since it is and important dimension, should be correctly set. I think this is the only problematic distance to measure because of the slanted connection between the two corridors. I Hope this will help in your project. Samuel Laboy | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 255 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.228.217 |
Thankyou Samuel. Janine | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 282 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Samuel: Mulling things over - the difference of tan of the shaft = .5, and tan = .499xx is negligible, and .5 was probably what was intended. (Agree JD) Here's the question: How would an engineer go about digging this tunnel? One very long tunnel (think it was under the English Channel), was sited from each side and the direction aimed by lasers...Excavating from both sides, THEY missed a direct connection by 6 inches...THAT was with lasers! The Egyptians had no such thing, and it is doubtfull that were diggers inside the cave hauling entrance shaft dirt out - (to where?)...How far do you think they would miss hitting dead center of the pyramid, inside the cave, excavating from just one end? Was the point where they leveled off (345 ft down) a "closest estimate"?... Or did they have a reason for an additional 25.5 ft of horizontal tunnel?...Is it possible that the depth they DIDN'T complete should be ignored? ...i.e. Is it that they simply realized that they got to cave level sooner than expected with with that slope... and would have gone too low,if they had continued? New question: The "escape" shaft rather twists around until it meets the tunnel and may have been dug to a certain level first...then 'wiggled' along later to connect. Once the beginning 'wormhole' for the entrance passage was finished , the men would need a second air intake to finish the job. The escape shaft may have had a dual use. The later squaring and 1/4 in. precise alignment of 345 ft must have taken quite a bit of time. (Wonder how many men they lost on this project.) Even if they did slightly "miss the barn", I do not know how they ever got it to connect at all... How did they do this?? Janine | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 23 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.67 |
Hi Janine That's an interesting point about the "Well Shaft". Not only does it 'wiggle' about, it also missed the descending passage by being too far to the East when it reached the same level so a short piece of horizontal tunnel had to be cut. I would imagine when they got that close that sound would be the best guide. But the irregular route the Well Shaft takes does seem to suggest they were having difficulty keeping on track. Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 288 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Jon: Think they were having trouble keeping on track with the well shaft, too. That could not have been easy to dig... They couldn't see where they were going. Perhaps the shaft originally followed the line of a fissure? I asked JD how they knew the cave was there in the first place (to center a pyramid over it). He said the "fissures to the outside" probably let them know it was there... Maybe animals disappearing into it... One would think the cave would need exploring before building on it. ...problem is, the well shaft doesn't look like it reaches the cave except through the descending tunnel...am I wrong? The subterranean chamber looks oddly like a cult place. (?) Benches, stairs, two hollowed out basin-like depressions in the raised part floor...I would like to think that those basins were natural, or made as a depression in which to place a torch, not sacrificial blood basins... (I'm glad it's gated off...that place is scary!) I understand the large square pit (reminiscent of Djoser's?), when cleared of the debris, could be over 60 feet deep...wonder if it has ever been excavated? (Down in the dumps would be about the last place you'd look for a dead pharaoh.)... It also may have had another use...C14 datable. Janine | ||
| Samuel Laboy Member Username: samuellaboy Post Number: 33 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 209.91.194.28 |
Janine, Sorry for the delay. It took me some time to prepared the sketches, for the benefit of the explanation. To work out the descending passage, it had to be done in two sections: from the ground level to the 345’ distance, and from the ground level up, to the exit (entrance). This last section, up the pyramid, should not be difficult. From the ground level down: To set the exact point where the excavation should start: Here is where my circle method is very useful. If the layout of the field survey for the pyramid is done with a circle, it will look like this.  I would like to know how to do this without the circle method. Since the vertical cross sectional view of the pyramid is withing a circle, it can be rotated to a horizontal position, making the terrain a drawing board, like the drawing traced in a papyrus. You can layout the location and position of the chambers, corridors, etc. over the terrain. Now, from calculations, or from the scale drawing, or by actually measuring in the field, the exact location for the initial excavation can be determined. To do this in the field, after the centerline axis (n-s) of the pyramid is set, they needed to measure and mark the displacement of 23.92 feet to the east (in their cubits unit), and set the centerline for the corridors. They could had Marked this line over the terrain by setting wooden stakes and level cords, oriented (n-s) to define this axis.  Set wooden stakes over the ground terrain, in the south-north direction, joined by a level (horizontally set) cords. This line should coincide with the centerline of the passages center. Now, the builders should measure 20.5” (1 cubit?) to each side of the centerline, to provide for the 41” width of the corridor. Set wooden stakes and level cords (n-s) direction to mark the corridor width. They will have three cord lines in the (n-s) direction, and completely level. The use of two cord lines for the top of the corridor, one for the center, and two others for the bottom, will increase their precision. From the same field layout survey, they could extend a cord to determine the length of this passage section =(250.69’), taken from my design.  Assuming the cross section of the corridor is 41” width and 47” height, the area for excavation to be marked over the terrain should measure, horizontally and to the south, the equivalence of 105 inches, this, to create the 47 inches as the height of the corridor. So, they have establish a 1:2 triangle, 47", 94", 105" sides, that is, (1)(47) =47”, (2)(47) = 94”, and (47) square root of five) = 105”. They could use the same wooden stakes to make these markings. They could had used long wooden poles, and set the inclination slope, using the cords. They could even place inclined (straight) planks, attached with nails to the poles, to completely fix the angle and make a line of site. They are now ready to initial the excavation.  After each cubit lenght of excavation, the chord alignment for the slope angle could be verified. Two men could excavate at the sides. Workers removed the chippings and debris to continue the excavation. The excavator men could use small wooden triangles, 1:2 ratio, and a plumb bob to confirm the alignment, which also continue been checked using the cords. As the workers inside the corridor cut the stones, they put the chips in baskets, where they are pull out with cords, to be disposed outside. These baskets could have a double cord system, where the workers could pull them in to the corridor when empty. This basket could serve as service devices: to replace the cutting tools, to receive water to drink, to received the supply of oil for the lamps, when needed, etc. At about the end of the 345', the cord corresponding to the corridor's length (fixed at the entrance) is delivered to the excavator men. They stop when they reach the end of this chord. Then, they work out the horizontal entrance to the subterranean chamber. This could have been measured also with a chord, and be available for the horizontal corridor work. However, this section needed another procedure for construction. The centerline cord could be used to set the point for change in angle, and keep the same south alignment of the line. To set the new cross section for the horizontal corridor, they could had used clamped cross sticks of wood, having the measurements of 32” width and 36” height between their extremes. They could have worked this horizontal section based on the centerline of the horizontal axis, and the cross sticks of wood as a measuring device. At the same time, a lot of people were working around the pyramid's site. My geometrical configuration, again, help me to identify the different point of work, plus the reasons that could be involved. If I am right or wrong, that is a different thing. If you refer to my post "A Civil Engineer Looks to the Great Pyramid", you will read that this descending corridor is align with point X, The pyramid’s cross sectional plane goes through the pyramid’s axis. However, we know that the centerline of the passages was moved 23.92’ to the east. The Pharaoh wants his mortuary temple built exactly below the Pyramid, not the corridors centerline. This is not seen in the (n-s) cross section view. Therefore, the Pharaoh’s chamber should be located to the west of the corridor. In order to further confuse the intruders, I said, the corridor was level, and continue to the subterranean chamber (unfinished, because it was a fake). But maybe you have noticed, that before the entrance to this chamber, in the horizontal section, there is a small niche, about 1 meter deep and 1.85 meters width, at the west wall. To me, this could be the entrance to another corridor to the real Khufu's chamber that was completely sealed. This, to my knowledge, has never been investigated. This supposed corridor should descend at any time in its way, to the Pharaoh’s chamber, which should be about 12 feet below, and at the center of the vertical axis of the pyramid. Inside the subterranean chamber, if you take a look to the west side of it, there are some excavations which apparently were abandoned, but that also could lead into corridors to the west side. In the suggested Pharaoh’s chamber location. If I am right or wrong, time will tell. In relation to the escape shaft, this could have been done when the subterranean chamber’s work was initiated. The excavation created so much debris and rubbish pieces, that make them difficult to remove from the site. Since the pyramid’s was still at the first level, they could have decided to construct this escape shaft from the level terrain, to facilitate the movement of the labors carrying all the litter. Those carrying the baskets could use the descending corridor, while those coming with the empties, could go through the escape shaft. This procedure could continue since the sub-chamber was not finished. The builders continue increasing the height of the shaft as the operation continued. To me, the reasons for the escape shaft to be so tortuous, is that this service shaft was not in the plans, and they had to improvised its way. They had to go away from the ascending passage when in that level, finally they decided to arrived at the end west corner of the Grand Gallery. Samuel Laboy | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 293 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Jon: Thankyou for the copy of the alignment of the chambers, from Capt's book. Come to think of it, I've read that. (¿) He burst into print with it right after someone else published "Stonehenge Decoded". Thanks again, Janine | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 294 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Jon: Thankyou for the copy of the alignment of the chambers, from Capt's book. Come to think of it, I've read that. (¿) He burst into print with it right after someone else published "Stonehenge Decoded". Thanks again, Janine | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 24 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.70 |
Hi Samuel A very interesting post, thanks. I'm still rather puzzled by the 'Well Shaft', I wonder if anybody has a cross section that shows its course viewed from the East West axis rather than from the more usual North South. I do have quite a large collection of books, both old and new, but none seem to contain this view. I'm particularly interested to see how the so called 'Cave' or 'Cavern' fits in to the picture. This feature is shown on the cross section below but doesn't usually get shown. As far as I know it's a natural feature just below the surface in the original mound, on the diagram it's just visible in the top area of the shadding.  Is the cave on the same axis as the other passages and if it is, is that a coincidence? If it isn't does that mean that the whole passage structure was planned to be on the same axis as this natural feature? Or do the centre of the mound and the cave just happen to coincide? Samuel wrote: "The builders continue increasing the height of the shaft as the operation continued." If they built the shaft as they went along wouldn't they have constructed it by leaving a gap in the structure rather than by continually laying blocks and then cutting a tunnel through them? Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 296 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Sam: Thankyou for the tunnel explanation, and the very nice diagrams that went with it. Yesterday, I was wondering if the builders simply 'missed the barn' and ended up with a needed horizontal extension. No. After some research on other pyramids of the same era, which also have a horizontal subterranean section, I believe the one one in the GP is intentional. The final underground depth of these horizontal passages, with respect to the level of the cave, varies somewhat... i.e. possibly arbitrary. Some come in evenly near the bottom, others don't. Question: Why do you want to develop this without the circle method?... They did use circles... Circles don't appear among quarry marks, but quarry marks are for stone masons...not a comprehensive written record of the involved mathematics . There are plenty of examples of circles cut in stone, done with large and small (apparently jeweled) circular saws. Some are over six feet in diameter! That skill, alone, is remarkable. I am certain they had a purpose for them. Why do you want to change it?...If so, several things are already in a 2:1 ratio, perhaps keeping the phi proportion might not be so difficult. Sooner or later, Mathematics will be required in any event, just as it originally was for the builders , no matter what method they used. Others might like to see an even simpler method extracted "from somewhere", so simple that a chimpanzee could it up!... Why?... We still cannot be sure of what method they used, but dull-witted, they weren't. Janine | ||
| Vincent Brown New member Username: vincent Post Number: 23 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 202.174.32.59 |
Hi Jon, The same book that you got the above picture from has the view from the north, it can be found on my website: Pyramid of Man - the House of Going Forth by Day Vincent | ||
| Vincent Brown New member Username: vincent Post Number: 24 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 202.174.32.59 |
Hi Jon, The same book that you got the above picture from has the view from the north, it can be found on my website: Pyramid of Man - the House of Going Forth by Day Vincent | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 25 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.71 |
Hi Vincent Thanks for that. The illustration I used is from a small book that contains plates from all sorts of old books but does not acknowledge the source. There is no illustration like the one on your website so I'm very gratefull as it is exactly what I was after. Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk | ||
| Vincent Brown New member Username: vincent Post Number: 25 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 202.174.32.59 |
Sorry Jon, I posted in haste. I thought you had taken that picture from Smyth's book but it was actually from that book by E.Raymond Capt wasn't it. That picture and the one on my website originally came from David Davidson's book, 'The Great Pyramid - Its Divine Message'. I was lucky enough to stumble across this one in a little old bookshop in the back streets in Cairo. Then I found their website when I got back: L'orientaliste I have ordered books through them since then too. Vincent. | ||
| Samuel Laboy Member Username: samuellaboy Post Number: 35 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 209.91.200.219 |
Jon, In relation to your question: --------------------------------------- If they built the shaft as they went along wouldn't they have constructed it by leaving a gap in the structure rather than by continually laying blocks and then cutting a tunnel through them? --------------------------------------- Here is a sketch, from the book Egyptian Pyramid Geometry, from H.R. Butler, page 88, which shows the escape shaft as cut through the prelaid masonry.  I think, this is the way it should be done, to keep the integrity and force bearing capacity of the rock layers. It is something like when you are going to dig a whole in the dirt of an embankment. You lay the soil and compact it, them you dig the hole. Samuel Laboy | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 298 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Thanks, Samuel. We may get the building techniques figured out yet! Janine | ||
| Janine Williams Intermediate Member Username: janine Post Number: 299 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 66.26.41.11 |
Jon: If you have not yet found a sketch of the east/west location of the connection of the well shaft to the entrance passage, the is one in Thompkins' book. Stumbled over it yesterday, but don't remember the page. The sketch is easy to find, just flip through. If no luck, I'll root out the page number. Janine | ||
| Samuel Laboy Member Username: samuellaboy Post Number: 37 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 209.91.201.247 |
Janine, In relation to my post about setting up the construction of the descending corridor, you asked me “Why do you want to develop this without the circle method?” There are two different aspects in the job construction. One is the design work and the other the construction. My circle method is for the design work. Using the designed plans they can figure out the required dimensions, but they have to use building construction techniques to build the structure. So, the circle remains in the plans and probably in some control points laid out in the field survey. All the underground sections were designed using the circle method. I guess you have received a copy of all the drawings I sent to you attached in an e-mail, about a month ago. For example, with the circle, they determined the length of the descending corridor, up to the change to horizontal. The designers could have determined the length of the horizontal passage, according to the distance set in the circle design. However, the field workers, probably never knew anything about how these distances were determined. The supervisors in charged of providing the corresponding lengths to he workers, should know. What must have been very useful for the field workers, were the wooden triangles 1:2, which were easy to construct, and by adding a plum bob, they could set them in position. I do not know if these were your questions. If not, please excuse me, and try again. Samuel Laboy | ||
| Jon Bodsworth New member Username: jon_b Post Number: 26 Registered: 09-2002 Posted From: 195.92.67.65 |
Hi Janine Thanks for the info about the Tompkins book. It was the first place I looked but I only read the first entry for the Well Shaft and completely missed the later stuff. I've found it now (page 247) and also read the text which actually answers most of my questions. Also thanks to Vincent for the web link. I love old books and searching them out. My copy of Piazzi Smyth is a great treasure, picked up for a couple of pounds in an second hand bookshop. Jon B www.egyptarchive.co.uk |
