How they Built the Great Pyramid of Egypt

Regarding the 20 year argument [This may have been overlooked. I'll repost it again]

The 20 year claim comes to us from an ancient Greek from around 200 BC that's about 2,300 + or - years after the Great Pyramid was built. Who says we are tied to that 20 year figure? It could have taken 25 or 30 or more years.

The Greek could have received the [20 year figure] wrongly from the Egyptians of his era circa 200BC that's again about [2,300 years or more after the fact]

reply to post by jackflap


Slave labor is slave labor.

The Egyptians worked their slaves hard.

And on top of this they did not stop for people who were frail and old.

Those conquered people would put their best people on these massive building projects.

Again, I stand by both my original posts, the pyramids took decades to build.

As societies crumbled so did work ethics of the people who went from being slaves to paid labor.

The modern work ethic is nothing compared to ancient times.

Especially when during ancient times often whipping, beating, and or death was the incentive.

Over minimum wage and unions of the modern day and age.

reply to post by johngtr


Different slaves did different jobs, some were farmers, some were stonemasons.

Farmers, farmed to feed everyone, stonemasons worked to their specific tasks, warriors defended all.

And sometimes slave labor was used as what we colloquially call today as cannon fodder.

Rotating shifts of people discounts anything about needing sleep.

Just as in today's modern society people work during the day while others work at night.

As modern jobs I've worked all three different shifts because of different schedules.

So did the ancient workers.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


Do you really think that you would have garnered the precision and beauty of such a monument using slave labor over generations? Do you believe that these ruthless slave drivers who had no time for the weak or aged just pushed them aside and continued with building the monument without missing a beat? Do you believe that slaves would have gave a damn about how tightly two stones fit together and that every one placed by a slave was scrutinized by a slave driver of some sort?

These are all simple questions that I have asked myself regarding this particular topic.

reply to post by SLAYER69

The 20 year claim comes to us from an ancient Greek from around 200 BC that's about 2,300 + or - years after the Great Pyramid was built. Who says we are tied to that 20 year figure? It could have taken 25 or 30 or more years. The Greek could have received the [20 year figure] wrongly from the Egyptians of his era circa 200BC that's again about [2,300 years or more after the fact]

I understood the post when you first posted it. It may be that you overlooked my post in reply to yours. I'll ask again.

Even if you double the amount of time. Let's say forty years to build it. That would be one stone every eight point two seconds non stop, three hundred sixty five, seven days a week.

Originally posted by jackflap
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

Do you really think that you would have garnered the precision and beauty of such a monument using slave labor over generations? Do you believe that these ruthless slave drivers who had no time for the weak or aged just pushed them aside and continued with building the monument without missing a beat? Do you believe that slaves would have gave a damn about how tightly two stones fit together and that every one placed by a slave was scrutinized by a slave driver of some sort?

These are all simple questions that I have asked myself regarding this particular topic.

Yes, I do, in fact I mentioned the reason behind it earlier.

Quote of SKL :

The modern work ethic is nothing compared to ancient times.

Especially when during ancient times often whipping, beating, and or death was the incentive.

Over minimum wage and unions of the modern day and age.

The Egyptians used their labor to sufficient efficiency so as to best make projects happen.

Just as oil lubricated the trees under massive blocks slaves blood lubricated Egyptian work.

The rise and fall of Egypt is just as many other societies on the backs of slavery.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by aivlas

 

I respectfully disagree..

Here is an example of them cutting an obelisk by hand which broke and was left in place.
It is as big and heavy [or heavier] than most of the stones found in the Great pyramid...
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6faff3dfe6ba.jpg[/atsimg]

edit on 21-3-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)

Nice OP BTW. This pic caught my eye also as the only other solid stone this size are the Trilithon stones in Baalbek and the Stone of the South, all over 1000 tons. I couldn't begin to figure out how they moved monoliths of that size. Just mind boggling!

reply to post by jackflap


Fair enough, now how many people did they have as a labor force?
Outside of the Ancient Greek what other sources from that period which states their was a certain [Time-line] or time constraint?


In the OP I wrote...

Accepted Egyptology states it took roughly twenty years of back breaking labor to build it. I as do many here question not the why or even the when but the how...

I didn't add any time frame for it's construction because frankly I don't believe it could have been done in only 20 years. I've also asked repeatedly why we are holding ourselves to ANY time frame? If most of the workers had to leave and tend to their farms then so what? They would come back the next season and continue working. Year after year, decade after decade. That was their life.

reply to post by SLAYER69


You may not have put a timeframe but I did.

Decades, which can be twenty, thirty, or forty years.

Depending upon which particular part of the building we're discussing.

Using mathematics to design these structures and levers, pulleys, and slave labor to build them.

Different aspects took different timeframes to build.

Quarrying rocks takes longer than transportation of said rocks.

As I mentioned to others earlier rotating shifts takes sleep time out of the equation altogether as well as farming.

The Egyptians utilized their slave labor according to what people did best.

Farmers, farmed, stonemasons, quarried rocks, soldiers defended and or kept people in line.

And anyone who did not have a particular trade?

Well, they were general slave labor, moving rocks, feeding people as food staff, and or whatever else was left.

The modern work ethic, again, is atrocious and appaling, compared to ancient times.

People today demand breaks, for cigarettes, or eating, or do not show up for work.

Whereas in ancient time the only break times were for food or shift change or possibly warfare.

Originally posted by jackflap
Do you really think that you would have garnered the precision and beauty of such a monument using slave labor over generations? Do you believe that these ruthless slave drivers who had no time for the weak or aged just pushed them aside and continued with building the monument without missing a beat? Do you believe that slaves would have gave a damn about how tightly two stones fit together and that every one placed by a slave was scrutinized by a slave driver of some sort?

We see this in other Great Ancient Monuments. The Great wall of China. Built by slaves, forced by the whip, very well built, some lengths are very amazing in quality. They had to build it that way or face death. It's an easy choice.

Life, Food, Shelter and attention to detail or Death To me it would be an easy choice. But back to Egypt, there is very little evidence for a slave force. Now If that's true and there were no or very few slaves used then people were very well kept and trained to pay close attention to details.

Would you disagree with the Great walls other name?
The longest Graveyard in the world

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7f6b2c438029.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a92e52c37ce0.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

Especially when during ancient times often whipping, beating, and or death was the incentive.

Let's say it took 300 years. That would be one stone every 63 minutes non stop for 300 years uninterrupted.

Let's say it took 600 years. That would be one stone every 126 minutes which is one stone every 2 hours non stop for 600 years uninterrupted.

Let's say it took 1200 years. That would be one stone every 252 minutes which is one stone every 4 hours non stop for 1200 years uninterrupted.

How long did the Egyptian civilization last and wouldn't maintaining what was already built years ago be a job in and of itself?

reply to post by SLAYER69


Attention to detailed is an acquired art.

I am a detail-oriented person but I chose to be that way.

As you have expressed and so did I slave labor was a large part of the trade of building in ancient times.

The Great Wall of China is a perfect example of what happened to slaves too.

Buried within the structure so as to cover-up the evidence of atrocities.

Not only this but from then to now things have majorly shifted.

Back in ancient times youth were taken on as apprentices for life.

They began learning their skill and or trade early on so they perfected it by their 30's.

Whereas in today's society people go to college to learn and never truly learn unless they have street smarts.

Or develop a capable ability to perform a trade or craft.

reply to post by jackflap


About 3,900 + or - Years.
Well longer than 1,200 years to build at a pace of one crew placing 1 block an hour. I'm surprised that you cannot seem to in-vision Thousands or Tens of thousands all working simultaneously in multiple shifts and teams/crews around the clock?


They didn't maintain their monuments.

Remember supposedly the Sphinx was buried and in disrepair from an era of 1500 years previously before it was refurbished around 1,200 BC according to legend. They built a city near the Nile lived there for about 20 to 300 years then the Nile would change course leaving them high and dry and they would move accordingly.

reply to post by jackflap


You're making an illogical argument here.

As I mentioned earlier, rotating shifts, and slave labor.

While group A built, group B ate or slept, group C was doing something completely different.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Shift Work

Shift work is an employment practice designed to make use of the 24 hours of the clock.

The term "shift work" includes both long-term night shifts and work schedules in which employees change or rotate shifts.

A related yet different concept, the work shift, is the time period during which a person is at work.

Did shift-work only develop in modern days?

No it did not.

It has been used for centuries upon centuries.

Depending upon whether those pushing workers knew their engineering or not.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Shift Work : Shift Patterns

Three-shift systemThe "three-shift system" is the most common pattern, with "first" from 06:00 to 14:00, "second" from 14:00 to 22:00, and a "third" (or "night") shift from 22:00 to 06:00 This is generally worked over a five-day week; to provide coverage 24/7, employees have their days off ("weekends") on different days.

All of the shifts have desirable and less desirable qualities.

First shift has very early starts, so time in the evening before is heavily cut short.

The second shift (or "swing shift") occupies the times during which many people finish work and socialize.

The third shift creates a situation in which the employee must sleep during the day.

Generally, employees stay with the same shift for a period of time, as opposed to cycling through them; this is seen as healthier.

Modern time does not have the monopoly on shift-work.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Engineering : Ancient Era

The Pharos of Alexandria, the pyramids in Egypt, the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, the Acropolis and the Parthenon in Greece, the Roman aqueducts, Via Appia and the Colosseum, Teotihuacán and the cities and pyramids of the Mayan, Inca and Aztec Empires, the Great Wall of China, among many others, stand as a testament to the ingenuity and skill of the ancient civil and military engineers.

The earliest civil engineer known by name is Imhotep.

As one of the officials of the Pharaoh, Djosèr, he probably designed and supervised the construction of the Pyramid of Djoser (the Step Pyramid) at Saqqara in Egypt around 2630-2611 BC.

He may also have been responsible for the first known use of columns in architecture.

Ancient Greece developed machines in both the civilian and military domains.

The Antikythera mechanism, the first known mechanical computer, and the mechanical inventions of Archimedes are examples of early mechanical engineering.

Some of Archimedes' inventions as well as the Antikythera mechanism required sophisticated knowledge of differential gearing or epicyclic gearing, two key principles in machine theory that helped design the gear trains of the Industrial revolution, and are still widely used today in diverse fields such as robotics and automotive engineering.

Chinese, Greek and Roman armies employed complex military machines and inventions such as artillery which was developed by the Greeks around the 4th century B.C., the trireme, the ballista and the catapult.

In the Middle Ages, the Trebuchet was developed.

Civil engineering is not tied to modern times it began at the dawn of time itself.

Originally posted by jackflap
1 stone every 4.2 minutes ...24/7/365 for 20 years straight non stop.

I think the tendency is to imagine them placing one stone at a time. But if they're working on all four sides simultaneously, I can see them relatively easily being able to drop one stone on one side every sixteen minutes or so, with the stones on the bottom levels (and a lot of the volume) going in much faster. The first twenty levels or so probably went in surprisingly fast. And it's not like these were placed with clock-like precision. Look at any photo of the exposed interior blocks, and they're pretty rough hewn and tossed in wherever they happen to fit.

Double that up, with two block placing teams on each side, and you're talking about one team placing a block every half hour or so. That's not ridiculous, once you have a system going.

I agree that the interior structures were somehow involved in the construction, along with being potential tomb chambers. The thing I always think is that actually, a pyramid is a relatively easy shape to build, because once you have some of it built, you can use the shape itself to help build the rest of it. It has a natural sloping shape for counter-weighting and sliding stones. Kind of like reverse quarrying, with one block being used to lift two others, over and over again.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by PsykoOps

 

They may be referring to the stone of Baalbek. Some also marvel at it's size and weight or the fact that it was moved. However, it is a perfect example of ancient monument builders Failing to accomplish the task. The most likely scenario for it's present day situation is that they probably bit off more than they could chew. Dragged the stone, it got stuck in a rut and it being too big and heavy they couldn't get it moving again and so they had to abandon it in place.

Epic Fail Had there been any Alien intervention we wouldn't be having this conversation. They would have anti-gravity ray gunned it successfully into place

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9ba799408159.jpg[/atsimg]

edit on 21-3-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)

Yes that is the one I was referring to. So they failed and left it in the place. What I'd question is what was the failure. I don't think it was failure to move the stone. If that were the case why wouldn't they just cut it into smaller pieces and use it for something else. It has lots of finished parts and that would be the logical thing to do. Maybe the project encountered another difficulty. Perhaps a war broke out or the whole project was cancelled for some reason.
Also now that I think about this I remember vaguely a theory about mayan constructions. Some people claimed to have observed some local bird hack it's nests in solid granite. They were awestruck that a bird could do that and followed them around and found them using some red flower that they said made the rock very soft. This is what I recall and it sounds quite far fetched. If anyone remembers details / links please share. It's quite a curious theory.

Originally posted by admriker444

Originally posted by thepainweaver
reply to post by artistpoet

 

One thing I've found quite odd, regarding the sonic levitation idea, is that either the king's or queen's chamber (can't remember) was said to be tuned (or off by a minuscule degree) to perfect A440 pitch.


As far as "pouring" the stones, there is a major difference between limestone and cement. Limestone, what the blocks are said to be made out of, is bedrock that takes hundreds of thousands of years to form. Any geologist that has visited the pyramids would be laughed out of his/her profession to misinterpret limestone. Also, think about how relatively quickly a synthetic concrete weathers, just in our lifetime. The Egyptians would have needed a very special "family concrete recipe" in order to last this long.

edit on 20-3-2011 by thepainweaver because: (no reason given)

www.timesonline.co.uk...

"Until recently it was hard for geologists to distinguish between natural limestone and the kind that would have been made by reconstituting liquefied lime."

its not just something i came up with fyi. there is serious consideration to the theory that the blocks were in fact poured in place.

why does this upset people ? does it cheapen the efforts somehow to build these monuments ? are we so arrogant to assume we know 100% for certain that its not possible ?

like i said before, most times the most easiest solution is the likely one. so whats more likely, that a thousand slaves pulled massive stones for miles with no wheel and few trees for 30 years... or that they simply used some technique we dont understand today to pour rocks in place like a cement

Did you happen to skip over the part where it says they would need an extraordinarily large amount of limestone chalk and wood to to make liquefied lime? Where did these materials come from? Show me some evidence of the moulds used. The "bubbles" at the top of the stones are likely from the natural weathering process. Again, the varying size of the blocks would suggest that the stones were not poured into moulds. Just because some guy in a lab didn't see the natural crystallization process using a microscope doesn't make his work or interpretation valid. Perhaps if his results are repeated by many I would believe it true. There is a lot of bad science out there, don't let one person's experiment fool you.

reply to post by Blue Shift


Exactly.

These people were not quarrying one block at a time nor were they moving one at a time.

They had millions of slaves doing this labor.

2, 4, 6, 8, or 20 blocks were being quaried at the same exact time.

So were the ones being moved.

Anyone who has worked within the confines of a team knows that utilizing skills means working at the same time.

While Johnny is making the pizza and putting it in the oven, Jimmy is making breadsticks, and Joey is put sodas into plastic bags, while Jimmy-Joe is washing dishes, a meager and exaggerated example of a workforce, but I think everyone gets the drift.

Now, put that into ancient building principles, and multiply it by thousands doing one particular job for one section, and other thousands doing other sections, and keep putting those principles elsewhere and millions are making a huge engineering project happen.

Again, through slave labor, no sissy minimum wages, it was work, eat, and sleep.

Be whipped, beaten, or die and this went on for centuries.

And Egypt did not have a monopoly on this many different cultures utilized slave labor.

Today it is called Human Trafficking but back then it was called slavery and a way of life.

The conquered were put to work or killed off depending on who was conquering.

OK so far we have


1. Artificial cement Stones poured in place [with no reference to or explanation about all the real-world physical evidence outlined in the OP]

2. Aliens built it [with no reference to or explanation about all the real-world physical evidence outlined in the OP]

3. It took about 1,200 years or more by placing 1 block an hour [Highly speculative but well within their almost 4,000 year history]

4. Hippos being used to haul stones.

5. Harmonic levitation [with no reference to or explanation about all the real-world physical evidence outlined in the OP]


7. Or just good old fashion blood, sweat and tears. [with reference to and explanation about all the real-world physical evidence outlined in the OP]

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


You may be correct I don't know. Mainstream science does not claim to know how it was done either. There are a lot of theories but no one can really pin it down. It is one of those mysteries that is fun to look into and consider. I'm not driven one way or the other.

I have heard that there were classes of slaves as well. Craftsmen and common labor. The craftsmen were responsible for the precision work that is so evident in these structures and the common labor did the bull work of moving them. It still is an awful lot of work to accomplish given their primitive techniques.