news.artnet.com: The Great Pyramid of Giza—the largest of Egypt’s pyramids—consists of about 2.3 million limestone blocks. The smallest of these weigh two tons, while the largest weigh over 60. History says laborers built this monumental tomb in 20 years. That means a block got laid every minute. How did they do it? Everyone wants to know.
9 comments:
It’s funny to me that the initial reason the idea of ramps were conceived is that we didn’t know any way that we, in modern times, could have done it without modern tools. Even reading this I was like “how the HELL would they have gotten those bricks up there without killing everyone” (even so people probably died anyway. I don’t think they had OSHA back then). I think that this is fascinatingly reflective of how most people see theatre. One would go see a show and think “man, how did they hang those? I bet they lifted them up or something” (not speaking from personal experience of course). When people see something they don’t understand how to do, they start thinking about how they would do it in the easiest manner possible. Separately, I think the method with which they argue that the king’s chamber was used as a part of the pulley system was because the architect couldn’t have designed a faulty portcullis is intriguing, because it hinges on a person who may or may not have made a small error.
It was interesting to hear the evidence presented in this article and imagine a different way of the building of the pyramids compared to current public perception of their construction. Further, it is always interesting to see discourse surrounding the building of the pyramids for the various people who may doubt basic construction methods and physics that make that which seems difficult or impossible to manageable and in certain cases, easy. From this article, the main takeaway I had is that I ought to try and approach technical problems by assessing what would be most simple and easy on those who make the project as in this example, hauling with counterweights allows for a much easier and efficient moving of the blocks compared to the hauling of blocks up ramps with many, many people to do that work. So even in ancient times, innovation in the form of simple physics is a key tenet to follow in construction and detailing.
I have always found it really fascinating that we don’t really have a great idea of how the pyramids were actually constructed. They’re such a giant thing that you would imagine there’d be a better record of how such a thing was constructed, but then again, history is just kind of weird. One piece of the article that really stood out to me as pretty believable evidence that there was some sort of pulley system thing going one was the mention of how it seems hard to believe that the Antechamber was part of a portcullis system because it didn’t work in a portcullis system, and the architect behind the pyramids probably wouldn’t have left a broken portcullis system. This to me seems like pretty solid logic, after all, the pyramids are still amazing by modern-day construction standards, so there were definitely some really smart people behind the engineering of them, and it definitely is hard to believe that a broken system would be left there.
I mean I of course was hoping for this article to say “we knew it all along it was actually aliens that built the pyramids, and we have been hiding this information for years”, but it’s whatever, pulley systems also make sense I guess. Honestly to be fair I thought we gave up on what they did to build these pyramids, but archeologists just won’t quit. While this all makes a great deal of sense that they would use pulleys, it doesn't make sense that they would know how to use that level of technology, and even if they did, why is there no documentation of the use of these tools? Of course it seems that this article is based on a scientific approach to the theories on how they were able to accomplish such a task, but it's the actual evidence of it all that I am more concerned about. Especially with how they are known for their archival skills, it just does not add up. And to that I again say aliens, duh.
No. They did not. Aliens built them, not humans. On a serious note, I don’t get why this is such a mystery at this point, yes they most likely did use a pulley system, ramps, or perhaps even a basket with wheels on the bottom, and lots and lots of slave or very underpaid labor. I think it’s quite hilarious seeing historians study for years to try to figure out the mechanism they used to build this. While yes, the scale and the sturdiness of the pyramids are incredible and should be studied, it obviously used a pulley system, they didn’t take their portal gun and teleport it up to the top, and it had to use ramps or a crane shaped tool that was manual. Physics still exists the same way it did when these big triangles were built, and it’s surprising they are still trying to figure out how these were built, but hey at least we will maybe one day figure out for sure rather than assuming I suppose.
I found this article to be super interesting! This article proved just how wondrous the Egyptian Pyramids are. Completing them in just 20 years means that they had to place a brick per minute, which is mind boggling.I think it is crazy that some believe that ramps were used to create the pyramids. It would be so difficult to move at minimum two pound bricks up such steep ramps. They would have needed so many extremely large ramps to complete them in the time frame too. As far as I know, there hasn't been any physical evidence of any ramps found. The fact that Egyptians could have used a counterweight system is awesome, and opens up new avenues for how we understand other ancient engineering. It was also cool to hear how the so called “structural anomalies”, like tapering of block heights, can actually be used as evidence. This reminds us that ancient civilizations were more advanced than we think.
I thought this pulley-and-counterweight theory was really interesting, especially because it challenges the way we assume ancient people worked. It’s so easy to look at something complicated and try to explain it using what we would do today, but in that time period, without the technology we have now? It becomes a real mystery. The idea that “they must have used huge ramps” feels like the simplest and most imaginable guess, but Scheuring’s argument shows how much intentional engineering might have gone into the Pyramid’s interior design. I like the point about the Grand Gallery floor scrapes and the counterweight traces. It makes the Pyramid feel less magical and more like a piece of engineering. I also thought the idea that the King’s Chamber may have been misinterpreted was fascinating. Overall, the theory makes ancient Egypt feel more human and inventive. It really relates to how theatre hides its most complex work behind what looks effortless onstage.
It’s interesting what we do and don’t know about historic constructions. While I’m sure that there was supporting evidence to the ramp hypothesis it always felt like a bit of a cop out to me. Ramps are so basic that it’s hard to imagine ancient Egyptians not having them while all other methods of lifting heavy stone blocks seem too advanced for an ancient wonder of the world so it’s easy to presume that they went for the simplest option rather than having the innovation of a pulley system. In a way this makes me wonder what we’ve built that will have future generations long down the line scratching their heads wondering how a civilization that is to them as basic as the ancient Egyptians are to us built so many huge structures. Of course building equipment is more standard now so it’s less likely that there would be less chance of there simply being no surviving records. At the same time many gaps in our knowledge of historical periods comes from scribes from that period feeling that something was so obvious it was a waste of time to write down that later faded from memory.
I worked for a live events company for a couple summers and my boss, who I really liked, was something of a conspiracy nut, which I liked less. I remember one day when we were loading a truck to go set up a music festival in New Hampshire he came up to me with a video of the newly discovered pillars that stretch far below some of the great pyramids. He stopped the video, looked me dead in the eyes and said to me with a straight face: “I don’t know about you, but no slave could have built that”. I laughed at this conversation for a long time but there may have been some truth to what he was getting at. A lot of arguments about pyramid construction rely on the idea that the pyramids had a nearly infinite labor force to construct them and were not bound to a time table as they took many many years to make. But what this article explains so directly is that the millions of bricks in the pyramids creation would take not only great effort to move and use in construction but also great efficiency in the way they were put in place in order to complete the pyramid in the amount of time it took to build it. This pulley system is fascinating, if unproven in the way it could clarify these discrepancies. The simple mechanical tool of a pulley would fit perfectly into the discussion of how these great structures were constructed so long ago and in such a short comparative time period. I want to see more research into this and look forward to more information on this topic now that this idea has been uncovered. With more inquisitive research like this, the mystery of the pyramids cannot last forever.
Post a Comment