The pyramids / egyptians
- Thread starter GoTheSwannies
- Start date
- Tagged users None
BEEG
Hall of Famer
- Aug 2, 2007
- 31,092
- 37,335
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Dallas Mavericks
(For those who are unaware, Sacsayhuaman is above the central tourist part of Cuzco, Peru. Like a lot of Incan period sites, it wasn't treated particularly well by the Spanish.) I suspct the question was either rhetorical or aimed at those who believe the Egyptian pyramids required a higher technology than available. Anyway ...
The Inca civilisation was fairly advanced, in pre-industrial era terms at least. And were still around when the Spanish arrived, so their ability to build such structures is well attested. Even without pack animals or the wheel.
One of the things about Cuzco is how easily you can define between pre-Inca, Inca, and colonial era in the architecture. Often all three layers are clearly present and even a completely ignorant eye like mine can pick it out. The Incan era has no mortar, so if all three are present its incredibly simple to see which is which.
Juddsblues, game, set, match.
However, a couple of observations which I think are interesting.
Firstly, it's true that if you sat down modern engineers and said build me a structure that will outlast civilisation itself, you'd still likely end up with a something which is quite similar to the great pyramid in design and location I remember watching a very interesting doco about how long artificial structures will last, and iirc the modern structure which was identified as likely to be around for upwards of 10 000 years were the Hoover dam, which is essentially just an enormous pile of massive concrete blocks. Iirc the use by date on high quality modern skyscrapers and bridges is something like 500 years if they aren't being regularly maintained. The point is though, there are very few structures which are designed to last that long without maintenance, because there is simply no cost benefit to doing so.
I think an interesting and quite alternative theory- Egyptians weren't standout masters of architecture, they were just the only ancient civilisation which by freak luck was located in an area where the building materials, (limestone blocks) topography and climate (hot, dry, sandy, limited vegetation) all favored very long lasting structures, and a permanently legible writing system.
The reason I think that's fascinating is that for all we know, there were far more complex or advanced civilizations in existence than the Egyptians around that15000-4000BC period which we just know diddly squat about, because they happened to build and write with materials and a climate that didn't favour preservation.
However, a couple of observations which I think are interesting.
Firstly, it's true that if you sat down modern engineers and said build me a structure that will outlast civilisation itself, you'd still likely end up with a something which is quite similar to the great pyramid in design and location I remember watching a very interesting doco about how long artificial structures will last, and iirc the modern structure which was identified as likely to be around for upwards of 10 000 years were the Hoover dam, which is essentially just an enormous pile of massive concrete blocks. Iirc the use by date on high quality modern skyscrapers and bridges is something like 500 years if they aren't being regularly maintained. The point is though, there are very few structures which are designed to last that long without maintenance, because there is simply no cost benefit to doing so.
I think an interesting and quite alternative theory- Egyptians weren't standout masters of architecture, they were just the only ancient civilisation which by freak luck was located in an area where the building materials, (limestone blocks) topography and climate (hot, dry, sandy, limited vegetation) all favored very long lasting structures, and a permanently legible writing system.
The reason I think that's fascinating is that for all we know, there were far more complex or advanced civilizations in existence than the Egyptians around that15000-4000BC period which we just know diddly squat about, because they happened to build and write with materials and a climate that didn't favour preservation.
I heard it was farmers. They worked on it during the seasons they couldn't farm.
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Why couldn't they farm?
The same reason many fruit farms employ seasonal workers now. During some seasons there isn't much work to do.
So all this unused labour went to work in the pyramids.
Agriculture on the Nile is very much related to the floods. It wasn't so much that they "couldn't farm" so much as there was probably little to do after harvest and before planting season.
Magnets. How do they work?
Sums up the thread from what I managed to skim through.
Sums up the thread from what I managed to skim through.
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
But why isn't there much work to do? Does it have nothing to do with the fact every summer the Nile flooded the plains?
You only need to plant crops once and then you only have to harvest them once.
Otherwise there isn't the same labour requirements so there were plenty of people avalaliable. The floods made the land fertile and effected when the optimal time for farming was.
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
What happened to the building site during the floods? where did the workers go when they couldn't farm or build (because of the floods)
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
How deep underground do the pyrimids go?
Why would they have just left it there? Why wouldn't floods have affected the building?
Because they weren't built on the flood plain. The Egyptians weren't idiots. Their whole society was propped up by the fertility of the Nile floods and so they would not have wasted arable land with a giant tomb. Thats why all the mortuary structures etc are located in the desert areas.
During the time the labourers were occupied farming the craftsmen would have kept working still.
- Sep 18, 2013
- 17,752
- 11,820
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
30 meters is pretty far.
You and other trolls theory doesn't add up, nor is there any thought put to your posts.
30 metres for the subterranean chambers, yes, but that's not the solid base the whole pyramid is built on.
The "base" for the pyramid is only just below ground level, & I think actually visible at one corner.
Probably the best day of my life. Helped that we went only 2 months after Mubarak was displaced so there was next to no tourists around.
The scale of them is just mind blowing considering how old they are. The Great Pyramid was the tallest man made structure on Earth for around 3800 years, when the Eiffel Tower took over
Similar threads
