The angle of the Red Pyramid came up in a thread below.



It's a complicated story as the most recent data from the work of Stadelmann and Poltz is only just beginning to filter through to printed works.

The most recent measure of the slope is 45° which was taken directly off the remaining casing stones uncovered by Stadelmann. This was done by Poltz and published in MDAIK 39 p.235. The same angle of 45° is given in Stadelmann's "Die Ägyptischen Pyramiden" p.101.



Perhaps because both of these are in German many English language publications have been slow to use them but recent translations of works by Dieter Arnold also now quote the 45° angle.

And that's where Verner's apparently impossible Pyramid with an angle of 45° but a width of 220m and a height of 104m comes in. Actually Verner is not alone in quoting them see also "The Encyclopaedia of Ancient Egyptian Architecture" Dieter Arnold 2003 p.199.

The 104m height is derived from an estimation of the original height based on the Pyramid today but Stadelmann discovered evidence that there has been subsidence over the thousands of years so the pyramid has been distorted.

The blocks of the Pyramid are made of poor quality limestone that crumbles easily:



This is unlike the blocks of the Great Pyramid and also unlike at Giza the foundation of the Pyramid is not on solid rock.

It's not surprising if the Pyramid has settled and the angle as measured today shows a difference from that measured directly off the casing stones. It's well know that the Bent Pyramid suffered serious problems at the same site.

Even the internal chambers that are made of much better quality and much harder limestone show the evidence of subsidence as the massive blocks have cracked and are being monitored by the SCA for further movement:





So early measurements by Perring (43°36') and Petrie (44°36') that reflect the subsidence have been superceeded by the more recent evidence from the surviving casing stones.

Jon

www.egyptarchive.co.uk