Jon_B Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I first posted about the Pyramidion at the Red
> Pyramid a long time ago and I think the thread and
> photos have disappeared so I'll update the
> information and photos.
>
> The Pyramidion was discovered during the 1982
> season by Rainer Stadelmann and the reconstructed
> version now sits in front of the East Face of the
> Pyramid.
>
>
>
> It seems to have been reconstructed a second time
> between my visits.
>
>
There seems to be a significantly less amount of stone in the second reconstruction. Is it just photogrpahed from a different angle that had less remnants? Very odd.
>
> The odd thing about it is that it's nothing like
> the same angle as the Red Pyramid itself. The
> Pyramidion as reconstructed is around 54° 30'
> compared to the Red Pyramid's 45°.
>
>
>
> There are several suggestions as to why.
>
> The simplest is that it doesn't belong to the Red
> Pyramid at all and might have been meant for a
> Satellite Pyramid which never got built or which
> was completely destroyed. Or it might have been
> shipped in from a completely different site for
> some unknown reason.
>
> Rainer Stadelmann suggests that it WAS meant for
> the Red Pyramid but I'm not at all convinced by
> his explanation:
>
> "with an angle of 45° and base lengths of 220 m
> the rather flat point would not have been visible
> from the nearby ground; if one were to gradually
> increase the angle towards the top, this would
> accentuate the apex, without this being too
> visible on the faces". (Observations on Pyramid
> Building, MDAIK 39 p.235)
>
> Another suggestion is the most intriguing and was
> put forward by Corinna Rossi in JEA Vol 85 p.222.
> She points out that the angle of the Pyramidion is
> the same as the lower part of the Bent Pyramid if
> it had been completed at that angle.
>
>
>
> She suggests that after the problems of the
> stability of the Bent Pyramid led to the reduction
> of the angle the all ready completed Pyramideon
> was abandoned and somehow ended up at the Red
> Pyramid.
>
> I suppose there's also always the possibility that
> it's not a Pyramidion at all but part of some, as
> yet unidentified, structure.
>
I love the way real Egyptologists who understand Egyptian thinking don't wed themselves to particular angles or ratios, but work with the evidence we have from the Fourth Dynasty to try and explain how and why they did the things they did.
Thanks for the info, Jon.
Anthony
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think.