>
> Crews have always been divided up in order to do
> the work.

Anthony replied:
Oh, please. We aren't talking about the local plumbers' union here. We're talking about a completely different culture from 4600 years ago. The idea that work crew organization has some universality to it, like the law of gravity or friction, is patently absurd.


Human nature does not change. All evidence says it is immutable.

Nor does the nature of work change. Details change and objectives change
but the nature of work is immutable nearly to the degree nature itself is.
Whether you need someone to repair a cherry picker or someone to tote a bale
the point is you need the skill at the place the work exists as it occurs.

The nature of the specific job is what causes the division of labor. The
existence of five crews suggests the job was divided equally among these
five crews which were made up of the various gangs needed to keep the work
going. That they were named after parts of a boat may or may not say some-
thing abou the nature and place of their work. It's possible, for instance
that the "Asiatic" team worked solely on the east (port) side of the pyramid
which would leave the "last" crew as the masons. This seems improbable since
there shouldn't have been four times more hauling work than mason work. It
would lso mean inequal crews which would be unusual.

Massive jobs require organization. It is much easier to utilize man-power
when it is divided into units of men which are individually replaceable. It
is easier to have distinct crews to do the work.

My best guess is that they worked two shifts each day and each of the three
crews on site worked four or five shifts per week while two were at home tend-
ing their business. Most workers lived well within walking distance of home
so could go home on their long week-ends.

There are many ways to divide the work but the existence of crews goes a long
way to suggesting the actual means.




____________
Man fears the pyramid, time fears man.