Origen wrote -"l think that the ark, as much as is clear from the things that are described, had four angles rising from the bottom that gradually narrowed as they came to the peak and came together in the space of one cubit. Thus the cubit is the length and width of the peak." The question of how Origen arrived at this peculiar and unorthodox idea of the ark as a pyramid remains an int
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
one of the panels on the famous bronze doors of the baptistry in florence shows a pyramid (albeit that renaissance scholars keep referring to it as 'noahs ark'). the representation of the pyramid has various lines drawn on it's surface. the near horizontal lines resemble a spiral ramp, though this is probably just coincidence; or perhaps related to ghiberti's ideas about pers
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Hermione,
My understanding is that Petrie measured course thicknesses at two corners, the one confirming the other (I stand to be corrected on this by other forum members). At any rate Petrie formally published his results. He was emphatic that the shafts emerge at different levels on the casing.
I have climbed Khufu twice and observed that, having established the corner course heights, it
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
If people are 'too afraid to ask questions' it may be because they are wary of triggering yet another orgy of vapid speculation. It's as if the discussions on the shafts, going back over one and a half years, never happened. The same questions and opinions continue to circulate, and will continue until objective data emerges.
As I wrote in a previous thread ( ) - "I came a
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Kanga,
There is little point starting a new thread while there remain questions about the survey data. Just have to wait I suppose. Sorry for interrupting this thread.
Robin
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
I just wanted to ask if anyone has come across any new information regarding the shafts?
Just to recap, I came across a serious discrepancy between Petrie's and Gantenbrink's figures for the shaft exits. I raised the question here a year or so ago. I wrote to Egyptological authorities and also joined the EFF where, with Alex Puchkov, a discussion took place on the question. There were
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Mark,
Your analyses depend upon a proposed length of the cubit at Dashur of 20.68", or 0.52527 m. The bulk of Egyptological references quote values around 0.523 to 0.525 metres for the length of the royal cubit, favouring 0.5236 - 0.524 metres.
To recap this very long thread, Petrie's figure for the Bent base was 189.46 m. Dorner's is 189.61 m. Monnier and Puchkov give an
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
yes indeed. specifically here -
thank you hermione
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Hans,
The picture in your post, showing the 'flattened' casing stones around Menkaure's entrance, reminded me of a discussion here some years ago but I can't find it - I don't know the subject of the thread it was in (side questions on the subject of building methods often crop up here and there in threads devoted to other subjects).
Anyway my point was that the
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
I quickly sketched up the present situation on the shafts, which is my understanding garnered from the ongoing discussions here. It might be a little difficult to follow because of complexity and screen monitor size limitations but I am sure interested parties here will understand it.
The faint grey lines (marked 'G') show Gantenbrink's ideal scheme. Line 'P
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
In the beginning post on this thread I showed a section through the King's chamber. As I said, I recall that years ago I managed to access and print some of the cyberdrawings out of curiosity. I don't remember much about it because I was doing a lot of other things at the time. Eventually I traced the 'main lines' of the shafts (ignoring the various bends coming ou
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
I've had a look through some Academic databases (the free ones that is - students rightly complain that the large, subscription-based organisations are far too expensive). So far I can find only a few technical patents by Gantenbrink. Take a look at Google Scholar for instance - it lists the afore-mentioned patents, but the two references to Gantenbrink's shaft work are merely referen
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
You paint a pessimistic picture of things. I have to admit though, looking at what the world has become you seem to be right, but hasn't it always been like this? Humans are born to lie - it is called politeness and a means of promoting social cohesion. Then there is conscience, the sense of right and wrong most of us carry within us. (I suppose this is some kind of 'Maat
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
25 years ago computers seemed easier to operate, albeit that the wretched windows kept breaking down and often things were incompatible. At any rate at that time I was able to install javascript and also the CAD viewer required to view Gantenbrink's cyberfiles without issue. Now trying to install javascript is something of a headache - a highly convoluted process is now required
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Sorry Hermione, I thought people might realize the remark was intended as a joke. As you say we must search for the book. In the meantime you have followed the present thread and might agree that everything seems to point to Gantenbrink - did he survey the pyramid himself or are we to take things on trust? I imagine you have many Egyptological contacts. Would you have any suggestions as to whom
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
Your reconstruction of the series of mistakes and the narratives built upon them is compelling, and the somewhat dismissive attitude I have encountered in my enquiries over the shaft question deepens my suspicion that nobody has properly addressed the problem and simply repeats assertions flying around the net. But it is clear that the controversy can only be brought to an end by Gant
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Perhaps you might better direct your objection to Alex - your figures support the conventional date but not altitudes during the earlier epoch. I'm happy with both stellar and geometric possibilities, but we can't resolve anything because of this survey data confusion.
Robin
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Chris,
Looks like I was wildly out in my estimate of the distance Khufu-Djedefre. I haven't got google earth.
Magli noticed various alignments linking pyramids, for instance from Giza to Djoser -
And what to make of the astronomical alignments to the setting points of stars? I wonder if all these things can be integrated?
Robin
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
I was fiddling about with Skyglobe and noticed the Kochab/Orion correlation but can't remember if Bauval knew about it - i lost contact after 1994. But I did notice the apparent vertical alignment between Belegeuse and Alnitak, although at the then supposed date 2450 BC. At the same time I noticed that the 'layout' position of the belt stars, with Saiph vertically below
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
Regarding the 45 degree contention here are a couple of pictures. First the alignments to Heliopolis (H) and Djedefre (D) from Giza (G) -
- you'll notice I propose a geometrical scheme for these alignments but for the moment ignore this.
The second picture shows the root two 45 degree construction in Khufu, defining the floorline of the King's burial chamber (and a
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
My opinion about the shafts remains flexible because precise measures of the shafts remain unavailable, and also because of the uncertainty of Khufu's date. Until at least the first of these impediments is removed we might have something to go on, but until then we can only put forward hypotheses.
Magli has written about the importance of the 45 degree alignment in Egyptian
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
Oh, you mean the author who wrote the PDF - I thought you meant Gantenbrink. If you look more closely at the PDF author's website -
- you may understand why i am not impressed with the author's ideas in general. On the other hand one should not discard an idea simply because it comes from a shaky source.
If Brabin is right, the contention that the entire upper passage
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
What is 'the author's explanation for the discrepancy'? Has it been definitely confirmed that Petrie made a mistake in his estimation of the course number in which the KC south shaft emerges on the casing?
If the shafts are geometric then their layout should relate to the geometry of the pyramid which, according to Gantenbrink's scheme for KC shafts, they do. Th
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
There is a serious lack of survey data for the shafts. Petrie plotted the exits in the 102 and 103 courses (averaging 157.27 cubits above base so that the horizontal distance between exits is 200 cubits. Gantenbrink's geometric plan requires higher exit points at 154 cubits above base. (The shafts were investigated again by the Djedi team who have not yet revealed detailed results to the pub
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Jim,
My understanding is that, for the Middle and New Kingdoms, the consensus chronology on the whole agrees tolerably well with carbon dates. At any rate the dating adjustments proposed for the Hyksos are relatively small. The problem is the Old Kingdom where the carbon dates are considerably earlier than conventional, and this discrepancy is put down to 'old wood'. However Puchk
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
I came across this paper on the Hyksos -
To explain the lack of information about the Hyksos the authors say - "Even after the decipherment of hieroglyphs, sources for the Hyksos rulers remained scarce and unreliable due to the ancient Egyptian stately customs of censorship and propaganda".
I couldn't help wondering what we can really know about the history of Egypt, an
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex
> The assumption about a height of the Red Pyramid
> of 200 cubits is used for simplification when
> precision is not needed (for example in wiki) or
> by adepts of round numbers.
Surely precision is always desired where possible?
> In order for the pyramid with the base 418c to
> have a height of 200c, its angle of slope should
> be 43° 44' whic
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Alex,
keeperzz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Robin,
>
> QuoteThere is a discrepancy of a few cubits in
> the width of the bend line. To intersect the
> junction of Bent pyramid slope and bend line, the
> Red pyramid would have to be higher than 200
> cubits. This means the Bent pyramid does not fit
> precisely within th
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
Hi Graham,
In Dorner's Figure 4 the pavement is not even shown - just a baseline of 362 cubits. To think that Dorner would envisage a 'hidden base' (the bottom edge of the casing stones for instance) for his Bent dimensions goes against all egyptological precedent - pyramids are referenced to a base on the pavement. Moreover Dorner shows the Bend height as 90 cubits from this s
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt
After looking at Dorner's diagrams it does appear that his figure of 362 is the base at the line of the pavement top.
It must be said that Legon's design for the Bent Pyramid is geometrically satisfying. It is shown to the right on the diagram below -
- the lower sloping length is equal to the vertical height of the upper part, and the dimensions are in whole numbers.
Howe
by
robin cook
-
Ancient Egypt