| Powered by phpBay Pro |
I need some help with Art History here-Egyptian!!?
I am having a midterm tomorrow and I have to state why these 5 pieces of art are significent. They are:
1. Palette of Narmer
2. Pyramids of Giza
3. Statue of Akhentan
4. Book of Dead
5. Menkaure and His Wife
You are talking about the great achievement that human being ever done , so theses are so significant and a great things that man really done , and very historical and very unique things , and they are related to the old Egyptians works and great things at that stage , specially the role of women and the role of God's Pharaoh .
Named after the Horus Narmer, whose titulary appears on both its faces, the Narmer Palette is a flat plate of schist of about 64 centimetres in height. Its size, weight and decoration suggest that it was a ceremonial palette, rather than an actual cosmetics palette for daily use.
It was found in Hierakonpolis, the ancient Pre-Dynastic capital located in the south of Egypt, by the British archaeologist J.E. Quibell during the excavation season of 1897/98, in a deposit, along with other artefacts stemming from the early beginnings of the recorded history of Ancient Egypt: fragments of a ceremonial mace head belonging to Narmer and some other mace head fragments inscribed with the name of the Horus 'Scorpion', one of Narmer's predecessors. The exact finding circumstances of the palette have not been noted and there appear to be some contradictions in the publication of Quibell's work at Hierakonpolis.
Decoration
The palette's top
The top of the palette is 'decorated' in a similar manner on both sides: the name of the king is inscribed in a so-called serekh between two bovine heads. The animal's heads are drawn from the front, which is rather uncharacteristic of later Egyptian art. In most publications, these heads have been described as cows' heads, which is interpreted as an early reference to the cult of a cow-goddess, perhaps even Hathor. It is, however, equally possible that the animals are bulls and that they refer to the bull-like vigour of the king, a symbolism that occurs elsewhere on the palette and would be continue to be used throughout the Ancient Egyptian history as well.
Back - Central scene
Most of the back side of the palette is taken up by a finely carved and highly detailed raised relief showing a king, undoubtedly Narmer, ready to strike down a foe whom he grabs by the hair. This pose would become typical in Ancient Egyptian art. He wears a short skirt, an animal's tail and the crown that at least in later times was associated with Upper Egypt: the White Crown.
Behind him an apparently bald person holds the king's sandals in his left hand and a basket in his right. The signs written behind this man's head may denote his title, but their exact reading and meaning are unsure. The fact that the king is represented as barefooted and followed by a sandal-bearer perhaps suggests a ritual nature for the scene depicted on the palette.
The king's victim is kneeling before him, his arms flung next to his body, as if to indicate that he was bound. Apart from a girdle, he is represented naked. The contrast between the naked victim and the clad king perhaps denotes that the victim was considered barbaric. The two signs behind his head have often been interpreted wrongly as the victim's name. It is much more likely that the harpoon denotes the "number one" and the lake means "water", indicating that this was Narmer's first battle in a watery area.
Above the victim's head, facing the king, a personified marshland is represented: the left side of a piece of land or swamp is decorated with the head of a man, somewhat reminiscent of Narmer's victim. Out of that land, 6 papyrus plants are growing, indicating that this land was a marshland. A falcon, symbol of the king, is perched on top of the papyrus plants and appears to draw the breath of life out of the nostrils of the marshland's face.
The mention of a marshland on the palette has very often been seen as a reference to the marshy lands of the Nile Delta, Lower Egypt. Indeed, in traditional times, Lower Egypt would be symbolised by a hieroglyph that represents a marshland. It is however equally likely that the marshland on the palette represents just that: a marshland, which could also have been the Fayum oasis, for instance, or just an area that was inundated.
An alternative interpretation for this symbol that has sometimes been forwarded, would be that each papyrus plant represents the number 1000 and that the falcon-king subdued 6000 enemies. The papyrus plant was indeed used in later hieroglyphic writing to write the number 1000, but it was drawn in a somewhat different manner than the papyrus plants on the palette. Furthermore, it is not so certain that the signs used at the very beginning of hieroglyphic writing, have the same phonetic or even ideographic meaning. The alternative interpretation seems a bit too far-fetched.
Back - Bottom scene
Underneath the king's feet, at the bottom of the palette's back, lie two overthrown, naked enemies. One of their arms is raised up, the other is drawn behind their backs. Their legs are sprawling. In fact, their entire posture indicates that they are fallen enemies. To the left of each victim, a hieroglyphic sign is drawn, the left-most representing a wall and the other some sort of knot. Both signs are usually interpreted as names of places that have been overthrown by Narmer. Their reading is unknown so even if they do denote names of places, we do not know which places they are.
Front - Top scene.
In the top scene of the palette's front, the second figure from the left, Narmer, is represented wearing the Red Crown, that is usually associated with Lower Egypt. He holds a mace in his left hand, while his right arm is bent over his chest, holding some kind of flail. The two signs in from of him represent his name, but they are not written in the so-called serekh.
He is again followed by an apparently bald figure that holds his sandals in his left hand and some kind of basket in his right. A rectangle above this sandal-bearer's head contains a sign of uncertain meaning.
The king is preceded by a long-haired person. The signs accompanying this figure could be read as Tshet if they already had the value they would have in later hieroglyphic writing. The meaning of these signs is unknown. A person similarly designed and with the same hieroglyphs, can also be found on the ceremonial mace-heads of both Narmer and 'Scorpion'. His role is normally interpreted as that of a 'shaman'. It must be noted, however, that if this Tshet had some kind of priestly function, his representation as a long-haired instead of a bald man, is atypical for later representations of priests.
Before the Tshet figure, four persons are holding a standard. The left-most standard represents some kind of animal skin, the second a dog and the next two a falcon. These standards might be the emblems of the royal house of Narmer, or of the regions that already belonged to his kingdom.
The object of this procession is made clear on the right hand side of the scene: 10 decapitated corpses are shown lying on the ground, their heads thrown between their legs. Above the victims, a ship with a harpoon and a falcon in it, are drawn. These signs are often interpreted as the name of the conquered region. If this name has remained the same throughout the history of Ancient Egypt, then the region conquered by Narmer was the Mareotis-region, the 7th Lower-Egyptian province.
The two signs in front of the probable name of the region, the wing of a door and a sparrow are thought to mean 'create' or 'found'. The entire group could thus be interpreted that on the occasion of the conquest of the Mareotis region, Narmer founded a new province, whose name was written by the ship, the harpoon and the falcon.
Front - Central scene
The central scene on the palette's front represents two men tying together the stretched necks of two fabulous animals. Between the animal's necks, a circular area is a bit deeper than the palette's surface. This lower circular area indicates the place where a cosmetic was put if this were not a ceremonial palette.
The tying together of the necks of the two animals has often been interpreted as a symbol for the tying together of Upper and Lower Egypt. Nothing, however, indicates that the animals are to be seen as the symbols of Upper or Lower Egypt. This is a unique image and no later parallels are known. It is not impossible that they have just been used to create a circular area in the centre of the palette. In addition, ceremonial palettes often represent the them of taming wild animals, one of the traditional tasks of the king.
Front - Bottom scene
The scene at the bottom of the palette's front face continues the imagery of conquest and victory. A bull, almost certainly a symbol of the king's vigour and strength, tramples a fallen foe and attacks the walls of a city or fortress with its horns. The name of the city or fortress attacked by the bull is written within the walls, but its reading is unknown.
Meaning
The overall military symbolism on the palette is clear. Using different types of imagery, the king is shown again and again as victorious over his enemies. He is shown striking down a kneeling enemy, whilst stepping on the bodies of some other foes on the palette's back. On the front of the palette, he is represented as a human overlooking the decapitated corpses of his foes or as a bull vigorously trampling an enemy and breaking down the walls of a city or a fortress.
The fact that the king is represented on one side wearing the crown of Upper Egypt, the region from whence he came, and on the other side the crown of Lower Egypt is very often seen as proof that the Upper-Egyptian Narmer was the one who successfully conquered Lower Egypt or part thereof.
The association of the Red Crown with Lower Egypt can not be doubted for later periods of the Ancient Egyptian history, but this association may not have been made during or before the Early Dynastic Period. Indeed, a pottery fragment dated several generations before Narmer and found in Upper Egypt already bears the representation of the Red Crown. It is thus possible that the Red Crown indicated a different aspect of royalty than the White Crown and did not, at that time, have any geographical meaning at all. That Narmer is represented wearing the Red Crown would, in this case, not prove that he conquered or ruled the whole of Lower Egypt.
But even despite the doubt concerning the meaning of the representation of the Red Crown, it still is clear that the decoration on the palette refers to an important military campaign waged by Narmer against a marshy area. Three names of cities or fortresses that were overthrown during this campaign are mentioned and even though we do not know which places these names refer to, they were part of the conquered marsh lands. The fact that their names and the name of a fallen enemy are mentioned on the palette points to the great importance Narmer attached to this conquest.
The palette also refers to the foundation of a region indicated by the signs ship-harpoon-falcon, a group of signs that at least in later times would be used to denote the 7th Lower Egyptian province located in the eastern Nile Delta. If this group of signs indeed can be interpreted as the founding of a province in the eastern Nile Delta then the Narmer Palette can still be viewed as a historical document referring to the conquest of the eastern part of Lower Egypt.
- The Narmer Palette -
The front (left) and back (right) of the Narmer Palette.
The name of Narmer is shown in a serekh between the two bovine heads.
Narmer strikes down a foe. Many Egyptologists have been tempted to interpret this scene as the conquest of Lower Egypt by Narmer.
Two dead enemies, symbolising conquered towns, are represented underneath Narmer's feet.
Narmer inspects a heap of beheaded corpses, likely to represent slain enemies after the battle.
The taming of wild animals has often been viewed as a metaphor for the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt.
A bull, symbolising the king destroys the walls of a city or fortress.
Early Dynastic Period
1st Dynasty
Successor: Aha
Titulary
Umm el-Qa'ab (tomb?)
Scorpion Macehead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Ancient Egypt Site created by Jacques Kinnaer Last update: 17 July, 2006
Women in Egypt
Menkaure and His Queen
Christopher L. C. E. Witcombe
Menkaure and
His Queen
4th Dynasty
2548-2530 BCE
Greywacke
Height: 4 feet 67/8 inches (139.5 cm)
(Museum of Fine Arts, Boston)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright © (text only) 2000
Christopher L. C. E. Witcombe
All rights reserved
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This essay appeared originally in
IMAGES OF WOMEN IN ANCIENT ART
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. DESCRIPTION
Menkaure is portrayed in the familiar Egyptian pose standing as if at attention with his left leg extended forward, his arms held stiff at his sides, and his fists clenched holding some unidentified cylindrical objects. His stance appears assertive, indicative of his power. He is represented as a mature yet vigorous man, perhaps in his thirties, with slender hips, broad shoulders, and well-developed arms. His body has been made to appear lifelike and, except, as is common to all Egyptian statues, in such areas as the knees, which are over-emphasized, and the edge of the shin-bone, which is too sharp, is anatomically correct. Overall, he appears to represent the ideal of manly beauty in Old Kingdom Egypt.
Menkaure's face also appears to have been idealized, though its features, which are not particularly refined or aristocratic looking, have been particularized to the degree that it strikes us as being a portrait. Projecting from his chin is a short transversely striped, squared-off, wedge-shaped ceremonial beard. On his head he wears a nemes, or headdress, the sides of which are pulled back behind his rather large ears, with the lappets falling to either side of his chest. The beard and the headdress are the primary symbols of his pharaonic status. Besides the headdress, the only other article of clothing he wears is a shendjyt kilt which is folded across the front, with one end falling down beneath, and held in place with a belt round his waist.
Next to Menkaure stands his queen, usually identified as Khamerernebty II (but see Menkaure's "Queen"). She stands in a more naturalistic way than Menkaure with her right arm reaching around his waist and her left one bent at the elbow and holding his left arm. She wears a long, very thin, close-fitting linen garment which coves her body almost down to her ankles and clings to her body without folds or creases. The effect would appear to be not a case of excessive static cling, or an example of the "wet-drapery" style encountered later in Ancient Greece, but intended to reveal, and describe, the forms of the queen's body.
Her breasts are outlined and the nipples indicated, as is her navel and the slight bulge of her tummy. The material also clings in an unnatural way around her pubic area describing a broad triangular shape with the two lower converging sides following the slightly curving lines of her groin, and the slightly convex but sharply drawn horizontal indicating, not a panty line (no such thing at this early date) but presumably the upper edge of her pubic hair.
The way in which the sculptor has carefully delineated the queen's pubic area is also found on statues of women of higher rank, such as the goddess Hathor, as well as on statues of women of lower rank, such as the wife of Ptah-khenui in the statue in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
Ptah-khenui and his wife
Old Kingdom, Dynasty V.
2488-2400 BCE
Painted Limestone
Height 2 feet 35/8 inches (70.1 cm)
Discovered in 1936, Giza, tomb G 2004
(Museum of Fine Arts, Boston: inv. 06-1876)
This sort of treatment of the pubic area would appear to be a convention reaching back into the predynastic past when on fertility figurines the sexual triangle was exaggerated into a wide triangular shape indicated by incisions and extending across almost the whole width of the front of the body.
Her knees, like those of Menkaure, are also exaggerated and outlined unnaturally through her dress. The dress was probably sleeveless, with the upper edge coming just above, or just below, the breasts and held up by wide straps. But neither the edges of the straps at her shoulders, nor what would have appeared as a plunging neckline, are indicated, thereby making the dress seem invisible and her to seem nude even while clothed.
It must be kept in mind that, as surviving traces of colour indicate, the statue was originally painted and that probably such lines as the shoulder straps of the queen's dress would have been shown (although it was actually more frequently the case that these lines would be engraved on the actual sculpture).
Jewellery, especially necklaces, such as is seen worn by the woman in the Ptah-khenui and his wife, would probably also have been painted on the sculpture. In reality, such necklaces, according to tradition already established in the prehistoric period, were composed of beads made of bone, egg-shell, ivory, animal teeth, sea-shells and other organic material. The many-stranded necklaces also used gold, silver, and semi-precious jewels and cylindrical beads called wesekh and menat.
Queen Hetepheres I, the great grandmother of Menkaure's queen, was buried with ivory and silver bracelets decorated with butterflies of lapis lazuli, turquoise, and carnelian. No doubt, such jewellery was as much amuletic as decorative intended to bring the wearer good fortune and also serve as a protection against evil.
On the queen's forehead can be seen her own hairline below what is thereby seen to be a thick wig, probably made from human hair, tucked behind her ears like Menkaure's nemes and worn in a tripartite manner with two locks passing in front of the shoulders and reaching to the level of the arm-pit, and the rest falling behind. Although the tripartite wig was also worn by women in subordinate positions, it may have been more an indicator of maturity than of class.
It should be noted that the statue is unfinished. Only the heads and part of the upper part of the body have received their final polish, and clearly the carving of the lower parts of both figures, especially the legs and feet of The queen, was left incomplete. Moreover, the flat area next to their feet where inscriptions identifying each figure would have been carved is blank.
Menkaure, Hathor, and Cynopolite Nome
Old Kingdom, Dynasty V.
2548-2530 BCE Green schist (Greywacke)
3 feet 13/8 inches high
(Egyptian Museum, Cairo)
An examination of the statue of Menkaure, Hathor, and Cynopolite Nome, one of the four (and a fragment of a fifth) so-called triads of found at Menkaure's Valley Temple , makes it clear that also unfinished are Menkaure's shendjyt kilt, which lacks its pleats, and the queen's wig, which lacks the striations seen in the hair of Hathor and the accompanying personification of the Cynopolite Nome.
3. THE QUEEN'S HUSBAND
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MENKAURE AND HIS QUEEN
Chris Witcombe | Sweet Briar College
MENKAURE AND
HIS QUEEN
1. Discovery
2. DESCRIPTION
3. The Queen's Husband
4. Matriliny in Dynasty IV
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Book of the Dead
An Introduction
by Marie Parsons
The Book of the Dead is the name given by Egyptologists to a group of mortuary spells written on sheets of papyrus covered with magical texts and accompanying illustrations called vignettes. These were placed with the dead in order to help them pass through the dangers of the underworld and attain an afterlife of bliss in the Field of Reeds. Some of the texts and vignettes are also found on the walls of tombs and on coffins or written on linen or vellum rather than on papyrus.
The texts are divided into individual spells or chapters, nearly two hundred in total, though no one papyrus contains them all. Specific chapters could be selected out of the total repertoire. If the prospective owner of a Book was wealthy and his death not untimely, he might commission a scribe to write the text for him, based upon his personal choice of spells. Other less wealthy clients had to make do with a ready written text, a template, in which spaces had been left for the insertion of the name and titles of the buyer.
These spells were influenced by and developed after the Pyramid Texts and Coffin Texts. The spells were originally designated by the Egyptians as the Book of the Coming Forth by Day, expressing the freedom granted to the spirit forms to come and go as they pleased in the afterlife. The Spells in this Book, like the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts (which were named those by Egyptologists), primarily served to provision and protect the deceased. It is concerned with descriptions. and with practical help and magical assistance for the hereafter.
Early examples of spells from the Book of the Dead are found on mummy cloths and coffins of the New Kingdom, as were used commonly by officials beginning with the reign of Tuthmosis III, and then they appear on papyri. By the reign of Merneptah the spells appear on the walls of certain tomb chambers, beginning with Spell 125, the Judgment of the Dead. The spells also appeared continuously through the Third Intermediate Period and the Late Period.
Some spells such as #148 and 110 appear on temple walls, the latter at Medinet Habu. The chapters such as spells 26-30, and occasionally spell 6 and spell 126, regarding the heart, were inscribed on scarabs.
At first, only in certain cases and for special emphasis did spells include a vignette, a symbolic representation in pictorial form summarizing the intent or content of a spell. In a burial chamber from the reign of Tuthmosis III, only two of a total of 35 spells are illustrated, but by the Ramesside Period, the reverse is true and only a few spells are un-illustrated. In Dynasty 21 and in the Late Period, vignettes were often used for the spells, without the texts. But in many manuscripts the vignettes constitute a row of pictures, with texts placed beneath them.
The earliest Book of the Dead on record dates to the mid-fifteenth century BCE, but some of the spells had their origins in the Pyramid Texts from the 5th and 6th Dynasties, carved more than 1000 years earlier. The Pyramid Texts themselves in part refer in their own turn to rituals and practices probably in common usage 1000 years prior to them.
The Pyramid Texts were carved on the inside or pyramid walls of Kings and queens of the 6th Dynasty and early First Intermediate Period for another 200 years. Eventually more spells were added to the Pyramid Text repertoire, and the texts were written now in the cursive script called hieratic, not in hieroglyphics, within the wooden coffins. These texts are thus now known as Coffin Texts.
In the Coffin Texts, as in the Book of the Dead, the sun-god is no longer supreme with regard to the afterlife, as he was in the Pyramid Texts. Some spells in the Book of the Dead still praise the sun-god Ra as being all-important. But, now it is Osiris, the king of the underworld, under whom the blessed dead hope to spend eternity, and it is Osiris with whom the dead become assimiliated as "the Osiris X", where X is the name of the deceased. Osiris also became the judge of the dead, before whom a trial would take place to determine if the deceased was worthy to enter the realm of Osiris in the afterlife.
The Coffin Texts also spoke of a belief in an afterlife spent in the Field of Reeds where agricultural tasks would be performed by the deceased for all eternity. To undertake this work for the deceased, the ushabti-formaula makes its first appearance in the Coffin Texts, and are later incorporated into the Book of the Dead. The ushabtis were small figurines, often representing the deceased or servants of the deceased. They would act as magical substitute workers and relieve the deceased of all hard work in the afterlife.
None of these concepts were incongruous to the Egyptian. He could believe in an afterlife in which he would spend eternity in the company of the circumpolar stars as a blessed akh, yet also be restricted to the burial chamber and offering chapel of the tomb as a ka, but also visit the world of the living, inhabit the Field of Reed, and travel across the sky and through the underworld as a ba with the sun-god.
Sources:
The Ancient Egyptian Books of the Afterlife by Erik Hornung, translated by David Lorton
The Book of the Dead by R.O. Faulkner
Return to Egypt Home Page
Design, Layout and Graphic Art by Jimmy Dunn, an InterCity Oz, Inc. Employee
All content, Graphic Art, Design, Layout, and Scripting Code Copyright 1996 by InterCity Oz, Inc.
The Great Pyramid of Giza (29°58′44.68″N, 31°08′02.58″E) is the only remaining of the Seven Wonders of the World. Most Egyptologists agree the pyramid was constructed over a 20 year period concluding around 2560 BC.[1] It is generally believed the Great Pyramid was built as the tomb of Fourth dynasty Egyptian pharaoh Khufu (Cheops), after whom it is sometimes called Khufu's Pyramid or the Pyramid of Khufu.[2] Khufu's vizier, Hemon, is credited as the architect of the Great Pyramid.[3]
Believed by mainstream Egyptologists to have been constructed in approximately 20 years, the estimate accepted in the mainstream for its date of completion is c. 2560 BC.[1] This date is loosely supported by archaeological findings which have yet to reveal a civilization (of sufficient population size or technical ability) older than the fourth dynasty in the area.
The Great Pyramid is the oldest and largest of the three pyramids in the Giza Necropolis bordering what is now Cairo, Egypt in Africa. It is the main part of a complex setting of buildings that included two mortuary temples in honor of Khufu (one close to the pyramid and one near the Nile), three smaller pyramids for Khufu's wives, an even smaller "satellite" pyramid, a raised causeway connecting the two temples, and small mastaba tombs surrounding the pyramid for nobles. One of the small pyramids contains the tomb of queen Hetepheres (discovered in 1925), sister and wife of Sneferu and the mother of Khufu. There was a town for the workers, including a cemetery, bakeries, a beer factory and a copper smelting complex. More buildings and complexes are being discovered by The Giza Mapping Project.
A few hundred meters south-west of the Great Pyramid lies the slightly smaller Pyramid of Khafre, one of Khufu's successors who is also commonly considered the builder of the Great Sphinx, and a few hundred metres further south-west is the Pyramid of Menkaure, Khafre's successor, which is about half as tall. In modern day, the pyramid of Khafre is the tallest of the three pyramids since the Great Pyramid has lost about 30 feet of material from its tip. In ancient times, Khufu's pyramid was indeed taller, but even then, Khafre's pyramid appeared taller because its sides are at a steeper angle than Khufu's pyramid and it was constructed on higher ground.
Materials and workforce
Many varied estimates have been made regarding the workforce needed to construct the Great Pyramid. Herodotus, the Greek historian in the 5th century BC, estimated that construction may have required 20,000 workers for 20 years. Recent evidence has been found that suggests the workforce was in fact paid, which would require accounting and bureaucratic skills of a high order. Polish architect Wieslaw Kozinski believed that it took as many as 25 men to transport a 1.5-ton stone block. Based on this, he estimated the workforce to be 300,000 men on the construction site, with an enormous additional 60,000 off-site. 19th century Egyptologist William Flinders Petrie proposed that the workforce was largely composed not of slaves but of the rural Egyptian population, working during periods when the Nile river was flooded and agricultural activity suspended.[4]
Egyptologist Miroslav Verner posited that the labor was organized into a hierarchy, consisting of two gangs of 1000 men, divided into five zaa or phyle of 200 men each, which may have been further divided according to the skills of the workers.[5] Some research suggests alternate estimates to the accepted workforce size. For instance, mathematician Kurt Mendelssohn calculated that the workforce may have been 50,000 men at most, while Ludwig Borchardt and Louis Croon placed the number at 36,000. According to Verner, a workforce of no more than 30,000 was needed in the Great Pyramid's construction.[4]
A construction management study carried out by the firm Daniel, Mann, Johnson, & Mendenhall in association with Mark Lehner and other Egyptologists, estimates that the total project required an average workforce of 13,200 people and a peak workforce of 40,000. Without the use of pulleys, wheels, or iron tools, they surmise the Great Pyramid was completed from start to finish in approximately 10 years.[6] Their critical path analysis study reveals estimates that the number of blocks used in construction was between 2-2.8 million (an average of 2.4 million), but settles on a reduced finished total of 2 million after subtracting the estimated area of the hollow spaces of the chambers and galleries.[6] Most sources agree on this number of blocks somewhere above 2 million.[7] The Egyptologists' calculations suggest the workforce could have sustained a rate of 180 blocks per hour (3 stones/minute) with ten hour work days for putting each individual block in place. They derived these estimates from construction projects that did not use modern machinery.[6] This study fails to take into account however, especially when compared to modern third world construction projects, the logistics and craftsmanship time inherent in constructing a building of nearly unparalleled magnitude with such precision, or among other things, the use of up to 60-80 ton stones being quarried and transported a distance of over 500 miles.
In contrast, a Great Pyramid feasibility study relating to the quarrying of the stone was performed in 1978 by Technical Director Merle Booker of the Indiana Limestone Institute of America. Consisting of 33 quarries, the Institute is considered by many architects to be one of the world’s leading authorities on limestone. Using modern equipment, the study concludes:
“Utilizing the entire Indiana Limestone industry’s facilities as they now stand [for 33 quarries], and figuring on tripling present average production, it would take approximately 27 years to quarry, fabricate and ship the total requirements.”
Booker points out the time study assumes sufficient quantities of railroad cars would be available without delay or downtime during this 27 year period and does not factor in the increasing costs of completing the work.[8]
The entire Giza Plateau is believed to have been constructed over the reign of five pharaohs in less than a hundred years. Beginning with Djoser who ruled from 2687-2667 BC, three other massive pyramids were built - the Step pyramid of Saqqara (believed to be the first Egyptian pyramid), the Bent Pyramid, and the Red Pyramid. Also during this period (between 2686 and 2498 BC) the Wadi Al-Garawi dam which used an estimated 100,000 cubic meters of rock and rubble was built.[9] Beginning with Saqqara, Egyptologist Barbara Mertz estimates nearly 700 pyramids were constructed in Egypt during a roughly 500 year period .[10]
The accepted values by Egyptologists bear out the following result: 2,400,000 stones used ÷ 20 years ÷ 365 days per year ÷ 10 work hours per day ÷ 60 minutes per hour = 0.55 stones laid per minute.
Thus no matter how many workers were used or in what configuration, 1.1 blocks would have to be put in place every 2 minutes, ten hours a day, 365 days a year for twenty years to complete the Great Pyramid within this time frame. To use the same equation, but instead assuming the time of completion to be one hundred years instead of twenty, it would require 1.1 blocks to be set every ten minutes. This equation, however, does not include the time and labor required to design, plan, survey, and level the 13 acre site the Great Pyramid sits on. Nor does it include the construction time for the two other main pyramids on the site, the Sphinx, the temples, networks of causeways, several square miles of paving stones, the leveling of the entire Giza Plateau, the 35 boat pits carved out of solid bedrock, or several other highly laborious features.
Layout
Map of Giza pyramid complex.Papyrus documents (citation needed) and existing cubit measuring rods give us the units of measure used to specify the plan of the pyramid and so it is thought that, at construction, the Great Pyramid was 280 Egyptian Old Royal Cubits tall (146.6 metres or 481 feet), but with erosion and the theft of its topmost stone (the pyramidion) its current height is 455.21 feet approximately 138.8 m and that each base side was 440 (20.63 inch) royal cubits.[11] Thus, the base was originally 231 m on a side and covered approximately 53,000 square metres with an angle of 51.50.40 degrees (seked = 5½)—close to the ideal for a stable pyramidal structure. Today each side has an approximate length of about 230.4 meters(755.8 feet). The reduction in size and area of the structure into its current rough-hewn appearance is due to the absence of its original polished casing stones, some of which measured up to two and a half metres thick and weighed more than 15 tonnes.
In the 14th century (1301 AD), a massive earthquake loosened many of the outer casing stones, which were then carted away by Bahri Sultan An-Nasir Nasir-ad-Din al-Hasan in 1356 in order to build mosques and fortresses in nearby Cairo; the stones can still be seen as parts of these structures to this day. Later explorers reported massive piles of rubble at the base of the pyramids left over from the continuing collapse of the casing stones which were subsequently cleared away during continuing excavations of the site. Nevertheless, many of the casing stones around the base of the Great Pyramid can be seen to this day in situ displaying the same workmanship and precision as has been reported for centuries.
The first precision measurements of the pyramid were done by Sir Flinders Petrie in 1880–82 and published as "The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh".[12] Almost all reports are based on his measurements. Petrie found the pyramid is oriented 4' West of North and the second pyramid is similarly oriented. Petrie also found a different orientation in the core and in the casing ( – 5 ft 16 in ± 10"). Petrie suggested a redetermination of north was made after the construction of the core, but a mistake was made, and the casing was built with a different orientation. This deviation from the north in the core, corresponding to the position of the stars b-Ursae Minoris and z-Ursae Majoris about 3,000 years ago, takes into account the precession of the axis of the Earth. A study by egyptologist Kate Spence, shows how the changes in orientation of 8 pyramids corresponds with changes of position of those stars through time. This would date the start of the construction of the pyramid at 2467 BC.[13]
For four millennia it was the world's tallest building, unsurpassed until the 160 metre tall spire of Lincoln Cathedral was completed c. 1300 AD. The accuracy of the pyramid's workmanship is such that the four sides of the base have a mean error of only 58 mm in length, and 1 minute in angle from a perfect square. The base is horizontal to within 15 mm. The sides of the square are closely aligned to the four cardinal compass points to within 3 minutes of arc and is based not on magnetic north, but true north.
Khafre's Pyramid. Unlike the Great Pyramid, Khafre's Pyramid has some of its smooth outer casing limestones intact.The pyramid was constructed of cut and dressed blocks of limestone, basalt or granite. The core was made mainly of rough blocks of low quality limestone taken from a quarry at the south of Khufu’s Great Pyramid. These blocks weighed from two to four tonnes on average, with the heaviest used at the base of the pyramid. An estimated 2.4 million blocks were used in the construction. High quality limestone was used for the outer casing, with some of the blocks weighing up to 15 tonnes. This limestone came from Tura, about 8 miles away on the other side of the Nile. Granite quarried nearly 500 miles away in Aswan with blocks weighing as much as 60-80 tonnes, was used for the portcullis doors and relieving chambers.
The total mass of the pyramid is estimated at 5.9 million tonnes with a volume (including an internal hillock) believed to be 2,600,000 cubic metres. The pyramid is the largest in Egypt and the tallest in the world. It is surpassed only by the Great Pyramid of Cholula in Puebla, Mexico, which, although much lower in height, occupies a greater volume.
At completion, the Great Pyramid was surfaced by white 'casing stones' – slant-faced, but flat-topped, blocks of highly polished white limestone. These caused the monument to shine brightly in the sun, making it visible from a considerable distance. Visibly all that remains is the underlying step-pyramid core structure seen today, but several of the casing stones can still be found around the base. The casing stones of the Great Pyramid and Khafre's Pyramid (constructed directly beside it) were cut to such optical precision as to be off true plane over their entire surface area by only 1/50th of an inch. They were fitted together so perfectly that the tip of a knife cannot be inserted between the joints even to this day.
The Great Pyramid differs in its internal arrangement from the other pyramids in the area. The greater number of passages and chambers, the high finish of parts of the work, and the accuracy of construction all distinguish it. The walls throughout the pyramid are totally bare and uninscribed, but there are inscriptions — or to be more precise, graffiti — believed to have been made by the workers on the stones before they were assembled. All the five relieving chambers are inscribed. The most famous inscription is one of the few that mentions the name of Khufu; it says "year 17 of Khufu's reign". Although alternative theorists have suggested otherwise, given its precarious location it is hard to believe it could have been inscribed after construction; even Graham Hancock[14] accepted this, after Dr Hawass let him examine the inscription. Another inscription refers to "the friends of Khufu", and probably was the name of one of the gangs of workers[15]. Though this doesn't offer indisputable proof Khufu originated the construction of the Great Pyramid or when building began, it does appear however to clear any doubt he at least took part in some phase of its construction (or later repairs to an existing building) during his reign.
There are three known chambers inside the Great Pyramid. These are arranged centrally, on the vertical axis of the pyramid. The lowest chamber (the "unfinished chamber") is cut into the bedrock upon which the pyramid was built. This chamber is the largest of the three, but totally unfinished, only rough-cut into the rock.
The middle chamber, or Queen's Chamber, is the smallest, measuring approximately 5.74 by 5.23 metres, and 4.57 metres in height. Its eastern wall has a large angular doorway or niche, and two narrow shafts, about 20 centimeters wide, extending from the chamber towards the outer surface of the pyramid. These shafts were explored using a robot, Upuaut 2, created by Rudolf Gantenbrink. Upuat 2 discovered that these shafts were blocked by limestone "doors". During Pyramids Live: Secret Chambers Revealed, National Geographic filmed the drilling of a small hole in the southern door only to find another larger door behind it. The northern passage (which was harder to navigate due to twists and turns) was also found to have a door. Egyptologist Mark Lehner believes that the Queen's chamber was intended as a serdab—a structure found in several other Egyptian pyramids—and that the niche would have contained a statue of the interred. The Ancient Egyptians believed that the statue would serve as a "back up" vessel for the Ka of the Pharaoh, should the original mummified body be destroyed. The true purpose of the chamber, however, remains a mystery.[16]
At the end of the lengthy series of entrance ways leading into the pyramid interior is the structure's main chamber, the King's Chamber. This chamber was originally 10 x 20 x 5V5 cubits, or about 17 x 34 x 19 ft, roughly a double cube.
The other main features of the Great Pyramid consist of the Grand Gallery, the sarcophagus found in the King's Chamber, both ascending and descending passages, and the lowest part of the structure mentioned above, what is dubbed the "unfinished chamber".
The Grand Gallery (49 x 3 x 11 m) features an ingenious corbel halloed design and several cut "sockets" spaced at regular intervals along the length of each side of its raised base with a "trench" running along its center length at floor level. What purpose these sockets served is unknown. The Red Pyramid of Dashur also exhibits grand galleries of similar design.
The sarcophagus of the King's chamber was hollowed out of a single piece of Red Aswan granite and has been found to be too large to fit through the passageway leading to the King's chamber. Whether the sarcophagus was ever intended to house a body is unknown, but it is too short to accommodate a medium height individual without the bending of the knees (a technique not practised in Egyptian burial) and no lid was ever found.
The "unfinished chamber" lies 90 ft below ground level and is rough-hewn, lacking the precision of the other chambers. This chamber is dismissed by Egyptologists as being nothing more than a simple change in plans in that it was intended to be the original burial chamber but later King Khufu changed his mind wanting it to be higher up in the pyramid.[17] Given the extreme precision and planning given to every other phase of the Great Pyramid's construction, this conclusion seems surprising.
Two French amateur Egyptologists, Gilles Dormion and Jean-Yves Verd'hurt, claimed in August 2004 that they had discovered a previously unknown chamber inside the pyramid underneath the Queen's Chamber using ground-penetrating radar and architectural analysis. The believe the chamber to be unviolated and could contain the king's remains. They believe the King's Chamber, the chamber generally assumed to be Khufu's original resting place, was not constructed to be a burial chamber.[18]
[edit]
Dating evidence
The Edgar Cayce Foundation, researching claims that the pyramids were at least 10,000 years old, funded the "David H. Koch Pyramids Radiocarbon Project" in 1984. The project took samples of organic material (such as ash and charcoal deposits) from several locations within the Great Pyramid, and other pyramids and monuments from the Old Kingdom period (ca. 3rd millennium BC). These samples were subjected to radiocarbon dating to produce calibrated date-equivalent estimates of their age. This yielded results averaging 374 years earlier than the estimated historical date accepted by Egyptologists (2589 — 2504 BC) but still more recent than 10,000 years ago.[19] An astronomical study by Kate Spence suggests the pyramid dates to 2467 BC.[13]
A second dating in 1995 with new but similar material obtained dates ranging between 100-400 years earlier than those indicated by the historic record. This raised questions concerning the origin and date of the wood. Massive quantities of wood were used and burned, so to reconcile the earlier dates the authors of the study theorized that possibly "old wood" was used, assuming that wood was harvested from any source available, including old construction material from all over Egypt. It is also known, given the poor quality and relative scarcity of native Egyptian woods, that King Sneferu (and later Egyptian pharohs) imported fine woods from Lebanon and other countries such as Nubia for the creation of decorative furniture, royal boats (as found buried around the Giza Plateau), or other luxuries generally reserved for royalty[20]. Mark Lehner points out that this was not without "great cost"[21]. It is unknown, given the expense, effort, and value of such woods, if they were ever imported as an expendable source of industrial fuel, especially on such a large scale.
Project scientists based their conclusions on the evidence that some of the material in the 3rd Dynasty pyramid of Pharaoh Djoser and other monuments had been recycled, concluding that the construction of the pyramids marked a major depletion of Egypt's exploitable wood. Dating of more short-lived material around the pyramid (cloth, small fires, etc) yielded dates nearer to those indicated by historical records. As of yet the full data of the study has yet to be released[22] in which the authors insist more evidence is needed to settle this issue. In the absence of the "old wood" theory, the study admits "The 1984 results left us with too little data to conclude that the historical chronology of the Old Kingdom was in error by nearly 400 years, but we considered this at least a possibility." [19]
In his book Voyages of the Pyramid Builders [22], Boston University geology professor Robert Schoch details key anomalies in both radiocarbon studies; most notably that samples taken in 1984 from the upper courses of the Great Pyramid gave upper dates of 3809 B.C. (± 160yrs), nearly 1400yrs before the time of Khufu, while the lower courses provided dates ranging from 3090-2723 B.C (± 100-400yrs) which correspond much more closely to the time Khufu is believed to have reigned. Given that the data imply the pyramid was built (impossibly) from the top down, Dr. Schoch argues that if the information provided by the study is correct, it makes sense if it is assumed the pyramid was built and rebuilt in several stages suggesting later Pharaohs such as Khufu were only inheritors of an
Alternative theories
In common with many other monumental structures from antiquity, the Great Pyramid has over time been the subject of a great number of speculative or alternative theories, which put forward a variety of explanations about its origins, dating, construction and purpose. In support of these claims such accounts either rely upon novel reinterpretations of the available data from fields such as archaeology, history and astronomy, or appeal to mythological, mystical, numerological, astrological and other esoteric sources of knowledge, or some combination of these.
Such ideas have been part of popular culture since at least the turn of the 20th century and can be traced back among others to such figures as the early-twentieth century American psychic Edgar Cayce, whose "psychic channeling" of "Ra Ta" purports to have conveyed that the pyramids were built by refugees from Atlantis, and even to his predecessor Ignatius Donnelly. In recent years, some of the more widely-publicized writers of alternative theories include Graham Hancock, Robert Bauval, Adrian Gilbert and Boston University geology professor Robert M. Schoch. These have written extensive alternate theories about the age and origin of the Giza pyramids and the Sphinx. While many Egyptologists and field scientists tend to dismiss such accounts out of hand as being a form of pseudoarchaeology if only because the subject material does not conform to conventional wisdom, other specialists such as astronomy professor Ed Krupp who have been involved in debate surrounding their ideas have attempted (though his claims have been rebutted by the authors and several others [23] [24][25]) to offer astronomical refutations based on analyses of the presented evidence for several of their claims. [26]
A common theme found in many of the alternative theories put forward concerning the Giza pyramids and many other megalithic sites around the world, is the suggestion that these are not the products of the civilizations and cultures known to conventional history, but are instead the much older remnants of some hitherto unknown advanced ancient culture. This progenitor civilization is supposed to have been destroyed in antiquity by some devastating catastrophe brought about by the end of the last ice age, according to most of these accounts sometime around 10,500 BC. For the Great Pyramid of Giza in particular, it is maintained (depending on the theorist) that either it was ordained and built by this now-vanished civilization, or else that its construction was somehow influenced by knowledge (now lost) acquired from this civilization. The latter point of view is more common among recent theorists such as Hancock and Bauval, who have acknowledged that the Great Pyramid incorporates star shafts 'locked in' to Orion's Belt and Sirius at around 2450 BC, though they argue the Giza ground-plan was laid out in 10,450 BC. [27]
The a priori existence of such a civilization is postulated by such theorists who believe this is the only reasonable explanation how the most advanced of ancient historical cultures, such as Egypt and Sumer, were able to reach such high levels of unequaled technological advancement from their very beginnings with what might appear to be little or no precedent. This precedent they argue is not unknown, but found all over the globe in the form of megalithic ruins discovered at the beginnings of history but too complex they argue to have been constructed by the cultures they are ascribed to by the mainstream. As another of these theorists John Anthony West writes in reference to Egypt in particular: "How does a complex civilization spring full blown into being? Look at a 1905 automobile and compare it to a modern one. There is no mistaking the process of 'development'. But in Egypt there are no parallels. Everything is right there from the start."[
Items Recently Purchased From This Site:
| Powered by phpBay Pro |
