• SturgiesYrFase
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 months ago

    Somehow I feel we are not being told the whole story here…

    This shit.

    • burgersc12@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Well, honestly i have no idea, just seems crazy for everyone to be like “we know what it was used for because some guy in the 1800s said so”

      • SturgiesYrFase
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Or maybe the mummified remains that were found inside might have been an good indication?

        • burgersc12@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          The great pyramid is “assumed” to have had a mummy by people in like 900ad no mummies, just more mysteries. Why is the only mummies we find in the three pyramids from a woman, and a man from 2000 years after they were built? The evidence for the royal tomb hypothesis is surpisingly thin. If you think about what we actually see when we look at the pyramids, they are feats of engineering on the scales of which were not seen again until the 1800s. It is insane to me that we think we have any idea how or why the pyramids came to be based on the very minimal amount of evidence we do have on their construction. Not to mention the mysteries of some of the design choices i.e. menkaure casing stones

          • SturgiesYrFase
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’ll agree on the why. But the how isn’t really a mystery.

              • SturgiesYrFase
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                Egyptologists have long claimed that the pyramids were the tombs of the Egyptian pharaohs. Since 1997-1998, we have the evidence that defends it.

                From the article you linked.

                None of the things you linked say anything about the time frame for construction.

                https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

                This one says 27 years, and gangs of 100k labourers. 2.3 million blocks, totalling 6 million tonnes. 5.5 million tonnes of limestone, 8k tonnes of granite, and 500k tonnes of mortar.

                https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Physical-and-chemical-properties-of-some-Egyptian-limestone_tbl1_262921514

                By this, density of some local limestone is between 2250kg/m and 2700kg/m, a tonnes is 1000kg. This is a difficult size to manage, but with log rollers, and 100k workers, 27 years is absolutely doable.

                • Icalasari@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Plus, they lived in a desert where there wasn’t much in terms of entertainment. It seems like an unbelievable amount of work for us as we have free distractions all over

                  Back then? The fuck else were you gonna do? Drink all day? Gamble? Both of which require money?

                  • SturgiesYrFase
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Speaking of drinking! Beer has historically been a part of a Mason’s wages! Not because everyone used to be an alcoholic, but because drinking straight water could kill you!