HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: small@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Peter Small)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:57:57 GMT
Organization: Boeing

In article <1992Nov12.182544.5475@spectrum.xerox.com> chris@eso.mc.xerox.com writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.184249.6310@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:
>>found out the alignment had gotten off?  My suspicion is that given the
>>most modern equipment and technology and unlimited amounts of money we still
>>couldn't rebuild the Great Pyramid.  The blocks wouldn't match and the
>>interior passages wouldn't link up.  It would be a fiasco, or rather it
>>would be a patchwork of countless repairs and cosmetic coverups of 
>>construction blunders.
>
>Oh come off it.  If I can singlehandedly lay out 100 feet of 20' wide 
>driveway (plus a perpendicular turnaround), with all corners at 90 
>degrees, using nothing but a bunch of pointy sticks and two strings 
>of known length (ok, I had a hammer, too), in about 60 minutes, it 
>would be a good bet that a team of Egyptians could have done the same.  Maybe 
>they could have even extended the techniques to larger projects.
>
>The Eisenhower Tunnel on I-70 in Colorado was built using the most modern 
>equipment and technology.  It's about 1 1/2 miles long, and the `interior 
>passages` were off by just fractions of an inch in th middle.
>
Yes, but there is a very big difference between contructing using concrete
and steel or bricks and mortar and constucting using stone blocks one set on
top of the other with no mortar to hold them together.  And this was done
with blocks weighing over a ton each.  The 20th century cultural brain tends
to look back at the technology of the ancient world with disdain, totally
discounting what is in front of them to be seen.  There is no way that
the pyramids could be built using the technology of today, let alone the
structures in the Andes which used 50 to 100 ton blocks.  There is much
that is an enigma in the ancient remains, that speaks of a different 
technology, possibly, at play.  To dismiss these things as the works of
savages or ignorants ignores the evidence of the structures themselves
and pontificates the religion of 20th century scientific dogma as the only
way that things can and should be viewed.  What if there are things that
science cannot explain, because it's in too small a bird cage?

PS


-- 
-----------------------------|**************************************************
-- small@bcstec.ca.boeing.com|
-- uunet!bcstec!small        |
-----------------------------|
From: zebee@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au (Zebee Johnstone)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Queen Baodicea
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:15:57 GMT
Organization: The University of Adelaide
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sirius.itd.adelaide.edu.au

cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear) writes:

[about the Lindow Man, and the book Druid Prince]

>I'm sorry, but conscience demands that I put an opposing view.  As a
>work of speculative fiction this book works well, but do *any* of the
>arguments, starting from the one that Lindow Man was a Druid, have even
>a shred of hard *evidence* to back them up? I think 

I haven't read the book, but I've seen the film...
  
As I remember, they deduced his staus as a druid from the fact that 
his hands had no callouses.  IF he had been a farmer, herder, bard,
or fighter then the marks of his profession would have been on his hands.
(See also Sherlock Holmes).
  
That doesn't leave too many profession for someone from a subsistence
culture.

So as far as I can see, the proposition that he was a priest has a lot
going for it.  Can you see an alternative explanation?

What kind of "hard evidence" do you require?  That is a serious question,
as it is not possible to answer your question without it.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Zebee Johnstone  DoD #605   | You don't own an Italian motorcycle 
     Adelaide City Council       |  - you merely have the privilege 
    zebee@itd.adelaide.edu.au    |    of paying its bills.... 
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Organization: Unocal Corporation
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:56:29 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.184249.6310@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:
>The problem of accuracy and alignment -- just of the sides with themselves --
>is still unsolved.  I don't know the size of the Nova experiment, but abso-
>lute size is essential to the experiment.  It is one thing to build a 
>pyramid 30 feet tall, another to build one the size of Cheops'.

Cheops wasn't the first.  There are smalled ones, dirt-filled ones, and
stepped ones.  These are evolutionary experiments.

There are instances in modern history where in the span of a generation or
two a single or a few clever engineers make major technological advances,
given the right supportive environment.  For example, Edison pretty much
invented the consumer electronics industry.  The name of the clever engineer
who pretty much invented pyramid construction- starts with an 'I'- is one
of the rare individuals named in the Old Kingdom.
From: zawr02@hou.amoco.com (Andrew W. Robinson)
Subject: Re: paleontology
Reply-To: zawr02@hou.amoco.com
Organization: Amoco
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:33:48 GMT

In article 3622@reed.edu, odlin@reed.edu (Iain Odlin) writes:
>In article <199210.2222.2420@dosgate> "alan latta" <alan.latta@canrem.com> writes:
>>1) paleontology isn't archaeology and shouldn't go on this conference.
>
>  Agreed.  However:
>
>  Where should it go?  There is no sci.paleontology... (Yet, anyway...)

Pre-human paleontology is generally considered a subset of geology. How about
sci.geo.geology?
---
Andrew Robinson
--------------------------------------------------------------
Amoco Production Company
Robinson_Andrew_W/ets_ess@hou.amoco.com	
--------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed are solely my own.
From: clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:54:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Nov9.175413.16730
Organization: University of Central Florida

I was a little disappointed that they didn't try a scheme for
moving the blocks that I read about once in Science (Nature?).

Imagine the block sitting on a bunch of wooden (bamboo, whatever)
poles about 1 or 2 inches in diameter (3-5 cm).  The poles
radiate in all directions so that a bunch of people can share in
the lifting of the stone.  Each pole flexes so that the load is
shared pretty equally among all the people.  If you assume 100
people, each lifting 100 pounds, they can lift a 5 ton block.
The 100 people would form a circle about 30 feet across, but if
you use four people per pole, you could get the bunch into a 15 or
20 foot circle.  

The bunch of people then proceed to walk the block up the ramp.  No
problems with friction, turning corners and the like.  Would be good
to have a few strategically placed mounds to rest the block on 
occasionally, though.

Lots of variations possible.  Hang the block on a framework supported
by many poles, etc. etc.  The key thing is to avoid the friction
of dragging by using many people to carry the blocks.

--
Thomas Clarke
Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central FL
12424 Research Parkway, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32826
(407)658-5030, FAX: (407)658-5059, clarke@acme.ucf.edu

P.S.  A bunch is a precise measure of crowd size = 100 people :-)
From: odlin@reed.edu (Iain Odlin)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 12 Nov 92 08:28:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov12.082853.6382
Organization: The Stuffed Animal Trauma Team  (We're Trained Professionals)

In article <1992Nov11.184249.6310@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:
>found out the alignment had gotten off?  My suspicion is that given the
>most modern equipment and technology and unlimited amounts of money we still
>couldn't rebuild the Great Pyramid.  The blocks wouldn't match and the
>interior passages wouldn't link up.  It would be a fiasco, or rather it
>would be a patchwork of countless repairs and cosmetic coverups of 
>construction blunders.

  Good heavens no!  We modern types couldn't possibly ever do something like 
  that.  Hoover Dam was, after all, built by aliens.  The Golden Gate Bridge
  didn't meet in the centre (since we moderns cannot align anything) until
  Elvis himself came out of hiding and showed the engineers how.  And the
  World Trade Centre is, of course, just a figment of our fevered, deluded
  imaginations.

  And, just in case my sarcasm wasn't enough:  You are making the viciously
  erroneous assumption that the Ancient Egyptians are "just like us, only far
  better at Engineering."  As I pointed out in a previous posting:  These
  things were built by hundreds of people who did *NOTHING ELSE*.  The pyr-
  amids are the ultimate tribute to their Gods' representative on Earth.  You
  therefore do your damnedest to get it right, or your afterlife will be far
  less than pleasant.  These people had very different goals, dreams, thoughts
  and lives than we do.

  And, just to throw another log on the fire:  The NOVA pyramid was built by
  volunteers, all of whom do other things in "Real Life," and none of whom
  had much in the way of experience in building pyramids using purported an-
  cient methods.  *Of course* they made mistakes.  I suppose you get everything
  right the first time you do it?  If so, I don't envy you your boring ex-
  istence.

  In general, I'll apologize right now for the tone of this reply, but I get
  very tired seeing these patently absurd ideas that keep being ressurected
  over and over...  Thank you, National Enquirer...

  If you want a good look at the sort of people who made these sorts of things,
  check out John Romer's "Ancient Lives."  It's about the folks who made the
  Tombs in the Valley of the Kings; much later than the pyramids, but the
  attitudes discussed in the book are still highly relevant.
-- 
 --------------------------------- Iain Odlin ---------------------------------
                  10 Crosby Street, Level 3, Portland ME 04103
                                 odlin@reed.edu
 -------- Contraceptives should be used at every conceivable occasion! --------
From: mikeq@freddy.CNA.TEK.COM (Mike Quigley)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:49:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: master.3885
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Redmond,  OR.

In article <1992Nov9.175413.16730@cs.ucf.edu> clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke) writes:

>The key thing is to avoid the friction
>of dragging by using many people to carry the blocks.

I also questioned the ancient Egyptians' ability to place one block about 
every three minutes by dragging alone.

Also, notice how irritable that stonemason was? Not the kind of guy
to inspire cooperation.

Mike
From: bew@druwa.ATT.COM (WeissBE)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: origin of the Greek gods
Summary: origin of the Greek gods
Date: 13 Nov 92 22:15:05 GMT

In article <32520@jeeves.Teknowledge.COM>, aterry@Teknowledge.COM (Allan Terry) writes:
> 
> I'd love to know if there is evidence that the gods of classic Greece are
> continuations of Mycenaean religion.  If myth and religion were part of the
> discontinuity, where did the gods come from?

Allan,

If I remember my Mycenaean archeology courses correctly from the early
70s, all the major Greek gods with the exception of Apollo appear
in the linear B tablets.  It always struck me as ironic that the
most Greek of the gods in spirit was perhaps not originally a Greek
deity.  

Barry
From: ayoub@globey.cs.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 6 Nov 92 03:44:09 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison

I have a quick question for the experts here:  In this program, the professor
conducting the study made this statement: According to tradition, the external
layer of stone on the surface of the Pyramids were stripped in the Middle
Ages to build some other monuments. Are there any studies that prove or
disprove this statement ? Or could it just be just the weather factor that
stripped off this layer? If so then why there still remains some of this
coating on the top of the second Pyramid? Would not it be more logical that
*if* it was the weather, then the coating on the top would be the first to
deteriorate ? I appreciate all responses.

Nabil

          .-------------------------------------------------------------.
         /  Nabil Ayoub                        ____/   __  /    ____/  /
        /  Engine Research Center             /       /   /    /      /
       /  Dept. of Mechanical Engineering    ___/    __  /    /      /
      /  University of Wisconsin-Madison    /       /   |    /      /
     /  Email:ayoub@erctitan.me.wisc.edu  _____/ __/   _|  _____/  /
    '-------------------------------------------------------------'
From: joan@koala.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 9 Nov 1992 19:59:43 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: koala.berkeley.edu

In article <3885@master.CNA.TEK.COM> mikeq@freddy.CNA.TEK.COM (Mike Quigley) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.175413.16730@cs.ucf.edu> clarke@acme.ucf.edu (Thomas Clarke) writes:

]>>The key thing is to avoid the friction
]>>of dragging by using many people to carry the blocks.
]>
]>I also questioned the ancient Egyptians' ability to place one block about 
]>every three minutes by dragging alone.
]>
]>Also, notice how irritable that stonemason was? Not the kind of guy
]>to inspire cooperation.
]>
]>Mike

Actually, I thought he was very reasonable, considering he was
constantly
being interrupted from what he had evidently been asked to do.

I thought the main narrator in the brimmed hat was a bit snide
and slimy, and very irritating.

No accounting for taste.

Joan V

Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: duncan@rti.rti.org
Subject: Re: origin of the Greek gods
Organization: Research Triangle Institute, RTP, NC
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 17:18:42 GMT

Try "The Mycenaean Origin of Greek Religion" by Nilsson (sp?).

Steve Duncan
duncan@rti.rti.org
From: Scott_Riddick@dream.uucp (Scott Riddick)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 13 Nov 92 05:51:52 GMT
Organization: DreamStates BBS & CyberNet HQ in G'ville, FL   1-904-331-4317


 SS> If they were just for tombs, then why build them so exactly aligned
 SS> to
 SS> the polar axis?  Why were no mummies found in them?  And more to the
 SS> line of this inquiry, how is it that they have stood  for over 4500
 SS> year
 SS> and yet are still level and alligned with the poles and the Nile
 SS> Delta?

 SS> Some how, the idea of a bunch of men in loin clothes hauling blocks
 SS> of
 SS> limestone over greased ramps doesn't seem to fit the technology
 SS> inherent
 SS> in the building of these structures.  Much of the building technique
 SS> cannot be reproduced today, including its accurate alignment.

Of course we could duplicate the alignment today.  The argument that we
can't is completely Von Danniken-ized.  Hell, our global satellites can
pinpoint locations anywhere on the globe to about a foot...a simple
pole-alignment would be cake.
 

-- Via DLG Pro v0.995

UUCP:  uflorida!dream!Scott_Riddick
INTERNET: Scott_Riddick%dream.uucp@ufl.edu
      or: dream!Scott_Riddick@ufl.edu
From: karl_best@novell.com (Karl Best)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:52:52 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc.

In article <1992Nov9.235026.9726@wdl.loral.com> mab@wdl39.wdl.loral.com (Mark A  
Biggar) writes:
> In article <4116@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> small@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Peter  
Small) writes:
> >In article <1992Nov6.034409.28555@cs.wisc.edu> ayoub@globey.cs.wisc.edu  
(Nabil Ayoub) writes:
> >The question that I wonder about the pyramids is Why were they built?
> 
> >Some how, the idea of a bunch of men in loin clothes hauling blocks of
> >limestone over greased ramps doesn't seem to fit the technology inherent
> >in the building of these structures.  Much of the building technique
> >cannot be reproduced today, including its accurate alignment.
> 
> Did you watch the NOVA episode?  They built a pyramid using only those
> methods, including the alignment NS.  This uses only simple geometry.
> As shown in the program, all you need is a shadow stick and a string compass.

But they weren't wearing loin cloths, were they? :-}

--
Karl Best                              Far away, across the field
Novell Tech Pubs           ...  __o    the tolling of the iron bell
Provo, Utah  801-429-3428 ..   -\<,    draws the faithful to their knees
kbest@doc.novell.com      ...(_)/(_).  to hear the softly spoken magic spell
karl_best@novell.com                      -Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: rowanf@crc.ricoh.com (Rowan Fairgrove)
Subject:  Celtic bells?
Reply-To: rowanf@crc.ricoh.com (Rowan Fairgrove)
Organization: RICOH California Research Center
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 15:54:31 GMT

I was discussing Celtic archaeology the other night and 
someone asked me if any bells, chimes or gongs had been 
found in pre-Christian Celtic sites.  I couldn't think of any in the site
inventories in my head and I haven't had a chance to look for info.

I am aware of saintly bells being among the most popular holy relics
 of the Celtic saints, but I don't know anything about pre-Christian 
Celtic bells.  I have heard that among Iron Age artifacts of Scotland
there are some metal shaker type things, which are percussive in nature
and a stone which makes a musical ringing sound when struck.

Does anyone have information or a source for information on actual
metal bells? 

Thanks.


Rowan Fairgrove
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: rgep@emu.pmms.cam.ac.uk (Richard Pinch)
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Organization: Department of Pure Mathematics, University of Cambridge
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 10:40:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.055033.20778@reed.edu> odlin@reed.edu (Iain Odlin) writes:
>[...]
>  When considering the "inherent technology," keep in mind that these were
>  built by slaves who did *nothing else*.  These were a people who spent months
>  on *one arm* of a statue, just to get it right.  And it wasn't just one per-
>  son; it was scads of them working cooperatively in a way not really seen
>  since.
>[...]
>

No, _not_ slaves, please!  The craftsmen and artists were highly paid
employees of the state, trained in schools attached to certain temples.
The workers were ordinary people who were employed on these vast works
during the inundation when the flooded fields made agriculrutal work
impossible.  They were paid for the work they did.  The corve'e was
regarded rather as we regard income tax: unavoidable but hardly the
mark of a slave.  There were a few slaves at various times, mainly
foreign prisoners of war, but never a significant number.  The labour
force probably amounted to 500,000 to 1,000,000 million people for
two to three months a year.

Richard Pinch
From: cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk (A.T. Fear)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: I say Boudicca, you say Bondica...
Date: 8 Nov 92 23:09:42 GMT
Organization: Keele University, England


I say Boadicea because I'm a reactionary, I also say Caractacus not
Caratacus...  Tacitean manuscripts have quite a variety of forms.  The
usual move is to adopt Boudicca as the best reading.  Graham Webster
insists that this is putting in too many 'C's in and reads Boudica.  He has
a bit of support from the Iberian Peninsula where on an inscription we
have a lady called Boudica (AE 1967 170 for those who want to check it
out).  Dio uses the form Buduica if I remember rightly and calls her
tall, grim and wearing her hair down to her waist - a sort of British
Crystal Gayle???

Andy

=================================================================
ANDY FEAR 		  BLACKPOOL FC - THE PRIDE OF LANCASHIRE

cla04@seq1.keele.ac.uk    VIVA ER BETI MANQUE PIERDA		

or    			  TANGERINE AND GREEN... MAGIC
		  		 
Dept. of Classics,        
University of Keele,	 "I am willing to love all mankind, except 
Staffs ST5 5BG,		  an American"
ENGLAND. 		 	      - Dr Johnson
==================================================================
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: anthony@panzer.b17b.ingr.com (Anthony Shipman)
Subject: moving pyramid blocks
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:19:20 GMT

Although I missed the episode of NOVA, I have been interested for many years
about how these massive stone blocks were moved. If the Egyptians could build
these huge pyramids, it seems they could come up with better ways to move the
blocks than pushing them along the ground, whether on wooden rollers or not.

A few years ago I saw a documentary on the Jerusalem temple that seems like a
good possibility for moving the Pyramid blocks, also. I can't remember if the
show was talking about Solomon's or Herod's temple, but the method the ancients
apparently used was to cut the blocks as huge stone cylinders, then roll them to
the spot they wanted, then cut the cylinder on-site into the shape they wanted.
Sounds pretty nifty to me. Any comments?

Anthony

Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: ed_eck@milkwy.enet.dec.com 
Subject: Re: Queen Baodicea
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:02:20 GMT


In article <1992Nov6.131041.22420@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, ashall@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Andrew S Hall) writes...
>You might a book called Life and Death of a Druid Prince. I don't recall the
>authors, but it is about the Lindow Man found in a bog near Manchester. The
>book includes a history of resistance to the romans that culminates in the
>battle where Baodicea was killed.


_The Life and Death of a Druid Prince_ by Anne Ross and Don Robins. 
ISBN 0-671-69536-3. Published in Great Britan by Rider and in the USA
by Summit Books.

I have it in front of me now--fascinating book about a bog body that was
determined to have been a Druid prince who was sacrificed in 53 AD to the
three highest Celt gods. His death was meant to stop the advance of the
Romans. I've been trying for months to find time to post a condensation.

Ed Eck
Digital Equip. Corp. 
Environmental Test Labs
Franklin,MA
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (Christopher J. Ambler, Phish)
Subject: Mayan Calendar Information Needed
Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business.
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1992 12:02:53 GMT

The mayan calendar supposedly is cyclic and ends abruptly at the end
of an era in 2011 or 2012. Can anyone shed light on this for me? I'm
involved in trying to provide skeptical information on a cyclic time
theory that seems a load of bunk. This theory attempts to show via
chaotic math that the mayans were right on ending their calendar when
they did, because that's an asymptote in the equasion. What I'm looking
for is information on how the calendar is organized, when it ends, and
if there's a rational reason WHY the mayans ended it when they did.
I'm told that it could keep going on forever because of its cyclic
nature.

This is all new to me, so I'm trying to find the facts. Anyone here
who can help, I'd GREATLY appreciate some email. I don't read this
group, but hopefully I can get some help from the immesurable power 
of the Usenet.

Thanks in advance...

-- 
SO WE'RE SUPPOSED TO PLAY IN    | cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu | Fubar Systems BBS
CURITIBA IN 18 HOURS, BUT OUR   |                          | (805) 54-FUBAR
BUS IS BEING HELD HOSTAGE BY    | Because all you of       | 3/12/24, MNP5, 8N1
THE LOCAL PROMOTERS. -- INSOC   | Earth are IDIOTS!!       | FSBBS 2/FSUUCP 1.3
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology