HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: odlin@reed.edu (Iain Odlin)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: The Great Pyramid of Giza
Date: 20 Nov 92 06:11:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov20.061107.26446
Organization: The Stuffed Animal Trauma Team  (We're Trained Professionals)


>-unknown author

  Why am I not surprised?

  From an equally unknown book?  Mayhap a tabloid?

  Someone recently asked why noone has commented on this quote (which I have
  deleted).  I think the quote speaks for itself:  (A) it's not really worthy
  of comment.  The facts are there for anyone with library access (and a good
  working knowledge of several other languages) to look up.  And (B) a quote
  like this is damn-near impossible to comment on anyway.  The person who wrote
  it (and usually the person who brings it up, too) has no desire to hear any-
  thing other than:  "Oh my God!  You're right!  How could I have been so
  stupid all these years?" and will dismiss as intolerance any other comment.

  Now, the person who posted it may be the exception that proves the rule,
  but part (A) still applies.
-- 
 --------------------------------- Iain Odlin ---------------------------------
                  10 Crosby Street, Level 3, Portland ME 04103
                                 odlin@reed.edu
 ------- "Mummies are embalmed, eviscerated corpses.  They don't walk." -------
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 18 Nov 92 15:14:10 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Nov17.023401.6804@panix.com> mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.155208.19545@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org
>(Gerry Palo) writes:
>
>>This is an important but exhausting point of discussion.  Its
>>theoretical resolution would take considerable time, and its
>>practical resolution probably won't happen. Let us agree to
>>disagree.  The main question remains a matter of legitimate
>>contraversy, how the originals were made without our modern
>>technology.  There is a variety of opinion on that too. Another
>>point of controversy was what they were built for.  More
>>disagreement.
>
>Quite aside from crackpot theories aout them, the pyramids *do*
>pose a number of unresolved questions concerning technology,
>logistics and organization.  As the matter was put to me a few
>days ago by Nabil Shwelim, you can get an initial idea of the
>problem with an easy calculation.  There are roughly 2.6 million
>blocks of limestone in the Great Pyramid (aout 2.2 million in
>that of Kephren), and the reign of Khufu/Cheops was purportedly
>23 years [Dr. Swelim has shown that some of the kinglist values
>for the 3rd dynasty are wrong however, so this may not be accurate]. 
>
>Even taking the absurd limit that the thing was all designed and
>the blocks cut and immediately available on site and all support
>for labor already arranged at the start of this 23 years, and
>not even considering auxiliary construction [such as the ramps
>that have been proposed as means for moving the blocks into place]
>this gives us an interesting result:
>
>	23 years * 365.35 days/year * 24 hours/day = 201618
>
>	2.6 * 10^6 blocks / 201618 hours = 12.9 blocks/hour
>
>throughout the whole bloody reign of Khufu.
>
>Meaning that every 60/12.9 minutes (4 minutes, 40 seconds roughly)
>a rock of several tons weight gets accurately set in place, night
>and day for 23 years.  Or allowing for night, say every 2 minutes.
>
>We are NOT talking about trivial engineering feats here, folks.
>(The things LOOK damn impressive, too, I might add.)
>-- 
>Michael L. Siemon			Inflict Thy promises with each
>mls@panix.com				Occasion of distress,
>					That from our incoherence we
>					May learn to put our trust in Thee

Interesting numbers.  One small point.  There is not a shred of
evidence that Khufu's reign was bloody.  That it must have been
is a conclusion based on the assumption that only a bloody reign
could have compelled people to do it, which in turn assumes that
the only way to have done it was using construction principles
that we understand today.  Usually when a tyrant whips his nation
into massive works of slave-built public construction the results
are shoddy, or at least it falls apart in the next generation. But
more pyramids were built again and again in many generations. So,
now we have to add to the puzzle, not only how did they do it, but
how did they do it joyfully?

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
From: gregb@yang.earlham.edu
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Date: 15 Nov 92 20:31:57 GMT
 <1992Nov11.184249.6310@digi.lonestar.org> <1992Nov12.005629.13891@unocal.com>
Organization: Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana

In article <1992Nov12.005629.13891@unocal.com>, stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:
> 
> 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.

The clever engineer whose name started with an 'I' was Imhotep.  I can't
recall his exact occupation (maybe he was a vizier?) but he served under
the Old Kingdom ruler Djoser (or Zoser) in the Third Dynasty.  Not only
did Imhotep virtually invent pyramid construction but also designed the
first collosal structure made entirely of stone.  This structure was the
Step Pyramid at Saqqara.  Imhotep had originally planned the usual mastaba
design for Djoser's tomb, and such a tomb was built.  However, the engineer
then had the mastaba expanded and had five more mastabas of decreasing size
placed upon one another.  Hence the step pyrimid form.  Later generations
expanded on this idea to create the well-known, true pyramidal form for tombs.
In fact, later Egyptians thought Imhotep was so clever, he was deified.
(For those who don't know, by the way, a mastaba was a popular design for
Egyptian tombs which were flat, long boxlike buildings.  The word means
'bench' in Arabic.)
So little bugged-eyed men did not, in fact, design or build the pyramids
at Gizeh or anywhere else in Egypt.  Although I would not be surprised
if they were the one who made those odd little Sumerian statues.

======================================================================
Greg Braswell         Earlham College
gregb@earlham.bitnet
gregb@yang.earlham.edu
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: rcmolden@parmesan.cs.wisc.edu (Robertc. Moldenhauer)
Subject: Re: alt.egypt??
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:11:25 GMT

In article <BxtAst.pK@ddsw1.mcs.com> eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun) writes:
>Did anything come of alt.egypt or whatever it was supposed to be called?
>
>I believe they were trying to set up a newsgroup reference to ancient egypt.
>And exclusively for those a.e. buffs.
>
>Eshin-Fun
>
3~
There was a call for discussion on Soc.culture.egyptian, but I haven't
heard anything lately.  I believe the group was more for modern nile
From: jlove@ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu (Jack Love)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Qimron's suit against BAR
Date: 22 Nov 1992 22:03:06 GMT
Organization: /usr/local/trn/lib/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu

As promised in an earlier item, the following is a summary of the
issues involved with the suit filed on account of the publication
of the Qumran scroll known as MMT. This summary is based on an
article by the editor of Biblical Archaeology Review (BAR), Hershel
Shanks, in the September/October 1992 issue (vol. 18 number 5, p.
67ff).
 
The plaintiff in this matter is Prof. Elisha Qimron of Ben-Gurion
University of the Negev (Israel). The scroll in question was first
discovered about 35 years ago and is evidently in very poor
condition. Prof. Qimron indicates that he (and John Strugnell,
formerly chair of the Dead Sea Scroll international committee)
invested enormous energy in reconstructing the scroll fragments. As
near as I can tell from reading the account in BAR (which is, after
all, the defendant in this action), Prof. Qimron claims that his
efforts in reconstruction give him intellectual rights over the
text. Strugnell has not joined the suit.
 
The MMT scroll was not available for BAR's facsimile edition of the
DSS (prepared by Eisenman and Robinson and published by BAR in
1991). However, BAR knew that the scroll had been published in an
obscure Polish journal, and they included the text from that
journal. Evidently, the Polish publication had obtained the text
and published it without Qimron's permission (the exact mechanism
here is unclear to me). Since the publication, it first withdrew
subsequent distribution of the article, but then resumed doing so.
Qimron has not initiated any legal action against the Polish
publication as far as I know.
 
BAR's counterclaim is that the copyright on the Dead Sea Scrolls
expired about 2000 years ago. Even with regard to the
reconstructive surgery, rights evaporated as soon as the Polish
publication was issued.
 
Qimron is alleging damages in excess of $200,000. The case is being
tried in the Israeli courts, and Qimron was successful in getting
an injunction against the distribution of the BAR book anywhere in
the world (although I'm not sure I understand how this can be
enforced). BAR has indicated that the cost of litigation, not to
mention any settlement, may put it out of business. I think it's
worth mentioning that the editor (Shanks) is an attorney.
 
BAR is soliciting contributions to help defray legal expenses.
Please refer to the above mentioned article if you are interested
in contributing. Of course, depending on your view of the matter,
you might want to contribute to Qimron.
 
Jack F. Love
From: karl_best@novell.com (Karl Best)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: The Great Pyramid of Giza
Date: 20 Nov 92 23:25:03 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc.

In article <Bxyq15.6zL@acsu.buffalo.edu> v064lnev@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu  
(Avatar) writes:
> 

[all sorts of nifty stuff deleted]

I've got a small booklet at home (actually in storage since we're in the  
process of moving) published in the 1930's that discusses the Great Pyramid.  
One section of the booklet analyzes, in excruciating detail, a series of linear  
markings found along one interior passageway. By the author's interpretation  
this is some sort of cosmic timeline: a center point locates the present (the  
time the pyramid was built). Going backwards up the line are marks for major  
events in history (reign of different phaorohs, the flood, the creation, etc.).  
Going forwards along the line has marks for sundry major events until we get to  
the end of time.

At the time the booklet was published the author used the length of the line  
and spacing of the marks to predict that the end of the world would be some  
date (I forget exactly when) in the 1980's. I suppose that that was a pretty  
safe prediction to make in the 1930's. 

--
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
From: mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Nov 3rd NOVA on pyramids
Summary: back-of-envelope calculation
Date: 17 Nov 92 02:34:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: panix.1992Nov17.023401.6804
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <1992Nov16.155208.19545@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org
(Gerry Palo) writes:

>This is an important but exhausting point of discussion.  Its
>theoretical resolution would take considerable time, and its
>practical resolution probably won't happen. Let us agree to
>disagree.  The main question remains a matter of legitimate
>contraversy, how the originals were made without our modern
>technology.  There is a variety of opinion on that too. Another
>point of controversy was what they were built for.  More
>disagreement.

Quite aside from crackpot theories aout them, the pyramids *do*
pose a number of unresolved questions concerning technology,
logistics and organization.  As the matter was put to me a few
days ago by Nabil Shwelim, you can get an initial idea of the
problem with an easy calculation.  There are roughly 2.6 million
blocks of limestone in the Great Pyramid (aout 2.2 million in
that of Kephren), and the reign of Khufu/Cheops was purportedly
23 years [Dr. Swelim has shown that some of the kinglist values
for the 3rd dynasty are wrong however, so this may not be accurate]. 

Even taking the absurd limit that the thing was all designed and
the blocks cut and immediately available on site and all support
for labor already arranged at the start of this 23 years, and
not even considering auxiliary construction [such as the ramps
that have been proposed as means for moving the blocks into place]
this gives us an interesting result:

	23 years * 365.35 days/year * 24 hours/day = 201618

	2.6 * 10^6 blocks / 201618 hours = 12.9 blocks/hour

throughout the whole bloody reign of Khufu.

Meaning that every 60/12.9 minutes (4 minutes, 40 seconds roughly)
a rock of several tons weight gets accurately set in place, night
and day for 23 years.  Or allowing for night, say every 2 minutes.

We are NOT talking about trivial engineering feats here, folks.
(The things LOOK damn impressive, too, I might add.)
-- 
Michael L. Siemon			Inflict Thy promises with each
mls@panix.com				Occasion of distress,
					That from our incoherence we
					May learn to put our trust in Thee
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: The Great Pyramid of Giza
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:26:23 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

jfb@draco.macsch.com (John Baskette) responds to Zerxes M Bhagalias
unknown source about the pyramids and ancient alien visitors, citing
the work of the great early egyptologist, Flinders Petrie, and quoting 
extensively from Peter Tompkins's "Secrets of the Great Pyramid".

     [deleted]

>Where do you get your facts and information?  Can you document
>them from primary source material?  My bet is that your sources
>are all of doubtful reliability.  Since some of your claims are 
>clearly false, why should I believe anything else you say on this 
>subject?

At last a reasonable, non-inflamatory challenge.  I remember this
book of Peter Tompkins.  Wasn't there also a chapter in it by 
Stechini or something like that which was quite precise and re-
visited the subject of ancient mensuration.  I recall that he
argued quite well that the ancients were far more precise in their
measurements than we give them credit for, and that the early studies
like those of Petrie were primitive (the hieroglyphics hadn't even been
translated in his time) and religiously tendentious, but that the
questions they raised as far as measurements are still valid. John,
did you happen to look at that chapter?  Does it have any bearing on
this subject (of the precision of the measurements, not of aliens or
prophetic time-lines)?

It is true that the trend in scholarship has been to dismiss these
early claims of the prophetic time-line types, and rightly so.  But
there may have been a swing too far in the other direction.  The result
may well be that more thorough study that would reveal new information
about the proportions would be quite possible but has been neglected. 

Is there any minority opinion scholarship that has reopened the 
question of the measurements of the pyramids -- e.g. with respect to 
ancient standards, their possible use as geodetic measuring instruments, 
etc.?

Gerry Palo (73237.2006@compuserve.com)
From: gpowell@ent1.ent.ncsu.edu (Eugene Powell)
Subject: pyramids
Summary: use or uses of the pyramids may never be known 
Originator: gpowell@ent1.ent.ncsu.edu
Keywords: counterweights
                                     /\
 
Organization: Dept. of Entomology - NCSU, Raleigh, NC
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:02:10 GMT
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: alt.egypt??
Date: 20 Nov 92 19:40:08 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Nov20.081125.20120@cs.wisc.edu> rcmolden@parmesan.cs.wisc.edu (Robertc. Moldenhauer) writes:
>In article <BxtAst.pK@ddsw1.mcs.com> eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun) writes:
>>Did anything come of alt.egypt or whatever it was supposed to be called?
>>
>>I believe they were trying to set up a newsgroup reference to ancient egypt.
>>And exclusively for those a.e. buffs.
>>
>>Eshin-Fun
>>
>3~
>There was a call for discussion on Soc.culture.egyptian, but I haven't
>heard anything lately.  I believe the group was more for modern nile 

This is not a very high volume newsgroup.  I think that if the participants
try to stick to archaeology, there should be room to discuss the pyramids
and other Egyptian archaeological themes, including some of the more
controversial points of view.  There appear to be others who regard
some of those viewpoints as irredemably beyond the possibility of
ever being able to be called scientific, and that they should be
banned from the group.  But sending all of Egypt into exile (get it?)
well I don't know about that.  True an a.e. group might attract more
interest and become quite wild and (gasp) unscientific.

Gerry Palo
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: ggrieve@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (greig.grieve)
Subject: Re: The Great Pyramid of Giza
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 20:19:10 GMT
Summary: stones - big ones

In article <1992Nov19.154814.22764@unocal.com>, stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:
> In article <Bxyq15.6zL@acsu.buffalo.edu> v064lnev@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Avatar) writes:
> >	The pyramid stones, some of which weighed up to 70 tons, were so finely
> >cut and positioned as to give joints of less than a fiftieth of an inch in

  "Mysterious ancient works in stone, ranging from the minute to the gigantic,
   are a testimony to ancient wisdom. The most enormous stone blocks found in
   temple construction are in Baalbek, Lebanon, a remarkable ancient center
   of Sun worship. The magnificent temples of Baalbek, with their vast courts
   and impressive pillars, are, for the most part, more recent structures than
   the feature for which the site is famous. In an outer wall of the acropolis
   at Baalbek, three blocks are so large that they have acquired their own
   name, "the trilithon". Each of these blocks measures sixty-four feet long
   and thirteen feet wide. Estimated to weigh 1,200 tons apiece, they are
   situated in the wall at a height of twenty feet above the ground. It is
   estimated that it would require 25,000 men to raise these stones. The
   placement of the trilithon has puzzled the most expert engineers.

   The older portions of the acropolis wall containing these huge blocks date
   to Phoenician or Canaanite times. In the Roman temple of Jupiter at the
   site, one of the foundation stones dating to more ancient times weighs
   2,000 tons. The foundation stones and the trilithon have a common bond
   with the millions of enigmatic stones in the Egyptian pyramids. They have
   a stellar connection - they were built under the direction of priests of
   solar cults during the long era when the Sun was worshipped as the
   supreme God. Did all the ancient builders use the same construction method
   as they raised the earth's mightiest monuments for the Sun? There is no
   doubt that there was cultural and technological exchange between Egypt
   and other lands.

   In Khafra's Valley temple at Giza, blocks weigh up to 500 tons apiece..."

   [The Pyramids: An Enigma Solved]

The solution proposed is that the blcks were cast in place.
From: gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Re: Dead Sea Scrolls again
Date: 18 Nov 92 00:04:37 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

I have heard claims that the scrolls are being suppressed because they offer
dramatic confirmation of the New Testament and vice versa, because they 
contradict it.  By the way, I thought that the scrolls were largely under
control of the Israelis. I was not aware that the Roman Catholic Church
has any authority over their publication or witholding.  Who does control
them?

Gerry Palo (73237.2006)
Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
Subject: Kirsten Anderson
From: pjhst10+@pitt.edu (Peter   J Hill)
Date: 20 Nov 92 14:33:12 GMT
Distribution: sci.archaeology
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

I am trying to locate a friend that I lost touch with a few years ago.  She
went to BrynMawr for Archaeology, and then went to AnnArbor.  If anyone
knows of Kirsten Anderson, I would appreciate it if you would send me
information on how I could get in contact with her.  

Thank you very much

Peter John Hill
PJHST10@VMS.CIS.PITT.EDU

Newsgroups: sci.archaeology
From: ayoub@globey.cs.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub)
Subject: Re: alt.egypt??
Reply-To: ayoub@erctitan.me.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 00:44:36 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.081125.20120@cs.wisc.edu> rcmolden@parmesan.cs.wisc.edu (Robertc. Moldenhauer) writes:
>In article <BxtAst.pK@ddsw1.mcs.com> eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun) writes:
>>Did anything come of alt.egypt or whatever it was supposed to be called?
>>
>>I believe they were trying to set up a newsgroup reference to ancient egypt.
>>And exclusively for those a.e. buffs.
>>
>>Eshin-Fun
>>
>3~
>There was a call for discussion on Soc.culture.egyptian, but I haven't
>heard anything lately.  I believe the group was more for modern nile 

Indeed there is an RFD on Soc.culture.egyptian. I think the scope of this
newsgroup will be broad enough for discussions that relate to Ancient and
Modern Egypt as well. Discussion is going on now in news.groups and a CFV
will be posted as soon as the discussion is over (after a week or two, I
think).

Nabil

          .-------------------------------------------------------------.
         /  Nabil Ayoub                        ____/   __  /    ____/  /
        /  Engine Research Center             /       /   /    /      /
       /  Dept. of Mechanical Engineering    ___/    __  /    /      /
      /  University of Wisconsin-Madison    /       /   |    /      /
     /  Email:ayoub@erctitan.me.wisc.edu  _____/ __/   _|  _____/  /
    '-------------------------------------------------------------'

Newsgroups: sci.geo.fluids