It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pyramids, thinking out of the box: Water and Clay.

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 01:46 AM
it back. The thread "" Pyramids......sound and water??? ""

posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 07:23 PM
Keep it simple, stupid ! Still stands as the first rule of thumb. So, also for me.

After contemplating a bit further on the ominous amounts of water needed if a men made lake had to be filled, a better idea came to mind.
Fill the bottom of each to be constructed layer, with slightly whetted Nile clay, and use this slippery bottom to slide the core blocks in place.
Much easier, no boats or barks or floats needed anymore, and a tiny amount of water needed for that method, just to keep the clay whetted.
A small amount of blocks would be left out in the outer rim of each pyramid layer, to let the endless stream of core blocks pass through from the ramp, up into the recent building site layer, where core blocks were put in place.
In every layer, the parts of corridors, air shafts and chambers will have been spared out, or cut out for that specific layer, according to the "blueprints" on papyrus provided by the team of architects and their assistants (mathematicians and geometrician included).

The grinding in place to fit each adjacent block for an, as perfect as possible fit, would also have been far easier than in knee deep water.
A simple bucket chain of water carriers would then suffice, to keep the clay and the sides of the core blocks whetted.

This gives more weight to my idea of a water well origin of the subterranean chamber, which is by the way, not 150 meter but 105 meter under ground level of the Great pyramid, a typing error on my side in this post.
If you look at the pyramid drawing from Petrie in that post, something far easier than pumps and clay pipes comes to mind :

The use of triangular formed buckets, fixed in an endless double rope chain (with a big horizontal wheel on a wooden axle fit in the bedrock, on each end), while the bottom of the buckets were sliding over a path of whetted clay on the tunnel floor, which bucket chain ropes would have been moved by 2 pairs of oxen, one pair stationed in the horizontal corridor, hacked out to the left of that subterranean chamber, and one pair on ground level.
Each oxen would pull a long rope with a copper hook, which could be attached to short wooden poles intertwined at set distances (f.ex. 1 meter) in the double bucket chain ropes. And unhooked when the rope hook would near the lowest position of the bucket rope chain, near the lower horizontal wheel in the subterranean chamber.
The second oxen would then have had time to be led back to the beginning of that horizontal corridor, and his rope plus hook would be attached to the bucket chain rope, higher up again, and so on.
Another pair of oxen would perform the same task at the ground level opening of that tunnel, only their hooks would have been attached to the up going part of the endless loop bucket chain rope.

Just to get a rough idea of a bucket chain.

This same method could have been used to transport water ( and/or whetted clay) up the sides of the pyramids, and then the hacked out bedrock holes all around the 4 sides of the Great Pyramid could have been used to place the wooden (or stone) axles from the lower wheels of that bucket chain in.
That explains perfectly the way the holes were found. They were drilled under an angle. That way the wheels plus axles were in line with the angle of the pyramid's 4 sides. And the upper wheel axles were fixed in holes drilled in special blocks at the highest level of that moment. Wear and tear of the axles and the holes in those blocks would have taken their toll, and worn out blocks will have been broken down to use as filler stones in the core construction. New blocks and axles will have been used to replace them. When stone axles were used, that stone will have been chosen from much harder stone than the drilled blocks. So axles will have been used much longer.

This also explains the far too wide holes in the bedrock at ground level, to be intended as connection pole holders for exact measurements of the 4 pyramid sides. They needed these big holes, to hold the far bigger size axles, needed to lift up bucket chains the sides of the pyramid for at least 80 meters high.
At that height, reached during construction, they will have changed to see saws for lifting blocks up higher levels and layers than the ultimate height of the big ramps, about 80 meters high at the max.
They kept delivering core blocks to 80 meters, and then tilted those blocks up one level at the time.
See my working proposal for that see saw method in the forum thread link, mentioned in my first post on page 1.

So now we are left with the various methods of transporting multi ton stones from the quarries to the building site levels.
One interesting new idea I found here, a "swing block mover" :

James Murphy demonstrates how a small version of
his Murphy Mover works. He’s looking for help to write
a technical article on the invention to get more
serious study of it.

Read the comments on that page bottom, however the "sand" objection of one poster is mute, since we know that long stone slate paved roads were layed out first from the quarries to the building sites, and to and from the docks at the Nile, and the Canals under the Giza Plateau.

Another great idea I saw in a video link given by Marduk in the above linked thread, in a short film of multi-tons block moving proposals from a very inventive elderly man, mr. Wally Wallington :
Building Stonehenge - This Man can Move Anything

Wally Wallington has demonstrated that he can lift a
Stonehenge-sized pillar weighing 22,000 lbs and
moved a barn over 300 ft. What makes this so special is
that he does it using only himself, gravity,
and his incredible ingenuity.

He used a sort of railroad, formed from triangular blocks layed in line, shaped like a long row of "vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv" 's.
And then placed a one ton square stone block at the beginning, and sort of "rolled" the block then several meters with exceptional ease over this "rail".
With just his bare hands.
He also demonstrates a few other amazing methods to set huge 20 tons stone blocks up right from a horizontal position, all by his own hands and a few contra weights. AMAZING man !

If any ancient Egyptian inventor ever came up with the same ideas, it would have been fairly simple to explain how they moved huge stone blocks for kilometres from the quarries to the pyramids.
Hats off for Wally !
Let's try to email him, and ask him to post in this forum.

Him and us and a few boy scouts could build an impressive pyramid in a few years.[smile]

PS : Tombs of the unknown workers.
Discovery indicates craftsmen built pyramids :

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 12:42 AM
of this post of mine in page 1, since it has some blatant errors in it :
This post.

I have now corrected quite some pieces of this post as follows below :

I expected you to contemplate on the idea of the deepest chamber to be constructed as a water well, and hoped to get a discussion started on the 150 feet deep position of it, since I do not see that depicted in the Petrie drawing above.
My wrong : , the Subterranean Chamber centre was 1056.0 ± 2 inch below the Pavement. That's 26,82 meter. Which is 88 feet.! Not a 150 feet deep position.

It looks more like 60 meter ( my wrong, in fact 26,82 meter = 88 feet), since we know the height of that pyramid, 240 meter. ( my wrong, in fact 482 feet = 147 meter).

And why the horizontal corridor was hacked out to the left of it for about 100 feet = 30.48 meter length, then ending in a dead end. Were they trying to find a new water artery?
Also I would like to discuss my proposal of ancient Nile river beds much closer to the Giza Plateau, and the much higher ancient seasonal flooding, compared to present times.
Can we find any geological surveys regarding this thesis?
Aerial photography from the region, ground radar photo's, infra red photo's (wet soil gives away former river beds). Clay and sand deposits will indicate former river beds, etc.
I fairly well realize how far fetched inundation of the first layers of a pyramid sounds for the occasional reader.

I still find it highly possible that the architect inundated the first layer, so his construction workers could use the water level line of the lake as a very precise fixture point for all the first core blocks. He needed a solid levelled out first layer of blocks to start with. If not so, he risked shifting of layers over time to the lowest side. He probably realized the risks of minor and major earthquakes for an unbalanced structure.
At second thought, he would have used a double line of tight together laid blocks, at the north side only, and filled a small space between the 2 lines with water to the top, using clay to keep the system watertight.
When ready with the levelling of the tops of all blocks in these 2 lines, his workers would push the inner blocks fit to the outer blocks. Then they proceeded with the next line of blocks. Until they reached the opposite south base site. The 2 other east and west sides would automatically been build up with this method.

The encasing marble which covered the outside of the pyramid has eroded or been removed over time. With this casing off, the pyramid lost 33 feet = 10 m (orig.txt 11m) of all of its dimensions. The top platform is 10 m square. The base of the pyramid is 754 feet = 230 m and covers 13 acres. The original entrance to the pyramid was about 15 m higher than the entrance that is used today. Apparently Al Mamum, who opened up the new passage, could not find the original opening. The new passageway leads straight across and joins in with the original passage, the descending passage. The descending passage led only to a subterranean chamber. This descending passage that leads down is set at a 26 degree angle that descends down 345 feet = 105 m into the earth under the pyramid.

EDIT : it is not fully clear to me if the writer meant the length of this passage, or the depth compared to ground level.!
This is very important for my thesis that this subterranean chamber was a water well in the flooding season.
The height of the Giza Plateau is about 60 meter above the present day floodplains level, so a possible depth of 105 meter could clearly indicate a former water well, reaching ancient groundwater levels.
However the best chances are he meant that the passageway was 105 meter long.

The passageway is only 3'6" (1.1m) wide and 3'11" (1.2m) high. The chamber is closed to the public. The chamber itself is a room that measures about 46' x 27'1" x 11'6" (14 x 8.3 x 3.5 m). There is a passage that leads 100 feet (30,48 m) horizontally to the western side. The purpose of the pit is uncertain.
The descending passage beyond where the new entrance meets it, is closed off by a steel door. The ascending passage rises at the same angle as the descending, 26 degrees. The ascending passage leads up into the pyramid. The ascending passage is the same dimensions as the descending, 3'6" (1.1m) wide and 3'11" (1.2m) high. It can be quite a difficult trek for some people. The passage leads on for 129 feet (39m).

Some of the feet to meter conversions in this above link are wrong or not exact.
1 foot converts to meters when multiplied by 0.3048 ( 1 foot = 30.48 cm.)
1 inch converts to meters when multiplied by 0.0254 ( 1 inch = 2.54 cm.)

The pit was an originally square one in the middle of the floor of this subterranean chamber, and in 1837

Perring sunk his round shaft down in the bottom of the ancient square shaft. This hole in the dimly–lighted chamber, about 30 feet deep (with water in it after heavy rains have rushed down the entrance passage), and with a very irregular and wide opening, makes measurement about here somewhat unpleasant. I avoided filling the shaft with the earth removed from the passage, or with the stones which Perring excavated from it, in case anyone should afterwards wish (p. 61) to excavate farther at the bottom. The southern passage is very rough, apparently merely a first drift–way, only just large enough to work in, intended to be afterwards enlarged, and smoothed; its sides wind 6 or 8 inches in and out.

Find this above quote in Petrie's measurements pages for the inside of the Great Pyramid : , the subterranean chamber measurements by Petrie.

So Perring has dug deeper in 1837 from the original square shaft bottom, for a depth of 30 feet = 9.14 meter.
If I read Petrie's measurements right in here : , the Subterranean Chamber centre was 1056.0 ± 2 inch below the Pavement.
That's 26,82 meter. Plus the square pit depth and Perrings 1837 round pit of 9.14 meter deep is at least 35.96 meter, so by far not enough to reach the 60 meter difference with the flood plains level at the bottom of the Giza Plateau.
( See , the 60 m height of the Giza Plateau.)

Does this mean my water well thesis is not viable, or a water arterie leading down from a higher up source is left for my imagination.?
Btw, the passageway was also far too small to fit an oxen in, so only a pair of oxen at the entrance of the downward passage to the subterranean chamber could have been used to drag water buckets up a waterwheel. Which still seems viable as a hypothesis. Only when a well is added to the thesis however.

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 12:49 AM
the egyptians didn't know what a water wheel was
you might as well claim that they used a hydraulic claim to place the blocks
or a helicopter

Water wheels of various types have been known since Roman times

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 12:50 AM
I don't relinquish the water well idea yet, since I found some discrepancies in several data I based my water well thesis on above.

My idea of a water well purpose for the subterranean chamber originated from a few Giza Plateau height data given by writers, apparently not scientists, on two websites referenced earlier on by me, which are contrary to the data from Petrie,
( All Content, Design and Graphic Art Copyright 1996-2007 by InterCity Oz, Inc.) :

1. Various wrong data.
2. The 60 m height of Giza Plateau,
see these 2 drawings :

Image Map of Giza

Side View of Giza

I must repeat here, mr. Petrie has done an amazing amount of surveying work in two winters at Giza in the early 1880's.!
And by reading a lot of his pages now, it is clear that he not only had a keen eye for measurements but also for constructional details and the human factor. His pages are littered with personal details and ideas about eventual construction methods and methods of quarrying derived from observed traces left on the rocks and stones used in the Giza pyramids.

My Notes and questions to the readers, on Petrie's work :

1. Why was the original ancient square pit dug in the bottom of the subterranean chamber if not to create a well.?

And how deep was that one originally.? The answer to that : :

or 1,321 under pavement ; leaving a ledge about 20 inches wide, a second or deeper part of the shaft goes downwards, the N.E. and N.W. sides being continuous with those of the upper part ; it is, in fact, a smaller shaft descending out of the N. corner of the larger. The sides of the smaller shaft are, N.E. 57? S.E. 53? S.W. 60, N.W. 56. The original depth of the smaller shaft I could not see, it was apparently about 40 inches according to Vyse, when Perring sunk his round shaft down in the bottom of the ancient square shaft. This hole in the dimly–lighted chamber, about 30 feet deep (with water in it after heavy rains have rushed down the entrance passage), and with a very irregular and wide opening, makes measurement about here somewhat unpleasant.

1.321 inches = 33.55 meter. And then still a smaller ancient shaft went deeper, 40 inches is about 1 meter deeper, so 34.55 meter. Enough to reach ancient ground water level in my opinion.
Then Perring in 1837 ( 4.800 years later) dug another 30 feet = 9.14 meter deeper from that ancient point, a total of 43.69 meter. I suspect the groundwater level to have sunken considerably since that ancient time.
Finds from Lehner and Hawass conclude to a much wetter region at that time. Lots of mollusk shells were found.

2. The subterranean chamber is quite a big one, with 14 x 8.3 x 3.5 meter dimensions.
Thus the smaller than average human heights dimensions of the downward passageway is puzzling.
( 3'6" (1.1m) wide and 3'11" (1.2m) high.)
If this chamber had a ceremonial value, why these hacked out tight dimensions to reach it.?

3. :

All measures stated in this volume are in Imperial British inches, unless expressed otherwise; and it has not thought necessary to repeat this every time an amount is stated ; so that in all such cases inches must be understood as the medium of description.
... and that the buildings were erected near the edge of the limestone desert, bordering the west side of the Nile valley, about 150 feet above the inundated plain, and about 8 miles from the modern Cairo.

That's 45.72 meter above the inundated plain.! And not 60 meter as shown in the above Image Map of Giza drawing.

3a. , Petrie's measures :

Beginning of Horizontal Passage floor to subt. chamber = –1181 inch = 30 meter level below Pyramid Pavement.

It is important to know what height the Great Khufu pyramid pavement is above the inundated plain level, if it was a well chamber.
I have the impression it is less than 45.72 meter or 150 feet.!
And yes, it is 10 meter lower :

Because its apex is in better condition and it is located on an elevation (of about 10 meters), Khafre's sometimes appears to be the largest of the three great Pyramids of the Giza Plateau. However, originally it was some three meters lower than its neighbouring pyramid belonging to Khafre's father, Khufu.

That means we can probably subtract 10 meter from 45.72 meter is just 35.72 meter down to the inundated plain.
Petrie gave –1181 inch = 30 meter level below Pyramid Pavement.
We now miss just 5 meter here, to place the bottom of the horizontal passage to the subterranean chamber, at about ground water level. We still don't know how deep the original ancient pit in the chamber was. If that was more than 5 meter, the well idea is again viable. (See note 1, second question again for the answer now, 34.55 meter.)

Who knows the exact, verifiable figures for the height of the Great pyramid pavement above the inundated plains.?


Of photographs, over five hundred were taken, on 1/4 size dry plates, mainly of architectural points, and to show typical features. Volumes of prints of these may be examined on application to me, and copies can be ordered from a London photographer.

Does anyone know if these have survived the years, and where to find these photographs.?
Can they be found in the Petrie Museum, and do they have a web site.?
I am very interested in photo's of that Khufu Pyramid subterranean chamber, from any old source.
That chamber is long closed to the public already, so there are no recent photo's I expect.
Is there any more recent investigation done in that chamber, with public reports, after Petrie.?

5. :

The Osiris Shaft is located under the causeway of Khafre, and it is about 25 feet deep. In ancient times people used the water-filled shaft as a swimming-hole, and even to the present day many people, including archaeologists, have entered the shaft. For centuries, however, the meaning of the Osiris Shaft has escaped even the most learned scholars.

This "water shaft" is already the stuff of legend and Internet rumour. It opens in the causeway linking the Sphinx to the second pyramid, and it descends in several places to a depth of nearly 100 feet below the plateau. 'The shaft received its name from the crystal-clear water that fills its bottom chamber. This unfinished water-filled cavern is entered from a higher chamber that contains niches filled with granite stone coffins. One of the empty niches contains a shaft in its floor that leads to a flooded corridor. Wading into the darkness, one can hear the echoes of ground water dripping from the rock walls.

I decided to investigate this shaft last year. Excavation of the second level revealed six rooms cut into the rock; the rooms contained two granite sarcophagi, pottery, and bones. Analysis of the pottery and bones dated this level to 500 BC.

The last level we excavated was about 25m underground, and it was completely filled with water. We stayed for two months draining the water from the shaft and working inside it, and I felt I might and up blind and deaf from all of the dust, mud, and noise of the water! This was the most difficult excavation I was ever involved with.

After the excavation, I looked down into the water and saw the -remains of four pillars surrounded by a wall. Inside them was part of a large, granite sarcophagus with the lid thrown off. This discovery reflected the words of Herodotus when he said that Cheops was buried inside a granite sarcophagus and there was water near Cheops pyramid. People have always wondered about these words, but no one ever discovered the exact location. Even Herodotus admitted that he never saw the burial with his own eyes, because he would never be able to go down into the shaft. He must have based his writing on the words of guides.

I made my second discovery from this excavation after moving the lid of the sarcophagus. I found inscribed in the ground the hieroglyphic word "pr", meaning "house." It is known that the Giza plateau was called "pr wsir nb rstaw", or "the house of Osiris, Lord of Rastaw." "Rastaw" refers to the underground tunnels, and most likely the name of the plateau reflects the tunnels inside the Osiris Shaft. The final chamber we found was most likely a symbolic tomb for the god Osiris; he was believed to control the underground tunnels and tombs of the kings.

In the Late period, the Egyptians cut a tunnel about 6m long on the west wall of the shaft. We sent a boy through the tunnel, only to find that it is closed of and does not lead to any more chambers. To derive the date of the shaft, a boy was lowered into the water-filler tomb on a rope to collect artifacts. From the objects retrieved, we dated the shaft to the New Kingdom, 1550 BC.

Dr. Zahi Hawass Director of the Giza Pyramids and Saqqara.

See also the photo's and video of the Osiris Shaft tombs here :
found at

As we know from the drawing above, the Sphinx is located at the rim of the inundation plains at the foot of the Giza Plateau, at the beginning of the sloping up causeway to Khafre's Pyramid, the second one.
The pharaohs believed in an afterlive with dry feet, supposedly.
Isn't that thus a strange place to place granite tombs, where they were at such risk to get inundated.?

Further, this above small remark is interesting :

it descends in several places to a depth of nearly 100 feet below the plateau. 'The shaft received its name from the crystal-clear water that fills its bottom chamber.

Petrie gave the height of the Plateau as 150 feet above the inundated flood plains.
These water filled tunnels go 100 feet below the Plateau.
Does that mean that we may subtract 1/3 of the 150 feet Petrie gave as the height of the Plateau, to strike water if we dig a water well from the pavement level at the Great Pyramid.?
So, at 100 feet = 30.84 meter deep we could find water in ancient times.?
The floor of the horizontal passage to the subt. chamber is 1181 inch = 30 meter level below Pyramid Pavement.
The subt. chamber floor is lower, see Petrie.
And there was a square pit going deeper in that floor, to 34.55 meter.! See note 1.

Can you, the reader, agree with this train of thoughts, or can you counter my thoughts with solid arguments.?
Can you eventually answer my other above valid questions?

As you can see in the Image Map of Giza above, Khufu's pyramid is located very near the rim of the Plateau, and as you can read in that drawing's right bottom, there were Port Structures. A Port means water.
We also note Khufu's Lower temple in the top right of the drawing, which means that Khufu's Causeway must have run from the west side base over the Plateau rim to that temple down there. There are only a few remnants left of this Causeway.

My questions :
If the bottom chamber was a groundwater well, than the architect must have come up with a water transportation system up from that well which was a few times more economical during Nile flooding, than simply using a human chain of water carriers with buckets from the Lower Temple Port, up that Causeway.
Can you agree with that, and do you think a water wheel system with buckets is plausible for that period.?

Why don't we find so deep bottom chambers in the Khafre and Menkaure pyramids.?

Do you think whetted clay is a plausible method of assistance in pyramid blocks and stones transportation.?

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 01:34 AM
you squeezed your post in between, in those few seconds.

Yes, I realized that too.
Perhaps a few straight ropes with several flat bottom buckets were used, and alternately hauled up as the empty ones were lowered again.
It still would immensely increase the amount of water per period, and decrease the amount of workers.

Of course such sort of simplified system with much bigger water containers slid by oxen over the polished Causeway from the river ports could have been used also, especially during the high tide Nile season.
Again whetted with clay mixed with slate powder perhaps, when used to slide heavy objects over them. A m3 of water weights also a ton, and the container utilized, which holds it, is just slightly over 1 by 1 by 1 meter inside. To overcome spillage. Wooden frames covered with hides, to keep the container weight low as possible?

Then we keep everything within the technological boundaries of that time.
And still beat the human bucket chain with several advantages it doesn't has.

I read somewhere (Herodotus?) that the causeways shone like mirrors, so smooth was the surface polished.
Herodotus also mentioned the existence of water at Khufu's pyramid. An old Greek/Egyptian guides urban legend?

posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 03:03 AM
hmmm can you find those quotes from Herodotus
because the last time I read him he claimed they built the pyramids using a ramp and wooden cranes

I'm bearing in mind that you have spent a lot of work on this and its very intricate but I have a question
what is wrong with the method that we already know they used to build the pyramids
the ones that the egyptians themselves claimed they used
were they lying ?
or aren't you aware of that

I also think you should check out the properties of clay
its not known for its slippery qualities

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 05:37 AM
This site is one of the best found yet, to understand the tools used by ancient Egyptians, the proposers of theories of non-human help with pyramid building REALLY should pay attention to the whole site, it's full with photo's and drawings of such human tools.

From the boat glide of Mirgissa, representations of workers pouring out water in front of sledges, and the experience transmitted by Chevrier,128 we know that a road surface of mud or lime treated with water would considerably reduce the friction. Chevrier found that six men could easily pull a sledge loaded with a 4.8-ton stone on a horizontal plane covered with watered mud. The relation would thus be one man per ton.

I named watered mud : whetted clay.
In my country, we have special road signs, warning for whetted clay during the sugar beet season, the roads are full from it rolling off the tires of the tractors, and when it's raining, this whetted clay surface is as slippery as ice.

I refered already in the first post of this thread to the 40 pages long (now closed) thread where I posted many ideas in, possibly used by ancient pyramid builders. My last post in that thread is imop the most viable construction method.
Ramps, levers and see-saws, all used by humans.

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 06:34 AM

Ramps, levers and see-saws, all used by humans.

in that case I agree with you
thankyou for informing me of the qualities of wetted clay
next time i need to pull a 1 ton weight on my own i will use that method
your scholarly abilities are wasted here you know

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 06:45 AM
No they aren't.

Please continue to contribute your work of progress, Lab, and thanks for actually trying to learn and suggest some things to us, instead of regurgitating the same old mantras.

Thanks for being a pro-active contributor, as to a re-active one.

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 07:59 AM
you're not listening nextguy

My last post in that thread is imop the most viable construction method.
Ramps, levers and see-saws, all used by humans.

this is the accepted orthodox method

posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 09:18 PM
Wording by Petrie, in the early 1880's :

On the whole, the rain-fall does not appear to have perceptibly changed during historic times.
The Nile, though so much higher in pre-historic or geologic times, as just mentioned, does not seem to have sunk at all, in Middle or Lower Egypt, in historic times ; though above the cataracts it has fallen some twenty or thirty feet. Below the cataracts, on the contrary, it has actually risen, owing to silting up; for many of the deepest tomb-shafts at Gizeh have now several feet of water in them at high Nile, and can only be entered just before the inundation. Also the thickness of mud over the remains both at Memphis and Karnak shows not only the great amount of deposit, but also how much the river must have risen for it to lay down mud so many feet above the old level of deposit.
The rise due to silting up proceeds, then, much faster than any slight diminution of the river which may take place.
The amount of the sand, then, cannot be affected by any variation in moisture ; and on looking back it seems very doubtful if there has been any change in it.

So, in the early 1880's, the deepest tomb shafts at Gizeh were filled with several feet of water all year long, except just before the inundation.

Remember, the foundation stones of the light tower of Alexandria, one of the 7 wonders of the ancient world, were found under modern sea level.
That means that either the sea level was lower, or the weight of all that sea water has forced the coast regions down several meters during 4.000 years.

I still think it was a well they tried to make.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in