Ancient and ArchaeologyÌý permalink
Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Tuesday, 12th August 2008
Compared to the last few centuries, much of human history seems to be one of very slow and halting progress. It seems like some civilizations made a few innovations and discoveries, but many civilizations may have conquered large swaths of land but did little to advance human civilization considering how long they were in power. Which civilizations would you argue contributed a lot to human knowledge and innovations? I think it would be easy to acknowledge Greek accomplishments during their Golden Era, but what other ones would you place with it? Han China? the Mayans?
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 2
Posted by villamarce (U9034231) on Thursday, 14th August 2008
The ancient egyptians i would have thought should be credited with an enormous contribution to mathematics, medicine and surgery as well as religion. There is some evidence that christianity and judaism have much of their roots in egyptian religious thought. Many of the "Golden era" discoveries were Greek plagiarisms from Egypt.Furthermore the Egyptians had the concept of "state" or "nation state" long before the Greeks.
Additionally much innovation was carried out through the muslim/moorish civilisations who helped lift Europe out of the Dark Ages.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 3
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Thursday, 14th August 2008
In ancient times global human population had less than the 1/4th of the population that 17th century world had. On the top of that civilisation was a hobby for 5-6 national groups concentrated in 2-3 points on the planet and no more. Compare that to the situation in the 17th century A.D. and you get the picture.
Note however that global level of civilisation really took off only after the 18th century. Till then and down to the basics life was no more evolved that in the 11th A.D. century or the 5th B.C. century if we compare the most evolved societies of all times. Even in the 19th century at times were certainly in the overall global level of civilisation was considerably accelerated to a level never reached before... well... if the English had trains and steam boats, the Minoan Cretans in the 3rd millenia B.C. had sewage systems, proper toilets and swimming pools a top hills with full view down to the Aegean.
Hence it all depends how you see it. Ö÷²¥´óÐãr for example clearly speaks about self-moving boats on autopilot, robots and other nice very "space" thingies.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 4
Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Saturday, 16th August 2008
Thanks for the suggestions, the Minoans are very interesting civilization considering how small it was compared to some of its neighbors.
I guess why I kind of asked this is because many empires did not really seem to make much progress technologically or in research, philosophy etc. considering how long they existed. I mean the Romans were great engineers but did they really progress significantly from what the Greeks had done in a short time? I would say the same would be true of the Islamic Caliphates, they improved on some of the Greek innovations and contributed a few of their own, but considering the time that passed by, there was not much advancement, at least not compared to say industrial Europe, the Greeks and perhaps some of the Chinese dynasties like the Han or T'ang. The mention of Egypt in its Golden Era might be an exception too.
To me it just seems like Human Civilization has too often been one step forward and two steps back.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 5
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Saturday, 16th August 2008
A definition of the time scale you are assuming would be useful before one can make remark about relative progress.
Regards, P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 6
Posted by netherdutch (U5703301) on Saturday, 16th August 2008
Hi priscilla,
I wasn't thinking anything really fancy in regards to timeline, mainly just how many years the empire/kingdom etc played a significant role in events and the accompanying level of innovation they brought to human civilization during those years.
For example, the Han Dynasty in China lasted about 300 years and there is a fairly long list of innovations and inventions that they brought humanity in a relatively short period of time. However, compare this with say the Byzantines or Ottomans that were relatively power for 700 and 500 years respectively and the innovations seem quite a bit fewer. They both had noticeable accomplishments, but were not particularly strong in creating new technology/innovations considering how long they were powerful.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 7
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Saturday, 16th August 2008
Re: Message 5 and 4.
Priscilla and Nederdutch,
"definition of a time scale"
"human civilization...one step forward and two steps back"
Since one hour I am looking in "Der grosse Bildatlas der Weltgeschichte" (the big pictorial atlas of the worldhistory) by Dr Christian Zentner
It contains a synchronoptic (don't know if the word exists in English (those Germans with their words
) timetable of about 40 pages.
It has three columns : One on politics, one on economy-social-technics and one on culture and science.
I was so struck by the reading that there was already one hour passed before I realised that I had still a lot to do on this forum
Learned that Alexander the Great in 324 BC at Susa organized a mass marriage of thousands of his senior officers with Persian women to merge Macedonia with Persia...
No, about human civilization I see only a continuous growth, perhaps with some growth slowing down (invented that word while I didn't found a right translation), perhaps on the brink of halt, but somewhere in the world there was always a branch which was growing.
Taking the example of the branch: Can we see the history of human civilization as a kind of a tree? A tree during its life having prosperous years and bad ones. But that tree has several branches and due to circumstances one branch don't extend so vigorously as the other ones? For instance one branch is more exposed to the severe northwind or is coincidentally more hurt by lesser exposure to the sun? One can also consider that due to other benign circumstances that same branch later in its life grows better than the other branches? But on the whole the tree is always growing independent of one of its lesser evoluating or even dying branches? Hmm, a tree has not the eternal life as history?
I know my comparison can be a bit flawned, I just constructed it à l'improviste. But I think you get the drift?
Warm regards to both,
Paul.
PS: About eternal life and history...perhaps time is irrelevant and we are all part of one and the same "existence" in which hundreds of histories "exist" somewhere in the universe and as time is irrelevant they just "excist" . And where birth, growth and dead are all part of the same existence, as these cycles are implicit to a time perception .Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 8
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Saturday, 16th August 2008
Re: message 6.
Netherdutch,
(hmm I see now that it is not Nederdutch as I said before) I hadn' seen your message 6 while I composed mine...
Warm regards,
Paul.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 9
Posted by Jim Reuss (U10298645) on Monday, 18th August 2008
It seems to me that the inventors of the written word contributed the most to civilization's advancement. Without it, such as with the Indus Valley civilizations, we are unable to make accurate statements regarding the proper influence of various societies on their neighbors and in history. Let us give credit, then, to the Sumerians who provided the framework for the transmission of knowledge (technical, or otherwise)from generation to generation for all of mankind.
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 10
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Monday, 18th August 2008
To Paul, re message 8
The post script - tut tut, you have been allowing your mind to ramble into the parallel time labyrinth; the road to madness. I've often tried to travel it, so I know.
Those wretched modern physicists haven't helped by saying that there are many dimensions - eleven for certain but probably at least 5 more.
I understood what you meant in this context - brave man for trying to put it into words.
Regards, P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 11
Posted by villamarce (U9034231) on Tuesday, 19th August 2008
Are you suggesting that the Sumerians had writing before the Egyptians?
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 12
Posted by Stoggler (U1647829) on Tuesday, 19th August 2008
Writing developed in Mesopotamia first - The original Mesopotamian writing system (c3500BC) derives from a method of keeping accounts, and by the end of the 4th millennium BC had evolved into using a triangular-shaped stylus pressed into soft clay (cuneiform writing). Thus the invention of the first writing systems is roughly contemporary with the beginning of the Bronze Age in the last half of the 4th millennium BC in Sumer.
The earliest forms of writing were logographic in nature, based on pictographic and ideographic elements. However, by the middle of the 3rd millennium BC, the Sumerians had developed a syllabic adjunct to their script, reflecting the phonology and syntax of the spoken Sumerian language. This logo-syllabic script was soon adopted by Akkadian and Eblaite speakers for their own languages, and later by Hittite and Ugaritic speakers.
Egyptian hieroglyphs appeared not long after Sumerian. While it is possible that Egyptian writing is an example of trans-cultural diffusion from their trading partners in Mesopotamia, the Egyptians did not borrow Mesopotamian written symbols. Instead, they used their own artistic iconography.
With thanks to Wikipedia...!!Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 13
Posted by Jim Reuss (U10298645) on Tuesday, 19th August 2008
Thanks, Stoggler for doing the footwork I was too lazy to do. I realize that the overviews of ancient civilizations' relative importance and contributions are always up for challenge and reinterpretation; my limited understanding was that the Sumerians are currently thought to be the inventors and developers of written communication as we know it.
It seems to me that one of the compelling aspects of ancient studies is concerned with discovering the "firsts" - first cities, first nations, first innovation, etc. However, given that the broad outlines of mankind's march toward civilization is still up for dispute, it's unlikely that we'll ever be able to definitively thank the inventor of the wheel, regardless of where he or she first discovered or invented it.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 14
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Tuesday, 19th August 2008
I venture to suggest that the great river civilisations, those of the Tigris and Euphrates, the Indus, The Nile and the Yellow River had almost parallel development. Doubtless that was in fits and starts depending on the strengths their rulers. They each developed a written language, used the wheel,had structured law enough to organise the lay out of cities, communications systems, trade and so on. The key was using water for better food production. After that it ws onwards and upwards.
As ever my simplistic way of looking at things.
Regards, P>Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 15
Posted by King Atur-tii (U7470590) on Wednesday, 20th August 2008
The Great Pyramid has a total base length of half a nautical mile, nautical miles are based on the size of the Earth, so if you know the length of a nautical mile you know the size of the Earth.
Also, at 30 degrees lattitude where Giza is situated; on the winter solstice at midday the angle of the sun is 36.5 degrees, and the shadow created by the second pyramid at this moment every year is 365 cubits in legnth.
How many days in a year?...Exactly.
The causeways on Giza are at the precise angles of the sunrises at the cross quarter days and the equinoxes.
The Sphinx looks towards Leo on the vernal equinox, however this only would occur at the age of Leo (circa 10,500bC), and what's more is the causeway that is next to the sphinx points exactly at the brightest star in Leo at this time.
You ask which civilization contributes towards the technology and capabilities of this world...you tell me.
In the words of somebody who discovered Egypt in the Napolionic era; the Greeks invented nothing!Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 16
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Wednesday, 20th August 2008
Oh no - another of those maths proves everything thingy's.
I reckon if I put my mind to proportion and measured in cubits, I could learn alot from my new shed and its alignment. And I wonder how the Egyptians measure/ record degrees-mm?
Not that I doubt the relevance of your general ideas, however the real maths of all this stuff is much more complicated.
So and the shadow created by the second pyramid at this moment every year is 365 cubits in legnth.
How many days in a year?...Exactly.Ìý
Well exactly it's 365.25 days actually.
You'd better find a measurement that will accomodate a leap year pattern. I expect you'll be able to. That's the joy of creative reasearch.
The Babylonians had another method based on circles. The Egyptians were not greatly into circles, I think?
The Greeks proved that the earth was a sphere and the Romans found ways to trample over much of it. And what were they up to in China at the same time as the pyramids were being built?
So much to learn and so little time.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 17
Posted by villamarce (U9034231) on Thursday, 21st August 2008
Hi Stoggler
"In October 1991 Professor Robert Schoch, a geologist from Boston University, demonstrated that the Sphinx was sculpted between 5000 BC and 7000 BC, dates that he considered conservative."
Do you think it possible ,that this kind of construction could have been carried out without a system of writing?Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 18
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Thursday, 21st August 2008
Forgive the interruption a this whas not addressed to me, but I don't quite understand what you mean.
Sculpture does not need any written word - and I did do it as a main subject for 18 months. Drawing, yes - much drawing and clay modelling. And as for the big jobs - say the UNESCO reclining figure, Henry Moore did not appear to write stuff down - and I visited his studio at the time of its orginal trial figure. A broad vocabulary was useful for when - say for instance you carved a bit more away than you intended - and better not written.
I've no idea how the sphinx was constructed -at an immediate guess and doubtless wrong, it was from an assembly of blocks. So what exactly do you mean - or am I being extra thick?
Regards, P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 19
Posted by King Atur-tii (U7470590) on Thursday, 21st August 2008
Priscilla, the good thing about mathematics is that it's black and white, clear to see. There is no evidence more absolute than mathematics and is the one thing that never becomes distorted over the centuries.
You will find that there is only 0.25 days extra due to the day being slightly more than 24hrs. The earth turns 360 degrees on its axis in 24 hours, the extra time is because the Earth needs to turn slightly more for the sun to be facing the same side of the Earth again as the Earth has moved slightly round the sun in it's orbit.
And so the Egyptians are right, as it's the number of revolutions in relation to space that it is based on, and not the sun.
If you think this is the limit of the knowledge of the Egyptians, mathematics or otherwise, you are misguided. I could amaze you with the mathematics the Egyptians knew, most of it being on par with our knowledge today, and even slighly ahead of us with regards to celestial mechanics.
This is very much the tip of the iceberg, however I'm sure you will know this.
If you think all this is all coincidence, then blind you are.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 20
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Thursday, 21st August 2008
Maths is absolute, human application and physical variables in time are less precise. Sadly I do not have the ref books with here on this fascinating subject - as observed and recorded by ancient scholars. Doubtless the Egyptians made full use of their observations as did many others in various ways.
An interesting thought, however - the ancients spent more time outside and with little else to do, obersvation of the heavens in the darkened night is a revelation. I have experienced that for long periods in a desert sky at night - when it was clear enough to see many satellites pass over head. Early applied deduction and observation is understandable. linking it all with religious belief was inevitable. We might be in awe of what the ancients learned but we ought to be more in awe of the mind bending work of modern mathematicians and physists.
accomplishing.
It place me mathematically at about 5000BC.
I am not in contention with you, just fascinated by the notions - but not bowled over by them.
Regards, P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 21
Posted by King Atur-tii (U7470590) on Friday, 22nd August 2008
Ask any engineer or architect you know to study the pyramids, and they will come back and tell you they are amazed. The great pyramid is still the most accurate and massive building built today.
The solid granite coffer inside the "king's chamber" could only be created with several tonnes of pressure on a diamond drill.
Also, Giza is actually situated exactly at the centre of the worlds distribution of landmass.
Also, if you enlarge the great pyramid so the one side of the base is equal to diameter of the Earth, then the height becomes equal to the radius of the Earth combined with the radius of the moon.
However this is only accurate when using an average of the polar and equatorial radii demonstraing a shockingly brilliant knowledge and understanding of the Earth and moon which you just simply cannot attain from astronomy alone in one location.
Just as a final little note; I recently found that when you divide the polar radius of the Earth (6356.8KM) by the moon's radius (1737.4KM) you get 3.65...
Someone is playing games with us!Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 22
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Sunday, 24th August 2008
Re: Message 10.
Priscilla,
Regards, Paul.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 23
Posted by Nik (U1777139) on Friday, 29th August 2008
It is more or less known that we know practically nothing about Byzantines. From the bits and parts we know and understand about them and from the fact that Renaissance was provoqued by the few fragments that westerners managed to grasp (mainly a will to develop rather than texts and knowledge) we can say easily that this was no stationary Empire. If anything it was progressing much more fast every 100 years than the pace at which Rome progressed (or regressed) in 500 years. It was also one of the very few civilisations that managed to habitate continuously at enormous numbers the very same city for some 1000 years without major problems, only that shows their capacity (for those that cannot grasp that well what else can I say...).
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 24
Posted by Scaramunga (U4485565) on Wednesday, 3rd September 2008
Egyptian hieroglyphs appeared not long after Sumerian.Ìý
With regard to the emergence of Egyptian writing, does anyone know how well developed the earliest examples proto-hieroglyphs are?
If for example the writing found at tomb U-J is relatively sophisticated, wouldn't this indicate that ancient Egyptian writing is older than archaeologists currently acknowledge?
I would have thought that it would have taken some time for a writing system to evolve from basic logo-graphic markings into something approaching the sophistication of hieroglyphs.
Any thoughts?Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 25
Posted by graeziey (U13374945) on Friday, 19th September 2008
For me ROME! Because until now it is the most popular country who has a rich vast history. Also, their monuments and artifacts are so antique that are until now are known to the world!
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 26
Posted by graeziey (U13374945) on Friday, 19th September 2008
For me ROME! Because until now it is the most popular country who has a rich vast history. Also, their monuments and artifacts are so antique that are until now are known to the world!
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 27
Posted by villamarce (U9034231) on Wednesday, 24th September 2008
Hi Priscilla
Im not insuating anything about your argument. Its just that I believe that the Great Sphinx ( and for that matter, the pyramids)were civic projects. The fact that they were civic projects makes me wonder if that implies a certain likelihood of having a system of writing?Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 28
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Wednesday, 24th September 2008
Possibly yo are right. On the other hand there are ways of doing things without the tools we depend on.
Simple case in point. My beach hut was blown away - I also live in a distant place. It was thatched shack built in the time honoured way about a hunk of tree in a vertical cross bar. Quite clever, actually.
Then the local villagers decided to rebuild it for us. The discussion about it was under a fishermen's shelter as they repaired nets and their women sent he best tea of all time fragrant with spices flavours you'd not know.
I said what I wanted. They said how it could be done - the best angle for it, the load bearing stuff, plinth etc was all decided by matks in the sand - and foot prints. All very basic. I had the materials sent. It was done in three days - exactly as we planned; nothing on paper and the entire village understanding what was to be done. It then became a prototype for others because this was a new idea that we developed that sunset.
People do this the world over. You need to clear your head of what we need to achieve a result and try to work out how else it could be done by people who are just as smart as we are but a darn sight more practical. And I ought say the payment was likewise worked out and fairly so.
I have a complicated life but I handle it in a simple way and it seems to work very well.
Regards, P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 29
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Wednesday, 24th September 2008
Quite agree Priscilla.
People have been constructing for millenia without the benefit of a written language. I've seen many, quite amazing, examples of ingenuity and practicality in constructions here in Greece also without the benefit of written plans. Anything from fences, sheds and wells to houses.
Slightly different tack, my mother-in-law was illiterate and quite frankly she could put any person, no matter how well educated, to shame. Every single thing was stored in her head rather than on paper, from cooking, clothesmaking, knitting, crochet, spinning, weaving, natural dying, knowledge of plants & medicinal remedies etc. She could visualise what she wanted to make and without the aid of a recipe, pattern, plan or one written word proceed in its construction. The end result was inevitably perfect and always improvised to fit any area or person.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 30
Posted by PaulRyckier (U1753522) on Wednesday, 24th September 2008
Re: message 29 and 28.
Therese and Priscilla,
thank you very much for your interesting posts. I learned a lot from them.
Warm regards to both,
Paul.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 31
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Thursday, 25th September 2008
Thanks for the back up, ID.
Many people seem to think that because they cannot function/design without detailed instructions then and 'outside' intelligence must be at work.
As I told my daughter when she got her first degree and thought the bottom rung of anywhere too lowly a place to start work. 'One degree means you have 359 more to learn by yourself.'
So she got some more in different disciplines - until the penny dropped.
I should have said that the hut has 4 rooms, a sunken drain pit for a kitchen and bathroom - and a gale proof verandah roof that is of an odd rope tie - which has so far worked. It is angled so that I get the best of the sun in winter and shade in summer - masterly. In a few thousand years someone may deduce from the surrounds that we sacrificed chicken legs there.
P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 32
Posted by villamarce (U9034231) on Friday, 3rd October 2008
I appreciate what you are saying but with all due respect your temporary shelter construction is hardly comparable with building something on the scale of the pyramids is it? This is particularly the case when you consider the mathematics and astronomy involved in building with such precision.
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 33
Posted by priscilla (U1793779) on Sunday, 5th October 2008
Thank you for the polite tenor of your reply, VN.
Of course my hut will not stand the test - mark you it replaced a wood and straw one put up by the villagers for the RAF in 1926 that only came down because I negelcted my drive on termites.
Back to the pyramids.
What I was trying to say ws tha it is easy to underestimate hat other people can do who know nothing of the sophistications to which we priviledged and experienced.
There are countless ancientstone edifaces world wide that were also made by craftsmen.
A craftsmen is someone who knows when the metal is hot enough, the meat roast, the ell deep enough , the bridge sound, the right day to plough, where and whn to drop the nets and so on. Perhaps you have never met any - I have scores -especially by the sea. And being born by a tidal place, I can tell when it is high tide even when I am 80 miles inland. You just know -sometimes you sense it in he air. I can't define it.
Now about large pyramids -how would you set about t with out pecil and opaer and a calculator
I would make a model in mud bricks - and fiddle about until I got it right and according to the master's wishes. Once you ave a model - and the labour, get your stons and build o it. Siteing something in relation to signs in the the heavans is not hard in desert regions.
Not if you have lived out countless nights under a black desert sky and watched the rising and setting of the stars and planets in their due season. No sound, no distant lights to dull the sky, soon you learn where - and when to watch for what. I still do it in UK on winter's nights because I know the sky.
And measurement? Cubits - now there's thing - degrees were also called cubits because angles were measured against marked uprights for their constants.
Is it because they are of stone that you think it neede maths skill? Then wonder on the great sculptors who manage to carve out things of great beauty that stand - and no paper and pencil or computer graphics in sight. I still marvel at that. Try carving a block of soap and see for yourself. Great ancient lego heaps are impressive but possible with far less sophistication than perhaps you think necessary. Intelligence ingenuity and shrewd observation are no new thing.
Craftsmanship however, that is what I fear we are losing. Perhaps I am wrong. Just my thoughts.
Regards P.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 34
This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the in some way.
-
Message 35
Posted by villamarce (U9034231) on Thursday, 30th October 2008
I think if you were to read up about the processes of making the Great Pyramid in particular its astonishing mathematical accuracy and scale you would see that actually it is a scientific phenomena that modern constructors with current technology have been utterly unable to replicate. It really is not a pile of bricks,or even something so relatively simple as a Cathedral building. so my whole argument in the first place was that i suspect that some form of written administration would probably be necessary to achieve such results.
Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 36
Posted by an ex-nordmann - it has ceased to exist (U3472955) on Thursday, 30th October 2008
I think if you were to read up about the processes of making the Great Pyramid in particular its astonishing mathematical accuracy and scale you would see that actually it is a scientific phenomena that modern constructors with current technology have been utterly unable to replicate.
Ìý
This is taking rather a liberty with the truth. The mechanics involved in constructing the pyramids are understood, and in the absence of assembling as dedicated and sizeable a workforce prepared to operate under the same circumstances as their ancestors, no modern constructor has even contemplated trying to reproduce the task, let alone replicate it.
This in no way detracts from the tremendous engineering achievement which the pyramids undoubtedly are, but to employ hyperbole of the sort you just did is an insult to the intelligence, vision and sheer hard labour which people made available and used in order to construct such impressive monuments which amaze even modern eyes.
I would add also that pyramid construction developed over a long period and that this evolution of technique and design is highly visible today. Ironically, the "great" pyramids which many today marvel at and ascribe to the intervention of aliens etc were considered in contemporary times rather inferior to later refinements which saw the introduction of more plastic and more economic building materials. Unfortunately they were also, in the long term, less durable - giving the false impression today at a casual glance of a deterioration in building technique and architectural innovation.
Which is not to say that there weren't glitches along the way. Sneferu's two aborted attempts before finally achieving a success with the Red Pyramid at Dashur show a possible failure on the part of his builders to appreciate the true properties of their construction material, which in turn might suggest - given that they were obviously on a steep learning curve - that Khufu's pyramid, next to be built, benefited enormously from such an intensive period of trial and error construction. No magic, no extraterrestrial help, no Atlanteans on hand to advise - just good workmanship honed through years of doing the job.Link to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
-
Message 37
Posted by Stoggler (U1647829) on Thursday, 30th October 2008
The solid granite coffer inside the "king's chamber" could only be created with several tonnes of pressure on a diamond drill.
Ìý
I doubt that very much
Also, Giza is actually situated exactly at the centre of the worlds distribution of landmass.
Ìý
How do you define the centre of the world's distribution of landmasses? Based on what? Plus, the landmass of today differs to the landmass of 5,000BP or 10,000BP (or however many of years ago you want) - it's not constant. When are you talking about?
Just as a final little note; I recently found that when you divide the polar radius of the Earth (6356.8KM) by the moon's radius (1737.4KM) you get 3.65...
Someone is playing games with us!
Ìý
What's your point? Funny that when I do the calculation I get 3.65943...
Assuming that you're equating 3.65 with 365 days of the year, the calcualtion of 3.65943 (or your 3.6588) does not equate to the length of the year, which is about 365.24 days (and is not a constant but changes from year to year - hence the leap second)
And all that is of course if the Egyptians used a decimal number system (I don't know if they did or not).
I do hear some outlandish claims made of the pyramids, most of which are completely poppycockLink to this forum: Which ancient civilizations were truly innovative?
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Ö÷²¥´óÐã iD
Ö÷²¥´óÐã navigation
Ö÷²¥´óÐã links
Ö÷²¥´óÐã © 2014 The Ö÷²¥´óÐã is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.