Welcome to History for Granite. Join me to explore ancient Egypt. Please subscribe,
and together we’ll uncover secrets from the past, written in stone.
The Old Kingdom pyramids of Egypt are one of the strangest topics to research in the modern day.
On one hand there is a great wealth of physical data that can be observed and collected. On the
other hand, the scientific documentation is wildly inconsistent and incomplete.
If you’re wondering why some of the oldest and most famous man-made structures remain difficult
to scrutinize, I don’t have a good answer for you. It’s a question I ask myself every single day.
That’s not to say that good work hasn’t been done. Flinders Petrie’s documentation in the
late 19th century is of the highest standard and essential for many types of research.
But we are in the 21st century now, and technology has advanced far beyond the steel
tape Petrie used to record much of his data. Pyramid measurements are useful, but there is
so much more we need to see. Evidence remains hidden in the dark. It may have faded to the
naked eye but there are clues on the stones that science might reveal to bring new insights.
In this video, we’re going to discuss some recent surveys of the pyramids and confront
the problems with them. I’m also going to show you a never-before-seen clue in the Grand Gallery
proving the ancient past is within reach if there is the will to go looking for it.
When reading accounts of explorers at the pyramids centuries ago, you really develop a respect for
how difficult the work was to carry-out. These men were risking their lives to study them,
and enduring the harsh desert with no safety net should something go wrong.
While a few of these early explorers were hunting for fame & fortune, the best documentation comes
from men who expected no great reward for their painstaking efforts. It was scientific curiosity
that drove these men, for it was obvious treasures were long gone, and knowledge of
the past was all that could be acquired. But the pyramids are huge, and the ravages of
time obscure many details that could easily go unnoticed.
Howard Vyse observes this in 1837, writing quote:
“Few travelers have had either leisure or opportunity to examine them minutely, for the
hostility of the Arabs appears to have been always formidable, and considerable labor and time were
necessary to obtain any satisfactory results. End Quote.
Vyse was a rare example a researcher with ample resources, but most
others needed to constantly improvise. Astronomer Charles Piazzi Smyth even designed
and built his own camera for taking some of the earliest photographs of the pyramids in 1865.
Photographs from him and others in the late 19th and early 20th century are of immense importance,
because of the subsequent damage that has occurred since they were taken.
The pyramids are pitch black inside, and thus photographing their interiors was
even more of a challenge with early film photography. Notably, the only surviving
images from a century ago are from independent explorers and not institutional Egyptology.
Photographs are ideal because they reveal details people may have overlooked in their day. But the
precious photos are few and far between, and thus written documentation remains the primary resource
for research before the mid 20th century. There is however, a long and unfortunate history
of researchers in Egyptology never formally publishing their findings. Whether
its procrastination, unexpected death or simply lacking an incentive to publish – it’s a tradition
that goes back centuries. Flinders Petrie understood the
great cost of this habit, writing quote: “It is a golden principle to let each year
see the publication of the year’s work, in any research: but the writer places himself thus at
the disadvantage of showing how his information may have been defective, or his views requiring
change, as year after year goes on. Such a course, however, is the honest and the most useful,
as half a loaf is better than no bread.” End quote.
Egyptologist Margaret Drower elaborates on this point, writing quote:
“Too many excavators sit for years on their material, hoping to cross
every T and elucidate every puzzle before they commit themselves to print, while their memory
of their fieldwork fades, costs of production rise, and the world waits for the information
only they can provide.” End quote.
Sometimes this failure to publish means the information is lost forever. This
happened at Djedefre’s pyramid, which may never truly understand because of it.
However, before the 21st century if work was written down and never published it could
sometimes be recovered at later time. Nathaniel Davison was the first person to scientifically
record the height of each course on the Great Pyramid in 1765, and even drew a diagram of the
summit which has changed in the past centuries. Davison never published any of his research,
but his diaries still exist and thus I can show his diagram of the summit. This drawing has never
been reproduced in any Egyptology publication. That’s the great advantage of data recorded in
ink and film, it can survive even if its creators do not distribute it. And that’s
really all the old documentation is, stacks of paper bound into books and diaries made
available at a reasonable price. The modern data is different.
It’s private. And it’s made of electronic information stored in proprietary formats
in computers. There’s no reason to believe this data will survive even a few decades
if it’s not widely distributed. Let alone a few centuries such as Davison’s journals buried in
the special collections at Stanford University. I am speaking in particular of the data collected
by laser scanning, drone photogrammetry and other similar technologies. So why is
this data being collected if it’s not being made available for scientific research?
The reason is that the companies with the access and funding to carry-out such studies aren’t doing
it as a scientific endeavor. Their purpose is to profit from selling TV-documentaries,
social media advertising campaigns, and other related business ventures.
In 2019 there was a six-part cable TV documentary series called Pyramids: Solving
the Mystery. In this series, drone photogrammetry is constantly hailed as the ultimate breakthrough
for studying the monuments. If you’re wondering why that is,
I’ll let Egyptologist Mark Lehner explain in this quote from the show.
Quote: “I would encourage all of you, do not wait,
got out today, and buy the photogrammetry.” End Quote.
Subtle, isn’t it? For all the flack YouTube gets, at least creators here
must disclose when the words they speak are bought and paid for. Traditional media
has no such ethical constraints. Back to Mark Lehner’s sales-pitch,
I personally am an outlier in that there’s nothing I’d rather do than to ‘go out today
and buy the photogrammetry’. But I can’t do this, because it’s
not for sale. And it never was. The business strategy of selling
photogrammetry was abandoned by the producers, probably because there is no market for such a
product. It’s the same reason that people wait in long lines to see the Mona Lisa in person,
yet nobody hangs perfectly affordable reproduction in their home.
The only people interested in such data are researchers like me, but we can never gain
access if it’s left to rot on private servers. And let’s be very clear, the data will quickly become
useless and forgotten as technology evolves beyond the systems used to process and store it.
Ironically the sales pitch from these companies capturing the imagery is that they are preserving
the past. Anyone with a basic understanding of digital history knows that computer data ages
quicky, costs money to maintain, and is likely to disappear forever if it’s not widely distributed.
In other words, the message of preservation is either naïve or simply marketing.
I’m sure producers of related TV shows would argue that the show itself is the documentation,
and that the experts who evaluated the data at the time give the relevant analysis.
But that’s simply not how proper research is done. A few paid-for experts giving
their opinions at one moment in time is nearly worthless. If the data can’t be
independently evaluated in the future, then it’s not even approaching the scientific method.
Here's an example of how unreliable the results are from these TV-show produced studies.
Two documentaries made only five years apart used high-tech scanning equipment to measure parameters
of the Bent Pyramid. Both studies were interested in determining if the Bent Pyramid’s unique shape
was the result of construction problems or if it was instead an intentional design.
Here is the conclusion reached by the show using photogrammetry analysis, quote:
“Facing the risk of collapse due to deep cracks,
the builders decide to be practical. They take an unusual and important decision. Despite
their idea of building a triangular pyramid, they change their plains.”
End Quote. Now compare this to the conclusion
reached by the show using laser scanning: “The laser scan data has convinced Steve that
the top of the Bent Pyramid, so long thought to be a hasty rescue mission is actually a
deliberate feature.” The exact opposite conclusion is reached by
different experts using different technologies. So, who are we to believe? The answer of course,
is neither. Without the ability to look at the data, there is no
reason to assume either production is accurate in its assessments.
This is frustrating, because all the effort to capture this data is wasted.
Consequently, the TV-show science on the pyramids isn’t science at all, it’s merely entertainment.
It’s easy to laugh at shows like Ancient Aliens for being fantastical speculations,
but shows with real Egyptologists will make ridiculous assertions as well.
Here is Egyptologist Meredith Brand commenting on the Red Pyramid.
“Looking around, all of the stones are the same color and they look really similar.
Except for over here on this wall there’s a stone that’s darker than the stones around it. Could
there be another chamber behind it? I wonder if Sneferu’s mummy is still in the Red Pyramid”.
‘Ancient astronaut theorists say yes!’... err sorry wrong show.
I have no problem with entertainment or even speculations with mediocre evidence
to support them. But these productions claim to be preserving cultural heritage,
which is simply not true. If nothing is shared than nothing is preserved, and these productions
are just a fancier version of the street vendors you find lurking about ancient Egyptian sites.
There is also a huge opportunity cost with for-profit infotainment organizations conducting
archaeological research. In recent years the World Scan Project was granted access to document the
well-shaft of the Great Pyramid, a feature of the monument which has never been properly recorded.
They made it clear to me via email that they have no intention of publishing their data. When a
different organization later requested access to the well-shaft, Egypt’s Ministry denied them on
the basis that the World Scan Project had recently gone inside. The situation is truly ridiculous.
I should contrast this bad behavior with the work done at real academic organizations,
most notably Harvard University under the direction of Peter Der Manuelian. His Egyptology
department made a huge effort to publish many documents and photos on their website, and I
encourage you to visit it. There’s also a related virtual 3d tour inside the Great Pyramid put
together by educators and viewable for free. Manuelien has even made hundreds of 3d Egyptian
artifact scans available on his personal Sketchfab account. He does this because that’s what real
researchers do. They publish as much as they can and make it as widely accessible as possible.
I can’t for the life of me imagine Flinders Petrie saying, “No you can’t see the data”.
Yet that is the response given by these people claiming noble
motives for their high-tech research. In my videos I always try to go above and
beyond to show the visual evidence directly. It's a huge effort to hunt down rare images so
everyone can see for themselves what is real and what is speculation.
On this channel I have tried to push the research of pyramids forward,
but there is so much more that can be done. Counterintuitively, some of the best evidence
in the pyramids is rapidly disappearing in the modern day. Every year that goes
by without scientific study reduces the chances of answering mysteries that may be solvable.
There is one mystery that is often on my mind, and I know everyone will concur about its importance.
The Grand Gallery of the Great Pyramid. A true masterpiece of the Old Kingdom,
one of the most iconic constructions in all of ancient Egypt.
The grandiose design was made to impress anyone passing through,
but what else might have been its function? It’s full of slots, grooves, and niches,
in addition to scratching and staining patterns that indicate repetitive movement.
Something very interesting was going on in the Grand Gallery, but what might that be?
Many interpretations have been conjured, but all these ideas suffer from a lack
of data. There isn’t even a source for the layout of stones in the Grand Gallery.
In 1990 Zahi Hawass republished Petrie’s book “The Pyramids and Temples of Giza”. In this version
Hawass wrote an addendum describing the work done at that time on the Grand Gallery. It says that
the condition of all the blocks was recorded with drawings and photographs, but 34 years
later these documents have not been published. There’s lots of speculation one can make about
the Grand Gallery, but without documentation that’s all we are left with – speculation.
Unable to examine the stones as they exist, we are left with a facsimile, a model, a loose and
generic representation of reality. This is the imaginary version of the pyramid I grew up with
as a child. There were paintings, drawings and descriptions of the Grand Gallery but not the real
thing. The real Grand Gallery was still hiding in the dark, its secrets lost to the naked eye.
In the summer of 1909, John and Morton Edgar took some of the earliest photographs inside the Great
Pyramid. Some of these images preserved a clue about what the Grand Gallery was used for.
Several pictures were taken at the entrance to the passage leading to the Queen’s Chamber at
the gallery floor. In each of these images, red ochre references lines
can be seen on the lintel above the passage. The two most prominent lines are easily spotted on
the western side, running straight and vertical. These marks are found in other pyramids as well,
and though they have survived four and half thousand years, modern tourism is
causing them to rapidly disappear. The single cartouche of pharaoh Sneferu
in the Bent Pyramid looked to have completely faded in a modern-day photograph,
and it was only uncovered 70 years ago. But upon a closer first-hand inspection, the
cartouche can still be detected if one carefully examines the block where it was inscribed.
Thanks to Anyextee for sharing this clip, a great example of independent research.
This magical effect of seeing the past reemerge is what I want for all the pyramids,
and I will now prove that this type of closer inspection is warranted.
The Edgar brothers’ photos are often found in poor quality, because only the first edition
of their 1910 book was printed from the original plates. Unsatisfied with copies available online,
I purchased an original edition of their book and scanned every image myself at the highest
quality that could be accomplished. This was a big leap in quality, but still I wanted more.
Amazingly, Morton Edgar sold original film transparencies of his photographs, which
he called ‘Lantern Slides’ and a friend of the channel helped me obtain scans of some of those.
They have a higher dynamic range and resolution than can be found in the printed book.
It was in these Lantern Slides at the bottom of the Grand Gallery that
I could finally confirm a suspicion about what might have been occurring inside the space.
The pair of red ochre lines on the western side of the lintel are clear as day,
but another pair closer to the center of the block can now be detected.
We have a pattern, and it’s a pattern that is found in
only one place within the Great Pyramid. A palm’s width between a set of parallel lines,
and 2 palms between each pair. ¬This is very close to the arrangement of
rope holes and grooves found in the portcullis antechamber at the top of the Grand Gallery.
The lintel here is 15 centimeters narrower than the portcullis lintel and thus the
dimensions are slightly squeezed, but it’s a very close match.
Now we are faced with a fascinating question. Why would the builders of the Great Pyramid
need reference lines for ropes similar to the portcullis at the bottom of the Grand Gallery?
There are many intriguing possibilities, and one idea is that the ropes from the portcullis
were attached to a mechanism in the Grand Gallery that would more easily facilitate
its opening and closing. In my video on the portcullis,
I estimated 30 men could create the force necessary to pull it open in the Grand Gallery,
but perhaps a more efficient solution was devised. There was a lot of repetitive motion in the floor
of the Grand Gallery, and the portcullis gives us a strong reason for such an occurrence.
But what really happened in the Grand Gallery I can’t solve for you. Not yet. Not without real
data, real science, and real publications. And with every year that goes by, more clues
are lost to the ravages of time. First they slip out of sight to the naked eye, and eventually
beyond the reach of high tech investigations. I get a lot of comments that we can never really
know what happened at the pyramids because so much time as passed. But I don’t believe
that to be true. Even these fragile ochre markings survived until the 20th century,
and perhaps forensic imagining can see them where our own eyes cannot. They are but one
example of the rapidly disappearing evidence in the pyramids that needs to be documented.
And let’s be very clear on this point. Many people and organizations that have gathered
data do not publish it out of self-interest and our history suffers for it. We are left
with not the pyramid as it once existed, but a vague facsimile in which the truth
of the past can no longer be detected. While many great ideas on the pyramids
can be put forth, the only satisfying part is when the physical evidence can be seen. That’s
the only way to know if you’re getting closer to the truth. Even the smallest detail can have big
consequences. A thin line of plaster, an anomalous cut in a stone, and even
ochre reference lines long forgotten can reshape our understanding of the past.
It's time for Egyptology to start taking the pyramids seriously again, and to follow
Petrie’s advice and quickly publish the data so that at least we have something, rather
than as he says, ‘no loaf of bread at all’. Thanks to everyone who watched this video to
the end. Please subscribe to the channel to see more of this content. Give a like or comment as
you see fit, and above all, remember to ask your friends if they take their History for Granite.