Cheops

There has been an increasing need to explain the geometric representation of the Pyramid of Cheops in Egypt. Some divergent approaches have been attempted, which need further exploration. The aim of this research paper is to unfold the mysteries behind one of the most notable notions of our universe, as it lies hidden in the dark configuration of space, the void. The space which incubates patterns depicted in the form of a pyramid can also nurse buried void. The approach used in this investigation is based on mathematical illustrations, which led to conclude that void versus matter is a constant strain for balance, and has been ever since the first formation of the apex of a pyramid. The main findings of this paper are that the manifest states, as shown in the schematic diagrams depicting the shape of the pyramid of Cheops, are in the form of balance between void and matter. The key conclusion is that there is a link between the graphical representation of the distributed building blocks in any horizontal layer of the pyramid of Cheops, and the general depiction of its form and angle derived from a geometric balance in the arrangement of its building blocks.

C'est une nouvelle théorie originale (non farfelue). Cette partie décrit le début de la construction de la pyramide de Chéops jusqu'à la construction du couloir ascendant. Je pense apporter une "pierre" pour comprendre la philosophie de l'architecte et la résolution de plusieurs énigmes. Mon but est de mettre en évidence les traces qu'on laisser les  égyptiens, (non exploitées jusqu'alors) et de donner une explication plausible. J'espère que cela ouvrira de nouvelles perspectives.

C'est une nouvelle théorie originale (non farfelue). Cette partie décrit la construction du couloir ascendant. Elle analyse, les éléments troublants laissés par les égyptiens à l'intersection entre le couloir ascendant et la syringe. Puis montre le nouveau plan de l'architecte.
Je pense apporter une "pierre" pour comprendre la philosophie de l'architecte et la résolution de plusieurs énigmes. Mon but est de mettre en évidence les traces qu'on laisser les  égyptiens, et de donner une explication plausible. J'espère que cela ouvrira de nouvelles perspectives.

This is a new original theory (not far-fetched). This part describes the construction of the ascending corridor. It analyzes the disturbing elements left by the Egyptians at the intersection between the ascending corridor and the descending passage. Then show the architect's new plan. I think I bring a "stone" to understand the philosophy of the architect and the resolution of several puzzles. My goal is to highlight the traces left by the Egyptians, and to give a plausible explanation. I hope this will open up new perspectives.

The lack of information about such grandiose structures of antiquity as the pyramids of Egypt and, in particular, about the largest of them - the Great Pyramid, sometimes called the Pyramid of Cheops (Khufu), confuses historians and pyramid researchers. The Sumerian civilization is the latest discovery of historical science. Its language and its cuneiform characters are still not fully understood. Perhaps the clay cuneiform tablets contain secrets of the Great Pyramid that have yet to be discovered.

This is a new original theory (not far-fetched). This part describes the beginning of the construction of the pyramid of Khufu until the construction of the ascending passage. I think I bring a "stone" to understand the philosophy of the architect and the resolution of several enigmas. My goal is to highlight the traces left by the Egyptians, (not exploited until then) and to give a plausible explanation. I hope this will open up new perspectives.

This is a new original theory (not far-fetched). This part describes the beginning of the construction of the pyramid of Khufu until the construction of the ascending passage. I think I bring a "stone" to understand the philosophy of the architect and the resolution of several enigmas. My goal is to highlight the traces left by the Egyptians, (not exploited until then) and to give a plausible explanation. I hope this will open up new perspectives.

The Herodotean account about Mycerinus has been pieced together from legendary materials of Egyptian provenance. These must have reached Herodotus’ ears through the various informants who provided him with knowledge about Egyptian history and lore. The manner in which these narrative materials have been organized and set out within Herodotus’ second book is exceedingly artful and sophisticated. The entire section concerning Mycerinus is teeming with suggestive parallelisms, pregnant juxtapositions or contrasts of motifs, poignant symmetries, and dramatic ironies, which point to a deeper layer of narrative meaning under the superficial sequence of incidents. In this skilful narrative texture the expert hand of Herodotus, the master storyteller, can be recognized.

One of the qualities which make Herodotus a great narrator (arguably the first ingenious “short story writer” in the western tradition) is precisely the richness of substrata which underlie his tales, the multiplicity of ever deeper levels or recesses which lurk under the superficially plain exposition of events and invite the reader to discover them. This kind of effect characterizes not only Herodotus’ major and famous novellas (Gyges and Candaules, Periander and his son, Xerxes and the wife of Masistes) but the total of his narrative art; it may be detected even in the seemingly simple, paratactic successions of episodes and anecdotes, such as those that make up the biography of Mycerinus. There is always the feeling that behind or under the story ostensibly told a wealth of further stories is hidden — many other possible combinations of the events, unspoken motivations, implicit explanations of the happenings, or imaginable interpretations of the characters’ destinies, which resound as though from the inner side of the text. For this purpose, Herodotus the narrator employs a number of artifices which allow readers (or listeners) a glimpse into the mines of alternative or complementary tales beneath the visible aspect of the story. Such artifices include, for example, enigmatic happenings and paradoxes, which are often coupled with not fully explicable articulations of causes and effects; also, the breaks in narrative linearity and the creation of polyphony through the insertion of variant versions; and finally, the implicit analogies to mythical or otherwise well-known traditions, which create a kind of deeper register or counterpoint to the actual telling of the story.

A fundamental theme unifies the two halves of Mycerinus’ Herodotean bios: namely, time and its manipulation or distortion. Mycerinus’ eros for his own daughter brings about virtually a reversion of human time. Incest inverts indeed the normal direction of time, as the Greeks were well aware through the story of Oedipus; in Oedipus’ myth, the incestuous son becomes the husband of his mother, and the father is made the brother of his own children, as though time were running in reverse.  Mycerinus’ illicit sex with his child has the same effect; it turns the parent into husband of his own daughter. The pharaoh’s weird treatment of the maiden’s corpse produces an analogous effect. Mycerinus refuses to give up his dead child to the grave; he keeps her body in a chamber of his palace, among the living, and has it regularly carried around in the city, under the sunlight, as though the deceased person were still alive. This arrangement is again tantamount to a simulated regression of time; the dead girl continues to be lodged in the same house in which she passed her life, and to go about in the city where she spent her earthly existence, as though she could be snatched back from death and restored to her previous living conditions. Mycerinus’ actions make time move backwards. The same will for time manipulation is displayed in the sequel of the pharaoh’s adventures, after the announcement of the fatal oracle. Mycerinus once again seeks a reversion of the normal flow of the day by transforming the nights into mornings. He also strives to extend and multiply his years in an artificial manner — another attempt to alter the dimensions of time.  The control of time, however, is a prerogative of the gods, not a human capacity. Zeus, in myth, may triple the duration of a night, so as to enjoy more amply the favours of Alcmene; or he may grant a mortal, such as Teiresias, an extraordinarily long existence which spans many human lifetimes.  Mycerinus’ usurpation of this exclusively divine privilege is therefore a transgression. The fate dealt by the gods to this transgressive pharaoh, notwithstanding its explicit justification, looks very much like retaliation in kind for the specific nature of the pharaoh’s misdeeds. Faced with a man who twists and distorts time, the divinity cuts this man’s time short.

Ultimately, the entire narrative about the pharaohs of the pyramids reflects Herodotus’ programmatic observations about Egyptian life and customs, which are set out early in the second book. The Greek historian viewed Egypt as a kind of mundus inversus, a reversed image of the normal Hellenic society: a land where all customs and practices were the exact opposite of the corresponding ones in the other nations, and everything ran contrary to what his fellow-Greeks would have deemed as canonical and standard. The same pattern of thought is consistently applied in the stories of the three pyramid-building monarchs. Every plot motif and narrative situation in the biographies of these kings displays an inversion of the normal and expected order of things. Every polarity is turned on its own axis, as its diametrically opposed constituents exchange their places. The royal maiden is degraded into a prostitute; conversely, the prostitute acquires a memorial of royal status. The nights are turned into days. Time in general flows backwards; the father becomes his daughter’s consort. The dead corpse is kept among the living, staying in the palace and carried around in the city streets. Even the metaphysics of divine will is affected. The impious and oppressive monarchs are rewarded with prosperity and long life, while the lenient and benign king is reprimanded and has his time cut short.The pyramids were (as they still are) the emblematic monuments of Egypt, the symbols par excellence of Egyptian civilization.  Probably for this reason Herodotus wove into his discourse about the pyramid-builders his programmatic thesis regarding the idiosyncrasy of the Egyptian world as a mundus inversus. The story of the most characteristic memorials of that world should exemplify by itself what Herodotus perceived as the peculiar character of the land and its entire culture.

The raw materials for Herodotus’ chapters about the pharaohs of the Giza pyramids were of Egyptian provenance. But the shaping of the narrative, the selection and interweaving of the dominant themes, the creation of pregnant analogies and ironical antitheses — all these are the work of Herodotus the master storyteller. Much of Herodotus’ charm in this respect derives from his ability to invest even a seemingly simple chain of anecdotes with a rich substratum of layers upon layers of narrative meaning. The symmetries, paradoxes, and ironies of the text allow us a glimpse into a wealth of unspoken tales, alternative or parallel or complementary to the one told — tales which enrich the narrative voice with their silent resonance.

The Djoser pyramid is an open book encrypted in the laws of physics.
For whom familiar with those laws, the 12 pits 33 m deep under the base unveil the secrets of this pyramid:
- The king's dead body is still intact in the middle of the pyramid, never put
  down in the central pit granite construction.
- Floats in those pits full of water lifted the building blocks efficiently.
- The pyramid constructor made up a funerary scene in the subterranean galleries to fool the "visitors" of the future.
The deadline is full success, the king still preserved 4500 years later.
The Djoser descendants, were not dumb to the point of not using the same very efficient set of rules for their pyramids, but had to improve tools and methods to enable an explosive increase in size.
For an unknown reason this know how vanished for ever after the "Menkaure" pyramid was achieved.

ABSTRACT: This lecture provides a broader background summary of each ruler of Dynasty 4, including Sneferu (2613 - 2589 BCE), Khufu (Cheops) (2589 - 2566 BCE), Djedefre (2566 - 2558 BCE), Khafre (Chephren) (2558 - 2532 BCE), Bikka?, Menkaure  (Mycerinus) (2532 - 2504 BCE), Shepseskaf (2504 - 2500 BCE), and Queen Khentkawes I.  The lecture provides an overview on the reign lengths, various domestic construction projects, achievements, selected events, and related trends, and the evidence for international relations, during each reign; excerpts from later textual sources are provided to flesh out what later traditions, histories and folklore recalled regarding selected rulers (e.g., Palermo Stone; Turin Canon; Herodotus; Manetho), while an overview is also furnished regarding the known burial complex and associated art, architecture, and material remains for each ruler.  UPDATED: Feb. 28, 2023.

A very selective preliminary bibliography, prepared for my postgraduate seminar on Persian and Egyptian stories in the "Historiēs Apodexis" of Herodotus. The bibliography is hardly exhaustive and does not aspire to cover the entire (and vast) field of Herodotus' Persian and Egyptian logoi. It includes general works of reference on Herodotus and the East, and several specialized studies regarding the Persian and Egyptian sections of the "Historiē".

Furthermore, particular bibliographical lists are given with regard to certain individual stories about Persian or Egyptian rulers and magnates (these are the stories on which the seminar discussions and presentations focus). The Egyptian narratives that receive such particular treatment are the following: the saga of Pharaoh Sesostris (Hdt. 2.102-110); the tales of Rhampsinitus (2.121-122); the tale of Pheros (2.111); the story of Sethos (2.141); the traditions about Pharaoh Amasis  (2.172-182, 3.1-4, 3.40-43); the legend of Helen in Egypt, in the court of Proteus (2.112-120); and the traditions about the Pharaohs of the Giza Pyramids (2.124-134).

The Persian stories which become the focus of attention are the following: the birth legend of Cyrus (1.107-122); the story of the mad king Cambyses (3.1-38, 3.61-66); the conspiracy of the Magi and Darius' ascension to the throne (3.61-79, 3.86-88); the debate on political constitutions carried out by the three Persian noblemen (3.79-82); the novella of Masistes and his wife (9.107-113); the story of the doctor Democedes and queen Atossa (3.125, 3.129-137); the conquest of Babylon by Zopyrus (3.150-160); and Xerxes' council and ominous dreams before the expedition to Greece (7.8-19). Finally, a few works are collected concerning Herodotus' logoi about Babylon and India.

Что скрывают за собой образы Нефтиды, Исиды, Осириса, Нут? Предназначение, структура и функциональность Великой Пирамиды скрытые в символике и мифологических образах Древнего Египта. Связь Великой Пирамиды и мифологии Древнего Египта с событиями Неолитической революции. Шумерские повествования и Большая Галерея. Висячие Сады Вавилона - искаженное описание пирамид Гизы. Отражение событий Неолитической революции в мифах о создании мира.

A door is not a door when it is closed. It is then wall made of a different material. A door is not a door when it is open. There is a gap in the wll, the ‘door’ is redundant. So when is a door a door?

Earlier published as “The Invisible Verb” in Indian Journal of Indian Writing in English 1994

ABSTRACT: This video discusses more recent evidence from the dynasty 4 pyramid site of Djedefre at Abu Roash, arguing for its original completion in Dynasty 4 (e.g., French excavations revealed that the mortuary temple had been completed), and a much later damage to sculpture and dismantling of the pyramid in the Roman period.  It also discounts early arguments for a usurpation of the throne by Djedefre, and reveals his pious burial of his father, Khufu, via his cartouche on the underside of one of many blocks sealing one of Khufu’s boat pits.  This documentary response sheet contains a series of sequential questions drawn from the video, History Channel: The Lost Pyramid (shown in-class; also available online via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIDDDlgu5to [88 minutes]).  These sequential questions aim to maximize both student attention to various pertinent points made throughout the documentary and greater retention of the materials covered by the documentary.  In addition, the documentary has been vetted for overall content accuracy (albeit updated and/or corrected in-class), and selected to provide supplementary visual aids (e.g., images of regions, sites, finds, and other materials; re-enactments), and other data to aid in student comprehension of the course lectures and readings from the textbooks. UPDATE: March 12, 2023, minor edits.

The aim of this paper is to forecast the methodology by which Cheops Pyramid as a historic building was built, based on notions of modular patterns discovered within the following planar illustrations, starting at the apex and descending to its grand base.

Some of Cheops’ heritage in terms of form and function has existed for millennia, as its mark was recapped with a front line that was constructed thousands of years before. Such a voyage through the missing captures of the building techniques wouldn’t have occurred without the incidental outcome that resulted from overlaying the various pixelated plans of block arrangements on the floor maps of Cheops. This building is believed to exhibit norms similar to those governing the balance between matter and void in the universe.

By assessing this historical masonry structure of Giza, we have come to find some regulatory approaches concerning how to asses the construction of such a building by predicting their interiors, spatial definitions, customs, and layouts. As there are no major records of their plans, the best practice anticipated in this paper is to modularize the figurative appearance of such buildings, by imitating themes of the repetitive patterns of past regional Egyptian architecture seen as pixels. This led to the fundamental solution to such a dilemma in building construction.

ЗАДАЧИ КАМПАНИИ Работа третьего сезона раскопок, проведенная Французским институтом восточной археологии в Каире и отделом египтологии Женевского университета продолжала расчистку инфраструктуры пирамиды. Эта фаза раскопок включает значительную выемку грунта, в том числе и очистка северной грани тетраэдра. После завершения этого этапа можно будет исследовать северный район в поисках ожидаемого присутствия верхнего заупокойного храма этого комплекса. В этом году, помимо намеченных целей, проведены две расчистки фундамента, на юге и востоке, что позволит создать продольные и поперечные разрезы пирамиды. ПОВЕРХНОСТНЫЕ РАСКОПКИ ВОКРУГ ПИРАМИДЫ Северный сектор пирамиды: Были продолжены раскопки северного сектора пирамиды, которые в прошлые сезоны приводили к обильному нахождению керамики. Временной период найденной керамики ограничен, было установлено, что вся эта керамика, однородная по своей последовательности накопления, принадлежала IV династии. Пределы этой расчистки, в которых отсутствует встреча любых параллельных структур на этой площадке, кажется, что это пространство должно было представлять собой открытую эспланаду, ограниченную внутренней стеной пирамиды и погребальной дорогой, подходящей к северо-восточному двору. В западной пристройке эти раскопки также обнаружили наличие уплотненного слоя, толщиной около 30 см, из обломок сырцового кирпича, который частично перекрыл указанную свалку. Связанная с добычей камней из пирамиды, эта насыпь мог служить направляющей для эвакуации расколотых блоков. На северном фасаде северо-восточного двора, в месте подхода погребальной дороги к вратам комплекса, раскопки портала выявили конструкцию внушительных размеров из сырцового кирпича, включенную в сухую каменную стену. Вход ведет в проход шириной примерно 1,10 м, одностворчатая дверь, открываемая вокруг консьержа со стороной 3,00 м, открывает доступ через второстепенную дверь с юго-востока. Эта конструкция была восстановлена из размерных кирпичей. в модуле Древнего Царства (18 X 36 X 12 см), в то время как насыпали гравий, чтобы защитить напольные штукатурки (рис. 1 и 2).

Отсутствие информации о таких грандиозных строениях древности как пирамиды Египта и, в частности, о самой большой из них - Великой пирамиде, иногда называемой Пирамиде Хеопса (Хуфу), приводит историков и исследователей пирамид в замешательство. Шумерская цивилизация - это последнее открытие исторической науки. Ее язык и ее клинописные знаки до сих пор не до конца поняты. Возможно, глиняные клинописные таблички содержат тайны Великой Пирамиды, которые еще предстоит открыть.