Is the Red Pyramid Really a Tomb?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 вер 2024
- The mysterious Red Pyramid of Snufru begs the question, why did Snefru build multiple pyramids? And what happened to the floor of the upper section? This pyramid could only really be explored after 1991 and remains in a beautiful state of preservation, with the exception of one chamber. Let me show you some of the key features of the Red Pyramid.
Sources:
• Sunday Site Visit 19: ...
• FIRST TRUE PYRAMID, TH...
• The Red Pyramid's stra...
• NEW DISCOVERY: The Sec...
• Inside The RED PYRAMID...
www.academia.e...
isida-project....
I suppose the reason the right of the giant stone is less polished than the left is there was originally a ramp to the upper section on the right side, there is a similar line on the other side of the room in the old photo.
@HistoryforGRANITE
@AncientArchitects
@ancientsitesgirl
5:50 You are correct, Perring thought he saw more holes but they do not exist. He certainly saw the ones near the upper chamber entrance, and mistakenly thought they spanned the lower chambers. I think the black staining on the corbels plays tricks on the eyes in torch-light. The riddle to solving the Red Pyramid is to ask yourself, 'when is an antechamber not an antechamber?'
Thanks for confirming, those fuzzy black and white stripes seem hard to focus on even with modern light.
Thanks for watching, hope you don’t mind me pinging you every once in a while, you have such great videos and ideas and I assume we have the same viewer pool, so it’s not really possible to make a video on a subject you already did without addressing your thoughts. I couldn’t for the life of my figure out why they wouldn’t dig out the tunnel like you said, until I thought about how they’d actually dig through stone.
Knowing what any of the Red Pyramid is is tricky. What you said was basically one of my editing passes, I had “antechamber” a few times in the script and replaced them since I didn’t think that’s what it was.
I think what often gets missed in discussing the pyramids as tombs is that they were also monuments, maybe even primarily monuments. Since nothing remotely similar had ever been built before, the first pyramids would have been absolutely awe inspiring, and given the King enormous prestige. The Red Pyramid is definitely a mystery, as there really isn't any evidence suggesting Sneferu was entombed there, except the idea that it was built because the Bent Pyramid was structurally unsound.
I agree. These are tombs in the same way the place where Kim Jong Un is embalmed is a tomb or that of Joseph Stalin. They hold tremendous cultural significance besides merely being a grave marker as evidenced by the temple complexes and generations of cult presence.
4:40 Alternatively the blocks were cut oversize to facilitate fast & rough handling thus eliminating the need for precision alignment during construction of the chamber. Then chiseled back to provide the desired interior dimensions / aesthetic.
That’s an interesting concept. I’m not sure that works considering all the other stones seem purposefully and masterfully put in place, but that seems a likely way to do it. I think if we combine our ideas we get the right answer. They put an oversized block in place, and chiseled it down to get this shape, but not for speed, for a flex. Good catch!
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquity Agreed, the only thing we can be sure of is the Pyramids are good at keeping secrets.
4:37 these corners are there because the block were not perfectly squared to begin with, so when aligning the blocks on one side they had a protrusion on the oposite side, so they chiseled it out and what is left is what you can se.
Someone else mentioned that too. I think that’s probably the how, but not necessarily why. If they always did this, all the corners would look that way, only one stone is cut this way though.
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquity well yes, because that was the one that didn't fitt propperly. it's not if they always do this or not. this is a fix for a mistake made when cutting the stone. the mistake was probably not notised untill the stone was put in place. considering the size of the stone it was eazyer to to cut the stone in place to match the wall then to remove it and fix sides,
@@totobeni that’s a very good possibility considering there is only an inch or so on one side. If one intended to show off, you’d probably make a corner that’s even on both sides.
Great to be challenging the current theories and I agree with your thinking here apart from the lighting of fires inside an enclosed space to crack the masonry. Having visited the Red Pyramid in 2010 the oxygen levels inside are not the best and I doubt any fire would burn long enough to produce the heat required to crack the stone. Happy if to see the calculations if someone has the science to prove me wrong. Keep up the great work.
Remember even if that is true, the fact that we’re not sure if a fire would burn long enough, also means they wouldn’t be sure and they might have just tried anyway. Smoke is what covered Sibsons stone and ended up dissolving the surfaces.
Personally I think there is probably enough air to get the job done. Smoke would take hours to go away, so they probably set up a fire before they stopped each day, lit it on their way out, and let it burn while they slept.
There’s no rush to hit the rocks hot, once baked, they’re brittle. From experiments digging obelisks it only took about 15 minutes of heat for the surface of the stone to become noticeably more brittle. They weren’t trying to crack them with the fire, just make them weaker for their hammers.
Thanks for the support and great comment! Love how thoughtful my viewers are.
Fragments of a mummy were found in the debris in one of the chambers. It is not clear if this is Sneferu's mummy, but if you are going to make a video asking whether the red pyramid is a tomb, it seems like it would be a good idea to discuss the human remains found inside.
Oh geez, yeah’s that’s negligence on my part. I somehow didn’t consider it relevant to the script, but I gotta remember I have some of the best informed viewers on the platform. If I dismiss something, I need to explain why I did so.
So there were remains found somewhere in the upper section that showed signs of mummification. I believe I saw carbon dating that placed it from the new kingdom, but I’d even dismissed it before that. The bones are always said to be of someone around the age of 35 to 40, and by all accounts Snefru would have died in his 60s or 70s. I concluded confidently that it was an invasive burial and thus not relevant when researching the purpose it was designed for by Snefru.
Certainly a huge oversight, I should have made it clear why I was convinced it was invasive.
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquity I am not aware of carbon dating of the mummy. I will have to look into that. I have not read much about the remains other than Batrawi's description. Batrawi says the remains were of a man "past middle age" but "he did not live to a very advanced age." I don't know if other scientists have examined the remains and weighed in on the age of the person at death, but I don't think we can rule out Sneferu based on Batrawi's description.
I don't know how we could be confident Sneferu lived past the age of 60. We don't know how old he was when he became pharaoh, and we don't know his exact reign length, although he likely reigned for at least 25 years. If he became king as a child or teenager he could have reigned for 40 years and still died before 60.
I do not have an opinion one way or the other about whether the remains belong to Sneferu or whether Sneferu was entombed in the red pyramid.
@@OMFGimontheinternet this is certainly something I should dig further into. I plan on going to Meduim then the bent one, so we’ll get further info on Snefru in that research.
From my research, researchers seem to believe Snefru rules for either 24, 30, or 48 years. 24 seems too short considering the timeframe we know for the construction. His father seems to have also had a fairly long rule, so Snefru would have received the crown later. I will make sure to provide details in later videos with all my sources. Even if it wasn’t Snefru, my thing is mysteries and an unidentified man in a pyramid is a good one. Who is this guy?
I think you're on to something, the passage leading to the upper chamber wasn't originally there, the whole passage was dug out, so the chamber needed another way into it, There is definitely another entrance like the bent pyramid has, plus they is no portcullis blocks in the red pyramid like they is in EVERY other pyramid
That’s a possibility, though you’d have to wonder why 7 meters of stones happened to be all the same size and lines up in such a way. Dug tunnels tend to be round like the one in the bent pyramid. The lack of portcullis is another strong point that this specific pyramid may not have been meant to be a tomb. I could see another hidden chamber system like the bent one, though you’ve have to wonder how you’d get in. Maybe it’s hidden in plain sight in any of the HD drone images online?
For your consideration...No fires inside! - Very limited oxygen to keep it going and it would be impossible to beathe in there for an age afterwards! Besides, where did all the soot go? As for the hole in the floor, once the first block or two are removed, others can be then removed whole, sequentially with a lot less effort than the floor being smashed up collecitvely by brute force. Perhaps a pit or other feature in the chamber floor originally prompted an extensive dig here? If this was done by the first to gain access to the pyramid, they would be convinced it still held the goodies, somewhere inside. The dark block is just that, a dark block. There doesn't seem to be an issue with colour matching in many of the sites/ structures elsewhere in Egypt. Besides, if you want to disguise a passage, the last thing you would do is make it stand out in any way, right? "Don't lick the pyramids"..lol! Thanks Wallace, love this channel
I should have specified how I thought they may have done it. They didn’t need to keep it going, 15 minutes was enough to noticeably weaken limestone during experiments with obelisks. Smoke would probably smother the fire before oxygen, I don’t suggest people were actually in there while the fire was burning.
I suggest they’d light a fire as they were leaving for the night, let it burn out and the smoke would be clear by the time they woke up the next day. They were just trying to make the stones weaker so they could hammer quicker.
This would have certainly been a multi-day project, possibly even weeks. That’s a really really big hole.
The soot would just be absorbed and mixed with soil, sand, bat droppings, and whatever other animals dragged in over thousands of years. It was in that debris shown in Perrings diagram.
About the dark stone advertising the location: it’s unclear if the stone is truly darker, or if this is a thin patina created by 4500 years of exposure. It may have looked identical when actually put in place, but since it came from a different place, it was chemically different and aged differently.
I’m glad you like the channel, and that you know not to lick the monuments.
According to the land of chem site the pyramids are chemical processing plants and the big one is a sulfur oven and lightning preserver
Yes, I know. I work with a bunch of chemists, and I physics is necessary for computer science. There theories just don’t work. If they did, they could make a small model. They also require thousands of years of extra technology they just decide to overlook. One of my sources mentions they pumped methane into the lower chamber. Ok… where’d they get methane? How’d they store it? If they had methane storage technology, why not just burn it like we do for energy instead of these convoluted processing plants.
Secondly, no pyramids walls were ever hermetically sealed. All the pyramids leak like sieve when it rains. Some people say hydrogen, we STILL don’t have the materials to store hydrogen. We have to lock it up in other chemicals. It’d be better to do any sort of chemical storage underground rather than build a huge structure for it.
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquity it was only storing heat and energy from the lightning it was generating, also the kings chamber is a crucible of sulfur dyoxyde, go to the land of chem site to find out more
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquity a model would not work because the size and consequent weight of the pyramid is/was necessary to be able to maintain the pressures needed to create heat in the roof structure.
@@leftofright why would pressure create heat in the roof? The pressure on the corbels haven’t changed since construction, there’s still millions of pounds of them, and that’s not enough to generate heat. Stone doesn’t start having inherent heat pressure until you’re miles below the surface. Caves are freezing and their walls have way more weight in them. We can also artificially create pressure vessels far exceeding what the pyramid could contain so demonstrating physics shouldn’t be out of range.
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquityhi, its much like the temperature difference when gas escapes from high to low, the inverse effect happens. This is why the roof is stepped, as it dispersed the pressure from a flat roof and allows for the the heating by compression. The chemical processes cause the pressure, because the volume of the end result is higher than when the process started. it seems to me this is a separation process when gasses are trapped in liquid. we may learn that the obelisks where perhaps also key to whole process, where lightning may have served as the catalysts to complete the reactions. i might be wrong by far, but ive been there and what i was told as a kid made sense. do me a favour and check out how easy it is to make ammonia. it's quite easy to do. considering all the other strange chemicals that we already know was used. to me it makes the most sense. we need to look at the bigger picture, a lot of evidence is already there pointing to a much older race of man that once had a golden era. and was destroyed possible in the older dryas which last 1500 years. enough to wipe them out as a nation. we need to rethink the possibility that more has happened in the past that we do not know about, or is being uncovered.
how could they light and maintain large fires in a space of such limited oxygen?
Lighting a fire is not really an issue. Throw some wood in a pile and cover it in oil and it’ll light right up. This room is much bigger than it looks.
They didn’t need to maintain it, it actually only took about fifteen minutes to bake the stone, and once done there was no rush as it’d remain brittle.
My theory is they did this at the end of each day. They dug what they could, at the end of each day, they’d light the fire and evacuate. The smoke would suffocate it but it’d go long enough and smolder afterwards enough to bake the stone. While they slept the smoke would settle, then they’d go down and break the baked stone. Repeat until down 14 feet.
But imagine the time required for the smoke to clear and for levels of oxygen too reach the point to continue the work, it must have taken days or weeks
@@henryhvpa descent point, but smoke is heavier than air so I imagine most of it would trickle its way down to the two lower chambers over the night. I don’t think it’d be pleasant, but I’d expect it’d be workable.
You could also do things like set out some pots of water or oil, these kind of act like traps for smoke in enclosed spaces.
You trip over tombs everywhere in Egypt. But the pyramids are not tombs? Never understood the logic. Especially if it's from people that watch documentaries and question nothing from it. So many I seen and took in what they are saying to only go online and see they are incredibly off. As for the black stone. That's been know forever. I seen people discussing what could be behind it decades ago.
No, it was technically still a tomb, in the same way empty mastabas in southern Egypt were tombs of old kings.
I think this may be the only case of this though, I think the subterranean section of the great pyramid was intended for offerings in the same way I suggest the red pyramid was. Except Khufu was also buried above in the kings chamber, making it a 2 for 1 monument. I propose the evolution went from a mastaba in both north and south Egypt, to Snefru creating two pyramids in one location, to both ceremonial and actual burial being combined from the great pyramid onward. This is the only one I think is not a tomb in the sense that it actually was meant to hold a mummy. It was still a ceremonial tomb, perhaps holding a ka statue or something.
Besides if both the Red and Bent pyramids were made by one man, even if intended to both be tombs, he’d likely pick one or the other, leaving one unused, and it seems he picked the Bent.
@@WallacesMysteriesofAntiquitythe pyramids are not tombs.
Definitely chemical reactors. Evidence is overwhelming.
None of the pyramids are Tunes