Jump to content
  • Welcome to Whats Up Austraila!

    Intuitive, Social, Engaging...Registration is FREE.
    Register Log in
old man emu

What is the answer to this ecclesiastic question?

Recommended Posts

The Dark Ages were pretty Dark, alright - it was the age of brutal martyrdom, repression, plagues, and almost-constant brutal wars, as one group tried to wrest power and control from other groups.

 

But the really old periods is what fascinates me. How did they build the Pyramids? They reckon they used lots of slaves and sand ramps and wooden rollers.

Seems like a vast amount of crude working methods, as compared to the incredible preciseness of the Pyramids themselves. I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if they utilised Liebherr tower cranes.

After 4000 years in the dirt, what would be left of Liebherr tower cranes? Some rusty staining in the soil!

 

What about the preciseness of the fit of the stonework in the Pyramids? Not only massive blocks weighing multiple tens of tonnes, but fitted together with precision to within mm's.

I reckon they had Atlas Copco compressors and air-powered stone-grinders, too. After 4000 years, there would be no sign left of any A-C compressors.

I bet the Pharaohs killed anyone who drew an A-C compressor, or an air-powered stone grinder on a stone tablet - and destroyed the tablet, too! Thus we have no record of their tools.

 

I found an interesting article about how the Incas formulated their building mortar from acid sulphate mine water, with plant extracts added.

This mortar was exceptionally acid and dissolved the rocks placed together, until there was hardly a gap to be seen - and when the mortar set, it was stronger than concrete.

 

https://www.siftdesk.org/article-details/On-the-reddish-glittery-mud-the-Inca-used-for-perfecting-their-stone-masonry/264

 

There is also the curious chemistry of the mortar used in Roman port walls construction. The scientists are still struggling to figure out the precise chemistry - but it involves seawater in the Romans volcanic mortar mix.

Our modern day concrete reaches maximum strength at around 60 years, then it starts to degrade and weaken (slowly). But the 2000-yr-old Roman mortar in their sea walls is actually stronger today, than when it was new.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/07/03/secret-roman-concrete-survived-tidal-battering-2000-years-revealed/

Edited by onetrack
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first ferro boat goes back that far, sits in an Italian pond then brought to the surface when wanted. 

spacesailor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this fascinates me too. I have spent decades thinking about cutting and breaking rock efficiently. Can’t help thinking the ancients knew something that I don’t.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, onetrack said:

The Dark Ages were pretty Dark, alright - it was the age of brutal martyrdom, repression, plagues, and almost-constant brutal wars, as one group tried to wrest power and control from other groups.

Recent archaeological discoveries are starting to discount that idea, which is a carry over from the writings of initially the Romans for whom any opposing group were barbarians, and later from the writings of monks who were the losers during early Viking raids.

 

The recent material uncovered, both artifacts and human remains indicate that Pre-Roman Europe had a  well integrated trading and cultural system that the Romans adapted when they took political control of Britain, and which continued to be used throughout the Romano-British period, the period miss-named the Dark Ages, through the Medieval and is still in use today.

 

Brutal matrydom? Monks of the Christian persuasion who turned the other cheek to robbers and got the sword for their impudence.

Repression? The peoples of Britain had established legal systems for dealing with disputes. No doubt crimes like murder were dealt with by execution, but we did the same until 1967, but the lesser crimes were dealt with by known rules.

Plagues? Epidemics are hard to control when your Society does not even know what causes them. We still have bubonic plague and influenza, plus measles and Ebola.

Constant brutal wars? The facts that mass graves indicating the disposal of the battle slain are hardly ever found, and that most cemeteries from that period show death by natural causes cast doubt on the assumption of constant brutal wars.

Power plays? After some initial argy-bargy between newcomers and original inhabitants, things seem to have settled down into peaceful co-existence. If your heritage is from Great Britain, check your DNA profile and see how much foreigners contributed to the person who is you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OME - The substantial hoards of buried treasure, coins, and jewellery that are regularly dug up in Britain - and I mean regularly - indicate to me that large numbers of settlements were overrun regularly by invaders, and the buried hoards were desperate attempts to try and save their valuable possessions from rampaging pillagers. It was a dangerous era to try and survive in.

 

There are many undiscovered major gravesites to this day, and they are only uncovered when erosion washes away soil, or extensive excavation is carried out for development.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hoards_in_Great_Britain

 

 

 

Edited by onetrack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From your reference source:

Hoards associated with the Anglo-Saxon culture, from the 6th century to 1066, are relatively uncommon. More Anglo-Saxon artefacts have been found in the context of grave burials than hoards in England. 

 

Hoards might be relatively common, but when you hear numbers of casualties said to have come from battles, where are the skeletons? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Cupboards, I'm led to believe. Mainly with the aristocracy. Nev

Edited by facthunter
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pmccarthy said:

Waterloo skeletons were ground up and sold as fertiliser.

That's the bare bones of his reply. He should flesh it out a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was nothing magical about the pyramids...  here's an example.... After a level was completed, they built a small clay wall around the pyramid and sealed between the blocks with clay too, then they flooded the level and trimmed off the protruding bits.

There are clay stains on blocks to this day, and the levels are tilted very slightly but measureably, away from the prevailing wind.

 

 Of course, the main thing about the pyramids was the stupidity of their very idea. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another amazing thing was that as the world's  superpower, they never sent an expedition up the Nile.

The source of the Nile was discovered by the English, thousands of years later. Dr Livingstone was there somewhere  I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't go looking for something unless finding it is important to you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/12/2019 at 6:07 PM, pmccarthy said:

All of this fascinates me too. I have spent decades thinking about cutting and breaking rock efficiently. Can’t help thinking the ancients knew something that I don’t.

I remember seeing this video a long time ago, as is evident by the film quality. This bloke had some good techniques for moving big things.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a place in Florida named Coral Castle (in error, as it's actually built from Oolitic Limestone, which probably does resemble coral, somewhat). The "Castle" comprises over 1000 tons of limestone construction, all moved by one man.

Coral Castle initially commenced construction in 1923 at a different location, but it was moved 10 miles (16kms) in 1936, and expanded substantially from the original size, on the new site, by the builder.

 

That gent was an eccentric, somewhat reclusive Latvian, by the name of Edward Leedskalnin. He amazed people by the size of the limestone blocks he moved by himself - and usually working at night, which added to his air of mystery.

Very few people ever saw him moving these blocks of limestone. The average weight of the stone blocks he moved was 15 short tons (13.6 tonnes), and several are 25 to 30 short tons (22.7 to 27.2 tonnes).

One stone gate he built, with a centre pivot, weighed 8.2 tonnes, and it was perfectly balanced, and could be pushed open and shut by a child.

When the gate froze up and stopped rotating in 1986, they had to use a 45 ton crane and six men to lift it off its foundation for repair.

It was then discovered that Leedskalnin had drilled a hole through the centre of the stone block and mounted the gate on an old truck axle bearing. The bearing had simply rusted up.

 

There was constant talk that Leedskalnin had used some kind of hidden knowledge, levitation, or "lines of energy" in the Earth, to counter gravity in moving the massive blocks.

He died in 1951 without ever revealing how he shifted the blocks by himself. Books were written about his amazing efforts, and it appears even a film was made about him.

Any time he was queried on the secret to moving the huge blocks, he merely answered, "It's easy, when you know how".

Current analysis is that he simply used the principles of leverage and counterweighting, as the "secret" behind his astonishing, solitary, stone-moving feats.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_Castle

Edited by onetrack
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The Jigger they get the water out of the river uses a rock for a counterweight.  People always look for the easy way out. That's why they had slaves.  God -King is  a good job, unless you have a BAD Mrs God -King.  They didn't solve the eternal Life thing tho. Mummy isn't always right. Nev

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called a sharduf Nev. That see-saw thing to lift water...Or something like that...  and yes the very idea of a mummy is stupid huh.  As was the idea of putting all your treasure in the most conspicuous place there was.

I agree that they didn't want to know the source of the Nile as they already had their religious explanation.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...