I regret the forfeiture by my friend and opponent, Dr.Spy. Even though he has stipulated in the Description that forfeiture of a round is allowed, I must remind my opponent that forfeiture, by DART policy, cannot exceed one-half of arguments. If the forfeiture of his first round is a strategy to have my fifth round waived, no such strategy was offered or agreed upon by description nor comments, nor PMs, so I do not accept the strategy. Regardless, I will make a first round argument, and a fifth round, and all other rounds to which Pro offers argument.
First, a bit of disclosure to my opponent and to readers/judges:
I am fluent in New Kingdom [18thdynasty] hieroglyphs [from the 16thcentury BCE]. I have, at my disposal,
Egyptian Grammar,Sir Alan Gardiner, third edition, Oxford University Press, 1969, the text I used in my junior year’s Egyptian grammar course, as potential reference to offer translation of any images which feature hieroglyphic text. Further, I have made a life-long study of ancient Egyptian culture.
I Brief History of the Egyptian Civilization I.a A bit of history of Egypt is needed to equate the Old Kingdom, of particular relevance to this debate, the Middle Kingdom, and the New Kingdom of ancient Egypt.
[1] In the list below of these kingdoms, the third column are approximate dates, having no real relevance to Egyptian history with the exception of the Moses Exodus, but having naught to do with the Sphinx and Great pyramid, other than both are already many centuries old by that point in history. I add “relevant history” as a guide to those uninitiated in ancient Egyptian culture by reference to more common knowledge of Ancient Hebrew [House of Israel] culture.
The Old Kingdom is the period by early 20thcentury estimation, and then later, designation of the original construction of the Great Pyramid [the pyramid of Khufu, Old Kingdom Pharaoh, born: est. 2615]
[2]and the Sphinx [along with other architecture] of Khufu’s son, Khafre [Old Kingdom Pharaoh, born: 2560 BCE].
[3]I note, in particular the equivalence of relative Middle and New Egyptian kingdoms to the lifetimes of Abraham,✭father of the House of Israel, and who sojourned among the Egyptians in his lifetime, and Moses,✻deliverer of the House of Israel from Egypt as slaves for better than 400 years.
Kingdom designation Dates Relative history
I.a.1 Old Kingdom 2686 – 2181 BCE Noah Flood 2900 BCE
1.a.2 Middle Kingdom 2025 – 1700 BCE ✭Abraham birth 2054 BCE
1.a.3 New Kingdom 1550 – 1069 BCE ✻Moses Exodus 1400 BCE
II The Great Pyramid of Giza: Khufu II.a Perhaps no single architecture on earth is as studied as is Khufu’s Great Pyramid on the plateau of Giza. Enduring as the tallest structure on earth until the completion of the Lincoln Cathedral in Lincoln, England in 1311,
[4] there is also no other architecture on earth that is as mysterious and unwilling to reveal its secrets than the Great Pyramid.
[5] II.a.1 But, the debate is not about those mysteries, per se, but, rather, about its age. Fortunately, there are several clues, more than one might imagine, that contribute to the notion that we have currently defined the accurate age of the Great Pyramid. I will be exploring these clues over the next three rounds, including this first, using the first three rounds for all Con arguments, leaving the fourth round to finish rebuttal to Pro’s arguments, and leave the fifth round for final conclusions.
II.b One obvious dating method that could be applied is by measure of the radioactive isotope of Carbon, designated as 14C, or Carbon-14 dating, a method that has been around for over 70 years. Let’s simply apply the method to the stones of the Great Pyramid. It could be done on interior stones, to which we have, now, easy access, and which have not suffered the obvious weathering, and obvious thievery of collectable samples. “Yes, I have a piece of the Great Pyramid,” countless individuals over the long history of the pyramid can claim.
II.b.1 The problem with 14C dating is obvious, or is it? 14C depends on the presence of organic material, and Khufu’s tomb is inorganic. It is stone, not wood. Everybody knows this.
II.c Hold! Back-up. Let’s not let that idea of stone go unturned. We make so many presumptions about ancient technology, we have a whole generation of people being taught new theories by such television programs as “Ancient Aliens” of the History Channel, which generally present our ancients as bumbling buffoons who had to learn their tech from aliens. No not from over the border, but from beyond the planet.
II.c.1 I refute such programs, based on such ‘science’ presented as fact that, for example, DNA is made up of three amino acids [a claim I watched in disbelief because, as a 16-year-old, I attended a lecture at UCLA given by Dr. James Watson, Nobel Prize recipient for the discovery of the construct of the DNA molecule, who, early in his lecture, established that DNA is a construct of
fouramino acids. I trust him over “Ancient Aliens,” thank you.
II.c.2 Contrary to “A-A,” I attribute the ancients of having developed technology, in cases beyond even our own today. Such as the development of various recipes for concrete. The ancient Romans, for example, knew of a formula enabling curing under water, but that formula is lost to history. We have developed one of our own, but that feat was not accomplished until at least a century after we first re-developed a successful air-cured concrete in 1820.
II.c.4 In that vein, but much earlier, as early as the Old Kingdom, the Egyptians created a recipe of “concrete” using limestone, quartz, and other materials, and water, to cast stones of immense size using this limestone slurry.
[6] Immense, as in Great Pyramid size. It was always thought that the limestone blocks of Khufu’s tomb were quarried and shaped using copper chisels. Copper was mined by the ancients, and is abundant in Egypt, but copper is a relatively weak material to use as a chisel.
[7] Not to mention that, as extensively as the Giza plateau has been archeologically excavated, not one copper chisel has ever been found.
[8] Casting offers an answer to the age-old mystery of the laser-like precision of the sides of the stones – Ancient Alien method – such that it is observed that a sheet of paper cannot be passed through the joined edges. Bye-bye, aliens.
Moreover, the blocks of the limestone in the Great Pyramid exhibit a higher water content than contained, for example, in the natural limestone of the sculpted Sphinx, which was sculpted in-place of a solid mass, not constructed by blocks, and then sculpted.
[9] “A recent paper [2007] “…reporting these findings, the researchers reflect that it is ‘ironic, sublime, and humbling’ that this 4,500-year-old limestone is so true to the original that it has mislead Egyptologists and geologists and, ‘because ancient Egyptians were the original – albeit unknowing – nanotechnologists.’”
[10] II.c.5 So, have we abandoned the idea of dating the Great Pyramid by 14C? No, not entirely. 14C dating is a measure of the ratio of 14C present in plant or animal tissue compared to normal Carbon present, knowing that 14C has a half-life of 5,730 years, well outside of the dating that applies to the Great Pyramid if it is a construct ion of Khufu’s tomb.
[11] However, unless the construction of buildings uses sufficient organic material, it was thought that such structures could not be dated by 14C.
II.c.6 However, in the 1960s, it was discovered that while limestone, itself, as a block of stone, ostensibly containing little or no organic material, the fabrication of limestone-based mortar does, in effect, contain the critical radioactive carbon isotope, 14C, and thus can be measured by the method established in the 1940s.
[12] What was missing was the discovery in 2007 that the Great pyramid was not only constructed of a cast limestone slurry, looking nearly identical to naturally-occurring limestone, therefore hiding in plain sight, but that these fabricated, not hewn blocks of stone were sealed together with limestone mortar. The whole of them, being water-borne, contained atmospheric CO2, and 14C, and were, therefore, measurable by the 14C dating method.
With the discovery, 13 years ago, of the cast limestone-based concrete formula used by Old Kingdom construction, and the added discovery of a similar formula mortar between the stones, the quarry just got turned on its head, along with the aliens who allegedly gave our intrepid Egyptians their technology.
II.c.7 The completion if the Great Pyramid is thus dated at 2490 BCE
[13] Consulting a map of the Giza plateau reveals the complex of architecture on site approximately 1.4km2.
[14] Approximately top [North] central on the site is Khufu’s Great Pyramid. Directly to the Southeast on a 45˚ angle, the Pyramid of Khafre, Khufu’s son, was erected. Due east of Khafre’s structure across a distance of approximately 450m is the Sphinx, considered a construction begun, and dedicated to Khafre.
III The Sphinx III.a The Sphinx is not a unique product of Khufu’s son, Khafre, who was Khufu’s eldest son of several, and was destined to follow his father as Pharaoh. He, the son, though not the ambitious type relative to his father’s massive construction, was responsible for four construction efforts on the Giza plateau, one being the Sphinx. The others were his own pyramid, as noted due east of the Sphinx, the Funerary Temple of Khafre, due east of the pyramid approximately 50m, and the Valley Temple of khafre. Southeast of the Sphinx approximate 100m.
III.b One of the prominent differences between the Sphinx and the other structures on the Giza plateau is that while all other structures, other than the cast-limestone of Khufu’s pyramid tomb, appear to be standard limestone quarried blocks, but they have apparently not been studied further as was Khufu’s to determine they may have been cast limestone as well, the Sphinx is definitively sculpted in place from a natural limestone mound originally known as the Mokkatam Formation.
[15] III.b.1 It is believed that the partially destroyed face if the Sphinx is that of Khafre, however, there is no hieroglyph script on or around the Sphinx, nor anywhere else on the plateau that links anything to the identification of the Sphinx.
III.c Just the extreme erosion of the Sphinx has led some to believe the Sphinx is a far older structure than the others on plateau; as old as 9,000 years [7,000 BCE], the last era in which there was sufficient rainfall on the plateau to have caused such erosion.
III.d However, there are two other possible explanations:
III.d.1 Just within historic documentation, post Egyptian New Kingdom, has observed a more rapid erosion of the Sphinx that with typical exposed limestone observed elsewhere; the Mokkatam Formation appears to be particularly susceptible to extreme erosion in a short period of time.
III.d.2 In additional to the above, because there is even more extreme erosion observed around the perimeter base of the structure. This could be due to unusually high flood of the Nile. The Sphinx sits at a level of 25m above the typical shoreline, but there is other evidence of its flooding elsewhere on the plateau, and the water table beneath the Sphinx has been recorded as just 4.5M beneath the exposed level of the Sphinx, the nature of limestone is such that it will wick water, so the “flood” just through the limestone could explain the extreme erosion.
[16] III.e The dating of the Sphinx can be only within the lifetime of Khafre, a minimal 28 years, between 2560 and 2532 BCE. There is a known statue of Khafre wearing the same pharaonic headdress typical of the late Old Kingdom, with exposed ears, round face, and tied, straight beard, cut short [obviously broken off on the Sphinx, but once there].
III.f What was said in §II.a.1 of this round regarding the Great Pyramid debate structure goes as well for the Sphinx.
References:
Thank you for voting
Thank you very much for voting
Thank you so much for voting
Thank you very much for voting
Where is DrSpy? Has not shown up for 2 months. I'm not that interested in shadow boxing, but it appears that is what we have.
Does anyone know if Dr. Spy has abandoned the site? Hasn't been here for a month.
Sorry, forgot to mention: I accept all definitions and debate details. I do not know how to add pictures, so I'll appreciate a primer. I note that we can forfeit one round and, depending on the will of judges, not be penalized, but it appears more than one is automatic forfeiture of the debate. Don't want to risk that; I plan to avoid it completely.
Oh, Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz...
This is such a tempting subject, as I am fluent in New Kingdom hieroglyphs grammar, and as such familiar with the culture, but the former has little to do with architecture, and I am inclined to accept that the dating of these great structures is currently in error. However, my appreciation of the ancient Egyptian civilization is too tempting to refuse, so I'll take this on as a reluctant Con. This will be fun to contradict my own thinking. I'm glad you're allowing a good amount of time for argument; I'll need it! Anything may happen. Thanks, and good luck, my friend.