> Origyptian Wrote:
> > In truth, regardless of the reason that the
> > granite box was found in an askewed orientation in
> > the KC, propped up by a piece of flint which
> > apparently was retrieved from
> > outside of G1 (for whatever reason
> > Petrie though might account for that), it's
> > nevertheless quite an enigma that those alleged
> > granite porcullis fragments were found in such
> > disperse locations as...
- > > - Outside the Main Entrance
> > - Wedged into the first 90 degree downward elbow in the Well Shaft
> > - In the western recess of the short HP leading to the SC
> > - At the lower step inside the Pit.
> > A far easier way to explain those various
> > relatively remote locations of those fragements is
> > that their original function was related to
> > structural components in the local vicinity where
> > they were found and not all the way up at the AC.
> Do we know for sure that the fragments are in fact
> pieces of portcullis blocks?
> What evidence is there to support that idea?
The four granite fragments that we see there today have been reported to be almost as thick as the channels and have evidence of bore holes at one end, and these holes ahve been reported match the separation of the four grooves on the south wall.
> > Likewise, the pattern of damage we see on the
> > vertical ribs of the AC do not support the notion
> > that those granite fragments originally comprised
> > portcullis blocks in the AC. Rather, it seems far
> > more plausible (to me at least) that the channels
> > in the AC were occupied by something other than
> > simply those granite blocks, something valuable
> > which was taken away.
> The pattern of damage on the vertical ribs is
> indicative of objects being removed in one piece.
> If stone portcullis blocks were broken in order to
> remove them, then why the pattern of damage to the ribs?
> Why break up both the ribs and the blocks?
And that right there is the problem with the notion that granite blocks were cut into the fragments we see today. The fragments seem to be about half as wide as the space between the east/west walls of the AC and contain evidence of 2 bore holes, and this implies they were chiseled vertically down the midline in order to remove them from their position in the AC channels. But if pillagers chiseled the blocks vertically in half, then there would be no need to chisel the ribs in the walls at all since each half of the block would easily slip out of the channel without needing to exert the additional effort to remove the ribs. Also, the bottom aspect of most of the ribs is still intact, and only the central aspect of the ribs appear to have been chiseled away. All of this seems to contradict and not support the Granite Portcullis model.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?