OCaptain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Origyptian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > OCaptain Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > >
> > > Are you suggesting that the Old Kingdom
> > Egyptians
> > > were unable to construct the Pyramids because
> > they
> > > had not discovered the wheel? Are you
> > suggesting
> > > that wheels are the only method for moving
> the
> > > stone blocks that can work?
> >
> > I'm suggesting that if Egyptology and
> > traditionalists are so dead set on a 3rd
> > millennium provenance for all those pyramids,
> then
> > they might want to present a coherent,
> plausible
> > narrative that incorporates all of the evidence
> > suggesting how that work was done, because so
> far
> > no such narrative (or evidence) seems to exist.
> > Until that's done, other possibilities abound
> to
> > better account for the evidence (and
> conspicuous
> > lack thereof), such as an older provenance.
> >
> > Meanwhile, at Mahram Bilqis I see relatively
> small
> > blocks of limestone of simple geometry at
> ground
> > level, erected about 2 millennia after the Old
> > Kingdom pyramids, well into the Iron Age. I
> don't
> > consider that to be a valid comparison to the
> > topic at hand.
>
>
> Sure it does - it shows that knowledge of the fast
> wheel does not predict whether or not one can do
> exceptional large-scale stonework.

Well, I don't see them building any pyramids, or anything else more than about 20' tall at that site. I'm tending to doubt that that project is anywhere near the "exceptional large-scale" of any OK pyramid. Sorry, but I don't consider it a valid comparison, especially considering the Arabians' access to iron technology.