DUNE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Jon,
>
> So many possible scenarios that could explain what
> went down in those days, and your two may be what
> did, the lubricant idea is kinda plausible to some
> degree, i say some degree because not all sides of
> these chambers exhibit this run off of plaster,
> and not all roof beams are plastered, see these
> three pics below.
>
>
>
>
> This shot seems to show the ceiling beams devoid
> of plaster , the left insert is of course
> Campbells chamber, im not sure what chamber
> Hawaas is in
>
>
>
>
> Just to show this gloopy looking plaster dripping
> down the side walls.
>
>
>
> So yea there's no consistancy in their use of this
> plaster, it may be the difference use could be
> down to what gang was working on the chamber
> installation at the time.
>
> I feel were going to be stuck with speculation as
> to its purpose, mainstream archaeology hasn't
> given it any research since Petrie's time, and i
> doubt if they ever will.
>
> So yea your sequence of events could be right.
>
>
> Sfbey wrote,
>
> "The cartouche is not on plaster. It is on white
> Tura limestone."
>
> Well if you took some time and examined the photos
> by Colette Dowel of the block that the Khufu
> Cartouche is on you could only come to one
> conclusion, and that is that the ceiling block has
> been platered, ergo the cartouche is on top
>
> Take a long look at those pics here
> <[grahamhancock.com]
> 4> and if you still think its bare limstone, then
> with due respect, i can only suggest making an
> appointment with an optician
>
> DPP

Hi Dune..
I can only imagine that if the ceiling plaster on the flat ceiling, lower chambers is not consistently applied overall, and combined with the wall slop then it was only applied where needed and absolutely necessary. I'm thinking in terms of hauling a granite beam weighing tens of tons over the sidewalls, it getting stuck and it needing lubricant. Which may not be the case for all the beams, some needing slippery stuff, some not ..
In your pictures of the side wall slop, the slop seems to correlate with the beam widths.. Could it be that the larger heavier beams needed more or more viscous lube??? They do vary in size weight by quite a large degree..

The plaster in the upper chamber is obvious, you can even see the runs, sags and curtains.
Question is, was it decorative or did it have a practical purpose.?

It could be as simple as providing a highly reflective coating to aid with illumination, Painting it white??
However that wouldn't explain it being shoved into the block joints.

It looks to me like, at least in the upper chamber they were rendering and sealing and weren't too concerned about the appearance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05-Oct-16 19:28 by Jon Ellison.