This E text uses UTF-8 (unicode) file encoding. If the apostrophes, quotation marks and greek text [ἀπολύτρωσις] in this paragraph appear as garbage, you may have an incompatible browser or unavailable fonts. First, make sure that your browser’s “character set” or “file encoding” is set to Unicode (UTF-8). You may also need to change the default font.
With the respectful compliments of the author.
Address,
Mr. R. BALLARD,
Malvern,
ENGLAND.
THE SOLUTION
OF THE
PYRAMID PROBLEM
OR,
PYRAMID DISCOVERIES.
WITH A
NEW THEORY AS TO THEIR ANCIENT USE.
BY
ROBERT BALLARD,
M. INST. C.E., ENGLAND; M. AMER, SOC. C.E.
CHIEF ENGINEER OF THE CENTRAL AND NORTHERN RAILWAY DIVISION
OF THE COLONY OF QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA.
NEW YORK:
JOHN WILEY & SONS.
1882
Copyright,
1882,
By JOHN WILEY & SONS.
PRESS OF J. J. LITTLE & CO.,
NOS. 10 TO 20 ASTOR PLACE, NEW YORK.
NOTE.
In preparing this work for publication I have received valuable help from the following friends in Queensland:—
E. A. Delisser, L.S. and C.E., Bogantungan, who assisted me in my calculations, and furnished many useful suggestions.
J. Brunton Stephens, Brisbane, who persuaded me to publish my theory, and who also undertook the work of correction for the press.
J. A. Clarke, Artist, Brisbane, who contributed to the Illustrations.
Lyne Brown, Emerald,—(photographs).
F. Rothery, Emerald,—(models).
and—A. W. Voysey, Emerald,—(maps and diagrams).
CONTENTS.
| PAGE | ||
| §1. | The Ground Plan of the Gïzeh Group | [9] |
| Plan Ratios connected into Natural Numbers | [13] | |
| §2. | The Original Cubit Measure of the Gïzeh Group | [15] |
| §3. | The Exact Measure of the Bases of the Pyramids | [19] |
| §4. | The Slopes, Ratios and Angles of the Three Principal Pyramids of the Gïzeh Group | [20] |
| §5. | The Exact Dimensions of the Pyramids | [23] |
| §6. | Geometrical Peculiarities of the Pyramids | [28] |
| §6A. | The Casing Stones of the Pyramids | [32] |
| §7. | Peculiarities of the Triangles 3, 4, 5 and 20, 21, 29 | [35] |
| §8. | General Observations | [38] |
| §9. | The Pyramids of Egypt the Theodolites of the Egyptian Land Surveyors | [41] |
| §10. | How the Pyramids were made use of | [44] |
| §11. | Description of the ancient Portable Survey Instrument | [51] |
| Table to explain Figure 60 | [64] | |
| §12. | Primary Triangles and their Satellites;—or the Ancient System of Right-angled Trigonometry unfolded by a Study of the Plan of the Pyramids of Gïzeh | [64] |
| Table of some "Primary Triangles" and their Satellites | [74] | |
| §13. | The Size and Shape of the Pyramids indicated by the Plan | [77] |
| §14. | A Simple Instrument for laying off "Primary Triangles" | [79] |
| §14a. | General Observations | [80] |
| §15. | Primary Triangulation | [82] |
| §16. | The Pentangle or Five-pointed Star the Geometric Symbol of the Great Pyramid | [91] |
| Table showing the comparative Measures of Lines | [96] | |
| §17. | The manner in which the Slope Ratios of the Pyramids were arrived at | [104] |
LIST OF WORKS CONSULTED.
Penny Cyclopædia. (Knight, London. 1833.)
Sharpe's Egypt.
"Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid." Piazzi Smyth.
"The Pyramids of Egypt." R. A. Proctor. (Article in Gentleman's Magazine. Feb. 1880.)
"Traite de la Grandeur et de la Figure de la Terre." Cassini. (Amsterdam. 1723.)
"Pyramid Facts and Fancies." J. Bonwick.
General Plan of Gizeh Group
THE SOLUTION OF THE PYRAMID PROBLEM.
With the firm conviction that the Pyramids of Egypt were built and employed, among other purposes, for one special, main, and important purpose of the greatest utility and convenience, I find it necessary before I can establish the theory I advance, to endeavor to determine the proportions and measures of one of the principal groups. I take that of Gïzeh as being the one affording most data, and as being probably one of the most important groups.
I shall first try to set forth the results of my investigations into the peculiarities of construction of the Gïzeh Group, and afterwards show how the Pyramids were applied to the national work for which I believe they were designed.
§ 1. THE GROUND PLAN OF THE GIZEH GROUP.
I find that the Pyramid Cheops is situated on the acute angle of a right-angled triangle—sometimes called the Pythagorean, or Egyptian triangle—of which base, perpendicular, and hypotenuse are to each other as 3, 4, and 5. The Pyramid called Mycerinus, is situate on the greater angle of this triangle, and the base of the triangle, measuring three, is a line due east from Mycerinus, and joining perpendicular at a point due south of Cheops. (See Figure 1.)
Fig. 1.
I find that the Pyramid Cheops is also situate at the acute angle of a right-angled triangle more beautiful than the so-called triangle of Pythagoras, because more practically useful. I have named it the 20, 21, 29 triangle. Base, perpendicular, and hypotenuse are to each other as twenty, twenty-one, and twenty-nine.
The Pyramid Cephren is situate on the greater angle of this triangle, and base and perpendicular are as before described in the Pythagorean triangle upon which Mycerinus is built. (See Fig. 2.)
| Fig. 2. | Fig. 3 |
Figure 3 represents the combination,—A being Cheops, F Cephren, and D Mycerinus.
Lines DC, CA, and AD are to each other as 3, 4, and 5; and lines FB, BA, and AF are to each other as 20, 21, and 29.
The line CB is to BA, as 8 to 7; the line FH is to DH, as 96 to 55; and the line FB is to BC, as 5 to 6.
The Ratios of the first triangle multiplied by forty-five, of the second multiplied by four, and the other three sets by twelve, one, and sixteen respectively, produce the following connected lengths in natural numbers for all the lines.
| DC | 135 |
| CA | 180 |
| AD | 225 |
| ____________ | |
| FB | 80 |
| BA | 84 |
| AF | 116 |
| ____________ | |
| CB | 96 |
| BA | 84 |
| ____________ | |
| FH | 96 |
| DH | 55 |
| ____________ | |
| FB | 80 |
| BC | 96 |
Figure 4 connects another pyramid of the group—it is the one to the southward and eastward of Cheops.
In this connection, A Y Z A is a 3, 4, 5 triangle, and B Y Z O B is a square.
| Lines | YA to CA | are as | 1 to 5 |
| CY to YZ | as | 3 to 1 | |
| FO to ZO | as | 8 to 3 | |
| and | DA to AZ | as | 15 to 4. |
I may also point out on the same plan that calling the line FA radius, and the lines BA and FB sine and co-sine, then is YA equal in length to versed sine of angle AFB.
This connects the 20, 21, 29 triangle FAB with the 3, 4, 5 triangle AZY.
I have not sufficient data at my disposal to enable me to connect the remaining eleven small pyramids to my satisfaction, and I consider the four are sufficient for my purpose.
Fig. 4.
| At level of Own base | At level of Cephren's base | ||||
| Of these natural numbers the bases of the pyramids are as follows. | } | = | Cheops Cephren Mycerīnus | 56½ 52½ 26¼ | 52½ 52½ 27¼ |
I now establish the following list of measurements of the plan in connected natural numbers. (See Figure 4.)
Plan Ratios connected into Natural Numbers.
| BY YZ | 1 1 | } | 48 | 48 48 | BC FB | 6 5 | } | 16 | 96 80 | DC BC | 45 32 | } | 3 | 135 96 | FB BY | 5 3 | } | 16 | 80 48 |
| DN NR | 61 60 | } | 3 | 183 180 | DN NZ | 61 48 | } | 3 | 183 144 | CY BC | 3 2 | } | 48 | 144 96 | FH DH | 96 55 | } | 1 | 96 55 |
| CY DC | 16 25 | } | 9 | 144 135 | PN PA | 61 48 | } | 2.4 | 146.4 115.2 | JE EX | 3 2 | } | 24 | 72 48 | YX AY | 7 4 | } | 9 | 63 36 |
| BA FB | 21 20 | } | 4 | 84 80 | CA DC | 4 3 | } | 45 | 180 135 | BC EB | 32 21 | } | 3 | 96 63 | EA AZ | 7 4 | } | 15 | 105 60 |
| CB BA | 8 7 | } | 12 | 96 84 | YZ AY | 4 3 | } | 12 | 48 36 | FO OR | 32 21 | } | 4 | 128 84 | AB BO | 7 4 | } | 12 | 84 48 |
| ED AE | 8 7 | } | 15 | 120 105 | BA EB | 4 3 | } | 21 | 84 63 | FT ST | 84 55 | } | 1 | 84 55 | BC AC | 8 15 | } | 12 | 96 180 |
| VW FW | 55 48 | } | 1 | 55 48 | GE DG | 4 3 | } | 24 | 96 72 | VW SV | 55 36 | } | 1 | 55 36 | ND NO | 61 32 | } | 3 | 183 96 |
| SJ SU | 7 6 | } | 12 | 84 72 | HN FH | 4 3 | } | 32 | 128 96 | BJ AB | 45 28 | } | 3 | 135 84 | PA AZ | 48 25 | } | 2.4 | 115.2 60 |
| GX DG | 2 1 | } | 72 | 144 72 | GU DG | 5 2 | } | 36 | 180 72 | EO AY | 37 12 | } | 3 | 111 36 | SR RZ | 61 12 | } | 3 | 183 36 |
| SU SV | 2 1 | } | 36 | 72 36 | HW DH | 144 55 | } | 1 | 144 55 | HT DH | 36 11 | } | 5 | 180 55 | FH FE | 96 17 | } | 1 | 96 17 |
| TW TU | 36 17 | } | 1 | 36 17 | FO OZ | 8 3 | } | 16 | 128 48 | DA AZ | 15 4 | } | 15 | 225 60 | EA EF | 105 17 | } | 1 | 105 17 |
| SR RO | 61 28 | } | 3 | 183 84 | JB BY | 45 16 | } | 3 | 135 48 | AC CN | 15 4 | } | 12 | 180 48 | WH HG | 144 17 | } | 1 | 144 17 |
| YW AY | 20 9 | } | 4 | 80 36 | FW FE | 48 17 | } | 1 | 48 17 | YV AY | 15 4 | } | 9 | 135 36 | TH HG | 180 17 | } | 1 | 180 17 |
| MY ZY | 9 4 | } | 12 | 108 48 | AC CG | 20 7 | } | 9 | 180 63 | VZ ZO | 61 16 | } | 3 | 183 48 | |||||
| AC CH | 9 4 | } | 20 | 180 80 | EA AY | 35 12 | } | 3 | 105 36 | EU FE | 84 17 | } | 1 | 84 17 | |||||
| NZ ZA | 12 5 | } | 12 | 144 60 | CY YZ | 3 1 | } | 48 | 144 48 | CA AY | 5 1 | } | 36 | 180 36 | |||||
The above connected natural numbers multiplied by eight become
| R.B. cubits. | R.B.C. |
| (Thus, BY 48 × 8 = 384. | |
| GX 144 × 8 = 1152). |
§ 2. THE ORIGINAL CUBIT MEASURE OF THE GIZEH GROUP.
Mr. J. J. Wild, in his letter to Lord Brougham written in 1850, called the base of Cephren seven seconds. I estimate the base of Cephren to be just seven thirtieths of the line DA. The line DA is therefore thirty seconds of the Earth's Polar circumference. The line DA is therefore 3033·118625 British feet, and the base of Cephren 707·727 British feet.
I applied a variety of Cubits but found none to work in without fractions on the beautiful set of natural dimensions which I had worked out for my plan. (See table of connected natural numbers.)
I ultimately arrived at a cubit as the ancient measure which I have called the R.B. cubit, because it closely resembles the Royal Babylonian Cubit of ·5131 metre, or 1·683399 British feet. The difference is 1/600 of a foot.
I arrived at the R.B. cubit in the following manner.
Taking the polar axis of the earth at five hundred million geometric inches, thirty seconds of the circumference will be 36361·02608—geometric inches, or 36397·4235 British inches, at nine hundred and ninety-nine to the thousand—and 3030·0855 geometric feet, or 3033·118625 British feet. Now dividing a second into sixty parts, there are 1800 R.B. cubits in the line DA; and the line DA being thirty seconds, measures 36397·4235 British inches, which divided by 1800 makes one of my cubits 20·2207908 British inches, or 1·685066 British feet. Similarly, 36361·02608 geometric inches divided by 1800 makes my cubit 20·20057 geometric inches in length. I have therefore defined this cubit as follows:—One R.B. cubit is equal to 20.2006 geo. inches, 20·2208 Brit. inches, and 1·685 Brit. feet.
I now construct the following table of measures.
| R. B. CUBITS. |
PLETHRA OR SECONDS. |
STADIA. | MINUTES. | DEGREES. |
| 60 | 1 | |||
| 360 | 6 | 1 | ||
| 3600 | 60 | 10 | 1 | |
| 216000 | 3600 | 600 | 60 | 1 |
| 77760000 | 1296000 | 216000 | 21600 | 360 |
Thus there are seventy-seven million, seven hundred and sixty thousand R.B. cubits, or two hundred and sixteen thousand stadia, to the Polar circumference of the earth.
Thus we have obtained a perfect set of natural and convenient measures which fits the plan, and fits the circumference of the earth.
And I claim for the R.B. cubit that it is the most perfect ancient measure yet discovered, being the measure of the plan of the Pyramids of Gïzeh.
The same forgotten wisdom which divided the circle into three hundred and sixty degrees, the degree into sixty minutes, and the minute into sixty seconds, subdivided those seconds, for earth measurements, into the sixty parts represented by sixty R.B. cubits.
We are aware that thirds and fourths were used in ancient astronomical calculations.
The reader will now observe that the cubit measures of the main Pythagorean triangle of the plan are obtained by multiplying the original 3, 4 and 5 by 360; and that the entire dimensions are obtained in R.B. cubits by multiplying the last column of connected natural numbers in the table by eight,—thus—
|
R. B. CUBITS. |
||
| DC | 3 × 360 = | 1080 |
| CA | 4 × 360 = | 1440 |
| DA | 5 × 360 = | 1800 |
or,
|
NATURAL NUMBERS. |
R. B. CUBITS. |
|
| DC | 135 × 8 = | 1080 |
| CA | 80 × 8 = | 1440 |
| DA | 225 × 8 = | 1800 |
&c., &c.
(See Figure 5, p. 18.)
According to Cassini, a degree was 600 stadia, a minute 10 stadia; and a modern Italian mile, in the year 1723, was equal to one and a quarter ancient Roman miles; and one and a quarter ancient Roman miles were equal to ten stadia or one minute. (Cassini, Traite de la grandeur et de la Figure de la Terre. Amsterdam, 1723.)
Fig. 5
| R.B. Cubits. | R.B. Cubits. | ||||
| FB | = | 640 | EB | = | 504 |
| BA | = | 672 | BA | = | 672 |
| AF | = | 928 | AE | = | 840 |
| DC | = | 1080 | NO | = | 768 |
| CA | = | 1440 | OF | = | 1024 |
| AD | = | 1800 | FN | = | 1280 |
| DG | = | 576 | AY | = | 288 |
| GE | = | 768 | ZY | = | 384 |
| ED | = | 960 | ZA | = | 480 |
| R.B. Cub. | ||||
| At level of Cephren's Base which is the plane or level of the plan.— | } | { | Cheops' Base Cephren's Base Mycerīnus' Base | 420 420 218 |
Dufeu also made a stadium the six hundredth part of a degree. He made the degree 110827·68 metres, which multiplied by 3·280841 gives 363607·996+ British feet; and 363607·996+ divided by 600 equals 606·013327 feet to his stadium.
I make the stadium 606·62376 British feet.
There being 360 cubits to a stadium, Dufeu's stadium divided by 360, gives 1·6833 British feet, which is the exact measure given for a Royal Babylonian Cubit, if reduced to metres, viz.: 0·5131 of a metre, and therefore probably the origin of the measure called the Royal Babylonian cubit. According to this measure, the Gïzeh plan would be about 1/1011 smaller than if measured by R.B. cubits.
§ 3. THE EXACT MEASURE OF THE BASES OF THE PYRAMIDS.
A stadium being 360 R.B. cubits, or six seconds—and a plethron 60 R.B. cubits, or one second, the base of the Pyramid Cephren is seven plethra, or a stadium and a plethron, equal to seven seconds, or four hundred and twenty R.B. cubits.
Mycerinus' base is acknowledged to be half the base of Cephren.
Piazzi Smyth makes the base of the Pyramid Cheops 9131·05 pyramid (or geometric) inches, which divided by 20·2006 gives 452·01 R.B. cubits. I call it 452 cubits, and accept it as the measure which exactly fits the plan.
I have not sufficient data to determine the exact base of the other and smaller pyramid which I have marked on my plan.
The bases, then, of Mycerinus, Cephren, and Cheops, are 210, 420 and 452 cubits, respectively.
But in plan the bases should be reduced to one level. I have therefore drawn my plan, or horizontal section, at the level or plane of the base of Cephren, at which level or plane the bases or horizontal sections of the pyramids are—Mycerinus, 218 cubits, Cephren, 420 cubits, and Cheops, 420 cubits. I shall show how I arrive at this by-and-by, and shall also show that the horizontal section of Cheops, corresponding to the horizontal section of Cephren at the level of Cephren's base, occurs, as it should do, at the level of one of the courses of masonry, viz.—the top of the tenth course.
§ 4. THE SLOPES, RATIOS, AND ANGLES OF THE THREE PRINCIPAL PYRAMIDS OF THE GIZEH GROUP.
Before entering on the description of the exact slopes and angles of the three principal pyramids, I must premise that I was guided to my conclusions by making full use of the combined evolutions of the two wonderful right-angled triangles, 3, 4, 5, and 20, 21, 29, which seem to run through the whole design as a sort of dominant.
From the first I was firmly convinced that in such skilful workmanship some very simple and easily applied templates must have been employed, and so it turned out. Builders do not mark a dimension on a plan which they cannot measure, nor have a hidden measure of any importance without some clear outer way of establishing it.
This made me "go straight" for the slant ratios. When the Pyramids were cased from top to bottom with polished marble, there were only two feasible measures, the bases and the apothems;[1] and for that reason I conjectured that these would be the definite plan ratios.
[1] The "Apothem is a perpendicular from the vertex of a pyramid on a side of the base."—Chambers' Practical Mathematics, p. 156.
Figures 6, 7 and 8 show the exact slope ratios of Cheops, Cephren, and Mycerinus, measured as shown on the diagrams—viz., Cheops, 21 to 34, Cephren, 20 to 33, and Mycerinus, 20 to 32—that is, half base to apothem.
|
| |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
The ratios of base to altitude are, Cheops, 33 to 21, Cephren, 32 to 21, and Mycerinus, 32 to 20: not exactly, but near enough for all practical purposes. For the sake of comparison, it will be well to call these ratios 330 to 210, 320 to 210, and 336 to 210, respectively.
| Fig. 9. Cheops. | Fig. 10. Cheops. |
Figures 9 and 10 are meridional and diagonal sections, showing ratios of Cheops, viz., half base to apothem, 21 to 34 exactly; half base to altitude, 5½ to 7 nearly, and 183 to 233, nearer still (being the ratio of Piazzi Smyth). The ratio of Sir F. James, half diagonal 10 to altitude 9 is also very nearly correct.
My altitude for Cheops is 484·887 British feet, and the half base 380·81 British feet.
The ratio of 7 to 5½ gives 484·66, and the ratio of 233 to 183 gives 484·85 for the altitude.
My half diagonal is 538·5465, and ratio 10 to 9, gives 484·69 British feet for the altitude.
I have mentioned the above to show how very nearly these ratios agree with my exact ratio of 21 to 34 half base to apothem.
| Fig. 11. Cephren. | Fig. 12. Cephren. |
Figures 11 and 12 show the ratios of Cephren, viz., half base to apothem, 20 to 33 exactly, and half base, altitude, and apothem respectively, as 80, 105, and 132, very nearly.
Also half diagonal, altitude, and edge, practically as 431, 400, and 588.
| Fig. 13. Mycerīnus. | Fig. 14. Mycerīnus. |
Figures 13 and 14 show the ratios of Mycerinus, viz., half base to apothem, 20 to 32 exactly, and half base, altitude, and apothem respectively, as 20, 25, and 32 very nearly.
Also full diagonal to edge as 297 to 198, nearly. A peculiarity of this pyramid is, that base is to altitude as apothem is to half base. Thus, 40 : 25 :: 32 : 20; that is, half base is a fourth proportional to base, apothem, and altitude.
§ 5. THE EXACT DIMENSIONS OF THE PYRAMIDS.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
Figures 15 to 20 inclusive, show the linear dimensions of the three pyramids, also their angles. The base angles are, Cheops, 51° 51′ 20"; Cephren, 52° 41′ 41″; and Mycerinus, 51° 19′ 4″.
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
Fig. 19. Mycerīnus.
|
|
In Cheops, my dimensions agree with Piazzi Smyth—in the base of Cephren, with Vyse and Perring—in the height of Cephren, with Sir Gardner Wilkinson, nearly—in the base of Mycerinus, they agree with the usually accepted measures, and in the height of Mycerinus, they exceed Jas. J. Wild's measure, by not quite one of my cubits.
In my angles I agree very nearly with Piazzi Smyth, for Cheops, and with Agnew, for Cephren, differing about half a degree from Agnew, for Mycerinus, who took this pyramid to represent the same relation of Π that P. Smyth ascribes to Cheops (viz.: 51° 51′ 14·″3), while he gave Cheops about the same angle which I ascribe to Mycerinus.
I shall now show how I make Cephren and Cheops of equal bases of 420 R.B. cubits at the same level, viz.—that of Cephren's base.
John James Wild made the bases of Cheops, Cephren, and Mycerinus, respectively, 80, 100, and 104·90 cubits above some point that he called Nile Level.
His cubit was, I believe, the Memphis, or Nilometric cubit—but at any rate, he made the base of Cephren 412 of them.
I therefore divided the recognized base of Cephren—viz., 707·75 British feet—by 412, and got a result of 1·7178 British feet for his cubit. Therefore, his measures multiplied by 1·7178 and divided by 1·685 will turn his cubits into R.B. cubits.
I thus make Cheops, Cephren, and Mycerinus, respectively, 81·56, 101·93, and 106·93 R.B. cubits above the datum that J. J. Wild calls Nile Level. According to Bonwick's "Facts and Fancies," p. 31, high water Nile would be 138½ ft. below base of Cheops (or 82·19 R.B. cubits).
Piazzi Smyth makes the pavement of Cheops 1752 British inches (or 86·64 R.B. cubits) above average Nile Level, but, by scaling his map, his high Nile Level appears to agree nearly with Wild.
It is the relative levels of the Pyramids, however, that I require, no matter how much above Nile Level.
Cephren's base of 420 cubits being 101·93 cubits, and Cheops' base of 452 cubits being 81·56 cubits above Wild's datum, the difference in level of their bases is, 20·37 cubits.
The ratio of base to altitude of Cheops being 330 to 210, therefore 20·37 cubits divided by 210 and multiplied by 330 equals 32 cubits; and 452 cubits minus 32 cubits, equals 420.
Similarly, the base of Mycerinus is 5 cubits above the base of Cephren, and the ratio of base to altitude 32 to 20; therefore, 5 cubits divided by 20 and multiplied by 32 equals 8 cubits to be added to the 210 cubit base of Mycerinus, making it 218 cubits in breadth at the level of Cephren's base.
Thus, a horizontal section or plan at the level of Cephren's base would meet the slopes of the Pyramids so that they would on plan appear as squares with sides equal to 218, 420, and 420 R.B. cubits, for Mycerinus, Cephren, and Cheops, respectively.
Fig. 21. Click on the image to view larger version.
| R.B. Cub. | |
| Apex of Cephren above Base Cheops | 295·98 |
| Apex of Cheops above Base Cheops | 287·77 |
| Apex of Mycerinus above Base Cheops | 156·51 |
| Base Cephren above base of Cheops | 20·37 |
| Base Mycerinus above base of Cheops | 25·37 |
Piazzi Smyth makes the top of the tenth course of Cheops 414 pyramid inches above the pavement; and 414 divided by 20·2006 equals 20·49 R.B. cubits.
But I have already proved that Cheops' 420 cubit base measure occurs at a level of 20·37 cubits above pavement; therefore is this level the level of the top of the tenth course, for the difference is only 0·12 R.B. cubits, or 2½ inches.
I wish here to note as a matter of interest, but not as affecting my theory, the following measures of Piazzi Smyth, turned into R.B. cubits, viz.:—
| PYR. INCHES. | R.B. CUBITS. | ||
| King's Chamber floor, above pavement | 1702· | = | 84·25 |
| Cheops' Base, as before stated | 9131·05 | = | 452·01 |
| King's Chamber, "True Length," | 412·132 | = | 20·40 |
| King's Chamber, "True First Height," | 230·389 | = | 11·40 |
| King's Chamber, "True Breadth," | 206·066 | = | 10·20 |
He makes the present summit platform of Cheops 5445 pyramid inches above pavement. My calculation of 269·80 R.B. cub. (See Fig. 21) is equal to 5450 pyramid inches—this is about 18 cubits below the theoretical apex.
Figure 21 represents the comparative levels and dimensions of Mycerinus, Cephren, and Cheops.
The following peculiarities are noticeable:—That Cheops and Cephren are of equal bases at the level of Cephren's base;—that, at the level of Cheops' base, the latter is only half a cubit larger;—that, from the level of Mycerinus' base, Cheops is just double the height of Mycerinus;—and that from the level of Cephren's base, Cephren is just double the height of Mycerinus; measuring in the latter case, however, only up to the level platform at the summit of Cephren, which is said to be about eight feet wide.
The present summit of Cephren is 23·07 cubits above the present summit of Cheops, and the completed apex of Cephren would be 8·21 cubits above the completed apex of Cheops.
In the summit platforms I have been guided by P. Smyth's estimate of height deficient, 363 pyr. inches, for Cheops, and I have taken 8 feet base for Cephren's summit platform.
§ 6. GEOMETRICAL PECULIARITIES OF THE PYRAMIDS.
In any pyramid, the apothem is to half the base as the area of the four sides is to the area of the base.
| Thus—Ratio apothem to half base Mycerinus | 32 to 20 |
| Thus—Ratio apothem to half base Cephren | 33 to 20 |
| Thus—Ratio apothem to half base Cheops | 34 to 21 |
| AREA OF THE FOUR SIDES. | AREA OF THE BASE. | |
| Mycerinus | 70560· | 44100 |
| Cephren | 291060· | 176400 |
| Cheops | 330777·90 | 204304 |
All in R.B. cubits.
| Therefore— | 32 | : | 20 | : : | 70560· | : | 44100 |
| 33 | : | 20 | : : | 291060· | : | 176400 | |
| 34 | : | 21 | : : | 330777·90 | : | 204304 |
[2]Herodotus states that "the area of each of the four faces of Cheops was equal to the area of a square whose base was the altitude of a Pyramid;" or, in other words, that altitude was a mean proportional to apothem and half base; thus—area of one face equals the fourth of 330777·90 or 82694·475 R.B. cubits, and the square root of 82694·475 is 287·56. But the correct altitude is 287·77, so the error is 0·21, or 4¼ British inches. I have therefore the authority of Herodotus to support the theory which I shall subsequently set forth, that this pyramid was the exponent of lines divided in mean and extreme ratio.
By taking the dimensions of the Pyramid from what I may call its working level, that is, the level of the base of Cephren, this peculiarity shows more clearly, as also others to which I shall refer. Thus—base of Cheops at working level, 420 cubits, and apothem 340 cubits; base area is, therefore, 176400 cubits, and area of one face is (420 cubits, multiplied by half apothem, or 170 cubits) 71400 cubits. Now the square root of 71400 would give altitude, or side of square equal to altitude, 267·207784 cubits: but the real altitude is √(340²-210²) = √71500 = 267·394839. So that the error of Herodotus's proposition is the difference between √714 and √715.
[2] Proctor is responsible for this statement, as I am quoting from an essay of his in the Gentleman's Magazine. R. B.
This leads to a consideration of the properties of the angle formed by the ratio apothem 34 to half base 21, peculiar to the pyramid Cheops. (See Figure 22.)
Fig. 22. Diagram illustrating relations of ratios of the pyramid Cheops.
Calling apothem 34, radius; and half base 21, sine—I find that—
| Radius is the square root of | 1156 | |
| Sine | 441 | |
| Co-sine | 715 | |
| Tangent | 713 | |
| Secant | 1869 | |
| and | Co-versed-sine | 169 |
So it follows that the area of one of the faces, 714, is a mean between the square of the altitude or co-sine, 715, and the square of the tangent, 713.
Thus the reader will notice that the peculiarities of the Pyramid Cheops lie in the regular relations of the squares of its various lines; while the peculiarities of the other two pyramids lie in the relations of the lines themselves.
Mycerinus and Cephren, born, as one may say, of those two noble triangles 3, 4, 5, and 20, 21, 29, exhibit in their lineal developments ratios so nearly perfect that, for all practical purposes, they may be called correct.
| Thus—Mycerinus, | [3]20² | + | 25² | = | 1025, | and | 32² | = | 1024. |
| and Cephren, | [4]80² | + | 105² | = | 17425, | and | 132² | = | 17424. |
| or | [5]400² | + | 431² | = | 345761, | and | 588² | = | 345744. |
See diagrams, Figures 11 to 14 inclusive.
In the Pyramid Cheops, altitude is very nearly a mean proportional between apothem and half base. Apothem being 34, and half base 21, then altitude would be √(34²-21²) = √715 = 26·7394839, and—
21 : 26·7394839 :: 26·7394839 : 34, nearly.
Here, of course, the same difference comes in as occurred in considering the assumption of Herodotus, viz., the difference between √715 and √714; because if the altitude were √714, then would it be exactly a mean proportional between the half base and the apothem; (thus, 21 : 26·72077 :: 26·72077 :: 34.)
[3] Half base to altitude.
[4] Half base to altitude.
[5] Half diagonal of base to altitude.
In Cheops, the ratios of apothem, half base and edge are, 34, 21, and 40, very nearly, thus, 34² + 21² = 1597, and 40² = 1600.
The dimensions of Cheops (from the level of the base of Cephren) to be what Piazzi Smyth calls a Π pyramid, would be—
| Half base | 210 | R.B. cubits. |
| Altitude | 267·380304, &c. | " |
| Apothem | 339·988573, &c. | " |
Altitude being to perimeter of base, as radius of a circle to circumference.
My dimensions of the pyramid therefore in which—
| Half base | = | 210 | R.B. cubits. |
| Altitude | = | 267·394839 &c. | " |
| Apothem | = | 340 | " |
come about as near to the ratio of Π as it is possible to come, and provide simple lines and templates to the workmen in constructing the building; and I entertain no doubt that on the simple lines and templates that my ratios provide, were these three pyramids built.
§ 6A. THE CASING STONES OF THE PYRAMIDS.
Figures 23, 24, and 25, represent ordinary casing stones of the three pyramids, and Figures 26, 27, and 28, represent angle or quoin casing stones of the same.
The casing stone of Cheops, found by Colonel Vyse, is represented in Bonwick's "Pyramid Facts and Fancies," page 16, as measuring four feet three inches at the top, eight feet three inches at the bottom, four feet eleven inches at the back, and six feet three inches at the front. Taking four feet eleven inches as Radius, and six feet three inches as Secant, then the Tangent is three feet ten inches and three tenths.
Thus, in inches (√(75²-59²)) = 46·30 inches; therefore the inclination of the stone must have been—slant height 75 inches to 46·30 inches horizontal. Now, 46·30 is to 75, as 21 is to 34. Therefore, Col. Vyse's casing stone agrees exactly with my ratio for the Pyramid Cheops, viz., 21 to 34. (See Figure 29.)
Fig. 29. Col. Vyse's Casing Stone.
75 : 46·3 :: 34 : 21
This stone must have been out of plumb at the back an inch and seven tenths; perhaps to give room for grouting the back joint of the marble casing stone to the limestone body of the work: or, because, as it is not a necessity in good masonry that the back of a stone should be exactly plumb, so long as the error is on the right side, the builders might not have been particular in that respect.
Fig. 59. (Temple of Cheops, standing at angle of wall.)
Figure 59 represents such a template as the masons would have used in building Cheops, both for dressing and setting the stones. (The courses are drawn out of proportion to the template.) The other pyramids must have been built by the aid of similar templates.
Such large blocks of stone as were used in the casing of these pyramids could not have been completely dressed before setting; the back and ends, and the top and bottom beds were probably dressed off truly, and the face roughly scabbled off; but the true slope angle could not have been dressed off until the stone had been truly set and bedded, otherwise there would have been great danger to the sharp arises.
I shall now record the peculiarities of the 3, 4, 5 or Pythagorean triangle, and the right-angled triangle 20, 21, 29.
§ 7. PECULIARITIES OF THE TRIANGLES 3, 4, 5, AND 20, 21, 29.
The 3, 4, 5 triangle contains 36° 52′ 11·65″ and the complement or greater angle 53° 7′ 48·35″
| Radius | 5 | = | 60 | whole numbers.[6] |
| Co-sine | 4 | = | 48 | " |
| Sine | 3 | = | 36 | " |
| Versed sine | 1 | = | 12 | " |
| Co-versed sine | 2 | = | 24 | " |
| Tangent | 3¾ | = | 45 | " |
| Secant | 6¼ | = | 75 | " |
| Co-tangent | 6⅔ | = | 80 | " |
| Co-secant | 8⅓ | = | 100 | " |
Tangent + Secant = Diameter or 2 Radius
Co-tan + Co-sec = 3 Radius
Sine : Versed-sine :: 3 : 1
Co-sine : Co-versed sine :: 2 : 1
Figure 30 illustrates the preceding description. Figure 31 shows the 3·1 triangle, and the 2·1 triangle built up on the sine and co-sine of the 3, 4, 5 triangle.
The 3·1 triangle contains 18° 26′ 5·82″ and the 2·1 triangle 26° 33′ 54·19″; the latter has been frequently noticed as a pyramid angle in the gallery inclinations.
Figure 32 shows these two triangles combined with the 3, 4, 5 triangle, on the circumference of a circle.
[6] 60 = 3 × 4 × 5
The 20, 21, 29 triangle contains 43° 36′ 10·15″ and the complement, 46° 23′ 49·85″.
Expressed in whole numbers—
| Radius | 29 | = | [7]12180 |
| Sine | 20 | = | 8400 |
| Co-sine | 21 | = | 8820 |
| Versed sine | 8 | = | 3360 |
| Co-versed sine | 9 | = | 3780 |
| Tangent | = | 11600 | |
| Co-tangent | = | 12789 | |
| Secant | = | 16820 | |
| Co-sec | = | 17661 |
Tangent + Secant = 2⅓ radius
Co-tan + Co-sec = 2½ radius
Sine : Versed sine :: 5 : 2
Co-sine : Co-versed sine :: 7 : 3
[7] 12180 = 20 × 21 × 29
It is noticeable that while the multiplier required to bring radius 5 and the rest into whole numbers, for the 3, 4, 5 triangle is twelve, in the 20, 21, 29 triangle it is 420, the key measure for the bases of the two main pyramids in R.B. cubits.[8]
[8] 12 = 3 × 4, and 420 = 20 × 21
I am led to believe from study of the plan, and consideration of the whole numbers in this 20, 21, 29 triangle, that the R.B. cubit, like the Memphis cubit, was divided into 280 parts.
The whole numbers of radius, sine, and co-sine divided by 280, give a very pretty measure and series in R.B. cubits, viz., 43½, 30, and 31½, or 87, 60, and 63, or 174, 120 and 126;—all exceedingly useful in right-angled measurements. Notice that the right-angled triangle 174, 120, 126, in the sum of its sides amounts to 420.
Figure 33 illustrates the 20, 21, 29 triangle. Figure 34 shows the 5·2 and 7·3 triangles built up on the sine and co-sine of the 20, 21, 29 triangle.
The 5·2 triangle contains 21° 48′ 5·08″ and the 7·3 triangle 23° 11′ 54·98″.
Figure 35 shows how these two triangles are combined with the 20, 21, 29 triangle on the circumference, and Figure 36 gives a general view and identification of these six triangles which occupied an important position in the trigonometry of a people who did all their work by right angles and proportional lines.
Fig. 36. Ratios of Leading Triangles.
§ 8. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
It must be admitted that in the details of the building of the Pyramids of Gïzeh there are traces of other measures than R. B. cubits, but that the original cubit of the plan was 1·685 British feet I feel no doubt. It is a perfect and beautiful measure, fit for such a noble design, and, representing as it does the sixtieth part of a second of the Earth's polar circumference, it is and was a measure for all time.
It may be objected that these ancient geometricians could not have been aware of the measure of the Earth's circumference; and wisely so, were it not for two distinct answers that arise. The first being, that since I think I have shown that Pythagoras never discovered the Pythagorean triangle, but that it must have been known and practically employed thousands of years before his era, in the Egyptian Colleges where he obtained his M.A. degree, so in the same way it is probable that Eratosthenes, when he went to work to prove that the earth's circumference was fifty times the distance from Syene to Alexandria, may have obtained the idea from his ready access to the ill-fated Alexandrian Library, in which perhaps some record of the learning of the builders of the Pyramids was stored. And therefore I claim that there is no reason why the pyramid builders should not have known as much about the circumference of the earth as the modern world that has calmly stood by in its ignorance and permitted those magnificent and, as I shall prove, useful edifices to be stripped of their beautiful garments of polished marble.
My second answer is that the correct cubit measure may have been got by its inventors in a variety of other ways; for instance, by observations of shadows of heavenly bodies, without any knowledge even that the earth was round; or it may have been evolved like the British inch, which Sir John Herschel tells us is within a thousandth part of being one five hundred millionth of the earth's polar axis. I doubt if the circumference of the earth was considered by the inventor of the British inch.
It was a peculiarity of the Hindoo mathematicians that they tried to make out that all they knew was very old. Modern savants appear to take the opposite stand for any little information they happen to possess.
The cubit which is called the Royal Babylonian cubit and stated to measure O·5131 metre, differs so slightly from my cubit, only the six-hundredth part of a foot, that it may fairly be said to be the same cubit, and it will be for antiquaries to trace the connection, as this may throw some light on the identity of the builders of the Pyramids of Gïzeh. Few good English two-foot rules agree better than these two cubits do.
While I was groping about in the dark searching for this bright needle, I tried on the plan many likely ancient measures.
For a long time I worked in Memphis or Nilometric cubits, which I made 1·7126 British feet; they seem to vary from 1·70 to 1·72, and although I made good use of them in identifying other people's measures, still they were evidently not in accordance with the design; but the R.B. cubit of 1·685 British feet works as truly into the plan of the Pyramids without fractions as it does into the circumference of the earth.
Here I might, to prevent others from falling into one of my errors, point out a rock on which I was aground for a long time. I took the base of the Pyramid Cheops, determined by Piazzi Smyth, from Bonwick's "Pyramid Facts and Fancies" (a valuable little reference book), as 763.81 British feet, and the altitude as 486.2567; and then from Piazzi Smyth's "Inheritance," page 27, I confirmed these figures, and so worked on them for a long time, but found always a great flaw in my work, and at last adopted a fresh base for Cheops, feeling sure that Mr. Smyth's base was wrong: for I was absolutely grounded in my conviction that at a certain level, Cheops' and Cephren's measures bore certain relations to each other. I subsequently found in another part of Mr. Smyth's book, that the correct measures were 761.65 and 484.91 British feet for base and altitude, which were exactly what I wanted, and enabled me to be in accordance with him in that pyramid which he appears to have made his particular study.
For the information of those who may wish to compare my measures, which are the results of an even or regular circumference without fractions, with Mr. Smyth's measures, which are the results of an even or regular diameter without fractions, it may be well to state that there are just about 99 R.B. cubits in 80 of Piazzi Smyth's cubits of 25 pyramid inches each.
§ 9. THE PYRAMIDS OF EGYPT, THE THEODOLITES OF THE EGYPTIAN LAND SURVEYORS.
About twenty-three years ago, on my road to Australia, I was crossing from Alexandria to Cairo, and saw the pyramids of Gïzeh.
I watched them carefully as the train passed along, noticed their clear cut lines against the sky, and their constantly changing relative position.
I then felt a strong conviction that they were built for at least one useful purpose, and that purpose was the survey of the country. I said, "Here be the Theodolites of the Egyptians."
Built by scientific men, well versed in geometry, but unacquainted with the use of glass lenses, these great stone monuments are so suited in shape for the purposes of land surveying, that the practical engineer or surveyor must, after consideration, admit that they may have been built mainly for that purpose.
Not only might the country have been surveyed by these great instruments, and the land allotted at periodical times to the people; but they, remaining always in one position, were there to correct and readjust boundaries destroyed or confused by the annual inundations of the Nile.
The Pyramids of Egypt may be considered as a great system of landmarks for the establishment and easy readjustment at any time of the boundaries of the holdings of the people.
The Pyramids of Gïzeh appear to have been main marks; and those of Abousir, Sakkârah, Dashow, Lisht, Meydoun, &c., with the great pyramids in Lake Mœris, subordinate marks, in this system, which was probably extended from Chaldea through Egypt into Ethiopia.
The pyramid builders may perhaps have made the entombment of their Kings one of their exoteric objects, playing on the morbid vanity of their rulers to induce them to the work, but in the minds of the builders before ever they built must have been planted the intention to make use of the structures for the purposes of land surveying.
The land of Egypt was valuable and maintained a dense population; every year it was mostly submerged, and the boundaries destroyed or confused. Every soldier had six to twelve acres of land; the priests had their slice of the land too; after every war a reallotment of the lands must have taken place, perhaps every year.
While the water was lying on the land, it so softened the ground that the stone boundary marks must have required frequent readjustment, as they would have been likely to fall on one side.
By the aid of their great stone theodolites, the surveyors, who belonged to the priestly order, were able to readjust the boundaries with great precision. That all science was comprised in their secret mysteries may be one reason why no hieroglyphic record of the scientific uses of the pyramids remains. It is possible that at the time of Diodorus and Herodotus, (and even when Pythagoras visited Egypt,) theology may have so smothered science, that the uses of the pyramids may have been forgotten by the very priests to whom in former times the knowledge belonged; but "a respectful reticence" which has been noticed in some of these old writers on pyramid and other priestly matters would rather lead us to believe that an initiation into the mysteries may have sealed their lips on subjects about which they might otherwise have been more explicit.
The "closing" of one pyramid over another in bringing any of their many lines into true order, must even now be very perfect;—but now we can only imagine the beauties of these great instrumental wonders of the world when the casing stones were on them. We can picture the rosy lights of one, and the bright white lights of others; their clear cut lines against the sky, true as the hairs of a theodolite; and the sombre darkness of the contrasting shades, bringing out their angles with startling distinctness. Under the influence of the Eastern sun, the faces must have been a very blaze of light, and could have been seen at enormous distances like great mirrors.
I declare that the pyramids of Gïzeh in all their polished glory, before the destroyer stripped them of their beautiful garments, were in every respect adapted to flash around clearly defined lines of sight, upon which the lands of the nation could be accurately threaded. The very thought of these mighty theodolites of the old Egyptians fills me with wonder and reverence. What perfect and beautiful instruments they were! never out of adjustment, always correct, always ready; no magnetic deviation to allow for. No wonder they took the trouble they did to build them so correctly in their so marvellously suitable positions.
If Astronomers agree that observations of a pole star could have been accurately made by peering up a small gallery on the north side of one of the pyramids only a few hundred feet in length, I feel that I shall have little difficulty in satisfying them that accurate measurements to points only miles away could have been made from angular observations of the whole group.
§ 10. HOW THE PYRAMIDS WERE MADE USE OF.
It appears from what I have already set forth that the plan of the Pyramids under consideration is geometrically exact, a perfect set of measures.
I shall now show how these edifices were applied to a thoroughly geometrical purpose in the true meaning of the word—to measure the Earth.
I shall show how true straight lines could be extended from the Pyramids in given directions useful in right-angled trigonometry, by direct observation of the buildings, and without the aid of other instruments.
And I shall show how by the aid of a simple instrument angles could be exactly observed from any point.
This Survey theory does not stand or fall on the merits of my theory of the Gïzeh plan. Let it be proved that this group is not built on the exact system of triangulation set forth by me, it is still a fact that its plan is in a similar shape, and any such shape would enable a surveyor acquainted with the plan to lay down accurate surveys by observations of the group even should it not occupy the precise lines assumed by me.
And here I must state that although the lines of the plan as laid down herein agree nearly with the lines as laid down in Piazzi Smyth's book, in the Penny Cyclopædia, and in an essay of Proctor's in the Gentleman's Magazine, still I find that they do not agree at all satisfactorily with a map of the Pyramids in Sharp's "Egypt," said to be copied from Wilkinson's map.
We will, however, for the time, and to explain my survey theory, suppose the plan theory to be correct, as I firmly believe it is.
And then, supposing it may be proved that the respective positions of the pyramids are slightly different to those that I have allotted to them on my plan, it will only make a similar slight difference to the lines and angles which I shall here show could be laid out by their aid.
Let us in the first place comprehend clearly the shape of the land of Egypt.
A sector or fan, with a long handle—the fan or sector, the delta; and the handle of the fan, the Nile Valley, running nearly due south.
The Pyramids of Gïzeh are situate at the angle of the sector, on a rocky eminence whence they can all be seen for many miles. The summits of the two high ones can be seen from the delta, and from the Nile Valley to a very great distance; how far, I am unable to say; but I should think that while the group could be made general use of for a radius of fifteen miles, the summits of Cephren and Cheops could be made use of for a distance of thirty miles; taking into consideration the general fall of the country.
It must be admitted that if meridian observations of the star Alpha of the Dragon could be made with accuracy by peeping up a small hole in one of the pyramids, then surely might the surveyors have carried true north and south lines up the Nile Valley as far as the summit of Cheops was visible, by "plumbing in" the star and the apex of the pyramid by the aid of a string and a stone.
True east and west lines could have been made to intersect such north and south lines from the various groups of pyramids along the river banks, by whose aid also such lines would be prolonged.
Next, supposing that their astronomers had been aware of the latitude of Cheops, and the annual northing and southing of the sun, straight lines could have been laid out in various sectoral directions to the north-eastward and north-westward of Cheops, across the delta, as far as the extreme apex of the pyramid was visible, by observations of the sun, rising or setting over his summit. (That the Dog-star was observed in this manner from the north-west, I have little doubt.)
For this purpose, surveyors would be stationed at suitable distances apart with their strings and their stones, ready to catch the sun simultaneously, and at the very moment he became transfixed upon the apex of the pyramid, and was, as it were, "swallowed by it." (See Figure 37.) The knowledge of the pyramid slope angle from different points of view would enable the surveyor to place himself in readiness nearly on the line.
Surely such lines as these would be as true and as perfect as we could lay out nowadays with all our modern instrumental appliances. A string and a stone here, a clean-cut point of stone twenty miles away, and a great ball of fire behind that point at a distance of ninety odd million miles. The error in such a line would be very trifling.
Such observations as last mentioned would have been probably extended from Cephren for long lines, as being the higher pyramid above the earth's surface, and may have been made from the moon or stars.
In those days was the sun the intimate friend of man. The moon and stars were his hand-maidens.
How many of us can point to the spot of the sun's rising or setting? We, with our clocks, and our watches, and our compasses, rarely observe the sun or stars. But in a land and an age when the sun was the only clock, and the pyramid the only compass, the movements and positions of the heavenly bodies were known to all. These people were familiar with the stars, and kept a watch upon their movements.
How many of our vaunted educated population could point out the Dog-star in the heavens?—but the whole Egyptian nation hailed his rising as the beginning of their year, and as the harbinger of their annual blessing, the rising of the waters of the Nile.
| Fig. 38. From the North West Bearing 315° Sun in the West. | |
| Fig. 39. From the South East Bearing 135° Sun in the West. | |
| Fig. 40. From the North East Bearing 45° Sun in the East. | |
| Fig. 41. From the South West Bearing 225° Sun in the East. |
It is possible therefore that the land surveyors of Egypt made full use of the heavenly bodies in their surveys of the land; and while we are pitifully laying out our new countries by the circumferenter and the compass, we presume to speak slightingly of the supposed dark heathen days, when the land of Egypt was surveyed by means of the sun and the stars, and the theodolites were built of stone, with vertical limbs five hundred feet in height, and horizontal limbs three thousand feet in diameter.
Imagine half a dozen such instruments as this in a distance of about sixty miles (for each group of pyramids was effectually such an instrument), and we can form some conception of the perfection of the surveys of an almost prehistoric nation.
The centre of Lake Mœris, in which Herodotus tells us two pyramids stood 300 feet above the level of the lake, appears from the maps to be about S. 28° W., or S. 29° W. from Gïzeh, distant about 57 miles, and the Meidân group of pyramids appears to be about 33 miles due south of Gïzeh.
Figures 38, 39, 40 and 41, show that north-west, south-east, north-east, and south-west lines from the pyramids could be extended by simply plumbing the angles. These lines would be run in sets of two's and three's, according to the number of pyramids in the group; and their known distances apart at that angle would check the correctness of the work.
A splendid line was the line bearing 43° 36′ 10·15″, or 223° 36′ 10·15″ from Cheops and Cephren, the pyramids covering each other, the line of hypotenuse of the great 20, 21, 29 triangle of the plan. This I call the 20, 21 line. (See Figure 42.)
Figure 43 represents the 3, 4, 5 triangle line from the summits of Mycerinus and Cheops in true line bearing 216° 52' 11·65". This I call the south 4, west 3 line.
The next line is what I call the 2, 1 line, and is illustrated by figure 44. It is one of the most perfect of the series, and bears S. 26° 33' 54·9" W. from the apex of Cephren. This line demonstrates clearly why Mycerinus was cased with red granite.
Not in memory of the beautiful and rosy-cheeked Nitocris, as some of the tomb theory people say, but for a less romantic but more useful object; simply because, from this quarter, and round about, the lines of the pyramids would have been confused if Mycerinus had not been of a different color. The 2, 1 line is a line in which Mycerinus would have been absolutely lost in the slopes of Cephren but for his red color. There is not a fact that more clearly establishes my theory, and the wisdom and forethought of those who planned the Gïzeh pyramids, than this red pyramid Mycerinus, and the 2, 1 line.
Hekeyan Bey, speaks of this pyramid as of a "ruddy complexion;" John Greaves quotes from the Arabic book, Morat Alzeman, "and the lesser which is coloured;" and an Arabic writer who dates the Pyramids three hundred years before the Flood, and cannot find among the learned men of Egypt "any certain relation concerning them" nor any "memory of them amongst men," also expatiates upon the beauties of the "coloured satin" covering of this one particular pyramid.
| Fig. 42. South 21. West 20. Bearing 223°.36'.10·15". | |
| Fig. 43 South 4. West 3. Bearing 216°.52'.11·65". | |
| Fig. 44. South 2. West 1. Bearing 206°.33'.54·18". | |
| Fig. 45. South 96. West 55. Bearing 209°.48'.32·81". | |
| Fig. 46. South 3. West 1. Bearing 198°.26'.5·82". | |
| Fig. 47. South 5. West 2. Bearing 201°.48'.5". | |
| Fig. 48. South 7. West 3. Bearing 203°.11'.55". |
Figure 45 represents the line south 96, west 55, from Cephren, bearing 209° 48' 32·81"; the apex of Cephren is immediately above the apex of Mycerinus.
Figure 46 is the S. 3 W. 1 line, bearing 198° 26' 5.82"; here the dark slope angle of the pyramids with the sun to the eastward occupies half of the apparent half base.
Figure 47 is the S. 5, W. 2 line, bearing 201° 48' 5"; here Cephren and Mycerinus are in outside slope line.
Figure 48 is the S. 7 W. 3 line, bearing 203° 11' 55"; here the inside slope of Cephren springs from the centre of the apparent base of Mycerinus.
I must content myself with the preceding examples of a few pyramid lines, but must have said enough to show that from every point of the compass their appearance was distinctly marked and definitely to be determined by surveyors acquainted with the plan.
§ 11. DESCRIPTION OF THE ANCIENT PORTABLE SURVEY INSTRUMENT.
I must now commence with a single pyramid, show how approximate observations could be made from it, and then extend the theory to a group with the observations thereby rendered more perfect and delicate.
We will suppose the surveyor to be standing looking at the pyramid Cephren; he knows that its base is 420 cubits, and its apothem 346½ cubits. He has provided himself with a model in wood, or stone, or metal, and one thousandth of its size—therefore his model will be O.42 cubit base, and O.3465 cubit apothem—or, in round numbers, eight and half inches base, and seven inches apothem.
This model is fixed on the centre of a card or disc, graduated from the centre to the circumference, like a compass card, to the various points of the compass, or divisions of a circle.
The model pyramid is fastened due north and south on the lines of this card or disc, so that when the north point of the card points north, the north face of the model pyramid faces to the north.
The surveyor also has a table, which, with a pair of plumb lines or mason's levels, he can erect quite level: this table is also graduated from the centre with divisions of a circle, or points of the compass, and it is larger than the card or disc attached to the model.
This table is made so that it can revolve upon its stand, and can be clamped. We will call it the lower limb. There is a pin in the centre of the lower limb, and a hole in the centre of the disc bearing the model, which can be thus placed upon the centre of the table, and becomes the upper limb. The upper limb can be clamped to the lower limb.
The first process will be to clamp both upper and lower limbs together, with the north and south lines of both in unison, then revolve both limbs on the stand till the north and south line points straight for the pyramid in the distance, which is done by the aid of sights erected at the north and south points of the perimeter of the lower limb. When this is adjusted, clamp the lower limb and release the upper limb; now revolve the upper limb until the model pyramid exactly covers the pyramid in the distance, and shows just the same shade on one side and light on the other, when viewed from the sights of the clamped lower limb—and the lines, angles, and shades of the model coincide with the lines, angles, and shades of the pyramid observed;—now clamp the upper limb. Now does the model stand really due north and south, the same as the pyramid in the distance; it throws the same shades, and exhibits the same angles when seen from the same point of view; just as much of it is in shade and as much of it is in light as the pyramid under observation; therefore it must be standing due north and south, because Cephren himself is standing due north and south, and the upper limb reads off on the lower limb the angle or bearing observed.
So far we possess an instrument equal to the modern circumferenter, and yet we have only brought one pyramid into work.
Fig. 6 Cheops.
Fig. 7 Cephren.
Fig. 8 Mycerīnus.
Fig. 15. Cheops.
Fig. 16. Cheops.
Fig. 17. Cephren.
Fig. 18. Cephren.
Fig. 20. Mycerīnus: