History Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread VII

Never heard of this.

See here.

Herodotus said:
It has twelve covered courts — six in a row facing north, six south — the gates of the one range exactly fronting the gates of the other. Inside, the building is of two storeys and contains three thousand rooms, of which half are underground, and the other half directly above them. I was taken through the rooms in the upper storey, so what I shall say of them is from my own observation, but the underground ones I can speak of only from report, because the Egyptians in charge refused to let me see them, as they contain the tombs of the kings who built the labyrinth, and also the tombs of the sacred crocodiles. The upper rooms, on the contrary, I did actually see, and it is hard to believe that they are the work of men; the baffling and intricate passages from room to room and from court to court were an endless wonder to me, as we passed from a courtyard into rooms, from rooms into galleries, from galleries into more rooms and thence into yet more courtyards. The roof of every chamber, courtyard, and gallery is, like the walls, of stone. The walls are covered with carved figures, and each court is exquisitely built of white marble and surrounded by a colonnade.

I think the answer to daft's question is partly that the archaeological world is not convinced by the claims of the Mataha expedition, and partly that there is a vast amount of salt water beneath the surface of the site, making excavation a very difficult proposition.
 
The Mataha expedition didn't really find the structure at Hawara. An excavator found a large stone plateau near the pyramid at Hawara and believed it to be the foundation of the Herodotus's Labyrinth after the Ptolemies had quarried all the stone. The Mataha expedition use ground scanners to determine if the structure was a foundation or a roof, and they believe they found evidence of walls and rooms beneath the stone. The actual design of the structure is still unknown so we can't match it to Herodotus's description of the Labyrinth.

Why did the Ancient Egyptians abandon the construction of Pyramids? Any approximate dating?

Pyramids were basically giant "Loot me" signs, so later Pharaohs may have thought it was too much effort just to have valuables stolen by graverobbers. Most pyramids in Egypt were built during the Old and Middle Kingdoms. Pharaohs during the New Kingdom were buried in less conspicuous tombs in the Valley of the Kings.

Later, Nubians began building pyramids and went crazy with it. I believe there are even more pyramids in Sudan than there are in Egypt.
 
I was at my school's library and didn't want to do my homework so I looked for a book that mentioned the Egyptian Labyrinth. I found one and noticed it didn't even considered that the stone structure found in Hawara was roof instead of a foundation. So I looked more into the Mataha expedition. I found a video that I think was made by the members of the expidition.

Spoiler :


From watching the video, they were vague with how they determined the labyrinth was still intact and it seems the expedition was funded by one guy who had a hunch. Looking around more on the internet, this expedition is mentioned on a lot of conspiracy sites claiming the Egyptian government will not allow the results to be published. My guess is their findings didn't really hold up to academic standards so no journal published it. (If they even tried to get it published)
 
I was at my school's library and didn't want to do my homework so I looked for a book that mentioned the Egyptian Labyrinth. I found one and noticed it didn't even considered that the stone structure found in Hawara was roof instead of a foundation. So I looked more into the Mataha expedition. I found a video that I think was made by the members of the expidition.

Finding a buried structure with an intact roof would be extremely unusual - what usually happens to stone structures is that their walls are 'borrowed' by others to use in other structures, with the result that only the foundations are left. Even when that's not the case, excavated buildings usually only have shattered tiles on the floor to show where the roof was - thanks, perhaps, to the weight of earth on top of them.
 
Finding a buried structure with an intact roof would be extremely unusual - what usually happens to stone structures is that their walls are 'borrowed' by others to use in other structures, with the result that only the foundations are left. Even when that's not the case, excavated buildings usually only have shattered tiles on the floor to show where the roof was - thanks, perhaps, to the weight of earth on top of them.

I get my hopes up too easy when I hear someone has found something cool. I've already put the book back, but the consensus did seem to be that the labyrinth was taken apart so the stone could be used elsewhere.
 
Well, the Cretan Labyrinth was mythically built to house a famous monster. Perhaps they don't want to awaken what's at the center of this one. Hmmm, time to start working on a script...
 
The Mummy: Return to Egypt? Brendan Fraser needs something to keep him alive.
 
Of course. Personally I find it more interesting that by the time of Herodotus 'labyrinth' had already become synonomous with any kind of mazelike structure. I guess that'll teach me not to read Herodotus. ;)
 
Well, if you must read conspiracy sites, you'll find all sorts of questions about things which probably have totally innocuous answers.
 
The Mummy: Return to Egypt? Brendan Fraser needs something to keep him alive.

This time the bad guys are: The Egyptian Government Agents, bent on stopping anyone from attempting to make a major discovery (religion could have something to do with their motives) and a corrupt western Millionaire/Egyptologist-similar.

A movie like this would do well in box office, and perhaps get real work of uncovering this incredible ancient structure finally started.
 
Well, if you must read conspiracy sites, you'll find all sorts of questions about things which probably have totally innocuous answers.


Skeptics never discover anything of note.
Dig in and seek the answers for yourself(literally on the internet), don't believe in everything you're told by the "official versions".
The rich and powerful out there aren't willing to let general public in on everything.
 
Of course. Personally I find it more interesting that by the time of Herodotus 'labyrinth' had already become synonomous with any kind of mazelike structure. I guess that'll teach me not to read Herodotus. ;)

Read Strabo then.
 
If you're open-minded, please ignore things someone says, simply because they've said them?

I'm more than willing to believe that powerful factions are deliberately trying to hoodwink the general populace, but given how that is going on right in front of our noses pretty much every day with varying levels of success, grand and elaborate conspiracy theories are generally the ones most likely to be wrong.
 
Read Strabo then.

I formulated that a bit odd; I meant to say I haven't read Herodotus. Well, except some excerpts.

If you're open minded please ignore most of what the so-called Egyptologist, Dr. Zahi Hawass has to say, he will deny anything and everything, that's his job, I suppose.

That doesn't sound very open minded...
 
When did capturing enemy ships fall out of favour? What changed to make it obsolete?

I imagine it has to do with the advent of long range guns.


in a mood of reading on Naval stuff these days . Saw the hint in a book on the technical development of the Ironclads . Arturo Prat is the guy who commanded a warship and managed to board the enemy as the enemy was intentionally trying to ram . he has ships named after him , a province in Chile as it seems and the Wikipedia says:

"Arturo Prat" is the most ubiquitous street name across Chile. There are 144 communes in Chile which have a street bearing his name...


so up to almost 1880s that boarding could be a tactic that could have been tried . Corrects my own notion of 1850-60s .
 
Skeptics never discover anything of note.

On the contrary, nothing would be known for certain if it weren't for sceptics, because it's only by doubting and rigorously testing claims that you can tell which ones are true.

I would tend to assume that it would be in the interests of the wealthy and powerful to promote any verifiable amazing archaeological discoveries in their countries, as major sources of income, global interest, and tourism. It's certainly in the interests of academics and of academic publishers to publish positive remarkable results. If the Mataha expedition had verifiable results they would have been published in a high-ranking academic journal. The expedition's website claims to have published some results "in the scientific journal of the NRIAG in fall 2008", but the current NRIAG journal only began in 2012. They presumably refer to its now defunct predecessor Journal of Geophysics, but I'm not able to find any resources from that journal so I can't check this publication. The website goes on to state:

The conclusion of the Hawara geophysic-survey is, however, still waiting to be internationally released by Dr. Zahi Hawass, the Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities (Egypt). Since the release of the scan results at the Ghent University public lecture, Dr Zahi Hawass requested to stop communicating our results, intimidating the Mataha Expedition team members with Egyptian National Security sanctions. After 2 years of patience we decided June 2010, to oppose all cunning and deceit by posting the conclusion on the labyrinthofegypt.com website:

And that's obviously rubbish, because as I say, if they had legitimate results they'd have no difficulty at all publishing them in other journals over which Hawass would have no control. The fact that they can only "publish" them on a purpose-built website indicates that no legitimate academic outlet regards them as publishable. And you can be certain that such outlets would want to publish results of this kind.
 
Top Bottom