I think archeologists and historians misinterpret the purpose of pyramids.

I'll bite. I'm assuming you mean Egyptian pyramids, as that architecture has been found across the globe.

May I point out that timber is pretty scarce in the desert and so stone was really the only option.

The high ground for archers is an interesting thought, but there's not really any area for them to amass and be defended from opposing projectiles.

Finally, I don't recall hearing of any archeological findings of weapons and armor near the base. If it were indeed a bunker, it would seem they were never used for such. Which begs the question of why make more?

[–] Sarcastaway [OP] 0 points (+0|-0)

I'm assuming you mean Egyptian pyramids

Mainly referring to those, but the pyramids in south america do also come to mind.

May I point out that timber is pretty scarce in the desert and so stone was really the only option.

Fair point in regard to my arson comment. Though I believe mud/cob/thatched structures would have been the norm even in more wooded areas?

The high ground for archers is an interesting thought, but there's not really any area for them to amass and be defended from opposing projectiles.

In theory the increased range would allow an archer to discourage any opposing archers from getting close enough to be a threat. I'll admit the lack of a foothold and space at the top does poke a hole in my theory.

Finally, I don't recall hearing of any archeological findings of weapons and armor near the base.

If you're referring to the theoretical weapons dropped by attackers, I assume those would be quickly collected for use. Refined metals being valuable, I assume scavengers would make short work of any remains. It should also be mentioned that the vast majority of projectile weapons used during ancient egyptian times were wood/stone/bone, which would decompose somewhat quickly.

Which begs the question of why make more?

I can only speculate, but I think a many generations of pharaohs one-upping each other could explain much of that. And they were of course eventually used as tombs, which carried a large degree of legal and religious stigma for those who violated them.

[–] jobes 2 points (+2|-0)

Stone construction prevents arson and render any sort of siege weapons useless.

Stone construction hinders siege weapons, but it does not make them impossible to destroy. Many siege weapons were used well specifically to destroy stone structures. The pyramids may have been an exception tough due to their excessively solid internal construction. There weren't frequent hollow chambers near the outside that could be easy targets for collapse, so they would be nearly impossible to siege. They just did not have any defense structures, no way to mobilize soldiers/archers, to use counter siege equipment, etc. so I don't see them as military buildings

[–] PhunkyPlatypus 3 points (+3|-0)

You seem to be mixing up the time period. The pyramids are what like 3000 BC? My ancient history is pretty shit, but IIRC seige weapons first started with archimedes and the Greeks in like 500 bc. It might just be me, but it sounds like you're referring to more medieval sort of weaponry.

I may be totally wrong, but I can't recall any thing that would properly fall into that category.

Wait I have an idea..

Summoning @lockeproposal

[–] LockeProposal 3 points (+3|-0)

No, you're about correct. As far as I'm aware, siege weaponry wasn't prevalent in this time period. Walled cities were in some areas, but armies generally fought outside the walls. Chariots were big at this time.

I don't have any sources in front of me to quote as I just got off shift, but if someone has anything to add, I'd gladly check beck into this conversation when I wake up.

[–] Sarcastaway [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

Thanks for contributing to the discussion.

I think you're probably right about siege weapons not being around during ancient Egyptian times. I do wonder though, were large battering rams used during that era? A battering ram seems low-tech enough that someone must have had the idea to pull one around behind a chariot.

[–] cryptex 0 points (+0|-0)

The pyramids of Giza were power plants.

Read the book, the Giza power plant by Christopher dunn. He makes an extremely compelling case that these were ancient high tech machines.

I think archeologists and historians misinterpret the purpose of pyramids.

7 comments

/s/Discussion