Great Library of Alexandria books

[Ian]

I was just wondering. If some of the books that the Great Libary of Alexandria were copied, then the originals might still be in circulation. I would like to know if I am correct.

[Eleatic Stranger]

There were books that the Library of Alexandria had that are still extant today (in fact, it's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say that most of the extant books we have now were in the Library -- along with a whole ton of books that are irrevocably lost now). Imagine, for comparison, if all the libraries in the world were lost and all that remained were books owned by a few households. We'd lose an amazing amount of great literature, but I'd bet that the works of Shakespeare would survive.

[TillEulenspiegel]

The calculus is older then most know, Newton was a late entrant, about 2000 years late, Archimedes in fact was the father of calculus. Squaring the circle and the infinite series are his children.

How many other works were lost? Where would we be if we had complex maths 2000 yrs. earlier? What else was lost? It stuns the mind to think with all our "Modern" tools we can't recreate the systems and methods that built the Pyramids and other marvels.

[Ian]

There might be a few books that were in the Alexandrian Library in some Collage Librarys and some private librarys. What does anyone think of that theory?

[TeaBag420]

Originally posted by Eleatic Stranger
There were books that the Library of Alexandria had that are still extant today (in fact, it's probably not too much of an exaggeration to say that most of the extant books we have now were in the Library -- ........).........

It's not an exageration/exaggeration at all. IT'S QUITE SIMPLY FACTUALLY WRONG.

[TeaBag420]

Originally posted by TillEulenspiegel
The calculus is older then most know, Newton was a late entrant, about 2000 years late, Archimedes in fact was the father of calculus. Squaring the circle and the infinite series are his children.

How many other works were lost? Where would we be if we had complex maths 2000 yrs. earlier? What else was lost? It stuns the mind to think with all our "Modern" tools we can't recreate the systems and methods that built the Pyramids and other marvels.

Argument by assertion. Gratuitously asserted, just as gratuitously denied. "Squaring the circle" and infinite series <> calculus. Wrong, wrong, wrong. All wrong.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Originally posted by Ian
I was just wondering. If some of the books that the Great Libary of Alexandria were copied, then the originals might still be in circulation. I would like to know if I am correct.

I still have some of them checked out. I guess they are rather over due by now.

[sorgoth]

Originally posted by TillEulenspiegel
It stuns the mind to think with all our "Modern" tools we can't recreate the systems and methods that built the Pyramids and other marvels.


Yeah, we can.

But nobody wants to pay :p

[TillEulenspiegel]

Originally posted by TeaBag420
Argument by assertion. Gratuitously asserted, just as gratuitously denied. "Squaring the circle" and infinite series <> calculus. Wrong, wrong, wrong. All wrong.

What is wrong? Not assertion BTW there are contemporianious and extemporianious examples of his work as well as a hand written book that was overwritten in the middle ages that bare his own script. The infinite series came from his attempts at ruductionism in his trying to square the circle.

[Tudor]

Originally posted by TillEulenspiegel

It stuns the mind to think with all our "Modern" tools we can't recreate the systems and methods that built the Pyramids and other marvels.

This sort of statement puzzles me every time I hear it. It puzzles me even more when I read it on a computer monitor after it has been typed using a keyboard (the "Modern" tools, you know).

The methods and systems that build the pyramids, were, to put it bluntly, human slaves (couple of tens of thousands of them, actually; you see, they had the nasty habit to die sometimes, so more were brought to work).
Incidentally, how many slaves do you think it would take to build the Petronas Towers, using the same methods and systems that were available then? I know, the Petronas Towers are not giant piles of rock, but still......
And, let's see, how many slaves (armed with the same glorious methods) it would take to build the Eurotunnel? Or a particle accelerator? Or simply your computer?

And, my favorite: how many slaves do you think it would take to throw a rocket to the moon?

What a joke.....(tragic, that is)

[TillEulenspiegel]

It's not that simple Tudor. In speaking of the "methodology" of the pyramids building, one would be thought correct in adopting that point of view where there is unlimited slave labor and brute force engineering. Both , from newly revised and discovered evidence are by those accounts not true.

When I raised the question of engineering feats , it was not an allusion to some sort of "Chariots of the Gods" kind of mystical woo-woo. Rather an understanding of the exact constraints of actually construction on such a scale , using the normal laws of physics and the constraints of architecture available at the time ....and even now.

Source:http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/egyptians/great_pyramid_01.shtml
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/pyramid/explore/howold.html

[Soapy Sam]

Till.

Labour Unions.

HSE regulations.

I doubt Cheops had these problems.

Could we build a big pile of rock using traditional techniques? Of course we could. We would make a lot of mistakes and kill many people in the process.
Believe me, I've shovelled concrete in the desert and I've driven a CAT D-9.

Bulldozers are better.

[TillEulenspiegel]

Criminy.........Can You imagin OSHA at Cheops?...Uh Huh and the Pharoh makes You work without a bathroom break for how many Hours?
No Moses' slave who was almost crushed between two huge blocks are not addresed under Your medical/Dental plan.

[Tudor]

Originally posted by TillEulenspiegel
It's not that simple Tudor. In speaking of the "methodology" of the pyramids building, one would be thought correct in adopting that point of view where there is unlimited slave labor and brute force engineering. Both , from newly revised and discovered evidence are by those accounts not true.

When I raised the question of engineering feats , it was not an allusion to some sort of "Chariots of the Gods" kind of mystical woo-woo. Rather an understanding of the exact constraints of actually construction on such a scale , using the normal laws of physics and the constraints of architecture available at the time ....and even now.



Did I say anything about aliens? I don't remember.

You missed the point, which was that, in order to build a pyramid you only need rocks, slaves, rudimentary mechanical devices, sticks and string. You might need also a clever prick to tell slaves what to do. But the only giant things you will ever make using that are piles of rock. NOTHING else.

You look at those boulders and see monuments of human achivement. I see reminders of miserable and inept cruelty.

PS: What's with the third grade links?

[TillEulenspiegel]

Third grade links? I don't understand what You mean.

As far as the picture emerging from the workers and designers of the pyramids , it is one of a giant co-operative of skilled labor and not the Cecil B De'Mill version of the monuments. (the forced labor slave model)

[Tudor]

Originally posted by TillEulenspiegel

Third grade links? I don't understand what You mean.



As in: Little Jenny has just finished third grade.

Regarding the "giant cooperative": How does one establish that? By finding an ancient hospital at the base of the pyramid? What sort of evidence could an archaeologist uncover in order for a rational man to conclude something like that (twenty thousand men cooperating to move giant rocks) ? This is a methodological problem for the archaeologist and any rational person. Think of the logistical problems that arise from trying to get those people to know about your pyramid, not to mention trying to convince them to work on it.....Why go through so much trouble (risking never to get anything done) when you can simply use slaves, convicts and prisoners of war? I emphasize again: this is a methodological problem; one has to take into account sociological laws (including the laws of economic science) when investigating the past. In this case, a primitive society with no knowledge of electricity had no way to build a giant pile of boulders except using slaves (or magic or some other trick unknown to us; us being the ones who build spaceships).

"Skilled labour"? :bricks: You must be joking.

[B.S]

Originally posted by Tudor
Why go through so much trouble (risking never to get anything done) when you can simply use slaves,

Where's the risk if you are paying your laborers? They probably got a better wage than regular workers. No shortage of people in these conditions. They probably had to turn them away.

[TillEulenspiegel]

I[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tudor
As in: Little Jenny has just finished third grade.

Humm The BBC and PBS are third grade material.. OK If that's Your point of view. What sources would You consider vetted and worthy of quotation?


Regarding the "giant cooperative": How does one establish that? By finding an ancient hospital at the base of the pyramid? What sort of evidence could an archaeologist uncover in order for a rational man to conclude something like that (twenty thousand men cooperating to move giant rocks) ? This is a methodological problem for the archaeologist and any rational person. Think of the logistical problems that arise from trying to get those people to know about your pyramid, not to mention trying to convince them to work on it.....

Huh , I wonder what would an archaeologist in say 3500CE think of the enterprise of building of. the world trade towers?
Think that took any skilled labor? Maybe planning of both the depth and scope of the work and covering minutia up to as a few wires from a single light on the 39th floor to a switch?


http://www.egyptologyonline.com/craftsmen.htm
http://www.rom.on.ca/egypt/case/about/burial2.html
http://www.crystalinks.com/pyregypt.html

I hope You find these third grade links more informative.


Why go through so much trouble (risking never to get anything done) when you can simply use slaves, convicts and prisoners of war?

I'm not sure , but the assertion is one You made, prove it.

I emphasize again: this is a methodological problem; one has to take into account sociological laws (including the laws of economic science) when investigating the past. In this case, a primitive society with no knowledge of electricity had no way to build a giant pile of boulders except using slaves (or magic or some other trick unknown to us; us being the ones who build spaceships).

If You look I was the one who raised "Methodology" , so I don't know why Your trying to emphasize a point I asserted.

{b}"Skilled labour"? :bricks: You must be joking. [/B]

I do joke but it is rather more obvious then anything in this thread. Well welcome to the board.

[Tudor]

Till:

First, thanks for the welcome.

I just realized I'm not cut out for seriously debating things on a public forum, so from now on I will abstain from doing that.

Before I do that though, two things:

I would consider a paper published by a peer reviewed specialised journal to be a valuable source (none of those are online free of charge, though).

I was reffering to the methodology of history and archaeology as sciences, not to the methods of building pyramids.

[Tudor]

I can't resist posting this. Try this:

http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/070391.html

Is the closest thing to a serious article I could find.

It does however amplify my belief that there are some methodological flaws in his (Lehner's) interpretation of evidence: it seems to me that he's playing with words (they didn't have a choice, but they were not slaves because they used to eat a lot; i'm so not confortable with this reasoning, but well....to each the science they deserve).

[TillEulenspiegel]

I don't enjoy public debate either. When I first came to the board I was reticent to speak at all. My first post was attacked and I reconsidered my position knowing all the time that I was right. Well the scales tipped. I was proven right and looked at the subsequent debates.. and realized that there are people here that enjoy being conversant , not necessarily confrontational.

I have learned much and have striven to contribute as much as I take away. There are exceptional minds here. Don't post or do so when you feel comfortable. The time you spend here is not wasted.

Your link is great, tells a greater story then the fictions we've been brought up on. I can't believe that the Cecil B. DeMille reference I made was included in the artical..hehe serendip.......

[Khonshu]

All the archeology does seem to indicate that freemen comprised the vast majority of the labor used to build the pyramids.

It makes sense to me - for the brute force work, you had a country full of farmers to work in the off-season. For the skilled labor, they could work year-round if you employed them full time.

Using slave labor for skilled work is of dubious value. Slaves tend to be unhappy with their status, don't work all that quickly (the next job might be even worse), often there is a communication problem, and then - last but not least - there's intentional sabotage. Never fire a German rifle made in 1945 without having it checked over by a very competent gunsmith...

The truly amazing thing about the pyrimids to me is not that they moved such large blocks of stone, but the level of organization it took make such a huge structure structure within such strict tolerences.

[Eleatic Stranger]

Originally posted by TeaBag420
It's not an exageration/exaggeration at all. IT'S QUITE SIMPLY FACTUALLY WRONG.

Um... so you're saying the Library of Alexandria, while possesssing massive numbers of books, had managed to miss out on, say, The Nicomachean Ethics or the works of Sophocles? Perhaps you should revisit the concept of "multiple copies".....

[SamLeijen]

Greetings all
This is my first post and hopefully not my last.

I can't help wondering if the Vatican may have a collection of aged books from its many ex representives plunderings.

Did they really destroy all the books when the Aztecs were defeated?
I doubt it. There where a lot of Spaniards there and something would have drifted back into Europe. Not just gold.
Plunderers always take momentos.
I imagine the old Romans had scholars in their midst when they went plundering as well. What do scholars like??

Old books is what they like.

Have a happy thought and life will be easier to cope with.

[AK-Dave]

Originally posted by TillEulenspiegel
It stuns the mind to think with all our "Modern" tools we can't recreate the systems and methods that built the Pyramids and other marvels.
If by this you mean that we can't recreate the methods they used to solve the engineering problems of building a great pyramid (their thought process), you are quite correct. Using modern knowledge, we can build a great pyramid using the tools and raw materials they used. What was lost is how THEY solved the problem using those same tools and materials. All we are left with is a best guess based on how we would have done it if we were in their shoes. Using archeological evidence, we will probably get pretty close to finding out exactly how they did it, but until we come across the engineering notes from the people who actually built it, we will never know for sure.