Sign up ×
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm investigating proposed alignments between pyramid* shafts and constellations for a video project, and for it, I need to know shaft angles and directions, the directions with respect to true North on Earth (or easily convertible). My problem in looking into this has been that the pyramids are so steeped in new- (and old-) age pseudoscience that online resources I find are all of questionable veracity (i.e., they seem legit but then conclude that the angles are harmonic magical things therefore it was built by aliens).

Can someone point me to the answer via a reputable resource? I would assume with all the study of the pyramids over the centuries that these things are known and agreed upon by legitimate archaeologists.

*I'm referring to the three main ones in Egypt -- Khufu, Khafre, and Menkaure.

share|improve this question
Technically this is a request for reference, but I think this is perhaps the ideal request for a reference. I believe this is entirely in scope for H:SE; it is asking for a fairly specific reference, with fairly specific characteristics. If anyone disagrees, let's continue the discussion on meta – Mark C. Wallace May 22 '14 at 16:29
Well, if you have the answer, I'll take it, I just also need it referenced. :) Your word without a reference is just as good as the random web person's (no offense meant). – Stuart Robbins May 22 '14 at 17:26
@TylerDurden someone asks for help, someone maybe willing to help. Whats the bone in our meat , to vote to close it? Besides, its an interesting one. If 100's of 'not worth' questions can lie unanswered in the bosom of H:SE , whats the problem with having a valid question not closed? – Rohit Apr 25 at 16:16
Look, this is really a basic question with no intent to start a war. I do a blog and podcast called "Exposing PseudoAstronomy," and I've been getting into movies, too. I want to do one on the Orion-Pyramid correlation "theory" and show it's bunk. One aspect of it claims the shafts of the Great Pyramid would align with Sirius but only in 10500 BC. Therefore I need shaft angles. As I said in my post, I've looked but can't find reputable sources. I'm an astrophysicist, not an archaeologist nor historian, I don't know where to look for this. If you want to complain I'm lazy, then just don't post. – Stuart Robbins Apr 26 at 16:42
I'll say it again: This is not inherently a "source request." This is a request for a cited answer. I want the answer. But I want to make sure that it's not something randomly begatten from a new-age website. – Stuart Robbins May 13 at 2:15

2 Answers 2

Mark Lehner talks about this a bit in The Complete Pyramids, he mentions that they are oriented to Orion. (cf. Bauval R.G., 'A master-plan of the three pyramids of Giza Plateau based on the configuration of the three stars of the belt of Orion', Discussions in Egyptology 13 (1989), 7-18) His bibliography is very useful.

"The 'air shafts' extend like antennae through the body of the pyramid from both the King's and the Queen's Chambers. Those from the King's Chamber penetrate all the way to the outside, though very possibly the pyramid casing closed of these purely cultic shafts which may also have been originally plugged in the chamber." (p112)

"Rudolf Gantendrink's robot, Upuaut II, carried a video camera up the southern shaft of the Queen's Chamber, just 20cm (8in) square. It was stopped after about 65m (213ft) by a fine limestone plug with two embedded copper pins." (p112)

share|improve this answer
he wants reputable sources, not some pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo about astral alignment... – jwenting Oct 30 at 6:53
Yeah, unfortunately, it's Bauval's claims themselves that I'm trying to figure out if they're real or not. Therefore, using him as a reference for the numbers would not be fair. – Stuart Robbins Nov 10 at 4:38

There are shafts only in the largest pyramid and none have been found in the others.

The shafts actually make strange and irregular turns at various points, so there is no single "angle" or visage at a particular location in the sky. The depictions you see in books are idealized.

The mode of construction of the shafts is utilitarian and they seem to have some as-yet undiscovered mechanical function. The design and execution of the shafts is consistent with an engineering purpose, not a ceremonial purpose.

share|improve this answer
I don't get the down-votes: it sounds like a valid and informative answer to the question. – Greg Apr 28 at 11:08
@Greg the question asked for a reputabler source and this answer didn't cite any. – Crème Caramelita Apr 28 at 15:38
@CrèmeCaramelita Maybe my English is to weak, but my understanding is that according to the answer there is no that kind of source for the simple reason the statement is a lie / oversimplification. In that sense it is a logical and valid answer. – Greg Apr 29 at 10:20

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.