The Unexpected Consequences of a Story:
Preservation, pt. 5

July 15, 2006

One of the most popular medieval traditions concerning the pyramids at Giza is that of a supposed challenge from their builder, inscribed on the surface of the pyramid. Here is the version provided by Mas'udi in the 10th century:

...the following is written: “We constructed these pyramids, so whoever is thought to be our equal in sovereignty, attainment of power, and perfection in strength, let him destroy these pyramids and efface its inscriptions. Although to destroy is easier than to construct, and taking apart is easier than to put together." It is related that one of the Muslim kings began to destroy a few of them, but then the land tax was not sufficient for their tearing down.

Interestingly, al-Masudi intimates that a Muslim ruler had made an attempt at destroying the pyramids, but failed. Since the inscription itself is obviously apocryphal, it is tempting to think that maybe this failure led to the popularity of this tradition: the pyramids as standing challenges for rulers who come later.

Early in the 12th century, Abu al-Salt al-Andalusi provided a fuller version of the story:

[The Copts] assert that the builder of the pyramids was Surid, who did so on account of a vision he saw. The contents of this vision was that harm would come down from the sky, and that this harm would be a great flood. They say he built the two pyramids in the time of six months and covered them with a colored silk brocade. He wrote upon the pyramids: “We built them in six months. Tell whoever comes after us to destroy them in 600 years—yet to destroy is easier than to construct. We clothed them with colored silk, but let him clothe them in mats—yet mats are of less value than silk.”

This marks a conflation of the original tradition with the tradition concerning Surid, the supposed builder of the pyramids. In its earliest versions the challenge is simply written on the pyramid, and not tied to a specific king.. but now it has been brought into the orbit of a specific (although fictional) king.

This story was clearly in the air.. and now things get serious. At the death of Salah al-Din in 1193, his son Uthman took over as Ayyubid Sultan in Egypt. It was under this ruler that the most sustained attack against a pyramid took place:

Malik Aziz ‘Uthman ibn Salah al-Din Yusaf ibn Ayyub when he possessed sovereignty for himself following his father, ignorant ones among his friends enticed him to destroy these pyramids. He began with the small red pyramid and sent out to it excavators and stone workers, along with a group composed of the princes of his country and great ones of his kingdom. He ordered them to destroy this pyramid.

This is the account given by 'Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi early in the 13th century.. just a few years after the death of Uthman. Mysterious in his account, though, is just how his friends could "entice" him to destroy the pyramids. I can see friends enticing a king to, say, make a land grab or to raise taxes.. but to destroy the pyramids? One tries hard to imagine that conversation: "Uthman, why don't you spend millions and tear down the pyramids! Just for fun!" But I think we have to recall the popular tradition about the written challenge on the pyramids.. directed at later rulers. Suddenly an effort to destroy the pyramids becomes easier to understand. Their destruction would be a declaration of a later king's greatness. And for the son of Salah al-Din some such public declaration may have been important.

So he set about destroying the "red pyramid." None of the pyramids at Giza are today known as the red pyramid.. but in fact the smaller pyramid of Menkaure was once mostly covered in the reddish tinted Aswan granite. You can still see the lower portions of this covering:

Covered with those granite blocks, it could indeed be called the "red pyramid." These granite blocks, however, are present only on the lowest portions of it, which would have been covered with sand and debris (and thus spared).

Notice in the above photo the litter of blocks in front of the pyramid. It seems like a war zone.. and in some ways it was a war—aimed at a pyramid. 'Abd al-Latif gives a vivid description of what happened after Uthman was enticed:

So [his men] pitched camp nearby and the men and laborers gathered. They economized with respect to their expenses and occupied themselves for 8 months, with horses and with their own effort, destroying each day, after strain and exertion and the expending of great pains, one or two stones. People above would dislodge a stone with wedges; the people below would pull it with cables and ropes. When the stone fell, a great crash was heard from far away, to the point that mountains trembled and the earth shook, and the stone plunged into the sand... When their stay lengthened, their support dwindled, their fatigue multiplied, and their determination became feeble, they desisted, pained that they did not accomplish their desire, but had rather disfigured the pyramid and made plain their inability and failure. That was in the year 1196/7 AD.

Looking at the jumble of stones lying at the base of this pyramd, one can almost imagine the scene.. rocks falling, etc.. And there can be no doubt that they disfigured the pyramid: note the blunt scar on its face:

In the end, the joke is on Uthman. He has supported a large contingent of men for eight months, and they have hardly touched the smallest (!) of the three main pyramids at Giza. 'Abd al-Latif notes trenchantly:

One looking at the stones of this pyramid would think that it had been wholly destroyed. Then one gazing at the pyramid would think that nothing of it had been destroyed, rather that some of its side had fallen away.

All that work and the pyramid still looks whole! And visitors today would hardly realize that a war had been waged against it.. although seeing the piled up stones they should probably suspect that something was up.

We learn a couple of interesting points here. First, the pyramids were understood as a statement of power long past. Contemporary rulers could not tear them down, let alone build something like a pyramid. Second, and most important for our theme of preservation.. we see how important a story can be. The stories that are generated by a culture can have unintended consequences on physical structures. In this case a brash king appears to have seen in the story a chance to prove himself.. and to take advantage of the cultural meaning of the pyramids. Thankfully, he ended up being the perfect example of failure.. but let us never underestimate the power of a simple story, nor the damage it can do.