So, I was recently over on the r/history subreddit attempting to gather ideas from my fellow man but was unfortunately blocked by some extremely unfriendly mods whom told me to come ask some historians. The topic of discussion I will be asking historians, specifically independent historians with a good understanding of both physics and architecture is that of the structure of the pyramids. I've been watching a YouTube channel named "Ancient Architects" whom proposed a theory that the pyramids may have been built by two civilizations, he uses various kinds of reasoning however the most valid is that of the internal structure of the pyramids consisting of a large amount of 40-50 ton granite blocks quarried precisely, transported, then placed specifically in place during a time that had no possible way to do such a task (we can't reproduce the pyramids to this day). My two questions are, do you really think the Ancient Egyptians built the entirety of the structure that is the pyramids (both the external and internal blocks) and it is reasonable to ask if they were build by two civilizations at two times? Why or why not?
we can't reproduce the pyramids to this day
I think this is the initial supposition that underpins the basic question. But it is incorrect. Archaeologists know very well where the stones came from and have a very good idea how they were moved from the quarry sites to the structures under construction. There is no scholarly doubt that the ancient Egyptians built the pyramids, and very little doubt about their methods. Any introductory Egyptian history/archaeology book can convey the scholarly basis for our understanding of ancient Egyptian construction methods. (For example,Van De Mieroop, A History of Ancient Egypt (Wiley-Blackwell, 2010)).
Did your youtube theorist address the then greater problem of why the first civilization would have built internal tunnels and chambers only that the second civilization use them? Did the second civilization empty the chambers then reuse them? Where is any evidence for those events? What about the clear line of architectural development from mastabas to step pyramids to Giza? The Great Pyramids were part of well documented tradition of royal tomb making. At the end of the day the whole line of reasoning begins to break down because the initial premise 'ancient Egyptians could not possibly have done this' has no real basis in archaeology or history.
This same premise is frequently used to question ancient peoples' construction of other monuments. For example, I have seen the exact same phrase 'we can't do X today' to describe the interlocking stonework of Inca monuments. It is not true. In some cases we might not know 'how' they did it, but that is a different problem. Just because we don't know how ancient peoples built monumental architecture does not negate that they built those structures.
Nevertheless, in the case of the Egyptians you watched a Youtube video that addressed a non-existent problem by putting forward a faulty premise and then going off the rails. At least he didn't look like this.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/aliens1-5ad5062f3037130037462d1c.jpg){kind=link}