Egypt rooms

South of the pyramid of Menkaure, Giza, Egypt

The satellites of Menkaure

4th Dynasty (three small pyramids beside Menkaure)

Menkaure and, to the right, the three satellites. The eastern one was carried toward a true pyramid. The other two still read as steps. The Harvard dig found no name that settles who lay in them. Francesco Gasparetti, CC BY 2.0. Shown unedited.

Three small pyramids stand south of Menkaure. Two were left as four-step masses, and the eastern one was cased toward a true pyramid in granite. The dig that cleared their temples found a queen's statue without a name, and said so.

Why this is extraordinary

South of Menkaure's pyramid, which is the smallest of the three great ones at Giza, three little pyramids stand in a row, numbered from the east as III-a, III-b, and III-c in the publication of the Harvard dig, and today more often G3-a, G3-b, and G3-c. Howard Vyse had already emptied their underground rooms in the nineteenth century and found almost nothing that named an owner. In the burial chamber of the middle one he did record red-painted signs on the roof, and the only signs he could read spelled Menkaure. When the temples in front of the three were cleared in the early twentieth century, the eastern pyramid turned out to be the large and careful one, a true pyramid cased at least in part with granite, while the middle and western ones were step pyramids of four stages, left without that casing, and nearly twins.

The digger expected queens, because small pyramids beside a king's tomb had, where anyone could tell, belonged to queens. He also wrote that the clearing produced no material that actually identified them. Fragments of a finely finished alabaster statue of a queen came out of the debris of the eastern temple, without her name. Under a plastered floor in that same temple sat a little pot of five model alabaster cups, each inscribed for "the king's son, Kay," and the way they had been tucked under the floor looked like a later offering, not the burial itself. On prominence alone, the eastern pyramid was then assigned to the chief woman of Menkaure's family. That is an argument from size and finish, which the publication is frank about, and it is not an inscription in the chamber.

A later reading notices that the eastern pyramid's burial room is a T cut in the bedrock, the sort of plan used for a ka pyramid, a satellite attached to the king's own cult, and that a pink granite sarcophagus was nevertheless there, which pulls the other way, toward a real burial or a place where a body was prepared. The western chamber was never even finished, and Vyse thought nobody had been laid in it. So the row is not three identical queens' tombs. It is one elaborate pyramid, two stepped ones, and a set of empty name-plates.

People have also wanted the row to be a diagram, as if the builders had lined up a lesson in how pyramids evolved, from steps to a smooth true pyramid. The catch is that the three belong to one king's complex and were built as a group. A step face can be a pyramid whose casing was never added, which is what the publication says of the middle and western ones, rather than a memory of an older age. Beside Giza's third great pyramid there is a small, precise argument about who a subsidiary pyramid is for, which changes that argument into an open question, and the stones do not say the name.

The three small pyramids stand south of Menkaure, in a row from east to west. They have no shafts, and no published star slope of their own is in the sources used here. The cardinal north of the large pyramids, and the channels inside Khufu's, are other rooms. A step face on the middle and western pyramids can be casing that was never added, which is the reading already given, rather than a model of an older sky. South of the king's pyramid is a place in a complex. Place is not a sunrise.

Why it matters

If they are queens, the row is a family cemetery in stone. If the eastern one began as the king's own satellite and was only later used for a burial, the word "queen's pyramid" is a habit we brought to the site. A diagram of architectural evolution is a third story, and it has to beat the fact that they were built together.

The pin is the row south of Menkaure, not the great pyramid of Khufu, which has its own room at the Great Pyramid. One photograph shows the three satellites against Menkaure's flank. The eastern true pyramid is the finished-looking one. The steps are the other two.

Photo tour

1 photograph, unedited. On a phone, swipe the row. Choose one to look closely.

Menkaure and, to the right, the three satellites. The eastern one was carried toward a true pyramid. The other two still read as steps. The Harvard dig found no name that settles who lay in them. Francesco Gasparetti, CC BY 2.0

What is still unexplained

These sit beside the consensus account, with the same visual weight. None of them is marked solved.

Observed Steps beside a true pyramid The publication measures the middle and western pyramids as four-stage step pyramids, close to each other in size, and the eastern one as a true pyramid with at least a partial granite casing. Published bases put the eastern pyramid near 44 metres on a side, and the two stepped ones near 31 metres. Those faces are real. Reading them as a textbook of how the pyramid was invented asks the row to be a sequence in time, when the masonry says they are neighbours.
Open A queen without an inscription Small pyramids beside a king are, elsewhere, queens, so the expectation was reasonable, and the eastern temple did produce pieces of a queen's statue. It did not produce her name. The cups of the king's son Kay were under a later floor. Assigning the best pyramid to the chief wife is what you do when the architecture ranks people and the texts do not. It can be right. It is not yet a label.
Open A T-shaped room and a sarcophagus The eastern chamber is a T in the bedrock, which resembles the rooms of ka pyramids, the satellites that belong to the king's cult rather than to a second person. A granite sarcophagus argues that a body was meant to lie there, or that the room was used when a body was prepared. Both can be true if a satellite was reused. Neither is written on the wall. The western chamber, unfinished, may never have held anyone.
Not in these sources A southern row, with no star slope If these are queens' pyramids, they sit where the cult wanted the burials. The row runs east to west, and a row can be read as the sun's path only if someone publishes its azimuth against an equinox. No such number is in the sources used here. The king's name in the middle chamber ties the group to his reign. A name is not a star.

Location and dating

Location
Immediately south of the pyramid of Menkaure, Giza. The pin is the row of three.
Period label
Current consensus — open to revision Fourth Dynasty, the reign of Menkaure and his household. Current consensus that they are subsidiary pyramids of his complex — open on which, if any, is a named queen, and on whether the eastern plan began as a ka pyramid.
How this dating was done
The date is the king's. Menkaure's name in red paint on the roof of the middle chamber ties at least that room to his works, and the three sit inside his enclosure. No radiocarbon date of the casing is the date used here. Radiocarbon is a clock in the carbon of once-living things.
What could change it
A name on a chapel wall, or in the burial, would end the guessing. A join between the eastern casing and a later floor would show reuse rather than a first design.
Published ranges, drawn as bars. A bar is a claim about a span, not a point.
Menkaure's complex
2530 BCE2515 BCE2500 BCE
  • Menkaure's complex. A broad frame for Menkaure's reign inside the Fourth Dynasty, not a new chronology. The satellites belong to his complex.

What is actually there

Open questions

Question Status
Who was the eastern pyramid for? Open. Prominence suggested a chief queen. The inscription was never found.
Were the steps waiting for casing? That is how the publication reads the middle and western pyramids. A deliberate step design is the other possibility, and it is not required.
Is the row a lesson in pyramid history? The shapes invite it. One king's building program explains the shapes without a lecture.
Does the east-west row mark an equinox? Not shown. East to west is how they stand. No degree against the equinox is printed here.

The current narrative

Where publication stands today. It is the best-supported reading, and it is open to revision. It is not a verdict.

The current narrative — open to revision

Subsidiary pyramids of Menkaure's household

The three are Fourth Dynasty satellites of Menkaure, probably for queens or for his cult, two of them left as uncased step pyramids and the eastern one finished as a true pyramid. No text names the owners.

What supports this

  • They stand in his enclosure, and his name is painted in the middle chamber.
  • Where small pyramids beside a king can be identified, they are queens, which is why the dig started there.
  • The publication distinguishes a granite-cased true pyramid from two four-step masses left uncased.

What pushes back

  • The same publication says the clearing yielded no identification.
  • The eastern plan also resembles a ka pyramid, and a sarcophagus does not by itself name a queen.

What would settle it

They are his. Whose body, if any, lay in each one is the gap the excavator already printed.

Emerging narratives

Other published readings. Each may be right. None is adopted here unless the evidence carries it.

An emerging narrative

A diagram of how pyramids evolved

The row was built to show the change from a step pyramid to a smooth true pyramid, a little history of architecture set in stone.

What supports this

  • Two stepped masses really do stand beside one pyramid that was being cased smooth.
  • The contrast is visible from the sand, without a guidebook.

What pushes back

  • They are one complex, not three centuries lined up.
  • An uncased step pyramid is what you get when the outer skin was never added, which is the publication's reading of the middle and western pair.
  • Nothing in the temples says the builders were teaching later visitors a sequence.

What would settle it

The shapes are a temptation. The building history of a single reign explains them with less machinery.

Should the current view be reevaluated?

Consensus holds well

The three belong to Menkaure's complex, and the difference between a cased true pyramid and two uncased step pyramids is published. The names, and any lesson about the invention of the true pyramid, do not hold.

What drives this

  • His name in the middle chamber, and their place in his enclosure.
  • A true pyramid beside two four-step pyramids, described as cased and uncased.
  • No queen's name in the tombs.

This is the museum’s own weighing of the evidence. It is not a visitor vote, and it is separate from the slider.

Weigh it yourself

Anonymous. Nothing here is stored except on this browser. Your lean does not change the assessment beside it.

Subsidiary pyramids of Menkaure's household Unsure A diagram of how pyramids evolved

If the contested reading is right

What would follow if a reading that is not the consensus turned out to be true, and what could settle it. This explains the stakes. It does not adopt the reading.

The eastern pyramid was a ka satellite later used for a burial

One of the three would be the king's own ritual double, not a queen, and the sarcophagus would be a second chapter. The other two could still be queens.

Why it is still worth a test

The relationship of the granite sarcophagus to the original floor, published as a sequence rather than as a single find.

Sources

  1. Mycerinus, chapter IV, the three small pyramids The Harvard excavation. The true pyramid and the two step pyramids, the missing names, and the cups of Kay.
  2. G III-a Digital Giza. No inscription names the owner of the eastern pyramid.

Image credits