Could you check this please is it OK? thanks

Question

Contrary to the popular depictions the pyramids no built tby slaves or foreigners, after scaved the skeletons, scholars said that they must have been built by people of village who lived near and they was developed and overseen by Fharaoh's supervisors.

The builder's village there were bakers, butchers, brewers, and Bakeries excavated near the Pyramid could have produced thousands of loaves of bread every week, besides there are evidence of laborers survinving crushed or amputed.

There were builders permanent employees, some may have been women builders because Scholars shows skeletons of women that could have worked a lot with heavy stone for long time.

Must have been 20,000 to 30,000 workers built the pyramids over 80 years and may be when the River Nile was flooded. Scholars says that huge limestone blocks could be floated from quarries right to the base of Pyramids.

I see: tby, scaved, they were, there are evidences, and for a long time. But wait a native! - cogumela, Oct 17, 2010

and surviving - cogumela, Oct 17, 2010

wait for, cogu - 00494d19, Oct 17, 2010

Thanks, Heidi, for the point! What a forgetfulness! - cogumela, Oct 17, 2010

Answer 1

Hola Maylegoas, y bienvenido al foro.

Aquí tiene:

====

Contrary to the popular depictions the pyramids were not built by slaves or foreigners, after scaved?? the skeletons, scholars said that they must have been built by people of a village who lived nearby and they were developed and overseen by Pharaoh's supervisors.

In the builder's village there were bakers, butchers, **and ** brewers.** Bakeries excavated near the Pyramid could have produced thousands of loaves of bread every week**. Besides** there is evidence of laborers surviving being crushed or decapitated.

There were fulltime builders, some may have been women builders because scholars show skeletons of women that could have worked a lot with heavy stone for long time.

There must have been 20,000 to 30,000 workers that built the pyramids over 80 years and that may have been when the River Nile was flooded.

(No supe como arreglar "scaved")

Greg I think decapitated might be wrong here as no one could survive that. My guess would be "amputated". - Yeser007, Oct 17, 2010

I found this answer very useful. Thanks Goyo! - cogumela, Oct 17, 2010

A decapitation is an unintentional amputation. One could survive either, and either one could have been meant here, but decapitation seemed more likely to me. Also- amputation would require different sentence construction. - Goyo, Oct 17, 2010

It could have said: "evidence of laborers surviving being crushed or having limbs amputated." - Goyo, Oct 17, 2010

Decapitation actually means the cutting off of one's head. - sagiia, Oct 17, 2010

Thanks you are great - maylegoas, Oct 17, 2010

Sorry everyone, my mistake (see my answer). - Yeser007, Oct 18, 2010

Answer 2

Goyo, you were absolutely correct in your first statement, I was reading it wrong (as I sometimes do). For some reason I saw it as being said that the person survived after being crushed or decapitated which is obviously not possible, but survived meaning avoiding the mishap (crushing or decapitation) certainly makes sense and I should have just stayed out of it.

Answer 3

Goyo says:

...evidence of laborers surviving being crushed or decapitated.

This does mean surviving being crushed (possible) or being decapitated (not possible).

Goyo later says:

...evidence of laborers surviving being crushed or having limbs amputated.

That works!!!

Decapitación...no es posible sobrevivirla. - webdunce, Oct 18, 2010

I think it works if you look at survive as meaning to avoid the incident altogether whether crushing or decapitation. - Yeser007, Oct 18, 2010

Answer 4

delete-already answered

Contrary to popular depictions (omit the)

I had suggested examining in lieu of scaved.

thanks gfreed. - maylegoas, Oct 17, 2010