Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Great Pyramid Hoax - Episode3 (Signs of the Crime)


Scott Creighton

Recommended Posts

Hey UM,

Continuing my series of short documentaries exploring the hoax allegedly perpetrated by British pyramid explorer, Colonel Howard Vyse, within the Great Pyramid in 1837. Not for the faint hearted.

 

If you missed the two previous episodes, you can watch them here.

Episode 1: The Journal Speaks

 

Episode 2: Conspiracy and Cover-Up

 

Hope (some of) you will enjoy.

SC

 

Edited by Scott Creighton
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not this discredited ****e again?. 

Quote

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thanos5150 said:

From your link (above):

Quote

"...whether the main Khufu cartouche is a "forgery" or not is irrelevant as it does not explain how and when the DOZEN OTHER CARTOUCHES got there which could only have happened at the very earliest at the end of the 3rd Dynasty..."

The majority of these "dozen other cartouches" are observed in Lady Arbuthnott's Chamber.  Why no mention of them by Vyse on the day both he and Raven first explored this chamber (nothing is mentioned of them in his private or his published work on the day these two men first entered and explored LA's Chamber)? 

Sorry Lee - Vyse's 'story' around his (ahem) 'discovery' of these markings in LA's Chamber (including the other cartouches) is simply not credible/believable imo, and is pretty much covered in the 2nd of my video documentaries.

In his attempt to cover-up his deception, Vyse misrepresented material evidence.  He blatantly lied his socks off in his book (and yes, his blatant lie is documented in the video above).

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This makes no sense.  Someone just decides to paint the name of a king (any old king) inside an inaccessible area of the pyramid in ancient Egyptian... just for fun?  And put in words that weren't found in the corpus of that time period (it had been only 15 years since Champollion's breakthrough translation of the Rosetta Stone)?

Words that are later found in other inscriptions that couldn't possibly have been touched by Vyse or anyone else in the group?

Words that contradicted the belief of the time - when they believed pyramids were built by Hebrew slaves?

If he was going to forge something, forging a Hebrew inscription would have been far more on point.  It would have gotten him instant fame and attention and the support of every church in the world.  And forging Biblical Hebrew is a lot easier.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kenemet said:

This makes no sense.  Someone just decides to paint the name of a king (any old king) inside an inaccessible area of the pyramid in ancient Egyptian... just for fun?  And put in words that weren't found in the corpus of that time period (it had been only 15 years since Champollion's breakthrough translation of the Rosetta Stone)?

Words that are later found in other inscriptions that couldn't possibly have been touched by Vyse or anyone else in the group?

Words that contradicted the belief of the time - when they believed pyramids were built by Hebrew slaves?

If he was going to forge something, forging a Hebrew inscription would have been far more on point.  It would have gotten him instant fame and attention and the support of every church in the world.  And forging Biblical Hebrew is a lot easier.

Not to mention the Grinsell-Goyon located on the 4th course, west face, 71st stone on leaving the north angle. kLUuPjA.jpg

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

Unfortunately this thread got cut short and locked. Maybe the moderators can unlock it so it can be added to. 

Quoting myself from elsewhere:

Quote

The irony is that in Vyse's day, let alone for several decades after, most were of the mind that Khnum Khufu and Khufu were not the same person with Khnum Khufu being possibly a co-regent, a different pharaoh, or maybe a god. One thing they would have been certain of is that Khnum Khufu was the wrong pharaoh to attribute the pyramid to. So for Vyse to have faked all of these means he would have put the wrong pharaoh's name all over the place then somehow had an epiphany at the 11th hour to forge the "right" one. And then two more for good measure.

Another thing I don't understand about this forgery business is that Vyse's exposure to both cartouches in relation to each other would have been Wadi Maghareh and that published from a book hot off the presses before his own discovery which he may or may not have ever seen:

500px-Khufu_Wadi_Maghara.png

There are no gang names here yet Vyse not only understood this nomenclature and practice, but had the wherewithal to include it with nearly all of the cartouches he faked whether Khnum Khufu or Khufu further making them unique to both? Quite a fellow this Vyse.

As to the notion Vyse faked all 2 dozen instances of the different names of Khufu, this is just pure snake oil offered for no other reason than pure desperation regardless of how inane it is to maintain the narrative that the one is a "fake" because without them all being fakes it is meaningless if the one (three) are. Which is bad for business.  

Just one example, as noted many times before 6ft away from the "fake":

OIP.3rL99ot292fMuTZz6hurbgHaE9?pid=Api&r

 Which Scott tried to explain this one away with even crazier nonsense.

Its just sad and weird at this point.

 

Edited by Thanos5150
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Kenemet said:

This makes no sense.  Someone just decides to paint the name of a king (any old king) inside an inaccessible area of the pyramid in ancient Egyptian... just for fun?

SC: It wasn’t “any old king” though, was it? It was Suphis/Khufu, the king that Egyptologists (even in Vyse’s day) believed was the builder of the GP.  Vyse new this Suphis/Khufu cartouche very well. In his private journal he even draws it and refers to it by name – “Suphis”.  Vyse absolutely knew in 1837 he had the right cartouche. We even now know how he found this vital information.

And I’m fairly certain it wasn’t placed there by Vyse & Co. “just for fun”.

Quote

And put in words that weren't found in the corpus of that time period (it had been only 15 years since Champollion's breakthrough translation of the Rosetta Stone)?

SC: It’s not difficult if you find a cache of such inscriptions buried in the mounds around the pyramid’s base that Vyse was clearing away.  He even shows us in his published work some of the markings from some of the stones found at these locations. And Hanslune has kindly shown us that such gang name markings were indeed painted onto the exterior stones of the GP.  It’s not such a big stretch then to imagine that Vyse may well have found other gang names in the rubble piles and had them copied into the newly opened chambers. (Markings found outside the pyramid could have been placed upon the stones at any time during or even long after the construction, perhaps even as part of repair work.  However, markings claimed to have been discovered within sealed chambers that had to be blasted open, helps to unequivocally date the monument as these markings could not have been placed there once the chambers were sealed. Unless, of course, they're fakes).

Quote

Words that are later found in other inscriptions that couldn't possibly have been touched by Vyse or anyone else in the group?

SC: Finding similar, authentic inscriptions elsewhere, does nothing to prove the markings Vyse allegedly discovered are genuine. Even the ones Hanslune presents does nothing to actually prove those within the Vyse Chambers are genuine. If you are that naïve or gullible to think that it does, then I’ve a couple of £20 notes that I’d like to exchange with you for their $US equivalent. Keep in mind though, that even although genuine £20 notes do exist, that does not mean that every similar note is genuine.

Quote

Words that contradicted the belief of the time - when they believed pyramids were built by Hebrew slaves? If he was going to forge something, forging a Hebrew inscription would have been far more on point.  It would have gotten him instant fame and attention and the support of every church in the world.  And forging Biblical Hebrew is a lot easier.

SC: In the name of the wee man!!!!! Sorry – simply not going there as it will only take us down a blind alley of endless speculation that will, in the end, get us precisely nowhere. Let’s deal in the facts, shall we i.e. let’s deal with things as they are and not how you speculate they should have been.

What makes no sense, is a hieratic sign disappearing from a wall block in LA’s chamber between the time Perring copied the block’s markings and Hill made his copy of them (no more than a day or so later). Now we see it, now we don't! Why would that duplicate (upside-down) sign have disappeared from the Chamber?

What makes no sense is the claims (by others) that (referring to the same block as above), the scribe started writing the crew name one way, rotated his stance 180 degrees to write from the opposite side of the block. If that happened (as some have suggested), why would the scribe, in the initial attempt, commence by writing the last word of the crew's name first? Why would an AE scribe do that?

What makes no sense is that all the writing in these chambers has been written right-to-left (old / early hieratic) with the single exception of the numbers in Campbell’s, which are left-to-right (and appear more hieroglyphic in form). Why the sudden change from hieratic inscriptions to hieroglyphic inscriptions on the roof blocks (by that I mean hieratic and hieroglyphic forms have been written on the roof blocks)?

What makes no sense is two men exploring LA's chamber, checking its walls, making measurements and report not a single marking in the chamber being found during their initial inspection – a chamber that today possesses more markings than any other chamber? These two men would have been entirely anticipating finding painted markings upon the walls of LA’s Chamber since wall markings had (allegedly) been discovered upon the walls of the two chambers previously opened. But neither of them apparently saw any such markings during that initial exploration - nothing  is reported until several days later (and only in Vyse's published account - nothing about the discovery of any markings in LA's Chamber appears in Vyse's private account). Why?

What makes no sense is Vyse claiming Campbell's Chamber was opened on one day, changed it to another day, changed his mind again and then misrepresented material evidence to cover-up his attempted deception. Why did Vyse do that?

What makes no sense is finding a crew’s name written across two separate (adjacent) wall blocks.

What makes no sense is why a Prussian Prince would accuse Vyse of perpetrating a fraud for no reason.

What makes no sense is why Vyse’s private journal presents to us a Khufu cartouche with no horizontal lines in the disc which, right beside this Khufu cartouche, he writes “cartouche in Campbell’s” (though he’s very careful to include the 2 small dots under the snake sign - just not the disk lines).  Why do we see him placing edit marks on this same page until he has drawn a second Khufu cartouche now with the horizontal lines in the disc? Why does he place two vertical strokes beneath this revised cartouche ‘||’ – was this his ‘mark ||’ version of the Khufu cartouche?  Why is Vyse even bothering with any of this weeks after he supposedly discovered this cartouche in Campbell’s Chamber? He sees it, he draws it, he moves on.

If none of the above gives you even the slightest cause for concern or even pause for thought, then I suggest you are simply not paying attention or you're simply not prepared to even consider the possibility that Vyse could ever have done such a thing. Which is actually fine - you're perfectly at liberty to believe what you want. I personally believe Vyse likely did perpetrate a fraud because of all of the above - it's not a frivolous view.

There are many, many other anomalies that give rise to some difficult questions concerning these markings but I’ll leave you with the list above for the moment.

SC 

Edited by Scott Creighton
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

. And Hanslune has kindly shown us that such gang name markings were indeed painted onto the exterior stones of the GP.  

So, how did they get there? What the AE tore down the cladding and backing stones and marked the core stones with the Grinsell-Goyon mark, then reassembled it? It was found in 1949 just a tad after Vyse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

Unfortunately this thread got cut short and locked. Maybe the moderators can unlock it so it can be added to. 

Quoting myself from elsewhere:

As to the notion Vyse faked all 2 dozen instances of the different names of Khufu, this is just pure snake oil offered for no other reason than pure desperation regardless of how inane it is to maintain the narrative that the one is a "fake" because without them all being fakes it is meaningless if the one (three) are. Which is bad for business.  

Just one example, as noted many times before 6ft away from the "fake":

OIP.3rL99ot292fMuTZz6hurbgHaE9?pid=Api&r

 Which Scott tried to explain this one away with even crazier nonsense.

Its just sad and weird at this point.

 

I always wondered what the motivation was/is to label Vyse's work as a fraud.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Trelane said:

I always wondered what the motivation was/is to label Vyse's work as a fraud.

So, it can then be associated with ideas about the pyramids being built much earlier by, Atlanteans and or other lost civilizations. It's inconvenience to have actual writing from Khufu era folks inside a closed off area that was not reachable to anyone until the Brits used explosives. I believe the first guy to suggest that was Sitchen who wanted it to be much older too. SC took up his idea up later.  Of course one of the many problems with the idea is that they also found such a work gang scrawl on the outside core stones.... there is no current explanation of how that works into SC bogus claims.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Trelane said:

I always wondered what the motivation was/is to label Vyse's work as a fraud.

In the case of Sitchin, it was to further the aliens-were-responsible-for-the-pyramids agenda: which meant that the ancient Egyptians themselves couldn't have designed and constructed them.  As we know, many subsequent authors took up that particular ball and ran with it, although generally in different directions depending on their individual notions.

Sitchin himself claimed that Vyse resorted to forging Khufu's cartouche name because he had spent too much money on the explorations at Giza, and needed something to show for his efforts.  What Sitchin didn't seem to know was that Vyse was a very wealthy man who was at perfect liberty to indulge his hobby for as long as he liked.

In Creighton's case, Vyse's alleged forgery appears to have been inspired by a need to show that the pyramids were supposedly built far earlier than the time of Khufu, as “recovery vaults” to ensure the rebirth of civilization after a global cataclysm.  So, although he dismisses much of Sitchin's case as "badly researched," Creighton's own case still requires the forgery proposal to be shown as valid.

Consequently, Creighton has had recourse to any number of perfectly extraordinary scenarios - including the famous "secret cache", inspired by Alford - to explain and illustrate Vyse's supposed wrongdoing.  But, as pointed out earlier in this thread, little of what Creighton has to say makes any sense ...

To make the point again for any new readers who might not already have come across it: the crew-marks (crews or gangs were known as "aperu") in the various relieving chambers were most likely placed there as part of AE labour organisation methodology.   As early as 1838, Lepsius discerned that the distribution of aper marks was somehow significant. 

In the early 20th century, his pupil, Sethe, made more progress with this line of enquiry.  In the early 1990s, Ann Macy Roth ("Phyles of the Old Kingdom" explained the reasoning behind the distribution of aper marks, and how they indicated that certain work-crews were in charge of certain sections of the relieving chambers. 

It was most unlikely that the marks were placed on the stone blocks at the quarry as "postal addresses," as proposed in Creighton's 3rd video above [3:30]; for one thing, any marks would probably have rubbed off during subsequent handling and transport.  Most likely is that the marks were quickly scrawled on the blocks by the scribe attached to the aperu while the stones were still at the Great Pyramid itself, awaiting placement.  When they were eventually hauled into place by the relevant aperu (e.g., "Companions of Khufu," etc.) , some of the marks would inevitably appear upside-down. 

Finally, as Hanslune points out above, what Goyon discovered on the outside core stones after the Second World War was most likely another aper mark: followed by the finds of all the other aper marks in the second boat pit, etc. etc.

So who is most likely to have correctly discerned the real significance of the placement of the aper marks?  Richard Lepsius, Kurt Sethe and Ann Macy Roth? 

Or Scott Creighton?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For grins and giggle and the enlightenment of any lurkers here are images of the marks found in the Great pyramid except for the ones found in the shafts more recently.

w9BVtnz.jpg

lvSr08P.jpg

An amusing aside in the image above lower right corner those two symbols are the modern NATO map markings for anti-tank gun and light tank (well close too) - obviously Egyptology has  been hiding this from us! (sarcasm)

0vMLnuD.jpg

njS5mqb.jpg

CHFJbKi.jpg

Vyse or his henchmen would have been busy men. Also one other aspect of Sitchin claim. He tried to convince people there was only one cartouche - to make the idea more believable. In the era before the internet finding the images above would have required you to go to a specialist library and find volumes of old books. You will note there is more than one cartouche. I predict that when we look into the muon chamber/void we'll find more such gang drawings.

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hanslune said:

 

...

one other aspect of Sitchin claim. He tried to convince people there was only one cartouche - to make the idea more believable. In the era before the internet finding the images above would have required you to go to a specialist library and find volumes of old books. You will note there is more than one cartouche. I predict that when we look into the muon chamber/void we'll find more such gang drawings.

I should have made clear in my previous post that the cartouche name was often one of the elements of the name of the aper, or aperu, working on a particular project.  Vyse was elated when he first found the name: but, of course, neither he nor anyone else knew what an aper was, or what connection it had with the construction of the relieving chambers.  So it's difficult to see how he could have gone ahead with all the "forgeries" for which he's supposed to have been responsible ... 

Edited by Windowpane
add more detail
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Windowpane said:

 Vyse was elated when he first found the name. . . 

Where, exactly, does Vyse state he was "elated" at finding "the name" (presumably of Khufu)?

SC

Edited by Scott Creighton
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hanslune said:

Also one other aspect of Sitchin claim. He tried to convince people there was only one cartouche - to make the idea more believable. In the era before the internet finding the images above would have required you to go to a specialist library and find volumes of old books. You will note there is more than one cartouche.

Baffling. Literally the exact opposite is true. Sitchin notes the other cartouches extensively showing several of Perring's drawings including most of those you picture and then some. See Stairway to Heaven ch XIII "Forging the Pharaoh's Name". Merits notwithstanding, the argument is that there is just one Khufu cartouche out of many not of course that it is the "only cartouche".   

Edited by Thanos5150
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

Where, exactly, does Vyse state he was "elated" at finding "the name" (presumably of Khufu)?

 

Not quite sure why you'd be confused about this, as it was set out for you quite clearly some years back (see the first link in that post).

The episode was then discussed in more detail some years later in Ch. 19, here.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/21/2023 at 12:34 PM, Scott Creighton said:

And I’m fairly certain it wasn’t placed there by Vyse & Co. “just for fun”.

Then what, exactly, was the purpose of the forgery?  Schoolboy prank?  His version of "Kilroy was here"?  Sudden attack of reincarnation fever?  Others left graffiti, so why in the heck would he forge a labor gang sign?  Why not something more significant?

As far as I can tell, he got exactly nothing from it.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Then what, exactly, was the purpose of the forgery?  Schoolboy prank?  His version of "Kilroy was here"?  Sudden attack of reincarnation fever?  Others left graffiti, so why in the heck would he forge a labor gang sign?  Why not something more significant?

As far as I can tell, he got exactly nothing from it.  

Well ... first of all, according to Sitchin, as mentioned, Vyse perpetrated the "forgery" because he was running out of money, and wanted some really slam-dunk find that would bolster both his prospects and his bank-balance.

But, as we now know, there were a few problems with this: the first being that Vyse was positively rolling in wealth.

So that leaves subsequent commentators, the ones still convinced of Vyse's evil intent, with the suggestion that he was motivated by a desire for fame as the first person from the modern era to find confirmation of ancient accounts (such as Herodotus) to the effect that it was Khufu who built the Great Pyramid.

William IV's death a few weeks later meant that the presence of Vyse, an equerry to the Duke of Cumberland (who might have succeeded to the throne himself had it not been for his niece, Victoria), was now required at home; he was back in England by mid-October.  A series of family tragedies took place over the next few years: but he carried on with publishing (and, as far as can be made out, paying for) the three volumes of Operations and the other volumes that appeared under Perring's name.  But, as far as we know, he never made any profit from the publication: although, of course, he didn't actually need the money.  But, in the end, he did obtain a measure of fame, and a small place in history: although at the cost of the sort of strong-arm tactics on the GP that would never be favoured by archaeologists today. 

But Vyse and his gunpowder did mean that Lepsius (whose 1839 paper on the relieving chamber inscriptions Vyse likely read), Sethe and Ann Macy Ross were able to make progress on the question of how labour was organised in the OK: an area of knowledge that might otherwise have had to possibly await the use of endoscopes to discover the presence of the relieving chambers, and of the aper names in situ

 

Edited by Windowpane
clarification; correction
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Windowpane said:

Well ... first of all, according to Sitchin, as mentioned, Vyse perpetrated the "forgery" because he was running out of money, and wanted some really slam-dunk find that would bolster both his prospects and his bank-balance.

But, as we now know, there were a few problems with this: the first being that Vyse was positively rolling in wealth.

So that leaves subsequent commentators, the ones still convinced of Vyse's evil intent, with the suggestion that he was motivated by a desire for fame as the first person from the modern era to find confirmation of ancient accounts (such as Herodotus) to the effect that it was Khufu who built the Great Pyramid.

William IV's death a few weeks later meant that the presence of Vyse, an equerry to the Duke of Cumberland (who might have succeeded to the throne himself had it not been for his niece, Victoria), was now required at home; he was back in England by mid-October.  A series of family tragedies took place over the next few years: but he carried on with publishing (and, as far as can be made out, paying for) the three volumes of Operations and the other volumes that appeared under Perring's name.  But, as far as we know, he never made any profit from the publication: although, of course, he didn't actually need the money.  But, in the end, he did obtain a measure of fame, and a small place in history: although at the cost of the sort of strong-arm tactics on the GP that would never be favoured by archaeologists today. 

But Vyse and his gunpowder did mean that Lepsius (whose 1839 paper on the relieving chamber inscriptions Vyse likely read), Sethe and Ann Macy Ross were able to make progress on the question of how labour was organised in the OK: an area of knowledge that might otherwise have had to possibly await the use of endoscopes to discover the presence of the relieving chambers, and of the aper names in situ

 

Which brings up the question how did he know to set the explosives at that specific point? What was the clue that made him think there was a room to be found?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

Baffling. Literally the exact opposite is true. Sitchin notes the other cartouches extensively showing several of Perring's drawings including most of those you picture and then some. See Stairway to Heaven ch XIII "Forging the Pharaoh's Name". Merits notwithstanding, the argument is that there is just one Khufu cartouche out of many not of course that it is the "only cartouche".   

....

Remember this post from a few days ago: HERE

Quote

Far too often I see debunker and fringe alike, to equal measure which is disturbing, uncritically repeating sources which they only pick in the first place because they think it tells them what they want to hear and/or what someone else does not. And to make it worse the repeater usually doesn't even read and/or understand the source which often doesn't even support the claims the repeater is trying to make, in some cases only the opposite. Yeah its lazy, but also pathetic and dishonest.      

Yeah. The bookend to this is not even bothering and just making stuff up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Which brings up the question how did he know to set the explosives at that specific point? What was the clue that made him think there was a room to be found?

Well: during the work being carried out near Davison's chamber, a crevice had been seen, up through which it was possible to push a reed for about 2 feet.   ...  (As mentioned previously, these days I'm sure that they'd have used endoscopes).  Later, Vyse was able to push a candle on a rod up from Davison's into a space subsequently designated as Wellington's Chamber ...   By 30th March, they had made a hole into Wellington's.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Windowpane said:

So that leaves subsequent commentators, the ones still convinced of Vyse's evil intent, with the suggestion that he was motivated by a desire for fame as the first person from the modern era to find confirmation of ancient accounts (such as Herodotus) to the effect that it was Khufu who built the Great Pyramid.

And that would have been acceptable if he went around billing himself as such.  However, he wasn't.

People make graffiti for reasons - usually "I was here" kind of thing.  So if he wrote that (and wrote it so that it looked old and slightly worn) then he should have been promoting this at every opportunity.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.