Great Pyramid Void Enigma - Excerpt#2 From My New Book

Hi ATS,

As promised, please find below Excerpt #2 from my new book, The Great Pyramid Void Enigma (released today in the US & Canada by Bear & Co). You can read Excerpt #1 here.

Book Promo Video:

Excerpt from Chapter 6

Show Me the Mummy

One of the great mysteries of Egyptology is that no original burial of any pharaoh has ever been found within the pyramids. Certainly, bits of human bone, mummy wrappings, and other minor artifacts have been discovered within various pyramids, but none of these have been conclusively proven to have come from an original burial of a king and most, in fact, have been shown to come from much later, intrusive burials.

The stock answer from the Egyptologists to this apparent paradox, this lack of pyramid mummies, is to propose that the pyramid tombs were robbed in antiquity and that every royal mummy was destroyed by the tomb raiders, usually by burning in an attempt to remove the precious amulets that were usually placed in the mummy’s bindings during the embalming process. However, even more puzzling is that a number of undisturbed burials have been found with their sarcophagi still fully intact and sealed, and yet, when the stone box was opened in modern times, it was found to be empty, entirely devoid of any royal mummy!

One of the most bizarre of these occurrences took place at Giza in 1925 when the archaeological team led by the esteemed Egyptologist George Reisner discovered (by a fluke accident) the hidden, underground shaft tomb of Khufu’s mother, Queen Hetepheres I, just a short distance to the east of the Great Pyramid. About this, Egyptologist Barbara Mertz writes:

“Distinguished visitors and high government officials were lowered down the shaft in basket chairs and crammed themselves into the little room. The great moment had arrived. The heavy sarcophagus lid was prized up. In a hush of anticipation Reisner stooped to peer inside. Then he straightened and faced the distinguished audience.

“Gentlemen,” he said wryly, “I regret Queen Hetephres is not receiving. . . .” What puzzled Reisner was why the elaborate care and secrecy had been expended on the burial on an empty sarcophagus. It had been used for burial; certain discolorations on the bottom proved that much. . . .
What disturbs me is the fact that there have been other sarcophagi found in place, unopened—and empty. Two of them date to the Third Dynasty, not so distant in time from the heyday of Hetephres. The cases are not exactly parallel, but yet there remains the incontestable and bewildering common feature of the empty sarcophagi.”

This particular empty tomb (designated G7000x by Egyptologists) remains, to this day, one of the greatest mysteries of ancient Egypt. The typical answer by Egyptologists in response to this conundrum is that the royal personage was perhaps lost in battle, or had drowned in the Nile to then be devoured by crocodiles, or was killed by some other calamity that meant the body was otherwise unavailable for burial. These explanations for the absence of the royal mummy are typically given without any evidence to back up the assertion, which, in time, becomes so embedded in the mainstream narrative that it becomes accepted as historical fact rather than seen as the mere speculation that it usually is.

Figure 6.4a. The underground burial chamber (G7000x) of Khufu’s mother, Queen Hetepheres I, at Giza. (Image: George Reisner, 1925)


Figure 6.4b. When the sarcophagus was opened, the queen’s body was missing. (Image: George Reisner, 1927)

Here then we have a queen, Khufu’s mother, the most important queen in Khufu’s court, whose body had evidently not been lost to a Nile crocodile or, it would seem, to any other such disaster since the sarcophagus appears to have been used and the queen’s internal organs had been removed from the body, embalmed, and placed in a canopic chest in this burial chamber, deep under the bedrock of the Giza plateau.
Many of the queen’s grave goods were also found in the chamber, including a number of sheets of gold. The presence of these gold sheets and other items of value ruled out the activity of tomb raiders, who would surely have taken these and, most likely, would have smashed the sarcophagus lid to access the royal mummy and the many precious amulets often placed within the mummy’s linen wrappings. Furthermore, it is highly improbable that tomb robbers would have taken the time to replace the heavy lid back onto the sarcophagus after having removed the royal mummy.

Nonetheless, in an attempt to explain this mystery, Reisner goes on to offer his hypothesis as to why the queen’s body was missing from the sarcophagus.

“This lady outlived Sneferu and was buried by her son Cheops [Khufu], probably beside her husband’s pyramid at Dahshur. The [original] tomb did not remain long undisturbed and the queen’s body was destroyed by the robbers who broke into the chamber. A clever prime minister seems to have been able to convince Cheops that little damage had been done. He ordered the lid of the alabaster coffin replaced to hide the absence of the queen’s body, and the greater part of the unharmed burial equipment was moved to a secret shaft in front of the Great Pyramid in the new cemetery at Giza. Cheops apparently never discovered the ruse practiced upon him by his minister, for he made an offering to his mother’s spirit before the shaft was finally closed.“

Continued. . .

(Continued from previous).

No one can fault Reisner for his imagination here, but there are simply too many flaws in his hypothesis for it to be anywhere near tenable or even plausible. Indeed, Mark Lehner discounted Reisner’s theory, writing:

“The hypothetical original tomb of Hetep-heres I at Dahshur has not been found (the only evidence for this queen’s existence comes from G7000x). There is no textual evidence, contemporary with the 4th Dynasty or from later times, for the plundering of this tomb and the transfer of its contents to Giza. Reisner’s reconstruction of events is based entirely upon the archaeological evidence gathered from G7000x. Nevertheless, his scenario was passed down in the literature e.g. The Cambridge Ancient History (Smith 1971, 168), as historical fact.”

Lehner has his own view that this tomb of Hetepheres I (G7000x) was not a reburial of the queen at all but that this tomb was, in fact, the queen’s original tomb, that her body was later transferred by Egyptian officials to the first of Khufu’s three so-called Queens’ Pyramids (G1-a), and that the lid of the queen’s original sarcophagus in G7000x was then reseated and the sarcophagus once again sealed by Khufu’s officials…

However, what goes against Lehner’s hypothesis is that none of the queen’s grave goods were transferred to the new pyramid tomb, G1-a, but appear to have been left behind in their entirety in the original tomb at Giza. Also, there are no inscriptions of any kind in or around pyramid G1-a attributing or in any way connecting this pyramid to Queen Hetepheres I. Finally, pyramid G1-a is believed to actually have been a tomb belonging not to Khufu’s mother but rather to one of Khufu’s wives, Merytyetes (a daughter of Sneferu and Hetepheres I).

There is, of course, an entirely different narrative by which the circumstances and strange disappearance of this ancient queen’s body can be simply and rationally explained, along with the other Third Dynasty kings’ sarcophagi found in similar circumstances.

End of Excerpt #2. I shall be posting the third and final excerpt from my new book within the next few days or so. Please look out for it.

Best wishes,

SC

a reply to: Scott Creighton

Perhaps she walks the earth.

a reply to: Scott Creighton
OR, have you considered a more mundane answer (I'm not detracting from you excellent work but playing devils advocate) like. What if when building the pyramid say, that month there was a shortage of blocks and the builders just decided to save on blocks by creating the void as a way to save on blocks because the object of the pyramid was the look of the finished article not what materials were hidden inside?

a reply to: crayzeed

I understand you’re playing devils advocate here. But this is a joke right?

A monumental feat of engineering and construction. One of the seven wonders of the world, was haphazardly finished due to a shortage of blocks?

I think not.

I purchased Scott’s book. Looking forward to hearing what he has to say. There isn’t one single aspect of the GP that doesn’t have purpose. The hard part is wrapping our simple minds around it all.

a reply to: KKLOCO
Well, no joke, I'll be the devils advocate again. Apart from the internal corridors and rooms, the pyramid of Giza is certainly NOT a monumental feat of engineering or construction. It's just a pile of blocks. Having been and touched the pyramid and all my life I've worked in the building industry I can tell you each layer is not even close to being a feat. No interlocking blocks (like in the Aztec constructions) every layer has absolutely no relation to the one below or the one above. It is literally just blocks stacked on blocks.
The only feat I will give you is 1:- the amount of blocks used in the construction and 2:-how they got them that high.
Now If your going to talk about the missing outer layer then that is another matter.

a reply to: Scott Creighton

Sounds interesting!

And by the way. Any thoughts on why there are silica nanospheres in the pyramid blocks when they are not found from the stones in the surrounding quarries?

Seriously ATS - you guys and gals are totally AWESOME!!!! As of 10:28pm (BST), this is what YOU have done:



Am I grateful. You better believe it!

Warm regards to you all,

SC

Did you buy ATS?

a reply to: Scott Creighton

a reply to: Scott Creighton

lol. They still looking for mummies in the pyramid?

Now that's crazy just wacky stuff. Given how old those 3 pyramids are, on the low end, the reign of kufu, about 5000 years. On the higher end about 10 to 15 thousand years.

Ya at one point it was quite a feat of engineering. Makes the crap we have around today from skyscrapers to regular ol brick and mortar building. Look like straw houses. Pretty sure none of them will be around in a few thousand years thats for sure.

Anyways. Those things were noting but dust and bones thousand of years ago. Now looking at them? There even less then that. But anything that is still around to this day in all that time, in over 100 degree weather, and with constant sand blasting and the sun beating down day in and day out. Even though the outside protective layer was stripped thousands of years ago.

It is pretty surprising there still around.

Definitely those things may still be around, dead as they are, nothing but bones, then most modern building we have today end up being nothing but rubble.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

You actually got that backwards a sky scrapper takes vastly more engineering skill. At the time a pyramid structure was the only way to build up they didnt have the engineering skills to say the romans. You have to look at it from the time period it was an amazing feat.

Heres something fun the world record for moving a stone block goes to catherine the great in Russia at 1500 tonnes. Entirely moved by hand no animals used.

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: galadofwarthethird

...

Heres something fun the world record for moving a stone block goes to catherine the great in Russia at 1500 tonnes. Entirely moved by hand no animals used.

en.wikipedia.org...

Although there has in the past been some dispute about the details of its weight, etc.

More on that Russian stone block:

While the colossal statue was being molded, the sculptor and his patron were trying to find a base on which to mount the work. Prospectors searching in nearby Finnish Karelia for granite for the new Neva quays had discovered an enormous, monolithic rock, deeply embedded in marsh. When unearthed, it was twenty-two feet high, forty-two feet long, and thirty-four feet wide. Its weight, experts calculated, was fifteen hundred tons.

Catherine decided that this Ice Age boulder must serve as the pedestal for her statue. To bring it to St. Petersburg, a system was worked out that in itself was an engineering feat. Once winter came and the ground was frozen, the boulder was dragged four miles to the sea. It was cradled in a metallic sledge, which rolled over copper balls serving the function of modern ball bearings; the balls rolled in tracks hollowed out in logs laid end to end. It took capstans, pulleys, and a thousand men to inch the stone along, a hundred yards a day, from the forest clearing to the coast of the Gulf of Finland. There, a specially constructed barge was waiting; once it was loaded, the barge was supported on each side by a large warship to prevent its capsizing. In this fashion, the boulder moved slowly across the gulf and was towed up the Neva River, to be brought ashore, maneuvered into position, and deposited at its final site on the riverbank.

By this time, five years had gone by (Massie, Robert K., "Catherine the Great") .

a reply to: dragonridr

What are you smoking? A skyscraper is a hollow tin can compared to the great pyramid. Or even the smaller ones. And those are just the ones that survived. Most skyscrapers wont be here in 1000 years thats for sure. Much less 5000 or 10,000 years.

Look at the math alone, its almost impossible. And to do it all in the 20 years people say? Is just a silly claim.

Here this unquaried block at the Aswan quarry is about the size of the one in Russia you linked, about 1,200 I think. It is about what they would have to quarry, cut, remove, then cut again to size, then ship 500 miles, up river, or by camel, to site. And then place on building site, per day. To finish a 6 million ton pyramid it is what would be required in 20 years.

Now who here thinks they can do all that with a copper chisels, and dudes in loincloths using ropes, in 110 degree weather, working day and night? Only the silly. Or stupid. The ancient egyptians there populations died on mass, I am talking thousands and tens of thousands of dead every dam time the Nile didn't flood or the crickets ate there foodstock. It was litterally death on mass.

And that is not counting the fundation work, which is basically they dug hundreads of feet down, and placed blocks weighing thousands of tons for foundation even. And this unquaried block in the quarry? Is the same one that plato, and his great grandfather visited, and the Egyptians of that time showed them how it was done.

its still there, to this day, some 3000 years after Plato, for people to look at and wonder, and bang with rocks on it. You can go check it out? Think you can get it out in under a few hours and on the move to build site? Because that would be what it would take to keep to schedule of building the pyramid in 20 years.


As for what it would take to build a pyramid, out of limestone? Well this quarry in Belgium has been quarrying this site for hundreds of years since it was founded, using giant million dollar machines equipped with diamond segmented 20 foot long chainsaws.

And the total amount quarried in this quarry? Is about the size and mass of what they would need to build the great pyramid. They have been at it since the 1888. They would be hard pressed to quarry out that much material, and never mind build something like the pyramid, very hard pressed on getting the material needed alone.


So no. Skyscrapers are to buildings and architecture what sustaining yourself on eating sugar only is to keeping your body healthy? That is? Garbage, complete garbage, but it looks cool. And your teeth will fall out in a few years eating sugars only. Skyscrapers are nice and all. But they wont be here in 5000 years, not by a long shot.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

To build a skyscraper is far more difficult from an engineering standpoint than stacking stones. They need to know the stress and load on every joint. They have to know exactly how much expansion they will deal with in winter vs summer. Throw in earthquake engineering like California and the technical knowledge needed to build a skyscraper far outweighs the pyramids. The reason they built a pyramid is that they could not build it straight up, As far as how long something lasts depends on what it's made of. When building with stone you don't have to worry about corrosion etc. How long it lasts is no indication of the difficulty of its design. The Egyptians did not have the technology to build a sky scrapper we didn't get there until 1880s. Modern sky scrapers are even more difficult because they are taller they are so tall you have to take into account wind pressure on the building. The entire structure has to be able to sway or it would snap like a dried twig.

originally posted by: galadofwarthethird
a reply to: dragonridr

Now who here thinks they can do all that with a copper chisels, and dudes in loincloths using ropes, in 110 degree weather, working day and night? Only the silly. Or stupid. The ancient egyptians there populations died on mass, I am talking thousands and tens of thousands of dead every dam time the Nile didn't flood or the crickets ate there foodstock. It was litterally death on mass.

Did they? how often did the Nile not flood? The Nile never stopped flowing and they had irrigation.I see you've never been to the Middle-East or Cairo huh: Here is the average temps for the months:



...and no there is no evidence it was significantly hotter back then either if you think so please provided evidence that it was.

And that is not counting the fundation work, which is basically they dug hundreads of feet down, and placed blocks weighing thousands of tons for foundation even. And this unquaried block in the quarry? Is the same one that plato, and his great grandfather visited, and the Egyptians of that time showed them how it was done.

Are you stating this foundation work was for the pyramids?? The Giza ones are built on the limestone bedrock of the ridge line part of this ridge-line is incorporated into pyramids themselves (and one reason the 2.3 million stone number is wrong)

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: galadofwarthethird

To build a skyscraper is far more difficult from an engineering standpoint than stacking stones. They need to know the stress and load on every joint. They have to know exactly how much expansion they will deal with in winter vs summer. Throw in earthquake engineering like California and the technical knowledge needed to build a skyscraper far outweighs the pyramids. The reason they built a pyramid is that they could not build it straight up, As far as how long something lasts depends on what it's made of. When building with stone you don't have to worry about corrosion etc. How long it lasts is no indication of the difficulty of its design. The Egyptians did not have the technology to build a sky scrapper we didn't get there until 1880s. Modern sky scrapers are even more difficult because they are taller they are so tall you have to take into account wind pressure on the building. The entire structure has to be able to sway or it would snap like a dried twig.

Yeah do you ever notice how people always claim the AE, Inca etc., couldn't build stuff but they never challenge the Romans and Greeks? I wonder why I call it the 'W' question. The Pantheon in Rome has a 5,000 ton non-reinforced concrete dome - a single piece - no one seems to challenge that....The Romans and Greeks were far better engineers than the AE. They went big but it was relatively crude work.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: galadofwarthethird

To build a skyscraper is far more difficult from an engineering standpoint than stacking stones. They need to know the stress and load on every joint. They have to know exactly how much expansion they will deal with in winter vs summer. Throw in earthquake engineering like California and the technical knowledge needed to build a skyscraper far outweighs the pyramids. The reason they built a pyramid is that they could not build it straight up, As far as how long something lasts depends on what it's made of. When building with stone you don't have to worry about corrosion etc. How long it lasts is no indication of the difficulty of its design. The Egyptians did not have the technology to build a sky scrapper we didn't get there until 1880s. Modern sky scrapers are even more difficult because they are taller they are so tall you have to take into account wind pressure on the building. The entire structure has to be able to sway or it would snap like a dried twig.

And yet? None of the sky scrapers doting these cities? Will be here in 5000 years.

Let me retell you that in a way that you can understand.

If whoever designed and built the pyramid did exist? He or She or It is at least a million times more of a greater architect then any and all architects alive currently.

Lets just say in comparison, its like comparing a chimp, to a human.

And if the ancient Egyptians did it all with rope, and caramels, and copper chisels, and dude in wierd fancy hats impressing the masses to build palaces for them? Then they have achieved something which they have never since have recreated ore reached before.

Because the very first stone block in the quarry? They stumbled upon? Is still there, and thy still cant move it, even with modern technology like cranes and bulldozers? They would have a hard time moving it. Much less transport it 500 miles away even by train plane and automobile.


So ya brah! I am totally impressed by skyscrapers? I think they would make a great and dusty show when all standing today fall in on themself and become ruble, probably not even 2 thousand years from now.

But hey? I think they already recount on how long they last, before they have to demolish, or not to soon it will demolish itself.

So far? What your talking about? Is a theory. We will see in 2000 years from now, if you were right.

Now? How much do you think all the # you see around you will matter in 2000 years? Let me give you a hint? It would matter just about as much as the # that the people 2000 years ago saw around them.

In fact? I bet the first massive earthquake in there general area will likely crumble most. And in 2000 years from now? Well #? An asteroid like the one that hit the dinosaurs could hit in all that time.

And so? We will see. Just how strong and long they last. So far? Its a bit to early to tell, if you all have build the stronges and sturdiest building ever? #? Some of the stones in these megalithic structure have vetrications marks fusing the stones together in weird palces?

You know what vetrification means? It means that that area of the stones at one point got so hot? They melted together. And to be able to melt stone you would have to reach at least 5000 degrees? Steel melts at 2,750 degrees, So it would melt the metal into a puddle fast if steel was used.

And all of the verification points are on the outside? Which means? They must have had some really peculiar and really hot weather phenomenon in those days. Basically the weather at some point? In some parts? Sometimes reached as high as 5000 degrees.

Like cooking ants with a giant space magnifying glass basically?

So how long do you think these skyscrapers would last if exposed to temperatures up to and exceeding 5000 degrees would last? I mean, really? Probably would be like a lightsaber cutting through a metal door, even if that metal door was 2 feet thick.

Do any of these skyscrapers builder's? Have they ever thought of getting 5000 degrees burn insurance? Along with there earthquake insurance, and flood insurance? If not? Who know? There may come a time when it could be a thing.

In 2000 years guess we will see if there still standing.

a reply to: Hanslune

Did they? how often did the Nile not flood? The Nile never stopped flowing and they had irrigation.I see you've never been to the Middle-East or Cairo huh: Here is the average temps for the months:

Oh ya? So you were around 5000 years ago? Or even 3000 years? You even figured out why all the peoples of that time were always bitching about dying over every trivial thing?

Are you stating this foundation work was for the pyramids?? The Giza ones are built on the limestone bedrock of the ridge line part of this ridge-line is incorporated into pyramids themselves (and one reason the 2.3 million stone number is wrong)

No? Thats not even the question. Duh!

The 2.3 million stones are an average based calculation. Were the stones came from is likley the site, or at least half the material based on the layering of the site alone. There probably wasnt 6 billions tons of limestone in that quarry by a long shot.

And ya? Quariiying and transporting 12000 of stone 500 miles away? That alone take at least 7 hours if you were going 70 miles an hour from quarry to site withe modern equipment, like trains, and long haul trucks, or container ships.

So even quarrying and delivering that much weight in limestone blocks, would be almost impossible to complete on a 20 year basis. Maybe with hundreds of trucks hauling over the 500 mile roads back and forth all day? Literally any of them have to be serviced over a 20 years period? Would slow down operations and turn that 20 year period into a 40 year period fast.

Not to mention it would be a headache. Which is why? You have to quit thinking magical thinking? No? Some dudes in a loincloth riding a camel, and dying of thirst some 5000 years ago? He or she or them would not even be dreaming of pulling a 1200 stone some 500 miles away.

At all. Period. They did not even travel far from the birth villages back then. They would be lucky to see then next town over the hill sometimes there whole lifes, all 50 years to old age of it.

If your asking can they build the pyramid today with modern technology? Yes, yes it could technically be done.

But it wont be done. But could they build the pyramids in a 20 year time period? Back then? With people pulling on ropes and in there underwear under a 110 degree sun? All day?

What are you silly? You want to be pulling a 1200 rock some 500 miles away? Hell, go to home depot? Buy yourself some rope. And go try to move the first giant boulder you see some 500 miles way.

See how that goes. Do you know how long it would take you to count to 2.3 million? If you started now! Count 1 then go on every second? It would take you 7.2 years to count to 2.3 million if you counted every second of every day.

Day and night, every second of every day, keep counting till you reach 2.3 million? Math says it would take you 7.2 years if you start....NOW!

Now imagine you had to move 2.3 million blocks not only out of the ground? Hundreads of feet under? By quarry you know guys in diaper, banging rocks on rocks. But you also had to cut them to perceive shape. Then at least half of them move and transport some 500 miles away. And then place them on top of the others. All 2.3 million of them?

Now if how long would that take you? Or hell, bring along thousand friends use all modern machinery and technology you can get your hands or so? How long do you think you all to move all the 6 million tons of material required? |
|
It would take a long time right? You may have to forgoe all lunch breaks or sleep for the next 20 years. I mean if you had an army of millions of diaper wearing stone banging on stone people you could do it. But only if they start droping dead you replace them with another imediately.

If it takes longer then 1 minute, you may not reach your timegoal of finished construction under 20 years at all.

And this is why? Even the ancient egyptioans in antiquity? Dont have depections or even a memory of the pyramid even haveing an outside layer at all. Not even one depecition?

You know why?

Because when they first saw them some 5000 years ago? Was during a nomadic tribe expansion. And they were always just rock stacked on rock mostly even then. Before they striped the outer layer to make the places and pools and temples of the ancient Egyptian world.

Have you looked at Egypt lately? Mostly mud and brick landscape with few modern technicalities. Like. MacDonalds. But they still haven't achieved the level of building technology that whoever it was that built the pyramids had.

The have been rebuilding around the pyramids, for all there history, all 5000 to 6000 years of it. Even the modern buildings will have to be be completely rebuild in the next 500 years alone. And the bones of the pyramid at giza? Will still be there, relevantly unchanged.

Still long dead. The people 5000 years ago? Barely had a comprehensive language, much less a singular understood universal language to which English is today.

And if they built the pyramids some 5000 years ago? Then boy oh boy. Have they downgraded since. So much so that they dont even know how they did. Its like magical.

a reply to: Scott Creighton


How to flog a book.