Khufu Cartouche in GP Dated - Centuries Old

I felt it was important that this latest information on the Khufu Cartouch controversy be given a thread of its own as it is somewhat buried in the previous thread.

It now seems that paint WAS taken from the cartouche of Khufu and that it HAS been dated. The result... sit down folks... the result of the dating apparently dates the pigment from the Khufu cartouche to "centuries". Not millennia as you might expect but "centuries". Here is the Google translation from the Arabic of Professor Ahmed Saied (apparently of Cairo University) who has been following and commenting on this story:

Saied: "...they have analyzed samples of the cartouche of Khufu and reached the result, which is that Khufu did not build the Great Pyramid and that the ink used in the cartridges to jot down details constructed the pyramid is not old, but the age of the pyramid itself is larger than life, cartouche centuries, which confirms that the pyramid is not due to Khufu ..." - Source (4th paragraph).

It certainly seems that Professor Saied is saying that:

a) The paint samples were taken from the Khufu Cartouche (and it seems a this was done a number of years ago).
b) The samples HAVE been analysed (in Germany).
c) Results of the tests HAVE been returned and are known.
d) The paint "is not old" but "centuries".

The implications of this are far-reaching. If true, then this proves beyond doubt, as many alternative researchers have long suspected, that Col. Richard Howard-Vyse did indeed forge the Khufu Cartouche inside the Great Pyramid. This revelation also breaks the only tangible connection conventional Egyptology had that linked Khufu with the Great Pyramid.

Today there is a different landscape.

Regards,

SC

WOW.

I await more info. I have seriously been lacking in my interest of this subject. cool.

S & F

reply to post by Scott Creighton


I haven't voiced my suspicions before but when I look at the programmes on the pyramids and the tools found in the burial chambers it appears to me that the 'ancient Egyptians merely carved onto the already built pyramids and put their history on these even older buildings.

If, (IMHO) one could say that the ancient Egyptians built the pyramids themselves, surely we would have had records of how to move stones and how to construct the pyramids. We know from aerial photography that there are a huge number of sites where pyramids once stood but the search for the people who built them appears to have drawn little ideas on their numbers, origins etc.

Today all sorts of exciting information is trickling down, in that we can now consider the reality of sound and power sources etc. Perhaps at last, we are beginning to get to face up to the fact that we do have an ancient civilisation that has either evaded our archaelogists and scientists completely or, has been deliberately hidden from us through inaccurate history taught year in and year out.

reply to post by Scott Creighton


That's a blockbuster - and drastically changes the landscape of not only the origins & purpose of the GP, but also casts a pall over all of Egyptology. Either they knew this and did not share the findings, or they didn't in which case I have to question all of their methods and theories.

In either case, they have no standing wrt to anything anymore, unless & until they get out in front of this and lead the way on further *real* scientific investigation - not only of this issue, but in all aspects of the study of Ancient Egypt. The world should accept *nothing* from them until it has been scientifically and openly tested, studied & vetted.

Their word is no longer worth the paint on the cartouche. It's way past time to let the sun shine in so to speak.

What are your thoughts on this Scott? Is it as potentially damaging as it seems?

I want to thank you OP for the post ..I am reading other findings about the dates in question and would like to share it with the link . creation.com... peace

Scott Creighton
I felt it was important that this latest information on the Khufu Cartouch controversy be given a thread of its own as it is somewhat buried in the previous thread.

It now seems that paint WAS taken from the cartouche of Khufu and that it HAS been dated. The result... sit down folks... the result of the dating apparently dates the pigment from the Khufu cartouche to "centuries". Not millennia as you might expect but "centuries". Here is the Google translation from the Arabic of Professor Ahmed Saied (apparently of Cairo University) who has been following and commenting on this story:

Saied: "...they have analyzed samples of the cartouche of Khufu and reached the result, which is that Khufu did not build the Great Pyramid and that the ink used in the cartridges to jot down details constructed the pyramid is not old, but the age of the pyramid itself is larger than life, cartouche centuries, which confirms that the pyramid is not due to Khufu ..." - Source (4th paragraph).

It certainly seems that Professor Saied is saying that:

a) The paint samples were taken from the Khufu Cartouche (and it seems a this was done a number of years ago).
b) The samples HAVE been analysed (in Germany).
c) Results of the tests HAVE been returned and are known.
d) The paint "is not old" but "centuries".

The implications of this are far-reaching. If true, then this proves beyond doubt, as many alternative researchers have long suspected, that Col. Richard Howard-Vyse did indeed forge the Khufu Cartouche inside the Great Pyramid. This revelation also breaks the only tangible connection conventional Egyptology had that linked Khufu with the Great Pyramid.

Today there is a different landscape.

Regards,

SC

edit on 3/12/2013 by Scott Creighton because: (no reason given)

Is it possible that the Cartouche is indeed millennia old and it was just the paint that was new? That perhaps someone in the more recent past "touched up" the old cartouche and thus gave them samples of paint that postdated the actual artifact? Many old masterworks such as "The Last Supper" have been retouched and carbon dating some of the material from it may give erroneous dates, for example.

Excellent information Scott.

I for one am not surprised in the error of dates, what does surprise me
is that this information will become public and TPTB in Egypt would
allow this conclusion without trying to discredit or supress.

All we need now are the actual Pyramid Blueprints.

How would finding the blueprints impact our present day history..?

This is very interesting. Let's see if I got this straight. A major piece of evidence that they are using to say that Kafu created the pyramids is a concoction of a past archeologist? Fabricating or discounting evidence has been going on for centuries in all fields of research and this kind of evidence was used to create the dating methods of science. It is a reference for carbon dating.

Our whole system could be off, the guy who did this was not the only one doing it in the past either.

S&F

Hi Rickymouse,

rickymouse
This is very interesting. Let's see if I got this straight. A major piece of evidence that they are using to say that Kafu created the pyramids is a concoction of a past archeologist? Fabricating or discounting evidence has been going on for centuries in all fields of research and this kind of evidence was used to create the dating methods of science. It is a reference for carbon dating.

Our whole system could be off, the guy who did this was not the only one doing it in the past either.

S&F

SC: That is what it looks like from this evidence--Col. Howard-Vyse and his team painted these markings within the Great Pyramid themselves in a bid to empirically link the structure to Khufu. In 1837 Howard-Vyse was determined to make a great discovery in Egypt and the 'discovery' of the Khufu cartouche in these hitherto inaccessible chambers gave him his place in history. However, as can be seen from the link below, Howard-Vyse was more than willing to play dirty in his past activities, resorting even to fraudulent activity in UK parliamentary elections as well as some other dubious activities:

Howard-Vyse Fraud Allegations

Today a cornerstone of conventional Egyptology has been torn asunder. It is once again reasonable and legitimate to ask, "Who built the Great Pyramid and when was it built".

SC

Hi Riffrafter,

Riffrafter
reply to post by Scott Creighton

 

That's a blockbuster - and drastically changes the landscape of not only the origins & purpose of the GP, but also casts a pall over all of Egyptology. Either they knew this and did not share the findings, or they didn't in which case I have to question all of their methods and theories.

In either case, they have no standing wrt to anything anymore, unless & until they get out in front of this and lead the way on further *real* scientific investigation - not only of this issue, but in all aspects of the study of Ancient Egypt. The world should accept *nothing* from them until it has been scientifically and openly tested, studied & vetted.

Their word is no longer worth the paint on the cartouche. It's way past time to let the sun shine in so to speak.

What are your thoughts on this Scott? Is it as potentially damaging as it seems?

edit on 12/3/2013 by Riffrafter because: (no reason given)

SC: I think it has a number of ramifications, none of which are too good for conventional Egyptology. First of all it breaks the long-standing link between Khufu and the GP, the only tangible piece of evidence that conventional Egyptology could hold up as proof of Khufu's involvement with the Great Pyramid. With this link broken we have to ask, well who DID build this structure--and WHEN? The age of the structure comes from two key planks of evidence--the Khufu cartouche and the 1980s radiocarbon dating of the carbon in the limestone mortar that binds the pyramid blocks together.

From a reconstruction of the ancient Egyptian king lists handed down from a number of sources, conventional Egyptology places Khufu as king of Egypt ca.2,550 BCE. Thus they date the Great Pyramid to this period. However, they omit to take any recognition of the hundreds of mortal kings that are known to be missing from the king lists up to and before this period. There may be others missing that are not known to us, especially from the First Intermediate Period which was a relative 'dark age' in ancient Egypt after the collapse of the Old Kingdom.

The carbon dating tests that were done on the pyramids of Giza (and others) in the 1980s tested mortar only from between the outer pyramid blocks. These C14 tests gave a date for the charcoal within the mortar to c.2,900 BCE. As far as I am aware, no samples were taken from deep within the pyramid. This has led some (including myself) to speculate that repair works to the outer layers of the pyramids during the Old Kingdom period may have occurred (and there's some evidence to support this view) and that this could have resulted in these dates. More tests need to be done, taking samples of mortar (hopefully with some ash/charcoal trapped within it) from deep within the pyramid itself.

Of course, conventional Egyptology will simply reject these findings and will find all manner of ways to dispute them. That's expected. But it hardly matter. The genie is out the bottle and won't go back in. They may well contest it but there is now some evidence to show that the markings in these small chambers of the Great Pyramid were faked in 1837 by Howard-Vyse and his team. If conventional Egyptology want to prove that their date of ca.2,550 BCE is right then they will have to run their own fully audited and documented tests on the markings in these chambers. Until they do that and do it in full public view, the charge that the markings were faked (with evidence to prove it) is not going to go away. The ball is now very firmly in the court of the conventional Egyptologists. If they take upt he challenge then good--it's good to obtain corroboration. If they do not then we have to ask 'why not'? What is it they are afraid of revealing?

This newly released evidence really is a game changer.

Regards,
SC

reply to post by Scott Creighton


Man you couldnt be more wrong you totally misread what they were trying to tell you. Though relying on google translation its not your fault. What happened is two amatuer archeologists had a belief that the great pyramid was built by Jews. To back up there claim the say they took samples from the cartouche illegally i might add had it tested in a lab in Germany and it shows jews constructed it before moses. This is nothing more then a half baked theory and in fact when asked to provide proof suddenly they claimed were only able to get a sample enough for testing in truth i find it unlikely 2 amatuer archeologists were allowed any where near the cartouche.

Now you do realize that the cartouche is not the only evidence khofu built the pyramid dont you? In 1990 the pyramid builders necropolis was found at the eastern rock of the Giza Plateau, and that each tomb contains details of its owner and his job description, as well as his or her skeleton and funerary collection.Doesnt stop there however in 2012 a French archaeologist named Pierre Tallet found a rock cave near Wadi Al-Jarff on the Red Sea.Tallet found a collection of papyri dated to the reign of King Khufu mentioning the number of workers, artisans and boats that were used to transport the pyramid's blocks to the Giza plateau.These papyri were part of the diary of an engineer who was involved in the construction of the Great Pyramid and show the engineer's working plans.

Decided to add this as well i believe you owe colonel Vyse an apology you accused him of being a cheat and liar and as it turns out there is other evidence corroborating his discovery.Cracks me up you have groups who want to say atlanteans built the pyramids others hebrews and others aliens and what lengths they will go to take away the egyptians legacy.

So if somebody came along a couple of hundred years ago, say some short Frenchman or something, with an interest in Egyptian antiquities. Applied some paint to a cartouche to get a better look at it.

Using Occam's Razor, is that not quite a likely explanation for what has happened here?


(Though I still maintain you can't get reliable C14 dates off residue that's been exposed to the air scraped off stonework.)

Painterz
So if somebody came along a couple of hundred years ago, say some short Frenchman or something, with an interest in Egyptian antiquities. Applied some paint to a cartouche to get a better look at it.

Using Occam's Razor, is that not quite a likely explanation for what has happened here?


(Though I still maintain you can't get reliable C14 dates off residue that's been exposed to the air scraped off stonework.)

Not to mention he blasted his way in with dynamite leaving carbon residue everywhere. These two amatuer archeologists were fools why do you think they all ready ruled out carbon dating the cartouche in the first place. As i said they thought they were doing ground breaking work in reality they were fools.

Martians flying from Sadona to Earth on mercabas and setting up shop doesn't seem so crazy anymore.

I'm curious to see just how far this goes. It doesn't take much for people to forget but at least over time there will be more momentum.

dragonridr
Doesnt stop there however in 2012 a French archaeologist named Pierre Tallet found a rock cave near Wadi Al-Jarff on the Red Sea.Tallet found a collection of papyri dated to the reign of King Khufu mentioning the number of workers, artisans and boats that were used to transport the pyramid's blocks to the Giza plateau.These papyri were part of the diary of an engineer who was involved in the construction of the Great Pyramid and show the engineer's working plans.

Do you have a link/resource for this? I'd be very interested to read about it.

Thank you

EDIT TO ADD:

Here is the story about the oldest papyri ever found in Egypt "Diary of the Merrer: Official involved in the building of the pyramid for Cheops"

One other link: news.discovery.com...

Have they completely ruled out contamination? Perhaps it was just repaired/repainted around that time. It could have been contaminated 100 different ways. The fact that modern graffiti is present in and around the cartouche [within inches] lends some credence to the possibility that it was contaminated... even if by accident.

Also, isn't it weird that it it looks like it was painted by a child? You'd figure the guy who headed the construction of the greatest thing in the entire world would get a more fitting tribute than a sloppy painting on the wall. They built the whole pyramid, but didn't bother carving a relief or something? Seems sketchy to me.

But yeah, it could be contamination for sure. They should rule that out. With modern graffiti mere inches from the cartouche, contamination seems pretty likely. And to be clear, I am skeptical of egyptologists. I don't buy their chronology of egypt at all, but I also want to make sure we handle this in a way that won't embarrass us down the road. We need to be absolutely sure.

edit: Reclamation and reuse are also obvious possibilities. Even if the cartouche dates to "khufu's" reign, it doesn't truly date the pyramid. It dates the cartouche. Wouldn't be the first time ancient things have been reused/repurposed.

love to say it..."told you so"...but this thing with suppression of evidence is old thing.

One might wonder if the recent "theft" of the pigment in question had prompted the sudden revelation, out of fear of being exposed by 3rd party.

Sadly, this only confirms my current "worldview"...also gives support to conspiracies...which are obviously a reality we have to come to terms with.



btw Scott...how reliable is that link ?

MarioOnTheFly
love to say it..."told you so"...but this thing with suppression of evidence is old thing.

One might wonder if the recent "theft" of the pigment in question had prompted the sudden revelation, out of fear of being exposed by 3rd party.

Sadly, this only confirms my current "worldview"...also gives support to conspiracies...which are obviously a reality we have to come to terms with.



btw Scott...how reliable is that link ?

edit on 3-12-2013 by MarioOnTheFly because: (no reason given)

I suggest you read my earlier posts it answers your question!

Interesting OP,

My belief on it is thus:

Cheops is Job (CHJ + O + B/P) from the Bible.
- Worshipped One God
- Shepherding (no shepherds among Egyptian Pharaohs)
- Great Pyramid has numerous examples of Holy mathematics used in scripture (144,000 cubits etc.)
- Job was the Wise man of Uz (Wizard of Oz ref), the land of Uz extended from the Arabian peninsula to Giza westward and included Sinai.


Suphis was Joseph, son of Jacob from the Bible.
- vice Pharaoh
- built the canals along the Nile for irrigation
- Storage houses for grains (granaries)
- The land of Pharaoh and Suphis extended to Giza Eastward.

In my opinion, the Great Pyramid was built as a landmark commemorating the Creator God (as above so below) where the land of Suphis (Joseph) and Cheops (Job) met. It was a great building (Job is recorded as being a builder of Great things) project used during the 7 years of plenty prior to the 7 years of famine in honor of the God of Creation who saved Egypt from certain death.

God Bless,

reply to post by dragonridr

Hi Dragonridr,

Thanks for stopping by.

D: Man you couldnt be more wrong …

SC: Wrong? In what way? I am presenting only what has been presented as fact elsewhere. I see little reason to doubt those facts as I understand them.

D: you totally misread what they were trying to tell you. Though relying on google translation its not your fault. What happened is two amatuer archeologists had a belief that the great pyramid was built by Jews.

SC: I have no interest whatsoever in the speculations (wild or otherwise) of these two researchers. I am interested only in the science that they had done (via SGS Laboratories in Dresden, Germany) on the samples from the Khufu cartouche that they took.

D: …they took samples from the cartouche illegally i might add had it tested in a lab in Germany …

SC: Agreed.

D: …. and it shows jews constructed it before moses.

SC: Not that I am remotely interested, but how exactly does the ochre paint from a royal cartouche that has now been dated to being mere “centuries” in age (when it should, if we are to believe the Egyptologists, be dated in millennia) show that Jews constructed the pyramid before Moses?

D: This is nothing more then a half baked theory …

SC: Of which I am not the least bit interested.

D: …and in fact when asked to provide proof suddenly they claimed were only able to get a sample enough for testing ….

SC: Great. That’s what we need and what I have been arguing should happen for years. (No, I don’t condone their methods).

…in truth i find it unlikely 2 amatuer archeologists were allowed any where near the cartouche.

SC: They got to it:

Taking the paint from Khufu cartouche (See 1m31s)

D: Now you do realize that the cartouche is not the only evidence khofu built the pyramid dont you?

SC: You do realize that I don’t actually have a problem with Khufu as the builder of the Great Pyramid?

D: In 1990 the pyramid builders necropolis was found at the eastern rock of the Giza Plateau, and that each tomb contains details of its owner and his job description, as well as his or her skeleton and funerary collection.

SC: Can you present any definitive evidence that proves which pyramids these “builders” from the “builders necropolis” actually built? There are many pyramids at Giza. You do realize that at Giza (and elsewhere) there are a number of the giant pyramids that show clear evidence of reparation work, don’t you? So, did these “builders” from the “builders’ necropolis” build the pyramids or did they simply make reparations to already ancient structures that were in a state of dereliction?

D: Doesnt stop there however in 2012 a French archaeologist named Pierre Tallet found a rock cave near Wadi Al-Jarff on the Red Sea.

SC: The site was originally discovered by J. G. Wilkinson in 1832. It was rediscovered by a French team in the 1950s and work was re-commenced by another French team in 2011.

Tallet found a collection of papyri dated to the reign of King Khufu …

SC: The cartouche of Khufu is certainly presented in this papyrus. Has the papyrus been C14 dated? If so, can you tell us the results?

D: …mentioning the number of workers, artisans and boats that were used to transport the pyramid's blocks to the Giza plateau.These papyri were part of the diary of an engineer who was involved in the construction of the Great Pyramid and show the engineer's working plans.

SC: Indeed. And were they building the Great Pyramid or some other smaller pyramid at Giza? Were they merely making reparations to the Great Pyramid or some other pyramid at Giza? What does the papyrus say?

D: Decided to add this as well i believe you owe colonel Vyse an apology you accused him of being a cheat and liar….

SC: That’s because he WAS. The proof of Howard-Vyse’s corrupt activities are well documented.

Howard-Vyse the Corrupt Parliamentarian

D:… and as it turns out there is other evidence corroborating his discovery.Cracks me up you have groups who want to say atlanteans built the pyramids others hebrews and others aliens and what lengths they will go to take away the egyptians legacy.

SC: No, you have this somewhat back-to-front. It is conventional Egyptology that denies the ancient Egyptians their true legacy. These are an ancient people who tell us with their own writings that their culture was tens of thousands of years older than conventional Egyptology accepts. I’m with the ancient Egyptians on this one.

Regards,

SC