The Secret Chamber of Osiris: Lost Knowledge of the Sixteen Pyramids

by Scott Creighton

  This is to say that, almost without exception, Mr. Hill’s drawings of the glyphs in the various chambers had the correct orientation relative to his own signature and the signatures of the other witnesses except the two drawings from Campbell’s Chamber of the Khufu cartouche and crew name—the two facsimiles containing the very hieroglyphics I suspected Vyse had faked.†1

  Bizarrely, both of these facsimile drawings from Campbell’s Chamber were signed by Mr. Hill (the only witness) as though he had been copying them from an original source that had the hieroglyphics oriented horizontally (figure 6.12), thereby providing corroboration that the cartouche and crew name facsimiles had come from some other place where the source had been presented with a different orientation (i.e., horizontal) to what we actually find in Campbell’s Chamber (i.e., vertical). This then presents compelling evidence that Hill copied his facsimile drawing of the Khufu cartouche (and crew name) not from Campbell’s Chamber but from somewhere else where it had been presented to him horizontally, hence why he unwittingly and habitually signed the facsimile at the bottom (as most artists do), aligning his signature with the landscape orientation of the original.

  Figure 6.12. Reproduction of the Khufu Cartouche with Hill signature in landscape

  Figure 6.13. Mock-up facsimile of portrait Khufu Cartouche with mock Hill signature (bottom right)

  If Hill had made this facsimile from the vertically aligned (portrait) hieroglyphics that we observe today in Campbell’s Chamber (as is believed), then, by following the normal convention he employed with every other facsimile drawing he made that we were able to check, he should have signed his Khufu facsimile as is shown in figure 6.13.

  That Hill appears not to have followed his own convention in signing these facsimiles from Campbell’s Chamber strongly suggests that these drawings had originally been copied from some alternative source where Hill did, in fact, follow his normal signing convention—he instinctively and habitually signed the drawing as he normally would at the foot of the horizontal/landscape drawing (figure 6.12), because that was the orientation of the original source cartouche. That Hill then, rather stupidly, decided to rotate his already signed landscape drawing 90° to copy it into the Great Pyramid was to be his undoing as it resulted in this very obvious discrepancy we find today. Had Mr. Hill simply copied this drawing into the chamber horizontally then his deception would have gone entirely unnoticed.

  It seems somewhat ironic that Mr. Hill’s signature placed on his facsimile drawings is used to vouch for the authenticity of the hieroglyphics in these chambers, and yet it is his signature that has, in the end, been his undoing, since, once again, the truth of these markings in Campbell’s Chamber of the Great Pyramid is laid bare. And it has to be said—if Vyse and his team could change even just three markings in these chambers then their action taints all the markings found in Campbell’s Chamber and all other chambers below; this evidence becomes the fruit of the poisonous tree.

  A FINAL NOTE

  In April 2013 two German researchers from Dresden University, Dominique Gorlitz, Ph.D., and Stefan Erdmann, accessed Campbell’s Chamber of the Great Pyramid and while there removed (without any official permission to do so) a small sample of ochre paint from one of the hieroglyphs (not the Khufu cartouche), which they intended to have radiocarbon dated. At least one reporter, Dina Abdel-Alim of Day 7 Magazine, claims that the material had been radiocarbon tested by a German laboratory and that the paint was found to be only centuries old.*4 8 Alas, when I contacted the German laboratory involved to ask them to confirm this report, they refused to confirm or deny anything.

  WHERE NOW FOR EGYPTOLOGY?

  With all of this evidence coming from a variety of sources, what we are presented with here is the smoking gun pointing to an incredible and quite audacious hoax having been perpetrated by Vyse and his team in the Great Pyramid in 1837.

  It rather seems that wherever Vyse went and whatever field of human endeavor he operated, the whiff of scandal and of perpetrating some form of fraud was never too far behind. And so we now have to ask: Was Vyse a man whom we could truly say we can have complete confidence in? Can he be considered fully trustworthy, a reliable source? Is there anything in what we have learned that might raise sufficient doubt about this man that would lead us to question what he claims to have discovered in the Great Pyramid? In legal parlance what we have here is akin to asking is there reasonable suspicion—are there sufficient grounds to doubt the veracity of Vyse’s published account as it relates to the discovery of these painted marks in the Great Pyramid? In short, is the discovery of these inscriptions Vyse’s greatest achievement or his filthiest fraud?

  If we take the view that there exist sufficient doubts on the character of Vyse and that there is now also sufficient evidence that casts doubt on his claimed discovery, how does this impact Egyptology and where then does Egyptology go from here? The answer is simple: Egyptology must do what it should have done in the first place with these inscriptions—consider them inadmissible evidence until proper science can verify their authenticity. Egyptology must put aside all written testimonies made concerning the markings in these chambers, including Vyse’s published works, return to the actual, physical evidence itself, and apply hard science to try to determine the veracity of these inscriptions, for only then might the truth of these markings finally be settled.

  It is not for myself or anyone else to disprove the authenticity of the inscriptions within these chambers—it is the responsibility of Egyptology to take these issues seriously and, if possible, to scientifically prove that these inscriptions are authentic, rather than dutifully trusting the word of a man whose actions have brought a number of others he crossed paths with in his life to question his moral rectitude. Egyptology’s refusal to conduct official scientific research on these inscriptions in the face of mounting evidence that strongly suggests they were faked in 1837 is simply no longer a tenable position.

  The world deserves to know the truth of these inscriptions.

  7

  Ages of Deluge and Drought

  After the usual interval, the stream from heaven, like a pestilence, comes pouring down.

  PLATO, TIMAEUS

  When the ancient Egyptians measured the height of the stars and observed that they had departed from their normal course (i.e., the Earth’s rotational axis had somehow become disturbed, giving to an Earth-based observer the apparent view that the stars had changed their positions), they believed that this change in the heavens would, some three hundred years in their future, result in a great deluge followed by a disastrous drought—flood and fire. And by constructing their great pyramid arks they hoped that, after the worst effects of this devastating catastrophe had passed, they would have the means to “reboot” their civilization.

  The first thing to say here is that, whether the anticipated deluge and drought actually came to pass is actually a secondary issue. The key consideration here is that, in observing the changed heavens, the ancient Egyptians believed the change would result in these catastrophes, and the mere belief that these disasters were certain to occur in the not-so-distant future was motivation enough for them to put in place the necessary countermeasures (i.e., the construction of their giant pyramid arks to help guard against such a devastating outcome). But was such a belief justified? Was the need for the construction of their great pyramid arks vindicated? What evidence is there to support that such catastrophes—deluge and drought—actually came to pass?

  DELGUE

  The history (and prehistory) of humanity is a litany of ancient flood stories. From all over the world and from just about every known culture, stories of destructive floods have come down to us, some that were said to have been so devastating that only a few people survived to repopulate the Earth. Those of a religious faith will point to the truth of a single, worldwide flood that is testified in various religious texts. Those of a more secular and scientific outlook will insist that such flood legends refer only to localized flo
oding events (from these various cultures around the world) rather than a single, devastating global deluge that many of a religious outlook believe took place and was divinely ordained in order to “cleanse” the Earth.

  But what does science have to say on the subject? What evidence is there to support the idea of a single, devastating worldwide flood? In terms of our modern view of the world, the evidence of such a single global flood is probably best described as ambiguous; it rather depends on how the question is framed. Science tells us, for instance, that around twelve thousand years ago sea levels all over the world were around three hundred feet lower than they are today. Most of the world’s population today lives on coastal areas, and there is little reason why this would not have been the same for populations thousands of years ago when sea levels were much lower. As such those coastal settlements and their populations all over the world would, over time, have been gradually inundated by the rising sea, forcing them to relocate to higher ground. Technically, this long, gradual rise in global sea levels could be described as a global flood, but this was not, in the main, the kind of apocalyptic sudden deluge that many ancient flood stories relate. These cataclysmic flood stories tell us that the deluge was rapid and overwhelming, indicating that sea levels rose very rapidly by a considerable amount all over the world and that this great deluge was somehow related to events observed in the heavens. Consider these examples, first from China and then from South America.

  Hereupon Nu Kua melted stones of the five colors to repair the heavens, and cut off the feet of the tortoise to set upright the four extremities of the earth. Gathering the ashes of reeds she stopped the flooding waters and thus rescued the land of Chi.1

  The pillars of heaven were broken. The earth shook to its foundations. The sky sank lower towards the north. The sun moon and stars changed their motions. The earth fell to pieces and the waters in its bosom uprushed with violence and overflowed . . . the system of the universe was totally disordered.2

  How is such a sudden and overwhelming flood possible, and what evidence is there to support such rapid, devastating rises in global sea levels?

  J. Harlen Bretz and Catastrophism

  In the early twentieth century it was the established view of scientists that changes to the Earth’s natural landscape occurred imperceptibly and slowly over very long periods of time. The idea that sudden massive flooding (catastrophism) could play a part in the molding and shaping of our planet was largely ridiculed by geologists at this time. But when J. Harlen Bretz, a geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, made a visit to the Columbia Basin region in eastern Washington state, he discovered something in the peculiar landscape of this area that would challenge and ultimately change the long-held preconceptions of his peers.

  Bretz published a paper in 1923, arguing that the channeled scablands in Eastern Washington State were caused by massive flooding in the distant past. This view, which was seen as arguing for a catastrophic explanation of the geology, was against the prevailing view of uniformitarianism, and Bretz’s views were initially discredited. However, as the nature of the Ice Age was better understood, Bretz’s original research was vindicated, and by the 1950s his insights were also vindicated.3

  Bretz recognized peculiar features of the landscape in this area as unmistakable signs of catastrophic, massive flooding in the distant past (figure 7.1). Whereas the conventional view held that the erosion in this area occurred gradually over many tens of thousands of years as part of the planet’s natural sedimentation and erosive processes, Bretz’s view was that the landscape he observed had in fact been shaped almost instantly by a series of brief, cataclysmic megafloods.

  Figure 7.1. Cordilleran Ice Sheet and flood plains, circa 20,000 BP (before present). Image by United States Geological Survey.

  As deglaciation accelerated and the great ice sheets retreated, meltwater would have formed great proglacial lakes, dammed up with a wall of ice or moraine. As the water pressure in the lakes increased from the melting ice, eventually the ice dams or moraines would have yielded to this pressure and collapsed, allowing a cataclysmic outburst of water to surge over the land, gouging and reforming it instantly. A number of these sudden megafloods’ are now known to have occurred during the Holocene period. The last of these, from glacial Lake Agassiz, is believed to have occurred around 8,200 years ago. An article from the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters discusses “a sea-level jump that occurred within the 8.18 to 8.31 ka time window and is attributed to the final drainage of proglacial Lake Agassiz–Ojibway. . . . The total inferred eustatic sea-level rise associated with the very final stage of LAO drainage at 8.2 ka ranges from 0.8 to 2.2 m, considerably higher than previous estimates.”4

  If this final, massive outburst of glacial Lake Agassiz rapidly increased sea levels all over the globe by the upper estimated limit of 2.2 meters (7.2 feet), this would have had catastrophic effects for the people in just about every coastal settlement on the planet, giving no time for them to adapt and relocate; they would have simply been swept away. And the memory of such a catastrophic deluge would surely have been written into legend by cultures all over the world.

  So, while it is true that sea levels at the end of the last ice age generally increased slowly (by some three hundred feet) throughout the Holocene period, causing relatively little difficulty for global populations to adapt, this gradual rise was occasionally punctuated by dramatic leaps as a result of the sudden collapse of glacial dams and the massive outbursts of freshwater from the great proglacial lakes into the Earth’s oceans. Such sudden and dramatic increases would have given many of the Earth’s coastal settlements little chance.

  But it seems that even the gradual, upward rise in global sea levels seems to have occurred much quicker than scientists have hitherto realized. The discovery of ancient mangrove forests under the Great Barrier Reef gives an indication of just how quickly the general rise of global sea levels actually was.

  The discovery of ancient mangrove forest remains under the Great Barrier Reef has cast doubt on some theories about how quickly the sea level rose after the last ice age.

  Most scientists believe it was a gradual rise over the past 9,000 years. But the existence of relic mangroves 70cm (27in) below the floor of the Barrier Reef, some with leaves and branches still intact, suggests an abrupt rise.

  Dan Alongi, a biologist at the Australian Institute of Marine Science, said it appeared that sea levels rose about 3 meters in less than 30 years, drowning forests and flooding estuaries, 20 times faster than previously thought.

  “Material was very much intact, it didn’t even have time to fully decompose when it was buried,” he said. “So it does tell us that when climate change last happened it was comparatively quick.”

  It could indicate how quickly the climate might change in future, he said, adding that a sudden rise in sea level of the same magnitude would cause widespread damage to coastal areas.5

  DROUGHT

  The aridification of Egypt was a process that had been occurring for many thousands of years, and the people were well used to dealing with such a dry climate, blessed as it was with the annual inundation of the Nile, which allowed the country to flourish. But this general aridification was also punctuated by droughts so severe that the country was brought to its knees, which, indeed, is believed to be one of the key contributing factors for the demise of the Old Kingdom. Proof of such devastating droughts is now being found in Lake Tana in Ethiopia, the source of the Blue Nile.

  Two drought episodes occurred at 8.4 and 7.5 cal kyr BP [calibrated thousand years before present], and are also interpreted as a southward shift in the monsoon front. The first of these events appears to have preceded and been more significant than the 8.2 cal kyr BP. Precipitation declined after 6.8 cal kyr BP, although we do not see an abrupt end to the African Humid Period. This period culminated in a dry episode at ~ 4.2 cal kyr BP, supporting the view that reduced Nile flow was a contributing factor to the demise of the Egyptian Old
Kingdom.6

  Further research into this ancient drought that perhaps brought

  about the collapse of the Egyptian Old Kingdom was conducted by the University of St. Andrews.

  Researchers from the University of St Andrews have confirmed that a severe period of drought around 4,200 years ago may have contributed to the demise of the [Egyptian Old Kingdom] civilization. Using seismic investigations with sound waves, along with carbon dating of a 100-metre section of sediment from the bed of Lake Tana in Ethiopia, the team were able to look back many thousands of years. They were able to see how water levels in the lake had varied over the past 17,000 years, with the sediment signaling lush periods but also times of drought.

  Lake Tana—the source of the Blue Nile river—flows to the White Nile at Khartoum and eventually to the Nile Delta. Dr Richard Bates, senior lecturer in earth sciences at St Andrews, said their studies had confirmed that the ancient civilization that was the Egyptian Old Kingdom—often referred to as the Age of the Pyramids—may have experienced a prolonged period of drought of the same severity being seen in parts of Africa now.

  “Part of this research was driven by whether we could see anything in the lake sediment that would help us understand more about that period of drought, which was during the 90-year period at the end of the Old Kingdom, which really caused its demise,” he said. “There were great riots, and anarchy breaking out as a result of it.”