> Hello Martin,
> This rigamarole aside, looking at Vyse's drawing of the
> relieving chambers, by my count there are almost 2 dozen
> various lines of graffiti. Does Vyse's journal catalogue all of
> them with translations and/or is there another source you are
> aware of that does you can refer me to? All of this fuss is
> made over this one cartouche, yet the context of the 20+ other
> lines of graffiti is strangely ignored. It stands to reason
> given we can assume they were all made in the same era we would
> want to know what the others say to create a context for the
Perhaps you’d like first to explain how careful examination of evidence which Creighton examined carelessly is a rigmarole?
Have you read it? Have you read Creighton’s article? Do you understand the point I’m making?
Vyse’s journal has no translations. Vyse’s knowledge of hieroglyphs was that of an intelligent layman with a guidebook in his hand: next to none. He left all that to Samuel Birch. It was largely beyond Birch. The most advanced contemporary opinion was that of Lepsius, who examined Hill’s facsimiles in 1838. He didn’t get everything right. Lots of this stuff was not adequately understood until years later.
The other two well-attested crew names in the pyramid of Khufu are, in arguable translation, “Followers of the powerful White Crown of Khnum-khufu” and “Pure ones of Horus Medjedu”.
Yes, excessive attention is given to this one cartouche. This is partly dictated by television values.
Post Edited (24-May-14 19:59)