> DUNE wrote:
> > Can we be absolutely certain that Menkaures sarcophagus was
> > lost at sea, and whats more , what evidence is there that it
> > even made it on board the Beatrice .
> > Again we have our old friend Colonel Howard Vyse at the
> > of this story.
> > Ok i will make no bones of what i am going to imply about the
> > disappearance of one of the most finely carved basalt
> > sarcophaguses , and that is that it was sent to a private
> > collector of Egyptian antiquities .
> > Im going to post some clips of an article of some years ago
> > that mentions some anomalies of the events of that period
> > Vyse took the sarcophagus .
> > The news of the loss of the ship was reported in Lloyd’s
> > and Casualty Book.
> > The entry for Thursday, 31st January 1839 reads: “Beatrice,
> > Wichelo, [the skipper of the vessel], sailed from Alexandria
> > 20th Sept. & from Malta, 13th October for Liverpool, & has
> > since been heard of”.
> > Me, one wonders why three weeks passed before this sailing
> > set sail for Liverpool.
> > The vessel, it seems, had simply vanished, and along with it
> > disappeared one of history’s priceless and unique relics –
> > sarcophagus of the Fourth Dynasty pharaoh Menkaura,
> > Me, yes the quality of this sarcophagus was exceptional by
> > all accounts , and as the article says , it was unique and
> > priceless , or maybe someone did put a price on it ?.
> > Hawass believes the sarcophagus was removed from Egypt
> > illegally. “Stolen by the British in 1837,” he maintains (The
> > Spectator, 17th May 2006).
> > So did this ship really go down, ?
> > Peter A. Clayton (Chronicle of the Pharaohs, Thames and
> > 1994, reprinted 1999): The “ship carrying the sarcophagus
> > in a storm in 1838 shortly after leaving Leghorn. Efforts
> > in recent years using highly sophisticated technical
> > have failed to locate the ship.”
> > Me, Vyse gives us an excuse in his book as to why he took the
> > sarcophagus.
> > He says , "“As the sarcophagus would have been destroyed, had
> > it remained in the pyramid, I resolved to send it to the
> > British Museum,” wrote Vyse. Just why he thought it would
> > been destroyed remains a mystery, but this was often a
> > convenient (and sometimes valid) excuse at this period to
> > remove objects.
> > Me Yes it would have been sensible to remove FRAGILE objects
> > but to say the sarcophagus would have been destroyed seems
> > fetched , and if he felt that was the case , then why leave
> > Khufu's in its chamber, or was it because Khufus sarcophagus
> > did not look decorative .
> > By 9th August, Vyse was in Alexandria preparing for his
> > voyage to England. He sent a message to colleague Henry
> > still working at the pyramids, ordering him remove the
> > sarcophagus, a task which Vyse later admitted, was “not
> > trifling”. On 27th August, Vyse sailed for Malta on the first
> > leg of his journey home to England.
> > Later the sarcophagus was “cased with strong timbers” and
> > to Alexandria, presumably by boat along the Nile, although
> > gives no details of this operation.
> > Me, Why the lack of information on its movements from Giza.
> > At the time Vyse was in Egypt, everything found at the
> > Pyramids, and indeed at any other site, was acknowledged to
> > the property of the ruling Pasha, and it is not clear what
> > permission Vyse had for the removal of items
> > Me , Apparently Vyse made Two lists in his book as to what
> > going to be sent to England and what was staying in Egypt,
> > The sarcophagus was not on any of those lists, Why Not , ?
> > So was Vyse taking it out to protect it , or was it taken out
> > by request.
> > In a letter to Forshall from British Consul Patrick Campbell,
> > written in Alexandria and dated 2nd July 1838, the following,
> > passage occurs: “I beg to inform you that the sarcophagus
> > by Colonel Vyse out of the 3d. Pyramid at Ghizeh, and which
> > your letter to Viscount Palmerston of 7th February last you
> > requested His Lordship to instruct me to send to England, has
> > this day been embarked on board of the English ship the
> > Beatrice, bound for Liverpool and London ... .”
> > Me, Another mystery that needs some explanation, is that the
> > Captain of the Beatrice did not sail with the ship, i wonder
> > why.
> > Despite, Lloyd’s List stating that the Beatrice and Whichelo
> > sailed from Alexandria on its last, fateful journey on 20th
> > September 1838, the truth is that Whichelo was not on board.
> > know that he died in 1858; so why was he not on board his own
> > vessel when it sailed? This question will probably never be
> > answered. We do know that twenty days after Beatrice sailed,
> > 10th October, Whichelo boarded H.M. Steamer Blazer as a
> > passenger in Alexandria bound for Malta.
> > So did the sarcophagus sink to the bottom of the sea, with
> > more UNLISTED items, or did they survive by some alternative
> > route and now resides in someones private collection in
> > England.
> > DPP
> Most likely, the sarcophagus went down with the ship, and MOST
> ppl believe this to be true, (even Dr. H.). It's been
> speculated, (correctly IMO) that the ship was caught in a
> sudden storm, and the cargo shifted, (possibly initiated by the
> sarcophagus' extreme weight) causing the ship to sink. It was
> reported that some wreckage was seen floating off-shore.
> The Bill Of Lading would have this item listed if it was loaded
> onto the ship. Possibly the Port of Alexandria may still have
> possession of this document in their Archives. The Col.
> Campbell letter also supports the very high probability that it
> was on the ship.
Yes that's how it looks if taken at face value, in my present conspiracy mode, one might suggest that to Give the British Museum a valid insurance claim , some sort of evidence would be required to present the insurers with, and i guess that letter was more than likely used in their claim, to which we know they succeeded in claiming an amount that in todays time would amount to 10,000 pounds.
So yes saying in a letter it was on board is one thing , but as for hard evidence , then it would need an actual recorded observation by anyone on the ship, and as it was crated up t means no hard evidence could ever be confirmed.
> He says , “As the sarcophagus would have been destroyed, had
> it remained in the pyramid, I resolved to send it to the
> British Museum,” wrote Vyse. Just why he thought it would have
> been destroyed remains a mystery, but this was often a
> convenient (and sometimes valid) excuse at this period to
> remove objects...."
> You ignore the 'and sometimes valid' part, and the fact that
> the lid was found by Vyse destroyed, and then you call it a
I did not ignore the Valid comment, instead i said it would make sense to remove FRAGILE objects, to which it seems your the one who has ignored my comment on that, but lets not swerve around the Elephant in the room, and that is the reason for taking a 3 ton basalt sarcophagus under some flimsy claim that it could get destroyed.
Another curious aspect of this , is that Vsye made the decision to remove the sarcophagus while he was back in Alexandria preparing to leave, he sent a message to Raven to remove it, we then get no more information as to how it made its way to Alexandria, had his pencil broke ?.
> Vyse gave the info he thought necessary regarding the
> sarcophagus' journey to Alexandria....how much detail do you
> need here?
> As stated in the link, Vyse was required to go thru proper
> channels, etc. and to receive permission from the Pacha before
> shipment of any and all items discovered. Not sure why the
> sarcophagus wasn't listed in Ops.
Your not sure why it wasn't listed, well maybe because he did not have the required permission.
> The Captain WAS on board, and he was R.M. Whichelo's son. A
> ship's owner is not necessarily its Captain, esp. in that era.
I have never read that before, can you provide a link to information or say where you got that from.