Mysteries :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For serious discussion of the controversies, approaches and enigmas surrounding the origins and development of the human species and of human civilization. (NB: for more ‘out there’ posts we point you in the direction of the ‘Paranormal & Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Two points:

(1) Yes, Bauval and I have read the article in Nature.

(2) Yes, it confirms our theories about the dating of the construction of the Great Pyramid to around 2450 BC.

It is a common mistake amongst our critics, who have rarely if ever read our work, that we date the construction of the Giza pyramids to the epoch of 10,500 BC.

This is not the case. We say that the ground-plan of the three Giza pyramids uses the stars and the precession to "signal" or draw attention to the epoch of 10,500 BC. But we say that the actual construction work was done around 2500-2450BC.

I have long had a statement about this matter up on this website (see "Features" --my article on Outrageous Hypotheses) but for your convenience I paste it in below.


A Position Statement From Graham Hancock On The Antiquity And Meaning Of The Giza Monuments
22 July 1998

I am the author of "Fingerprints of the Gods" and the co-author (with Robert Bauval) of "Keeper of Genesis" (entitled "The Message of the Sphinx" in the United States).

Before continuing I advise all who are interested in this position statement to read first the critique of my work posted by Martin Stower on his website (http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~martins/Pyramid/kogenesis.html). Please also refer to John Anthony West's open letter to Martin Stower posted on Egyptnews.

Re the 'quarry mark' hieroglyphs in the relieving chambers above the King's Chamber in the Great Pyramid, I have rightly been taken to task for uncritically supporting Zecharia Sitchin's forgery theory. I reported this theory in Fingerprints (published 1995) and in Keeper/Message (published 1996).
As an author and researcher I hope that my work will always be 'in progress' and never finished or set in stone. When I come across new evidence that casts doubt on theories that I previously endorsed I am ready to change my views and admit to past mistakes.
As John West kindly reported in his open letter to Stower I have changed my views on the validity of the forgery theory. The relieving chambers are strictly off limits to the public and are extremely difficult to gain access to. I had been unable to obtain permission to visit them prior to the publication of Keeper/Message in 1996. However, in December 1997, Dr Zahi Hawass allowed me to spend an entire day exploring these chambers. There were no restrictions on where I looked and I had ample time to examine the hieroglyphs closely, under powerful lights. Cracks in some of the joints reveal hieroglyphs set far back into the masonry. No 'forger' could possibly have reached in there after the blocks had been set in place - blocks, I should add, that weigh tens of tons each and that are immovably interlinked with one another. The only reasonable conclusion is the one which orthodox Egyptologists have already long held - namely that the hieroglyphs are genuine Old Kingdom graffiti and that they were daubed on the blocks before construction began.
I have stated my view on this matter several times in public lectures during and indeed before 1998. In my September 1998 book "Heaven's Mirror" (with photographer Santha Faiia), and in the accompanying television series "Quest for the Lost Civilization", I likewise make absolutely clear my full acceptance that the Great Pyramid (or at any rate most of it) was built during the Fourth Dynasty.
This is not a sudden conversion. Although I was still open to the erroneous forgery theory while Keeper/Message was being written, I was also very much open to the orthodox theory that the Giza pyramids were Fourth Dynasty work - irrespective of the provenance of the quarry marks. The central thesis of Keeper/Message -- that the Giza monuments were built to commemorate the sky of 10,500 BC -- does not require us to conclude that all the monuments were necessarily built in that epoch. On the contrary I wrote in Keeper/Message that "the Great Pyramid must have some extremely strong connection with the epoch of 2500 BC - the approximate date at which all orthodox Egyptologists and archaeologists in fact believe it to have been built." Earlier, in Fingerprints of the Gods, I suggested that the ground-plan of the Giza monuments might have been devised in 10,500 BC but that the monuments themselves could have been built over an 8000-year period (from 10,500 BC down to 2500 BC). I pointed out that the Great Pyramid's famous star shafts unequivocally link the monument to the epoch of 2500 BC and that the construction levels through which the shafts run might be explained as "the later work of the same long-lived cult that laid out the Giza ground-plan in 10,450 BC.'
Robert Bauval and I have jointly evolved a tentative 'theory of Giza' over the past five years of our work together. Briefly this theory -- which we offer as a serious alternative to the orthodox 'tombs and tombs only' hypothesis -- is that the three great pyramids of Giza, and the Great Sphinx, form a symbolic architectural model of some of the principal stars of the Duat sky-region (through which the Pharaohs believed that their souls would travel after death) as that sky-region appeared at dawn on the spring equinox in the epoch of 10,500 BC. Citing the geological findings of John Anthony West and Robert Schoch, we have argued, and continue to maintain, that the Great Sphinx and its associated megalithic structures may actually have been built in that distant epoch. We have also argued, and continue to maintain, that the three great pyramids in general are likely to be much younger than the Sphinx and that they should probably be assigned to the Fourth Dynasty (rather than to any other period) because of the alignments of the star shafts.
Ultimately, however, our hypothesis does not stand or fall on the precise dates at which individual monuments were built. A symbolic architectural model of the Duat sky region as it last appeared in 10,500 BC could theoretically have been designed in any epoch (I repeat, in any epoch) by any culture possessing a knowledge of the astronomical cycle of precession and of how it alters stellar positions over long periods of time.
In short, we are more interested in why such a model was built than when it was built.
For the record I believe that Khufu did build the Great Pyramid - or anyway most of it (perhaps the subterranean chamber and some other rock-hewn parts of the structure may be earlier).
For the record I do not believe that Khufu built the Pyramid as his tomb. The very fact that his name only appears within the monument in the form of quarry marks accidentally left behind in inaccessible chambers goes to prove that he was not such an ego-maniac. I think that he built it for another purpose altogether - a far loftier and much more mysterious purpose. Further details are provided in my forthcoming book "Heaven's Mirror" (UK and US publication, late September 1998) and in the accompanying TV series 'Quest For The Lost Civilization' (The Learning Chanel, US, August, 1998; Channel 4, UK, September/October 1998).
Graham Hancock
Devon, England, 22 July 1998

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Spence and Precession 380 Andy 16-Nov-00 17:53
RE: Spence and Precession 149 Sharif 16-Nov-00 18:23
RE: Spence and Precession 167 Andy 16-Nov-00 19:16
RE: Spence and Precession 164 Sharif 16-Nov-00 22:15
RE: Spence and Precession 187 Andy 16-Nov-00 19:22
RE: Spence and Precession 155 Sharif 17-Nov-00 00:06
RE: Spence and Precession 177 Andy 17-Nov-00 01:19
RE: Spence and Precession 174 Dr Winston O'Boogie 17-Nov-00 11:27
RE: Spence and Precession 334 Graham Hancock 17-Nov-00 11:51
RE: Spence and Precession 147 Dr Winston O'Boogie 17-Nov-00 12:20
RE: Spence and Precession 235 Graham Hancock 17-Nov-00 14:29
RE: Spence and Precession 180 Sharif 17-Nov-00 12:02
RE: Spence and Precession 150 Dr Winston O'Boogie 17-Nov-00 12:29
RE: Spence and Precession 188 John Lennon 22-Nov-00 15:32
RE: Spence and Precession 146 jameske 17-Nov-00 12:34
RE: Spence and Precession 175 Sri Kowta 17-Nov-00 15:00


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.