I've just now found your post, where you asked........
No, am not suggesting that. I agree 100% with everything you say. I've spent many hours pondering this issue and am still looking for answers. I think someone who was with Vyse, maybe Brettell or Raven, photo shopped (so to speak) glyphs that were already there, making them into cartouches. It is obvious, considering the similarity of the cartouches, that if Khufu's was faked, so were they all.Quote
So, I ask you two directly:
Regardless of whether the cartouche is genuine or not, there are still roughly 2 dozens lines of hieroglyphs found in the relieving chambers which creates a much greater context than just this one cartouche. Are you suggesting all of the hieroglyphs are forgeries then?
I had started to index all the glyphs in all the chambers, to place them side by side for comparison, but unfortunately the only photos/diagrams I can find to use are Perring's drawings (as you posted). Collette has posted some pictures including one of the glyph that Erdman sampled which put a big snafu in my project. Her picture shows that what Perring drew is not the same as the actual glyph. Perring drew a chick/flamingo but Collette's picture clearly shows it is not a chick. So now I can't trust Perring's drawings. If only I could get to Egypt, I would photograph every glyph and post them all for everyone to use. But sadly, some people are stingy, creating that elite circle of - privileged to info.
It seems obvious, to me anyway, that there are two distinct styles of glyphs in the chambers. One style is of chicks & cartouches, and the other style is unusual, almost abstract or modern in appearance. I have searched through charts trying to find these. No luck so far. Am seriously hoping others here will shed light on the other glyphs, so am very pleased you brought the matter to attention.
I have searched for translations of the other glyphs but as of yet, haven't found any. All I've heard is that the others are measurements. Hence the focus on Khufu's, it's the only one translated AND it has been used to establish the 4th dynasty. I think the meaning of the 'others' is extremely relevant.
I have had the same questions as you and Origyptian and many of the same conclusions. Khufu could have been the local pub, mason's union, a number of possibilities. Fake or real, it proves nothing. It doesn't tell us if Khufu was a person, place or thing. If the cartouche's are faked, it opens up a whole new chronology regarding the 3rd dynasty and beyond, as you pointed out. That in itself, is enough of a reason to get to the bottom of it all. Indeed, that may be the most important reason.
For me personally, it is also a matter of truth, and trust in an academic body that calls itself a science. Wilkinson is the one who created 'Khufu', and this field of 'science' (egyptology) accepted his conclusion, prints it in textbooks, doesn't question it and built an entire timeline on it. All academic fields have a responsibility to report accurately to the general public, and it is just not cool that john q public is fooled into believing this Khufu farce. How would it change our thinking, our concepts, of the past and consequently the future, if we knew who built the pyramids and when. It could be a profound enlightening.
The builders of the pyramids deserve to be recognized, and they are not. We don't know who they were.