Author of the Month :  The Official forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Martin Stower Wrote:
> Martin Stower Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------------
> > A title which Vyse uses quite often is rendered in
> > his published work as “Madyr”. A letter from
> > Campbell, reproduced in this work, contains a
> > variant rendition: “Moudir”. We have here an
> > Arabic word, مدير, meaning “manager” or
> > similar. Other renditions I have seen include
> > “Moudyr” and “Moudhyr”. The relevant word
> > in “Vyse’s private notes” looks to me like
> > “Moudhy”: my provisional theory is that this
> > was Vyse’s attempt at the time to put down the
> > phonetic form of the Arabic title مدير. Vyse
> > had dealings with more than one holder of this
> > office. Towards the end of Vyse’s handwritten
> > entry for May 9, I can make out this: “the
> > ?Moudhy is very anxious”. There is of course not
> > the least indication that the object of his
> > anxiety was an act of forgery in the Great
> > Pyramid. If the word in question is indeed the
> > Arabic title, we see at once one good reason why
> > it was Raven (and not Vyse) “quarrelled” with
> > this man: Raven (unlike Vyse) could speak Arabic.
> > (Note: “quarrelled” is the usual British
> > spelling).
> I notice that where I have “anxious”,
> Creighton has “curious”. We agree to the
> extent of reading the word as “---ious”. A
> list of candidates is easily obtained:
> Of these, “anxious” and “curious” are
> clearly the most plausible. I do not insist that
> “curious” is wrong. My point is that the
> formation of the word is so vague that the
> intention of the writer will remain uncertain.
> Creighton transcribes the clause as “the [name]
> is very curious”. He sees the article, and the
> article suggests that what follows it is a
> title or office (and not a name).
> So I will stick to my proposal that what Vyse
> wrote was “Moudhy” (where “Moudhyr” would
> have been more correct).
> There is (still) nothing to suggest that what made
> the Moudhyr anxious (or curious) was an act of
> forgery.
> M.

I see that in Void, Creighton makes this remarkable statement:


. . . This idea of a nickname is given more weight when we observe that the first appearance of this name [sic] on May 9 is preceded with the word The (i.e., The M***ing). . . .

Again, he is aware of the article, but fails to grasp its implications.

Not content with that, he continues with this boggling inanity:


. . . We know that Brewer was a young man, being only twenty years of age in 1837. If he was also of short stature, Vyse could have referred to Brewer as “The Manling” or simply “Manling”—a young or short man. This, of course, is but speculation, and we will never know the truth of this with any degree of certainty until such time as this indecipherable name can be definitively transcribed from Vyse’s private journal.

Doubtless he will explain in due course how an indecipherable word can be “definitively transcribed”.


Options: ReplyQuote

Subject Views Written By Posted
Creighton’s “Witness M” 510 Martin Stower 12-Jul-21 12:42
Re: Creighton’s “Witness M” 223 Martin Stower 14-Jul-21 13:43
Re: Creighton’s “Witness M” 42 Martin Stower 14-Nov-21 23:33

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.