December 22nd, 2014

The most important time of the year in Egypt (before the building of the High Dam at Aswan in 1965) was the season of Innundation when the Nile would flood the adjacent land and fertilize the crop. This all important event took place between the summer solstice (end June) and the autumn equinox (end September).  The first dawn appearance of Leo at summer solstice would have signified to an ancient observer c. 3000-2000 BC that the Nile Flood was about to begin. Since also the star Sirius would also be making its first dawn rising –known as the Heliacal Rising– at the same time, then the signal would be interpreted metaphorically as the sun entering or joining Leo in the horizon when the start of the Nile Flood and when also Sirius would first be seen.


Image 1: The image in the eastern horizon at dawn c. 3000 BC at the start of the Nile flood i.e. summer solstice.

There are several passages in the Pyramid Texts that are metaphorical descriptions of  “the sun entering or joining Leo in the horizon when the start of the Nile Flood when also Sirius would first be seen”. It these various passages the sun is called ‘Ra’, and the Milky Way is called ‘Winding Waterway’ (Mer-Nekha). There is also another celestial figure called Horakhti (Horus of the two Horizons) which I would suggest is the constellation of Leo.


The king crosses the celestial river: “The reed-floats of the sky are set down for Ra by the day-bark, that Ra may cross on them to Horakhti at the Horizon.” Pyr. 926

[Here the sun is said to travel by boat to reach Horakhti in the horizon. But which horizon? It is well-known that the ‘reborn’ king was identified to Horakhti in the horizon. This is made clear in the Pyramid Texts, as well as confirming that it is the eastern horizon.]

“I go up on this eastern side of the sky where the gods were born, and I am born as Horus as ‘Him of the Horizon’.” Pyr. 934

[The term ‘where the gods were born’ is the eastern horizon at dawn i.e. where the celestial figures are seen rising. But at which time of year? This is around the summer solstice, confirmed in the Pyramid Texts by the appearance of Sothis and the start of the Nile Flood]


The king ferries over the sky to Ra: “The reed-floats are set in place for me that I may cross on them to Horakhti and to Ra.” pyr. 337

“The Field of Rushes are filled with water, and I ferry across on the Winding Waterway. I am ferried over to the eastern side of the sky. and my sister is Sothis (Sirius).” Pyr. 340-1

These Pyramid Texts, said to date from 2300 BC, actually describe an observable celectial event witnessed around 3000-2000 BC: the crossing of the sun disc on the Milky Way, and making its way eastwards to reach the zodiacal constellation of Leo at the time of the summer solstice, at the same time that the star Sirius rises heliacally and when the Nile flood begins (the exact date for this conjunction falls on c.2780 BC). There can be little doubt that the figure in the eastern horizon we call Leo today was, to these ancient observers, Horakhti (Horus of the two horizons).


Image 2: the sun ( Ra) about to ‘cross’ the celestial river (Milky Way) c. 2300 BC


Iamge 3: the sun (Ra) reaches Horakhti (Leo) at the time of the summer solstice c. 2300 BC.

But did the ancient imagine Horakhti as being a lion in the sky?

Horakhti i.e. ‘Horus of the two Horizons’ was generally depicted as a man, probably the pharaoh, with a falcon head, and doning a sun-disc over the head.


Image 4: (a) Ramses II making offerings at Horakhti. Temple at Abu Simbel. (b) Horakhti or Ra-Horakhti


Image5: Amenhotep III and Horakhti. Here the king is identified to Horakhti. The face of Amehotep III is thus interchageable with that of Horakhti i.e. man becomes falcon and vice-versa. Temple of Amehotep III, Luxor, West Bank.

There are, however, several depictions of Horakhti as a lion with a falcon head wearing the royal double crown in the temples dedicated to Horus.

Kom Ombo1Temple of Behdet

Image 6:Horus/Horakhti. A lion with a falcon/hawk head with the body of a lion

The Egyptologist Selim Hassan, who spent several years of his life excavation at the Great Sphinx, and studying all the ancient texts, mostly from the New Kingdom, that mention this monument, pointed out that the very first mention of the Sphinx in the New Kingdom was by Amenhotep (Amenophis) II. It was obvious to Hassan that this king “refers to the Sphinx under the names of Horemakhet and Horakhti”. Hassan went on to say that,

“Side by side with the name Horemakhet, we find the Great Sphinx also called Horakhti… During the New Kingdom, Horakhty could be represented under several forms. He could appear as a sphinx, either human or hawk-headed, as a hawk-headed man, or as a hawk, his original form. Many representations of him occur on the stelae in our excavations, showing him in all these forms.”

Temple of Ra-Horakhti at Per-Amon, lower Nubia Ramses IIsabua14imagesJY2560IT

Image 7: (a) Ramses II as Sphinx with hawk head   (b)  Ramses II as Sphinx with human head   (b) Amehotep III as Sphinx with human head

“In the beliefs of the Egyptians the King was the earthly representation of this God (Horakhti), and we have proof that in the very early period the dead King especially was called Horakhti. When Khafra cut the Great Sphinx, it was made in his likeness, that is to say in the likeness of Hor-akhty, with whom he was identified.”

These two names, Horemakhet and Horakhti, have a very similar rendition. Horemakhet meaning ‘Horus in the Horizon’, and Horakhti meaning ‘Horus of the two Horizons’. There is no doubt, however, that the name Horemakhet was exclusively used for the Great Sphinx of Giza, whereas the name Horakhti was used for a figure in the eastern horizon which I have identified to the zodiacal constellation of Leo and which was also idetified with the Great Sphinx.  If this is the case, then there is a problem with allocating the Great Sphinx to Khafre, a king of the IVth Dynasty who reigned in c. 2500 BC is this: the Great Sphinx is gazing directly DUE EAST, whereas the constellation of Leo/Horakhti rose at that time some 28 degrees north of due east. The correct epoch for the Great Sphinx to gaze at his own image would be 10,500 BC.

Sp2 (2)Sp2

Image 8: (a) Leo rising in 2500 BC                                (b) Leo rising in 10,500 BC


What makes the Sphinx-Leo correlation of 10,500 BC unlikely to be a coincidence is that it ‘works’ in conjuction with the ‘beginning’ of the Prececessional cycle of Orion’s belt as seen in the southern sky, which can be matched on the ground with the Giza Pyramids. This ‘beginning’ I have identified to the golden age that the ancients called Zep Tepi meaning the First Time (of creation).



Image 9: The sky in 10,500 BC over the Giza necropolis, which I have identified as ZEP TEPI i.e. the ‘First Time’

But if the ‘face’ of the Great Sphinx is not Khafre’s, as most Egyptologist believe, then whose face is it? In my opinion it is not the face of a pharaoh but that of a ‘god’.  But which god? The answer may be, yet again, found in astronomy or, as much as I dislike the terms, in astrology. This is because in 10,500 BC the Great Sphinx would not only be gaxing at equinoctical zodiacal Leo, but also at another zodical constellation which was also equinoctical: Aquarius.  In the Dendera Zodiac Aquarius is the only zodiacal constellation which is distictly Egyptian, being the image of the Nile god Hapy, seen as a man wearing the royal double crown and holding two small jars from which is seen water pouring out.


Image 10: Aquarius as Hapy on the Zodiac of dendera.

This quasi-similar image is also found on the so-called Dream Stele found between the paws of the Sphinx, where the pharaoh Thutmoses IV is performing the same water ritual in front of the Great Sphinx.


Image 11: Thutmoses IV as ‘Aquarius’ ?

It is no wonder perhaps that on the Dream Stele Thutmoses IV named the place where stands the Great Sphinx: “The sacred place of the First Time/Zep Tepi.”


POSTSCRIPT: Pliny the Elder (1st century AD) refered to ‘Timaeus the Mathematician’ (Timaeus of Licra 5th century BC) as follows: “He says that this takes place at the rising of the Dog-Star [Sirius], when the sun enters the sign of Leo, and stands in a vertical position over the source of the river, at which time at that spot there is no shadow thrown [the summer solstice as seen at Aswan at noon]. ” The Natural history, Liber V, chapter 10.

According to Harapollo (5th century AD): “they sometimes pourtray a lion, and sometimes three large water jars, and at other times heaven and earth gushing forth with water. And they depict a lion because when the sun is in Leo it augments the rising of the Nile, so that oftentimes while the sun remains in that sign of the zodiac.” Hieroglyphics of Harapollo, XXI

Intrestingly, the Russian astronomer Alexander Gurshtein, President of the Internation Astronomical Union’s History of Science, wrote in 1999:

“According to my conclusions, the Great Sphinx is a symbolical [sic] image for two solsticial constellations: Leo (summer) and Aquarius (winter).”

Dr. Gurshrein also suspected  ‘water rituals’ at the Great Sphinx.  [HASTRO-LOG9902 Archive Note 11 Feb 1999].

Egyptologists are generally opposed to the idea that the ancient Egyptians identified the constellation of Leo to a lion. However Richard H. Wilkinson, professor of Egyptology at the University of Arizona, and an expert on Egyptian deities, wrote:

“An important mythological aspect of the solar god in the heaven is found in his identity as a a cosmic lion as seen in Chapter 62 of the Book of the Dead, for example, which states that ‘I am he who crosses the sky, I am the lion of Re…’ The stellar constellation now known as Leo was also recognized by the Egyptians as being in the form of a recumbent lion… the constellation was directly associated to the sun god.” Wilkinson H., Richard. The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt, 2003, p.206]



December 17th, 2014


© Robert Bauval, 17 December 2014

Since the early 1990s I have shown that the Great Sphinx of Giza was intended to represent the zodiacal constellation of Leo at the epoch of 10,500 BC when this constellation was rising directly in front of the Sphinx due east, and that this remote epoch was regarded as the genesis of the pharaonic civilization which was known as “Zep Tepi” or “First Time”. My premise was not to claim that the Sphinx was actually built in 10,500 BC but rather that it was an astronomical marker for that remote time. The full argument of this theory was presented in a book I co-authored with Graham Hancock in 1996, Keeper of Genesis (Message of the Sphinx, in the USA).

There are only two times in the year when the constellation of Leo could be rising due east: Spring equinox and Autumn equinox.   It is an observable astronomical fact that when Leo is seen due east, Aquarius would be seen due west, and vice versa i.e. when Aquarius is seen due east, Leo is seen due west. In other words that the two horizons, east and west, are somehow to be considered with the Great Sphinx. It is an observable fact that Leo will occupy both horizons, once at sunrise in the east, and once at sunset in the west, but it is only around 10,500 BC that the position of Leo would be DUE east at sunrise, and DUE west at sunset, in the general alignment of the Great Sphinx  –head directed east, and hind part directed west.

In my book Keeper of Genesis, I showed that the celestial counterpart of the Sphinx i.e. Leo, was known to the ancient Egyptians as Horakhti, which means “Horus of the TWO Horizons” i.e. east and west. The ideal astronomical symbol for Horakhti would, therefore, be a merger of Leo and Aquarius, thus uniting two horizons. The ‘Leo’ part of the Sphinx is clearly its Lion body. Could the human head with the nemes (royal head-cloth) be symbolic of ‘Aquarius’? If so, was this how did the ancient Egyptians imagine Aquarius to look like?

The earliest example is found on the Dendera Zodiac, now displayed in the Louvre Museum in Paris. Aquarius is shown as a standing man dressed as a pharaoh wearing the nemes head-cloth and the royal crown of the south. The man is holding two small water from out of which water is seen pouring.


1. The Dendera Zodiac. Note Leo and Aquarius in oppsodition, east and west.


2. Detail of Aquarius figure from Dendera Zodiac


There are several depiction of the Great Sphinx dating from the New Kingdom showing it wearing the nemes and the royal white crown.


3. A sphinx wearing the nemes head-cloth and the royal crown


4. Stela found near the Sphinx

There is, in fact, a hole on the top of the Great Sphinx’s that is thought to have been a socket to support a royal crown. Selim Hassan, who excavated at the Sphinx in 1936 believed that this might have been the case: “the hole which existed in the top of the head may have originally been a socket for the insertion of a crown of wood, stone or metal.” [Hassan, The Sphinx, 1949, p. 103]. The author and orientalist, Robert Temple, found a photograph taken in 1896 with on it a handwritten inscription at the bottom that reads: “Some successfull [sic] at the foot of the Sphinx have recently veen carried out by  col. Raum. In 1896 the stone cap was discovered –the discovery seems to have been of much advance by Dean Stanley who in his travels wonders a propos of the collosal head of the Sphinx ‘what a sight it must have been when on its head was the royal crown of Egypt.’ [Temple, Robert. The Sphinx Mystery, 2009, p. 23]. Apparently colonel George Edward Raum was an American from San Francisco who came to Egypt in 1895, and excavated at the Sphinx in February 1896 when he allegedly found the ‘rock crown’.



5. The hole (now blocked) that was probably a socket to fix a royal crown


More interestingly still, almost the same figure of ‘Aquarius’ is shown on the so-called Dream Stela that stand between the paws of the Great Sphinx. The figure is the pharaoh Tutmoses IV standing in from of the Sphinx (or in opposition) who is depicted holding a small cup from which water is pouring (a second cup is also shown above his hand).


6. Detail from the Dream Stela showing the pharaoh pouring libations

My conclusion, based on the archaeological evidence and the astronomical alignment of the Sphinx leads me to concluded that the Great Sphinx is an earthly image of Hor-Akhti merging the “two horizons” occupied at the equinoxes by the zodiacal constellations Leo and Aquarius in 10,500 BC as they stood in apposition, due east and due west.


8. Zodiac showing Aquarius in the West, and Leo in the East in 10,500 BC

NOTE: The eminent Russian astronomer, Alexander Gurshtein, one time President of the IAU (International Astronomical Union) Commission for the History of Astronomy, had also suggested in 1999 that the Great Sphinx was symbolic of Leo and Aquarius, although when these constellation marked the summer and winter solstices respectively i.e around 3000 BC.  He also suspected that ‘water rituals’ were involved.


December 9th, 2014

“QUACADEMICS”: A term coined By my friend John A. West which should become part of the English language. A good example of quackademic behaviour (other than that of the King of Quacademics Dr. Hawass) was displayed recently by Egyptologist Peter Lacovara regarding the “Khufu Cartouche Affair”. In a typical, almost childish outburst, Lacovara made this comment on the Facebook of another Egyptologist, Kara Cooney :

“This whole thing is just outrageous… A pair of German crackpot followers of chief pyramidiot, Robert Bauval bribed the poor, underpaid guards to sneak in there and scratch off a few samples in order to have them analyzed to ‘prove’ that the cartouche was a ‘forgery’ and that the pyramid wasn’t built by Khufu… Bauval then tried to say that the damage happened earlier, and was done by Zahi Hawass, without a shred of proof. It is time that the Egyptological community stood up and said enough of this nonsense… It is shameful that this has been allowed to be so blown out of all proportion and the media whipped up by people using this story to smear Zahi, get their names in the press and stir up xenophobic resentment against real foreign scholars.”

Well Mr. Lacovara is a bigger Quacademic than I thought! He even sound (almost) like the King of Quacademics himself, his Excellency Doctor Zahi Hawass. So here for Mr. Lacavara’s personal benefit is again the uncontestable, smoking-gun, irrefutable, undeniable, “see with youe own eyes” proof that the samples were scratched off the Khufu Cartouche BETWEEN 2003 and 2006 –which is at least SIX YEARS BEFORE the “crackpot Germans” (to use your own derogarory term) supposedly performed this crime. And which, by the way, makes Zhi Hawass fully responsible since he was the Secretary-General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in 2003-6. As the old saying goes, put that in your pipe (or elsewhere if you wish) Mr. Lacovara,  and smoke it.

Cartouche 2004 2006 2013abaa



And here, too, is a video if you want to see with youe own eyes Hawass actually examining the Khufu Cartouche in 2008… and even showing the scratches where the samples were removed! Go to position 33:00


September 5th, 2014

The Edgar Cayce Foundation/Association of Research and Enlightenment (ARE) has had, since 1974, direct or indirect dealing with Zahi Hawass for the latter to assist them, directly or indirectly, to find the so-called ‘Hall of Records’ in the Giza Plateau as predicted in 1932 by Edgar Cayce. Several permits were given for the ARE or its senior members, directly or indirectly, by the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA) during 1977 to 1998 to this end.
In 1979-80, Hugh Lynn Cayce, the Director of the ARE (and eldest son of Edgar Cayce) made the following claims regarding Zahi Hawass:”I got him a scholarship at the University of Pennsylvania in Egyptology, to get his PhD. I got the scholarship through an ARE person who happened to be on the Fulbright Scholarship Board. He [Hawass] had aided Mark [Lehner] to work at the Sphinx, and I am very appreciative…”

The purpose and/or objective to help Hawass with his higher education in the USA was: “for Hawass to advance within the [Egyptian] government to further his own career and open doors for Hugh Lynn [Cayce]s project, [and] he could do it best on the wing of higher education at an American Ivy League college.”

These claims are made in the biography of Hugh Lynn Cayce: “Hugh Lynn Cayce: About my Fathers Business” by A. Robert Smith, 1988, p. 250.

Zahi Hawass, however, has strongly denied the veracity of these claims (Indeed, when in 1995 the American author John Anthony West exposed these claims to various people, Hawass, through his lawyers, threatened to take legal action for libel and defamation). (see link 1 below)

But if such claims, however, are indeed true, then would such action not fall under the US Department of Justice Foreign Corrupt Practices Act 1977 (USDOJ/FCPA)? (see link 2 below)

Let us note in passing that the USDOJ/FCPA has, since October 2013, officially opened an investigation for alleged bribery/corruption by the National Geographic Society/Channel involving Zahi Hawass. (see link 3 below)


2009: Lehner and Hawass Drill (Again!) at the Sphinx

Amazingly, in July 2009 Mark Lehner supervised further drillings at the Sphinx, and specifically one under the paws of the Sphinx “on behalf of Hawass.” Using the pretext that they were checking the level of groundwater under the Sphinx, Lehner unabashedly stated, “It’s a good chance to test many ideas, any new-age ideas about secret passages and hidden chambers under the Sphinx.” Working with the University of Cairo, a 10-centimeter-diameter drilling tube was used to punch a hole under the left paw of the Sphinx, going all the way southward to the right paw, the very place that Hugh Lynn Cayce had desperately wanted to inspect back in 1978! Yet with a sarcastic grin on his face, Lehner went on to say, “With all this drilling it should be possible to put to rest all these theories that there is some kind of tunnel or chamber under the Sphinx” (from Heritage Key Video by Sandro Vannini:

It has been reported to me that there was also a drilling contractor employed by the SCA in 2008–2009 to drill with a much bigger machine in the area of the Sphinx, but not too close, in order to pump out the water to bring down the underground water table. I was, in fact, at Giza in 2009 and indeed saw the big drilling machines of this local contractor. So was the drilling of Lehner and Hawass under the Sphinx another direct shot at finding the Hall of Records”? Were the two men closing an old but yet unfulfilled “deal” they had with the ECF? In Edgar Cayce’s A.R.E. Membership Newsletter, Ancient Mysteries Feb./Mar. 2009 edited by John Van Auken, the following announcement was made:

NEWS from the FIELD

Zahi Hawass to Drill Under the Sphinx!

by John Van Auken

I met with Dr. Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities, after he spoke for an hour to our A.R.E. group. He shared that Joe Jahoda, a longtime A.R.E. member, had convinced him to drill under the Sphinx for a chamber. Back in 1997, Jahoda and his partner, Joe Schor, in cooperation with Florida State University, conducted ground-penetrating radar around the Sphinx and found an open area in the bedrock beneath the Sphinx. This opening, possibly a chamber, is 30 feet down and is estimated to be 26 feet wide and 40 feet in length. The Cayce readings identify this chamber as an ante-chamber to the Hall of Records that is off the right front paw of the Sphinx. Jahoda asked if A.R.E. would purchase the special drill necessary to drill at an angle into the limestone bedrock. Kevin Todeschi, CE O of A.R.E., approved the purchase, and our donation “angel,” Don Dickinson, agreed to help A.R.E. with this purchase. Thus, the drill was purchased, crated, and shipped to Egypt. Zahi said that soon after the drill arrives, he’ll get his team together and begin the drilling. It’s exciting news! We are taking a major step toward finding one of Cayce’s three Atlantean record caches. Stay tuned for updates. Source: .pdf



Link 1:
Link 2:
Link 3:!bP1e7Y


August 17th, 2014

Six Egyptians officials have been held in jail since February 2014 for allegedly helping three Germans to take samples from the Cartouche of Khufu in the Great Pyramid at Giza without permission. They are awaiting trial, along with the three Germans (in absentia) on the 14th September 2014 at the Giza Criminal Court. If this accusation is true, then all the accused have committed a heinous crime against our world heritage, because the Great Pyramid, being the last surviving wonder of the ancient world, is undeniably the most sacred of monuments from antiquity. But the crime is the more heinous because of the huge importance of the Cartouche that bears the ‘signature’ of its builder, king Khufu of the great 4th Dynasty. Because the Great Pyramid is totally devoid of contemporary official inscriptions, inside or outside, and therefore totally anonymous, this cartouche is the linchpin that links it to Khufu. It is, quite simply, the ‘holy grail’ of Egyptology and its importance cannot be overemphasized. But is it true? Why are the Egyptian authorities so convinced of this? It is well known, and well documented (in photographs, videos, documents and radio) that the three Germans –Dominique Gorlitz, Stefan Erdmann and Jan Gartig—have entered the Great Pyramid on the evening of the 17th April 2013 with full intent to acquire samples from the Great Pyramid. An official permit from the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities (MOA) was obtained on their behalf through a travel agent in Cairo to visit the Great Pyramid privately after opening hours, from 6 to 8 p.m. The Germans were accompanied and supervised during this visit in the Great Pyramid by six officials from the MOA, the security police, a guardian and the representative of the travel agent. The Germans had requested that a 5 meters ladder be made available for their visit in order to reach the various places from which they wanted to obtain samples. As requested, the ladder was supplied by the authorities. The Germans were also allowed to take filming equipment with them, as well as some small tools with which to extract the samples from the ancient blocks. When inside the pyramid, the Germans, along with some of the Egyptians officials, first made their way into the King’s Chamber. There the ladder was used by Dominique Gorlitz, the scientist among them, to climb up to the ceiling of the chamber to scrape off a few milligrams of black soot encrusted on the granite beams that make up the roof of the chamber. After which the ladder was transported out of the King’s Chamber and place against the south end of the Grand Gallery in order to enter a tunnel that leads to the so-called Relief Chambers located above the King’s Chamber. Only Gorlitz and Gatrig (the cameraman) went up. They carried their gear all the way up to reach the topmost chamber where the Khufu Cartouche is found inscribed in red ochre paint, thought by Egyptologists to be ancient graffiti or quarry marks left by the workers who built the chamber. It is to be noted that the Khufu Cartouche is not the only graffiti in the Relief Chambers. The Relief Chambers were given English names when they were discovered in 1837 by Colonel Howard-Vyse: Davison, Wellington, Nelson, Lady Arbuthnot and Campbell. There are many graffiti inscription in all chambers except ‘Davison’ (the lowest). Many of these graffiti give so-called “gang names” based on various titles and names of the king. There are ten ‘gang names’ linked to the king’s ‘Horus name’, seven others linked to his name as Khnum-Khufu, and two others linked to the name ‘Khufu’. The Khufu Cartouche that samples were allegedly taken from in April 2013 is in Campbell’s Chamber, inscribed on the lower part of a ceiling beam that make up the south section of the pitched roof of the Chamber. This beam is the second from south-west corner of the chamber. When Gorlitz and Gartig reached Campbell’s Chamber they went straight to the south-west corner of the chamber but not to the second beam where the Cartouche is but to the first beam. There Gorlitz scraped off a tiny piece of red ochre graffiti from a hieroglyph located about 1.5 meters from the Khufu Cartouche. This is well-documented in photographic and video evidence which some months later they posted on a Youtube video. In early November 2013 this video was seen by several Egyptian officials. One of them, Ossama Karar, assumed that the tiny red ochre sample was scratched off the Khufu Cartouche, and reported this in an Egyptian newspaper. Karar also –for reasons unclear—claimed that the Germans wanted to prove that the Great Pyramid was built by ‘Jews’. Amazingly, a few weeks later, on 10th December 2013, the ex-Minister of Antiquities, Zahi Hawass, was interviewed in the popular Egyptian newspaper Masry al Youm in which he repeated this bizarre story but added a twist to it but categorically stating that the Khufu Cartouche had actually been “stolen” and that Robert Bauval (myself) had masterminded the whole crime! A week later, however, he meekly declared in a press conference that he had no ‘evidence’ to back up his weird accusations. Unfortunately such false accusations had already gone viral on the internet and in the media, which exacerbated the whole affair no end. Everyone knows that such fabrication and false accusations in the media against me and many others are not uncommon to Zahi Hawass. On the 17th December 2013, a team of inspectors from the MOA were sent to inspect what happened in Campbell’s Chamber. They reported with clear photographic evidence that not only the Khufu Cartouche was still there but seemed to be unharmed! However, a few days later a young Egyptologist in Cairo called Monica Hanna noticed that four small scratches could be seen on the top right part of the Cartouche, and immediately accused the Germans of having taken samples during their visit in April 2013. This prompted an investigation which resulted in proving with irrefutable evidence that the four ‘samples’ (scratches) from Khufu Cartouche had indeed been taken but not in April 2013 by Gorlitz but between July 2004 and December 2006! This evidence was carefully documented with official photographs and affidavits which were provided to the MOA and the Egyptian media in February 2014. The evidence has also been published in numerous websites, blogs, facebooks and youtubes. Furthermore this evidence has also been given to the various Egyptian and German lawyers involved in this case. Yet in spite of this, the Egyptian media, as well as the German media, have persistently accused the Germans of taking samples from the Khufu Cartouche! To make matters worse, very recently the new Minister of the MOA in Egypt, Dr. Mamdouh el Damaty issued this statement to the Egyptian Press Office on 14th August 2014: “Tomorrow the Egyptian embassy in Berlin will receive King Khufu’s cartouche samples after about one year of taking them illegally out of Egypt as they are antiquities according to the Egyptian law.” This statement from the Minister of the MOA has now appeared in dozens of Arabic newspapers and gone viral on the Internet. The question is why do the Egyptian authorities and media still persist in accusing the Germans of taking samples from the Khufu Cartouche when this has been clearly shown to be untrue and furthermore that the evidence has been presented to them on numerous occasions? Is it because if the Khufu Cartouche is not somehow linked to the Germans, in spite of the solid evidence to the contrary, then the whole business seems trivial? For surely taking a few milligrams of some insignificant graffiti by the Germans in April 2013 under the attenuating circumstances reported above, then this ‘outrage’ and ‘crime’ seems like a storm in a teacup? So why is the falsity still being perpetuated? Who is to benefit from this? There is no denying that Gorlitz and Erdmann took samples from the ceiling of the King’s Chamber and from a graffito in Campbell’s Chamber. They are therefore guilty of an act of vandalism, even if they claim it was for the sake of scientific truth, and even if it is but a few milligrams of soot and red ochre paint. But it is a fact that they did not steal or damage the Khufu Cartouche. Gorlitz and Erdmann have officially apologized to the MOA for their alleged act of ‘vandalism’ and offered to pay any fine required. Furthermore they have returned the samples they took which were not from the Khufu Cartouche, which amount to a few milligrams of soot and red ochre paint. They have also made a public apology to the Egyptian people in the influential Al Ahram newspaper. Is this not enough reparation? Why all this fuss involving the Egyptian MOA, the Egyptian and German Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Interpol, UNESCO, the Egyptian and German police and courts? Most of all, is this storm in a tea cup justified in keeping six Egyptians in jail for eight months over this storm in a tea cup? I think not. I say fine these poor men if necessary. Take a few months off their salaries if necessary. Even fire them from their jobs if necessary. But for God’s sake set them free, take them out of jail and let them return to their families, their wives and their children. For a pictorial view of the evidence, see this youtube:


August 11th, 2014
As it is well known, I have defended Dominique Gorlitz for having been wrongly accused of “damaging” or taking samples of the graffiti Khufu Cartouche in Campbell’s Chamber of the Great Pyramid in April 2013. This was because irrefutable evidence has come to light that the samples (4 scratch marks on the right rim of the Cartouche) were already taken by some unknown person(s) between July 2004 and December 2006. And although Gorlitz is definitely guilty of taking a sample from ANOTHER graffiti hieroglyph (also in Campbell’s Chamber) in April 2013, as well as samples of black soot from the ceiling of the King’s Chamber, he is definitely NOT GUILTY of damaging the Khufu Cartouche, since the first time he went to Egypt was in April 2013.
But things are not so certain with his colleague, Stefan Erdman, who was also with him inside the Great Pyramid in April 2013. Erdmann has been visiting the Great Pyramid since the early 1990s, and obtained many “private visit” permits to do research inside the Great Pyramid and take samples (of stones inside and outside the Great Pyramid), three of which were in the course of the year 2006. Erdmann has provided written affidavits to this effect, but categorically denies that he took samples from Campbell’s Chamber in 2006.
The purpose –or one of the purposes– of Gorlitz and Erdmann of entering the Great Pyramid on a “private permit” in April 2013 was to shoot footage for a TV documentary they intended to produce. This is the reason they took along a camercamen called Jan Gartig. The latter was working for Frank Hofer, a TV documentary producer. Hofer was responsible for making a trailer for the documentary which he published on his website as well as many other host websites. A few weeks ago, in mid-July, it has come to my attention that this trailer (which was taken off the Internet in December 2013) was also accompanied by a text/blurb written by Frank Hofer. This text makes it clear several times that samples were DEFINITELY taken from the Khufu Cartouche! (see link in my next comment below). But if so, this could only have happened between July 2004 and December 2006, making Erdmann (and not Gorlitz) a PRIME SUSPECT. All three men -Erdmann, Gorlitz and Hofer— insist that the text/blurb that came with the trailer and written by Hofer was a “mistake”. I must admit, however, that I find this very hard to believe.
I have to stress that I have not yet met in person either Erdmann, Gorlitz or Hofer. I have, however, had many conversation by skype with Gorlitz. I intend to meet Gorlitz in person in Italy on the 21 August, as we both are attending the same conference in Pescara. My intention, as you can all imagine, is to find out more from him regarding the activities of his colleague Stefan Erdmann in the period from July 2004 and December 2006 i.e. when the Khufu Cartouche was damaged and/or samples were taken from it.
Dr. Zahi Hawass was the last to see the Khufu Cartouche undamaged in July 2004. We also know that he saw and examined the Cartouche AFTER it was damaged in 2006 on several occasions. Yet, amazingly, he did NOT REPORT the damage!The plot, as the saying goes, thickens…Meanwhile here is a statement I had placed on 14 July 2014 on the message board of my colleague Graham Hancock as a record of my suspicions:
Here is the text/blurb put on the trailer “The Cheops Project” written by Frank hofer and posted on the Internet in October 2013 on behalf of Stefan Erdmann and Dominique Gorlitz:
“Who was really behind the construction of the Great Pyramid? With new dating methods Dr. Dominique Goerlitz and the author Stefan Erdmann want to reveal this secret. The new documentary of Frank Hoefer accompanies the two researchers on their examination to Egypt and many experts will give their statements. What is this documentary about? In 1837 the British pyramid researcher Howard Vyse discovered hieroglyphs and the cartridge of Cheops in the relieving chambers of the Great Pyramid that proove him as the principal. The authenticity of this cartridge has been a contentious point for a long time. While egyptologists are confident on the authenticity of the cartridge, Vyse very quickly came under suspicion to have faked it by himself so he can claim the sensational discovery for him. If this can be prooven a lot of questions will be added to the speculations on the builders of the Giza pyramids. While in the past only the correct spelling of Cheops name was in focus during the controversy of the cartridge’s authenticity, Dr.Dominique Goerlitz ( known for the Abora expeditions along the lines of Thor Heyerdahl) and author Stefan Erdmann want to determine it’s validity based on the newest examination and dating methods. A first sample of the cartridge was taken during a first expedition with our camera crew and is now in the hands of a well known institute for lab analysis in Germany. Despite this examination, which shall clarify the age of the cartridge, the amazing differences between the pyramids of Giza and other Egyptian buildings are shown. You will see that builders must have used high-tech to achieve the remarkable amount of precision and that the size and position of the pyramids are no coincidence but planned according to astronomical orbs. A range of experts on egyptology and stone cutting will get their chance to speak. Status of the project and the documentary The research team around Dr. Dominique Goerlitz, Stefan Erdmann and filmmaker Frank Hoefer (NuoViso) is working independently and without and big sponsor in the background. Until now a part of the budget was privately financed. This contains shooting for several days in Egypt as well as examinations of the Great Pyramid and especially the King’s Chamber and the relief chambers. This enabled us to take the samples of the king’s cartridge. Furthermore we stay in contact with a prestigious institute for lab analysis in Germany which shall examine the samples of the cartridge. Many experts and pyramid researchers already have been interviewed or shown their interest. How can you support us? With the elaborate film shootings and the expensive and the hard to get permissions to film in Egypt we could get the important samples (documented). This was privately pre-financed. More financial resources are necessary to bring the documentary to an end in short period of time. Especially the expensive lab analysis of the samples are only possible with a five digit amount of Euros. We also need to shoot additonal footage in Egypt, and last but not least fund the postproduction which contains cost-intensive orders for graphic/animation, composition, recording studio, licenses, color correction and voice actor. Also a transcript and a translation into the English language is planned. We really would like to release the results and the documentary as fast as possible but we need your help for that. Even a privately pre-finance will come to an end. That’s why we are happy about any donation you could give. As a small reward we offer you the opportunity to get your name listed on the official website or in the credits of the movie. You can also pre-order the DVD which will be sent to you after the release. support us at


Modern “graffiti” on limestone blocks in Egypt

August 10th, 2014



July 25th, 2014


How long has this been going on?


ECF 1878 b

1. Hugh Lynn Cayce and Mark Lehner in 1978


ECF 1878 c

2. Zahi Hawass in 1978


ECF 1878

3. Zahi Hawass supervising drilling under Sphinx  1978

ECF 1978 a

4. Drilling under the Sphinx 1978



2.resized boris 1993

5. Boris Said, Project Director in 1993

1.Resized two joes 1993

6. John West, Dr. Joseph Schor and Mr. Joseph Jahoda 1993



7.two joes at sphinx 1996

7. Dr. Joseph Schor and Mr. Joseph Jahoda 1996


6.resized two joes and Hawass1996

8. Mr. Jahoda, Zahi Hawass and Dr. Shor 1996



2009 b

8. Drilling under the Sphinx   2009


2009 a

9. Zahi Hawass and Mark Lehner 2009

Two dots or not two dots? That is the question…

July 24th, 2014

I have read Scott’s article in the July/August 2014 issue No. 106 of Atlantis Rising.

Scott bases his case on a page from Howard Vyse’s diary, where various cartouches bearing the name “Khufu” are seen. Notwithstanding the rather confusing argument about what Howard Vyse allegedly “intented” to do, Scott’s hypothesis (and it is one) all boils down to TWO DOTS that may or may not be there. Without those two dots, his whole case falls down like a pack of cards.

Let us take a closer and unbiased approach.


1. Here is the part of Vyse’s diary which shows the Cartouches.


2. This is the Cartouche at the bottom of the page


3. This is an enlargement of the Cartouche at to of the page


5.        6.RImg_5834

4. This is a drawing by Scott Creighton which is meant to be a copy of the Cartouche at the top of the page in Vyse’s diary (shown again here)


It is evident to me that Scott clearly omitted to add the dark line that is slashed across the Carouche, and it is clear that he wanted to highlight the TWO DOTS under the snake sign.  But are the TWO DOTS really there? Admittedly there are markings that COULD be TWO DOTS but clearly not as visible as Scott shows them in his own drawing, or wants them to be. And what about the dark line that slashes the cartouche and partially covers the POSSIBLE two dots? What does it mean when someone slashes a drawing this way? Does it not mean, perhaps, that this drawing is wrong” or “ignore this drawing”….? And furthermore does not the little “X” sign on the top right also means “wrong drawing”? And does this not also explain the cartouche at the bottom of the page which is, in fact, the correct reproduction of the ACTUAL cartouche in Campbell’s Chamber?


5. Khufu Cartouche in Campbell’s Chamber


The obvious discrepancy between the original drawing by Howard Vyse and the drawing made by Scott Creighton in the Atlantis Rising article in issue 106, July/August 2014 has already been pointed out by Martin Stower. I tend to agree with him that Scott WANTED to see TWO DOTS when they may in fact not be there at all. For without those precious TWO DOTS, his hypothesis does not work.


6. Top image is by Vyse’s own hands; the bottom image is by Scott Creighton


My own interpretation is that what can be derived from that page in Howard Vyse’s diary is that he was correcting himself of how the Khufu cartouche should be drawn rather than plan a forgery as claimed by Scott. Would not this make more sense than to to imagine that Howard Vyse left such alledged incrimination ‘evidence’ in his diary for posterity?…


More pics on Campbell’s Chamber in the Great Pyramid

July 23rd, 2014




Structural drawings by Prof. Jean Kerisel’s ‘La Pyramide a Travers les Ages’ , Presses de L’Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussees, 1991


Drawings credit “DUNE” (GMBH member)

2. Re Gorlitz Dominique1a

Photos courtesy Dominique Gorlitz