|You Are Here: HOME >> GUEST AUTHORS >> ALAN ALFORD - GREAT PYRAMID|
THE GREAT PYRAMID
By Alan Alford
The central premise of my theory is that the Great Pyramid is a religious monument, whose full significance may be apprehended only through a true understanding of ancient Egyptian religion. Crucially, however, I argue that Egyptian religion was not simply a Sun cult, as Egyptologists believe, but rather a ‘cult of creation’, i.e. a cult whose primary aim was to celebrate and re-enact perpetually the myth of the creation of the Universe. Accordingly, I reinterpret the Pyramid’s architecture in the light of creational mythology, this being a radically different perspective from that which has been adopted by Egyptologists during the past two hundred years.
The creational approach to the mystery of the Great Pyramid facilitates progress on several fronts simultaneously. Firstly, the symbolism of the Pyramid. Secondly, the amazing size and precision of the Pyramid. And thirdly, the Pyramid’s unique interior architecture.
The Symbolism of the Great Pyramid
According to Egyptologists, the true pyramid (i.e. the smooth-sided pyramid) was a solar symbol, its shape signifying the rays of the Sun falling to the earth. In keeping with this theory, the pyramid’s capstone, benbenet, is held to have been a solar icon or ‘Sun-stone’.
However, according to my cult of creation theory, the true pyramid was actually a creational symbol, as evidenced by the fact that its capstone, benbenet, symbolised the insemination of the sky. I therefore argue that the Pyramid’s shape encoded the mystery of the creation, and conveyed the entire story in a single hieroglyph. But further elaboration of this idea must be reserved for my books ‘Pyramid of Secrets’ and ‘The Midnight Sun’, since this is a matter of the highest sensitivity.
The Size and Precision of the Great Pyramid
The huge size of the Great Pyramid is unexplained by Egyptology. No king needed a tomb this big; nor does solar symbolism explain it. Some Egyptologists therefore regard the Pyramid as a colossal waste of time and energy, whilst others suspect that it, and the other giant pyramids, functioned as job creation schemes and mechanisms for the creation of the state.
The precision of the Pyramid is also a baffling mystery. As the Egyptologist Mark Lehner put it: ‘Why such phenomenal precision? For the royal designers such exactitude may have been imbued with symbolic and cultic significance that now eludes us.’
My creational approach to the Great Pyramid provides a unique explanation of its size and precision. However, the rationale is too sensitive to be recounted here and must be reserved for readers of my books. Suffice to say that the Pyramid is to be understood as a labour of religious devotion, its size and precision symbolising the idea of perfection that its shape represented.
The Unique Interior Architecture of the Great Pyramid
The Great Pyramid is unique in that several of its chambers are built high in its superstructure. This unprecedented system comprises the Queen’s Chamber, the Grand Gallery, and the King’s Chamber, which are connected together by a series of narrow passages.
For many years, Egyptology assumed that the king had changed his mind as to his burial place, and had raised the position of the burial chamber in order to protect it from tomb robbers. The highest room – the King’s Chamber – was thus the king’s tomb of choice.
In recent years, this ‘change of mind’ theory has been rejected in favour of the idea that all of the chambers were planned together from the outset. According to this view, the various chambers had funerary roles (the exact nature of which remains uncertain), with the King’s Chamber again being the king’s final resting place.
Therefore, whichever view is taken, Egyptology believes that the highest room – the King’s Chamber – was the tomb chamber, as evidenced by the presence there of the granite sarcophagus.
But was the king really buried in the King’s Chamber?
The hard facts of the matter are these: the King’s Chamber sarcophagus was found broken and empty; no trace of the king’s body has ever been found in the Pyramid, no direct evidence exists of a human burial in the King’s Chamber, and no reliable record has ever been unearthed of a king having being buried in, or removed from, either the sarcophagus or the Pyramid.
More seriously, the idea of the king being buried at a great height in the Pyramid’s superstructure goes against a fundamental principle of Egyptian religion – ‘the body to earth, the spirit to the sky’ – which dictated that the mummy be buried at ground level or below.
It therefore follows, incontrovertibly, that Khufu’s burial in the King’s Chamber is but a theory, and a rather dubious theory to boot. And this theory, like any other in Egyptology, should be regarded with a healthy dose of scepticism and subjected to tests, including the ultimate test of good common sense.
This is where my creational theory of the Egyptian pyramid comes into play.
Under the solar interpretation of Egyptian religion, the position of the tomb vis-a-vis the pyramid is a moveable feast. Egyptologists thus argue that, despite the general rule to place the tomb beneath the pyramid, the architect of the Great Pyramid raised the tomb into the monument’s superstructure, in a bold attempt to keep robbers at bay, or, by another theory, to seek an identity with the Sun-god in the horizon. Under the creational interpretation of Egyptian religion, however, this argument becomes wholly untenable, since it was a fundamental rule that the body of the king be placed in the earth, beneath the pyramid, in order that his soul, or spirit, would become one with the pyramid; this in accordance with the religious axiom ‘the body to earth, the spirit to the sky’. That the architect of the Pyramid would have broken this cardinal rule is inconceivable, for it would have destroyed the vital magic of the pyramid building ritual. Accordingly, I reject the orthodox theory that Khufu was buried in the King’s Chamber, at a height of 140 feet in the monument’s superstructure.
The scene is thus set for a radical reappraisal of the architecture of the Great Pyramid.
In my book ‘Pyramid of Secrets’, I propose that the king’s true tomb was located beneath the Pyramid, at ground level, where it probably remains hidden to this day. The Pyramid, in its lower parts, was thus a tomb, incorporating an ingenious decoy arrangement.
I then go on to argue that the upper parts of the Pyramid were sealed off at the time of construction, to form a sealed repository or time capsule, in which the builders deposited sacred relics, books and knowledge, lest their civilisation be destroyed by a prophesied ‘end of the world’ cataclysm. Crucially, I suggest that some of these time capsule artefacts remain to be found in the Pyramid, despite the looting of the monument in antiquity.
THE GREAT PYRAMID - DESCENDING PASSAGE AND SUBTERRANEAN CHAMBER
According to Egyptologists, the Descending Passage provided the sole entrance and means of access to the Great Pyramid, and was designed primarily for the royal funeral. The Subterranean Chamber is supposed to be either an abandoned tomb chamber (the king having changed his mind as to his place of burial) or possibly a decoy tomb chamber (to persuade thieves that the burial treasures had already been plundered).
The Descending Passage was built not only for the king’s burial (in the Pyramid’s lower parts) but also to provide access to the secret chamber system, or repository (in the Pyramid’s upper parts), for the benefit of a future civilisation. The entrance to the repository is the Ascending Passage, which was originally concealed by the prismatic stone which formed part of the ceiling of the Descending Passage. But there is strong evidence for the presence of a second secret passage, or a pair of such passages, in the Descending Passage, located in its side walls, about 35 to 40 feet down from the Pyramid’s main entrance.
In addition, it should be borne in mind that the Descending Passage might not be the sole entrance to the Pyramid; a number of other possible entrances are discussed in my book (following J.P. Lepre, 1990).
As for the Subterranean Chamber, this cave-like room symbolised the abyss and the underworld, and would have made a most suitable tomb chamber. However, whilst it is possible that the king was buried here, the vulnerability of such a burial suggests that the Subterranean Chamber was actually a decoy tomb chamber (see explanation in Well Shaft).
THE GREAT PYRAMID - ASCENDING PASSAGE
According to Egyptologists, the Ascending Passage was a secret passage that provided access to the upper chambers for the funeral of the king. The passage was originally concealed by the prismatic stone which formed part of the ceiling of the Descending Passage. However, as an additional barrier against tomb robbers, three granite plugs were lowered into the passage mouth after the funeral. It is not known why the builders used granite plugs (in a passage made of limestone), nor why there were three of them.
The Ascending Passage was a secret passage that provided access to the sealed chambers of a repository and time capsule. The granite plugs were slipped down the passage during the construction of the Pyramid, when the roof of the Grand Gallery was still open. Strictly speaking, the use of the plugs was unnecessary, given the fact that the mouth of the passage was camouflaged by the prismatic stone. Therefore, the inclusion of the plugs bears the hallmarks of a ritual, both as regards the sealing and the envisaged future unsealing of the passage. The use of three plugs, made of granite, probably had a religious significance.
THE GREAT PYRAMID - GRAND GALLERY
According to Egyptologists, the Grand Gallery was a glorious passageway to the king’s tomb chamber, but functioned also as a slipway for the granite plugs that would block the mouth of the passage below.
The Great Step (at the southern end of the Gallery) is not thought to have had any particular significance. The long grooves in the side walls are a real puzzle, as they seem to suggest a lower roof that was removed by intruders. No satisfactory explanation has ever been offered for the fifty-four niches in the side ramps, nor for the inset stones in the side walls. The corbelled architecture remains a mystery, though according to J.P. Lepre it may have had ‘a high spiritual symbolism’.
The Grand Gallery was the heart of the secret chamber system, but was also a simulacrum of the creation of the Universe. The Great Step was a platform for a statue of the Great God in geometric form, symbolising the mystery of creation. Dilapidation of the Great Step was caused by the forceful removal of this statue when the Pyramid was plundered in antiquity. The long grooves in the side walls contained a lower roof that spanned the Gallery at half its present height. This roof, probably made of wood, had its underside painted with stars – the images of the gods – in the act of rising at the First Time. Below, the fifty-four niches in the side ramps may have contained relics of the gods, perhaps in the form of sanctified (spiritualised) woods and minerals. Above, the upper roof demands to be removed so that the full extent of the corbelling may be seen. The corbelled architecture would indeed have had a high spiritual symbolism, and might encode the mystery of the creation, viewed from a mathematical or geometrical perspective. Finally, on a more mundane note, the floor of the Gallery did indeed function as a slipway for the granite plugs, whilst the inset stones in the side walls might conceivably be the result of a planning error.
THE GREAT PYRAMID - THE QUEEN'S CHAMBER
Egyptologists used to think that the Queen’s Chamber was an abandoned tomb chamber (the king having changed his mind as to his place of burial). But most experts now believe that the room was designed from the outset as a serdab, its corbelled niche containing a ka-statue of the king.
The Queen’s Chamber shafts are a real puzzle on account of the fact that they were sealed at their lower ends and blocked at their upper ends. It is generally believed that they are abandoned features – prototypes perhaps of the shafts in the King’s Chamber. Accordingly, it is suggested that they are unfinished ventilation shafts or unfinished soul-shafts. However, some Egyptologists claim that they are completed features (ka-shafts), and a minority even support the view that the southern shaft leads up to a small chamber, or serdab. All of these theories run into serious difficulties in explaining the fact that the shafts were sealed.
As regards the Queen’s Chamber Passage, it is recognised that this was sealed off by the bridging slab in the Grand Gallery. However, it is widely presumed that the chamber could be accessed at the time of the funeral.
The Queen’s Chamber was a secret chamber in a sealed repository. As such, it was sealed at the time of construction, and could not be accessed except by breaking the bridging slab (there is strong evidence that this slab was slotted into the floor of the Gallery at the time of construction).
The corbelled niche contained a statue of the Great Goddess in geometric form, symbolising the mystery of creation.
The Queen’s Chamber shafts were secret passages to secret chambers, differing from the Pyramid’s other passages only in their miniature size. The idea was that the explorer use the shafts as guides to dig tunnels to the chambers above. The distance (213 feet in each case) made this the ultimate challenge, and tends to suggest that the chambers (which would still be intact) contain the ultimate prize (the identity of which is discussed in my book). The metal-handled ‘doors’ at the top of the shafts are probably the original aperture covers that were used during construction to prevent ingress of tools, detritus, and living organisms. The plugs beyond these ‘doors’ suggest a ritual sealing and future unsealing, reminiscent of the granite plugs in the Ascending Passage.
Anomalous joints and stones in the Queen’s Chamber Passage may indicate the presence of an undiscovered secret passage (J.P. Lepre, 1990).
THE GREAT PYRAMID - THE KING'S CHAMBERS
According to Egyptologists, the King’s Chamber was the king’s final resting place – the raison d’etre of the monument. Supposedly, his mummy was sealed inside the granite sarcophagus, which was broken and plundered in antiquity.
The two ‘airshafts’ in the King’s Chamber may have provided fresh air for the benefit of the funeral cortege, but most Egyptologists nowadays call them ‘soul-shafts’ on the assumption that the king’s soul used them for a direct ascent into the northern and southern skies.
The huge granite beams in the King’s Chamber superstructure – a unique feature of the Great Pyramid – are thought to have had a structural purpose – to protect the flat roof of the chamber from the superincumbent weight of masonry.
The use of granite in this chamber and its superstructure is thought to reflect that material’s protective strength, but religious symbolism might also have been a factor.
The concept of burial at such a height inside a pyramid goes against a fundamental principle of Egyptian religion which dictated that the king’s body be buried at ground level or below. The soul-shaft theory is unacceptable too since the king’s soul could have used the Descending Passage for its ascent to the sky. Finally, the superstructure theory is problematic, since the raised roofs provided no additional weight relief.
The true purpose of the King’s Chamber, I suggest, was to effect a perpetual re-enactment of the myth of the creation.
The first key component of this re-enactment was sound. The granite beams in the superstructure were designed to vibrate in harmony with Earth resonance and transmit low frequency vibrations to the chamber below. The chamber, built of highly resonant granite, then amplified these vibrations and their harmonics, and transmitted audible sound via its so-called ‘airshafts’. The broadcasting of this low frequency sound re-enacted the sound of creation (the latter idea being attested in the Pyramid Texts).
The second key component of the re-enactment was meteoritic iron – the seed of creation – which was hermetically sealed inside the King’s Chamber sarcophagus (on the role of meteoritic iron in the creation myth, see my book). In a symbolic sense, the sound spiritualised the iron and ejected it into the northern and southern skies, via the shafts, thereby re-enacting the formation of the celestial bodies: the circumpolar stars in the northern sky, and the Sun, the Moon, and the rising-and-setting stars in the southern sky (in Egyptian myth, all of these bodies were said to be made of iron).
The King’s Chamber was therefore a ‘chamber of creation’, in keeping with the creational symbolism of the Pyramid, as illustrated in the diagram to the right.
It is important to realise that access to the King’s Chamber was not intended by the architect, but became possible after the acoustic system was damaged irreparably by an earthquake of exceptional force. The limit of the repository would therefore have been the Antechamber to the King’s Chamber.
THE GREAT PYRAMID - ANTECHAMBER TO THE KING’S CHAMBER
According to Egyptologists, the Antechamber was a portcullis room for the protection of the burial chamber. It is supposed that the three granite slabs (now missing) were lowered to the floor by means of wooden rollers and ropes, the vertical grooves in the south wall acting as guides for the ropes, and the granite leaf functioning as a counterweight. The use of granite, interlaced with limestone blocks, is a puzzling and unexplained feature of the Antechamber.
It is not apparent how a portcullis could have functioned in the Antechamber, and several facts argue strongly against the idea. Certain features are better understood as decorative and symbolic. The grooves in the south wall resemble the pattern of a fluted column, and are an exact image of a decorative pattern found on a 1st dynasty portcullis slab, whilst the granite leaf resembles the rolled-up reed-mat curtain design which was used from Old Kingdom times to symbolise the entrance to the ‘other world’. In addition, there is evidence that this room was not kept open for a funeral, but was sealed by a plate, or plug, of stone at the mouth of the King’s Chamber Passage. In keeping with my acoustic theory of the King’s Chamber, the Antechamber, built predominantly of granite, would have produced acoustic effects.
It is theorised that the ‘portcullis slabs’ and the granite leaf were tuned to resonate at certain low frequencies, and that a man was intended to stand in the gap in front of the granite leaf, at the threshold of the room, where the granite began. The sound effect might then have induced an altered state of consciousness in the subject, causing him to receive a vision of the creation. In short, it is proposed that the Antechamber was an initiation room in which a representative of a future generation, or race, of men would experience an insight into the physics and metaphysics of the Universe, as conceived by the builders of the Pyramid.
THE GREAT PYRAMID - WELL SHAFT
According to Egyptologists, the Well Shaft may have originally been cut to supply air to workers in the Subterranean Chamber. But it was then extended to provide an escape route for the workmen who became trapped in the Grand Gallery when they released the granite plugs into the Ascending Passage, immediately after the king’s burial in the King’s Chamber. These workmen then concealed the shaft’s lower entrance by inserting a secret door in the western wall of the Descending Passage. As for the Grotto, which is accessed via the Well Shaft, this cave-like feature is thought to be of little or no consequence for our understanding of the Pyramid.
The ventilation theory and the workmen’s evacuation theory encounter a number of serious problems.
It is more likely, in my view, that the lower section of the Well Shaft, B-C-D-E, was cut to provide access from the Descending Passage to the Grotto, this room having been sacred for centuries prior to the construction of the Pyramid. The need for this access may be explained by the need for ongoing rituals, but I favour the idea of a one-off use for the secret burial of the king.
The rough section of the Well Shaft above the Grotto, A-X, was probably an inspection tunnel, dug by the Pyramid’s guardians in order to inspect earthquake damage to the King’s Chamber (in support of this idea, a second tunnel has been cut from the top of the Gallery into the lowermost cavity above the roof of the King’s Chamber).
The purpose of the upper section of the Well Shaft, X-Y-Z, immediately beneath the Grand Gallery, remains a puzzle.
The burial of the king in the Grotto, with the Subterranean Chamber acting as a decoy tomb, would have been an ideal plan from a security point of view. However, an even better plan would have been to use the Grotto as a secondary decoy (hence the deep hole in its floor), with the real tomb being concealed in the vicinity (suggestions for the real tomb’s location are reserved for readers of my book).
A burial of the king’s body in the Grotto – or in its vicinity – would have accorded with the religious axiom ‘the body to earth, the spirit to the sky’, but, more than that, the positioning of the tomb amidst the height of the stepped plateau outcrop beneath the Pyramid would have corresponded to the primeval mound (the risen earth) of the creation myth.
In addition, it may be significant that the total distance from the Pyramid’s main entrance to the Grotto, via the Descending Passage and the Well Shaft, is almost exactly equal to the height of the Pyramid. Perhaps this amazing little fact did not go unnoticed in the mind of the architect.
THE GREAT PYRAMID - RIVAL THEORIES
CRITIQUE OF CHRISTOPHER DUNN’S
Dunn, a master craftsman and engineer, has long argued that the ancient Egyptians used advanced power tools in their cutting and working of granite and other hard stone. This led him to contemplate the source of the energy required by the power tools, and ultimately to propose that the Great Pyramid of Giza was the power plant at the centre of an ancient, hi-tech national grid!
Underlying Dunn’s theory of the Great Pyramid is his unswerving belief that the Egyptian pyramids must have been something more than tombs for the pharaohs. Following William Fix (Pyramid Odyssey, 1978), Dunn hinges his view on two key observations: 1. the failure of Egyptologists to find an original (as opposed to intrusive) pyramid burial, and 2. the sheer redundancy of stone in the earliest true pyramids, the giant pyramids of Giza and Dahshur. If the pyramids were merely tombs of the pharaohs - for which the direct evidence is lacking - why were they built to such enormous sizes? And, in the case of the Great Pyramid, why was it given such a unique and complex array of internal passages and chambers?
Dissatisfied with the conventional explanation of the Great Pyramid - and of course the many alternative theories proposed as of 1998 - Dunn set out to reverse engineer the Pyramid’s design in accordance with his considered view that it was in fact a hydrogen-fuelled power plant.
It has captured the imagination of thousands of readers, but can Dunn’s theory possibly be true? Or, if not, could he at least be on the right lines when he argues that the Pyramid was some kind of power plant?
As I am not an expert on hydrogen power, I will not address the technical feasibility of Dunn’s theory. But I would like to identify some areas where the fit between his theory and the design of the Pyramid is not as neat as he would like to think it is. Whether these discrepancies are fatal to his theory, or merely require some subtle modifications, I will leave it to the reader to judge.
Three facts, however, militate against this theory.
Firstly, there is no evidence for the vertical shaft, nor the copper cables. Quite the opposite. When National Geographic’s robot drilled through the ‘door’ at the top of the ‘airshafts’ in September 2002 (four years after Dunn’s book was published), it revealed only a hollow cavity measuring about 8 by 8 by 8 inches. Dunn’s hypothesised vertical shaft was not in evidence; nor was there any sign of the copper cables which supposedly ran from the ‘handles’ into the mouth of the vertical shaft. While it may be possible that the camera angle prevented these things from being seen, it would take a brave man to bet on it given that the next phase of robotic exploration is imminent.
Secondly, Dunn supposes that each ‘airshaft’ released chemicals into the Queen’s Chamber via a tiny crack in the wall. But the case for this is not convincing. Although it is true that Waynman Dixon spotted a crack in the south wall and hence discovered the southern shaft in 1872, the historical record indicates that no such crack was apparent in the north wall at that time. The opening up of the mouths of this pair of shafts has unfortunately destroyed the evidence either way. Nevertheless, the most likely scenario is that the shafts were originally sealed at their lower ends - perhaps as conduits to secret chambers - and that the crack in the south wall was caused by settlement over thousands of years.
even if we give Dunn the benefit of the doubt concerning the two
points above, it remains hard to understand why the builder would go
to the immense trouble of building tiny sloping shafts 213 feet long
when they could have created the same head pressure and flow by
means of two reservoir pools situated immediately above the
Queen’s Chamber, saving on pumping costs as well as building
costs. Dunn fails to explain the length and bearings of the shafts,
and ignores the evidence cited by Gantenbrink for the existence of
secret chambers beyond the ‘doors’ and stone plugs.
Firstly, if the flow of chemicals was determined by two tiny cracks in the walls of the Queen’s Chamber, why was it necessary to have a drainage shaft measuring 28 inches square? Dunn attempts to get around this problem by supposing that the drain - the entrance to the Well Shaft - was enlarged by the guardians of the Pyramid when they entered and inspected its upper parts, long after it was built. In his support, he quotes Petrie, who asserts that the entire Well Shaft was cut out by the builders as an afterthought. But both Dunn and Petrie overlook the point that the uppermost part of the Well Shaft is built with neatly squared blocks, whereas the section immediately below it is a rough tunnel through the lowermost layers of masonry. Therefore, while the inspection scenario may explain the rough tunnel and the violent removal of the ramp stone at the Gallery’s bottom west corner, it does not provide any basis for the belief that the shaft in between was enlarged. Furthermore, Dunn seems to accept (p. 214) that the next section of the Well Shaft, the part lined with limestone blocks immediately below ground zero, was part of the original design and construction. The evidence, therefore, suggests that the upper section of the Well Shaft was cut with dimensions of 28 by 28 inches from the outset - a size inconsistent with the function that Dunn attributes to it.
Secondly, Dunn supposes that the spent chemicals flowed down the Well Shaft into the Grotto, where they were directed into a hole six feet deep; they then soaked away through the floor which consists of packed earth. To make this scheme work, he has to assume that the original Well Shaft terminated at the level of the Grotto. The lower part of the shaft, he believes, was cut by the guardians in order to inspect the upper parts of the Pyramid (as proposed by David Davidson in 1927). But Dunn misses a key piece of evidence which indicates that the Well Shaft was cut from the top downwards through the bedrock. To quote J.P. Lepre: ‘The Well Shaft was dug out from the top down. This is indicated by the fact that its bottom end penetrates a few feet below its lowermost doorway. If it had been hewn from the bottom up, this bottom section would surely have been level with its doorway at that point.’ Lawton and Ogilvie-Herald likewise write in Giza The Truth: ‘There is incontrovertible evidence that the Well Shaft is an original feature which was dug from the top down’.
This in itself is not fatal to Dunn’s argument. He could modify his theory to have the chemicals drain all the way down the Well Shaft into the Subterranean Chamber and its Pit (and he does indeed allow for this possibility on p. 206 of his book). But if this was the aim, why did the builders connect the Well Shaft into the side of the Descending Passage and not take it directly into the Subterranean Chamber? Why make the chemicals drain along the lower forty feet of the Descending Passage - an area in which sensitive machinery and equipment would surely have been housed if the Pyramid was a power plant?
was this achieved?
But Dunn must also explain the unique design of the Grand Gallery, and for this reason he makes the crucial - and in my view mistaken - assumption (p. 160) that the vibrations of the Earth were of insufficient amplitude to drive directly the granite beams above the King’s Chamber. The purpose of the Gallery, he surmises, was to collect the vibrational energy over a large area and direct it into the King’s Chamber - in the form of airborne sound - to increase the acoustic energy to the required level.
Here in the Grand Gallery further problems emerge. Dunn claims that the Gallery was fitted with twenty-seven sets of Helmholtz resonators, fixed into position by means of the twenty-seven pairs of niches in the side ramps and the pair of grooves in the side walls. But both the niches and the grooves testify against this theory.
The niches in the side ramps of the Gallery are tucked away next to the walls, where they are overhung by the first of the seven corbels that give the Gallery its distinctive design. They are not in a suitable position to act as supports or anchor points for any kind of structure - hence the peculiar shape of the ladder holding the resonators in figure 41 of Dunn’s book. The true purpose of the niches remains a mystery, but they would not have contained anything taller than 7 feet 6 inches, well short of the 28 feet height of the Gallery.
The grooves in the side walls are also a problem. Dunn suggests that the ladders of resonators were held in place by ‘shot pins’ (presumably made of metal or stone) which slotted into the grooves. But this is inconsistent with the fact that the grooves are continuous, running the whole way up the Gallery from bottom to top. If Dunn’s theory was correct, we would expect to see fifty-four bolt holes in the walls, not two continuous grooves.
It gets worse. J.P. Lepre reports that there are chisel marks all the way along the grooves, indicating that something was once contained between them. In his book The Egyptian Pyramids, p. 82, he writes: ‘Among the interesting architectural features of the Grand Gallery are two grooves cut into the east and west walls... Hundreds of rough chisel marks are staggered along the top edges of these grooves... It is certain that something did traverse the Gallery’. Lepre speculated that the Gallery might have been roofed by ‘cedar panels inlaid with gold’, while for my part I have suggested wooden panels painted with stars (signifying the creation of the stars). But whatever it was that once spanned the Gallery at half its present day height, it completely fouls up Dunn’s theory, as well as a few other theories to boot.
Granite Plugs and The Antechamber
The Granite Plugs, he suggests, performed two critical roles in the power plant. Firstly, they would have allowed the operators to monitor the energy level in the Gallery, by means of vibration sensors attached to the bottom plug. And secondly, they would have allowed the operators to transmit an out-of-phase interference sound wave into the Gallery, to prevent the vibrating system from running out of control. But if this was the purpose of the Plugs, then why did the builders not fit a single plug? Why was it necessary to fit three? Dunn does not explain. Moreover, he does not explain why the bottom plug was hidden behind a camouflaging stone, the so-called prism stone. Why would the builders have done this, if the operators needed regular access to the Plugs?
The Antechamber, according to Dunn, contained an acoustic filter that allowed only certain desirable frequencies (apparently an F-sharp chord) to enter the King’s Chamber. These input frequencies were matched to the prime resonant frequency of the King’s Chamber. However, there are some aspects of the Antechamber’s design that Dunn’s theory does not address, such as the four vertical grooves in the south wall, and there are other aspects that are not adequately explained, for example the purpose of the Granite Leaf and the standing space in front of it, and the fact that the Antechamber is made primarily of granite (as if to suggest that it was built to resonate in its own right, like the King’s Chamber).
Here, Dunn stretches our credulity to the limit. His proposal goes like this: a microwave signal from space entered the King’s Chamber via its northern ‘airshaft’ and had its power boosted by a ‘crystal box amplifier’ contained in the sarcophagus. This microwave signal then stimulated the energised hydrogen atoms, causing them to emit microwave energy. This process having repeated itself exponentially, the microwave energy was collected in a receiver contained in the mouth of the southern ‘airshaft’ and thence up through the shaft to the outside of the Pyramid. There, it was beamed up to an orbiting satellite, which in turn channelled the energy back to Earth to provide electricity.
There are several comments to be made here.
Firstly, the mouth of the northern airshaft is cut too high in the wall to align with the sarcophagus, so any incoming microwave signal would have passed right over the top of it. It is not clear how it could have interacted with any equipment inside the box.
Secondly, Dunn assumes that the sarcophagus had no lid (pp. 189, 222) and that the signal interacted with hydrogen atoms inside the box. But there is clear evidence that the sarcophagus did originally have a lid and that it was hermetically sealed (see my book Pyramid of Secrets, pp. 73-74). I am not entirely certain how this affects Dunn’s theory, but there could not have been any hydrogen in the box.
Thirdly, the mouth of the southern airshaft is cut too high in the wall to align with the sarcophagus, so it is difficult to see how the output from the box could have been channeled into the shaft.
Fourthly - and worst of all - Dunn insists that the entire lengths of the northern and southern airshafts would have to have been lined with gold- plated iron in order to have an efficient conduit for the electromagnetic radiation (pp. 186, 221-22). This is quite simply at odds with the facts, as Dunn well knows. For both the shafts have been surveyed by robot and not a trace of a metal lining has been found (the iron plate found by Vyse in 1837 was embedded in masonry close to the southern shaft but it is not clear whether it actually formed part of the shaft). So, what happened to the iron? How was it removed from tiny shafts measuring approximately 8 by 8 inches to their entire lengths of 235 feet and 174 feet respectively? A job for the tooth fairies?
- My Personal View
'These page is the copyright of Eridu Books 2004. The images and diagrams are the copyright of Alan Alford or of other photographers, where indicated. Presented with permission of Alan Alford.
Recommended: 1920x1200+ display, CSS and
Java Script support : : : Hosted by Lunarpages
Popular Authors dealing with alternative
theories, esoteric subjects, mysticism, alchemy, aliens, Atlantis, ancient
Edgar Cayce, Madame Blavatsky, Alford, Sitchin, von Däniken, Hancock, Bauval, West, Childress, Davidovits, von Ditfurth, Gray, Anders, and many more...