Hello Anthony,

I wrote, ‘Of course, we know that the Antechamber was a portcullis system that sealed off the King’s Chamber after Khufu was laid to rest in it, but tomb robbers smashed through the portcullis stones.

You respond, ‘I only hold that the portcullis system was a portcullis system. On what grounds do you say it would not have functioned as one? ‘

1. The absence of semi-circular hollows at the top of the east wainscot
2. The levels to which the pilasters have been chipped away, top and bottom
3. The scooped effect of the bottom of the grooves in the south wall
4. The state of the top of the Granite Leaf
5. The absence of portcullis fragments in the immediate area
6. That the Antechamber was initially shorter
7. The Granite Leaf was a late introduction


I wrote, ‘Of course, as we know the blocks were slid into the Passage from above, then it is glaringly obvious they were stored in the Grand Gallery.

You comment, ‘Or on the floor of the Grand Gallery, leading into the QC.’

As you like to get your facts right, please allow me to correct you here.
What you describe as “the floor of the Grand Gallery, leading into the QC” is actually the floor of the Queen’s Chamber Passage.
This is, however, a minor detail.
The main error with your statement is that because of their height and combined length the three granite blocks could not have been stored in the area you claim; they would have blocked off the end of the top of the Ascending passage and blocked the opening to the Queen’s Chamber Passage.
You also failed to consider the ramp in the floor at the north end of the Gallery.
If these blocks were stored in the Grand Gallery, then they would have been on the GG floor proper – more than 22 feet sloping from the north wall of the Gallery.


I wrote, ‘Of course, we know that the Well Shaft was the escape route for the men who released the blocks down into the Ascending Passage.’

You reply, ‘It is the logical conclusion’.

No, Anthony, it is a logical conclusion based on a particular interpretation of the evidence.

A stronger logical conclusion is that this Shaft was designed to act as, and was used as, a ventilation shaft for the men working in the Pyramid’s Subterranean Passages and Chamber.


I wrote, ‘The portcullis system known as the Antechamber would not have worked, and so the KC could not have been sealed off the King’s Chamber.’

You wwrite, ‘I have addressed this above.’

Yes, but most unsatisfactorily, IMO.

You continue, ‘It would have worked just fine.’

Have you seen or read or heard of this being put to a practical test?
If so, perhaps you could provide details.
I don’t know of any such test.
My conclusion is based on the actual appearance and condition of the Antechamber and the Granite Leaf; plus the fact I "know" it was originally shorter and the GL was a late addition.


You write, ‘If, as you say, they were trying to fool people, why build an apparently obviously non-functioning portcullis system?’

If you can opine “It would have worked just fine.” Then its designer certainly fooled you.
Anyway, to answer your question, the so-called Antechamber was initially designed to be a portcullis system.
It was shorter than what we now see (5rc instead of its final 5.62rc) and had four (not 3 as the final product has) grooves running the full height of the wainscots.
At some point around the construction of the King’s Chamber, the portcullis system design (on which work had started) was abandoned and work started on a new scheme which involved, amongst other things, the introduction of the Granite Leaf.
For reasons unknown the work was not completed and the “Antechamber” was left as we now see it.

I wrote, ‘The Antechamber was altered in length and the Granite Leaf was a late introduction to the scheme’

You reply, ‘That is your supposition. I do not agree.’

Actually, it is a hypothesis based on available evidence, but never mind, eh.


I wrote, ‘The Ascending Passage is not steep enough for blocks to slide down it.’

You write, ‘Would you like to test that hypothesis by standing in front of one, after it's been slicked with oil and is being pushed from behind?
Remember... they only needed one at a time to go down, and they could have been inched along if they got stuck anywhere along the way. I think we discussed this about a year ago, and you admitted you hadn't considered that scenario.’

I had completely forgotten about lubrication, etc.
I think this particular statement of mine can be safely crossed off my list, don't you.


I wrote, ‘The Well Shaft was closed off above the Grotto, and built over for approx. 15 layers of core blocks because it was, apparently, no longer required, but it was later re-opened by tunnelling down through the 15 or so layers and building a shaft up as far as the north end of the Grand gallery.
This doesn’t fit the “workers post-sealing-the-Ascending-Passage escape route” scenario at all well.


You write, ‘It does if they changed their minds about a method of egress for the workers, exactly as you have suggested here.’

I don’t think the Well Shaft was ever intended to act as a “method of egress for the workers” because it was never necessary.
If, there was a change of mind about how the workers who supposedly released the blocks into the Ascending Passage were to egress the Pyramid, what, in your opinion, was the original plan?


I wrote, ‘The large block of granite that blocked the Well Shaft above the Grotto (and is now in the Grotto itself it’s too big to have been introduced via the Well Shaft at the north end of the Grand Gallery.’

You reply, ‘Too big? Can you share the dimensions so we can see if others arrive at the same conclusion? I'll be happy to do it in private if you wish.’
My conclusion is based on a) different photographs of this block in the Grotto (with people next to it, enabling perspective) b) the actual dimensions of the passage leading to the top of the Shaft at the north end of the Grand Gallery c) the varying width of the Shaft and the course it takes down to the Grotto d) the Edgar brothers detailed account of how they had the block shifted from its jammed position in the Shaft and into the Grotto d) various details and scaled drawings provided by Petrie, Lepre, and others.
I have yet to find published details of the block’s actual dimensions, but it is quite clear from photographs and scale drawings that it could not have entered the Shaft from the top.

BTW, why should I want to share details “in private” – I don’t understand.


You write, ‘So far I don't see anything very convincing in what you have said, so "going on" may be what is required.’

Fair enough.
I intend to start a thread dealing specifically with the Well Shaft in the near future (which will tie in with the AP being blocked before the alleged funeral)


I wrote, ‘There are problems, inconsistencies with the scenario you and others hold on to.’

Only so far as minor details are affected by individual choices 4500 years ago. …

As you may expect, I see these things as rather more than “minor”.


I wrote, ‘You need to step back and look at the whole interior afresh – and allow for the fact that simple arithmetic and geometry played a large part in how the interior came to be as it is.’

You respond, 'I'm sorry. I understand the whole interior, and arithmetic and geometry were just laymen's tools used to complete the whole that we see today. They had no meaning or purpose, in and of themselves.'

How interesting, Anthony.
You have no need what-so-ever to be sorry.
My understanding is almost identical to yours!


You write, ‘You are welcome to prove otherwise, but you'll have to go outside the pyramid and research the culture to do it. You can't just provide more measurements from inside the pyramid and expect it to be considered anything but a stack of coincidences.’

Like everybody else – including you - with access to the same evidence re Khufu’s pyramid, I cannot prove anything.
What I can do (and hope to do in the not too distant future) is provide a highly detailed hypothesis on how the interior of Khufu’s pyramid was designed.
It just happens that this hypothesis seriously questions many of the current orthodox and alternative views on it.

In the last three years or so I have devoted a lot of time and energy finding out as much as I can about 4th and 5th Dyn Egypt; what I have so far learned does not appear to date to effect my hypothesis one iota – but, then, who knows what tomorrow may bring…

As for your comment, ‘and expect it to be considered anything but a stack of coincidences.”

Any fool can dismiss a thing as a coincidence because it contradicts their view, belief, hypothesis, theory or whatever.
I am not, I assure you, a fool, Anthony.

MJ