“Many people have already succumbed to the temptation to secure fame, honor and money in economics, arts or science. When such fraud, counterfeit, or counterfeit is discovered, the offender will, in the worst case, suffer damage to property and honor. But undetected fraud can change history books! ”

These words can be used to summarize the amount of evidence that can be revealed in the data and diaries of the man Howard Vyse, who discovered in the interior of the Great Pyramid in the area of ​​the so-called remediation chambers Chufu's cartouche.

The first to name the builder of the Great Pyramid was the ancient historian, Herodotus. However, he is also questioned by another important historian, Manet, who was an Egyptian priest and historian living in 3. century BC during the reign of the Ptolemaic, conceiving the writings of Herodotus as fictitious, doubting the presence of Herodotus in Egypt, and believing that the report on Egypt is untrustworthy. The text of Herodotus is conceived according to the tastes of Greek readers, since it often refers to data rather anecdotal than historical in nature.

1837 goes out to Egypt, where another adventurer, Battista Galviglia, shows a few of the blocks he thinks are designated as stonemasons of ancient Egypt. Later, however, it was found that this is a natural coloring of the material.

However, Vyse does not want archeological work, but after a significant discovery, who would make him famous. Therefore, so-called " Menkaure pyramids, where the red painting with the name of the sovereign appears on the ceiling. It is strange, however, that Giovanni Belzoni, who has already searched the Pyramid for 19 years ago, does not mention any inscriptions referring to Menkaurea.

Diorodos historian 100 BC speculates the pyramid builder as Menkaure, but at that time there is no direct evidence. Clearly out of the discovery of truth, he uses the speculations already described, plus his counterfeits.

The surviving protocols show that 12.02.1837 Vyse in the Great Pyramid with colleague S. Perring investigates cracks over the so-called " Davison Chamber and with the help of gunpowder, other hermetically sealed chambers are found where they are found on the hieroglyph walls.

Already at the time of the discovery, everything is questioned and visitors claim that the characters look as if they were painted yesterday. Let us also make some of the later comments, such as Z. Sitchin and many others: "This name is a primitive fake!" Everything suggests that it was Vyse who deserved it. Sitchin even managed to find the model Vyse had used to make his fake - it was Materia hieroglyphica by John Gardener Wilkinson, published in 1828. In this book the author made a mistake in a very important place. "Ch" in the name of "Khufu" was reproduced with the wrong symbol. It was this mistake that was discovered on the wall of a hard-to-reach chamber. Such a mistake was unthinkable in Cheops' time! In addition, the name was drawn suspiciously fresh. The counterfeiter Vyse, however, committed an even greater misunderstanding: he used pictorial scripts that did not exist in the Cheops epoch at all, because they were developed only a few centuries later.

And so, according to traditional Egyptologists, the history of mankind is made. As renowned Egyptologists such as M. Lehner and Z. Hawass and others say: "We will not break down the history we have built…". Thus false experienced paradigms are considered, and taught in history, to be true facts.

[Hr]

In the illustration, we can see a comparison with the name entry on the wall in the Abydos temple. On this wall, a complete list of sovereigns from the times of the Gods [aliens] to 19 is written on both sides. dynasty. Cheops (Khufu) is recorded as the second ruler of the Fourth Dynasty.

It is important to know that for the ancient Egyptians, their own name was very important! There was even punishment in Egypt truncation / change of name. If you realize that your name is a life mantra, it has great consequences. It is obvious, therefore, that the authors (stonemasons) of the royal letter could not afford the mistake. It can be assumed that if the inscription in the relief chambers was authentic, it would be written grammatically correctly.