Scott Creighton has pulled a huge hoax in plain sight in his effort to call the work of Egypt adventurer Howard Vyse a hoax. Creighton knows that what Vyse discovered would demolish his theory that the Great Pyramid was built long before the 4th Dynasty Egyptians. So Creighton does not want any evidence that shows that Khufu and the 4th Dynasty Egyptians really did build the Great Pyramid. So he must find a way to discredit what Vyse found. Here's the issue: Creighton admits that the graffiti in the relieving chambers above the Kings Chamber in the Great Pyramid is the most powerful archaeological evidence that this huge monument was erected by Pharaoh Khufu of the 4th Egyptian Dynasty. Creighton further admits that his sentiments and loyalties are to the alternative and independent researchers who insist the Great Pyramid is the product of a much earlier civilization, definitely not Khufu. Thus Creighton does not like this graffiti because it ruins the narrative he wants. So Creighton has very strong motive to make the charge that he does: Vyse forged the graffiti. So Creighton claims the graffiti is not the work of Egyptian masons, as Egyptologists insist, but the work of the immoral 19th Century amateur Egyptologist Howard Vyse. Creighton is very hard on Vyse, indeed, maligns him with continuously negative rhetoric because of this misdeed: Vyse paid people who voted for him in his run for Parliament. That would seem like a totally immoral act on the part of Vyse, and would seem to indeed finger Vyse as a cheat. Creighton really has something here. Or does he? You see the fact is that what Vyse did, in paying those who supported him, was the practice of the day. People put effort into casting their vote, you appreciated it, so you paid them a small amount. Everyone did this in Britain at that time. To his credit Creighton quotes officials of the time who say exactly that. It was a custom which all participated in. We wonder if Scott Creighton has ever exceeded the posted speed limit when driving his car. Statistically most people do. So you can hardly come to the conclusion that Vyse is an immoral person because he did what everyone else was doing. Most of us exceed the posted speed limit occasionally. So Creighton's rush to demonize Vyse does not have the moral authority it should. This is strike one for Creighton, who is likely guilty of the crime for which he indicts Vyse - he exceeds the speed limit. Now on to the substance of his argumentation. And here is the huge central flaw, the huge elephant in the room (that no one seems to notice): Creighton invents the lynchpin evidence he needs to indict Vyse! The most important plank in Creighton's spirited argument against Vyse is something Creighton made up! He admits it at several places in his narrative. Let me explain.
To convincingly make his case Creighton
must show how Vyse knew more than ALL THE LIVING EGYPTOLOGISTS OF HIS TIME. Egyptology was a young science, just emerging in the early 19th Century when Vyse was working in Egypt. It was not known by any Egyptologist at that time that Egyptian pharaohs had 5 names, two of which would be circled with a cartouche. No Egyptologist at that time knew that the Horus name of Khufu was Hor Medjedu. Yet "Hor Medjedu" was one of the hieratic hieroglyphs scrawled on those relieving chamber walls. Somehow the immoral hoaxer Vyse, in his scheme to forge evidence that Khufu built the Great Pyramid, had his agents and assistants Hill and Raven write the name Hor Medjedu in the red ochre paint used by ancient masons. How did Vyse have greater knowledge than all existing living Egyptologists?
This is the Hor Medjedu name of Khufu that appears in the relieving chambers above the Great Pyramid. No Egyptologist in Vyse's time knew this was a name for Khufu.
Here is an actual photo of Khufu's cartouche in the Relieving Chambers.
Creighton says Vyse and his assistants had found hieratic script secretly (we can't know where because its secret!) and they simply copied this existing script into the relieving chamber walls. So Vyse didn't know that Hor Medjedu was one of the names of Khufu, he just happened to be among some signs which he saw written in this mysterious unknown place, and then had forged into those relieving chambers. Creighton expects us to unthinkingly embrace this imagined scenario as a fact! Creighton, now himself the great hoaxer, does not emphasize that his lynchpin evidence in his supposedly damning case is no evidence at all. It is the conjecture of Scott Creighton. Vyse and his associates never anywhere mention this secret find of Egyptian hieratic markings they found. No records in any of the journals, no deathbed confessions as often happens when there is a conspiratorial lie, no physical spot to go examine the secret stash of markings that Vyse used. Even though Vyse was trying to make discoveries in Egypt he keeps secret this secret cache of writings he and his associates found. We assume he found the stash before perpetrating his hoax, so why would he have failed to record finding such profound Egyptian writings? Again, he was trying to make new discoveries. This would surely be one! But no, for some reason he never tells us about this secret stash of writings. He decides, with evil intent, to have his associates put these markings he has found into the relieving chambers. Creighton writes about this secret stash as if it was real. As if we could go look at it someplace. As if Vyse had written all about it. Creighton has made up in his own mind that this secret stash exists, and then he takes this mental creation and makes it a physical fact, a hard piece of forensic evidence which he then foists upon all of his readers. Because without this secret stash which Creighton fabricates out of whole cloth imagination, the only conclusion left would be that these markings were just as they had been written over 4000 years ago. But we can't have that. So Creighton must forge a narrative. Is it Vyse who is the one who is pulling off a hoax... or is it Creighton? I phrase it as a rhetorical question to be nice to Creighton but I should really just say it the way it is: It is Scott Creighton who is pulling off a hoax here, not Colonel Howard Vyse. I must agree with Creighton when he closes his book by saying the Egyptian authorities should initiate a thorough scientific investigation of the various markings in the Great Pyramid's relieving chambers. Creighton admits that much of the graffiti is authentic, the work of actual 4th Dynasty masons living at the time of Khufu. It seems then that expert scientific analysis should be able to distinguish red ochre paint over 4000 years old from red ochre paint forged in the 19th century 4000 years later. You would think that such a difference of time would make it relatively obvious which marks had been made over 4000 years apart, if indeed they had been. But none of the famous independent researchers who share Creighton's bias as to the origin of the Pyramid ever mentioned any noticeable differences in the age of the markings. Graham Hancock, John Anthony West, Robert Schoch and Robert Bauval - the famous researchers who share Creighton's viewpoint about the time of the building of the Pyramid - who are among the few people ever given access to those chambers - Creighton never has - all concluded that the graffiti in those chambers is authentic. Many of their followers - who do not want that graffiti to be authentic - do not believe that Hancock, West, Schoch and Bauval are on record affirming the authenticity of the relieving chamber graffiti. But they all made very strong statements to that effect after viewing the graffiti. Again, Creighton has never been in the relieving chambers to view it for himself. The patriarch of the group, the feisty John Anthony West, said this: "Having been up there on numerous occasions, I am 100% convinced they are legitimate and reference Khufu...Arguments to the contrary are put forth by people who have not been up there and who do not know what the hell they are talking about." (source: Historian Matt Sibson, Ancient Architects) Will the real forger please stand up!? Is it Vyse... or is it Creighton? It is Creighton!
Final note: In my short review here I have not gone over argument by argument all the reasoning and evidence that Creighton lays out. He is an aggressive researcher and I do not want to diminish the effort he has put into this research. But I have identified the lynchpin detail of his argument, and the bulk of the other evidences rests on this detail. If there is no secret stash, there is no forgery. Scott Creighton has indeed appropriately named his book: The Great Pyramid Hoax.