GRANT BEY AND THE MISSING PYRAMID RELIC CARBON 14 DATING THE G...

Page 1 of 4

GRANT BEY AND THE MISSING PYRAMID RELIC

© Robert G. Bauval 2002

Published in Discussions in Egyptology, Oxford, Volume 50, 2001

OVERVIEW

In my previous article in DE 49 I narrated the story of the 'Dixon Relics' and how a 5-inch piece of cedar wood (which could
be C-14 dated) had been 'lost'. I can now confirm that this relic has been traced to a Museum in Scotland. The story of this
'missing' Pyramid relic is intrinsically linked to Dr. James Andrew Sandilands Grant, better known in Egyptology as Grant
Bey.

BACKGROUND

In September 1872 a British engineer, Waynman Dixon discovered the openings of the two shafts on the south and north
walls of the Queen's Chamber, and in the horizontal section of the shafts that leads into the chamber he found three small
relics: a small bronze hook; a portion of 'cedar-like' wood, and a granite ball. The relics were taken to England by John
Dixon, Waynman's older brother, and mailed to the astronomer Royal of Scotland, Piazzi Smyth, who recorded them in his
diary, then returned them to John Dixon. The 'Dixon Relics' then mysteriously disappeared. In 1993 I conducted a search
for these relics with Dr. Mary Bruck and they were eventually traced at the British Museum. Unfortunately the small piece of
'cedar-like' wood was missing, and thus no Carbon 14 dating was possible. The relics are now displayed at the British
Museum's Egyptian section. When the German Engineer, Rudolf Gantenbrink, explored the shafts of the Queen's Chamber
in the Great Pyramid in 1993 with a miniature robot fitted with a video camera, he managed to photograph a long piece of
wood whose shape and general appearance seemed to be the same as that of the shorter piece found by the Dixons in
1872 at the bottom of this shaft. This relic could, of course, be carbon 14 dated and hopefully provide an accurate age for
the Great Pyramid. So far this wooden rod has not yet been retrieved by Dr. Zahi Hawass, the Director-General of the Giza
monuments, in spite of the many requests made by myself and others. It seems that Dr. Hawass disapproves of C-14
dating. Thus finding the 'missing' Dixon Relic i.e. the 5-inches piece of cedar-like wood is crucial, as it would resolve this
impasse.

A Library Angel

By a strange twist of synchronicity, just as I had sent my article for DE 49, on the 9 May, 2001, I received an e-mail from
Miss Gemma Smith, the assistant librarian at Ablah Library at Wichita State University who, amazingly, informed me that
she had been able to trace the whereabouts of the missing Dixon relic to the Marischal Museum in the University of
Aberdeen. In my many years as an independent researcher, I have learnt that librarians are the most likely people to
stumble on a piece of evidence or important clue that others have ignored or bypassed. My colleagues and I have a name
for them: we call them library angels. Miss Smith was certainly one such 'angel', for she cleverly had remembered that
when Waynman Dixon had discovered the openings of the shafts in the Queen's Chamber of the Great Pyramid –and
consequently the three relics-- with him had been present his friend Dr. James A.S.Grant. A short biography of Dr. Grant
will be most useful to understand firstly why he was in the Great Pyramid with Dixon in 1872 and, more importantly, how
and why through him the whereabouts of the missing 5-inches cedar wood was traced.

James A.S.Grant was born in Methlick, Scotland in 1840. He was the son of a banker. Grant studied medicine at the
University of Aberdeen and, in the mid-1860s he went to Egypt to help with a violent outbreak of cholera. So successful
was Grant to halt this epidemic, that he was awarded the Egyptian Order of Medjidieh for his efforts. He was later given the
title of Bey (a sort of 'Knighthood') by the Khedive. Whilst in Egypt Grant befriended Waynman and John Dixon, two young
engineers from Newcastle who were engaged in the construction of a bridge across the Nile near Cairo. The Dixon brothers
were friends of Charles Piazzi Smyth, the astronomer Royal of Scotland who, in 1865, had conducted a survey of the Great
Pyramid. Piazzi Smyth also knew Dr. Grant and shared a common friend, the 'pyramid author' Sydney Hall. In 1872 Piazzi

http://robertbauval.co.uk/articles/articles/DE49cont.html 8/7/2017
GRANT BEY AND THE MISSING PYRAMID RELIC CARBON 14 DATING THE G... Page 2 of 4

Smyth had planned a second expedition to Egypt for the spring in order to make re-measurements of the Great Pyramid,
but was unable to go due to illness. It was then that he contacted his friend in Cairo, Waynman Dixon, and asked him to do
the measurements for him "taking out also a companion and duplicate measurer his friend Dr. Grant of Cairo". Grant and
Dixon undertook this and other works at the Great Pyramid in the summer of 1872 as confirmed by a letter from Dr. Grant
dated 26 October 1872: "I am gratified that you are pleased with what Mr. Dixon and I have been enabled to accomplish
during the summer months. We have a theory that seems very reasonable that there is a chamber away into the masonry
behind the only remaining bent-roof stones over entrance passage… The Messrs Dixons are now staying at the Pyramid
and will work until they are stopped…". For several years after, Grant kept a correspondence with Piazzi Smyth, and
reported to him the various developments and goings-on at the pyramids. Grant seemed to have been well acquainted with
the Egyptologist H. Brugsch whom Grant, expressing the usual rivalry with the French of his times, considered "a more
learned hieroglyphic scholar…than Mariette Bey". Grant wrote to Smyth: "I have been learning much from Brugsch Bey
lately" in relation to the controversy started by the French Egyptologist Auguste Mariette over the newly found “Inventory
Stela" at Giza. Later, when Flinders Petrie went to Egypt in 1880, he was to be very well received by Grant Bey and his
American wife in Cairo, and they struck a friendship that was to last till Grant's death in 1896. On one occasion Petrie
almost saved the life of Grant Bey when the latter fainted while climbing within a narrow tunnel inside the Great Pyramid. It
is well known that Grant Bey kept an extensive private collection of ancient Egyptian artefacts in his home in Cairo and,
although some of them where stolen as well as damaged by a fire caused by one of his servants, much that survived was
donated to the Marischal Museum in Aberdeen.

Returning to Grant's involvement with the Dixon Relics, we find that John Dixon (Waynman's older brother) reported their
discovery to the British press in The Graphic (7 Dec. 1872 p.530) and Nature (26 Dec. 1872 p.146). In the Nature article the
5-inch cedar rod (that later went missing) is described in this manner by the Warden of the Standards, Mr. Henry Williams
Chrisholm:

“The fragment of the cedar rod is 5 inches in length, with rectangular section of 0.5 inch by 0.4 inch. Its sides are not
accurately planed, and they bear parallel lines like file marks. It may possibly have formed part of a measure length…"

Dr. Grant was not pleased with the way his name had not been mentioned in these articles, and complained to Piazzi
Smyth about it in a letter dated 18 January 1873. Dr. Grant said that he did not quite object that the newly found channels
in the Queen's Chamber were referred as the 'Dixon Channels': "provided I am not left out in the cold like a simple servant
or workman… I am sure Mr. Waynman Dixon is not to blame if my name is suppressed [sic] when it ought to be mentioned.
Mr. John Dixon, although not on the spot when the discoveries were made yet expended a great deal more money than I
did and thus had a title to share co-partnership with his brother."

It is at this turning point in the story of the Dixon Relics that Miss Gemma Smith, in the early part of 2001, comes into the
investigation. Having read the epilogue in my book The Orion Mystery narrating my involvement with the Dixon Relics, she
picked up the passage from Piazzi Smyth that I quoted, and where Dr. Grant is mentioned at the moment of the discovery
of the relics in the Queen's Chamber:

"Perceiving a crack (first I am told by Dr. Grant) in the south wall of the Queen's Chamber, which allowed him at one place
to push a wire to a most unconscionable length, Mr. W. Dixon set his carpenter man-of-all-works, by name Bill Grundy, to
jump a hole at that place…"

Smyth then narrated how also the opening was found for the northern shaft by Waynman Dixon and Dr. Grant and,
consequently, the small relics found inside these two shafts.

Gemma Smith, realising that Dr. Grant should have indeed shared the recognition for the discovery of the channels and the
relics found in them, wondered if in fact John Dixon did not share the keep of the actual relics with Dr. Grant in order to
appease the slight animosity between them caused by the press articles. She thus decided to do a little investigation of her
own. She quickly became aware of the private collection of Egyptian artefacts that Grant had donated to the Marischal
Museum in the University of Aberdeen, and duly contacted the present curator, Dr. Neil Curtis, to see if there was any trace
of the missing piece of wood. Her hunch immediately bore fruit. Dr. Curtis managed to find a letter written by the daughter
of Dr. Grant's second wife, Mrs. E.F. Morice in which mention is, in fact, made of the missing cedar rod! The letter is dated
18 June 1946 and posted from St. John's Wood in London to the curator of the Aberdeen University Museum:

"Dear Sir,

On going through my late mother's effects (Mrs. James Andrew Sandilands Grant Bey, late of Cairo and Aberdeen), I have
come across a few items that might be of interest to the Aberdeen University Museum and which might be included in the
Grant Collection which you now have. Should the University care to accept the above as a gift I shall be glad to have them
packed and sent to you."

Mrs. Morice then lists 9 items from various provenances in Egypt. Item 2 is described in this manner:

"2. Stone mason's rule, left in ventilation shaft of great pyramid of Cheops 400 BC (sic.) in Queen's Chamber and
discovered by Dr. Grant Bey and Waynman (sic.) Dixon in 1886 (sic.) approx. This rule fell to fragments on being exposed
to the air."

http://robertbauval.co.uk/articles/articles/DE49cont.html 8/7/2017
GRANT BEY AND THE MISSING PYRAMID RELIC CARBON 14 DATING THE G... Page 3 of 4

The reason Mrs. Morice writes that the rule or rod fell into fragments when exposed to the air is probably because the relic
had been sealed in a glass tube by John Dixon. We know of this because it is mentioned in a letter to Piazzi Smyth dated
23 November 1872 when Dixon dispatched the relics to him for examination: "The relics are packed in a cigar box and
coming by passenger train --they consist of a Stone Ball; Bronze Hook and wood measure in glass tube…"

The Importance of the Wooden Rod for Dating of the Great Pyramid

I immediately made contact with Dr. Neil Curtis in Aberdeen. The Grant relics and memorabilia sent by Mrs. Morice had not
be classified but only stored in the Marischal Museum's vaults. Being understaffed and also in the process of refurbishing
the Museum, Dr. Neil assured me that a search for the missing 5-inch measuring rod would be carried out, but warned me
that this could take quite a while. I contacted Dr. Neil last on 14 June, but he had not been able to locate the missing rod
with the Grant collection, but felt confident it was somewhere in the Museum, perhaps filed in a different section. He
assured me that the search would go on.

It is extremely likely that the 5-inch piece found by Grant and Dixon in the northern shaft of the Queen's Chamber is, in fact,
a fragment from a longer piece as was suggested by the Warden of Standards, Mr. Henry Williams Chrisholm back in 1873.
We shall recall that when this shaft was re-explored by Rudolf Gantenbrink in 1993 (who was then working under Dr.
Rainer Stadelmann of the German Archaeological Institute in Cairo) he was able to see a wooden rod, measuring about 70
cm. long and having the same rectangular cross-sectional shape and general appearance than the smaller fragment found
in 1872 by Grant and Dixon, lying deep inside the shaft. A photograph of this wooden rod taken by Gantenbrink's robotic
camera showed fragments of white stone or plaster covering the part of rod that was pushed against the corner wall of the
shaft. This may explain the "little small stones" encrusted in the smaller piece found by Grant and Dixon as described by
Piazzi Smyth in his diary entry of the 26 November 1872.

But if this hypothesis is correct, then how did the smaller piece break off and fall down the shaft and come to rest where it
was found by Dixon and Grant in 1872?

The northern shaft starts with a horizontal part which is about 2 meters long and then slopes upwards for a further 24
meters at an angle of 39 degrees. It is at the junction of the horizontal and sloping parts that Grant and Dixon found the
small fragment. But could this piece have rolled down the whole length of the sloping shaft unaided? The answer is, in my
opinion, probably not. This is because a small, square-shaped rod not smoothly planed cannot easily slide or roll on its own
down the limestone flooring of the shaft and overcome the frictional resistance of the stone as well as the 20 or so masonry
joints. When Gantenbrink explored this shaft, we were all surprised to note that a modern iron rod which had obviously
been used to probe the shaft was still lying there, from somewhere about 7 meters up the sloping part of the shaft up to
where the shaft bent towards the west. In none of the literature from Dixon, Grant or Piazzi Smyth is this iron rod
mentioned. It is likely, however, that Grant and Dixon did, in fact, use this rod to probe the shaft but preferred not to report
their 'treasure hunting' exploration, and that in probing the shaft so did cause the 5-inch fragment of the wooden rod to
break off the longer piece and was pulled from its original resting place down to the bottom of the shaft by the iron rod.

At any rate, there can be no doubt that the wooden fragments viz. the small piece found by Grant and Dixon and the larger
piece still in the shaft photographed by Gantenbrink, are contemporaneous with the construction of the Great Pyramid,
since the shaft was sealed at both ends and not opened till 1872 by Dixon and Grant. These wooden fragments, therefore,
could prove extremely useful in defining a more accurate date for the monument by the Carbon-14 method. Retrieving
either or both pieces is thus of great importance to the study of this monument. The matter now rests in the hands of the
Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo and the Marischal Museum in Scotland.

Acknowledgements:

I wish to thank Gemma Smith, Dr. Neil Curtis, Dr.A. Nibbi, Dr. Mary Bruck and the staff at the Griffith Institute library in
Oxford. Special thanks to Rudolf Gantenbrink for the kind permission to use photographs of inside the northern shaft of the
Queen's Chamber in the Great Pyramid. Also to Mrs. Ann Colville, the great-granddaughter of Waynman Dixon for use of
the photograph of Waynman Dixon with his two sisters.

References:

-Letters from Dr. Grant and John Dixon to Piazzi Smyth 1870-1873, courtesy of Dr. Mary Bruck and the library of the Royal
Observatory of Edinburgh.

-Private communication with miss Gemma Smith, Ablah Library, Wichita State University May-June 2001.

-Private communications with Dr. Neil Curtis, Curator of the Marischal Museum, May-June 2001.

-NATURE Dec. 26, 1872 p. 147

http://robertbauval.co.uk/articles/articles/DE49cont.html 8/7/2017
GRANT BEY AND THE MISSING PYRAMID RELIC CARBON 14 DATING THE G... Page 4 of 4

-Discussions In Egyptology, Vol. 49, 2001, pp. 5-21, 'Carbon-14 Dating the Giza Pyramids? The Small Relics found inside
the Pyramids'

-Flinders Petrie, Kt. Seventy Years in Archaeology, Sampson & Low, Marston & Co. Ltd., London.

-Margaret S. Drower, A Life In Archaeology, Victor Gollancz Ltd., London 1985

-Who Was Who in Egyptology, by Warren R. Dawson, The Egypt Exploration Society, London.

http://robertbauval.co.uk/articles/articles/DE49cont.html 8/7/2017