[46]. Most ancient authors who have described this monument assert, in opposition to Diodorus, that its founder was buried in it.
The Great Pyramid is surrounded, on three sides, by almost innumerable tombs. On the east are three small pyramids; and on the same side, and on the west and south, are many oblong tombs, flat-topped, and with sides inclining inwards. Some persons who have been unreasonable enough to doubt whether the pyramids are sepulchral monuments, must, I think, be convinced of their error by the discoveries of Colonel Vyse: long before which, my brother found bones and mummy-rags in the principal pyramid of Sakkárah.
LETTER XXV.
February, 1844.
My dear Friend,
I fear that I might weary you if I gave you a description of the other pyramids as full as that of the first; and, as they are far less interesting, I would pass them over entirely; but a few remarks respecting them, some of which I owe to my brother, I do not refrain from offering, as I think they will interest you. It is no trifle, I assure you, for a woman to explore the interior of the Great Pyramid. My mind continued so impressed with the difficulties of this undertaking, for some time, that I could not forget them, even in my dreams. The examination of the others is somewhat less arduous.
The name of the founder of the Second Pyramid, commonly called that of Chephrenes, still remains involved in some degree of doubt. But in some of the tombs in the neighbourhood, we find a king’s name, in hieroglyphics, which, according to different dialects, may be read Khephré or Shefré; and it seems highly probable that the king to whom this name belongs was the builder of the pyramid in question.
This pyramid is but little inferior in magnitude to the first. From some points of view, it even appears more lofty, as it stands on ground about thirty feet higher than that on which the first rests, and its summit is almost entire. A large portion of its smooth casing remains on the upper part, forming a cap which extends from the top to about a quarter of the distance thence to the base. Notwithstanding this, Arabs often ascend to its summit; and many European travellers have done the same. In its general construction, this pyramid is inferior to the first; and its interior is less remarkable. By a sloping passage, similar to the first in the Great Pyramid, but cased with granite, and then by a long horizontal passage hewn through the rock, broken by two perpendicular descents, and sloping ascents, we reach the Great Chamber. This is similar in form to the “Queen’s Chamber” in the Great Pyramid, and contains a plain sarcophagus of granite, among blocks of the same material lately torn up from the floor, in which the sarcophagus was embedded.
Several Arabic inscriptions are scrawled with charcoal upon various parts of this chamber. Most of these were written before the opening of the pyramid by Belzoni, and are nearly illegible; generally recording the visits of Arabs, and in the modern Arabic characters. My brother could not find any date among them. From his manuscript notes, I copy the following observations respecting one of these inscriptions which has excited especial attention: consisting of two lines, written in the same characters as the rest, and with the same material, but not so imperfectly legible. “Belzoni particularly remarked these two lines, and took a Copt scribe to copy them; but this man did not faithfully execute his task: he concluded that the second line was a continuation of the first, which is far from being certain, and gave a transcript in which he presumed to restore what was defective in the original. His transcript has been thus translated by Mr. Salame: ‘The Master Mohammed Ahmed, lapicide, has opened them; and the Master Othman attended this (opening); and the King Alij Mohammed at first (from the beginning) to the closing up.’ This inscription has exceedingly puzzled the learned Orientalists of Europe; and great pains have been taken to find out who was the king mentioned in it, and at what period he reigned. It unfortunately happens that the first line is almost wholly defaced; a traveller having scribbled his name over it: the two first words, however, have not been written over; and I must pronounce it very uncertain whether they are as in the transcript above mentioned, and consequently, whether the inscription contain any mention of the ‘opening’ of the pyramid. But the second line, which is the more important, has not been defaced like the first; and the greater part of it is so plain that it can hardly be read otherwise than thus: ‘El-Khaleel ’Alee, the son of Mohammad ..., has been here;’ or, in the order of the Arabic words, ‘Has been here El-Khaleel ’Alee, the son of Mohammad....’ It is quite evident that the word which Belzoni’s copyist makes ‘el-melik,’ or ‘the King,’ is a proper name. Another inaccuracy in the copy published by Belzoni is the omission of the word signifying ‘son,’ after ‘’Alee.’ Thus we find that this inscription (instead of recording the visit of a king, or perhaps, even alluding to the opening of the pyramid) is probably nothing more than the Arabic scrawls which are seen in great numbers on many of the monuments of Egypt. It, and others similar to it, are of some interest, however, as showing that the pyramid was open at a comparatively late period.”