Paper 3. Pyramidology M. J. Cooper Version 2.0 (October 21, 2019) · 2019. 10. 3. · The popularity of pyramidology has waxed and waned over the years, depending upon what was being

© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page – Oregon USA

Paper 3. Pyramidology

M. J. Cooper

Version 2.0 (October 21, 2019)

Copyright © 2019 M. J. Cooper, Oregon, USA

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in

any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical

methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief

quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by

copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed ʺAttention: Permissions

Coordinator,ʺ at the address below.

Publisher: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

© Copyright 2019 M J Cooper In Accordance With Title Page – Oregon USA 1

3. Pyramidology

The definition of Pyramidology herein is the study of the Great Pyramid to determine its

divinity; more specifically, was it designed by God? Other definitions are excluded from this

study. In the course of studying the Pyramid, the question came to mind, ʺwhy did David

Davidsonʹs chronology end in 1953ʺ, as described in his book ʺThe Great Pyramid- Its Divine

Messageʺ? Though I never directly answered that question, my research has taken me down a

path where I now believe the Pyramid provides sufficient evidence to prove that it witnesses to

all of Godʹs 7000-year plan, which stretches far beyond 1953. This study presents that evidence.

This concept is not something new as many have followed this path before, such as John Taylor,

Piazzi Smyth, John and Morton Edgar, David Davidson, and Adam Rutherford. The ideas that

these researchers provided were based upon the information and tools that were available in their

times. The most significant difference between now (2018-19) and then (1865-1970) is that none

of the prior researchers had the advantage of a Personal Computer (PC) with astronomical,

spreadsheet, drawing, and word processing software and access to the internet. Without a PC, I

doubt that these hypotheses and clues could have been developed, and I believe that this marks

the predetermined time of a more detailed discovery as now rather than an earlier time.

The Goal of The Study

As stated, the original goal of this study was to understand why the chronology in David

Davidsonʹs book terminated in August of 1953 at the south wall of the Kingʹs Chamber.

However, it became apparent that the evidence does not support Davidsonʹs twelve-sided

Pyramid theory but that it should be square. Some students have a vested interest in Davidsonʹs

theories, which, to a certain extent, are based on the shape of the base. However, a new theory is

presented herein, which matches what the Pyramid purist looks for in the Pyramid. That is the

external, and primary internal dimensions are defined by the number of days in a year, 365.25 as

used by modern astronomers, the Sacred Cubit, the Bʺ, the number 2, and the constant π.

Because the twelve-sided Pyramid concept is not viable, it is necessary to change two tenets,

which are the length of the Sacred Cubit and the Pyramid inch to arrive at the new theory. I ask

the ʺDavidsonʺ reader to bear with the concept of this new theory until at least the end of ʺPaper

4. The Exteriorʺ regarding the external dimensions of the Pyramid. However, continuing to Paper

7, and beyond, will reveal so much more about God’s design of the Pyramid and His plan.

This new study shows how the Pyramid matches the story and chronology of the Bible, to the

day, in most cases and the hour in others. Since the Pyramid was designed and built before most

Bible events occurred, it foretold them and continues to do so.

It is this prophetic characteristic that validates the concept that God was responsible for the

design of the Pyramid. It is the way He has chosen to reveal Himself at this time in history. As

we saw earlier, Isaiah 19 says we should expect this revelation to occur at this time.


The Scope of the Study

The study will mainly concentrate on analyzing the surveys of the Pyramid to define the original

intent of the design and match that to Bible chronology. There are other tenets of Pyramidology

that will not be investigated in this study; at this time, as follows:

Precession of the equinoxes

Length of the earthʹs orbit

Mean distance of the earth to the sun

The weight of the earth

Obliquity of the Ecliptic

The volume of the earthʹs crust above sea level

The proportion of land and sea on the earthʹs surface

Built at the geographical center of the land surface of the earth

Stands on the longest land contact meridian

Situated on the most extended land contact, earth –circuit bearing (rhumb) on the Earthʹs surface

The purpose of the Capstone is an essential tenet of Pyramidology, and it will be described in

this paper. There is one other tenet of Pyramidology described, with new data, at the end of this

paper, which deals with the compass bearing of Bethlem and Patmos from the Pyramid.

The hypotheses under evaluation in this study are:

The Great Pyramid passage system can demonstrate its equivalence with the chronology of the Bible within one day, or better, over 7000 years.

The Great Pyramid assists in revealing the measurement system of God used in the creation of the universe.

There are several constraints:

At least two witnesses are required to prove any point.

Data sources need to be proven to be relevant to the Pyramid. For example, data from the Egyptian King Lists or Book of the Dead, if they were ever actually relevant, define a

Pyramid that is too large compared with that revealed by the surveys. Writings that

describe the initiation of a neophyte into the mysteries of Egypt or the worship of earthly

kings are hardly a source one should consider for defining anything associated with God.

Davidson ʺThe Great Pyramid: Its Divine Messageʺ, (pars. 108-109, pp. 87-88). On the

other hand, a survey relating to the dimensions of the Pyramid is relevant as the data is

speaking for the Pyramid itself. The following resources are acceptable sources of data

for this study:

o Surveys of the Pyramid o The Bible o Astronomy for generating and finding historical dates o Mathematics


o Proven history, particularly but not limited to biblical history – the Bible is an excellent source for the former

The hypothesis has evolved into three areas, as described below.

1. The first area is a mathematical study, which is based on clues derived from surveys of the Great Pyramid and numerical and physical constants such as π. Other than the Holy

Bible and the results of several surveys of the Great Pyramid, which are necessary as the

standards by which to compare the hypothesis, no reliance is placed on any other external

source of data as it may be corrupted. Its association with the Pyramid will need to be

proven, which is not an easy task after 6000 years.

By two independent mathematical proofs, it will be shown that the Pyramid was built

using the British Inch (Bʺ) as its primary unit, not the Pyramid Inch (Pʺ). However, the

Bʺ is a slightly corrupted form of God’s basic length unit with which He designed the

universe. The hypothesis also shows that the Cubit (20.6 Bʺ), is mathematically related to

the British Inch, and it too is used in parts of the Pyramid. Mathematics shows that the

base of the Pyramid should be about 9069 Bʺ based solely on the use of natural constants

and features of the Pyramid. The average of five surveys shows that the base, as built, is

approximately 9069 Bʺ, so the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the Base was

designed using Bʺ.

From the study, it will be shown how to mathematically reconstruct the exterior and

interior of the Pyramid as designed. The accuracy is generally better than ± 0.25 Bʺ, and

the worst-case difference is 0.55 Bʺ.

2. The second area is the construction of a complete timeline that matches both the Bible and the Pyramid from Adamʹs sin in Genesis to the Judgment Day of the Great White

Throne in The Book of Revelation. The concept, based on earlier studies by the

researchers named later, is that the chronology of the Bible maps to the floor of the

Pyramid passageways. Approximately one British Inch represents one year along the

sloping passages. The goal is to reconstruct a highly accurate and complete Biblical

timeline along the sloping passages that matches the passage lengths predicted by the

clues from the first part of the study.

A significant point of this area of the study is that the passageways demonstrate that all

7000 years of the Bible, i.e., both the Old and New Testaments, are portrayed in the

Pyramid. Five translations of the Old Testament were evaluated to determine which one,

or ones, fitted the Pyramid passages, and it was found that only the Masoretic Text could

be made to precisely fit.

3. The third area is that Danielʹs prophecies, and those in Revelation, can be mapped onto the internal passages of the Pyramid. This mapping explains features of the Pyramid that

have remained mysteries until now, particularly in the Grand Gallery, such as the two

grooves cut in the third overlap, the stepped ceiling tiles, and the 56 holes cut in the

benches either side of the Grand Gallery. Also shown is that Danielʹs 490 and 2300 year

prophecies are contiguous and stretch over 2790 years, and only a few hundred of the


2300 years remain. The central point of this area of the study is that it positively

identifies Jehovah with the Pyramid since it accurately portrays the Holy Bible.

I believe that the first area of the study shows that the Pyramid was designed by God, who is

identified by the second and third areas as Jehovah.

The three areas of the study, therefore, identify the Pyramid as the witness in Isaiah 19:19-20

(KJV)

The second is that the Pyramid message relates to Israel and has the potential to open their eyes

according to Romans 11:25-26 (KJV)

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in

your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be

come in. 26

And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer,

and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Put these two together then, it may be intended to open the eyes of Israel, according to Romans.

When all hope for Israel seems lost, then it may have the power to cause Israel to ʺcry unto the

LORD because of the oppressorsʺ Isaiah 19:20.

Introduction to the Study

The popularity of pyramidology has waxed and waned over the years, depending upon what was

being published at the time. The Figure below shows what I believe history, and the theory tells

us the Pyramid was intended to be rather than what it has become over time. Please use it for

general reference throughout the following discussions.


Brief History of the Pyramid and the Pyramidologists

This theory of the Pyramid tells us that it was built approximately 4700 years ago in the year

2661 BC. Many investigators have visited the Pyramid to seek its truth. Early visitors were

Herodotus, Strabo, and Diodorus Siculus. In 1637 an Englishman named John Greaves visited

the Pyramid and conducted a survey.

Later his work suggested to Sir Isaac Newton that the Pyramid contained facts about the Solar

System that he needed to complete his Laws of Gravitation. In this search, partly based upon

Greaves’ work, Newton wrote a study titled ʺA Dissertation upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jewsʺ.

In this document, it is said by many that he derives what became the Pyramid Inch (Pʺ) or 1.0011

Bʺ. In my opinion, based on this document, Newton found a Sacred Cubit of average length of

24.83 Bʺ, which, when divided by 25, results in an average unit of length 0.9932 Bʺ. If this value

is substituted for the Pyramid Inch of Pyramidology, all problems concerning the difference

between Petrieʹs survey, and the desire for a Pyramid that measures 365.25 times the sacred cubit

melt away. Newton did not discover what he was seeking from the Pyramid, but its connection

with astronomy was established.

Like the old Pyramid Inch was used to define the time-scale of the Pyramid chronology, the new

unit defines it in such a way that significant locations within the passage system can be shown to

represent precise and recognizable historical dates, and, as it happens, identifiable future dates.


In efforts to prove the divinity of the Pyramid, many connections have been made between it and

celestial distances and orbital motions, and these have become part of Pyramidology. These

relationships are not evaluated herein, at least at this time, because the precision of the Pyramid

chronology is considered sufficient to establish the divinity of the Pyramid.

It was John Taylor, an English Publisher, who pulled together the facts and figures from

researchers who had come before him and first detailed the divine nature of the Pyramid. His

data came from the likes of Greaves, Napoleonʹs savants, Howard Vyse, and others.

Vyse was an English colonel who visited the Pyramid in 1837. Between him and an Italian

named Captain Giovanni Battista Caviglia and later another Englishman named John Shae

Perring, they dug into and dynamited the pyramids and tombs at Giza in their search for hidden

chambers and maybe treasure. This approach caused damage to the Pyramid and surrounding

structures but also uncovered a lot of new facts. Perring did the best survey up to that date and

published it, between 1839 and 1842, as part of Vyseʹs three-volume work ʺThe Pyramids of

Gizeh,ʺ. It should be noted that Vyseʹs volume 1, page 3, tells us that Caviglia started the first 36

inches of the vertical shaft in the floor of the Subterranean Chamber, and Perring finished it to a

depth of over 30 feet. As you can see in the Figure below, Vyse did not include it in his drawing

of the Pyramid, so I do not believe it is part of the originally intended design.

Vyse Great Pyramid Drawing Representing its State in 1837 Without the Pit

Charles Piazzi Smyth was born in Naples, Italy, to Captain (later Admiral) William Henry

Smyth. He was named Piazzi after his godfather, the Italian astronomer Giuseppe Piazzi. His


father subsequently settled at Bedford and equipped there an observatory, at which Piazzi Smyth

received his first lessons in astronomy. He became the Astronomer Royal for Scotland in 1846.

On his death bed, Taylor convinced Smyth to continue his work. As a result, Smyth visited the

Pyramid in 1865 to conduct his survey. Through his connection with Taylor and his survey of the

Pyramid, I consider Smyth to be the focal point of Pyramidology. He was a British Israelite, and

one will see him distanced for that in websites like Wikipedia. I think that Pyramidology did not

get off the ground until he published his four books and other articles. It is interesting to note the

lure of the Pyramid on the scientific minds of Newton, Smyth, and others.

Basic Tenets of Pyramidology

Some of the basic tenets of Pyramidology, as written by Smyth and developed by subsequent

researchers, which, rightly or wrongly, are as follows:

The Pyramid, or Primitive, Inch Pʺ is the unit of measure of the Pyramid:

The Pʺ equals 1/25th of a sacred cubit as used in the Bible by Noah and others

1 Pʺ = 1.001 Bʺ so that there are 500,000,000 Pʺ in Earthʹs polar diameter o Smythʹs data indicated this diameter to equal 7899.3 miles o Modern data indicates that the diameter is 7899.8 miles, so Adam Rutherford

changed 1 Pʺ to be equal to 1.00106 Bʺ

The Pyramid base has to be 9131 Pʺ so that a complete circuit is 36524 Pʺ o This represents the number of days in 100 solar years

The base is, therefore, required to be 9140 Bʺ based on 1 Pʺ = 1.001 Bʺ

The base length of the Pyramid has been measured over the centuries, and the measurements

increased from 8316 Bʺ (693 ft.) without casing, by Greaves in 1637, to 9163 Bʺ (763.6 ft.), from

socket corner to socket corner by Vyse and Perring in 1837. The length measures gradually

increased because the debris around the Pyramid was diminishing and more and more of the

lower, and therefore wider, courses were revealed. The debris was caused by the Crete

earthquake in 1303 and the subsequent removal of the Casing Stones by the local population to

build palaces and mosques in Cairo. Eventually, in 1799, the French savants Le Pere and Colonel

Coutelle discovered first the NE socket and then the NW socket. They assumed the sockets were

intended to house the Pyramidʹs corner casing stones, and when measured, the base length

dramatically increased to 763.6 ft, which is 9163.2 Bʺ. At this stage, Taylor and Smyth were

beginning to postulate that 9141 Bʺ, or 9131 Pʺ, was the intended length.

Inglis found, by his measurements, that the mean of all four sides was 9110 Bʺ, based on the

sockets and then Ordnance surveyors, in 1869 measured the mean to be 9130 Bʺ. ʺOur

Inheritance…ʺ p516. The average of these two means is 9120 Bʺ I believe that Smyth felt that

the length of the base side was going to settle down somewhere between Vyseʹs and this average,

i.e., about 9145 Bʺ which would prove some of his theories.

However, in 1881, along came the bane of early Pyramidologists, Sir Flinders Petrie, and the

Father of Egyptology. He had the effrontery, according to Smyth in ʺNew Measures of the Great

Pyramid, by a New Measurer,ʺ to arrive at a mean base length, including the casing and at the


Pavement of 9068.8 Bʺ. This is about 72 Bʺ smaller than the value Smyth was seeking. Before

this, it was just assumed, erroneously, that the four socket corners defined the corners of the

Pyramid base. However, Petrieʹs measurements of the base were obtained by sighting along the

Pyramid faces, and from marks along the pavement where the edge of the Casing had been,

rather than at the socket corners. The sockets were likely used to define the Pyramid diagonals.

The sockets are at the four corners of the Pyramid base and are at different levels below the

Pavement. It is common sense that from the outside, a building should only be defined by what

one sees above ground, or Pavement level, and not by what you cannot see under this level. So

Petrieʹs measure must stand as being close to the intended base length of the Pyramid. According

to the Glen Dash Foundation, subsequent surveys provide the following data:

The Great Pyramidʹs Casing Lengths: Petrie, Cole, Dorner, Lehner/Goodman, and GDFS

Side Petrie Cole Dorner Lehner/ GDFS GDFS

All Bʺ 1881 1925 1979 Goodman 2015 Sockets

1984 2015

North 9069.41 9065.08 9068.03 9070.43 9068.07 9130.48

East 9067.72 9070.51 9069.65 9066.22 9068.27 9132.96

South 9069.49 9072.99 9069.76 9067.28 9070.24 9124.45

West 9068.58 9069.17 9069.76 9068.39 9071.14 9119.24

Average 9068.82 9069.45 9069.29 9068.07 9069.41 9126.78

In other words, over the last 140 years, five surveys of the Pyramidʹs base have only varied

within a range of 1.4 Bʺ, at the pavement.

Pyramid Core, Casing Stones, and Platform


The last column in the table above shows Glen Dashʹs measures of the distances between the

sockets. The average is 9126.78 Bʺ. The largest socket corner to socket corner measurement is

9132.96 B” from GDFS in the Table above, which is 8 B” shorter than the 9141 Bʺ required by

Pyramidology. Please see the evaluation of the viability of Davidsonʹs twelve-sided base later in

this paper.

Petrieʹs survey is sufficiently accurate that Wikipedia Great Pyramid of Giza says ʺAlmost all

reports are based on his measurementsʺ, and since he used theodolites and standard surveying

techniques, it has become the defacto standard of Pyramid surveys. There are minor variations in

his calculations of the base length that I and others have found. Also, due to the debris present in

the Descending Passage, Petrieʹs measurements are too short. Improved surveys have been made

of the base and the Descending Passage.

One can see Petrieʹs antagonism toward Pyramidology in chapter 21 of his book ʺThe Pyramids

and Temples of Gizehʺ, where he compares the theories, in a generally negative fashion, with his

measurements.

The results of Petrieʹs survey quite literally forced Pyramidology underground. Since a base of

9141 Bʺ (9131 Pʺ) was theorized the height of the Pyramid had to be 5819 Bʺ (5813 Pʺ), at what

Pyramidology theorized was an intended base angle of 51 51 14.31. This angle is known as a

π angle since it is computed by finding the angle corresponding to the tangent of 4/π. Taking

Petrieʹs base of approximately 9069 Bʺ, at the Pavement level, the height above the Pavement

would be 5773.5 Bʺ. To arrive at the height of 5819 Bʺ the base of the Pyramid had to be pushed

underground by Pyramidologists to 5773.5 Bʺ minus 5819.0 Bʺ, which is -45.5 Bʺ. However, the

Pyramid has no physical or mathematical features, which indicates this level. Petrieʹs

measurements showed that the bases of the sockets were at different depths below ground, from

28.5 to 39.9 Bʺ. All of the sockets are thus above the requisite level, -45.5 Bʺ, and the average

level of the sockets is 31.4 Bʺ.

In 1910 John and Morton Edgar, two Scots, surveyed the passages of the Pyramid and developed

theories that were used by Charles Taze Russell. These two brothers cleaned the debris out of the

Descending Passage and were able to conduct a much more accurate survey compared to Petrie.

They found it to be almost 8 Bʺ longer than he did. They have many ideas, data, and photos that

are useful in their books ʺGreat Pyramid Passagesʺ volumes 1 and 2 and ʺGreat Pyramid Its

Symbolism Science and Prophecyʺ 1924. The Edgarʹs also declare, in the above-referenced book,

p126, that the base of the corner sockets marked the base of the Pyramid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza


Is David Davidsonʹs 12 Sided Pyramid Viable or Not?

David Davidson, in conjunction with Herbert Aldersmith, published ʺThe Great Pyramid: Its

Divine Message. ʺ In this book, Davidson set about reconciling Petrieʹs measurements with

Smythʹs theories. Smyth required the length of the Pyramid base to be 9140 Bʺ so that it equaled

9131 Pʺ. When multiplied by four, it is seen that the Pyramidʹs perimeter equals 36524 Pʺ, which

symbolizes the number of days in 100 solar years. The conversion factor is 1.001 Bʺ/P.ʺ Petrieʹs

and all subsequent surveys measure the base as approximately 9069 Bʺ, about 72 Bʺ shorter than

required, so earlier theories needed to be adjusted.

The photograph below was taken under very favorable lighting conditions. It shows that there are

two, or possibly three, planes on the south face of the Great Pyramid. In 1881 Petrie reported that

each major face was divided down the middle and consisted of two planes with an angle between

them, which can be calculated to be about 179°. The small third plane at the base is debris from

the casing of the pyramid, which had not been completely removed in 1940 when the photo was

taken, and it should be ignored.

Aerial Photo by P. Groves (1940) – Shows Three Planes on South Face

Davidson recognized that Petrie had reported this double plane feature and proposed an

ingenious solution to the problem of Petrieʹs base length not being the requisite 9141 Bʺ. This

was a 12 sided Pyramid, as shown in the Figure below. The Figure only indicates the core of the

Pyramid, but this would have been covered by the casing of equal thickness all over, which

would result in there being three smooth planes per pyramid face following the contours shown.

Petrie had assumed that the casing edges were straight lines between the corners, and he showed

this in his Plate X. There is only one plane per face based on Petrieʹs assumption.


Davidsonʹs 12-Sided Pyramid

The following Figure shows both the basis of Davidsonʹs proposal and allows its viability to be

assessed. The Figure is based upon the Glen Dash Foundation Survey (GDFS) of the Great

Pyramid conducted in 2015. The four sides of the pyramid are shown in an exaggerated fashion,

as individual sub-diagrams within the Figure to better show the relationships between the

trapezoids and the surveyed edges of the Pyramid. The trapezoids mark the boundaries at the

bases of the hollowed-in pyramid faces, as proposed by Davidson, whereas the green, red, and

blue lines represent the casing, platform, and socket edges as assumed by Petrie and Dash.


The Basis of Davidsonʹs 12–Sided Pyramid Theory and its Viability

The first step was to draw an exact representation of the GFDS corners and edges reported in

ʺThe Great Pyramidʹs Footprint: Results from Our 2015 Surveyʺ at

http://glendash.com/archaeology/as-published.html#sthash.tyJRcsXp.dpbs

North

EastWest

South

A

E

F

B

D

J

I

C

B

G H

C

A

L K

D

M

http://glendash.com/archaeology/as-published.html#sthash.tyJRcsXp.dpbs


The coordinates of the corners, from the Figures on pages 12 and 13 of the report, were drawn as

blue, red, and green dots, and corresponding lines were drawn between them for each edge on

each face of the pyramid. Once drawn, the lengths and angles of the casing and platform sides

were checked for correctness against the reported values on page 11 of the Dash report. The

drawing then consisted of three quadrilaterals, which closely approximated squares. However,

the distance between the quadrilaterals was small compared with the length of the sides, and any

useful details were obscured. It was necessary to expand the sides to see these details. So the

squares were grouped and rotated clockwise by the mean angle of the casing, 3ʹ 54ʺ, so that a

theoretical representation of a perfect set of Davidson’s base trapezoids, aligned to the cardinal

points, could be overlaid. This process prevented the trapezoids from becoming distorted when

expanded in the next step. However, before the next step, the coordinates of the edges of the

casing measured by the GDFS were plotted as magenta dots and the areas representing the casing

edges, as found and used by Cole in 1925 were added as thick magenta lines. The magenta lines

overlapped the magenta dots, so the lines were moved inward slightly for clarity.

The coordinates of the magenta dots were provided by Glen Dash, for which I am most grateful.

Each side of the drawing was then independently cut and pasted into a new drawing, and the

sides were expanded by 100. The expansion was in the horizontal axis for the west and east sides

and vertically for the north and south sides. The expanded dots on the new drawing were then

reformatted, and the drawing was labeled.

As shown in the Figure of Davidsonʹs 12-sided pyramid, the base of each side is not a straight

line. Instead, Davidson has defined a hollowing in of each base using a trapezoid ABFE, etc. The

two parallel sides should be about 36 Bʺ apart. The trapezoids are regular in form.

Davidson justified the trapezoids as follows:

Petrie, Cole, and subsequent surveyors assumed that the casing edge ran in a straight line from D

to A, as shown in the south side in the above diagram. Davidson proposed that the casing edge

would have actually run from D to K to L and then to A and also that the extensions of the lines

AL and KD met at M. The length DA multiplied by 4 symbolizes the number of days in 100

solar years. The length DKLA multiplied by 4 symbolizes the number of days in 100 sidereal

years. The length DMA multiplied by 4 symbolizes the number of days in 100 anomalistic years.

In the above drawing, the green lines, i.e., the casing edge, on each side, were defined by GDFS

by the use of linear regression of the magenta points. GDFS says ʺIn theory, there is a 95%

probability that the original casing and platform corners fell within these windows. ʺ It is part of

Davidsonʹs proposal that the short sides in the middle of the trapezoids partly overlay the casing

edges at the center of the side, and it can be seen that, to a large extent, they do. To comply with

Davidsonʹs proposal, the casing edge, as shown by the magenta dots, should follow the sides of

the trapezoids, and we would expect to see them turn outwards at the end of the short side of the

trapezoid but, in no case do we see this happen. It can be seen that at the east end of the north


side, the south end of the west side and the west end of the south side the magenta dots do follow

the straight-line casing edges and not Davidsonʹs trapezoidal edges. The east side has too few

points to make a positive determination of whether the dots follow the casing edge or trapezoid

sides.

There is no evidence that the casing of the Pyramid was hollowed in, but the evidence does show

the casing edges do appear to be straight for their full length. It is observed that the casing edges

are more parallel to the edges of the platform, on which the Pyramid sits than they are to the lines

drawn between the socket corners.

In 1925 Cole carried out a survey similar to the GDFS. As there were no computers at that time

to calculate best-fit lines, he used his theodolite to ʺmechanicallyʺ fit lines along the casing edges

that he had found. The thick magenta lines mark the locations of Coleʹs casing edges. These lines

should overlay the green lines, but I have moved them inwards to improve clarity since they

obscured the magenta dots. Coleʹs survey results showed slightly different pyramid base lengths

and angles compared with GDFS. However, it can be seen that on the east end of the north side

and the west end of the south side, the magenta lines extend past the ends of the short side of the

trapezoid, indicating that they probably followed a straight line but did not follow the trapezoid

sides.

Adam Rutherford authored a four-volume treatise titled ʺPyramidologyʺ. He was present at the

Great Pyramid in 1925 and realized the implications of Coleʹs survey reported in ʺEgyptian

Government Survey (P39)ʺ. It is also notable that on page 299 of Pyramidology Book II he says:

ʺThat the geometry of the Pyramidʹs base reveals the three astronomical years was later shown

by David Davidson, notwithstanding that owing to his never having been to the Great Pyramid

and consequently having no knowledge of unpublished details of it, he had the erroneous idea

that the sides of the Pyramidʹs exterior were hollowed-in. But the results of the present authorʹs

research on the spot at the Great Pyramid, as well as the Egyptian Government Survey (P39),

demonstrated beyond all question that, unlike the hollowed-in core masonry, the original Casing

edge of the exterior of the Great Pyramid was quite straight. The author, on returning home from

Egypt on the occasion of his first visit there in 1925, informed Davidson of this fact that the sides

of the Great Pyramidʹs exterior Casing were constructed perfectly straight, whereupon Davidson

then put forward another theory, which will be dealt with in Book V.ʺ

Unfortunately, Rutherford died before he could publish Book V.

It is a reasonable conclusion from Coleʹs survey and the GDFS that the casing sides were straight

lines and not trapezoidal, and so Davidsonʹs 12-sided pyramid is not viable from this perspective.

Next, we will look at whether Davidsonʹs required 9141ʺ length between socket corners is viable.


The long sides of the trapezoids, in Davidsonʹs theory, should be parallel to and at a distance of

35.7625 Pʺ from the short sides and should overlay the socket corners shown as blue dots. As

shown in the above Figure, Davidsonʹs theoretical socket corners miss the measured socket

corners by a maximum of 17ʺ at the SW corner to a minimum of 1ʺ at the SE corner. Looking at

the relationship between the green, red, and blue edges of the pyramid, we can see that the

builders were able to maintain a reasonably parallel relationship between the casing and platform

edges. So if it had been critical, which apparently it was not, it would have been possible for

them to have maintained that relationship between socket corners.

The distance between the socket corners is required by Davidsonʹs theory to be 9141 Bʺ. Petrie

measured them as 9130ʺ (N), 9133ʺ (E), 9124 (S), 9119 (W), and 9127ʺ (Mean). Why does

Davidson think his scheme is viable? It is because he takes the statement ʺsocket corner to socket

cornerʺ too literally. In his Plate XX, he notes that the diagonals of the pyramid pass through the

NW, NE, and SE sockets at his points L, K, and M, respectively. However, the SW socket is

different, and the Figure below shows an expansion of the lower left-hand corner in Davidsonʹs

Plate XX.

Bottom Left Hand Corner of Davidsonʹs Plate XX Showing the Extra 17.5 Bʺ

Here Davidson has identified the socket as UW?YZX where ʺ?ʺ is the unlabeled NE corner of

the socket. He notes that there is a chiseled line in the socket floor between W and Z and that the

Pyramid base diagonal crosses the socket line YX at point Z. Most, if not all, observers also


consider that point Z is the socket corner. However, the Royal Engineers survey of 1869

measured the distance between Z and X as 17.5 Bʺ. So Davidson adds the 17.5 Bʺ to Petrieʹs SE

to SW socket length of 9123.13 Bʺ for a total of 9140.63 Bʺ. He then argues, in paragraphs 144

and 196, that this length was laid out first and is the model for the other three sides.

Apart from Davidson and Rutherford, I have not seen any other commentator conclude that the

extra 17.5ʺ, from Z to X, has any significance in establishing any past or future dimension of the

Pyramid. Davidsonʹs theory is not viable as it is based on faulty logic and faulty interpretation of

data.

The Pyramid Inch

Another tenet of Pyramidology is that the Pyramid Inch (Pʺ) is the standard of measurement. 25

Pʺ make a Sacred Cubit so that the Sacred Cubit would be 25.025 Bʺ in length. I have searched

extensively, and the best match I can find are cubits of 25.3 to 25.6 Bʺ. These are similar to

Newtonʹs findings in his ʺDissertation on the Sacred Cubit..ʺ The only place a cubit of 25.025 Bʺ

is used extensively is in Pyramidology. Therefore I have doubts as to its legitimacy as a means of

proving the divinity of the Pyramid. It is close to the truth to say that there are 500,000,000 Pʺ in

the Earthʹs polar diameter, which is, therefore, close to 20,000,000 sacred cubits. However, this

will never be a fixed standard. Science tells us the ice caps are melting, the water from them is

making the equator bulge more, and so the polar diameter is shrinking. However, the land at the

poles, which was previously compressed by the ice, is now expanding because the pressure on it

has been reduced, which increases the polar diameter. However, this increase is less than the

decrease caused by the water moving to the equator. The polar diameter is, therefore, varying

continually and is not suitable as a standard.

Pyramid Base Angle

A third and vital tenet of Pyramidology is that the theoretical base angle of the Pyramid is a π

angle. The lefthand Figure below shows that the ratio of the height of a π triangle, to its base, is 4

to π. Petrie and Smyth attempted to measure the base angle by a variety of means, and the best-

weighted measurement is from Petrie shown on the righthand side of the Figure below. It can be

seen that the theoretical angle does fall within the measured angle, but so do other angles. The

Base Angle will be discussed in Paper 4.


Theoretical and Measured Base Angle of the Great Pyramid

Pyramid Displacement, Rectification, Contraction and Expansion Factors

The Displacement Factor results from recognizing that the axis of the passage system is offset by

287 Bʺ to the east of the vertical axis of the Pyramid based on Petrie’s measurement. Davidson

computed a Displacement Factor of 286.1 Pʺ based on the difference between the inner and outer

squares of his twelve-sided Pyramid. However, it was discussed above that Davidsonʹs twelve-

sided Pyramid concept is not viable.

Rutherford assumes the Displacement Factor as a negative value, -286.1 Pʺ, and introduces the

concept of the Rectification Factor, which is a positive value, +286.1 Pʺ. Rutherford also

introduces the concept of the Contraction and Expansion Factors, which are 1/8th

the value of the

Displacement and Rectification Factors, respectively. The following recognizes that the

Displacement Factor is real and shows how Davidson computes his value and also how it is

computed in this study.

Davidson says, “P148. THE PYRAMIDʹS DISPLACEMENT FACTOR.

Criticism, therefore, has shown that the Pyramid was set out to a base line of 9141.1 Bʺ, that its

distance between centres of opposite base sides was 9069.5 Bʺ, and, independently, that its base

sides were centrally hollowed to the extent of about 36ʺ. The difference between the first two

values, 9141.1 and 9069.5 Bʺ, gives twice the extent of hollowing-in as 71.6 Bʺ, and therefore

the hollowing-in as 35.8 Bʺ =35.76 Pʺ.

The actual PyramId base circuit is therefore defined by two squares, one marginally 35.76 Pʺ

internal to the other. The outer square, defining the base corners, is 36,524.24 Pʺ circuit, and

the inner square is 8 x 35.76 Pʺ (or 286.1 Pʺ) less in circuit than the outer square.

51° 51' 14.31"

4

π

51° 52' 0.00" ± 2'

Theoretical Angle Petrie’s Measured Angle


Now 286. I Pʺ (286.4 Bʺ) is an important geometrical value of the Pyramid. It is also the

measurement of the displacement of the North to South Vertical Plane of the PyramIdʹs Passage

System Eastwards from the north to South Central Vertical Plane of the Pyramid.

The existing displacement of the Passage System, as defined, was measured by Professor Petrie

as follows :-

Petrieʹs stated possible range of error.

Entrance Door on North Face =287.0 Bʺ ±0.8 Bʺ.

Entrance Passage End in Natural Rock =286.4 Bʺ ±1.0 Bʺ.

Beginning of Ascending Passage =286.6 Bʺ ±0.8 Bʺ.

End of Ascending Passage =287.0 Bʺ ±1.5 Bʺ.

Plates XXIII, XXIV, and XXV (Figs. A, A1 and A2) show how the hollowed-in base feature, the

35th course axis, and the displacement of the Passage System are all geometrical functions of a

composite system of geometry featuring the solar year to the scale of 10 Pʺ to a day, and to the

scale of 100 Pʺ to a day. To convey the full significance of this to the reader it is necessary first

to define the precise value of the solar year intentionally identified with the Pyramidʹs base

square circuit.”

Davidson takes advantage of the Displacement Factor to define a twelve-sided Pyramid, which is

described in Paper 3. It shows that the Pyramid has three base circuits of slightly different

lengths, and theses circuits are defined by three different year lengths as follows:

Davidsonʹs Year Length (Days) (from para. 154)

Solar or Tropical Year 365.242465

Sidereal or Stellar Year 365.25647I536

Anomalistic or Orbital Year 365·259973I7

However, as shown by Paper 3, Coleʹs survey in 1925 and the Glen Dash Foundation Survey of

2015 show that the twelve-sided Pyramid concept is not viable.

Even with the concept of a four-sided Pyramid, there are still dimensions of about 286.1 Pʺ,

which need to be understood. For example, Rutherford points to the fact that the Grand Gallery

roof, according to Smyth, is 339.5 Bʺ and the vertical height of the Ascending Passage is 53 Bʺ.

The increase in height at the junction of the Ascending Passage and Grand gallery is 286.5 Bʺ or

286.2 Pʺ. He calls this the Rectification Factor, Vol II p 250.

The passage system is offset 287 Bʺ, 286.7 Pʺ, to the east of the central north-to-south vertical

axis.

Also, David Davidson, p172. Points out that:-


The levels of the Pyramid courses are as obtained by Petrie. The reader should note that the

geometrical considerations of Plates XXIII, XXIV, and XXV (Fig. A2) require that the special

apex Pyramid should be 364.27665 Pʺ =364.68 Bʺ high.

The Pyramidʹs geometrical height being 5813.01 Pʺ = 5819.40 Bʺ gives base of original apex

Pyramid, or top surface of the highest course of masonry at 5454.72 Bʺ above the base. This

agrees with the highest existing course, the 203rd course, at 545I.8 Bʺ, thus leaving 2.9 Bʺ for

subsidence of the highest course. Owing to the cumulative effect of the flat-arching of the

courses, from the centre of the base to the topmost course, as explained in ~~ 183 and 184, the

subsidence at the apex would not be more than this. The special apex Pyramid would not be a

single apex stone, but an apex Pyramid of finer (casing) limestone. The reader must not confuse

the apex Pyramid with the apex stone.

In chapter 3 of ʺPyramidologyʺ, Vol. II, Rutherford describes the Contraction and Expansion

Factors. The Contraction Factor is nearly 36 Bʺ which is the amount that the center of each

Pyramid side is reduced according to the twelve-sided Pyramid theory. Rutherfordʹs precise

dimension is 286.10216 divided by 8 = 35.76277 Pʺ. He argues that the circuit of each course is,

therefore, 286.1 Pʺ shorter than the intended length and so the Capstone will overhang each side

of the Pyramid by 35.76277 Pʺ. Rutherford calls this the Expansion factor.

The 286.1 Pʺ dimension can be accounted for in another way. Bear in mind that it is based on

Petrieʹs measurement of 287.0± 0.8 Bʺ or 286.7 Pʺ. In Paper 4, it is shown that the exterior

dimensions and angles of the Pyramid are based on the values π, 4, the Sacred Cubit of 24.83 Bʺ,

and 365.25, the number of days in a solar year rounded to the nearest quarter day. To Davidson,

the value 286.1 is the Displacement Factor based on Pʺ and 286.4 when based on Bʺ. The Figure

below shows how a value, close to 286.4 Bʺ, is interpreted in this new theory. Note that it is

actually closer to Petrieʹs measured value of 287 Bʺ. Note also that Tanα = 4/π and Y = 365.25.


In the Figure above, the dimensions show a value in black, which is the measured value, a value

in red, which is the theoretical value and an expression in blue, which is the theoretical equation

from which the dimension in red is calculated.

The lefthand Figure shows that the passage entrance is, according to Petrie (P35), 287±0.8 Bʺ

east of the vertical axis, which Davidson calculates is the Displacement Factor of 286.4 Bʺ.

However, it can be seen that if a right-angled triangle has a vertical height of 365.25 Bʺ and a

base angle 51° 51ʹ 14.3ʺ, which is Tan-1

(4/π), then its base length is 286.87 Bʺ, which is within

Petrieʹs range and closer than Davidson to Petrie’s measured value of 287 Bʺ.

In the righthand Figure above, the apex of the Pyramid is half the base length, 9069.165/2 ×

Tanα = 4534.58 × 4/π = 5773.61 Bʺ above the Pavement. Also, the average height of the top of

the 201st course is 5408.55 Bʺ. So the top of the 201

st course is 365.06 Bʺ below the apex of the

Pyramid. When the base angle, α is assumed to be 51° 51ʹ 14.3ʺ the base length of the triangle is

286.72 Bʺ which is within Petrieʹs range of 287±0.8 Bʺ for the passage offset.

These two triangles provide witnesses that the entrance to the Pyramid is offset 365.25/Tanα to

the east of its north-to-south vertical axis. It is, therefore, consistent with the exterior

measurements of the Pyramid, which also use the value 365.25. For example, the base length of

the Pyramid is 365.25 Sacred Cubits, which are determined to be 24.83 Bʺ, on average, by Sir

Isaac Newton. The use of Bʺ in the exterior of the Pyramid is also validated by these two

measurements and calculations.


The height of the roof of the Grand Gallery over the roof of the Ascending Passage is 286.5 Bʺ

according to Smyth and Rutherford. However, this is based on Smythʹs average height of 339.5

Bʺ, which, in turn, is based on a range of measurements of 11.6 Bʺ, from 334.4 to 346.0 Bʺ.

Most likely, this wide range is caused by the characteristics of Smythʹs self-designed measuring

apparatus, which required leveling in two axes, and also the ʺratchetingʺ of the roof stones.

If the vertical height of the Grand Gallery is based on Petrie’s average height of the corbels at its

south end, then the height is 235.34 Bʺ which is comparable to the height of the walls in the

Kingʹs Chamber, 235.2 Bʺ. (P46 and P, plate 13).

So the values of the Displacement Factor, etc., that Davidson and Rutherford arrive at can be

accounted for in terms that are consistent with other features of the Pyramid.

The Capstone

One of the major tenets of Pyramoidology is that the Capstone symbolizes Jesus. He is the head

of His People and His Church, and, when installed, the Capstone is the head of the Pyramid.

There are many verses in the Bible which refer to Jesus in a manner that points to the Pyramid as

follows:

Psalm 118:22 (KJV)

22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

Isaiah 28:16 (KJV)

16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried

stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

Matthew 21:42 (KJV)

42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders

rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lordʹs doing, and it is marvellous

in our eyes?

Mark 12:10 (KJV)

10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head

of the corner:

Luke 20:17 (KJV)

17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders

rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?


Acts 4:11 (KJV)

11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the

corner.

Ephesians 2:20 (KJV)

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the

chief corner stone;

1 Peter 2:6-7 (KJV)

6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect,

precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. 7

Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone

which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,

The above verses indicate that Jesus is the chief cornerstone, or the headstone of the corner, and

the stone which the builders rejected. The builders of the nation of Israel, who were the Pharisees

and Sadducees, thought that Jesus did not fit their concept of the head of their nation and rejected

Him.

The Bible verses quoted above refer to a stone that is the head of the corner, i.e., the chief stone

of which there can only be one. The photograph below shows how the four arris edges of the

Pyramid would come together to form an apex, which is also a corner, and yet they fall short of

this because some courses and the Capstone are missing.

The Capstone is called the Pyramidion, or Benben. In Hebrew, ʺBenʺ means ʺsonʺ, (Strongʹs

H1121) and ʺebenʺ, means ʺstoneʺ, (Strongʹs H68). Therefore, ʺBen-ebenʺ means son-stone.

Jesus is the Son of God and a specific cornerstone. Over the years, Ben-eben could have

morphed to Benben.


Top of the Pyramid Shows the 201st Course is Complete With Two Ruined Courses Above

As shown later in this paper, there is no evidence that the Capstone of the Pyramid was ever

installed, and the reason why is that the Capstone was not intended to be installed until later, and

the event that stimulates its installation has not yet occurred. Since the Capstone symbolizes

Jesus, then this event, at this time, can only be His second coming. It is shown in Paper 7 that the

Capstone is vertically in line with and covers, like an umbrella, the features in the Pyramid,

which symbolize resurrection and judgment, events for which Jesus is responsible.

The Symbolism of the Capstone

For the Capstone to symbolize Jesus, and also for the Casing Stones to symbolize the builders so

that the Pyramid aligns with the Bible narrative, the following criteria must be valid:

1. From the time that Adam originally sinned to the Crucifixion, Jesus did not head up His

people Israel on earth.

a. Therefore, the Capstone was not required to be installed, and it was not.

2. At His first coming Israel, and particularly the Pharisees rejected Jesus by crucifying

Him. However, that sacrifice opened up the path to forgiveness and had Israel asked for


that and accepted Jesus the Kingdom could have then begun. See Acts 3, especially 17-

26. The Capstone would have been added to the Pyramid, but that did not happen.

a. At that time, the Pyramid was just a little too big for the Capstone. The Pyramid

could have been made to fit with relatively minor changes by adjusting the Casing

Stones, which symbolized the builders, who are the Pharisees and, partly, Israel.

Partly because Israelites like Peter believed Jesus was the Son of God, but in Acts

3, he was talking to Israelites who did not believe that.

3. Since Jesus was rejected, it became necessary to wait for His second coming when he

would be King of Heaven on Earth. in Matthew 21:42-45 (KJV)

42

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders

rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lordʹs doing, and it is

marvellous in our eyes? 43

Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a

nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44

And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall,

it will grind him to powder. 45

And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he

spake of them.

Because of the rejection of Jesus by the Pharisees, the kingdom of God was to be taken

from them and given to another nation.

a. This was symbolized by the Casing being shaken off and removed by the

Caireans from the Pyramid thereby, requiring new Casing Stones to be added

later. This time is assumed to be after the second coming of Jesus. So it can be

seen that the old Casing Stones symbolize the builders who were the Pharisees.

The top of the 203rd

course is the current top of the Pyramid, and it is tempting to think that it

marks the base of the Capstone, but evidence shows that this is not the case. Since it is not the

Apex of the Great Pyramid, and since a complete understanding of the intentions of the Designer

is being sought, the task is to determine the form of the Pyramid between the top of the 203rd

course and its intended apex including the Capstone.

Paper 4 shows that the level of the top of the 203rd

course is significant in defining the overall

height of the Pyramid. The Ratio Clue, described in Paper 4, is part of this definition. If this

course did not stand out, by being the top remaining course, it is most unlikely that the Ratio

Clue would have been discovered, and the theoretical height would not be known either.


There is no evidence that the Capstone of the Pyramid was ever installed. The earliest record

relating to the Capstone comes from the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus around 60 BC. In

Bibliotheca Historica he describes the Great Pyramid as follows:

ʺFor the largest is in the form of a square and has a base length on each side of seven plethra

and a height of over six plethra; it also gradually tapers to the top, where each side is six cubits

long.

The entire construction is of hard stone, which is difficult to work but lasts forever; for though no

fewer than a thousand years have elapsed, as they say, to our lifetime, or, as some writers have

it, more than three thousand four hundred, the stones remain to this day still preserving their

original position and the entire structure undecayed.ʺ

The above was copied from chapter 63 of the translation available at Diodorus_Siculus/1C

The phrase ʺit also gradually tapers to the top, where each side is six cubits longʺ. ʺSix cubitsʺ

does not refer to the sloping arris edges, which are hundreds of cubits long, but indicates that

there was a six cubits square plateau instead. In turn, this implies that there was no Capstone.

This author is not aware of any visitor to the Pyramid who mentions seeing the Capstone, which

is indicative of the fact that it was never installed.

The history of the gradual reduction in the number of courses is shown by Colonel Howard

Vyse, who studied the Pyramid in 1837.

The following table was compiled from his book, ʺOperations Carried On At The Pyramids Of

Gizeh In 1837 Vol. II.ʺ.

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Diodorus_Siculus/1C*.html


Author Year Page

#

#

Courses

Platform

Dimensions

Notes

Diodorus 60 BC 184 6 Cubits (111ʺ) Casing intact

Bellonius 1553 191 250

Johannes Helfricus 1565 193 230 12 fathoms in circuit

Jean Palerme 1581 194 213 4 Paces QC 5 or 6 paces long

Prosper Alpinus 1591 196 125 10 paces

Baumgarten 1594 198 5 cubits Vyse ʺThis is obscureʺ

Sandys 1610 199 255 3 stones, 60 men

Pietro Della Valle 1616 202 210-250

M De Villamont 1618 203 215 15 sq feet

Greaves 1638-9 205 207-208 13.28 ft, 9 stones

M De Monconys 1647 214 208 Entrance on 16th step

M Thevenot 1655 215 208 16 ft 8ʺ

Melton 1661 217 206 16 ft 8ʺ Entrance on 16th step

M Lebrun 1674 222 210 16-17 ft Entrance on 16th step

M Maillet 1692 224 208

De Careri 1693 229 208 16 ft 8ʺ, 12 stones Entrance on 18th step

Lucas 1699 230 243 5 Stones, 2 wanting

Veryard 1701 232 206

Egmont 1709 234 206 6 + 6 stones wanting

Pere Sicard 1715 236 220 10 - 12 feet

Pococke 1743 244 212 9 stones + 2 wanting

M Fourmont 1755 251 207-208 Entrance on 16th step

Davison 1763 255 206 6 stones

M Denon 1799 265 208

Colonel Coutelle 1801 269 203 2 ruined tiers at top Entrance on 15th step

M Jomard 1801 274 203 2 ruined tiers at top

Dr. Clarke 1801 280 32 ft sq 9 stones

The data in the table is contradictory in places, and it was not possible to reconstruct a course by

course history. The best that can be done is to identify specific years and the difference in the

number of courses between them. In the Table above, data identified by yellow shading are

considered outliers and have been rejected from consideration, mainly because the total number

of courses differs significantly from the likely value at that time. Also, in these cases, the

dimensions of the platform at the top are either not defined or lie outside the range of the period

in which they were reported.


The stone courses of the Pyramid were unmoved until an earthquake loosened the casing stones,

and those near the top were probably cast off. Smyth claims an earthquake occurred in AD 908

and that the locals started to remove the remaining casing stones about AD 1000. Although

Smyth claims this earthquake was recorded, it does not appear in the Wiki List of historical

earthquakes but, the Crete earthquake in AD 1303 does, and the resulting tsunami devastated

Alexandria. the vintage news the-great-pyramid-of-giza-was-once-covered-in-highly-polished-

white-limestone-before-it-was-removed-to-build-mosques-and-fortresses/ says

After that, an amount of casing stone was carted away by Bahri Sultan An-Nasir Nasir-ad Din

al-Hasan, in 1356, to use as material for building mosques and fortress in nearby Cairo, the

capital and the largest city of modern-day Egypt. In addition, plenty more casing stones were

removed from the Great Pyramid by Muhammad Ali Pasha during the early 19th century and

reused as material for his Alabaster Mosque, also in Cairo.

Wikipedia Mosque-Madrassa_of_Sultan_Hassan provides details of where some of the casing

stones were used.

It is most likely that the 1303 Crete earthquake was the one that started to shake off the casing

stones, and this stimulated the local princes to purloin most of those that remained.

The analysis of the reduction in the number of courses begins with Diodorus. It is assumed that

he climbed up to the top of the Pyramid, sometime during his life between 90 BC and 30 BC, to

measure the sloping height and determine that the plateau was six cubits square. Is it possible to

climb a smooth face at 52°? It is a reasonable conclusion that the Capstone was missing at that

time since, according to Diodorus, there appeared to be no other damage, which would not be the

case if the Pyramidion had been removed. Therefore six cubits define the Base Length of the

Capstone at the Casing.

Although Diodorus was born in Sicily, he was a Greek historian, and it is assumed that he used

Greek cubits. There are two major versions of the Greek cubit, 18.23 Bʺ (kyrēnaikos pēchys) and

18.67 Bʺ (metrios pēchys) in length. In the absence of any data as to which cubit Diodorus used

the average of these two lengths, 18.45 B is used. Therefore the Base Length of the Capstone

would be approximately 111 Bʺ, and its approximate height would be that of a man, 71 Bʺ.

Greaves appears to agree with the use of the Greek cubit here since on page 208 of Vyseʹs book,

referenced in the Table above, he quotes Diodorusʹ measurement as 9 feet, which is 108ʺ.

The height of the Pyramid, above the Pavement, will be shown to be 5774 Bʺ, in round numbers.

The base of the Pyramidion will be 71Bʺ lower than this, which is 5703 Bʺ.

The following Figure shows course 160 and above. The courses above 203 and the Pyramidion,

which is shaded blue, are a reconstruction of the probably intended courses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historical_earthquakeshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_historical_earthquakeshttps://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/09/06/the-great-pyramid-of-giza-was-once-covered-in-highly-polished-white-limestone-before-it-was-removed-to-build-mosques-and-fortresses/https://www.thevintagenews.com/2016/09/06/the-great-pyramid-of-giza-was-once-covered-in-highly-polished-white-limestone-before-it-was-removed-to-build-mosques-and-fortresses/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosque-Madrassa_of_Sultan_Hassan


Top of the Pyramid Showing How Courses Are Arranged in Bands of Decreasing Height

There are two groups of the courses at this height of the Pyramid, which are banded in groups of

16. In general, the rule is that within these bands, a course is less thick than the one upon which

it sits. However, this is not always the case as some courses are slightly thicker than the one on

which they sit but not more than an inch. When the band is complete, the next course is thicker,

by several inches, and then they diminish again to form a new band. There are 16 banded courses

from 164 to 179, for a total of 332.0 Bʺ. There are16 banded courses from 180 to 195 for a total

of 345.6 Bʺ. The average of these two 16 course bands is 338.8 Bʺ. Courses 196 to 199 form an

uncharacteristic, at this height, four-course band.

From Petrieʹs Plate 8, the top of the 199th

course is, on average, 5363.6 Bʺ above the pavement.

The four existing courses above the 199th

diminish in height, indicating that a new band is being

formed. So adding 16 courses on top of the 199th, at an average of 338.8 Bʺ, would put the top

of the 215th

course at 5702.4 Bʺ, which is 0.6 Bʺ lower than the estimate. Adding the Pyramidion

makes a total of 216 courses, which is a reasonable number since 216 = 6 × 6 × 6, or 63 because,

as shown later, the height of the Pyramid is calculated using third-order equations. The primary

factors of 215 are 5, and 43. The number 43 occurs several times throughout these papers in a

significant manner.

215

166

165

164

163

162

161

160

190

189

188

187

186

185

184

183

182

181

180

179

178

177

176

175

174

173

172

171

170

169

168

167

203

202

201

200

199

198

197

196

195

194

193

192

191

166

165

164

163

162

161

160

190

189

188

187

186

185

184

183

182

181

180

179

178

177

176

175

174

173

172

171

170

169

168

167

203

202

201

200

199

198

197

196

195

194

193

192

191

213

212

211

210

209

208

207

205

204

206

213

212

211

210

209

208

207

205

204

206

214

216


The Figure below shows a reconstruction of the probably intended courses at the Head of the

Great Pyramid based on Vyseʹs historical records in the Table above.

Possible Reconstruction of the Missing Courses at the Top of the Great Pyramid

From the Table above, the first data point is based on Diodorusʹ 6 cubit plateau that is the base of

the Pyramidion at 5703 Bʺ above the Pavement. The Pyramidion is assumed to be designed to be

installed at this level and has a base length of 111 Bʺ and a height of 71 Bʺ.

The next data point is from Greaves in 1638, which is reconstructed at the top of course 209,

which is 5579 Bʺ above the Pavement. It is assumed that the casing stones and courses above this

height were all shaken loose or shaken off the Pyramid by the 1303 earthquake. The

reconstruction above uses Petrieʹs data (P25-26). He reports that the inside bottom edge of the

Casing stones of the first course were set back 108 Bʺ from the edge of the Casing, at the center

of the sides of the Pyramid. At the top of course 201, he reports that it resembles a rectangle

rather than a square, but the reconstruction assumes that it is supposed to be square and averages

Petrieʹs measurements for the four sides, for a length of 436 Bʺ. The sloping red lines in the


Figure above pass through the bottom inside edges of the Casing stones of each course, so that it

is possible to easily measure the theoretical length of the core stones of each course.

It can be seen at the ʺGreavesʺ level that the reconstruction shows a core length of 167 Bʺ more

than his measurement of 13.28 ft., or 159 Bʺ. The reason for this 8 Bʺ difference is not known.

Perhaps Greaves reported the shortest edge of the rectangular core instead of the average.

However, course 208 is a good fit for all the surveyors from Monconys to Denon, who reported a

plateau of 16 ft. 8ʺ, which is 200 Bʺ, at the top of course 208. The reconstruction Figure above

shows a precise match between the historical data and theoretical data at this point. Based on this

data, it is assumed that the height was reduced by two courses between 1647 and 1799.

The Table shows that the Pyramid decreased in height from course 206 to course 201, with a few

stones for courses 202 and 203 between the years 1799 and 1801. The Pyramid remained at this

height until Petrie surveyed it in 1881.

A granite capstone would weigh about 12 tons, at a density of 162 lb/ft3.

Pyramidions or Capstones at the Egyptian Museum (Bodsworth)

In summary, it can be seen that there is no data to support that the Capstone was ever installed.

Had it been its intended length is estimated to be 111 Bʺ, its height 71 Bʺ, and its weight, if made

of granite, would be 12 tons. These dimensions are assumed to be close to the intent of the


Designer. A couple of Capstones, or Pyramidions, are shown at the Egyptian Museum in the

Figure above. Though these appear to be slightly smaller than estimated above, it should be

remembered that the Capstone under discussion was intended to fit the largest Pyramid ever

built.

If the Capstone had been installed when the Pyramid was built, how was it removed by the time

Diodorus measured the plateau at the top? One reason is that it could have been dislodged by a

massive earthquake, which would also have destroyed much of the Casing. This destruction was

not evident to Diodorus since he reports that ʺ the stones remain to this day still preserving their

original position and the entire structure undecayed. ʺ

A second reason considers that the Capstone may have been manually removed later. The only

likely reason why it would have been removed is that it was valuable, and the thieves would not

have cared about damaging the Pyramid. An operation like this would have been a difficult task

without the aid of the original working platforms and other construction tools. Damage below the

Capstone, caused by the removal, would have been evident, but again Diodorusʹ reports no such

damage.

So it is concluded that the Capstone was not fitted during construction, which validates

criteria 1, repeated below:

1. From the time that Adam originally sinned to the Crucifixion, Jesus did not head up His

people Israel on earth.

a. Therefore, the Capstone was not required to be installed, and it was not.

So why would the Capstone have been rejected by the builders? It would have been built in

Heaven with the intent of it being let down like Jesusʹ at His second coming. Acts 1:9-11 (KJV)

9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud

received him out of their sight. 10

And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by

them in white apparel; 11

Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus,

which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go

into heaven.

It is assumed that the measurement system used by the Pyramid builder was intended to be the

same as used in Heaven, but the human version could easily have become corrupted. That would

symbolize how man is incapable of preserving that which God has given him without corrupting

it and his lack of understanding about Jesus, i.e., the Capstone.


An investigation was carried out, and it was determined that the various base units of Godʹs

measurement system can be discerned in the universe. The results of this investigation will be

presented in Paper 10, which, at this time, is unfinished.

The investigation reconstructed Godʹs values of six of the seven base units defined by the

measurement system as described in Wikipedia: Metric System . For length, it is determined that

there are 39.3899 God units per meter; and

there are 39.3701 Bʺ per meter;

So each of Godʹs units is 0.9995 shorter than 1 Bʺ, an increase of +0.05% in the human version.

It is easy to see that corruption of this magnitude could have crept into the measurement system

over time. For every 2000 God units required by the Pyramid plans, the builders would have

built 2000 Bʺ, which is 2001 God units. The 9069 unit base length would have been at least 4.5

God units longer than required. At a constant base angle, each course would be too long by the

same amount, including the plateau on which the Capstone was to sit. If the Capstone, course

216, had been set on this plateau, there would have been a ledge of about 2.25 God units between

its base and the top of course 215, as shown in the Figure below. The symbolism would be that

Jesus does not cover all of His Chruch, which is unthinkable. It also symbolizes that the builders

had added to Godʹs law, which is true, Matthew 23:4 (KJV)

4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on menʹs shoulders; but

they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

Ledge Around Capstone (Jesus) Caused By the Pyramid Builders (Pharisees)

The photograph below shows that over the millennia, the Mokattam casing stones have lost their

whiteness and need to be refinished. Had the Pharisees not rejected Jesus, he would have become

the king. The casing stones would have been trimmed to the correct size and, thereby, restored to

their pristine whiteness. Thus, the second of the criteria above is met.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_system


2. At His first coming Israel, and particularly the Pharisees rejected Jesus by crucifying

Him. However, that sacrifice opened up the path to forgiveness, and had Israel asked for

that, and accepted Jesus, the Kingdom could have then begun. See Acts 3, especially 17-

26. The Capstone would have been added to the Pyramid, but that did not happen.

a. At that time, the Pyramid was just a little too big for the Capstone. However, it

could have been made to fit with relatively minor changes by adjusting the Casing

Stones, which symbolized the builders, who are the Pharisees and, partly, Israel.

Partly because Israelites like Peter believed Jesus was the Son of God, but in Acts

3, he was talking to Israelites who did not believe that.

Original Casing Stone From the Great Pyramid

Since part of Israel rejected Jesus and did not repent of that act, then the kingdom of heaven was

taken from them. Symbolically they were shaken off or removed from the Pyramid in the 1303

Crete earthquake. Rutherford thinks that the Pyramid will be rebuilt at some time during the

Millenium, and that will be an opportune time to replace the missing Casing stones with new

ones on which the Capstone will fit precisely. Perhaps a new technology might make an

everlasting Casing possible. The new Casing Stones will symbolize the nation bringing forth the

fruits thereof. The Capstone will be let down from Heaven, symbolizing both Jesus and the

manner in which he will return. The third criteria will, therefore, have been met.


4. Since Jesus was rejected, it became necessary to wait for His second coming when he

would be King of Heaven on Earth. in Matthew 21:42-45 (KJV)

42

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders

rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lordʹs doing, and it is

marvellous in our eyes? 43

Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a

nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44

And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall,

it will grind him to powder. 45

And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he

spake of them.

Because of the rejection of Jesus by the Pharisees, the kingdom of God was to be taken

from them and given to another nation.

a. This was symbolized by the Casing being shaken off and removed by the

Caireans from the Pyramid thereby, requiring new Casing Stones to be added

later. This time is assumed to be after the second coming of Jesus. So it can be

seen that the old Casing Stones symbolize the builders who were the Pharisees.

Bearings From the Pyramid

Another tenet is that rhumb line bearing drawn on a map from the center of the Pyramid, at an

angle of east minus the angle of the Pyramidʹs sloping passages, passes through Bethlehem. The

bearing is 63° 41ʹ 50ʺ or 63.6973 °. Calculators on the Movable Type Scripts website are used to

evaluate this tenet.

Below are two views of the route that shows it comes as close as 225 meters to ʺManger Squareʺ

in Bethlehem, based on the scale at the bottom. There werenʹt any National Heritage agents back

then who could place a bronze plaque on the stable to positively identify it, saying ʺJesus was

born hereʺ so this is a reasonable claim. However, it is just one witness, and this study requires

two.

https://www.movable-type.co.uk/scripts/latlong.html


Recognizing that the nativity begins the New Testament, a search was carried out to see if there

was another witness, and a second one was found. If we go round the compass precisely 270°

and navigate along a great circle route with an initial bearing of north minus the theoretical

passage angle, i.e., 333° 41ʹ 50ʺ or 333.6973 °, we will come to the island of Patmos. Here the

apostle John received the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which is the end of the New Testament.

Shown below is the overall route, and the journey is mostly over the sea. For this journey, a boat

or airplane would be used, and navigation would be along a great circle route rather than a rhumb

line as one would follow on land.


The route comes within 600 m of the ʺCave of the Apocalypseʺ as shown in the close-up view

below:


The Pyramidʹs location permits the drawing of two bearings, precisely ¾ of a circle apart,

such that one passes through Bethlehem and the other through Patmos, symbolizing the

beginning and end of the New Testament. This location was chosen 2700 years in advance

of the New Testament, and so it is prophetic and validates the original tenet. Quite possibly,

the need to define these bearings helped define the location of the Pyramid.

Documents

Paper 3. Pyramidology M. J. Cooper Version 2.0 (October 21, 2019) · 2019. 10. 3. · The popularity of pyramidology has waxed and waned over the years, depending upon what was being