Tags
Abydos, Alan Dash, All things Woy, Amun, ancient Egypt, Anubis, Australia, basalt chisel, cartouche, Encyclopedia Of Dubious Archaeology, epithets, fraud, Günter Dreyer, Geb, Gosford, hieroglyphs, hoax, Kariong, Kenneth Feder, Khufu, National Parks and Wildlife Service, nefer, Nefer-Djeseb, Nefer-Ti-Ru, NPWS, obelisk, Old Kingdom, proto-Egyptian, Ray Johnson, Re-Horakthy, Rex Gilroy, Set, Son of Re, titles, Tomb Uj, translation
It’s time to put this issue to rest. This is my fourth and final installment in the hoax of the Gosford Glyphs. I suppose there’s always the chance I’ll return to the story at some future point, should more information surface that is worth comment. But for now I’d like to close our examination of the Gosford hoax with a review of modern investigations of the site and what relevant experts and witnesses have to say on the matter. Most of the material in Part 4 comes from Steve S., author of the blog All things Woy, whose investigative experience in the Gosford matter is the most throrough and rational I’ve encountered.
To begin, how far back can the Gosford glyphs really be tracked? When were they first brought to public attention? The site of the glyphs is somewhat remote, but not so much that one would expect them to have remained hidden for 4,500 years. That is, in fact, not what happened. Although it’s possible some of the glyphs may have been carved as early as the 1960s by local students, most of the carving seems to have begun in the early 1970s.
The first person to document the site was a local surveyor, now retired, named Alan Dash (Source). Dash was surveying a water easement in the early 1970s when he observed a man walking away from the Gosford site and heading toward a nearby abandoned cabin. Dash investigated the site and noticed some hieroglyphs carved along the western wall of sandstone, although at the time nothing was carved into the eastern wall.
Several months later Dash returned with a coworker to explore the site again, and noticed carvings on the eastern wall. About a year later more glyphs had been added, this time about 160 feet away from the original etchings.
The cabin to which Dash observed the man heading was frequently used by transients, and the man’s identity was never learned. The cabin was destroyed by brushfires in 1979, but this doesn’t seem to have stopped the carving activities. Early observers and photographers could chart the development of the glyphs, to a point, and the changes and additions are quite obvious. The photo below, from 1983, shows freshly cut glyphs:
- Gosford Glyphs: Courtesy of All things Woy
Several of the most prominent glyphs were apparently some of the last added, and include the cartouches (see Part 3). Also among these additions was the large figure of the god Anubis. The photo below was taken in 1983:
- Gosford Glyphs: Courtesy of All things Woy
Take note of the figure’s ears and compare them to the ears of the same figure in this photo from 2007:
- Gosford Glyphs: Courtesy of All things Woy
The fresh quality of the cutting is painfully obvious in the first photo. When the details to the ears were added is not known, but one can see the wear to the carving in the intervening 20-plus years. This is actually significant. We are supposed to believe that these glyphs were carved in the reign of King Khufu, well over 4,000 years ago. Yet in the vicinity are authentic Aboriginal petroglyphs that are dated to about 250 years ago. These authentic petroglyphs are barely discernible today and most believe they will be entirely gone within 200 years, because of the poor quality of the sandstone. It is the same stone into which the “Egyptian hieroglyphs” were carved, but we are told by the Gosford promoters that they really do date to the third millennium BCE.
These promoters will go to great lengths to bolster their claims. Probably the staunchest supporter today is a man named Hans Dieter von Senff. I mentioned him briefly in Part 2. I am not an Australian nor have I ever been to that country, but I have a strong feeling that von Senff has taken it upon himself to pick up where Ray Johnson left off (recall that Johnson died some years ago). I’ve personally debated von Senff on the Gosford issue in an internet forum to which I belong, and while von Senff is an intelligent and articulate man, I was not left impressed.
Von Senff claims to have found a basalt chisel dating to the original carving of the glyphs (in von Senff’s position, this means 2500 BCE). He insists the chisel contains geological inclusions not native to Australia, the implication being the Egyptian sailors carried it with them from their distant desert homeland. There’s a photo of the chisel in von Senff’s paper, “Ancient Egyptians in Australia. The Kariong Glyphs, a Proto-Egyptian script deciphered” (Page 16), which can be downloaded from the internet as a PDF.
This brings up concerns of removing a possible artifact from government land—remember that Gosford is under the protection of the National Parks and Wildlife Service. While such an act is highly unethical, we needn’t worry. Not surprisingly, there isn’t much to this chisel. The closest access to Gosford is Bambara Road, and in past roadwork the Gosford City Council used countless chunks of basalt identical to von Senff’s chisel as fill. Basalt is plentiful in this area.
A bit of slight of hand, yes, but this is what hoaxers will resort to in desperation.
As I mentioned earlier, one of the Gosford promoters’ chief complaints is that no one credible has been to the site or observed the glyphs to render an expert opinion. Bear in mind that neither Ray Johnson nor Rex Gilroy, nor anyone else among the promoters, are themselves qualified in Egyptology or Egyptian hieroglyphs to render an informed opinion. But if you recall, in Part 1 I included quotes from three different Egyptologists who have seen photos of the glyphs, and all three are in agreement that the site is a hoax. What more need be asked of real experts?
Well, there is more. Numerous witnesses and experts of various fields also agree the site is a hoax. Here is a summary of some of them, together with our Egyptologists:
• 1983: David Lambert, Rock Art Conservator of the Cultural Heritage Division of the NPWS
• 1983: Professor Nageeb Kanawati, Department of Egyptology at Macquarie University, Sydney
• 2000: Australian Egyptologist Dr. Gregory Gilbert
• 2003: David Coltheart in Archaeological Diggings, Vol 10 No 5 Oct/Nov 2003 Issue No 58
• 2012: Dr. Ray Johnson, Egyptologist, University of Chicago, director of the Epigraphic Survey in Luxor, Egypt
I hate to beat a dead horse but please do remember that the above Dr. Johnson, a real Egyptologist, must not be confused with the late Australian by the same name.
Some of this is also summarized in a letter penned by Gosford Area Ranger Laurie Pasco (see here), dated May 17, 2011. The effect of this letter is that the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service is officially on record as stating that the Gosford glyphs are a hoax.
And, finally, there is Kenneth Feder’s book Encyclopedia Of Dubious Archaeology: From Atlantis To The Walam Olum. Feder covers the Gosford site and provides a succinct and convincing conclusion that the site is a hoax. Feder himself comments that the glyphs “are a trasnparent fraud” (2010: 121).
I hope that in the four parts of this article, I have been able to demonstrate the obvious nature of the Gosford hoax. Numerous experts have evaluated the glyphs and have judged them to be fake. I should hope the average amateur historian could come to the same conclusion in a few seconds’ time. For that matter, the average layperson ought to be able to do so. The nature of the Gosford site is absurd on the face of it and stretches logic beyond its limits, but this has never thwarted its ardent supporters from insisting they’re real.
Still, I think we can all agree, no matter how ardent the supporters are, they remain wrong. No amount of zeal can change reality.
Who carved the glyphs? No one seems to know. In all likelihood more than one person is responsible. Why did the original hoaxer(s) do this? The answer to that is even more elusive. Whoever he or they are, I have a feeling he or they are having a great laugh.
This brings it to a close, then. Is there any more to be said? About Gosford, I don’t think so. Yet recently I encountered a fellow on the Net who claims to have found early Sumerian cuneiform inscriptions near Cairns. He insists he was able to translate them, yet he refuses to release his translations or drawings or photos of the inscriptions. And there’s always Rex Gilroy’s yarns about Gympie Pyramid, so all in all there’s no shortage of fringe fun to address Down Under.
But this is enough for now.
My special thanks to Steve S. of All things Woy for allowing me to use his photos and to draw on his own investigative research.
As always, thanks for reading.
——————————————————–
Feder. Kennth L. Encyclopedia Of Dubious Archaeology: From Atlantis To The Walam Olum. 2010.
is von Senff his real name? when you say in German: ‘er redet senf…’ that is slang for ‘he is telling lies’… or maybe one of his sncestors was known to be a great liar too… and given this name…
I honestly don’t know but I’ve wondered the same thing. I know he is elderly, and he has a Facebook page on which he says he has a doctorate in Germanics, whatever “Germanics” is supposed to be. I’ve dealt with a lot of fringe adherents through the years and I’ve found plenty of them to be patently misleading if not plain dishonest, but I don’t know what the deal is with von Senff. It’s what he always goes by.
I wouldn’t call him dishonest… with knowledge of germanics he must know he’s lying…
and this is australia… the man isn’t really hurting anyone… always nice with a tall tail 
No, you’re right, he isn’t hurting anyone. I guess fringe leanings are just a pet peeve of mine. I don’t like ancient history being turned into a comic book, so I let it get under my skin too easily.
me neither… this site proves how long these kind of things hang around for… if you can’t find something you can believe in, then you have to make it up… :-9
nice job mate ! , beware onslaught of loonies coming
Hey, Artemis. Thanks for dropping by. I probably wouldn’t have been able to write this piece had it not been for your assistance. Most comments have been pretty decent so far but there is one guy insisting the glyphs at Gosford are not even what’s important…and that something big is about to happen there. Of course he refuses to divulge any information and states only that he plans to include a “DNA scientist of world repute to assist” in new investigations. I mean, what the hell is it with Gosford? It seems to be a giant magnet drawing in all the crazies!
Must have found an alien dinosaur bone eh ? sounds like Hans ….
Google Gosford UFO
I dunno why they all come here , too many retired hippies I guess
cheers
Oh, man, you’ve got to be kidding. I did like you said and couldn’t believe what I saw. I had no idea Gosford was also a UFO hotbed. So maybe it was aliens who carved the glyphs. After all, wasn’t it aliens who founded our civilization and taught ancient humans everything they needed to know? That would include writing, you know. So maybe they’ve found an alien embedded in the rock behind the hieroglyphs, so a DNA scientist will be needed to study it.
Do hippies ever retire? I didn’t know it was an Australian thing, too. Maybe drug-addled hippies were enslaved by the aliens and forced to carve the glyphs. Gees.
“If you can read the Palermo Stone you can read the KARIONG Glyphs”
Dear kmt_sesh.
Just to update you on the Kariong glyphs, which you detest, because you cannot decipher them. Having sent you a private message some times ago, re your quest about the Palermo Stone, in order to help you. As you have not answered, I guess you deciphered them yourself.
Just wanted to let you know, that the Kariong Gyphs in Australia are the same glyphs as used in the Palermo Stone. Hence if you can transliterate the Kariong glyphs, you can read and transliterate the proto-egyptian Glyphs of the Palermo stone and vice versa. .As I indicated to you in the above message to you, I started with some transliteration of Pharaoh Den.
Have since transliterated the Cairo C fragment of the Palermo stone, which, as you know, is badly abraded. (had to use up to 500% magnification) to be sure of the details, however, a close investigation of Register 1, showed two interesting deviations to what I expected.
One partly destroyed Glyph was identified by me as a female ruler, which was confirmed in Register two and five.
Part 2 was, what appears to be a reference to a Syrian Ruler.Half of the Glypht is destroyed.
The transliteration concerns the coming of age of her son and the burial of her husband..The problem so far is in the translation, but when I have recovered from
my stay in Hospital, it will only be a few days to finish it. (Incidently, in Australia it is custom to be tested for Alzheimer’s during an Emergency Hospital stay, and as I knew, I never suffered from that dreadful condition, hence Woy Woy Steve, has again been proven to be careless with the truth, when he invents his facts and inserts superlatives,’when he described me as “Documented Alzheimer “, to gain the publics attention.)
You may also be interested to know thet the State Minister Robyn Parker has acknowledged in her letter of the 11th.August 2012, that the Kariong glyphs, are in fact, Egyptian Glyphs, thereby destroying the claim by Professor Nageeb Kanawati, that these glyphs are mere “GRAFITI”. However, I acknowledge, this falls far short of
of acknowledging the glyphs as being a modern construct.
I maintain that these are ancient glyphs, how else could I read them and the Palermo stone. I remind those in their Ivory towers, whether in Egypt, U.S.A, G.B. or Australia, that only by sharing newly discovered knowledge, only then can it be achieved that the historical gatepost is shifted.
However, I treat your commentary about me from the Ivory Tower with utter disdain, because I am no fringe scientist, as you pretend me to be, but my research is strictly based on science and research, otherwise I would not source every bit of information. You may, if you care reply privately to this update about Kariong.
dr.hansvonsenff@hotmail.com
Hans-Dieter von Senff, Ph.D.
Hello, Hans-Dieter
If nothing else I’m glad you posted on my blog so that I might apologize for not having responded to the private message you sent me. I did read it but then went on to other things, and forgot. As it happens, however, even before you sent me the message a member of that forum sent me more than sufficient research material on the Palermo Stone. I was in no further need of assistance.
As far as translations go, I prefer to do my own. In my request on the forum for published translations, what I sought were translations from experienced and respected professional Egyptologists so that I might compare my translation results with theirs. I was not interested in trying to translate the entire monument, anyway, but only small portions of Dynasty 4. I am not a professional Egyptologist or linguist, but I feel more comfortable if I can compare my own work with such a person. I’ve been studying hieroglyphs for around fifteen years now, so no more assistance was required. I thank you for the offer, in any case.
If you could see things from my perspective, you might understand my hesitancy in recruiting you, however. You refer to the glyphs on the Palermo Stone as “proto-egyptian,” and yet that is not true. The Palermo Stone dates to late Dynasty 5. By that point in time (c. 2400 BCE) Egyptian hieroglyphs were already more or less fixed in orthography and form. “Proto-egyptian” defines a style of hieroglyphs dating to late prehistory through the early stages of the Early Dynastic Period, so that style was already archaic and outmoded even by late Dynasty 5. The glyphs on the Palermo Stone certainly are not “proto-egyptian.”
I am not certain why you should endeavor to translate the Palermo Stone, unless it is for your own practice. The monument (including all known pieces) was deciphered a long time ago.
I see you took note (and offense) at my use of the term “fringe.” I know it comes across harshly, but if you believe that ancient Egyptians sailed to Australia and left recorded monuments there, you do in fact, and without argument, fall into the fringe camp. This merely means your beliefs fall outside the normal parameters of orthodox research, and that would certainly include a belief that Egyptians sailed to Australia and left recorded monuments. It’s no different from the fringe stance where Egyptians sailed to Mesoamerica and seeded the cultures of the Olmecs, Maya, Aztecs, and others, which we know did not happen.
My four-part blog article on the Gosford Glyphs says enough, I believe. It is a collation of evidence gathered by others, including Australians, and summarized and critiqued by myself. I stand by my conclusions, and I do so with complete confidence. I state in absolute terms that the Gosford Glyphs are a clumsy and obvious hoax. I think you know you and I will never come to an understanding on this, nor shall one sway the other, so I’m not sure why you’re contacting me. You’re free to do so but I don’t know what you’re hoping to achieve by it.
Hi Kmt_sesh
I’m still enjoying your blog enormously. Please keep up the excellent breadth and depth of your investigations.
You and other followers of the Gosford / Kariong glyph issue who have made it as far as No. 4 may want to see a document recently posted by Hans dieter von Senff at:
http://www.valeriebarrow.com/upload/transliteration-kariong-glyphs.pdf
It is HdvS’s transliteration document for the glyphs and explains why his own translation differs and is presumably better / sharper than that of the late Ray Johnson, who is supposed to have been one of the few people conversant with the early proto-glyphs.
You may enjoy the bottom of page 3, where you [I assume its you] are referred to as ‘a certain Museum director from Chicago’. This may be just the document to have in your back pocket when you march into the boss’s office asking for that raise. Get it and then fire the guy!
cheers
Denis
http://www.secretvisitors.wordpress.com/
[now showing - the latest in Kariong glyph videos]
Great to hear from you again, Denis. Thanks for the link to Hans-Dieter’s PDF. He and I first bumped heads on an internet forum where he tried to defend the Gosford hoax, and he presented the same paper there—minus the recent additions you noted. Goodness, that’s really something. I’ve been promoted to “director” and no one bothered to tell me? I must have missed the memo.
Hans-Dieter also misrepresented the inquiry I presented on another forum, probably because he was upset I did not accept his invitation to do some translation work for me. Thanks, but no.
I am familiar with the rest of Hans-Dieter’s paper. He won no support on the forum where he argued in favor of Gosford, but I’m sure he’s one of those who will never let it go, no matter how many different ways he’s been flatly disproved.
I don’t care if Hans-Dieter tries to challenge me in debate, nor do I even care that he seems to have chosen me as his nemesis, but I do not like to be misrepresented. I am of a mind now to right an addendum to my original Gosford entires, both to set the record straight and to show the flaws in his approach. His paper contains no genuine transliteration work and the hieroglyphic renderings are botched every which way, so it might be fun.
I honestly don’t know if Hans-Dieter believes in the Gosford glyphs but I suppose he does. That’s his right. It is not his right, however, to misrepresent evidence and pass off fallacy as fact, nor is it his right to misrepresent those who stand against him.
Hans-Dieter, if you happen to be lurking here still and are reading this, you might have bothered to check the “About Me” section of my blog. No, I do not give out my full name, but there are rational and understandable reasons for not doing so. In any case you would’ve learned enough about me to avoid the comical blunders you added about me in your “paper.” Take care to hone your research before you write.
wow you actually have no idea.
How many local Aborigines have you talked to?
Hello, Yomangi.
I’ve spoken with precisely zero Aborigines. Why would that matter? The hoax did not start with, nor is it likely being perpetuated by, Aborigines. As has been established, the “glyphs” cannot be dated to any earlier than the 1960s (and even that far back is suspect) and they do not say anything. Anyone educated in or familiar with ancient Egypt studies and the scripts used by that civilization, knows immediately that Gosford is a hoax. Several Egyptologists have viewed photos of the glyphs, and all agree they’re a hoax.
It’s that simple. No amount of desperate hopes to the contrary will ever change that basic fact.
Yomangi.
Of couse he wouldn’t. You seen what the American’s did with every allien civilisation from their own (the Indian’s)to Cambodia. This is encapsuled by President or was it V.P. Johnson and his infamous statement. “Bomb them back into the Stone age.
The point I am making is, that back in the early sixties, I read in Newcastle Libraries a Book, that described the arrival of the two brothers and how one of them was bitten by a snake. Not many details were given in the early 19th century book, but it was virtually word for word as told by your Elders in and around Kariong. Even Jimmy Little, the singer, told me that tale in Coomandooc, S.A.
However, the reason why I am commenting on this, is as follows.
When the British were mapping Broken Bay and beyond, they sent
their workers (Marines) out to Mount Penang to establish there the Lyre Trigonometric Station, the trail of which led within metres to the Burial site. As Britain had formerly established the “Uninhabited”, or to the Koree’s known as “Terra Nullum” claim
in order to legally deprive the aborigines of their land, like in the great U.S. of A., these glyphs would have come as a great surprise, as the aborigines then, where still hostile to white man, and could have used this place as a perfect ambush point. Hence my suggestion ist, that the only 1840-1860 reference to the Glyphs are to be found in the Royal Archives or in the Admirality Reports of the Royal Navy in London, because they could to easily blow the claim of “Terra nullum” out of the water.
As to the claim by the so-called expert kmetesh. mayby, just maybe he should Google Newcastle Morning Herald, 20th.Oct. 2012, p.5 and read the latest update on the new chamber found, only 3 metres beside the glyph engraved East Wall. No white man has the knowledge,
how to drag the Roofplate (up to 200 tons heavy,) into place.
Neither did the Aborigines, because they had no use for it in such a god forsaken place.
Knowing the jealousy among learned Egyptologist, it is no wonder, that, what they can’t read, is graffiti to them. And all these hoaxters, especially kmtsesh and his ilk, make these pronouncements
never having investigated the site.
Yomangie, don’t worry, the truth will be out, sooner or later… and the truth will set you free, because the chambers and the glyphs are real, even if hoaxters claim, they are not.
Does it surprise anyone, that all the Hoaxters, including kmtsesh,
never comment on the underground chambeers or the huge above ground chamber at Kariong.
The truth has been out for forty-some years, Hans-Dieter. No one with the requisite training and education takes Gosford seriously. I myself am not an expert, as I’ve plainly stated numerous times despite your steadfast desire to misrepresent me, and yet several authentic experts (Egyptologists) have reviewed the Gosford situation and all concur it is a hoax. You can’t seem to get past that. You yourself are not an expert, and you’ve conducted no real translation despite your efforts because no translation is possible for a hodge-podge of carelessly scratched glyphs that say nothing. Numerous things about the PDF you’ve posted on the internet bear out your lack of familiarity with hieroglyphs and with how they’re transliterated and translated. Anyone with proper training in hieroglyphs can and will see this after a few seconds of perusing your paper, so cease ridiculing proper and legitimate historical research and the people who conduct it—and commit yourself to credible and serious research so you, too, can see the errors of your ways.
I can say this much with confidence because I have acquired formal training in translating hieroglyphs. I can state categorically, just as real Egyptologists have done, that the Gosford glyphs say nothing and that the Gosford glyphs are a hoax. There is no evidence for them prior to the 1960s or 1970s. It’s telling that anthropologists had been through that area in the nineteenth century in a survey for authentic aboriginal petroglyphs, and made no comment about anything at the Gosford site. There was nothing to see.
I’m familiar with the piece in the Newcastle Morning Herald and it bears no comment because it’s merely an addition to the overall hoax.
Trust me, neither real historians nor we amateur historians are jealous. At most we’re annoyed…annoyed that such effort is put into keeping this catatonic hoax alive. It is not taken seriously, nor will it ever. It detracts from the legitimate history and rich heritage of Australia.
You, Yomangi, and others who perpetuate the Gosford glyphs are going to be waiting the rest of your lives, as will those who follow you in this misguided quest, because nothing will ever come of Gosford and related Australian sites. Of that I can absolutely and fully assure you.
This is not an ideal format for debate, Hans-Dieter. I suggest you return to Unexplained-Mysteries, where we can have it out in full. I know you gave up your attempts at the UM forum, but that’s a better place for this dialog. You can feel free to challenge my own blog article on Gosford point by point, which would lend you more credibility than avoiding the substantive points of my argument. I’ve noticed, in fact, that those who disagree with my four-part article really do not try to address the points I’ve made, but respond with only nebulous complaints and generalities. I sense a general unease among your group with addressing specific evidentiary challenges.
My apologies for the negative tone of this reply, but I’m left numb by the absence of critical thinking presented by so many people.