 Back in the 1990s and 2000s Robert Baval was a shining beacon of hope as he demonstrated that the history of Egypt was in that of a falsified one, a lost history that has encompassed many layers of separation from the original mother culture of the region. In notes and letters Robert's research reached new heights, showing that the history of what we know was there to be challenged and simply by looking can answers to the past be realized in a sensible and obvious kind of way. We recently came across exchanges that Robert had during this time of his research and we are going to bring this to you in a presentation that we hope you will enjoy so wait till you hear this. Ever heard about the so-called Dixon relics? In September 1827 a British engineer by the name of Wayman Dixon discovered the openings of two shafts on the south and north walls of the Queen's chamber and in the horizontal section of the shafts that leads into the chamber he found three small relics, a small bronze hook, a portion of cedar like wood and a granite ball. The relics were taken to England by John Dixon Wayman's older brother and mailed to the astronomer royal of Scotland Piazzi Smythe who recorded them in his diary then returned them to John Dixon. The Dixon relics then mysteriously disappeared. In 1993 Robert Baval conducted a search for these relics with Dr. Mary Brooke and they were eventually traced at the British Museum. Unfortunately the small piece of cedar like wood was missing and funny enough because of this no carbon-14 dating was possible. The relics are now displayed at the British Museum's Egyptian section when the German engineer Rudolph Gatenbrink explored the shafts of the Queen's chamber in the Great Pyramid in 1993 with a miniature robot fitted with a camera. He managed to photograph a long piece of wood whose shape and general appearance seem to be the same as the shorter piece found by the Dixons in 1872 at the bottom of this shaft. This relic could of course be carbon-14 dated and hopefully provided accurate age for the Great Pyramid. So far this wooden rod has not yet been retrieved by Dr. Zahae Hoas, the Director General of the Giza Monuments. In spite of the many requests many by Robert Baval and others it seems that Dr. Hoas disapproves of C-14 dating. Therefore finding the missing Dixon relic, the five-inch piece of cedar like wood is crucial as it would resolve many matters. In May 2001 Robert Baval received a letter from Ms. Gemma Smith on the matter, the Assistant Librarian at Abla Library at Wichita State University, who amazingly informed him that she had been able to trace the whereabouts of the missing Dixon relic to the Marishaw Museum in the University of Aberdeen. Librarians as it turns out are the most likely people to stumble on a piece of evidence or important clues that others have ignored or bypassed. Robert Baval describes librarians as library angels and Ms. Smith was certainly one such angel. She had remembered that when Wayman Dixon had discovered the opening of the shafts in the Queen's Chamber of the Great Pyramid and consequently the three relics with him had been present his friend Dr. James A.S. Grant. A short biography of Dr. Grant will be most useful to understand firstly why he was in the Great Pyramid with Dixon in 1872 and more importantly how and why through him the whereabouts of the missing five-inch cedar wood was traced. James A.S. Grant was born in Scotland in 1840. He was the son of a banker and he studied medicine at the University of Aberdeen and in the mid 1860s he went to Egypt to help with a violent outbreak of cholera. So successful was Grant to halt this epidemic. He was awarded the Egyptian Order of Mehegedet for his efforts. He was later given the title of Bay an Egyptian form of knighthood by the Cadibe whilst in Egypt Grant befriended Wayman and John Dixon two young engineers from Newcastle who were engaged in the construction of a bridge across the Nile near Cairo. The Dixon brothers were friends of Charles Piazi Smythe the astronomer royal of Scotland who in 1865 had conducted a survey of the Great Pyramid. Piazi Smythe also knew Dr. Grant and shared a common friend the pyramid author Sidney Hall. In 1872 Piazi Smythe had planned a second expedition to Egypt for the spring in order to make re-measurements of the Great Pyramid but was unable to go due to illness. It was then that he contacted his friend in Cairo Wayman Dixon and asked him to do the measurements for him taking out also a companion and duplicate measurer his friend Dr. Grant of Cairo. Grant and Dixon undertook this and other works at the Great Pyramid in the summer of 1872 as confirmed by a letter from Dr. Grant dated 26 October 1872 which reads I am gratified that you are pleased with what Mr. Dixon and I have been able to accomplish during the summer months. We have a theory that seems very reasonable that there is a chamber away into the masonry behind the only remaining bent roof stones over entrance passage. The messers Dixon's are now staying at the pyramid and will work until they are stopped. I have been learning much from Brooks and Bay lately. In relation to the controversy started by the French Egyptologist Auguste Marietta over the newly found inventory stealer at Giza. Later when Flinders Petrie went to Egypt in 1880 he was to be very well received by Grant Bay and his American wife in Cairo and they struck a friendship that was to last till Grant's death in 1896. On one occasion Petrie almost saved the life of Grant Bay when the ladder fainted while climbing within a narrow tunnel inside the Great Pyramid. It is well known that Grant Bay kept an extensive private collection of ancient Egyptian artifacts in his home in Cairo and although some of them were stolen as well as damaged by a fire caused by one of his servants much that survived was donated to the Marie Shaw Museum in Aberdeen. Returning to Grant's involvement with the Dixon relics we find that John Dixon reported their discovery to the British press in the graphic and nature in 1872. In the nature article the five inches cedar rod that later went missing is described in this manner by the warden of the standards Mr. Henry Williams Crissel. The fragments of the cedar rod is five inches in length with rectangular sections of 0.5 inches by 0.4 inch. Its sides are not accurately planned and they bear parallel lines like file marks. They may possibly have formed part of a measure length. It is at this turning point in the story of the Dixon relics that Ms. Gemma Smith in the early part of 2001 comes into the investigation. Having read the epilogue in the book The Orion Mystery where Robert Vival mentions his involvement with the relics she picked up the passage from Piazzi Smythe that he quoted and where Dr. Grant is mentioned at the moment of the discovery of the relics in the queen's chamber which reads, perceiving a crack first I am told by Dr. Grant in the south wall of the queen's chamber which allowed him at one place to push a wire to a most unconscionable length. Mr. Dixon set his carpenter man of all works by name Bill Grundy to jump a hole at that place. Smythe then describes how also the opening was found for the northern shaft by Wayman Dixon and Dr. Grant and consequently the small relics found inside these two shafts. Gemma Smith relishing that Dr. Grant should have indeed shared the recognition for the discovery of the channels and the relics found in them wondered if in fact John Dixon did not share the keep of the actual relics with Dr. Grant in order to appease the slight animosity between them caused by the press articles. She then decided to do a little investigation of her own. She quickly became aware of the private collection of Egyptian artifacts that Grant had donated to the Marie Shaw Museum in the University of Aberdeen and duly contacted the present curator Dr. Neal Curtis to see if there was any trace of the missing piece of wood. A letter is dated 18 June 1946 and posted from St. John's Wood in London to the curator of the Aberdeen University Museum and it reads Dear sir on going through my late mother's effects I have come across a few items that might be of interest to the Aberdeen University Museum and which might be included in the Grant collection which you now have should the university care to accept the above as a gift I should be glad to have them packed and sent to you. Mrs. Maurice then lists nine items from various provinces in Egypt item two is described in this manner item two stone mason's rule left in ventilation shaft of great pyramid of Chiops 400 BC and queen's chamber and discovered by Dr. Grant Bay and Wayman Dixon in 1886 this rule fell to fragments on being exposed to the air the reason Mrs. Maurice writes the rule of rod fell into fragments when exposed to the air is probably because the relic had been sealed in a glass tube by John Dixon we know of this because it is mentioned in a letter to Piazi smith dated 23 November 1872 when Dixon dispatched the relics to him for examination the relics are packed in a cigar box and coming by passenger train they consist of a stone ball bronze hook and wood measure in glass tube Robert Boval immediately made contact with Dr. Neil Curtis in Aberdeen the grant relics and memorabilia sent by Mrs. Maurice had not been classified but only stored in the Murray Shaw Museum's vaults being understaffed and also in the process of refurbishing the museum Dr. Neil assured Robert that a search of the museum five inches measuring rod would be carried out but warned him that this could take quite a while it is extremely likely that the five inches piece found by Grant and Dixon in the northern shaft of the Queen's chamber is in fact a fragment from a longer piece as was suggested by the warden of standards Mr. Henry Williams Chris Holm back in 1873 we shall recall that when this shaft was re-explored by Rudolph Gottenbrink in 1993 he was able to see a wooden rod measuring about 70 centimeters long and having the same rectangular cross sectional shape and general appearance than the smaller fragment found in 1872 by Grant and Dixon lying deep inside the shaft a photograph of this wooden rod taken by Gottenbrink's robotic camera showed fragments of white stone or plaster covering the part of the rod that was pushed against the corner wall of the shaft this may explain the little small stones encrusted in the smaller piece found by Grant and Dixon as described by Piazzi Smythe in his diary entry of the 26th November 1872 but if this hypothesis is correct then how did the smaller piece break off and fall down the shaft and come to rest where it was found by Dixon and Grant in 1872 the northern shaft starts with a horizontal part which is about two meters long and then slopes upwards for a further 24 meters at an angle of 39 degrees it is at the junction of the horizontal and sloping parts that Grant and Dixon found the small fragment but could this piece have rolled down the whole length of the sloping shaft unaided the answer is probably not this is because a small square shaped rod not smoothly plain cannot easily slide or roll on its own down the limestone flooring of the shaft and overcome the frictional resistance of the stone as well as the 20 or so masonry joints when Gottenbrink explored the shaft we were all surprised to note that a modern iron rod which had obviously been used to probe the shaft was still lying there from somewhere about seven meters up the sloping part of the shaft up to where the shaft bent towards the west and none of the literature from Dixon Grant or Piazzi Smythe is this rod mentioned it is likely however that Grant and Dixon did in fact use the rod to probe the shaft but preferred not to report their treasure hunting exploration and that in probing the shaft so did cause the five inches fragment of wooden rod to break off the longer piece and was pulled from its original resting place down to the bottom of the shaft by the iron rod at any rate there can be no doubt that the wooden fragments visible the small piece found by Grant and Dixon and the larger piece still in the shaft photographed by Gottenbrink are contemporaneous with the construction of the great pyramid since the shaft was sealed at both ends and not open till 1872 by Dixon and Grant these wooden fragments therefore could prove extremely useful in defining a more accurate date for the monument by the carbon 14 method retrieving either or both pieces is thus of great importance to the study of this ancient monument the matter now rests in the hands of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo and the Marishal Museum in Scotland what do you guys think about this anyway comments below and as always thank you for watching