Is 173 keter or euclid?

This article may contain affiliate links. For details, visit our Affiliate Disclosure page.


The SCP Foundation is home to a multitude of enigmatic and often dangerous entities, classified under different containment levels based on their properties and behaviors. Among these classifications, Keter and Euclid are two designations that represent significant distinctions in the level of containment required. However, when it comes to SCP-173, a peculiar and unsettling statue-like entity, the debate ensues: Is it Keter or Euclid? In this blog post, we delve deep into the anomalous nature of SCP-173 and its containment requirements to shed light on this intriguing question.

Is 173 keter or euclid?

I. The Elusive Essence of SCP-173

SCP-173: A Formidable Enigma: SCP-173, colloquially known as “The Sculpture,” is a haunting entity that manifests as a statue constructed from an unknown material. One would expect a stationary statue to be harmless, but SCP-173 defies conventional understanding. The entity displays an uncanny ability to move at high speeds when not observed by a sentient being. With each moment of inattention, SCP-173 closes the gap between itself and its target with astonishing swiftness, often resulting in fatal consequences. Its disturbing appearance, composed of a crudely humanoid figure adorned with an ever-present, unnerving grin, heightens the sense of unease surrounding this anomalous being.

The Argument for Keter Classification: A Potential Catastrophic Event: Considering SCP-173’s ability to rapidly close the distance between itself and its victims, many argue for its classification as a Keter-level entity. The potential for devastation in situations where SCP-173’s containment procedures fail cannot be underestimated. Even a momentary lapse in attention could allow the entity to wreak havoc on its surroundings, resulting in severe harm or loss of life. The relentless nature of SCP-173’s attacks and its sheer speed make it a formidable threat that demands the utmost caution and rigorous containment measures.

The Case for Euclid Classification: Mastering the Containment Challenge: On the other hand, proponents of the Euclid classification present a compelling case. While SCP-173 is undoubtedly dangerous, its containment is achievable with careful planning and diligent adherence to established protocols. Unlike Keter-level entities that pose an immediate and uncontrollable threat, SCP-173 can be effectively contained with proper procedures in place. The entity’s behavior, relying on visual observation as a key trigger for movement, allows containment teams to mitigate the risk by implementing strategies that minimize eye contact. This level of control over SCP-173’s movement, coupled with the absence of supernatural abilities beyond rapid locomotion, suggests that Euclid classification is more appropriate.

II. Containment Strategies and Their Efficacy

Securing the Unyielding Presence: The containment of SCP-173 presents a unique challenge that requires a careful balance of innovation and adherence to established protocols. Various containment strategies have been developed to ensure the safe confinement of this perplexing entity, each with its own merits and limitations.

Visual Limitation and Surveillance: Maintaining Unbroken Vigilance: A primary aspect of containing SCP-173 revolves around visual limitation and surveillance. To prevent the entity from initiating its rapid movements, a dedicated team of observers is deployed to maintain unbroken eye contact with the entity at all times. The use of closed-circuit television systems and automated tracking devices has proven effective in continuous monitoring, ensuring that SCP-173 remains under constant scrutiny. The meticulousness required to sustain visual observation, paired with strategic rotation of personnel, helps to minimize the risk of containment breaches.

Redundancy and Backup Measures: Fortifying the Defenses: To mitigate the possibility of accidental containment breaches or equipment failures, redundancy and backup measures are crucial. Implementing multiple layers of security, including reinforced containment chambers and redundant surveillance systems, serves as a failsafe against unforeseen circumstances. Routine maintenance and inspections play a vital role in identifying potential vulnerabilities and rectifying them promptly. By adopting a proactive approach to containment, the Foundation ensures that SCP-173 remains confined within the designated areas, minimizing the potential for widespread harm.

As the pursuit of knowledge within the SCP Foundation continues, it is crucial to remain vigilant and adaptive, constantly refining containment procedures to ensure the safety of both personnel and the general public. The enigma of SCP-173 serves as a reminder that anomalies can defy conventional understanding, challenging our preconceived notions of reality. Through the collaborative efforts of dedicated researchers, containment specialists, and vigilant observers, the mysteries surrounding SCP-173, and countless other entities, will continue to be unraveled, shedding light on the nature of the anomalous and the bounds of human comprehension.


In the realm of the SCP Foundation, classifying anomalous entities accurately is essential for effective containment and safeguarding the world from their potentially disastrous effects. In the case of SCP-173, the debate over its classification as Keter or Euclid showcases the nuances and complexities inherent in such categorizations.

While arguments can be made for both sides, the weight of evidence leans toward Euclid classification, considering the relative controllability of SCP-173 with the implementation of vigilant containment procedures. The entity’s reliance on visual observation and the strategic limitations imposed by containment strategies provide a framework for successfully confining SCP-173 and minimizing the risks associated with its unpredictable movements.

Is 173 keter or euclid?
Scroll to top