Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt

In actual practice, though, the device may have been used after 4800 BCE, especially if its interpretation was known.
*12. Though we do not see why it should be considered impossible, such an extremely ancient date would mean the
Calendar Circle would have had to survive through thousands of years of wet Sahara conditions and through periods
of heavy human use. Instead we think the device was constructed and used during the recent epochs of significant
human activity and then was abandoned when the area became hyperarid—and thus the construction survived mostly
intact to modern times.
*13. Our interpretation does not require precision knowledge of astronomy or precision matching to the stone diagram,
as some have objected. We did calculate the star locations with accuracy and precision only because there is no reason
not to do so. Further, we noted that the astronomy matches the field archaeological reconstruction precisely, because it
happens to, but the validity of our interpretation does not depend on such precision. If the field archaeology drawings
turn out to be a bit incorrect, our case for this interpretation is not hindered in any way. Of course, however, certainly
if these drawings are completely in error, then any interpretation based on them suffers.
*14. As we suggested in our earlier book, The Origin Map. Essentially the megalith alignments were consistent with the
C1 line, indicating the stars of Orion’s belt at the early date of 6200 BCE; and the B1 and B2 lines of megaliths,
indicating stars of Orion’s head and shoulders as suggested by the Calendar Circle; and the three lines A1, A2, and A3,
indicating the brightest star in the north, Vega, at simultaneous times with the Orion stars.
*15. J. M. Malville, R. Schild, F. Wendorf, and J. Brenmer, “Astronomy of Nabta Playa ,” African Skies/Cieus Africains,
no. 11 ( July 2007). The authors further suggested that the B1 and B2 megalith alignments may have been intended to
indicate Sirius on two different dates—ca. 3500 BCE and ca. 4500 BCE—and possibly also Orion’s belt ca. 4200
BCE or Alpha Centauri ca. 4400 BCE. They also proposed a new target for the A1, A2, and A3 lines toward the bright
star Arcturus at ca. 4500 BCE to 3600 BCE. In addition, they recommended that because many of the megaliths,
which they determine stood as stele when they were intact, are now scattered and fragmented, an uncertainty of order of
a half degree azimuth should be included when we try to ascribe star alignment dates to the megaliths. Finally, they
abandoned one major alignment of megaliths, the C line, and chose not to interpret them, noting they they are in a more
distant area that may have been removed from the playa.
*16. For any extremely rigorously minded scholars we note again that this correspondence of the megaliths to this
interpretation of the stars happens to be rather precise—but our interpretation does not depend on such precision. For
alignments such as these, even within a half-degree or so, correspondence would be considered a good match. It is
possible that the Neolithic builders and the way the stones toppled throughout the millennia happened to produce such
precision.
*17. We can note that the precise rate of precession is variable with time, and we use in all our calculations the modernly
calculated exact variable precession rate. The exactness of a number such as 2,166 for a zodiac age should not be
overly emphasized.
†18. Nabta Playa is centered at 22.5 degrees north latitude, giving the horizon there a geometric declination of 90 − 22.5
= 67.5 degrees, but astronomers generally use the visual horizon, which is a half-degree lower due to atmospheric
refraction of Earth’s atmosphere bending starlight, or about 67 degrees for the declination of the visual horizon at
Nabta.
‡19. Dubhe became an eternal star, always above the horizon, in around 3500 BCE, but perhaps it was considered
circumpolar enough by around 4500 BCE.
*20. The star Vega, on the opposite side of the sky from Orion, had its autumnal equinox heliacal rising around 5840
BCE, when it was in the center of the A megaliths—essentially, at line A2. In our previous publications we have noted
that the other alignments (B lines and A lines) were consistent with Vega in the north rising simultaneously with the
Orion shoulder stars that are also indicated in the Calendar Circle. Yet we note here that those alignments, if
represented by the present megaliths, must be re-creations of previous markers that are now beneath the playa
sediments, because those particular Vega and Orion alignment dates precede the final heavy sedimentation period.
Given that the complex structures also contain evidence of a much earlier symbolic landscape carved on the bedrock
under the playa sediments, it seems the interpretation that the A line and B line megalith indicated Vega and Orion at
the earlier dates (in addition to the later post-heavy sedimentation alignments) may still be viable. Indeed, as we will
see, there is evidence of symbolic architecture involving these stars—Sirius, Orion’s belt, and Vega—going back to the
First Time, or Zep Tepi, at Giza, circa 12,000 BCE.
*21. If we assume that the Sirius–Big Dipper simultaneous star alignments extended back to 6100 BCE, we may