Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt
Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt
Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
two-thirds <strong>of</strong> its length, the Vega-shining-down time would be extended by a couple <strong>of</strong> hundred years.<br />
§72. In <strong>The</strong> Origin Map, Brophy estimates around 11,770 BCE for the match <strong>of</strong> Orion’s belt and the pyramids, and in<br />
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Egypt</strong> Code, Bauval estimates 11,450 BCE. For a number <strong>of</strong> reasons, these matching dates should be considered<br />
estimates to within a few hundred years. For example, some date variation may arise from the choice between<br />
matching the line connecting the end stars (to the end pyramids) or matching the first two stars (to the first two<br />
pyramids). In addition, there may be some differences as to whether more recent, proper motion measurements were<br />
used for the stars and slight differences in approximations in the methods <strong>of</strong> celestial pole motion calculations. We do<br />
not, therefore, view the Orion’s-belt-to-pyramids layout match as a highly precise date, though it definitely occurred<br />
within this era. <strong>The</strong> subterranean passage star shafts, however, <strong>of</strong>fer more precise dating.<br />
*73. Dimmer stars cannot be viewed when they are just barely above the horizon, because <strong>of</strong> atmospheric extinction. As<br />
they rise farther above the horizon, <strong>of</strong>ten to a degree or more altitude, the light from the star passes through less <strong>of</strong><br />
Earth’s atmosphere and obscuring dust, and the star becomes visible to the eye.<br />
*74. <strong>The</strong> ancient names <strong>of</strong> its two sister structures were less poetic and seemingly less informative: Great is Khafre and<br />
Menkaure is Divine.<br />
*75. As we have said, there is a significant spread <strong>of</strong> half a degree or so in the viewing angle <strong>of</strong> these subterranean<br />
passages, due to their 1.2 meter- (3.9 feet) shaft heights, so the possible association <strong>of</strong> the precessional culmination <strong>of</strong><br />
Vega does not depend on the fact that it seems to have hit directly the middle <strong>of</strong> the viewing angle—that amount <strong>of</strong><br />
precision could be happenstance.<br />
*76. If we wanted to interpret the half-degree difference as precise to Vega, the central alignment would be about three<br />
hundred years later than for Khufu’s subterranean passage. Alternatively, they may be considered as less precise<br />
versions <strong>of</strong> the same alignment to Vega.<br />
†77. Djoser’s and Imhotep’s step pyramid complex at Saqqara was the first major pyramid complex construction, but it<br />
contained a step pyramid, not a true pyramid.<br />
*78. Recent discoveries in Turkey, at a site called Gobekli Tepi, involve finely carved megalithic pillars and rings that<br />
have been firmly radiocarbon dated to the tenth millennium BCE. In a submission to an academic journal, we<br />
mentioned Gobekli Tepi as evidence that man was making fine megalithic constructions much earlier than the Late<br />
Neolithic to support our contention that some <strong>of</strong> the megalithic constructions at Nabta Playa may also predate the<br />
orthodox view <strong>of</strong> the Late Neolithic. <strong>The</strong> anonymous academic referee objected to our reference on the grounds that<br />
“authors’ remarks on megalithic pillars found in Turkey are totally irrelevant. I reject any idea <strong>of</strong> possible contacts<br />
between Turkish site and Nabta assuming both sites were independently constructed.” In our paper, we neither claimed<br />
nor disclaimed contact between Nabta and Gobekli Tepi. We did claim that recent evidence pushed much farther back<br />
in time the dates <strong>of</strong> ceremonial megalithic architecture at other sites and that this evidence should lessen the resistance<br />
to consider new evidence, which might similarly push back dates at Nabta.<br />
*79. Orion’s belt also culminated south during the same epoch, ca. 10,650 BCE.<br />
†80. In <strong>The</strong> Origin Map it is shown to be 10,909 BCE.<br />
*81. Ingham calculated four cycles: 1,458 years ending in 2769 BCE; 1,456 years ending in 1313 BCE; 1,453 years<br />
ending in 141 CE; and 1,450 years ending in 1591 CE.<br />
*82. One problem: we don’t know how the ancient <strong>Egypt</strong>ians defined the heliacal rising <strong>of</strong> Sirius. All we know is that<br />
they considered it very important and called it the reappearance <strong>of</strong> Sirius or, simply, the rising <strong>of</strong> Sirius.<br />
*83. <strong>The</strong>re are two types <strong>of</strong> uncertainties regarding the serdab view angle. First is the spread <strong>of</strong> angles due to the aperture<br />
<strong>of</strong> the peepholes, and second is any remaining uncertainty as to the basic measures <strong>of</strong> its angles. Mark Lehner lists the<br />
altitude <strong>of</strong> the serdab as 13 degrees without reference, and the layout survey gives an azimuth <strong>of</strong> about 4.5 degrees for<br />
the whole complex. We then used a protractor and plumb bob at the site to estimate about 16 degrees for the serdab<br />
box. In any case, the serdab gazes generally in the correct region <strong>of</strong> the sky to view Alkaid simultaneous with Sirius<br />
rising heliacally on the day <strong>of</strong> summer solstice.