15.06.2013 Views

Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt

Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt

Black Genesis: The Prehistoric Origins of Ancient Egypt

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!