by Edward Malkowski
June
15, 2013
from
NewDawnMagazine Website
There is no other place on Earth like Egypt’s Giza Plateau.
Anyone
with even a slight interest in history and civilization is aware of this fact.
For on this plateau there stands the Great Pyramids and their
sculpted guardian, the Great Sphinx.
Although there are plenty of theories, no one really knows who built the Giza Pyramids or carved the Sphinx, or when they were constructed.
Although there are plenty of theories, no one really knows who built the Giza Pyramids or carved the Sphinx, or when they were constructed.
Any
statement as to who built them, or when they were built, is pure theory. In
light of all the various theories concerning these mysterious structures, I
don’t think the theoretical nature of the pyramid builders can be emphasized
enough.
What stands out at Giza more than anything else is not only the magnitude of the construction of the pyramids, but the internal design of the Great Pyramid; three chambers, of which one is subterranean, and their connecting passageways. The passageway that leads to the so-called King’s Chamber rises to a height of thirty-six feet!
What stands out at Giza more than anything else is not only the magnitude of the construction of the pyramids, but the internal design of the Great Pyramid; three chambers, of which one is subterranean, and their connecting passageways. The passageway that leads to the so-called King’s Chamber rises to a height of thirty-six feet!
On the
other hand, all other passageways were not built tall enough to accommodate the
average man or woman.
There is also the unique configuration of the King’s Chamber as well as the Queen’s Chamber. Both of these contain two shafts, one on each side of the chamber.
There is also the unique configuration of the King’s Chamber as well as the Queen’s Chamber. Both of these contain two shafts, one on each side of the chamber.
The
Queen’s Chamber contains a corbelled niche built into its east wall, and the
King’s Chamber’s ceiling is composed of five granite slabs stacked one atop the
other. Why these chambers were constructed in this manner is unknown.
The official theory is that the pyramids were tombs, and that King Khufu kept changing his mind where his burial chamber was to be placed; thus, the reason for three chambers in the Great Pyramid.
The official theory is that the pyramids were tombs, and that King Khufu kept changing his mind where his burial chamber was to be placed; thus, the reason for three chambers in the Great Pyramid.
However,
in comparison to typical Egyptian burial methods (the mastaba and the tombs in
the Valley of the Kings), the Giza pyramids, and particularly the Great Pyramid,
do not fair well within the Egyptian concept of a tomb.
The Ancient Egyptian View of the Afterlife
The Egyptians believed in an afterlife, and the tomb was an important part of that belief.
As the
tomb of King Tutankhamun testifies, the deceased’s chamber of internment was to
be decorated with art and filled with that person’s possessions. Why they
practiced this ritual was not for superstitious reasons, as one might suspect.
It was practical, according to their beliefs, and aimed at preventing that
person’s energy (spirit) from being re-absorbed into Nature’s spiritual
force.
For the ancient Egyptians, Ba animated a living person, whereas Ka was the energy emanating from that person.
For the ancient Egyptians, Ba animated a living person, whereas Ka was the energy emanating from that person.
Although
not an exact analogy, the Ka and the Ba are what traditional Western thought
might refer as spirit and soul. Another important aspect of
Egyptian belief represented immortality, the ankh, depicted as the
crested ibis.
The Ka, represented in art by up-stretched arms, was believed to be the part of man’s consciousness and energy (man’s spirit or inner quality) that related to the immediate world. It is the part of us connected to the physical body; where it lived, its possessions, as well as the people he or she was acquainted with.
The Ka, represented in art by up-stretched arms, was believed to be the part of man’s consciousness and energy (man’s spirit or inner quality) that related to the immediate world. It is the part of us connected to the physical body; where it lived, its possessions, as well as the people he or she was acquainted with.
The Ka
can be likened to one’s personality, which upon death is separated from the
body, and naturally seeks a way to once again take form. The Ba, represented by
a winged human head, or sometimes a human-faced bird, represented the part of
consciousness that is immortal.
When someone passed away, it was their goal as well as the hope of the family, that the deceased’s Ka would seek a way to remain united with their Ba. To help accomplish this eternal union, the possessions of the deceased were gathered together by the family and placed in the tomb with the mummified body.
When someone passed away, it was their goal as well as the hope of the family, that the deceased’s Ka would seek a way to remain united with their Ba. To help accomplish this eternal union, the possessions of the deceased were gathered together by the family and placed in the tomb with the mummified body.
Mummification prevented the body from decomposing and returning to
the soil of the Earth, whereas the tomb, with the deceased’s possessions, served
as a ‘home’ for the Ka.
As a
result, the Ka maintained its identity in the spiritual world and could seek out
its Ba in order to achieve ankh, which resulted in the resurrected and glorified
form of the deceased beyond the limits of an earthly realm.
Pyramids and the Concept of the Egyptian Tomb
Like the pharaonic tombs carved into the Valley of the Kings, royal mastabas built during the early dynasties - some as early as 3000 BCE - were also designed with ‘home’ in mind, as that home relates to a person’s Ka.
Case in
point: from the sixth dynasty, Mereruka’s mastaba was crafted in mansion-like
proportion with thirty-two rooms and adorned with statues and art depicting, for
example, scenes of wildlife along the Nile River.
The traits of Egyptian domestic life, so beautifully incorporated into the design of their tombs, are not found in the Giza pyramids. The Giza pyramids contain no art or hieroglyphics of any kind, very uncharacteristic of Egyptian tombs.
The traits of Egyptian domestic life, so beautifully incorporated into the design of their tombs, are not found in the Giza pyramids. The Giza pyramids contain no art or hieroglyphics of any kind, very uncharacteristic of Egyptian tombs.
So why is
it the case that the Giza pyramids are generally considered to be tombs of
fourth dynasty Pharaohs?
The
reason is because of an association of the Giza complex with another development
ten miles south at Sakkara where the Egyptians really did build tombs as
pyramids.
At Sakkara in 1881, the French Egyptologist, Gaston Maspero (1846-1916) discovered that the subterranean chamber of the Pepi I Pyramid (second ruler of the sixth dynasty) was engraved with hieroglyphics.
At Sakkara in 1881, the French Egyptologist, Gaston Maspero (1846-1916) discovered that the subterranean chamber of the Pepi I Pyramid (second ruler of the sixth dynasty) was engraved with hieroglyphics.
Over the
course of subsequent explorations, it was discovered that a total of five
pyramids at Sakkara also contained inscriptions, from the fifth, sixth, seventh,
and eighth dynasties of the Old Kingdom.
In 1952,
Dr. Samuel A.B. Mercer (1879-1969), Professor of Semitic Languages and
Egyptology at the University of Toronto, published a complete English
translation of "The Pyramid Texts" in a volume of the same name.
According
to Mercer, The Pyramid Texts contained ‘words to be spoken’ concerning
funerary ritual, magical formulae, and religious hymns, as well as prayers and
petitions on behalf of the deceased king.1
With the pyramids at Sakkara being confirmed as tombs the associative logic came to be that all pyramids must be tombs.
With the pyramids at Sakkara being confirmed as tombs the associative logic came to be that all pyramids must be tombs.
Furthermore, since there are two cemeteries (mastaba fields) to the
east and west of the northernmost Giza pyramid, assuming that all pyramids are
tombs was a likely conclusion. However, the condition of the Sakkara pyramids -
most of which are believed constructed after the Giza pyramids - poses serious
problems in this logical association.
Of the
pyramids at Sakkara only Djoser’s ‘Step Pyramid’ is in good condition, although
not really a true pyramid. (The Step Pyramid was originally a mastaba that was
modified into a pyramid.)
All other
pyramids at Sakkara, most of which belong to the fifth and sixth dynasties are
in ruins today and resemble mounds of rubble.
According to a consensus of Egyptologists, Djoser’s Step Pyramid at Sakkara was constructed during the third dynasty and was the forerunner to the fourth dynasty pyramids on the Giza Plateau.
According to a consensus of Egyptologists, Djoser’s Step Pyramid at Sakkara was constructed during the third dynasty and was the forerunner to the fourth dynasty pyramids on the Giza Plateau.
After
pyramid development at Giza, for whatever reason, the focus of pyramid building
shifted back to Sakkara.
The Great Pyramid - A Device
The easily observable and obvious differences in the Giza pyramids and the Sakkara pyramids, which were all supposed to have been built during the same era, are a problem.
The easily observable and obvious differences in the Giza pyramids and the Sakkara pyramids, which were all supposed to have been built during the same era, are a problem.
Clearly,
the construction techniques, as well as materials, for the Giza pyramids were
different than those at Sakkara, or else we would expect pyramids at both sites
to have stood the test of time in a similar manner. They did not. The important
point is why.
Did the
engineers and construction workers of the Old Kingdom not pass along their
methods from the fourth to the fifth dynasty? It seems they did not, which is a
very curious occurrence given the stability of Egyptian civilization.
It may
also be the case that the fourth dynasty Egyptians did not build the Giza
pyramids. No other pyramid in Egypt (the world for that matter) is like the Giza
pyramids, and in particular the Great Pyramid.
Additionally, there is no direct evidence to support the claim that
the Great Pyramid, or the other Giza pyramids were tombs. Nor is there any
record left by its builders as to what it was for or when it was built.
This
creates a problem of explanation.
Theories
are abundant, but the only theory I am aware of that covers all aspects of the
Great Pyramid’s interior design, is Christopher Dunn’s theory that it was a device.
According
to Dunn, the Great Pyramid was a machine for producing power by converting
tectonic vibration into electricity.
There are a number of reasons to accept Dunn analysis.
There are a number of reasons to accept Dunn analysis.
The fact
is, modern construction companies could not build the Great Pyramid today
without first inventing specialized tools and techniques in order to deal with
blocks of stone that vary in weight from ten to fifty tons.
Such an
endeavor would be on a magnitude equivalent to building a hydroelectric dam or a
nuclear power station requiring tens of billions of dollars in resources.
Although
our modern economy is different than that of the ancient world, the resource
required now as compared to then is the same! The stone must be quarried and
moved and the workers must be paid.
The fact
that an extremely large amount of resources were dedicated to Giza pyramid
development over a long period of time demands, in my opinion, that pyramid
building was utilitarian, and not for any fourth dynasty pharaonic vanity of
having the largest headstone in the world.
Prehistory - Evidence and Perspective
For me, the evidence clearly tells a very different story of early dynastic Egypt.
Sometime
around 3000 BCE, the establishment and growth of permanent settlements in the
Lower Nile Valley led to the development of civilization.
Why Giza
and the surrounding area were chosen as the focal point for early Dynastic Egypt
was because ‘civilisation’ had been there before, as the three pyramids and the
Great Sphinx testify. Without knowing what the pyramids were designed for, the
early Egyptians also assumed they must have been tombs.
As a
result, they rejuvenated the Giza Plateau and turned it into a Necropolis, then
expanded to Sakkara where they built tombs in pyramid form, albeit of lesser
quality and not brandishing the skills the original builders of the Giza
pyramids demonstrated.
Pyramid
building, even the smaller ones at Sakkara, was resource intense, so the
Egyptians reverted to burying their nobility in the traditional
mastaba.
This scenario, which calls for an earlier civilization with advanced technical skills, poses another problem. It does not fit the standard model of history. However, the notion that an earlier civilization existed does not rest on the Giza pyramids alone.
This scenario, which calls for an earlier civilization with advanced technical skills, poses another problem. It does not fit the standard model of history. However, the notion that an earlier civilization existed does not rest on the Giza pyramids alone.
There is
also the Sphinx, which in 1991 was geologically dated to between 7,000 and 9,000
years old by the team of John Anthony West and geologist Dr. Robert
Schoch.
Add to
that the megaliths of Nabta Playa in southwestern Egypt, which is believed to
have been a star viewing diagram, according to astrophysicist Dr. Thomas
Brophy, that relates not only the distance from Earth to the belt stars of
Orion, but their radial velocities as well.
Another
‘head scratching’ discovery is the 1260-ton foundation stones of the Baalbek
temple, west of Beirut in Lebanon, one of which was left in its
quarry.
Clearly history has its secrets, but there is enough evidence to validate, as theory, that civilization is much older than we have previously believed. History, according to the ancient Egyptians themselves, confirms this.
Clearly history has its secrets, but there is enough evidence to validate, as theory, that civilization is much older than we have previously believed. History, according to the ancient Egyptians themselves, confirms this.
According
to the Papyrus of Turin, which is a complete list
of kings up to the New Kingdom, before Menes (before 3000 BCE)
the:
…venerables Shemsu-Hor, [reigned] 13,420 years
Reigns up to Shemsu-Hor, 23,200 years 2
These two
lines in the king’s list are explicit.
According
to their documents, the total years of Egyptian history goes back 36,620 years.
The argument that the years in the king’s list do not represent actual years,
but some other, shorter, measurement of time seems more of an attempt to explain
away than to explain.
The
ancient Egyptians employed a sophisticated calendar system that involved a
365-day year, which was periodically corrected through the predictable and
cyclical nature of the star Sirius.
Every
1,461 years, the heliacal rising of Sirius marked the beginning of the new year.
A single Sirius cycle corresponds to 1,461 years, where each year is equivalent
to 365.25 days. In essence, the marking of the New Year at the heliacal rising
of Sirius was the ancient Egyptian’s ‘leap year.’
Of
course, determining the length of Sirius’ cyclical nature requires stellar
observation over thousands of years which means the origins of pharaonic Egypt,
or its source of knowledge, must originate in the remote past.
Late twentieth century Egyptologist Walter Emery seems to have agreed in principle that the origins of ancient Egypt date well into prehistory.
Late twentieth century Egyptologist Walter Emery seems to have agreed in principle that the origins of ancient Egypt date well into prehistory.
Emery
believed that ancient Egypt’s written language was beyond the use of pictorial
symbols, even during the earliest dynasties, and that signs were also used to
represent sounds, along with a numerical system. When hieroglyphics had been
stylized and used in architecture, a cursive script was already in common use.
His
conclusion was that:
All this shows that the written language must have had a considerable period of development behind it, of which no trace has as yet been found in Egypt.3
Ancient
Egyptian religion also testifies to a considerable period of development.
Their
religion, which is more of a philosophy of nature and life than it is a
‘religion,’ is based on a level of sophistication that, in all respects, appears
more scientific than it does mythical.
Symbolism and Nature - The Method of Egyptian Thought
From a modern Western perspective their religion has been billed as primitive and polytheistic, and appears as a mythological menagerie of gods.
Nothing
could be further from the truth. The source of this misunderstanding stems from
the Egyptian word 'neter' (neteru) being translated into Greek
as ‘god,’ which later took on the Westernized meaning of deity.
The true
meaning of neter was to describe an aspect of deity, not a deity
to be worshipped. In essence, neters referred to principles of nature in
a practical scientific way.
Yet, the meaning of a specific neter was communicated in a visually symbolic manner. When a human was depicted with an animal head, this signified the principle as it occurs in man. If the whole animal was depicted it was a reference to a principle in general.
Yet, the meaning of a specific neter was communicated in a visually symbolic manner. When a human was depicted with an animal head, this signified the principle as it occurs in man. If the whole animal was depicted it was a reference to a principle in general.
Alternatively, a human head depicted on an animal represented that
principle as it relates to the divine essence within mankind, not any person in
particular, but the archetypal; as the immortal Ba is represented by a
human-faced bird.
Another example is Anubis (the jackal), who presided over the process of mummification.
Another example is Anubis (the jackal), who presided over the process of mummification.
He did so
as a representation of the decomposition or fermentation process. In nature, the
jackal keeps its prey and allows it to decompose before consumption. Therefore,
he who presided over the mummification ritual was depicted in art as a man with
the head of the jackal, thereby representing man’s death as the digestive
principle found in nature.
From a
universal perspective, the decomposition of a body is, to Nature, digestion.
Hence,
those organs associated with digestion, after being removed from the deceased,
were placed in a Canopic jar with a lid shaped in the image of the jackal’s
head.
Before the Pharaohs
The 'sudden emergence' of Dynastic Egypt, at the beginning of the third millennium BCE, is one of civilization's greatest mysteries.
How did
this supposedly primitive North African culture organize itself into a
civilization of such magnificence? One aspect that I believe has been overlooked
is that mankind - anatomically modern humans - has been around for a very long
time.
According
to recent genetic studies, all people today are the descendents of a single
African woman who walked the Earth 150,000 years ago. According to geneticists,
her mitochondrial DNA exists in all of us.
This is a long time, 147,000 years, for our ancestors to have remained in a relatively primitive state. In my opinion, the evidence, some of which is incredibly anomalous (in particular the Great Pyramid) suggests they did not remain primitive.
This is a long time, 147,000 years, for our ancestors to have remained in a relatively primitive state. In my opinion, the evidence, some of which is incredibly anomalous (in particular the Great Pyramid) suggests they did not remain primitive.
Given the
evidence of ancient Egypt’s technical abilities (their monument, temples, and
other crafted artifacts still exist), as well as their sophisticated symbolism
in describing Nature, it appears that in establishing a dynastic society, the
Egyptians of the third millennium BCE benefited from a legacy of
knowledge.
Skeptics of this approach to history, of course, would want to know where the evidence of this technical and prehistoric civilization is.
Skeptics of this approach to history, of course, would want to know where the evidence of this technical and prehistoric civilization is.
If such a
civilization existed, surely there would be overwhelming evidence to support its
existence. If an exclusively uniformitarian approach to geologic formation were
generally accepted as fact, I would agree with the skeptic.
However, mass extinctions, as a result of environmental catastrophism because of volcanism, asteroid or comet impact, or stellar (gamma) radiation, now seems to be a reality.
According to geologists there have been five large mass extinctions in Earth’s history:
However, mass extinctions, as a result of environmental catastrophism because of volcanism, asteroid or comet impact, or stellar (gamma) radiation, now seems to be a reality.
According to geologists there have been five large mass extinctions in Earth’s history:
Although
all of these cataclysms occurred well before the modern human form, there are
two global disasters that occurred relatively recently.
Approximately 71,000 years ago Mount Toba, in Sumatra, erupted spewing an enormous amount of ash into the atmosphere. It was the largest volcanic eruption in the last two million years, nearly 10,000 times larger than the Mount St. Helen’s explosion in 1980.
Approximately 71,000 years ago Mount Toba, in Sumatra, erupted spewing an enormous amount of ash into the atmosphere. It was the largest volcanic eruption in the last two million years, nearly 10,000 times larger than the Mount St. Helen’s explosion in 1980.
The
resultant caldera formed a lake 100 kilometers long by 60 kilometers wide, with
devastating and lasting climatic consequences. A six-year long volcanic winter
followed, and in its wake an ice age that lasted for a thousand years. With its
sulfuric haze, the volcanic winter lowered global temperatures, creating drought
and famine decimating the human population.
According to geneticist’s estimates, the population was reduced to somewhere between 15,000 and 40,000 individuals. Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Utah, Lynn Jorde, believes it may have been as low as 5,000.4
Even closer to our time is the mysterious cataclysm at the end of the Ice Age, only 10,000 years ago. No one really knows if it was the result of natural phenomenon or an asteroid impact. What is known is that the climate drastically altered life for those who lived at that time.
According to geneticist’s estimates, the population was reduced to somewhere between 15,000 and 40,000 individuals. Professor of Human Genetics at the University of Utah, Lynn Jorde, believes it may have been as low as 5,000.4
Even closer to our time is the mysterious cataclysm at the end of the Ice Age, only 10,000 years ago. No one really knows if it was the result of natural phenomenon or an asteroid impact. What is known is that the climate drastically altered life for those who lived at that time.
It is a
known geologic fact that at the end of the Ice Age many North American species
became extinct, including the mammoth, camel, horse, ground sloth, peccaries
(pig-like hoofed mammals), antelope, American elephant, rhinoceros, giant
armadillo, tapirs, saber-toothed tigers and giant bison. It also affected the
climates of lower latitudes in Central and South America, as well as Europe in a
similar way.
Those
lands have also revealed evidence of mass extinction. Yet, the mechanism that
brought on this Ice Age ending cataclysm remains a mystery.
If an ancient technical civilization existed during the remote past, what would be the likelihood of that civilization surviving a global catastrophe intact? Estimates from the Toba eruption are not encouraging. Neither are the scenarios that astronomers and climatologists build today for a theoretical asteroid impact.
According to the archeological evidence, anatomically modern man (Cro-Magnon) appeared in Western Europe 40,000 years ago.
If an ancient technical civilization existed during the remote past, what would be the likelihood of that civilization surviving a global catastrophe intact? Estimates from the Toba eruption are not encouraging. Neither are the scenarios that astronomers and climatologists build today for a theoretical asteroid impact.
According to the archeological evidence, anatomically modern man (Cro-Magnon) appeared in Western Europe 40,000 years ago.
Where
they came from has been a long-standing mystery. The logical deduction is that
they migrated from Africa. However, such a migration requires a host
culture, of which there is no evidence.
Nevertheless, a likely location for this host culture would have been along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, which were likely a series of fresh water lakes during the remote past.
If ancient civilization existed in the region of the Mediterranean, it would not have survived the conflagration that turned those lakes into a salt-water sea.
If that were indeed the case, the remnants of those who lived on the perimeter of that civilization would appear to us, today, as anomalies such as the Giza pyramids and the giant stones of Baalbek.
Cro-Magnon cultures of Western Europe, although once a part of a great Mediterranean civilization, would also appear as an anomaly.
Nevertheless, a likely location for this host culture would have been along the shores of the Mediterranean Sea, which were likely a series of fresh water lakes during the remote past.
If ancient civilization existed in the region of the Mediterranean, it would not have survived the conflagration that turned those lakes into a salt-water sea.
If that were indeed the case, the remnants of those who lived on the perimeter of that civilization would appear to us, today, as anomalies such as the Giza pyramids and the giant stones of Baalbek.
Cro-Magnon cultures of Western Europe, although once a part of a great Mediterranean civilization, would also appear as an anomaly.
For us,
it would be as if they appeared from nowhere.
Footnotes
1. Samuel A. B. Mercer, 'The Pyramid Texts', 1952, p.2.2. René Schwaller de Lubicz, 'Sacred Science: The King of Pharaonic Theocracy', 1982, p.86.3. Walter B. Emery, 'Archaic Egypt', 1961, p.192.4. ‘Supervolcanoes’, BBC2, 3 February 2000, also see www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/1999/supervolcanoes_script.shtml
No comments:
Post a Comment