Did civilization exist 12000 years ago?
If we really want to find out at what time the gods (where by gods we mean beings with knowledge superior to that of the time, who were subsequently deified) physically lived on earth we should undertake ambitious archaeological expeditions that are capable of finding objects and buildings that date back to those times. Not having these resources, we will limit ourselves to an analysis of the data at our disposal.
Clue I: Herodotus of Halicarnassus and the Egyptians
The first piece of this endless mosaic that I feel like presenting you today is the work of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, an ancient Greek historian who lived between 484 BC and 425 BC.
In his work "Stories", a collection of 9 books, he narrates the ancient story up to the Persian Wars. In the second book, the one that interests us for our research, he tells about the Egyptians and their knowledge. Herodotus himself tells us that what he writes is only what he heard the Egyptian priests say, without additions, with at most a few personal comments, but well specified.
Starting our analysis, we find the first clue in the passage:
“The Egyptian Heracles is certainly an ancient god; as they themselves say, between the reign of Amasis and the time in which the original eight gods became twelve (Heracles according to them was one of these twelve) 17,000 years passed.”
Therefore, if we want to trace a hypothetical timeline of civilization, we learn that 17,000 years had passed since the 12 Egyptian gods made their appearance, originating from the previous 8, to the reign of Pharaoh Amasis I. Amasis I was a pharaoh of the XVIII dynasty who lived approximately in 1550 BC, so it appears that these so-called 12 Gods inhabited Egypt approximately in 18500 BC.
Continuing reading, after naming the first human king who reigned over unified Egypt, the priests list other kings who succeeded one another in that land:
“The priests then listed to me from one of their books the names of 330 other kings; among so many generations eighteen were of Ethiopian origin, the others were all Egyptians, including the only woman.”
Therefore, again according to the knowledge of the priests of the time, Egypt had seen approximately 330 pharaohs reign. Averaging 30 years per reign gives a total of 9,900 years. All this starting from the time in which Herodotus wrote, therefore the time of the first human king of the black lands (ancient name for Egypt) takes us back to 10,300 BC, always with a very approximate calculation.
If we continue reading we discover that Herodotus himself gives us an even more precise date, thanks to further Egyptian information:
"They explained to me that from the time of the first king up to this priest of Hephaestus, the last ruler, there had been 341 human generations and that in this long period of time there had been as many high priests and kings. Now, since three generations make up a century, 300 corresponds to 10,000 years; the remaining 41 (over 300) correspond to 1340 years; well in 11,340 years - they stated - no god ever showed himself in the form of a man; and nothing like this had ever happened before or happened after among the others who became kings of Egypt. Furthermore, they said that in this long period the sun had moved away from its usual course four times: twice it rose where it usually sets and twice it set where it usually rises. In this period Egypt did not suffer any alterations whatsoever, neither in agricultural products nor in phenomena connected to the river, nor in terms of illnesses or deaths.”
So we learn that as long as the gods lived on earth it was a golden age, no diseases, famines and/or poverty. Then around 12,000 BC these deities disappear. In fact, on that date the last kingdom with a divine sovereign, Horus son of Osiris and Isis, ended and the time of human sovereigns began, with consequent decadence, separation of the kingdom, wars, poverty and famine.
Then the same priests introduce Herodotus into a room of the temple and show him the statues depicting the 341 successive priests. The author lets us know that:
"They introduced me into the internal room of the temple, very vast, and they enumerated me, showing them one by one, the colossal wooden statues present there, as many as I have already mentioned: each high priest, in fact, erects his own statue in that room.”
but most of all:
“Arguing that each statue represented a «pyromi» born from another «pyromi»; they showed them all, 345, excluding any relationship with the gods or heroes. In short, these were the characters depicted in those images, they explained to me, and very different from the gods. Instead, before them, all the rulers of Egypt were gods who lived among men: from time to time a god took turns in power. The last to reign over Egypt was Horus, son of Osiris, and Egyptian correspondent of the Greek Apollo; Horus had put an end to Typhon's reign, ruling last. Osiris in Greek would be called Dionysus.”
So don't be mistaken. The Egyptians are keen to point it out, those are "Pyromi" and have nothing to do with the gods, the gods are something else. Pyromi, the author himself lets us know, means "handsome and valiant man", a kind of idol, a myth to imitate, but nothing divine.
Concluding with the review of quotations we focus on a further passage in which Herodotus confirms the dates cited previously. As if to avoid any misunderstanding, he gives us more data that confirms the calculations made:
"Among the Greeks, the most recent gods are considered Heracles, Dionysus and Pan, while among the Egyptians Pan is the most ancient and belongs to the group of the eight indicated as first gods; Hercules, on the other hand, is among the second gods, called the twelve, and Dionysus in that third series originating from the twelve. I have already stated how many years, according to the Egyptians, elapsed from the time of Heracles to that of King Amasis; from Pan they say there were more, from Dionysus less, and they calculate 15,000 years from him to the reign of Amasis. The Egyptians declare themselves confident in this information, because they constantly keep count of the years and record it in writing.”
So if 17,000 years had passed from the appearance of the 12 gods to the reign of Amasis, 15,000 had passed from the divine reign of Dionysus-Osiris.
Even more would have passed from the kingdom of Pan. If, as we had previously calculated, the appearance of the 12 was to be traced back to 18,500 BC, the reign of Osiris would date back to 16,500 BC, while that of Pan even before 18,500 BC. Herodotus often uses the names of the Greek divinities to indicate the Egyptian ones, this because he also understood that the origin is the same.
At this point, to understand who Pan and Heracles are, we must refer to the iconography of said deities. Pan, for example, is the god of all living beings, with a human body but a goat's head and legs, which recalls the representation that the Egyptians made of the god Amon, later linked to Ra, probably the Sumerian ANU.
Therefore it is probable that in 18,500 BC the reign of the 8 primordial gods, including Amun-Ra, ended, leaving the baton to the 12 gods of the second generation, including Heracles.
Heracles (Hercules) in turn was the god of strength and of trade and merchants, difficult to find in the Egyptian pantheon. It is likely that he was to be identified with Ptah, one of the creator gods according to the inhabitants of the Nile valley.
Finally, if we have to date, as was our objective at the beginning, the era in which the gods physically governed the land of Egypt, and probably the rest as well, we must go back to a date even before 18,500 BC.
Clue II: The Sumerian Kings
We move a little: from Egypt to Sumer. We are interested in the so-called Sumerian Royal List, a very ancient document, written in Sumerian and found in 16 versions, which lists a whole series of Kings and Dynasties, reigning over Mesopotamia.
This list begins with the Protodynastic I period, that is, the dynasty of sovereigns who reigned before the universal flood. Semi-divine rulers, sons of the Sumerian gods.
After the kingship descended from heaven, the kingdom dwelt in Eridu. In Eridu, Alulim became king; reigned for 28,800 years
- Alulim of Eridu: 8 sars (28,800 years)
- Alalgar of Eridu: 10 sars (36,000 years)
- En-Men-Lu-Ana of Bad-Tibira: 12 sars (43,200 years)
- En-Men-Ana
- En-Men -Gal-Ana of Bad-Tibira: 8 sars (28,800 years)
- Dumuzi of Bad-Tibira, the shepherd: 10 sars (36,000 years)
- En-Sipad-Zid-Ana of Larag: 8 sars (28,000 years)
- En-Men- Dur-Ana of Zimbir: 5 sars and 5 ners (21,000 years)
- Ubara-Tutu of Shuruppak: 5 sars and 1 ner (18,600 years)
- Zin-Suddu
The units of measurement taken into consideration are the "sar" and the "ner", 3600 and 600 years respectively.
As can be seen, the reigns of these Kings are very long compared to human standards. Continuing, we read about the kings of the Protodynastic II period, that is, the rulers of the various cities, dynasty by dynasty.
If we consider for example the longest, that of Kish, we find known kings who even orthodox archeology recognizes as having existed: Etana and En-Men-Barage-Si.
En-Men-Barage-Si died according to scholars around 2680 BC. Etana, on the other hand, is placed between 3000 and 2700 BC, but this seems rather strange given that the list of kings of Kish presents 10 rulers between Etana and En-Men-Barage-Si: 10 kings who reigned in just 20 years, an average of 2 years of reign each. It already becomes more plausible if we consider 3000 BC.
The point, however, is that the list assigns kingdoms of excessive length to each name in the list to make the accounts match. So either the date of life of Etana of Kish should probably be moved back (that of En-Men-Barage-Si cannot be moved as there is historical evidence on this king and it can be said that he really died between 2650 and 2680).
If we wanted to play a game and add up all the reigns of the kings of the protodynastic II period starting from En-Men-Barage-Si backwards, we would find that the first post-diluvian king, Jushur began his reign in 17355 BC. On this date it should also date back to the universal flood according to the Sumerians.
Clue III: Egypt and Giza
Let's return to Egypt and more precisely to the most famous plain in the world, that of Giza. As everyone knows, it is home to 4 enormous pyramids, immobile in that place for millennia. But despite all the studies and the excavations carried out, many still ask themselves questions or, more precisely, are not satisfied with the answers.
Who created the pyramids? Why? As? but above all, when?
Part 1: The Pyramids
According to official science, pyramids where built by Cheops, Chefren and Menkaure. According to the unofficial science pyramids where built by someone who came much earlier. How do you assert this?
No inscriptions have been found inside the pyramids (except the clearly false ones inside the great pyramid of "Cheops") and this is extremely strange, given that all Egyptian monuments were always covered in hieroglyphics and inscriptions. No document attests to their construction, indeed there is a Sumerian coin which represents a real pyramid, which suggests that the Sumerians already knew it.
Many scholars have therefore proposed various theories, the one considered most probable is the position of the pyramids following Orion's Belt. Three stars of the constellation of the same name and which, to tell the truth, shown on an aerial photo of the Giza plateau, match perfectly with the 3 pyramids. But is this possible?
According to some, yes, if the pyramids are backdated. When then? Well, with current computerized astronomy programs we can trace back to the moment in which Orion's belt was visible at night on those lands: the answer is between 14,000 and 12,000 BC.
Outside of this interval the constellation disappears from the celestial view of 'Egypt.
So, where the pyramids built during that time?
Part 2: The Sphinx
The Sphinx, the largest monolithic statue in the world. Located near the 3 pyramids, it features a lion's body and the head of a man. For official science it presents the portrait of Pharaoh Khafre: because it resembles him, because it has the headdress of a pharaoh and because near it stands a temple with statues of Khafre. But is this enough to say it?
In fact, the temple may have been placed there later. The head is very disproportionate, smaller than the body. Clearly a big error by high masters such as the Egyptians. Unless we accept that the head was a different one first and then someone changed it to the current one, making it smaller (obviously).
Then someone proposed that the vertical erosion that the Sphinx presented could only be the work of abundant rainfall. But if it was really the work of Chefren (2630-2510 BC) it could not have undergone such erosion given that already in 1450 BC (approximately) Thutmosis IV restored it and freed it from the sand from which it had been almost completely buried. There was no time for such erosion.
And then when would there have been these copious rains in Egypt? Only from a certain period onwards: that is, before 10,500 BC, then that territory became more or less as we know it today.
But another clue can be given to us by the very existence of the Sphinx. It is a lion, and we have seen that its head was probably also that of a lion. It is oriented to watch the sun rise in the East. Remembering that the sun always rises within a constellation and that the precession of the equinoxes causes it to change over time, wouldn't it be quite fascinating if a lion-shaped statue watched the sun rise in the constellation of the same name? When could this have happened?
According to what many have calculated, approximately given that the constellations are not all the same in width, this could have happened between 12,000 and 9500 BC.
In that period in the age of Leo an enormous Leo watched the sun rise in the house of Leo . Suggestive, isn't it?
Part 3: The Zed
The Egyptians were one of the most "talkative" civilizations of all antiquity. Each of their temples, architectural works and monuments was literally covered with inscriptions that recounted facts of daily life, heroic gestures and history. Their writing was the hieroglyphic one that so struck the human imagination. Among the various hieroglyphs, there is one that interests us this time: the Zed.
For those who don't know, Zed is a recurring figure in Egyptian representations. Its unclear function has given rise to numerous theories about its meaning. It consists of a vertical column which has horizontal notches in a variable number at the top. Also called the dorsal column of Osiris as, according to many, it represents the vertical column of the god, and is a sign of royalty and divinity. Pharaohs almost always had a Zed next to their name.
But our theory is another: the Zed as a counter of eras. Zodiac eras, to be precise.
What does this make us think? First of all, the fact that there are various versions, what always varies is the number of horizontal levels, sometimes 3, usually 4, once 5. We find hundreds of Zeds, all at 4 levels, which at first glance suggest a standard hieroglyph. Then later different Zeds are found, with only 3 levels, and all older than the previous ones (these are never later than the first dynasty, I found a stele from the second dynasty of the pharaohs Seth Peribsen and Seth Kashakemui with a 4-level zed).
So until about 3000 BC (or shortly after) these objects are 3-level, then they become 4-level. There is a change, an evolution, but due to what? This is suggested by the unique find, the only 5-level Zed in existence. It is kept in the Louvre, has 5 horizontal notches and belongs to the Roman era, therefore not prior to 400-300 BC, as Roman influence was minimal before that date (Egypt was conquered in 30 BC).
What important event occurred (twice!) in this period of time that caused the dorsal column of Osiris to vary? It wasn't easy for the first proponent to understand, but the answer was the Zodiac Age.
In Roman times the era of Pisces had just begun more or less - 5th level.
Before this, we were in that of Aries (Statues of Amun Ra in Karnak with the head of Aries). I remember you that an era lasts on average 2160 years but each era has a different length depending on the size of the constellation in the sky, some last more, some less – 4th level.
Before Aries was Taurus (crete with the Minotaur, Hator in Egypt, the golden calf of the Bible) – 3rd level.
And so we have arrived at the third level of the zed.
But then we become curious and want to know: where do we arrive by returning to the origin of the zed? Well, we find that by removing one level and arriving at the 2nd, we are in the Gemini era. Remaining with only one level we are in the era of Cancer. But whoever conceived this calendar wanted to indicate a passage, "I have experienced the change of an era!", so it was already there when the Cancer era arrived. In fact, by removing the last level, only the stem of the Zed remains: we are in the era of Leo. The beginning of everything.
Is this another clue that takes us there?
But when was this age of the lion??
Based solely and exclusively on Zed's findings I tried to calculate the dates of the various eras. I got these results (all dates may vary by a few centuries):
- Age of Fish – from 500 BC to 1660 AD - 5 levels; Zed of the Louvre
- Age of Aries – 2660 to 500 BC - 4 levels; Room of the Ancestors (Thutmosis III) – Dendera – Pyramid of Zoser – Palette of Seth Peribsen and Seth Kashakemui.
- Era of Taurus – 4820-2660 BC - 3 levels; Zed of the First Dynasty (which I must admit I have not been able to find on the internet)
- Gemini Era – 6980-4820 BC - 2 levels; no findings
- Era of Cancer – 9140-6980 BC - 1 level; no findings
- Age of Leo – 11300-9140 BC – level zero, beginning
