Pyramidology & the Astrological Ages

[Jim Eshelman]

Here are the years covered by the astrological ages, based on Solar Fire calculations. (I'm not going to worry about exact dates. None of us will live through a transition this time around.)

Age of Virgo 13,169-10,879 BCE (2,290 years)
Age of Leo 10,879-8614 BCE (2,265 years)
Age of Cancer 8614-6372 BCE (2,242 years)
Age of Gemini 6372-4153 BCE (2,219 years)
Age of Taurus 4153-1956 BCE (2,197 years)
Age of Aries 1956 BCE to 221 CE (2,176 years)
Age of Pisces 221-2376 CE (2,155 years)
Age of Aquarius 2376-4510 CE (2,134 years)

[SteveS]

If an ancient Sage or group of Sages were to put a TIME “message in a bottle” with stone monuments meant to last the ravages of TIME for a future humanity, it could only be done with the astronomical science of Precession tracking the movement of certain Stars, i.e. Orion’s 3 Belt Stars. The astronomical/mathematical science of Precession with Giza’s Monuments can only prove this to an astronomical mind, which is exactly the intention of these ancient Sages at Giza. As to WHY—it has something to do with the beginning of the astronomical Precessional Ages of Leo & Aquarius, app 13,000 years apart or a half Precession Cycle.

Also see this link https://www.solunars.com/viewtopic.php? ... 590#p47590 for further exploration.

[SteveS]

I came to the realization of the Precessional Blueprint at Giza since 1995—no way I could have seen/understood it if I didn’t know the Sidereal Zodiac---it simply can’t be seen with the Tropical Z. But what has me stirred-up now combined with Precession Blueprint at Giza is solid evidence of the Younger Dryas Comet by a group scientist since 2007. Just take a look at this dramatic weather Greenland Ice Core graph (link below) which happened in the Precession Age of Leo. WTF, something suddenly altered the weather on the planet. I can only speculate what the sage(s) who blueprinted the Monuments at Giza with the Precession Cycle is trying to meassage to humanity with this ancient wonder.

https://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/o ... ples.shtml

[Jim Eshelman]

FWIW, I don't think there is any evidence here of knowledge of a processional cycle.

You have different monuments, built centuries or millennia separate from each other, with each aligned with equinoxes of the time it was built. (This totally local phenomenon could be observed and measured at each different point in time.)

[Venus_Daily]

I've always found astrological eons so fascinating. The fifth element singing about "The Dawing of the Age of Aquarius" is so ironic considering Pisces is all about deception and religious delusion. Do these eras actually reflect the direction of humanity and the environment? What about Alister Crowley's Aeons? Are they the same?

[Jim Eshelman]

Crowley's aeons are unrelated to the Astrological Ages. For example, the Aeon of Horus began in 1904 while the Age of Aquarius will begin 472 years later, in 2376.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

FWIW, I don't think there is any evidence here of knowledge of a processional cycle.

Got it Jim, this is good for me to know/realize, thanks. I will not waste your time with anymore questions about precession at Giza. My studies point me to conclusions Giza contains the most striking ground plan of astronomical precessional aligned monuments in the world. And this ground plan of fantastic monuments took millennial to implement/complete, IMO.

[Jim Eshelman]

Individual buildings raised over the course of millennia, each aligned with equinoctial points at the time of their construction, would give a long term trace of the effects of precession that we can see in the completed work. I'm sure that happened. - This is not the same as saying anyone knew precession existed or that there was a master plan unfolding that was known in advance.

In any case, I'm happy to do the math you need to match the topic.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

This is not the same as saying anyone knew precession existed or that there was a master plan unfolding that was known in advance.

Jim, I am not saying this because I think I am special trying to draw attention to myself. I am saying this because it has been proven to me by certain writings as a truth--no different than certain writings to me on Sidereal Astrology has proved to me that it’s a branch of astrology far superior to Tropical Astrology or any other branch of astrology taken as a whole branch.
Jim wrote:

In any case, I'm happy to do the math you need to match the topic.

I appreciate this Jim, for you are the only astronomical teacher I am in contact who can prove certain astronomical things to my mind about the monuments at Giza. However, I may not possess the intelligence to understand where you are coming from.

[SteveS]

I think this Hamlet’s Mill Preface Link belongs in this thread. I don’t recommend this book unless this Preface highly interests you, for plowing through all the myths in this book is somewhat of a headache.

Preface Link: https://zsitchinindex.wordpress.com/anc ... l/#preface

Hamlet’s Mill was first published in 1977, long before I came into close contact with alternative authors who took Hamlet’s Mill, only in the early 90s, and started to look at Giza with an astronomical mind using the Precession Cycle. The authors of Hamlet’s Mill risked their professional careers by researching and writing their book. Most of the research for their book was supported by a grant from the Twentieth Century Fund. I wish I could find Jim and Mike a grant for writing/teaching certain things about Sidereal Astrology.

Anyway, I want members to know that the basic conclusion from the authors of Hamlet’s Mill was this, paraphrasing: The phenomenon of precession and the mystery of “precessional numbers” was encoded in ancient myths from all around the world, which the authors of Hamlet’s Mill interpreted as astronomical knowledge handed down from some as yet unidentified and “almost unbelievable” ancestor civilization. The authors I have come into contact with deeply believe Ancient Egypt inherited a Legacy about profound knowledges pertaining to the Astrological Ages.

New technology computer programs with precessional math, after Hamlet’s Mill was first published has proven as much as my intelligence has allowed, that the Giza Monuments are representing a half-precessional cycle from the beginning of the Age of Leo, c. 10,500 BC to the beginning of the Age of Aquarius, 2376 BC. I find it most interesting that only in the last 30 years with a cuspule approach to the Age of Aquarius, this Precessional Giza discovery is working its way into millions of people’s minds across the planet. This is being proved on Joe Rogan’s Podcasts with millions of hits about alternative things about our history. I want to believe this is signaling a major paradigm shift of thinking with the Age of Aquarius closely approaching in context of a whole Precessional Cycle.

[Jim Eshelman]

"Closely approaching"? Is five human lifetimes away "close"? - I guess one reason I don't overly concern myself about such things is that nobody alive today will ever be touched in the slightest by any of this. It has no practical astrological use. it's unlikely anything I write on the subject would survive half the time from now until the first, faint effects could ever be discerned more than three and a half centuries from now.

[Veronica]

Individual buildings raised over the course of millennia, each aligned with equinoctial points at the time of their construction, would give a long term trace of the effects of precession that we can see in the completed work. I'm sure that happened. - This is not the same as saying anyone knew precession existed or that there was a master plan unfolding that was known in advance.

In any case, I'm happy to do the math you need to match the topic.

I feel that the crust of the earth itself is such a building. I also feel that the very water of the earth also is, as well as forests. I think looking at time from the perspective of long living trees like the Bristlecone pine, crystal and mineral deposits in the earth, and even Niagara Falls reveals the effects of precession on life much more clearly and articulately then our human attempts which apparently while obviously to our ancestors at the time befuddle us today.
Jim I read your statement as talking more about the building blocks of life itself, then an actual man made building. Our DNA and RNA most definitely IME are influenced by precession.

[SteveS]

I am only posting stuff here which may/could broaden our perspectives about the history of our planet.

[Veronica]

I post things that have to do with the story of the planet, regardless of wether it fits into or corroborates his story.

[SteveS]

V wrote:

Our DNA and RNA most definitely IME are influenced by precession.

Interesting V, I know nothing about this issue with Precession associate with the Astrological Ages. Can you provide some links for more explanations?

[Veronica]

V wrote:

Our DNA and RNA most definitely IME are influenced by precession.

Interesting V, I know nothing about this issue with Precession associate with the Astrological Ages. Can you provide some links for more explanations?

I dont have any "links" as in webpages. I personally dont believe the validity of most web links, as anyone can publish anything they want on the internet without it being true...with no repercussions.
I read books because I know that publishers dont want to get sued for printing misinformation, and an author doesnt want to ruin his career by publishing unsound, and unvetted material.

A good book to start investigating this is Rupert Sheldrakes The Presence of the Past. The topic is also address in the fiction book Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. The God Problem by Howard Bloom has fantastic information but you have to read between the lines to get the whole AsAbove So Below understanding. Power Sex and Suicide by Nick Lane explains a lot as well.
Clan of the Cave Bear also provides excellent information.

[SteveS]

Thanks V. In this tread I am interested in discussing anything to do with these Astrological Ages calculated by Precessional Astronomy. I have tons of material with what I think are well researched links supporting what I think is interesting material, but I understand and respect your feelings with links.

[Veronica]

Your welcome Steve, anytime.
I think you would enjoy Sheldrakes books, he really digs deep.

One of the things I have learned from Jim over our years, and something that has helped me understand myself and the world better, is to argue against things that seem blatantly true to me, to see it from someone opposeds point of view. Sometime I pretend that the issue I am exploring is a bona fid court case and I have to defend my opinion/stance/perspective in a court of Law, or the converse..that I am a prosecutor against the issue. Doing this practice of cross examination of ideas I come across has helped me gain deeper truths of the matter, things that I could not grok from my perspective alone.
I encourage you to keep digging and asking your questions and looking for truth, never give up on your dreams of understanding more and having more knowledge!

[SteveS]

Venus wrote:

I encourage you to keep digging and asking your questions and looking for truth, never give up on your dreams of understanding more and having more knowledge!

Thanks V, this is exactly what I have been doing by looking for the truth at Giza, and I strongly believe the Astrological Ages are definitely a major part of the Giza story.

[Jim Eshelman]

I've renamed this sign to be consistent with how it developed, and move it to a new location. I'll then create a new thread on the astrological ages for astrological purposes.

[Jim Eshelman]

If one accepts conventional archaeology, the Sphinx at Giza was built in the 26th century BCE, right in the heart of the Taurus Age. (The reign of Khafre was about 2558-2532 BCE, VP 8° Taurus.)

If, instead, you side with a minority of archaeologists of the last century (the fact that they are a minority doesn't mean they're wrong), the dating is somewhere between 10,000 and 5,000 BCE, or somewhere in the Leo, Cancer, or Gemini ages.

This is the main division in archaeological thinking that Steve is addressing, I think. The practical considerations are far beyond what I could put in one post, though I admit that the first thing that comes to mind is that the earlier dates mean they were creating this all with stone tools - the development of metal tools coming later. There was no copper (or other) metallurgy until after the earlier set of dates, though it was well in place in the later set of dates. I suspect this isn't definitive by itself, therefore, unless metal working were discovered in or related to the Sphinx.

Much of my life I've wanted to think that the Sphinx represented the juncture between Virgo and Leo. I think it probably isn't so - that it's a dynastic (Old Kingdom) construction from the 26th century. It might be otherwise, though.

[SteveS]

Jim, thank you so much for the above post. I will defintely respond later, go to go tend to some stuff,

[Jim Eshelman]

A bit of idle doodling...

If, as most archaeologists think, the Great Sphinx of Giza was built during or just after the reign of Khaphre (2558-2532 BC), let's count primary "Phoenix" cycles (just for convenience) from the inauguration of the Sothic Era is 2767 BCE. Khaphre's presumed reign ended 235 years after 2767. A firm "Phoenix cycle" (every eight years) occurred in 2527 BCE (one of many: not necessarily anything special about the year except it was an important calendar marker soon after Khaphre likely died).

2527 BCE started the 30th full Phoenix Cycle since 2767. Sirius rose helically July 17, 2527 BCE, 4:05 AM LMT at Giza. Idle observations: There was also a New Moon that day (Moon 6° before Sun at sunrise), so a new lunar month began probably a day and a half later. (I'll check that shortly.) The VP was 7°50' Taurus, so this was only a couple of days from the summer solstice. As with all heliacal risings of Sirius, Hamal culminated and Altair had set. - I just checked, Moon was 6°30' above the west at sunset July 18, still too early to be seen, so it was a day earlier.

But here's a better representation of where I was going. (This information applies to this entire time - for decades - though I'll leave it centered on 2527 BCE for now.) The New Moon of the year - the first appearance of the crescent Moon at sunset following the vernal equinox - occurred April 20, 2527 BCE, 6:16:26 PM at Giza. Moon was 8°40' above the horizon, so likely visible only briefly. (I think it would have been visible: Moon was in late Taurus with her perigee in early Cancer, so she was relatively close to Earth, a tiny bit brighter, a tiny bit larger.)

At this New Moon is spring, with Sun in mid-Taurus, Antares was 2°19' above Asc, just risen. Aldebaran had just set (3 1/2°) with Rigel exactly setting and Canopus just above the west. AND LEO WAS ON MIDHEAVEN. There are different ways to have this constellation emphasized and, here, at the exact moment the year began by one important calendar, for decades (maybe centuries) Antares and Aldebaran were across the horizon and Leo on Midheaven - bright and glorious for all to see - as Sun set and the year's new Moon first appeared. (For this particular year, Regulus was 3° off MC in exact mundane square to the just-set Aldebaran.)

All sorts of really cool stuff was happening every year as the first new Moon of spring appeared - all with Leo straddling Midheaven magnificently.

Meanwhile, Sun was always in Leo for the helical rising of Sirius - the other important New Year's Day - and, while the Egyptians paid no particular attention to that, it means the Full Moon for the flooding of the Nile was indeed in Aquarius.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Much of my life I've wanted to think that the Sphinx represented the juncture between Virgo and Leo. I think it probably isn't so - that it's a dynastic (Old Kingdom) construction from the 26th century. It might be otherwise, though.

Jim, I have a book titled “The Witness of The Stars” by E.W. Bullinger, 1893. It is a well-researched book about ancient material about the Sidereal Zodiac and things Biblical. On page 20-21 the author writes:

The original Sphinx is a figure with the head of a woman and the body of a lion. The Sphinx is from a Greek word meaning to bind closely together. It was therefore designed to show where the two ends of the Zodiac were to be joined together, and where the great circle of the heavens begins and ends. In the Zodiac in the Temple of Esneh, a Sphinx is actually placed between the Signs of Virgo and Leo, as shown in the illustration on the preceding page.

In RT Rundle Clark’s book “Myth and Symbol in Ancient Egypt” Clark’s final conclusion about Pharaonic Egypt is a Myth about the gods in an epoch translated as “Tep zepi” – “The First Time.” I am pretty sure this “First Time” is symbolized with the beginning of the Precessional Age Leo, and the end of the Precessional Age of Virgo, represented by the Sphinx on the Giza Plateau. I also believe the Sphinx proven by the recent science of geology with its enclosure walls being severely eroded by heavy torrential rains proves the Sphinx is much older than the Pyramids. But it really doesn’t matter to me how old Giza/Sphinx is, for I believe whoever designed Giza was in possession of some precise Precessional Astronomy with the Sidereal Zodiac, with a plan for Giza with a scientific language of precessional time and allegorical astronomy which was deliberately expressed in the principle monuments at Giza along with the astronomical language in the Pyramid Texts, the oldest know religious texts known to this World.

[Jim Eshelman]

Egyptology exploded open in the early 1800s with the discovery of the Rosetta Stone in 1799 and the first truly scholarly works in the following few decades. Europe and America were on fire with interest in the subject. But what was known by the 1890s was still quite small. Budge, for example, did wonderful academic work, though today it is rightly considered short-sighted - simply because the field has grown so much since. Even the greatest archaeologists of the 1890s have to be taken with a grain of salt.

Ethelbert Bullinger was a respected Bible scholar and seems to have been excellent with classical languages. He was a fascinating person of non-trivial academic skills. His views on Egyptology, though, are more of a charming romance. They sound wonderful, they're emotionally satisfying, but they have little to do with the science of archaeology. (BTW, when I say he was "respected," I side against his detractors. His Biblical history views were so extreme that we was quite controversial, even heretical, in his own circles. Personally, I don't hold his heresy against him <g>. I'd have thought him a Scorpio rather than a Sagittarius, but Sun had clearly made it into Sagittarius the day before he was born. His Cancer Moon shows in his tendency to reorganize and categorize history and the structure of the Divine Plan - they remind me much of Max Heindel's works (even though their exact topics and conclusions are quite different.) His career was in restructuring the history of fables, and he seems to have approached Egyptology the same way. - I love some of his ideas, I'd love a sci-fi movie based on them, but I just don't think there is a snowball's chance they're connected to fact.

Clark is another matter. He was born a bit later and was an actual Egyptologist. He's worth a solid look.

I am pretty sure this “First Time” is symbolized with the beginning of the Precessional Age Leo, and the end of the Precessional Age of Virgo, represented by the Sphinx on the Giza Plateau.

I think you're about six or seven thousand years off. I could be wrong, but then nearly everyone who has spent their life's work on archaeology is wrong, too. It wouldn't be the first time that happened, of course, but it seems safer to bet on them being right.

I also believe the Sphinx proven by the recent science of geology with its enclosure walls being severely eroded by heavy torrential rains proves the Sphinx is much older than the Pyramids.

I've read things on that. Not a lot, but a few things (especially Lubicz back in the day and some more recent articles). I'm not qualified to assess the evidence.

I suspect, though, that there is much we still don't know about the building of Sphinx of Giza. The erosion theory seems controversial at best. Even in the last couple of centuries, wind erosion (essentially sandblasting the statue) has eroded it noticeably, so it seems no vast time is required for these signs of wear and tear to show. For others reading this that haven't dug into the matter, here is a reasonable summary of the pros and cons of the theory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphinx_wa ... hypothesis

I admit that I just don't know what's what, but side with the arguments for a Taurus Age (dynastic Egypt) construction.

But it really doesn’t matter to me how old Giza/Sphinx is, for I believe whoever designed Giza was in possession of some precise Precessional Astronomy with the Sidereal Zodiac, with a plan for Giza with a scientific language of precessional time and allegorical astronomy which was deliberately expressed in the principle monuments at Giza along with the astronomical language in the Pyramid Texts, the oldest know religious texts known to this World.

The place we differ most is on the question of when precession was actually understood. All the evidence is that it wasn't known to exist until the last few centuries BC at earliest. One can orient a building due east-west, or even track where to point things at a given spot in time, without any such knowledge, so - even if all the assertions were accepted as fact - there's still no need for precession to enter the discussion.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

I admit that I just don't know what's what, but side with the arguments for a Taurus Age (dynastic Egypt) construction.

Yes, without a doubt the Taurus Age for the Pyramids and other great Temples. And IMO, someone knew the exact degree in the Sidereal Zodiac for Alnitak during the Taurus Age, and knew its declination cycle. I can't buy as a coincidence Alnitak's Precessional declination cycle the same as Precessional Time cycle as the SVP cycle of Precessional Age of Leo & Aquarius, all Monumentally placed at Giza. I think Ancient Egypt possessed some excellent Precessional knowledge. There is probably more to this Alnitak declination cycle represented by the 2 sets of 3 Queens Pyramids at Giza. If you ever find the time to read Lubicz “Sacred Science”, we could discuss some of his most interesting points about Ancient Egypt. “Sacred Science” is a most interesting book, one of my favorites with Lubicz quoting other ancient scholars about their travels/learnings to Egypt.

And I understand where you are coming from about Bullinger’s book. But still he recognized the star/astronomical lore in the Bible as well as some of the astronomical symbology from Ancient Egypt, which I believe made its way into the scriptures of the Bible. I dispute his ideology about the Bible but found it interesting he recognized the Sphinx was a Greek word meaning “to bind”-- symbolizing Virgo & Leo, and I don’t believe the Ancients were symbolizing a “binding” of these two Signs in a seasonal sense, but for a Precessional sense. Thanks for the feedback.

[Jim Eshelman]

And IMO, someone knew the exact degree in the Sidereal Zodiac for Alnitak during the Taurus Age, and knew its declination cycle.

Agreed on the longitude - that's easy enough. (To tease you with another fact: By at least the 28th century BCE the last pentade of Taurus was named qd which is of uncertain meaning but possibly [probably?] means "the building.)

Cycle of declination is another matter. I doubt that very much. There aren't signs AFAIK of the Egyptians recording declination at all. They were ecliptic oriented, not equator oriented. It would have made much more sense in Babylon, but it's way to early for Babylon.

I can't buy as a coincidence Alnitak's Precessional declination cycle the same as Precessional Time cycle as the SVP cycle of Precessional Age of Leo & Aquarius, all Monumentally placed at Giza.

The only reason they have a time-connection is that Alnitak is in the last few minutes of Taurus. One might as well be surprised that Spica was the exact location of the autumnal equinox just over 70 years after the Pisces Age began. It just happened to be there.

I think Ancient Egypt possessed some excellent Precessional knowledge.

Understood. I think, though, that you are inferring it from something else that may or may not be true and (if true) may or may not have this cause. Consider this: If Egypt understood that the VP was something distinctive to calculate, the Sidereal zodiac probably never would have been conceived; and yet it was, and was the prevailing theory for thousands of years until precession was eventually discovered.

There is probably more to this Alnitak declination cycle represented by the 2 sets of 3 Queens Pyramids at Giza. If you ever find the time to read Lubicz “Sacred Science”, we could discuss some of his most interesting points about Ancient Egypt. “Sacred Science” is a most interesting book, one of my favorites with Lubicz quoting other ancient scholars about their travels/learnings to Egypt.

I read it long ago. Have forgotten all but the highlights. A brilliant man, it seems, but (from his time and expertise) not someone to take seriously about objective historical facts of astrology.

And I understand where you are coming from about Bullinger’s book... I dispute his ideology about the Bible but found it interesting he recognized the Sphinx was a Greek word meaning “to bind”-- symbolizing Virgo & Leo, and I don’t believe the Ancients were symbolizing a “binding” of these two Signs in a seasonal sense, but for a Precessional sense.

That's a literally correct translation, but I think misses the mark a bit. The Greek word sphinx comes from the root sphiggo. (A double gamma, gg, was pronounced like ng in ancient Greek, so sphiggo would have been pronounced "sphingo.") The root can indeed mean "to bind tight," or t least "to hold tight," but the emphasis is on the tightness, or squeezing, not on the connection itself. When a creature called "sphinx" appeared as a monster in Oedipus casting her riddles like a troll on a bridge, the name is usually translated in English as the "Throttler," the one who strangles. This choking, strangling, squeezing off meaning survives in at least one really important English word: sphincter!

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Understood. I think, though, that you are inferring it from something else that may or may not be true and (if true) may or may not have this cause. Consider this: If Egypt understood that the VP was something distinctive to calculate, the Sidereal zodiac probably never would have been conceived; and yet it was, and was the prevailing theory for thousands of years until precession was eventually discovered.

Excellent point Jim, I understand. I also believe the Sphinx is thousands of years older than the Pyramids at Giza proven by the science of Geology clearly showing extreme rain water erosion. Also the Sphinx is an Equatorial Marker for possibly the beginning of the Precessional Age of Leo, at the very least Leo was rising with the SVP 10,500 BC. Regardless when the Sphinx was built-- somebody knew to represent the Sphinx with a Lion’s (Leo) body and somebody knew the Sidereal Zodiac that the constellation of Leo was rising on a vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC. This can be proven scietifically with the new technology of Precessional Computer Programs encompassing + 20 thousand of years in the past. My research tells me there was probably an advance science of Precessional Astronomy dating back before the last Ice Age, or at the least this advance science of Precessional Astronomy existed for the architect of Giza, but without someone reading/research the same books as me---its difficult to explain.

7 min video below representing my above opinions with sound geological scientific research on the Sphinx, but mainstream orthodox archeologists reject. I don’t trust what a-lot of our history (“historical facts”) has taught us. Just as I damn sure don’t believe academia when they tell me astrology is bunk when I have proved to my mind otherwise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8A-6PoLc9nk

Jim, “historical facts” does not prove to me someone did not have the astronomical thinking intelligence with precessional astronomy to use the star Alnitak in Orion’s Belt for an exact maximum/minimum declination cycle which just so happens to fall on the beginning precessional ages of Leo and Aquarius. And then use a Sphinx with a Lion’s body with a Man’s head indicating the same Precessional Ages. IMO. we have a profound Precessional astronomical plan at Giza and I strongly believe it has something to do with Clark’s discovery Pharaonic Egypt had as their number one Myth something to do Tep Zepi, the First Time, in other words—Giza is representing “Tep Zepi, the First Time.” And, without knowledges of the Sidereal Zodiac and our SVP this astronomical ground plan at Giza is obscured. Just because a culture is thousands years old doesn’t mean there were not scientist with minds like Galileo, Kepler, or Newton who understood mathematical/astronomical science with Precession, which today’s orthodox academia would not dare accept as possibly true. Thanks for your feedback Jim . More later.

[Jim Eshelman]

I also believe the Sphinx is thousands of years older than the Pyramids at Giza proven by the science of Geology clearly showing extreme rain water erosion.

The word "clearly" seems an overstatement since geologists as a whole disagree with this opinion. Here's one handy summary of Schoch's controversial theories and conventional geology's response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphinx_wa ... er_erosion

Also the Sphinx is an Equatorial Marker for possibly the beginning of the Precessional Age of Leo, at the very least Leo was rising with the SVP 10,500 BC.

Equatorial marker? I'm not sure what this means. The Sphinx is currently 29N59 latitude. The obliquity of the ecliptic in 10,500 BCE wasn't too different from what it is today, 23°55' meaning that anything north of 23N55 wouldn't even have been considered "the tropics" let alone equatorial. The present site of Giza was nowhere near the equator. - Or perhaps I misunderstand what you mean here.

Regardless when the Sphinx was built-- somebody knew to represent the Sphinx with a Lion’s (Leo) body and somebody knew the Sidereal Zodiac that the constellation of Leo was rising on a vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC.

The first climb (lion's body) seems true, but this could have been for any number of reasons, including purely religious or ceremonial (or perhaps because, during the Taurus Age, Leo dominated the southern sky at the first moment of the new year - so many theories are possible).

Your second statement, that somebody knew "Leo was rising on a vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC," isn't supported by any of the facts you've cited. The Sphinx does look due east, so it is staring at the equinoctial rising Sun (both vernal and autumnal) every year, no matter what constellation it rose in. More importantly, though, is that Egyptian astronomy and astrology weren't Sun-based. I can't think offhand of any example of AE records preserving Sun's sign as a measuring point.

Jim, “historical facts” does not prove to me someone did not have the astronomical thinking intelligence with precessional astronomy to use the star Alnitak in Orion’s Belt for an exact maximum/minimum declination cycle which just so happens to fall on the beginning precessional ages of Leo and Aquarius.

I think we need to approach this from the other side. I think the question isn't "Is there anything that can disprove this theory?" but, rather, "Is there anything that can prove this theory?" Start with the working hypothesis that it isn't true and then find sufficient evidence to overwhelm that position and force you to think it must be true.

For example, your statement about Alnitak means only that Alnitak's longitude is 30° Taurus. That, by itself, is neither more nor less significant than the fact that Vega's longitude is 20° Sagittarius. It is only because it happens to fall at a sign dividing line that it seems more important than other facts.

Just because a culture is thousands years old doesn’t mean there were not scientist with minds like Galileo, Kepler, or Newton who understood mathematical/astronomical science with Precession...

I agree. It doesn't mean that at all. OTOH, Kepler and the others only understood precession because of Hipparchus' discoveries centuries earlier, i.e., there is no reason to think Kepler would have discovered precession. If he'd gone looking for it, he had the intelligence and skill, but may have been no obvious reason for him to have gone looking for it.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Equatorial marker? I'm not sure what this means.

Maybe a better choice of words would be a SVP marker in the Sidereal Zodiac as to what is rising on the horizon looking due East on the Spring Equinox.
Jim wrote:

The first climb (lion's body) seems true, but this could have been for any number of reasons, including purely religious or ceremonial (or perhaps because, during the Taurus Age, Leo dominated the southern sky at the first moment of the new year - so many theories are possible).

Agreed. It’s just my conclusion the Sphinx is a Precessional Age Marker with its symbols indicating a Precessional Age of Leo to the Precessional Age of Aquarius, the same half precessional cycle as the declination cycle of Alnitak. In order for me to offer strong supporting evidence for my Precessional conclusions, would require me to cite a-lot of material from many different books that strongly indicates to me there is some kind of “Sacred Science” involved with the Precessional Cycle, particularly involved with the 4 fixed Signs.
Jim wrote:

Your second statement, that somebody knew "Leo was rising on a vernal equinox c. 10,500 BC," isn't supported by any of the facts you've cited.

The main reason I stated this Jim, and the only way I probably could get you to understand where I am coming from would for you to read the book “Hamlet’s Mill” with Hamlet’s Mill representing the Precession Cycle itself. I am convinced there is an important part of humanity’s history missing but it’s kinda like explaining to a Tropical Astrologer there is another important zodiac to consider, The Sidereal Zodiac
Jim wrote:

I think we need to approach this from the other side. I think the question isn't "Is there anything that can disprove this theory?" but, rather, "Is there anything that can prove this theory?" Start with the working hypothesis that it isn't true and then find sufficient evidence to overwhelm that position and force you to think it must be true.

Well put Jim. The best way I can explain "Is there anything that can prove this theory?"--and grant you it is not a good explanation is: When I was working (3-days) with a very high grade psychic in Chicago in 1977, she took me to her mediation room and told me I would be “initiated” with some very important books (ISR one of em) in my life. I thought she was full of it, but now I realize she was so right and how important these books are for my life.
Jim wrote:

For example, your statement about Alnitak means only that Alnitak's longitude is 30° Taurus. That, by itself, is neither more nor less significant than the fact that Vega's longitude is 20° Sagittarius. It is only because it happens to fall at a sign dividing line that it seems more important than other facts.

No, there is much more than because it’s at the end of Taurus. It is difficult to explain but no big deal. Again, it would take a combination of books to read and understand why Alnitak means more to me with my Pyramidology work. Jim, the best way I can sum-up my conclusion about Giza is:
I strongly believe “Myth is the means of expression employed by sages who teach the esoterism of natural facts inexpressible in words.” And I strongly believe Randle Clark’s book “Myth and Symbols of Ancient Egypt” with his lifelong work coming to the conclusion that the Founding Myth for Pharaonic Egypt had something big to do with “Zep Tepi, the First Time”, and I strongly believe Giza is representing Zep Tepi, the First Time”, and our Sidereal Zodiac plays a big part in “Zep Tepi, the First Time.” And the greatest book I have ever read dealing with world’s Myth’s is “Hamlet’s Mill” which has absolutely proven to my mind that the Precession Cycle is buried in a hell of a lot of the World’s Myths, which is buried in Pre-History, it makes little sense from a mainstream perspective, yet there it is—in the World’s Myths. I am just following this huge Mystery where it leads me with my books. But probably the biggest Mystery I have encountered in my life are Solunars which speaks so much truth about our lives as: “Timing is everything,” and my life’s history has proven to me this is a historical fact. Anyway, thank so much for your feedback. I will next get into parts of Lubicz book “Sacred Science” The King of Pharaonic Theocracy.

[Veronica]

Steve wrote
". I am convinced there is an important part of humanity’s history missing but it’s kinda like explaining to a Tropical Astrologer there is another important zodiac to consider, The Sidereal Zodiac""

I absolutely completely 100% agree with this.
Society for the most part does not give a rat's aff about this story, and I doubt most ever will.
but for clarification I am referring to the Patriarchal culture in which women are nothing and men are everything important.

[SteveS]

I love studying/speculating about pre-history's possible past V, and I feel strongly Giza has something to do with the un-written past astronomically, but its difficult to put into words, at least for me. I have always been very interested in culture's who worshiped the Mother Principle of Nature as the true guiding healing spirit--not the male dominated cultures with their Mars inclinations.

[Veronica]

Finding words for our feelings is one of the biggest challenges of life it seems.
The whole thing is such a mystery, there are so many mysterious monuments on Earth, all over the place. I've tried figuring it all out myself, and all I come away with is that people are amazing, resilient, creative and loving creatures, and despite all the things that we did wrong, or could have done better throughout all of our humanity, we are still here trying everyday to get by as best we can. We all have a part to play and a contribution to the creativity of life itself, and some peoples contributions are very cool buildings of stone, and others are a knit pair of alpaca mittens, it all matters.
I encourage you to keep looking and digging and let us know what you find.

[SteveS]

V wrote:

I encourage you to keep looking and digging and let us know what you find.

Thanks V, I am always seeking.

[Jim Eshelman]

On this point of those earlier stages, you two might be interested in an excerpt from one of my books, Visions & Voices. I was writing about the "three aeons" - not astrologically distinguished periods, but stages in the neurological (and, consequently, sociological) evolution of humans. (These aeons are quite specifically unrelated to the Astrological Ages model.] The context of the discussion was explaining why Aleister Crowley spoke of "three aeons" after he received his channeled revelation in 1904; but my discussion was aimed at detailing something larger than that single framework. -- Steve, if this is jumping out of or derailing your discussion too much, I can come back and delete it. FWIW, I think the "First Time" of which you speak is what I call below the Aeon of Isis and is a time before humans developed ego distinction; and that AE reference to it is an emerging rational, ego-centered intellect struggling to think almost incomprehensibly about a time before self-conscious reason.

This [qabbalistic] model of the human psyche is useful in understanding another often obscure model, that of the three Æons.

At the time Crowley received The Book of the Law in 1904, some anthropologists had been focusing, for many years, on evidence of a matriarchal and matrilineal stage in human culture that had preceded the patriarchal and patrilineal form that had been principal especially in Europe for thousands of years.

Besides family structure and political and other social patterns believed to exist in this prior time, there were believed to be religious forms distinctive to the two broad time periods, as well as characteristic scientific models (particularly in astronomy) and commonplace theories of human reproduction.

Anthropology has gone further and has understood these things better in the century intervening. There were likely no discrete periods of time when all of these varied elements coexisted in quite the way previously thought. Nonetheless, it is important to understand how the theories of his day affected Crowley’s thinking, and also to understand what deeper actualities may have been working their way toward our conscious awareness in these earlier theories.

It is worth examining some of these patterns briefly.


Regarding procreation, common sense assures us that there surely was a time when the link between sexual intercourse and pregnancy was unknown. Early humans had sex, just as they did any number of other activities, and (with no necessary link observed) women got pregnant and delivered babies. During this time, everything from pragmatic respect to religious awe would have centered on woman in this role. Women did this amazing thing all by themselves!

At some point, though, the connection of pregnancy to sex would have been discovered, and this seems to have coincided with a shift of importance and social regard to the man. Creator gods replaced creator goddesses. The prevailing theory, then, was that men deposited children within women, whose job was “merely” to bear them nine months and deliver them whole. At Crowley’s birth [1875], this was still the general scientific theory of reproduction. I have seen one medical textbook as late as the 1920s asserting the same position.

However, by the dawn of the 20th Century, there was an emerging theory gaining ground that man and woman equally contributed parts of themselves to the creation of a child. That new knowledge would be pivotal in reformulating human thought and culture. The miracle was seen to be neither the man nor the woman alone, but their co-participation in the bringing forth of the real wonder, the child itself.


Regarding astronomy, we can track a different progression. There was a time when primitive humanity was interested almost exclusively in the conditions of the Earth – which certainly felt solid and unmoving! – and the wonders of the heavens (especially the nocturnal heavens) made them seem, most likely, the domains of gods. Astronomy was visual, not conceptual or mathematical, which means that it was lunar rather than solar: You could see the stars at night and the Moon’s monthly passage across them, but could not witness the stars behind the Sun. As late as early first millennium CE, Egyptian astronomers (who were pretty sophisticated) were still recording primarily lunar passages, although they had learned to track the Sun indirectly – by noticing the stars opposite the Sun’s position, those that first rose at sunset. On the other hand, another way to identify these stars was a lunar way: the occurrence, within a particular star field, of the Full Moon.

In the last millennium or two BCE, though, other solar phenomena had started to garner attention. In particular, the Sun’s annual seasonal cycle, swinging from high declination at summer solstice to walking low around the sky at winter solstice, appeared to be the life-rhythm of a great god of light that waxed and waned in strength. Even more so, the Sun’s daily behavior looked like the birthing, triumphing, and dying of heaven’s greatest lord, only to be resurrected afresh the next morning. It is no wonder, then, that humanity’s heroes and greatest gods became expressions of the Sun’s seasonal and diurnal behavior. In time, a slain or dying god, resurrected to new life and bringing new light, became the religious embodiment of many cultures’ highest ideals.

Medieval and Renaissance astronomy brought an end to the astronomical theories on which these ideas originally were based, though it took well into the 18th Century for the fall of geocentrism and related scientific models to find deep acceptance. By 1904, the world was ready for a new perspective.

Part of this new astronomical vision arose from a revolution in theoretical physics. In particular, 1904 also marked breakthroughs by Albert Einstein which led eventually to two competing and seemingly mutually exclusive models: a general theory of relativity, which works only in very large realms but collapses entirely in microscopic contexts; and a quantum theory that flourishes in the microscopic yet collapses in the macroscopic. Soon the crusade began to find a unifying model wedding these two “parent” theories. 21st Century physics may have found their “child” in the string theory of particle physics.


Regarding religion, especially in the West, patterns have unfolded more or less paralleling the astronomical theories mentioned above. In simple terms, primitive religions were focused primarily on Earth and the Moon. These, in time, were succeeded by a wave of religions that were primarily solar, and which particularly celebrated by metaphor the annual and daily birth-death-resurrection cycle of the Sun. The religion that Liber Legis introduced for a new stage of human evolution is stellar; that is, it is superficially solar, but recognizes the Sun no longer as a ruling father, king, or god, but as simply one more star amid countless other stars.


All of this is terribly interesting to me and to many others. It show many kinds of progression from an essentially feminine set of ideas, to ideas essentially masculine, to… something else: an era of “child” ideas that necessarily arise only from the collusion of their predecessors. What this survey does not provide, however, is a coherent timeline demarcating distinctive “æons” or zones of time, when all the feminine ideas lined up together, then were supplanted by all the masculine ones.

In the late 19th and early 20th Century, though, the idea of a “matriarchal” time supplanted by a “patriarchy” was quite popular.

When the message of The Book of the Law began to sink in for Crowley, he began to conceive of human history in three phases, or æons. He had already been told [by the channelled Book] that the New Æon just beginning was ruled by Horus, successor to his father Osiris. It was natural, therefore, to relate the earliest phase to Horus’ mother (and Osiris’ mate), Isis. Thus, he began to write of the Æon of Isis, the Æon of Osiris, and the Æon of Horus, which we might more generically call the Age of the Mother, Age of the Father, and Age of the Child. [FOOTNOTE: This casual use of the word “age” should not be confused with its astrological use. For example, the astrological Age of Pisces extends from 220-2376 CE, flowing right across the transition from the Æon of Osiris to that of Horus in 1904. (At the Vernal Equinox 1904, the vernal point was at 6°35'51" Pisces.)]

...But is there any legitimacy to these ideas at all? If they are not reflective of a convergence of social, political, familial, scientific, religious, and other overlapping ideas, are they anything at all?

I think they are. There is a further history of evolution in the human species that these “æons” actually map. It is the progressive development of each successive stratum of the human psyche.

I define the Æon of Isis as that period of history when the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human was Nephesh, or what we now call subconsciousness. This is still the typical state of consciousness of non-domestic animals (and, mostly, of most domestic animals), and what we term the infantile level of consciousness in modern humans. It is characterized by a herd-like collectivity, a natural empathic and even telepathic rapport, and a closer link to the land and all the forms of life arising from it.

I define the Æon of Osiris as that period of history when the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human has been Ruach (ego-consciousness) – that is, the “conscious” mind presently characteristic of a typical psychologically healthy human adult. This period has also been characterized by the reactive suppression of things most associated with “Isis” stage consciousness, including women, children, and small animals (as emblematic of Nephesh consciousness), and substantial conscious suppression and minimization of our relationship to subconsciousness in general, in the emergence of individual ego-distinction from the shared communion of subconsciousness.

I accept, based on evidence persuasive to me, that at some point around the start of the 20th Century humanity entered a third developmental phase. It is comfortable to me to accept that this is the Æon of Horus that Crowley said began in 1904, because that label and approximate timing match what I can observe from other information channels. And, as you surely will have anticipated by now, I define the Æon of Horus as that period of time within which the baseline level of functioning of the typical adult human will emerge as Neshamah, or what we generally call superconsciousness. Obviously, we are not there yet! Similarly, even in recent centuries we can see significant development in human ego formation, so that the Osiris Æon must be viewed as having been a gradual unfolding. Political liberty, for example, is a relatively new idea, measurable in mere centuries. The King Arthur myth, roughly a thousand years old, is a remarkable example of a solar king (symbolic of our baseline ego development) who, in all his majesty and glory, is still but a boy (as was collective ego-development of his time), still struggling with his relationships with Isis Æon ideas.

The ego was not a new invention of consciousness anytime in the last several thousand years; however, it has undergone substantial maturation in only the last few hundred, suggesting that it is a relatively new “organ” in recent millennia. [FOOTNOTE: The foundation pattern for the subsequent development of the Ruach (and, consequently, of Western Civilization) can be traced to a single place and time: the academies of Greece in the 5th Century BCE.] Similarly, superconsciousness is not new to humanity. Books such as Maurice Bucke’s Cosmic Consciousness and William James’ The Varieties of Religious Experience document important parts of its gradual emergence. But, for most of human history, it has been proportionately rare. As the 20th Century dawned, it seems that active, aware cosmic consciousness was becoming much more common.

We are looking at a “hundredth monkey” type of effect. Individual people have long wakened faculties of consciousness that typical people do not even know about, let alone use. But that does not mean that typical people do not have these faculties available to them. When a sufficient (small) percentage of people awaken these faculties, some mechanism – whether a shared band of consciousness, or the impact of social spread – will cause this awakening to spread radically across the face of humanity.

[Veronica]

Ya know Steve, I always thought it was just too dang obvious that the pyramids lined up with Orions belt. If you live there you see it with your own eyes. Orion is the most prominent constellation in many peoples minds, one of the easiest of all symbols to see. I always thought that maybe instead of the pyramids being lined up to Orions belt that maybe the lost secret mystery is they line up with a different constellation. What if it was a trick and they wanted us to think Orions belt was a big deal, but instead they were highlighting a different constellation? Maybe its inconsequential that it highlights Orions belt, but more import that it points out another cycle which we were able to see by looking at Orions belt and questioning existence. If our passionate human nature hadn't been so studiously inquisitive we would not be living with so much comfort around us.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Steve, if this is jumping out of or derailing your discussion too much, I can come back and delete it.

Not at all Jim, I think you make some valid points which indeed could have something to do with what the Ancient Egyptian Priests (AEP) (Pyramid Age) understood, but impossible to put into words. I think Crowley with what was channeled to him as the ages of “aeons” could very well be the same source of intelligence channeled to the AEP. I think you have put into words well as good food for thought something very difficult to put into words. But, you have always been gifted with putting the right words together, particularly when it comes to the language of Sidereal Astrology with helping natives, Mike too
Jim wrote:

I think they are. There is a further history of evolution in the human species that these “æons” actually map. It is the progressive development of each successive stratum of the human psyche. Similarly, superconsciousness is not new to humanity.

I think this important Jim, If I understand where you are coming from, Lubicz touched on these same issues in his book “Sacred Science.” I keep thinking of Confucius 4 genii (a genius source) strongly associated with the 4 fixed signs maybe with the precessional ages as possibly a peak with major timing sources through certain astrological ages for higher “superconsciousness” in history through possibly channeled psychic sources for higher knowledges. It could be a higher refined psychic superconscioness is astrologically related to the four fixed signs, I don’t know. You know with some of my past posts I have been around a-lot of some type of “superconsciousness” with high grade Psychics. I ask em where does their sight come from and they all tell me from some divine source. We see with the Pharaonic Culture born in full bloom with the beginning of the Age of Taurus, a very high “superconciseness” culture developed producing a very high civilization lasting close to 4,000 years before its final demise. I also strongly believe the high Priest of Ancient Egypt had refined knowledges with psychedelic substances which could have greatly aided their “psyches” (“superconsciousness”) to certain higher knowledges. Of course, my main interest would be with possible higher "superconsciousness" astronomical sources dealing with the Sidereal Zodiac . Jim, do you know if Crowley experimented with psychedelics? Thanks Jim for your feedback here with your last post.

V, I have been meaning to ask you: Was there a specific reason why you named your Son “Orion”. I have at times wondered about this...

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, do you know if Crowley experimented with psychedelics?

Extensively. (Those few that were available at his time.) He's the first person I know who mapped the specific consequences of individual drugs against the layers and phenomena of the human mind as described in Buddhism. (That was around 1909.)

[Jim Eshelman]

V, I have been meaning to ask you: Was there a specific reason why you named your Son “Orion”. I have at times wondered about this...

You mean it's not just that Orion was rising at her birth? The longitudes all just above horizon, Rigel and Betelgeuse mundanely a few degrees below, and Rigel precisely opposite her setting Mars?

[SteveS]

SteveS wrote:
Jim, do you know if Crowley experimented with psychedelics?
Jim replied:

Extensively. (Those few that were available at his time.)

I kinda figured he did. Do you know if Crowley was on psychedelics when he received the channeled information about the “aeons” ages?

He's the first person I know who mapped the specific consequences of individual drugs against the layers and phenomena of the human mind as described in Buddhism. (That was around 1909.)

Is there any available written material by Crowley on this “mapping”?
Jim wrote:

You mean it's not just that Orion was rising at her birth? The longitudes all just above horizon, Rigel and Betelgeuse mundanely a few degrees below, and Rigel precisely opposite her setting Mars?

Enough said.

Jim, during my most benefic Nov 24 SLR, I came into contact with James Powell’s 2020 book “Deadly Voyager,” link below. I consider it a very important book, possibility beginning important shifting paradigms in the scientific world of earth sciences. Also, I feel what possibly happened on Earth during the time period Powell is writing about could possibly have something to do with Giza. Since Powell resides in the LA area, are you familiar with his work? Also, if you happen to come across his AA Natal, I would be most interested. Thanks Jim.
http://www.jamespowell.org/

[SteveS]

For your entertainment, 50 min Nova (PBS) broadcast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKVYAXZnXps

And now with the recent 2020 book, “Deadly Voyager” by James Powell, I have become convinced Powell has proven with solid documented scientific proof that an extinction level event occurred on our Planet 12,800 years ago caused by pieces of a large fragmented comet. I think large fragments of this comet hit the massive North American/European Ice Sheets causing massive floods (think of Noah’s Biblical Flood) which has been recorded in many different cultures of World’s Flood Myths. This new scientific data (comet data) began in 2007.

But, what really peaks my interest are the Precession Cycle material also contained in the World’s Myths, proven to me by the book “Hamlet’s Mill”, representing the Precession Cycle itself. This is more mysterious to me than the Flood Myth’s, but I love a good Mystery . Giza could possibly be some kind of an extension with the World’s Precession Cycle Myths proven (to me) with the book Hamlet’s Mill. More later

[Jim Eshelman]

Do you know if Crowley was on psychedelics when he received the channeled information about the “aeons” ages?

Drugs are possible but not psychedelics, though that's unclear. During his entire time in Egypt on that trip, it seems likely and in character that he had regular access to hashish. During most of his life, he'd have been scrupulously recording such things in his diaries, but the diaries of that period are extremely sparse. I suspect hashish at least during the days themselves if not during the channeled writing, but no suspicion of psychedelics.

He's the first person I know who mapped the specific consequences of individual drugs against the layers and phenomena of the human mind as described in Buddhism. (That was around 1909.)

Is there any available written material by Crowley on this “mapping”?

He wrote an article called "The Herb Dangerous" under the pen name Oliver Haddo in The Equinox No, 1 and 2. I believe (but I'm not sure) that this is what Israel Regardie published in the '60s under the title, "Roll Away the Stone." If you're curious and have an Amazon Prime membership, I suggest you get the $0 free Kindle version (you can read it on the Kindle Reader software if you don't have a Kindle) then, if you like the book, spend the $30 price for slim paperback (or much higher price for collectibles). I don't have "Roll Away the Stone" so I can't check directly that it's the right reprint.

Jim wrote:

You mean it's not just that Orion was rising at her birth? The longitudes all just above horizon, Rigel and Betelgeuse mundanely a few degrees below, and Rigel precisely opposite her setting Mars?

Enough said.

Since Powell resides in the LA area, are you familiar with his work?

Not by name. A quick Google search alerts me he has written about possible historic comet strikes and I may have read news accounts if he had anything published in the major journals, but I don't recognize him by name.

[Veronica]

V, I have been meaning to ask you: Was there a specific reason why you named your Son “Orion”. I have at times wondered about this...

You mean it's not just that Orion was rising at her birth? The longitudes all just above horizon, Rigel and Betelgeuse mundanely a few degrees below, and Rigel precisely opposite her setting Mars?

But I had absolutely no knowledge of that, I only learned that in my time here.
Because that's who he is Steve, that's the name that fit, I read each and every book of names and words. I tried thousands of names and none fit. Right before he was born, when the constellation was bright and my husband was exasperated with my shooting down of all names came in from outside and said how about Orion, and it lit up my heart. That's who he is. Orion.


I feel that our ancestors saw Orion, and it inspired them and helped them stand tall and be brave.

[SteveS]

From Lubicz book "Sacred Science" Appendix V1 The Egyptians' Knowledge of Astronomy:

The Egyptians, taking advantage of the favorable conditions, appropriated to themselves the knowledge of astronomy, which they were the first to study….the Chaldeans of Babylon, being colonists from Egypt, enjoy the fame which they have for their astronomy because they learned that science from the priest of Egypt.
The disposition of the stars as well as their movements have always been the subject of careful observations among the Egyptians….they have preserved to this day the records concerning each of these stars over an incredible number of years, this study having been zealously preserved among them from ancient times.
Diodoros of Sicily, op. cit. V, 57, and 1, 81.

[Jim Eshelman]

Yes, that's pretty basic history. We have better resources than Diodoros Siculii today, but the above seems exactly right.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

Yes, that's pretty basic history. We have better resources than Diodoros Siculii today, but the above seems exactly right.

What Lubicz and J. Norman Lockyer (“The Dawn of Astronomy”) proved to themselves with their studies of Ancient Egypt was there was a working knowledge of Precessional Astronomy at this time. IMO, what we should be asking ourselves with an open mind when Diodoros said:

…they (Egyptians) have preserved to this day the records concerning each of these stars over an incredible number of years…

Is—what does an "incredible number of years" encompass, since "these stars" change sky positions with precession? I love studying ancient history.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim wrote:

Yes, that's pretty basic history. We have better resources than Diodoros Siculii today, but the above seems exactly right.

What Lubicz and J. Norman Lockyer (“The Dawn of Astronomy”) proved to themselves with their studies of Ancient Egypt was there was a working knowledge of Precessional Astronomy at this time.

You mention Lockyer... who disappointed me, probably because I had gigantic expectations. He was right about so much. Lockyer was an extraordinary figure in science (he discovered helium! - and founded Nature, which still persists as Earth's publication of peer reviewed authenticated science). His credentials are sound and he deserves the respect of an honest hearing, but his work doesn't at all demonstrate a pre-classical knowledge of precession. (For example, one can entirely orient buildings to the equinoxes and solstices with no knowledge of precession at all.)

Lubicz, on the other hand, wasn't an archaeologist. He was an occultist with religious and right-wing political agendas that rightly interpreted the religious nature of much inside the pyramids, then used them to support his religious and occult views. We have to be careful not to confuse his writings with actual archaeology.

I was a huge fan in my teens of James Churchward's stunning presentations and arguments as well - his Mu works owned my attention for years alongside other subjects. But, again, he was wrong. (I regret that my American Astrology article on Mayan astrology has so much of a Churchwardian flavor about it. I'm pretty sure everything I wrote in that article is wrong, especially my attempt to retrofit their calendar structures to the Nakshatras.)

IMO, what we should be asking ourselves with an open mind when Diodoros said:

…they (Egyptians) have preserved to this day the records concerning each of these stars over an incredible number of years…

Is—what does an "incredible number of years" encompass, since "these stars" change sky positions with precession? I love studying ancient history.

This would have been true if I'd only meant a few centuries; but by Diodoros' time, the Egyptians had at least 2,500-3,000 years of astronomical records and probably more. That's certainly "an incredible number of years," don't you think?

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

(For example, one can entirely orient buildings to the equinoxes and solstices with no knowledge of precession at all.)

Jim, I realize this about the equinoxes and solstices. But Lubicz/Lockyear proved to me the Ancients were orintating their Temple's enterances using precession with the rising/setting of stars. And then after 2-3 hundred years were reorintating their same temples (entrances) to new locations for the stars risings. If you had the books and page numbers I had, I may have a chance to explain this better, but its no big deal. Nobody's knows for sure their possible knowledge with the Precession Cycle. I am only making converstation which I find interesting/true.

[Jim Eshelman]

Jim, I realize this about the equinoxes and solstices. But Lubicz/Lockyear proved to me the Ancients were orintating their Temple's enterances using precession with the rising/setting of stars.

That only requires observing the stars at the time you are building the temple. They were aligning them visually, not by calculation or theory. You don't need to know about precession to do this (it's irrelevant to the process). - Of course, WE have to know about precession to look back and confirm what they could have seen just by looking out a doorway.

And then after 2-3 hundred years were reorintating their same temples (entrances) to new locations for the stars risings.

Again, you don't need to know about precession for this. After 2-3 hundred years, the VP would have moved 3-5° and, again, they would just have to observe where things were at that time. It took no calculation.

[SteveS]

Jim wrote:

It took no calculation

Lubicz shows the Ancient Egyptians (AE) knew how to calculate the heliacal rising of Sirius, if this is true, could not they calculate the rate of Precession with Stars?

In Lubicz book “Sacred Science” about Ancient Egypt; Appendix V titled “Catalogue of Egyptian Books According to Clement of Alexandria, Clement states what these books were about. Lubicz writes from Appendix 5:

It is possible to verify the statements of Clement of Alexandra regarding the existence of veritable libraries. One of the chambers in the Temple of Edfu, bearing the name of Chamber of Writings (bear in mind we are dealing with writings which are already very ancient), has a list of works (12) carved on one of its walls:

Clement states: “Numerous chests containing books with large rolls of parchment.”
1 of these books pertain to:

{Book} of knowing the return to their stations of the Sun and the Moon.

Could not we interpret this book as having to do with high % Sidereal Astrology’s Solunars?
Another of these books pertain to:

Book which regulates the return of the stars.

Could have something to do with calculating the Precession Cycle, almost a certainly with the return of the heliacal rising of Sirius.
Lubicz continues from Appendix V:

In any case, “all of these Books or this collection of Books was known to the Greeks under the name of Hermetic Books, because having assimilated the Egyptian Thoth with Hermes, they considered him, according to the ancient tradition along the banks of the Nile, to be the author of these Books.”1

Lubicz states:

Many realities about Ancient Egyptian (AE) Sacred Sciences confirmed by the texts, for some incomprehensible reason displeases Egyptologists

IMO, the Egyptologist telling the world Giza was built as tombs for Phararos is a crock, leading me to highly suspect what orthodox Egyptologists tells me as the truth with the this ancient culture, particularly when most all Egyptologists know absolutely nothing about astronomy or precession, nor things about the Sidereal Zodiac. The real astronomers who have studied AE seem to be divided as to what the AE astronomers knew or not knew. I am not saying everything Lubicz wrote in "Sacred Science" is true, but I would beleive Lubicz scholarship over most other orthordox teachings about AE. Lubicz was a complete independent with no ties to any orthordox academia estalishments whereas most all Egyptologists were funded by orthordox academia. Lubicz was independently well-off economically---he was not writting to make $, he was writting what he felt as the truths about Ancient Egypt, but again this does make him correct on everything he was writting about, noboby knows for sure...

Next, I will post some on what Lubicz beleived the AE astronomers knew about calculating the rate of Precessional Movements of the Stars, as well as calculating the heliacal rising of Sirius for different locations in Egypt.