How old is the Egyptian/Asetian Empire? (Discussion)

A'nen Sedjet wrote:
But there is so little proof of these origins, scientists to this day all argue between Sumerian, Assyrian, Egyptian, Indian origins of things, there just isn't any positive scientific proof yet.

This assumption is not entirely correct, in terms of modern science as in terms of known history.

Assyria, as the old nation in Mesopotamia, has the oldest Assyrian rulers dating as far back as 2000BC and never older, ruling them out. Before that there was no Assyrian monarchy, or kingdom for that matter. That is, if you are not mentioning Assyria as the province of the Persian Empire, which dates even more modern (around 500BC).

As far as India goes, we assume Indian history from the beginning of the civilization from the Indus Valley, and that settlement does not go further than 3500BC (and this is even stretching a bit some of our carbon-based datations). But if we refer to the Vedic period, from where much of the Hindu occult and metaphysical knowledge flourished, then we are talking about a shifting period between the Bronze Age India and Iron Age India, which is even more modern (between 1000BC and 500BC according to most modern datations).

Now the civilization that so many like to falsely proclaim as the cradle of civilization - Sumer. The Sumerian history is the one that may cause more confusion in this subject, however, it still remains highly modern in terms of history when compared to Ancient Egypt. And yes, I am afraid the proofs you so asked are quite scientifical.

The neolithic period of the Sumerian civilization goes far back, in an extreme maximum of 5500BC (probably less), in what is known as the Ubaid period, followed by the more well known Uruk period after 4000BC.

Now... Egypt.
I can surpass the ages of all those civilizations with a single example - The Great Sphinx of Giza.

The immortal monument was first dated by direct correlation with the Khafre pyramid in the Giza plateau, pointing to an age around 2500BC, not being too precise. This was done by mere assumption that the face of the Sphinx resembled the face of a statue of the Pharaoh Khafre. Clearly not the way how Egyptology should be done and reason why there are still so many misconceptions in modern Egyptology.
Anyways, putting mere assumptions by the side and centering on pure science, we directed to the aid of Geology. The proper analysis of erosion padron on the bedrock of the Sphinx exposed quite a dramatic truth... the monument is at the very least older than 10.000BC. Several theories flourished on the top of that scientific evidence and much speculation, which is out of the scope of this thread. Anyways, without trying to lift much of the veil and bringing too much confusion into the post, that Geological datation acomplishes more than just to reset the date of the Sphinx far back, but fully redesigns medieval Egyptology. Are the 3 Pyramids really correctly dated? Are they really tombs of Pharaohs? Did Pharaohs really give their names to those huge structures? Or did in fact they merely used the name of those Temples as their own Pharaohnic names?

I leave all the answers up to you. But don't mention there is lacking proof, as far as I can tell, the most state-of-the-art research in history and science supports more easily the Asetian history and the Asetian facts, than many theories of most modern Egyptologists.

Maktub

WOW

For quite some time I have been reading more than participating, but this time I simply could not help myself. What a freaking knowledge showdown from Maktub. Amazing display of knowledge in a very concise and direct answer. In my opinion one of the best posts I have seen so far. I am deeply impressed.

Just wanted to express my admiration by Maktub's posts, generally on this forum. It is rare to find anywhere on the internet, or out of it, someone with such a sense of expression, knowledge and teaching. Clearly all definitions of a quite evolved being.

Thank you.

Jonathan

Yes, thank you Maktub for your wonderful information

Now . . .
If the Sphinx was built 12,000 BC, that means that in only 88,000 years
(from the 100,000 year date for Homosapiens), we went from basic
Homosapien to constellation-worshiping monument builders during an ice
age, which is highly unlikely.

The face of the Great Sphinx is believed to be the head of the pharaoh
Khafra, which would date its construction to
the Fourth Dynasty 2723–2563BC.

However, there are some alternative theories that re-date the Sphinx to
pre-Old Kingdom (before 2770-2200BC) and according to one hypothesis,
to prehistoric times (12,000BC).

The timeline I am looking at says around 10,000-6,000BC there was a
shift from the 'Hunter/Gatherer' attitude to 'Food Producer' in some
areas.. West Asia initially, and Egypt by 6,000BC. Somewhere after
this, the Lion become a depiction for a Sphinx.

The first Hieroglyphics in Egypt came around 3100, well before the Old
Kingdom (2770-2200BC), but hieroglyphs do not appear on the Sphinx as
far as I'm aware, which is odd as well, as most Egyptian New kingdom
architecture has them. So that would date it Old-Kingdom or older.

The Egyptians seem to pre-date the Greek Minoans by 770 years also, who
appeared over 500 years from 2000-1500BC when they were wiped out.
What names ancient Egyptians called the Sphinx statues is unknown. The
Arabic name of the Great Sphinx, Abu al-Hôl, translates as "Father of
Terror".

There was a single Sphinx in Greek mythology, a
unique demon of destruction and bad luck, according to Hesiod, a
daughter of the Chimera and Orthrus, or, according to others, of Typhon
and Echidna - all of these Chthonic figures.

She was
represented in vase-painting and bas-reliefs most often seated upright
rather than recumbent, as a winged-lion with a woman's head; or she was
a woman with the paws, claws and breasts of a lion, a serpent's tail
and birdlike wings.

Greek Mythology: Hera or Ares sent the Sphinx from her Ethiopian homeland (for the
Greeks remembered the Sphinx's foreign origins) to sit outside Thebes
(Karnak) and ask all passersby history's most famous riddle: "Which
creature in the morning goes on four feet, at noon on two, and in the
evening upon three?" She strangled anyone unable to answer.

The
word "sphinx" comes from the Greek 'Σφινξ' or 'Sphinx', apparently from
the verb 'σφινγω' or 'sphingo', meaning 'to strangle'.

Oedipus
solved the riddle: MAN – he crawls on all fours as a baby, then walks
on two feet as an adult, and walks with a cane in old age.

. . . just some food for thought!

Brilliant, brilliant post by Maktub. Always a pleasure to read and to learn.

A'nen Sedjet, your post basically pastes information from other websites, which without quoting or referring the source, does not look so good. Besides it barely added anything to the discussion.

I believe what Maktub said gives much to think and talk about...
Again, bravo!

These were discussions I had on other forums in the past I though would be of use, perhaps I was wrong.
The crux of it was that there's a very good chance that the Sphinx was of Greek origin.

A'nen Sedjet wrote:These were discussions I had on other forums in the past I though would be of use, perhaps I was wrong.
The crux of it was that there's a very good chance that the Sphinx was of Greek origin.

Dude... are you insane?

Even yourself stated the impossibility in dates for that. Greeks are modern. The Sphinx is old/ancient.
The only thing Greek about the Sphinx is the name we call it, since we don't know what the Egyptians used to call it. Although there is a very tiny hint in the Asetian Bible towards the meaning behind the Sphinx, or part of it, for those that were aware enough to notice it.

Amazing post Maktub, highly informative, as always.

A'nen Sedjet, how can you think the origin of the Sphinx is Greek? Can you try and explain that with your own words and not precisely pastes from various different websites without any links given? I just cannot understand how one can think such a thing, when it is more than obvious how the Greeks are modern, as Victor also stated...

Aghrab

Sure, as good as Maktub's post is (which it is) it is entirely based on the assumption of a water eroded base. That is quite iffy at best.
Where, in Egyptian mythology do we have anything that resembles the Sphinx? But, we do have a very close resemblance of it in the Greek myth I stated. There are also closer resemblances in Assyrian / Akkadian & Sumerian mythology.

As I posted 'The Egyptians seem to pre-date the Greek Minoans by 770 years' . . . 770 years is not that much of a difference. But I was not stating that I believe the Greeks to have built the structure, I was merely pointing out the similarities of the Sphinx in Greek mythology, and that they are cited as recalling its origin as being Ethiopia.

Again, I was merely throwing some other ideas out there . . . pardon me for posting. I'll certainly keep it to myself next time.

A'nen Sedjet wrote:Where, in Egyptian mythology do we have anything that resembles the Sphinx?

I can't understand what you are questioning here , in fact I think that no other culture has embraced felines as the Egyptians did in ancient times ,many of the primeval deities of Egypt are feline, starting with Akeru the Lion God , then Godesses Mafdet ,Bast , Seckmet , God Mahes many of them embodying almost similar roles -guardian of doors of the Underworld and of Sacred Places ,fierce wariors and protectors of the Gods ,slaughters of Apep ,protectors of Egypt , keepers of the Law and executioners

A'nen Sedjet wrote:Sure, as good as Maktub's post is (which it is) it is entirely based on the assumption of a water eroded base. That is quite iffy at best.
Where, in Egyptian mythology do we have anything that resembles the Sphinx?

That is no assumption, that is science. Geology is one of the oldest and most solid scientific forces known by mankind. What is there iffy at fully carved water drainages fossilized in limestone bedrock? That cannot in any way be developed during the periods of Dynastic Egypt, since the paleo weather is more than well researched for those times, especially due to Sahara's proximity. It leaves no error margin, that construction is older... and far older than any Greek people. Not older by centuries, but older by milleniums. This is irrefutable, no matter what Egyptology theories people go by. Thinking of the Sphinx as a Greek construction is ridiculous at its best, and insulting of the Egyptian people at its least.
As Hellen correctly stated, the usage of Sphinxian iconography is more than recurrent in the Egyptian culture, does not need a genius to extend the parallels. But then we have the astronomical alignments of the monument, and that is unlike anything Greek. The Greeks, in none of their constructions ever came even near the precision and detail used by Egyptians in what comes to astronomical alignment and perfectionism.

At the end, if you still want to parallel the Sphinx of the Greek mythology with the feline-body construction of the Giza plateau, the answer is as always in front of your eyes. The Greeks copied it. Nearly their full mysteries, spirituality and science was took out of Ancient Egyptian influence and inspiration to be then revamped in a mix of mythologies that lacks the spirituality and the depth that was achieved by the Egyptians. They took a religious cult of the natural and universal powers of cosmos, of a deep knowledge of Life, Death and Rebirth, and inspired by it they created a blend of godhood mythos with a strong value of the masculine body appearance, which was fully opposed to the Egyptian aesthetic value, which saw the beauty and body of women as the equinox of sacredness on Earth, being that the pure definition of beauty.

Maktub

Alright chill out everybody, I'm not disrespecting the Egyptians nor am I saying I believe these ideas, I am just throwing them out (didn't I say that already) and allowing those in the know to comment on them. If the proper etiquette of this forum is not to pose alternative ideas to discuss and to just agree with everything Egyptian, then excuse my ignorance.


The Age of Leo was from 10,970 to 8810 BC . . . would that have any significance?

What of the concept that within 90,000 years (if the Sphinx was indeed built around 10, 000 BC) Man went from primitive Homosapien / hunter-gatherers to sophisticated metaphysical architects? I do suppose almost 100,000 years is quite a long time.
Although placing the Sphinx older than that puts it in a place in time where Man was just not capable of these constructions.

Furthermore, as I think about it and read more, I'm going to suggest the Sphinx to be a statue of Anubis and the erosion of the base to be caused by a moat filled with water. As there is still water beneath the Sphinx according to scientists. The water being raised by wooden devices called norias which were used throughout the Nile Delta.

The 5th century Greek historian Herodotus states the the body of Cheops lies in the island surrounded by water . . . could this be the moat encircled Sphinx guarded by Anubis?

A'nen Sedjet wrote:Alr

What of the concept that within 90,000 years (if the Sphinx was indeed built around 10, 000 BC) Man went from primitive Homosapien / hunter-gatherers to sophisticated metaphysical architects? I do suppose almost 100,000 years is quite a long time.
Although placing the Sphinx older than that puts it in a place in time where Man was just not capable of these constructions.

As far as i'm concerned i believe that this question , your question in itself it is a proof of what Maktub said that science itself supports the Asetian history .These are primordial times of Sep Tepy when Gods lived on Earth together with humans teaching them science and architecture , medicine ,and initiating them in metaphysics and this was the time when to my believe the Sphinx and Pyramids were raised , possibly by men , but with the science of Gods .


Hellen

And I also believe that the Sphinx was female , not male.

A'nen Sedjet wrote:Furthermore, as I think about it and read more, I'm going to suggest the Sphinx to be a statue of Anubis and the erosion of the base to be caused by a moat filled with water. As there is still water beneath the Sphinx according to scientists. The water being raised by wooden devices called norias which were used throughout the Nile Delta.

The 5th century Greek historian Herodotus states the the body of Cheops lies in the island surrounded by water . . . could this be the moat encircled Sphinx guarded by Anubis?

Unlikely. The water erosion marks are of intense tropical rain, not lakes or any other water formation. There are several scientific works published that support this, however, the Aset Ka itself has scientific work done on that field, by their own team of Geologists. And yes, the Order has several scientific teams assembled in their structure, although their research works are not published under the designation of "Aset Ka". That is, the ones that actually reach the light of day. Those decisions of what to publish or what to keep surpass any of us and reflect reasons that we may not be aware of.

Maktub

Hellen wrote:And I also believe that the Sphinx was female , not male.

I believe the Sphinx had no sexual polarity. Check its iconography present on the Asetian Tree of Life, published in the Asetian Bible. See its location on the universal Tree.

Maktub

The Sphinx is Amon?

Maktub wrote:

Hellen wrote:And I also believe that the Sphinx was female , not male.

I believe the Sphinx had no sexual polarity. Check its iconography present on the Asetian Tree of Life, published in the Asetian Bible. See its location on the universal Tree.

Maktub

i see what you mean ,did not thought of it and it will take some time for me to fit it in , while to my understanding Atum was not embodied and did not descend on Earth as the Four Rulers of Egypt did

Maktub, Interesting discussion. But in reading the posts, it brings up a question that I would have for you. The question is
how accurate do you consider the information from Zecharia Sitchin regarding earlier history?

Regards,

Maxx

Maxx wrote:Maktub, Interesting discussion. But in reading the posts, it brings up a question that I would have for you. The question is
how accurate do you consider the information from Zecharia Sitchin regarding earlier history?

Science fiction.
Now, really, I am not the right guy for you to ask that question. Most of his work and theories are around UFO/Alien nonsense, being him one of the proponents of a variant of those theories. To cut my story straight, I am one of the active opposers of all alien-driven theories for ancient history, especially Egypt, and a strong opposer of all that New Age fountain of highly creative theories. To me they are hilarious at best and culturally insulting at least.

Are you into his theories?

Maktub

I just picked up one of his books called Divine Encounters and started to read it. It brought to mind a question I had from reading just a short time is........why have not others reached the same decision that he has from what he says he has deciphered. I am assuming that the info is there for everyone to see and read.......the same things he is talking about. If that would be the case, then why is he the only one coming out with this info. I am aware of all the books he has put out but have never read any of them. This would be my first.

In light of the above discussion, I thought my question would fall into some area of what he is talking about and I know you would have knowledge of this.

Now, one theory I do agree with is the UFO connection. I would believe that the beings from the UFO's would have something to do with the areas of intelligence we see from the past in different cultures. It does not happen over a long period but it is input in what looks lilke a single bound or flash and then mankind progresses.

AND, I do not even begin to think that the Egyptians built the large items by themselves with no help. I am of opinion that the Gods were the instagators of this type of building. Maybe what I have written above comes close to what Sitchin puts out even tho I have never read his works before. Mankind had to be more developed in the past than what it appears he/she is at this time. The primary reason for this has to come from another dimension.

Regards,

Maxx

Maxx wrote:Now, one theory I do agree with is the UFO connection. I would believe that the beings from the UFO's would have something to do with the areas of intelligence we see from the past in different cultures. It does not happen over a long period but it is input in what looks lilke a single bound or flash and then mankind progresses.

AND, I do not even begin to think that the Egyptians built the large items by themselves with no help. I am of opinion that the Gods were the instagators of this type of building. Maybe what I have written above comes close to what Sitchin puts out even tho I have never read his works before. Mankind had to be more developed in the past than what it appears he/she is at this time. The primary reason for this has to come from another dimension.

I can understand and make sense out of Universal Gods coming to this realm to boost our abilities, knowledge and powers, as it may have happened in Egypt. But I can't really fit in my mind that being done by extraterrestrial beings that came from other planets. Superior beings from other realms, illuminated or godly souls, I can grasp, but aliens is just a bit too far fetched for me.

Hi

I like when the forum get's animated on a discussion or other , and i wish to be always like this , because is a good way to learn and sometimes correct some thoughts
now i am thinking 'aliens' could be just another wrong name , people always rush to call names and build philosophies on a picture they not fully see and things they not always fully understand , all religions are made of that...


Hellen

That is what I am saying, that the aliens and the Gods were one and the same. Look at some of the pictures of UFO's and the Gods that appear to be that they were connected on the walls. In thinking about what is written in the Aset Bible, how could you not connect it from the beginning to the end any other way? Also, I would love to hear what Maktub would base his statement on, the cartoon section, I mean.
Aren't I mischievous?

Regards,

Maxx

Maxx wrote:That is what I am saying, that the aliens and the Gods were one and the same. Look at some of the pictures of UFO's and the Gods that appear to be that they were connected on the walls. In thinking about what is written in the Aset Bible, how could you not connect it from the beginning to the end any other way? Also, I would love to hear what Maktub would base his statement on, the cartoon section, I mean.
Aren't I mischievous?

Regards,

Maxx

Well, you see, what you said and what i said is not quite the same thing , i'm not pro ufo theories , i see them like just another human try to explain and express metaphysics


Hellen