Such a trip is related to the Egyptian concept of the Tuat or Duat, which, since it contains neither water nor air, and is “an unfathomable abyss... dark with the blackest darkness” wherein a man can wander, and in which there is no life, is space itself.531 At this point, notes Rux, a journey through the Tuat “not only involves one Sphinx - it involves two.”532
A double sphinx (Aker)533 can be seen depicted in the Pyramid Texts and the Book of the Dead, being either two sphinxes back to back with a solar disk between them, or else a single body with one head gazing eternally east (as ours does at Cairo), and the other gazing eternally west...it is referred to as the “Great God who opens the Gates of Earth.”534
The Pa-Ra-Emheb Stele, moreover, refers precisely to “Ra’s building of the Sphinx in his image amid a ‘protected place in the Sacred Desert’ with a ‘hidden name,’ the place of the ‘King of the Gods’ in the ‘secret underworld’.” Additionally, this stele also mentions “the extension of cords and a crossing of the sky to the subterranean world where secret things are made.“535 And as if that were not enough, Rux states that Wallis Budge himself wrote in 1934 that
Mars... was called Hor-Tesher, the “Red Horus,” He was said “to journey backwards in traveling,” and he was also known as “Harakhti,” “Horus of the Two Horizons.” The God of this planet was Ra; he had the head of a hawk with a star above it.” The Cydonia Sphinx of Mars is to all appearances exactly that: the head of a hawk with a star above it, the star (diadem) containing a stylized human face.536
Consequently we have the following relationships:
• The association of Mars with Ra;
• Ra’s association with two sphinxes;
• The existence of the Sphinx at Giza, which may be associated with Ra through the use of red paints on its beard;
• The apparent existence of a sphinx or chimerical Face on Mars, depicting both humanoid and feline aspects in its two halves, and an ornithological or bird-like quality when viewed as a whole, which is associated with Ra’s depiction as the “Falcon of the Horizon;
• The use of the term “eye” to refer not only to planets, as with the red and blue eyes of Horus referring to Mars and Earth respectively, but also to refer to weapons, as with the Eye of Ra, which is used by Sekhmet to destroy all life on earth in a fiery conflagration;
• The association of Ra’s “eye” with his diadem, which parallels the lapis exilis or “stone of power” of Lucifer in the Christian tradition,537 and the evident presence of just such a diadem in the “humanoid” version of the 1998 Mars Orbital Camera’s imaging of the Martian Sphinx;
• The apparent association of Ra, as a sun-god, not only with light, but apparently with crystals, as with the stone or “eye” of his diadem;
• The association of mankind, of Adam, with the ”red earth“, i.e., the Red Planet of Mars; and, from chapter two,
• The association of Mars with the “scarred warrior” of some ancient mythological motifs, a scarring quite visibly demonstrated in the massive scar of the Valles Marineris.
And last, but surely not least,
• The clear association of Mars with warfare.
These associations allow us to hypothesize both who was involved in this paleoancient war, and where it was fought, for these associations indicate that the warfare referred to in ancient Sumerian and Egyptian texts was interplanetary - cosmic — in nature, and involved at the minimum, both Mars and Earth, and their “gods.” And we have now yet another variation on our now familiar formula:
Mountains ≈ Celestial Bodies ≈ Pyramids ≈ Eyes ≈ Weapons.
Perhaps, in the light of this formula, it is not surprising that the Martian Sphinx should likewise be near a “protected compound” of pyramids, the most massive of which is the celebrated five-sided D & M Pyramid! We would, however, be remiss if we did not take note of the other players...
6. Saturn and Jupiter
Interestingly enough, Scandinavian tradition records that Saturn (Greek Kronos) was involved in dismembering the body of the deity Mimer, yet another mythological allusion, from a wholly different quarter than that of Sumer or Egypt, with their “dismembering” of Tiamat or Osiris, indicating that Saturn, perhaps, or one of its satellites, may have also been involved in this ancient war.538 Similarly, Marduk, as a sun-god, is associated not only with Ra and the Sun, but also with the planet Jupiter. We have already observed that De Santillana and Von Dechind note the peculiar association of Saturn with Mars.
But while there is abundant evidence that Mars might have once been a water bearing planet and, as the Martian ruins attest, home to intelligent life, the picture is not so easy when it comes to the two gas giants of the solar system. Clearly neither could be the home to any intelligent life as we know it.
However, Richard C. Hoagland has recently pointed out the peculiarly artificial characteristics of Saturn’s little moon, Iapetus, in a brilliant, and breathtaking paper posted on his website, entitled “Moon with a View.”539 We shall have more to say on this matter in a subsequent chapter. But for now we merely note the following: external planetary evidence from Saturn’s moon Iapetus would appear to corroborate in loose fashion the mythological association of Mars, Earth, and Saturn in an ancient interplanetary war that destroyed a citilization based in part on those worlds.
In this regard it is intriguing that Rux finds an association of the Egyptian god Thoth with the ringed planet.540 Moreover, one version of the Book of the Dead, the Ra papyrus in the Leiden Museum, even has Thoth ordering the Deluge.541 The association of Thoth with the Deluge has been noted elsewhere,542 but now Thoth clearly enters the picture as one of the main players not only in events subsequent to the Deluge, as much esoteric tradition maintains, but in events leading up to it. He becomes a part of the conceptual matrix along with Ra, Marduk, Ninurta, Nergal, the Sun, the Earth, Mars, Saturn, the war, and its associated technologies. And as if all of this were not enough to consider, even rabbinical tradition associates Mars with the serpent of Paradise.543
In the face of all these diverse and yet intricately interlocking details, it is perhaps not surprising, then, that the Hopi Indian nation of North America has a tradition that the world in and on which they live is their fourth world. Their third world, to which they fled after their second world was destroyed, was not only colored red, but lay in the astronomical “east”. After their arrival here, on their fourth world, the former red world was now referred to as being in the west. As Rux observes,
This, along with the description of a world destroyed by spinning off its axis and perishing in a Flood, make for a good argument that Earth was abandoned for Mars, then was returned to when Mars itself was later destroyed - or perhaps that the Hopi Second World was that shattered planet (mythically referred to in Babylon as Tiamat) which is now the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.544
Perhaps the reference to a world “spinning off its axis and perishing in a Flood” is not to be interpreted in the standard sense of most catastrophists as a world knocked off its axis of rotation, but of a world knocked off its axis of revolution around another planet. If so, then the Hopi tradition provides yet another mythological confirmation of Van Flandern’s multiple Exploded Planet Hypothesis, where the first event destroyed a large, ancient water-bearing planet, freeing its satellite (Mars), and concussing it with a massive shock wave of debris and water in a planetary Deluge and destruction by fire.
In any case, one thing should now be apparent, and that is that the standard models of interpretation of these myths - be they catastrophist or Jungian — simply cannot account for the presence of artificial structures on our nearby planetary neighbors nor for the many mythological connections between the Earth and Mars, connections those very artifacts attest to, much less can it account for the fact that one entire moon, Iapetus of Saturn, exhibits all the characteristics of being itself a gigantic artificial artifact and satellite. But the cosmic war hypothesis can do so, and moreover, is corr
oborated by their existence in a detailed correspondence between mythological motifs and external evidences that the other methods of mythological interpretation simply fail to account for. The actuarial probability that all these correspondences are merely coincidental would be astronomical.
However, important questions and tasks remain, for a broad chronological framework has yet to be extrapolated, and more importantly, the moral character of the combatants, and the enduring legacy of the war itself, have yet to be considered in detail....
11.
THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE NEPHILIM
“In v.irtually all of the mythologies of the world there is the theme of an ancient conflict among the gods. In Egyptian myth it is the conflict of Osiris and Horus against Set; in Babylonian myth it is the battle of Marduk against the primeval goddess Tiamut; in the Canaanite myths of Ugarit it is Baal against Yum and Mot; and in Greek myth it is Zeus against the Titans. All of these conflicts relate in one may or another to the original conflict, the first divine conflict ever set down in writing, which was the ongoing conflict between Enlil and Enki as told by the ancient Sumerians. ”
Peter Goodgame545
Certain “characters” from ancient myths have repeatedly appeared throughout this work: Ra, Marduk, Ninurta, Nergal, Thoth, Zu, and to a lesser extent, Horus, Osiris, and by implication, the consorts of all of these. This cluster of names from Mesopotamia and Egypt highlights the cultural milieu from which our own culture’s biblical basis derives, and the poles between which it thus moves. Like all such traditions, it has its own unique way of recounting the same events, and its own unique perspectives on why the events happened. This broad Mesopotamian-Egyptian context, however, is one largely hidden from most of the public and accessible only to a few specialists, or more recently, to those interested in pursuing alternative or revisionist paradigms of ancient human history.
Accordingly, in order to gain an appropriate perspective from which to view the peculiarly biblical understanding of some of these events, it is necessary to place them against the backdrop of the relationships of the above personages. And the term “relationships” here is to be understood in the fullest sense of the term, for it is a little known fact that the genealogies of these individuals may be reconstructed from the ancient Mesopotamian myths. One scholar who has taken the time to do this is Laurence Gardner, in his book Genesis of the Grail Kings. When one views his genealogical charts one gains that additional and much-needed perspective on why the cosmic war was considered by so many cultures to be a war of rebellion, a “civil war in the pantheon.” One also gains an immediate understanding of the central role of mankind in this struggle, and a unique and ancient perspective on answering some age old biblical riddles. We shall present the first three of Gardner’s genealogical tables, and then comment on each of them as a way of beginning to answer the important questions of ”Who were the ‘good’ guys and the ‘bad’ guys in this war? And why were they good, or bad?”
Before doing so, however, a generalized comparison and cautionary note on Biblical and Sumerian parallels is in order.
A. General Observations and Cautionary Notes on Sumerian and Biblical Parallels
Ever since Frazer’s The Golden Bough was published in the last years of the nineteenth century, it has become an academic fashion to point out the parallels between biblical stories and motifs and those found in other traditions and mythologies. One theme in particular, that of the “dying and rising god” became a favorite, with many scholars pointing to Egypt’s god Osiris as perhaps the best non-Christian example of this motif. Osiris, then, may seem like a very unusual place to begin a series of generalized observations and cautionary notes about the Sumerian and Biblical parallels, but it will become highly relevant as we proceed in this chapter.
We will begin with the Coffin Texts from ancient Egypt, which provide two intriguing comments about Osiris:
This is the sealed thing which is in darkness, with fire about it, which contains the efflux of Osiris, and it was put in Rostau... (Coffin Texts, Spell 1080)
This is the world which is in darkness. As for any spirit who knows it, he will live among the living. Fire is about it, which contains the efflux of Osiris. As for any man who shall know it, he will never perish there, since he knows what shall be in Rostau.... Rostau is (another name) for Osiris...” (Coffin Texts, Spell 1087). 546
Recall that “Rostau” was another name for the underground complex of tunnels at Giza, and by implication, was a metaphor of the “Underworld” itself. Osiris is thus identified in the Coffin texts with this “Rostau” underworld of tunnels. Moreover, note that the Coffin texts imply that some sort of technology guards Osiris’ “efflux.” Osiris, in other words, is not a good example of a “dying and rising god” — in spite of what many academics would maintain - for a very simple reason. In fact, as Peter Goodgame has aptly observed, Osiris would actually seem to be “the least-suited to be a member of the category,” for the simple reason that his rising was not bodily, but in the spirit world. As far as this world is concerned, Osiris is a “dead and gone” god, not a “dying and rising” god.547
But why would Egypt develop such a complex religious and philosophical tradition to begin with, especially since Egypt springs, fully fledged, into being almost from nowhere. As John Anthony West and many other alternative researchers have observed, Egypt itself maintains that it is a legacy of something else. But the view was once not restricted merely to alternative researchers. It was once the considered opinion of academe’s most respected mainstream scholars, among them the father of modern Egyptology, Sir William Flinders Petrie. Petrie put forward his own theory after his lifetime of exhaustive study, a theory known as the “Dynastic Race” theory. Petrie maintained that
In the pre-dynastic era Egypt was invaded by a technologically superior group of elite foreigners who came originally from Mesopotamia. This “Dynastic Race” invaded and conquered Upper Egypt and settled... near where the important cult centers of Abydos, Thebes, Luxor and Edfu would later emerge. Petrie referred to this invading force as the “Falcon Tribe,” and the name of their capital of Nekhen means ”City of the Falcon.“548
But as Peter Goodgame correctly observes, this racially-based theory quickly fell into disrepute in academic circles after the horrors of World War Two and the Nazi party’s genocide in the name of racial superiority. It was replaced with an ill-considered “nationalism” in Egyptology as the former European colonies of Africa broke away from their former superintending imperial powers. Nonetheless, Petrie’s theory appears to have great merit, for it explains why there are so many detailed comparisons between the mythologies of Egypt and Mesopotamia, comparisons illustrated in the peculiar conceptual parallels between Edfu and the Tablets of Destinies.
Sumeria, then, forms the other terminus, along with Egypt, between which the Biblical narrative of the Old Testament flows, and thus it was only natural for scholars to seek parallels between the two.
And parallels there undoubtedly are.
Peter Goodgame puts the case for these parallels, and the problems they raise, in very precise terms:
Much of pagan mythology and religion, in its many different forms and cultural expressions, can be traced back to this original conflict, but it is interesting that the accounts that most closely parallel the Sumerian accounts of creation, of the gods, and of human civilization and religion, are not to be found in later “pagan” traditions, but are instead found in Hebrew accounts, specifically the book of Genesis. Both the Sumerians and the Hebrews told a story of mankind being created from the earth of clay with divine assistance; both sources refer to an ancient dispute between a farmer and a shepherd; both give an account of gods or angels descending from heaven and influencing human civilization; both mention the creation of the first city; both testify of a great flood that covered the land which wiped out civilization and almost all of mankind; and both speak of the conquests of a great king who was involved in some way with a
great temple or tower and with the creation of the many languages that divided the nations.549
But this raises a very obvious and pertinent series of questions.
How could such a strict form of Hebrew monotheism have “evolved” from the liberal and diverse polytheistic religion of the Sumerians? Another way to pose this question is: Where is the God of Israel to be found within the Sumerian pantheon? This is a good question to ask because Abraham, the founder of the nation of Israel, was supposedly called out by God from the city of Ur, which was located in the heart of the land of the Sumerians.550
To put it differently, we are looking at two parts of a whole, with each part representing two very diverse and antithetical theologies.
But this does not answer the question Goodgame poses: Where in the Sumerian pantheon would one locate the Hebrew God, Yahweh? Or to state it differently, where in the Hebrew “angelic hierarchies” would one place the principal Sumerian gods? However one asks the question, the fundamental problem remains. There are, notes Goodgame, three main contenders for the Sumerian equivalent of the Hebrew God Yahweh: Anu, Enlil, and Enki.
The Yahweh-Anu parallel is exemplified in two major ways, according to Goodgame. Anu is, like Yahweh, a “father” god dwelling in the uttermost and inaccessible glory of heaven.551 But the “apparent relationship between YHWH and Enlil is much more substantial.” Even though Enlil was not viewed by the Sumerians as the original creator god, he nonetheless was the ultimate King over all gods, and over mankind as well, and some Sumerian myths even refer to Enlil, and not Enki, as the creator of mankind. This important point - the disputed origin of mankind through the action of Enlil or Enki - is, as we shall see, ably resolved by Laurence Gardner by reincorporating the Hebrew component into the story. But there is one last important Yahweh-Enlil parallel, and that is that both gods directly order the Flood.
The Cosmic War: Interplanetary Warfare, Modern Physics and Ancient Texts Page 31
