R Avry Wilson

This recent discovery of a circular feature abutting the environment of ancient Meroe in the northern Sudan results in the need to review the structure's properties and what, if any, relationship it may have to ancient Egypt. The latitudinal placement and physical properties lend an air of curiosity as to the age and meaning of this particular stone-work circle. Other known structures of similar character in the region are compared. The intent is to provide a foundation through which further study of the artefact can bear fruit.

A review of early dynastic naming conventions which result in a fresh understanding of the choices they made, and how it may relate to an ancient Egyptian view of the environment. This brief study therefore aims to purify and contextualize some of the king's titles.

PREFACE The intent of this work is to investigate and consider the influence of volcanic events and how they relate to historic beliefs of ancient peoples, in which case an excellent historical candidate is the group residing in northeast Africa, namely (but not limited to) the ancient Egyptians. By examining their texts – focusing on their chief creation myth – and by looking at the pyramid form itself we find there are quite evident markers for volcanological influences. Given times frames of eruptions in the surrounding regions (especially those of a greener Saharan environment), more recent continuous activity of the Bayuda Volcano Field (and others), plus migration routes of people on the African continent as related to environmental changes of the past 10-20 thousand years, there can be little doubt of the people of the Holocene having witnessed such cataclysms and eventually incorporating them into their lore.

Given the plethora of gods that managed to form in the minds of the ancients, the task of  formulating their origins becomes daunting. It appears moreso when one considers the context of the extended myths built up around the root properties and attributes of any particular god. Nevertheless, not all god-myths are so enveloped in abstract metaphors as to not allow an investigator to discern some of the very obvious and basic principles lying at their chronicles’ core.

For many years archaeological missions in the eastern Sahara have provided fruitful evidence for a distinct cross-regional relationship between the inhabitants of the Nile and the tribes west of it. In some sense it can be difficult to know whether Egyptians of the Old Kingdom and prior ages were merely travelers to the desert or were – in part – originally from there. One thing can be certain: they were there. Extensive surveys and many years of personal dedication by a handful of archaeologists have determined an acute connection, so although when one ponders ancient Egypt and immediately thinks of the lush Nile Valley as its national limit, it is unwise to constrain it to the river alone. Rather, when contemplating the catalytic seed of an Egyptian nation we must – and do – consider the whole of northeastern Africa. Thus the ancient society we know today can be seen as a conglomerate of peoples drawn from afar and within. This view continues to be anchored more and more firmly through successive findings in both the eastern and western deserts, as well as regions to the distant south (such as Nubia), Sinai and the Arabian peninsula. As time progressed the area of influence obviously expanded, but early on the immediate countryside is what would provide a more substantial and formative impact base. More recent intrigues have served to augment a Sahara-Egypt bond, one of which was no less an unsolved curiosity as it was a development waiting to happen.

By the time the Greeks and Romans arrived on the scene the ancient Egyptian nation was already thousands of years old, as were the core ideals of its ancient religion. Most striking in reverence went beyond the pyramids themselves where we discover the true focal point of this religion was in the many temples built within and between the Nile delta and the far reaches of what we now call the Sudan. It was here in the halls and sanctuaries of these temples where priests would gather, where commoners would present gifts and prayer to the gods and/or the soul of the deceased pharaoh, and where the secrets, science and mystery of the ancient Egyptians echoed within. But above all else, there was a glaring, obvious and millennia-long consistency which marked the entire Ancient Egyptian religion: there was this world-the real world-and the other world, i.e. the netherworld, and getting from one to the other required a very special point of transit. On the one hand, this point was seen symbolically as the 'akhet'-an elusive part of the sky through which souls would pass on their journey from this world to the next (the akhet also had other attributes), while on the other hand such a point became manifest in physical representations: false doors. These doors we see today as rock-cut facades that have an outline of a doorway but with the portal itself actually being a solid interface of rock. There are no hinges or moveable parts; they are all part of the whole carving. These 'false' doorways were intended purely for the dead, and not at all for the living. It was through this door that the soul of the deceased made the very first step from this plane of reality into the great beyond, and it is excruciatingly reasonable to conclude that these portals were the most holy of all things, that the whole the ancient Egyptian religion rested on the transit of the soul through them. So when we look to the mortuary temples it is no surprise to find them at the rear or deepest part of the temple. Only the most highly ordained priests were ever allowed to see this area of the temple, and rightly so since it was the absolute sanctuary of the gods.

One of the currently longest standing and in-depth debates in relation to the pyramids of the Giza Plateau concerns the theoretical overview of their design, the integrity of an overall layout, and the inherent symbolic nature of the structures. Quite a few theories exist that may carry the above attributes; nevertheless, there is one which stands out above the rest for its contextual issues and confirmable prowess. It has been dubbed the 'Orion Correlation Theory'. Many people recognize this front-runner as that of Robert Bauval's, who along with co-authors Adrian Gilbert and Graham Hancock brought it to the attention of the world in their widely popular literary works 'The Orion Mystery' and 'The Message Of The Sphinx', respectively. As is par for the course when dealing with any new idea, customary reviews and investigations of this theory have emerged. Some of the staunchest rebuttals to date belong to none other than Dr Ed C. Krupp, director of the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, California. Beginning in 1995 and continuing on until as recently as 2001, Dr Krupp's reviews have appeared in a number of publications (one being 'Sky & Telescope' magazine) and other media. To this day these particular commentaries remain at the core of the debates, and have been presented on several television shows in an attempt to enlighten viewing audiences the world over of the perceived errors surrounding an alternative view of Giza. At the time of writing this rebuttal, Dr Krupp's ideas remain aloft as the accepted bane for the particular views of Robert Bauval, and are touted by some as the end-all refutation for the Orion Correlation Theory (OCT). However, it does not end there. Contrary to the appearances given by a strong consensus and their oftentimes steadfast support, the explanations offered by Dr Krupp are invariably left wanting, and can – and do – serve to unknowingly confuse or innocently mislead the general public. The purpose here is to outline my reasons for making such a statement, and will cover the original (and main) argument of cardinality. It will also include return commentaries on noted peripheral characteristics of the OCT.

This article will present the outcomes of trigonometric functions applied to the relationship of angles and relative distances of ground based monuments to stellar objects-namely, the stars of the constellation of Orion. Based on these outcomes, I will argue that the architectural design of the principle monuments at Giza were intentionally founded upon the visual interpretation of the Belt Stars, and also how other main magnitude stars making up the constellation of Orion may have played a part in alignment and/or ground configurations.