http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php
==========================================================
More on the God King Scenario (GKS)
Battles
If you would like to go straight my challenge before reading the
following click here. <#Challenge>
smitingHistory teaches us that Egypt was a warring nation; a large army
was big business. It wasn't required for defence as the Egyptians did
not want peace; peace was not a virtue. It was the role of the pharaoh
to lead his army to conquer foreign lands and return home with the
spoils of war.
Many battles were recorded for posterity on temple walls and some, such
as Ramesses II and the battle of Kadesh, were repeated many times. The
sacred inscriptions provided details of the many pharaohs who fearlessly
fought off and defeated the enemy, sometimes single-handedly.
/?The King himself led the way of the army, mighty at its head, like a
flame of fire, the king who wrought with his sword. He went forth, none
like him, slaying the barbarians, smiting Retenu, bringing their princes
as living captives, their chariots, wrought with gold, bound to their
horses.' / (A viceroy of Kush recording Tuthmosis' exploits)
The battle accounts were accompanied by images of the pharaohs in the
act of ?smiting the enemy.' The enclosed illustrations are typical of
the many recurring scenes which depicted the pharaoh with mace raised
ready to vanquish the enemy. Such scenes echoed the mythical conflict
between the gods Horus and Seth in the continuing battle of good against
evil. This archetypal image can be found in scenes from Egypt through to
the fertile-crescent and Anatolia. Some refer to this scene as ?God with
the Upraised Arm.'
Fact: Despite the many hundreds of military expeditions carried out by
the pharaohs over a 3,000 period archaeologists have been unable to
verify ANY of the events recounted in Egyptian records. This, despite
the fact that we know the exact location of many of Egypt's Pharaonic
battles.
smiting3The GKS contends any pharaonic war, military campaign or border
skirmish recorded via ?scared' text and images were ALL time honoured
accounts of the countless cosmic battles undertaken by Mars, the Moon
and Mercury (rarely Venus) in the guise of Egypt's warrior kings, as
they fought and defeated the masses upon masses of space debris that
once engulfed our solar system 4,000 years ago. This was the very same
dust and debris that turned the Sun red
for over three millennia. To further understand the God King Scenario
please click here.
Before we progress, I would like to make something very clear; I'm not
for one moment contending the earthly Egyptians never engaged in
warfare, they undoubtedly did, as evidenced by the later occupation by
foreign rulers such as the Greeks and Romans (although the evidence
seems to suggest these guys just walked in and took over) and some
sparse archaeological evidence which we will consider later. The key
here is, and will always be, the ?sacred' inscriptions. To reiterate,
sacred images and text all recount cosmic events of above and have
little if anything to do with proceedings here on earth. It is the very
reason why hieroglyphs were considered sacred. I would further add it
would be impossible to record and humanise cosmic conflicts unless
conflicts were actually experienced here on earth.
Evidence?
I will shortly present what I consider to be irrefutable archaeological
evidence in support of my thesis (more specifically, the lack of it) but
first allow me to set the scene by taking a look at some of the oddities
surrounding the battles of the pharaohs. The following will be brief and
I refer you to my book for a more in depth analysis.
Impossible Logistics?
The record shows numerous kings marched north in to Syro-Palestine. How
was it possible for 20,000 soldiers to march some 600 miles plus for
months on end across the scorching hot Sinai desert, barefoot and
wearing nothing more than a loincloth? To keep thousands of men (and
animals) fed, watered, clean and free from disease would have required a
superhuman feat on a scale bordering on divine intervention. Yet, if the
annuls are anything to go by, the Egyptians seem to have managed this
impossible feat hundreds of times over with military campaigns
north-east into Syro-Palestine. Sometimes, as in the case of Tuthmosis
III eighteen consecutive campaigns undertaken in Syria in as many years.
Some accounts even recall Egyptian troops carrying boats across distant
desert lands in order to engage the enemy. How on earth was this done?
Impossible logistics simply disappear when invoking the GKS.
Errant planetary bodies in the guise of divine warrior kings were
observed with vast swarms of moons, asteroids and boulders trailing in
their wake, these were the legions of foot soldiers dutifully following
the king into battle. They were the celestial doubles of people here on
earth - the Egyptians knew them as their kas (See The Egyptian Dualism
).
"He shall be at the head of all the kas of the living." Thutmose III:
The Napata Stela.
Kings and infantry were observed crashing headlong into swarms of enemy
space debris to the north, south, east and west, thus perceived to
extend the borders of Upper and Lower Egypt, heaven and Earth.
(Tuthmosis/Moon)
?/I made the boundaries of //Egypt // as far as that which the sun
encircles. I made strong those who were in fear; I repelled the evil
from them. I made //Egypt // the superior of every land ---------
favorite of Amun, Son of Re, of his body, his beloved Thutmose I,
Shining like Re.? /
By way of sacred inscriptions and images the earthly Egyptians honoured
their celestial counterparts (kas) by meticulously recording each and
every conflict on temple walls.
Tutankhamun (Mars)
/"Perfect god, likeness of Re (sun), who appears over foreign lands like
the rising of Re, who destroys this land of vile //Kush//, who shoots
his arrows against the enemy." /
They humanised them and gave them the only perspective they could,
through that of the natural world. Essentially, we have an ?as above, so
below' situation. For example; if Egypt's foes were hundreds miles to
the north across the blistering Sinai desert and Pharaonic Mars was
observed waging war against space debris above these foreign lands,
then, whatever it took to reach this location on earth, it was played
out in the annuls as such. In other words, what happened above was drawn
from the world below; only above, superhuman feats were very much possible.
Planetary god kings riding golden chariots with loyal infantry in tow,
traversed the heavens with relative ease, impossible logistics simply
disappeared. No watering holes required, no supply route stretching back
to Egypt required, no beasts of burden or horses to look after; food
just wasn't a problem. Consequently, hunger, malnutrition and staying
free from disease simply disappeared in the divine magical world above.
Even the numbers of infantry could be exaggerated i.e. 20,000 or 40,000
infantry traversing above the blistering deserts for months on,
defeating the ?vile Asiatics,' and returning home in record time becomes
completely plausible. This is, of course, from our modern day
perspective, to the ancients it was a different story. What they saw
were planetary kings, who by their very location were deemed
intermediaries between heaven and earth (Upper & Lower Egypt), battling
to maintain ?divine order' (/ma'at/) by fearlessly charging into and
vanquishing vast swarms of enemy space debris - thus clearing a path to
the gods, the ?next world' and a life of immortality. The very reason
why everything had to go through the Pharaoh. These cosmic wars
symbolically represented in the iconic ?smiting scenes' carved on
numerous temples walls (See the photos on this page).
Leading the army from the front.
Pharaohs adopted the most ridiculous battle tactic that any modern day
commanding officer would cringe at, that of leading the army from the
front.
/?The King himself led the way of the army, mighty at its head, like a
flame of fire, the king who wrought with his sword.? /
Is this possible? Yes, but highly unlikely!
The Pharaoh /was /Egypt; kings were worshiped as gods, they were
intermediaries between heaven and earth, the mortal and the divine.
Without the king it was believed the whole cosmos would fall into chaos;
without the king there was no Egypt. Despite this fundamental belief
Egypt's kings thought it would be a good idea to risk this godly status
and by extension Egypt itself by, not only vacating Egypt for many
months, but also potentially setting themselves up to be first in line
to die - by leading the army from the front!
Common sense dictates with such beliefs and absurd tactics Egypt's foes
would be guaranteed certain victory by simply killing the king (?cutting
off the head' springs to mind). A task make easy, in that you'd be blind
to miss him; he's the one leading the charge in a golden chariot,
wearing very distinctive attire including a large blue crown adorned
with a rearing cobra. I know who I'd be aiming for to bring this battle
to a swift end and you certainly wouldn't need to pin a bulls eye on him.
As mentioned above, planetary bodies in chaos naturally led from the
front with vast legions of gravitationally tied asteroids and comets
trailing in their wake; planetary bodies were ?mighty at the head.?
Pharaonic planets led the charge literally ?like a flame of fire,? not
humans. Such descriptions are clear alluding to celestial bodies.
See here for more epithets clearly
referring to astral kings.
Egypt, 3,000 year of warring; Pharaohs killed in action ? none!
Hundreds of wars, battles and border skirmishes over a period of three
thousand years and yet no pharaoh ever lost a battle. This, as we have
just discussed, despite the fact that they all led from the front.
*
*No Pharaoh ever lost a battle because they were all guises of Mars,
Mercury and the Moon and these warrior bodies were no match for the
lesser armies of ?enemy' asteroids and comets. The celestial warrior
kings literally crashed headlong into these and swallowed them up with
ruthless efficiency. Although now mere specs of light in the night sky
(apart for the Moon), these warriors are still with us and remain
undefeated to this day. The surfaces of these planets bear witness to a
time when they fought and hoovered up countless tons of ?evil' debris
that threatened to blot out the sun (Re) and bring the whole world into
chaos. The enemy (and ordinary Egyptians) are always depicted smaller
than the king because as boulders and space debris they were.
Not a scratch!
Not only were they never defeated all fighting Pharaohs returned home
without a scratch. Ramesses the Great, Tuthmosis III (Egypt's Napoleon)
Seti and many other warriors to this very day lie in the Cairo museum
showing no signs of engaging in battle. No severed limbs, missing
fingers, skin abrasions or battle scared faces (many have been x-rayed).
In fact, it is believed (as in the case of Ramesses II and Amenhotep
III) they probably died of tooth decay (So much for living gods!). This
just doesn't make sense, how is it possible to lead vast armies from the
front, engage the enemy in a bloody battle and return home without a
scratch?
Warrior kings reveal no physical sign of battle because these are the
earthly representatives of celestial bodies. The true warrior kings were
guises of the planets Mars, Mercury and the Moon (GKS). It is with these
bodies where we will find the illusive ?battle' scars. Take a look at
the surfaces of Mars, Mercury and the Moon, they are all pot marked with
millions of impact craters. Especially the Moon, the Moon has to be
singled out for it has been pummelled by space debris over and over
again. It bears the hallmarks of numerous cosmic battles, or as I
contend, the pharaonic wars as carved for posterity on numerous temples
walls along the Nile.
Why bother to march out and battle at all?
Egypt was one of the richest nations in the ancient world; the Nile's
abundance deemed it the envy of its neighbours. The Egyptians had
everything they required to survive and live a comfortable life, so why
risk life and limb by marching out across blistering deserts to engage
the enemy hundreds of miles away when everything you needed was back
home? What was the point? Are we expected to believe the driving force a
behind such adventures was a bit of booty? Surely, as an agrarian
society, working the fields in order to survive was more important? What
of the power vacuum left behind when pharaoh's army was away for months
on end? Tuthmosis III and the Battle of Kadesh takes this king away from
Egypt for at least 10 months. Talk about leaving the back door open! Why
not just stay putt and defend the abundant wealth afforded by the Nile?
The afterlife.
The Egyptians were obsessed with the afterlife and to be guaranteed a
place in the next world it was essential for the deceased to be
mummified, an elaborate process involving sacred rituals and typically
lasting 70 days. As well as mummification, and again to further ensure a
life of immortality it was absolutely imperative for the deceased to be
buried on Egyptian soil. Emphasis has to be placed on this fundamental
belief; it lay at the bedrock of Egyptian religion, the hundreds of
thousands of interred mummies bear testament to this.
Here we have a serious conundrum, inasmuch, are we expected to believe
the Egyptians risked their place in the next world, a life of
immortality by undertaking arduous military campaigns hundreds of miles
away across deadly terrain? What if they died en route? What of the
thousands of soldiers killed in action? Where are they? Were they
interred on foreign lands? This is not possible, in that it goes against
the fundamental conviction that if you were not embalmed and buried in
Egypt, then you were not eligible for a life of immortality in the
hereafter. I cannot stress this point enough; to be buried outside Egypt
deemed immortality absolutely null and void!
But are we then expected to believe hundreds of rotting corpses were
transported back to Egypt some 600 miles across dry arid scorching hot
deserts? Even to the uninitiated, this not only doesn't make sense, in
ancient times it has to be impossible.
?Little is known about how the Egyptians prepared themselves for dealing
with expected casualties??
http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/timelines/topics/army.htm
It is my contention the Egyptians rarely strayed from the relative
safety of the Nile Valley, certainly not vast armies of men with the
king at the head marching across distant lands, there was no impending
need. Sure, they carried out trading and mining expeditions beyond
Egypt's borders and there is no doubt they mined for certain coloured
rock (black granite) and turquoise in the Sinai. They also undoubtedly
explored as far as they dared, or as conditions and the climate allowed
them to, including following the Nile (safe) south, deep into Nubian
territory (pretty normal behaviour really).
Furthermore, in veneration of the ?sacred' battles fought by the
celestial god kings they sent out small groups to mark the astral
location (as near as possible) by carving honorary victory stela (carved
stone), recounting the bravery and incredible deeds undertaken by their
celestial counterparts. There is evidence to suggest this occurred on a
number of occasions, given the GKS isn't this just as you would expect?
But all of the above expeditions involved small numbers; small
self-surviving groups who could negotiate inhospitable terrain,
accomplish their mission and return to the relative safety of the Nile.
It certainly did not involve thousands of troops marching out across
deadly terrain with the king at the helm. If such distant campaigns were
undertaken, you would think, at the very least, and to save marching out
again and again to the same place the Egyptians would leave behind a
controlling army or garrison - alas, even this was not done. This is
because planetary bodies rarely remained stationary in the heavens, if
they did, this was seen as a siege.
Irrefutable evidence.
We will now turn our attention to what I consider overwhelming evidence
in support of the GKS - the archaeological evidence, more specifically
the lack of it. Inasmuch, in the face of the many hundreds of military
expeditions carried out by the pharaohs archaeologists have been unable
to verify ANY of the events recounted in Egyptian records. This
situation exists even though the location of Egypt 's numerous conflicts
are known. We would expect to find the remains of swords, arrow heads,
battle axes, chariot parts, amour, and more importantly battle-scarred
human remains or mass graves. However, there is a distinct lack of
archaeological evidence and no data to support the existence of ancient
battlefields. Upon close scrutiny, it becomes very obvious that the wars
and battles of the kings exist in ?sacred' words alone - no
archaeological evidence exists for them as ever having taken place. That
is of course, unless we look up and take into account the GKS.
We will consider briefly one of the best documented battles of the
ancient world, Ramesses II and the Battle of Kadesh. We have more
accounts of this battle than any other from ancient times. It was carved
on numerous temple walls. History states that Ramesses led 20,000
infantry into Syro-Palestine and fearlessly fought and defeated 40,000
Hittites (according to Egyptian inscriptions). Detailed maps exist which
show the exact location of Kadesh near the Orontes River in Syria. They
include diagrams, complete with arrows, which show how the battle was
played out. Modern photographs and details of Kadesh can be found at
http://touregypt.net/featurestories/kadesh.htm
and here
http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/ramseskadeshcampaign.htm
However, despite an abundance of information it seems the Battle of
Kadesh existed in sacred words only as the exact location of Kadesh has
yet to be found - there is no archaeological evidence revealing its
location and if any battles took place there. I find it perplexing that
so many books and TV documentaries cover 'The Battle of Kadesh' and yet
none are backed up by archaeological evidence.
Moreover, the record shows Kadesh was the site of many military
campaigns. Many pharaohs before and after Ramesses fought bloody battles
there; these wars totaled many hundreds of thousands of men i.e.
Ramesses II's army of 20,000 soldiers plus 40,000 Hittites totaled
60,000 men alone. Yet it seems they left nothing behind. There isn't a
museum in the world that houses battle implements or killed in action
soldiers which can /irrefutably / linked to any battles fought at Kadesh.
A prediction; the location of Kadesh will never be found unless people
begin to look up and take into account the GKS.
Some may say absence of evidence is not proof enough and believe that
we're just not looking in the right place and one day battle strewn
Kadesh will be found. Although unlikely given the scope and information
available, it is possible. So let us turn our attention to the scene of
many a major battle and a location where archaeologists have been
excavating for years.
Megiddo (Armageddon)
Megiddo is one of the most
fabled and fought over pieces of real estates in the ancient world; at
least 34 battles are known to have taken place here (the majority
involving the Egyptians). Eighteen consecutive campaigns attributed to
Tuthmosis III (Egypt 's Napoleon) alone and yet no corroboratory
archaeological evidence exists.
Thutmose III: The Battle of Megiddo
http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/megiddobattle.htm
To put this into some kind of context, Megiddo is an location where
hundreds of thousands of soldiers engaged in numerous battles over a
period of 3,000 years i.e. thousands of chariots, battle axes, spears,
bows and arrows, the carnage, dead soldiers, etc. etc. and yet no
archaeological evidence remains to corroborate them as ever taking place
- nothing. We have an abundance of written documentation but - NO CRIME
SCENE! This is despite the fact that archaeologists have been digging
there for decades.
I wrote to N Franlin the coordinator of the Megiddo expedition (Tel Aviv
University) and politely asked ?where's the archaeological evidence for
any of the battles fought by the Pharaohs at Megiddo?? In the absence of
any evidence whatsoever, this is the reply I received.
Chariot parts
/?Chariots were made mainly of wood and leather. Neither medium survives
for long. Metal parts were small and were either collected and re-used
or deteriorated. Ceremonial chariots e.g. Tutmose's chariot would have
had gold decoration -- those chariots were collected as booty and also
re-used/re-cycled.? /
Weapons
/?Always collected and re-used. Nothing went to waste. They were better
at recyling than we are in the modern world!? /
Dead bodies on the battlefield.
/a) They are either left and deteriorate quickly in the rather acid
based limestone derived soil prevalent in the area. If anything ever
survives it is often a lone tooth! /
/b) Bodies are retrieved by the army that sent those soldiers if the
victor and buried. /
/c) Bodies are retrieved by the opposing army if the victor and
displayed and/or mutilated to show how strong the victor is. /
With the greatest respect to N Franklin, the answers provided above make
absolutely no sense at all. Common sense deems the whole thing is
impossible and nonsensical. How can 34 major battles involving hundreds
of thousands of soldiers spanning some 3,000 years completely disappear
off the face of the Earth? If it is known that the ancients ?? /were
better at recyling than we are in the modern world!? /then, what's the
point in continuing then? It was even found that Megiddo wasn't even
fortified! How can this be when the pharaoh Tuthmosis III was supposed
to have laid siege to the city for 7 months?
To prove that the Egyptians were not ? better at recyling than we are in
the modern world? we only need visit the site of Ramesses' II ancient
city, Per-Ramesses (modern day Qantir).
Recent excavations here revealed amongst other items hundreds of broken
stone carved ?knobs.' These were later identified as chariots parts,
they form part of the harness and can be seen on the ceremonial chariots
of Tutankhamun in the Cairo Museum. The chariot parts were not difficult
to find, they were found just below the surface and surprisingly within
just three days of digging (source Bietak Documentary Lost City of the
Ancients). Although most were in bits many intact ?knobs' were also
found. They even unearthed a complete horses bit, to date the only one
of its kind.
Point to consider;
How difficult was it to pick these artefacts up? To my knowledge they
were found around the location of stables (as you would expect). Nowhere
near the mayhem of battle ? it is with ease these parts could be
collected. They were not; they were left where they fell because as
broken stone parts they were useless, impossible to recycle. All things
normal, it is this sort of artefact and other similar items associated
with battle that should be strewn about all over the site of Megiddo ;
there should be millions of battle artefacts. As we have seen there are
none. What of the fully working ?knobs' and the horses bit? I thought
the ancient were super efficient at recycling? The finds at Per Ramesses
proves that this was not so.
These finds merely show us show the Egyptians were pretty much the same
as us when it came to recycling. Broken parts of machinery were simply
discarded with complete working parts occasionally getting lost or
mislaid. This would include the occasional horses' bits, although none,
it seems, at Megiddo !
Thutmose I (Moon) "He brought the ends of the earth under his domain."
The dead soldiers. *
*
Egypt had two basic obsessions, the ?next world' and ?warfare.' There is
overwhelming evidence to support Egypt's obsession the former with
numerous mummies disinterred on a regular basis, but there is no
evidence to support Egypt's other obsession - that of war. The lack of
archaeological evidence is very important and provides overwhelming
support for the GKS. We will consider this in the light of the lack of
human remains.
It is of course impossible to calculate exactly how many men died in
battle, however, I have worked out that over a period of 3,000 years,
the very least we could expect is well in excess of over 300,000 men
killed in action (see book). This is a very conservative figure; the
number is, in all probability much, much higher. Also, this doesn't
include the enemy dead, so if the annuls are anything to go the figure
would be ten times this amount i.e. running into the millions.
Remembering, the Egyptians smote the enemy with ruthless efficiency and
never lost a battle.
How could so many men disappear of the face of the Earth?
Egyptologist R.B. Partridge in his book Fighting Pharaohs.
?We do not know where most soldiers were buried, especially those who
died away from Egypt ?' (Partridge, 2002, p 126)
This fact epitomised at Megiddo where there are no battle artefacts and
no dead soldiers whatsoever.
Perhaps they were buried somewhere close to the battle?
As discussed, to step outside Egypt was a step outside immortality, so
to be buried outside Egypt goes against everything the Egyptians lived
for, literally. So, this is a none starter especially when taking into
account the 70 day mummification process. However, for argument sake,
let us assume they were buried close to the battle as some believe.
?The dead had to be buried close to where they fell which was generally
in foreign soil, a fate many Egyptians dreaded.?
http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/timelines/topics/army.htm
The question remains, where are they? In dying for king and country, no
doubt they were, at the very least given a decent burial along with full
military honours, but nowhere outside Egypt will you find remains of
Egyptian soldiers. No mass war graves, no carved stela, no cenotaphs or
otherwise inscribed with ?killed in action? fighting the vile Asiatics?
- nothing! A fact epitomised at Megiddo.
What of the enemy dead?
?Fallen enemies were often mutilated and their corpses left to the
crows, vultures and other scavengers? (ibid).
If found, they shouldn't be difficult to identify in that the Egyptians
apparently cut of their right hands (& penises) in order to count them
(why not simply mark them with a stick? One, two, three?). Although
highly unlikely, are we to presume the victors cleared these up and
buried them in mass graves, or perhaps there was always just enough
survivors to carry out this gruesome task, either way, if this was done
at Megiddo, it has to be the most incredible clear-up operation ever
known to man. To reiterate, no enemy remains, no Egyptian remains, no
battle artefacts, no mass graves, no memorials, etc, etc.
I consider the lack of archaeological support irrefutable evidence in
support of the GKS, but how am I to prove this? Perhaps I should join
the archaeologists at Megiddo, dig yet another hole and reiterate what
they been saying for a hundred years or more - "look ..., nothing!" Or
perhaps I should appeal to people's common sense?
*
* Archaeological evidence from Egypt.
I don't see any point in readdressing the possibility of transporting
thousands of decomposing dead soldiers back to Egypt, given the
scorching climate and the distances involved I deem this absolutely
impossible. Further, who in their right mind would undertake such a
gruesome task?
Moreover, the archaeological evidence doesn't support this, insofar as,
nowhere in Egypt (or beyond) do we find mass war graves, cemeteries, or
even cenotaphs that correlate with the many hundreds of ?scared' battles
recorded on temple walls throughout the Nile Valley.
It seems the veneration of those killed in action just doesn't exist in
Egypt or beyond its borders - no monuments, cenotaphs, memorials or
otherwise inscribed ?here lies, killed in action, fighting for king and
country at Megiddo? ? nothing!
To say this is odd would be an understatement; what of the families of
those who died in combat, wouldn't they insist on the construction of
some kind of memorial and cenotaph in honour of their fallen, perhaps
even setting aside days of remembrance? Apparently not.
Surely, if such conflicts did indeed take place here on earth and not
above as I contend, there should be thousands of wars graves, and if the
fallen were not brought back, the very least we could expect is a few
hundred cenotaphs or inscribed monuments. Perhaps evidence enough to
equal Egypt's other obsession, the next world.
That said, as stated earlier, the Egyptians undoubtedly fought battles
and there is some scant evidence to support this. All can be explained
in the context of the GKS
*
*Sixty Egyptian soldiers found in Deir el-Bahari*
*
?A mass-tomb found in Deir el-Bahari contained 60 bodies of slain
Egyptian soldiers who perhaps lost their lives in Nubia . That these
soldiers were given a burial so near the king's own funerary monument,
demonstrates how much importance was attached to them.?
http://www.ancient-egypt.org/index.html
This is a very, very rare discovery, to date the only location in Egypt
where we have dead soldiers numbering more than one! It is presumed
these soldiers died fighting for Mentuhotep, this maybe so but there are
no inscriptions to verify this. No inscriptions honouring these apparent
loyal subjects. Certainly nothing to link the soldiers with any of
Egypt's scared battles. If these soldiers did take part in one of Egypt
's recorded battles, as presumed then we have to ask, where are the
other many thousands of dead soldiers from Egypt's other wars? We have
millions upon millions of mummies verifying Egypt's obsession with the
afterlife but only one mass warrior tomb, which incidentally, is dated
to the Middle Kingdom, so we haven't even reached the height of Egypt's
military might of the New Kingdom. It doesn't add up; there should be
thousands of similar mass warrior tombs.
The rarity of this find correlates with my premise that the earthly
Egyptians engaged in conflicts and skirmishes (and possibly civil war)
but on a scale nowhere near, and totally separate to anything recorded
in the sacred annuls. These were reserved for the celestial kings.
RARE Egyptian soldier
The fact that the above is a rare discovery is proven by a recent
article from the National Geographic News.
Rare Egyptian ?Warrior? Tomb Found.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/02/080215-egypt-coffin.html
The article speaks for itself, however, I've extracted a few points of
note. Ramesses
?An unusual??
??may contain the mummy of an ancient warrior??
?The discovery of burials belonging to soldiers and mercenaries, who had
elevated status in the wartime society, are even rarer??
?We don't know about the origin of Iker," Galán said. "We don't even
know if he was Egyptian, Nubian, or Libyan.?
And of course, the heading ?rare.? Rare, because there is a gigantic
void when it comes to unearthing Egypt's deceased warrior soldiers. We
have many dead kings (without a scratch), but we do not have the
soldiers ?killed in action.'
I would also add there are no inscriptions linking Iker with any major
battle and there's no evidence to suggest he was KIA. If it turns up
that he fell fighting for the king, this would be a major discovery, the
only one of its kind. But it shouldn't be!
Given Egypt's obsession with warfare and given all things normal the
above article should read something along the lines of "Another Egyptian
Soldier Found" or perhaps "Another Cache of Soldiers Found." As we can
see the opposite couldn't be more true!
Seqenenre Tao
The nearest we get to a high ranking official meeting with a brutal
death is a Theban Price called Seqenenre Tao (see photo).
Seqenenre Tao met a violent death this is without doubt. He had
apparently been stabbed behind the ear, his cheek and nose had been
smashed with a mace, and smacked above the right eye with a battle axe.
It has been suggested Seqenenre was probably killed during battle with
the Hyksos (Shepherd kings).
There are a few problems with this, firstly although his head is bashed
in his arms are in one piece, this suggests he may not have died in
battle (certainly not battle ready) because the tendency is to protect
yourself by raising your arms when blows are reigning down, resulting in
broken or lacerated arms. Seqenenre shows signs of neither, so this
means either the first blow rendered him incapacitated resulting in
death or we have to look for alternative possible circumstances
surrounding his death. It has been noted by some experts that his wounds
show signs of healing, suggesting he may have recuperated somewhat only
to eventually succumb to his wounds.
It is merely an assumption by Egyptologists that Seqenenre died fighting
the Hyksos (Shepherd kings) as there are no inscriptions to verify this.
You would think if Seqenenre ventured north to engage the Hyksos at the
very least he'd be ?battle ready.' While we're on the subject, we know
practically nothing about the Hyksos; this is because they were rouge,
unrecognisable ?shepherd moons' dominating a chaotic sky.
We are faced with the same basic questions raised above; if Seqenenre
was slain fighting the Hyksos, then where's his loyal KIA infantry? The
expulsion of the Hyksos apparently took place within Egypt 's borders,
so here we have no need to transport rotting corpses across deadly
terrain; the Egyptians merely have to recover the fallen, mummify them
and bury them with full military honours. Here we have a chance for the
archaeological evidence to correlate with the written word. But alas it
just doesn't happen. No fallen soldiers (Egyptians or otherwise) from
the time of the Hyksos.
Ahmose son of Ebana
Although there exists no slain soldiers that can be conclusively linked
to Egypt's annuls of war, we do have some apparent first hand accounts
of Egyptians either claiming to have fought in battle or scribes
recounting certain events (Note; none killed in action).
One such account comes to us via the tomb of Amose, son of Ebana.
Ahmose, son of Ebana, was an officer in the Egyptian army during the end
of the Seventeenth Dynasty (the Second Intermediate period) and the
beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty (the New Kingdom ). He fought at
Avaris, Sharuhen (in Palestine) and in Nubia in the service of Seqenenre
Tao II, Kamose, Ahmose I and Tuthmosis I. Ahmose received many honours
for his bravery in battle and recounted his deeds on the wall of his
tomb. (Source; http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/ahmoseebana.html
)
Same question as above, where's Ahmose's fallen comrades?
Ahmose wasn't killed in action; this is surprising considering how many
pharaohs he fought under. He must have been about 60 in his last battle,
an incredible feat as the average life span was about 40 years.
Ahmose's tomb inscriptions and other similar battle biographies are as a
result of humans venerating their celestial doubles (kas
) and have little, if anything to do with
events here on earth (GKS). The skies of earth were awash with bodies
perceived as courtiers, viziers, priests wearing leopard skins (similar
to Jupiter's pizza coloured moon Io
), fans bearers (Also
Io's fan bearing attribute
),
nobles, concubines, overseers and other dignitaries. And of course,
masses upon masses of trailing boulders, or as perceived by the
Egyptians, the infantry. Ahmose, I believe was once a large Moon of
Mars, hence, a Crew Commander.
? /I have been rewarded with gold seven times in the sight of the whole
land??
?Then the gold of valour was given me, and my captives were given to me
as slaves.?
/
There are a number of references the king rewarding certain loyal
subjects with gold, be it gold rings or gold collars. This is Mars
belching out enormous great rings of scolding hot ?golden' lava from its
many volcanoes. These landing on close proximity moon sized bodies or in
this case Ahmose, son of Ebana. The ?captives' reference is Ahmose, as a
moon, gravitationally capturing smaller boulders as he and the pharaoh
(mars) heroically crash headlong into vast clouds of enemy debris.
A CHALLENGE!
I would like to challenge Egyptologists and archaeologists to provide
substantial archaeological evidence for any of the major Pharaonic
battles that are supposed to have occurred in ancient times. I am not
referring to a few broken bones, the occasional sword, a battle axe or
even a few broken chariots. The Egyptians fought many battles over a
3,000 year period and therefore there should be an abundance of
archaeological evidence including the bodies of tens of thousands of
dead soldiers.
This really is the crux of the matter - Egyptian or otherwise, where are
the hundreds of thousands of soldiers killed in action from ancient times?
I can provide evidence from the surfaces of Mars, Mercury and the Moon
as these heavily cratered planets provide the real legacy of pharaonic
battles.
This is a crucial point because if I am wrong, if concrete evidence is
provided, my theory would fall apart and that would be the end of the
GKS. I am prepared to take this risk because I am confident that my
theory as presented is accurate and entirely correct.
I wonder how many other ?alternative' authors would be brave enough to
set such a challenge!
Update: 12th Aug 2008
The above 'challenge' includes the Greek Pharaoh Alexander the Great and
his conquest of the ancient world.
The Battle of Gaugamela.
Forget the Greek
propaganda and story telling, where's the archaeological evidence to
support any of battles attributed to Alexander the Great? To be precise,
where's the KIA soldiers? Where does it say - "here lies (name?) killed
in action fighting for his beloved god (son of the sun) Alexander." What
of the enemy, where's the hundred of thousands of soldiers slain by
Alexander and his army - where's the thousands of mass graves, cenotaphs
or otherwise? I could go on and ask exactly where is Alexander the Great
buried?
20th Aug.
For those that believe the archaeological evidence for ancient battles
is not forthcoming because the ancients were somehow the Houdini's of
recycling. In other words the dearth of battle artefacts is a result of
the victors gathering up every single item and reusing them.
Further research reveals this to be nonsense.
The words of Arrian, a 2nd century historian writing on the first major
battle of Alexander the Great - the Battle of Issus.
?By order of Alexander all the dead (Alexander's men) were buried with
their arms and equipment the day after the battle.?
So much for recycling!
One would presume Alexander adopted the same burial practice throughout
his numerous campaigns. So here we have thousands upon thousands of dead
soldiers interred with full military equipment at KNOWN ancient
battlefields (this doesn't even include the enemy dead).
The question remains - where are they?
Time to dust of them metal detectors!
Alexander, "beloved of Amun (sky god)," "chosen by Re" (literally), was
just one of the many names given to either Mars or Mercury as they were
named and renamed many times over as divine kings of earth.
On going discussion on 'The Nonexistent Battles of the Pharoahs'
over at the Graham Hancock message board