AR14 - THE SEARCH FOR KINNAMAN'S ENTRANCE CONTINUES... By Stephen Mehler

Ancient Mysteries

Future Science

Unexplained
Anomalies

Super Search On:

Stephen Mehler

Your Ad Here

Shop Atlantis Rising Online

Home | Archives | Discussions
Back Issues | Subscribe | Links

	THE SEARCH FOR KINNAMAN'S ENTRANCE CONTINUES... by Stephen Mehler
Index of Issue 14

(In issue #10, Stephen Mehler reported on the search for a secret entrance to the Great Pyramid. The late Dr. R.O. Kinnaman claimed that, in the company of Sir William Flinders Petrie, he found just such an entrance. In an attempt to authenticate the claim Mehler went to Egypt in September and filed this report.

With the plethora of articles in Atlantis Rising and other magazines recently concerning prophecies and predictions of events to happen within the next few years, there has been a flurry of visitors traveling to Egypt. Many groups, scientific and lay people alike, are wondering if the predictions of Edgar Cayce, Gordon Michael Scallion, and others about the opening or revealing of the alleged Hall of Records under the Sphinx and the Giza Plateau will actually occur in 1998-99.)

It is in this light that the first preliminary site survey by the Kinnaman Foundation (see Atlantis Rising #10) was recently undertaken. A team consisting of myself and the head archivist of the foundation, Robert M. Vawter, spent a few weeks under the guidance and tutelage of one of the great masters of the indigenous traditions concerning ancient Egypt, Dr. Abdel Hakim Awyan. While we did not find an entrance into the Great Pyramid on the south face, nor anti-gravitational machines, nor records from Atlantis, we did document significant information, both geological and archaeological, to lend strong credence to the theories of a much older civilization once present in the Nile Valley.

Hakim (as he prefers to be referred to) has long been an advocate of much older dates for the Sphinx, the Giza Pyramids, and other temples and structures throughout Egypt. Our investigation covered sites from Meidum and Dahshur (south of Giza) to Abu Ruwash (north of Giza). Hakim refers to the ancient civilization as Khemet not Egypt, a word which is a Greek distortion of the term Het-Ka-Ptah (Hi-gi-ptos = Egypt) which only meant place of the essence of Ptah. Ptah was the deity who became prominent in the Old Kingdom (ca. 2700-2100 B.C.) and whose main temples were at Memphis (Men-refer). Therefore, the term Egypt only referred to one site, not the whole civilization, as does Khemet! In fact, in Khemetic terms, we refer to the land from Abu Ruwash to Dahshur as Bu Wizzer, or the land of Wizzer (Wizzer being the correct term for the Greek Osiris). This will be explained in much greater detail in future articles and a book, now in process.

We do wish to present here some of the results of our preliminary site survey, realizing that much greater investigative work needs to be done. We wish to lend support and acknowledgment to the many researchers who have paved the way for our work, such as John Anthony West, Dr. Robert M. Schoch, Graham Hancock, Zecharia Sitchin, David Hatcher Childress, Christopher Dunn, and Larry Hunter. But it is primarily the wisdom and teachings of Master Hakim that has provided the basis for this and all future work.

It is a very simple yet profound concept that is guiding our research. All terrestrial life, as the current state of our science teaches us, is dependent upon fresh water for its survival. Even more than food, we humans cannot exist for very long without fresh water. The obvious reason that civilizations arose in Egypt was because of the great river, the Nile. Dr. J.O. Kinnaman referred to ancient Egypt as the child of the Nile, and while that certainly was true, we are now posing the question: which Nile? It is clear from geological studies that the Nile has changed course and location in its history, and this fact may be extremely important in uncovering ancient civilization. Although geologists debate the exact dates, they do not dispute the evidence that the Nile once flowed about 8-10 miles west of its present course and may have been almost 100 meters higher than its present levels. We found much evidence to indicate the ancient civilization of Khemet drew its water from the west, from the ancient Nile. Particularly, the sites of Sakkara, Abusir, and Dahshur, located today west of the present Nile Valley and River, had remains and ruins of aqueducts and sluices that once flowed from west to east or from the ancient Protonile, as geologists refer to it. We observed this because the aqueducts flowed downhill from the west. If further research bears this out, and most scientists agree the present Nile is 10,000 to 20,000 years old, it is obvious that ancient Predynastic Khemet must have been older than 20,000 B.C.

Credit here must be given to John Anthony West for a statement he made in response to criticisms by Dr. Mark Lehner concerning West, and to Dr. Robert Schoch's work on redating the Sphinx. Lehner claimed there were no potshards nor a cultural context for a previous civilization prior to Dynastic Egypt (3100 B.C.). West responded that we need to trace the old Nile, not the present river, to find this answer. This is exactly what we intend to do. We believe the present four main oases west of the present Nile Kharga, Dakla, Farafra, and Bahariya are the remains of the ancient Protonile. We found numerous potshards of many different styles and apparent dates, some thrown by hand before the invention of the potter's wheel to indicate many thousands of years of occupation sites drawing water from the west, the ancient Nile! We also found many sites that are virtual virgin archaeological areas, where very little investigation has been undertaken by previous researchers. The aqueduct remains we found were made of limestone, basalt, granite, and alabaster, with the distinctive megalithic, cyclopean block style evident on the Giza Plateau distinctive, we believe, of the predynastic culture of Khemet!

Again, the concept of fresh water, known in Ancient Khemet as Asgat, is the key to the lost cultural context we intend to demonstrate. The Khemetic word Asgat is still evident in the modern Arabic names Aswan (the end of the waters) and Assut (the beginning of the waters). We believe the ancient Protonile flowed from Aswan to Assut (south of modern Cairo) and the ancient Mediterranean Sea flowed into Khemet and covered the whole northern area to present Fayum. The great fertility of the soil around the Fayum area of Egypt today could be because it was totally under the ancient Mediterranean Sea.

One other piece of interesting information and area investigated should be mentioned here. Hakim kept telling me there was evidence of a Mayan temple in ancient Khemet and he would show it to me. We went to an area near Sakkara where there were the remains of an 18th Dynasty (ca. 1300 B.C.) temple of an official named Maya. Hakim adamantly stated there was no Khemetic word Maya and that this term was a title! Although clearly looking like a typical dynastic structure, some glyphs on a chapel ceiling that could be interpreted as ancient Mayan. I have sent a photograph to the great indigenous teacher Mayan Daykeeper Hunbatz Men for his comments on these glyphs.

As for our investigation of Dr. J.O. Kinnaman's claims of an entrance to underground chambers on the south face of the Great Pyramid, we did find some interesting things. We found many blocks with distinctive marks on them, marks carved within the last 100 years and with evidence of plaster around them! These plaster fills appear to be within the last 100 years also. Do they cover a moveable block of limestone? We also found numerous tunnel entrances on the Giza Plateau many - possible ways down under the plateau and perhaps leading to the Hall of Records! As we know, the authorities in Egypt today have not been enthusiastic about such investigations (but are they conducting such research on their own?).

In 1992 Hakim and I engaged in an extensive discussion of the subject of Atlantis. He indicated then he did not support an Atlantis theory, primarily because of its possible racist implications (namely that enlightened white people could have come to ancient Khemet and taught ignorant Africans writing, mathematics, astronomy, wisdom, etc.). But in our current conversations, I postulated a hypothesis to him that perhaps Atlantis and ancient Khemet were never a separate, in fact, totally inseparable'

Perhaps the continent of Atlantis, whether part of Antarctica as the Flem-Aths believe or separate in the Northern Atlantic, was economically, culturally, and spiritually connected to ancient Africa. When Atlantis fell, having maintained active trade and contact with ancient Khemet for thousands of years, one of the places naturally to seek shelter and survival would have been with their ancient tribal families in Khemet and the Nile Valley. Hakim has no problem accepting the theory of Atlantis in this context, with proper understanding of how old and how long high civilization is recognized as having existed in ancient Khemet and other parts of Africa.

It may turn out, with adequate funding and permission to continue these investigations, that proof of Atlantis will indeed be found beneath the sands of Egypt, and much of that proof is basically easy to find!