Teotihuacan - Newly Discovered 120-Meter Tunnel Being Excavated by Archaeologists

See the video of the ongoing archaeological excavation of the 120-meter tunnel discovered recently at Teotihuacan at ViaMichelin Travel: Digging deep into Teotihuacan's mystery

Akhet was no Horizon and Cheops (Kochab) was no Khufu, but rather QUTB as the AXIS or POLE of Heaven and Akhet as Azote, its Bosom

The key to the linguistic understanding of the name of Kochab as the ancient Pole Star (so used by the ancients rather than the weak star Thuban) and its relation to the Great Pyramid Cheop(s) is found in the Arabic term qutb:

"Qutb, Qutub, Kutb, or Kutub (Arabic قطب), literally means 'axis', 'pivot' or 'pole'.[1] Qutb can refer to celestial movements and used as an astronomical term or a spiritual symbol."

Current mainstream Egyptological understanding of Pharaonic language and astronomy is in great need of correction.

According to present day Egyptology, the Great Pyramid of Giza was allegedly called "Akhet Khufu" and allegedly meant "The Horizon of Khufu". That is wrong.

As pointed out already in previous postings and in the suggested relation of the terms Kochab and Cheops to Arabic qutb "axis, pole", it is clear that the Great Pyramid was a geodetic monument used for astronomical calculation, which is why one of the shafts points to Kochab, a bright star near heaven's center used by the ancients as the position of the North Celestial Pole.

But what about Akhet?

Akhet by no means meant "horizon" and much more likely candidates would be ancient Pharaonic, Indo-European viz. Arabic and/or Hebrew terms similar to Latvian azote meaning "bosom" (i.e. "domicile" in this endearing sense), whence also Latvian auklēt  "to rock (a child) on one's bosom", a term similar to aklis "blind" and said of course also of the "darkness of the night".

In our previously published The Origin of the Cult of Horus in Predynastic Egypt, we wrote:

"[This material on Akhet is very speculative since the only source at my disposal shows only ONE mountain as the north celestial pole in ancient Egypt. It is also not critical to the main discussion.]

Aakhut [=Egge?, =Achu? Akhet] is possibly mistranslated by Egyptologists as "horizon" whereas it actually seems in the Old Kingdom to mark the domicile of RA at night. Budge first translated akhet as "horizon" in the context of the Sun revolving around it, but the Sun does not revolve around the horizon. That is astronomically false. The sun revolves around the north celestial pole (as all stars do). (See Gerald S. Hawkins, Stonehenge Decoded, p. 96.) Akhet is thus originally possibly the heavenly mountain domicile of the Sun - it is not the Sun allegedly rising between two mountains, which is how the appropriate later hieroglyph is interpreted. Why in Egypt where there are no mountains would the horizon possibly be so portrayed? We have the similar symbol widely found also on Minoan Crete. These two summits at midheaven would be:

1) the North Ecliptic Pole (which never changes), and

2), the North Celestial Pole, the changeable pole we call the Pole Star, which is not always marked exactly by a particular star and where the position of the pole star is determined by precession."

Both David Talbott (Ship of Heaven) and Aymen Ibrahem (Egyptian Cosmology: Akhet - The Horizon of Heaven or something else?) are thus perfectly right in doubting the identity of Akhet as meaning "horizon" in the Old Kingdom.

Ibrahem asks: "Have the Egyptologists Misinterpreted Akhet as the Horizon?" He writes the following Abstract of his article:

"The Egyptologists may have inappropriately interpreted the Egyptian hieroglyph symbol Akhet as the "horizon". In this article, the author attempts to demonstrate that the hieroglyph symbol Akhet stands for "solar eclipse" and not "horizon".  He also puts forth the idea that the ancient Egyptians believed that the solar eclipse was the heavenly abode of the Sun.... The ancient Egyptians also mentioned a habitation of the Sun in the sky. This habitation was in the Old Kingdom (2700-2200  BC) believed to be an island in the waters of the sky called akhet."

We agree that the akhet was originally the abode of the Sun and that this dark abode was the center of heaven at night, where the Sun was at home. The akhet was the "bosom" of heaven in the protective sense, i.e. where it slept in darkness.

Vincent Brown writes about the Akhet:

"Between the Duat and the morning sky lies the Akhet.  Though it is usually translated "horizon", the Akhet is in fact a region below the visible horizon, rather than a dividing line between night and day; It is the region through which the sun passes in the hour between its emergence from the Duat at first light and it appearance in the day sky at dawn...."

Ursa Minor in Islamicate Celestial Globes: Their History, Construction, and Use by Emilie Savage-Smith and Andrea P.A. Belloli, Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology, 46, 1985

When discussing systems of ancient stars and constellations, the following is a very useful source:

Islamicate Celestial Globes: Their History, Construction, and Use
by Emilie Savage-Smith and Andrea P.A. Belloli, Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology, 46, 1985

The book in plain text as below is found at http://www.sil.si.edu/smithsoniancontributions/HistoryTechnology/text/SSHT-0046.txt

The original pdf can be seen at http://si-pddr.si.edu/jspui/bitstream/10088/2445/1/SSHT-0046_Hi_res.pdf:

"Abstract: Islamicate celestial globes made as early as the eleventh century are found in museums and private collections today. There are also references in classical Greek and Roman literature to carlier globes that are no longer extant. These globes are of interest to the history of astronomy, of art, and of technology. The globe presently in the National Museum of American History of the Smithsonian Institution, which is a fine example of a seventeenth-century Mughal Indian globe, was selected for detailed analysis and serves as the focus for this monograph. The first part of the study compares this particular globe with other known Islamicate globes and places the development of such globes within the historical perspective of the earlier Greco-Roman world from which it drew many of its traditions. An historical survey is given of all references and artifacts from the Greco-Roman and Islamic world that can have bearing on our knowledge of the design, construction, and use of such globes. The nature and general characteristics of three basic types of Islamicate celestial globes, and their probable uses as well as methods of construction, are the subjects of the second chapter of the study. Photographs of selected Islamicate globes from the thirteenth to the nineteenth centuries, as well as line drawings based on written descriptions, accompany the historical and analytical discussion. The fourth chapter on iconography analyses the constellation figures on the Smithsonian globe from the perspective of an art historian. This chapter was contributed by Belloli, Andrea P.A.. The second major part of the study presents a discussion of the star names engraved on the Mughal globe, tracing the origins of the terms in Greek mythology or early Bedouin constellation outlines. The discussion of each constellation is accompanied by a photograph of the constellation as depicted on the Smithsonian globe. An account of lunar mansions is included as background to early Bedouin asterisms, which greatly affected later Islamicate star names and eventually "modern" western star names. The sixth section presents an extensive descriptive catalogue of the 126 Islamicate celestial globes known to scholars prior to 1982. The references in the other sections to particular globes are keyed to the entry numbers in this catalog. Following the catalog are tables comparing the features of the globes and transcriptions of the signature inscriptions. Six entries (Nos. 127-132) were added to the catalog while the study was in press."

In the plain text of the above work (see the original PDF for foreign language terms that do not resolve as plain text), we find the following discussion involving the Lesser Bear (Ursa Minor) and the Pole Star (I have corrected errors in the plain text version that was apparently converted with imperfect OCR):

"THE FORTY-EIGHT CONSTELLATIONS

Constellation 1. The Lesser Bear [Ursa Minor]

FIGURE 49

The Lesser Bear, like the Greater Bear, was called both a bear and a wagon in Greek times, the latter probably being the older image. One can easily observe our asterism of the Little Dipper in the seven formed stars comprising the constellation. The Lesser Bear does not appear in Homer. Aratus (lines 30-44) recounts the story of Zeus having as a child been hidden and nurtured by two bears, the other being the Greater Bear, for which he rewarded them by placing them in the heavens. He also says that the constellation is called [Kunosoura], the Cynosura (dog's tail) as well, and that the Phoenicians sailed by the Lesser Bear, while the Greeks steered by the Greater Bear. In the Islamic world the Lesser Bear was also used as a guide in travel.

The notion of a bear for this constellation as also for the Greater Bear, unfortunately requires that a nearly tailless creature have a long, incongruous tail. The depiction of the Lesser Bear on the Smithsonian globe is with an exceedingly long tail, even longer than that of the Greater Bear, giving it a striking resemblance to a binturong, indigenous to India, rather than a bear. The Greek notion of the Lesser Bear was superimposed in the Islamic world over an earlier Arab conception of the region. The title of the constellation in Figure 49, written in front of the bear, reflects the Greek asterism and reads surat dubb al-asghar (constellation of the Lesser Bear).

In the Bedouin tradition a bier or corpse-bearing plank with three accompanying mourning daugthers was also seen here, parallel with the image seen in the Greater Bear. This traditional image was called banat na'sh al-sughra (the smaller form of the daughters of the bier), the bier being the four stars in the square [beta, gamma, zeta, eta] Ursa Minoris] and the daughters the three in the tail [epsilon, delta, alpha Ursa Minoris]. This name does not appear on the Smithsonian globe, but does occur on globes No. 4 and No. 5 (see Kunitzsch [1961], no. 96).

Two calves were also seen by the Arabs as belonging to the bier, which [al-Sufi] identified as the two bright stars of the square, those on the shoulder and front leg [nos. 7 and 6; gamma, beta Ursa Minoris], respectively. In Figure 49 the star on the shoulder [gamma Ursa Minoris] is labeled over the top of the back akhfa al-farqadayn (the more obscure of the two calves). The inscription across the middle of the bear applies to the one on the front leg [beta Ursa Minoris, Kochab] and reads anwar al-farqadayn (the brighter of the two calves). The particular designations of the two stars appear to be unique to the globes made by the Lahore family, though the terms appear in [al-Sufi's] text and catalog as well as other writings, such as those of Ulugh Beg.

The star at the end of the tail, the Pole Star [alpha Ursa Minoris, Polaris], is labeled al-jadi (the goat) in Figure 49. This name is also of ancient Arab origin. The large hole drilled next to it is the hole of the celestial (equatorial) North Pole.

The constellation has in addition to seven formed stars, one unformed one beneath the stomach of the Lesser Bear. This star is labeled fa's al-raha "the axis of the millstone" [Flam. 5, Ursa Minoris] in Figure 49. [Al-Sufi] (Suwar, 28) said it resembled the axis of a millstone that had in its center the North Pole; some people called the star simply "the axis of pole" ([al-Biruni] Astrol., sec. 160; Kunitzsch [1961], no, 97c). The word fa's more precisely means the protuberance on the edge of a millstone where the axis or rod was attached to turn it. The Pole was seen as being the center of the millstone turning in a socket, while at the fa's a beam or rod was attached to the millstone that had at the other end of the rod the two [calves], farqadan [beta, gamma Ursa Minoris], who turn the grist mill.

It was also said (Ideler, 15-16; Kunitzsch [1961], no, 970) that around the North Pole were obscure stars that together with the "smaller form of the daughters of the bier" formed the shape of a fish in whose middle is the North Pole. Ulugh Beg states that the small stars around the Pole form ihlilaj (the fruit of the myrobalan), the latter being the name of a tree native to Asia bearing edible red or yellow fruit. These images are not known to be represented on any celestial globes."

What is confused in the above discussion is the relationship of the celestial North Pole to the Pole of the Ecliptic, which never moves, and around which the position of the celestial North Pole "revolves" in the course of ca. 26,000 years.

That path of precession is a circle upon which the star Polaris is almost directly located. By chance in our modern era it also directly marks the celestial North Pole, whereas at the time of the building of the Great Pyramid, e.g., Polaris was NOT the pole star. Rather, the very weak star Thuban marked that North Pole spot, so that is was logical that the ancients more likely used the much brighter star Kochab -- above Thuban and a bit to the right -- to mark that celestial North Pole. That is why one of the shafts in the Great Pyramid points to Kochab.

Ancient World Blog wrote previously about this at Great Pyramid Cheops Shafts Kochab Thuban Pole Star.

Kochab Cheops Stonehenge & the Pole Star

Where in the heavens did the ancients place their pole star? a pole star that changes its position due to precession, and a "location" where there often is NO star.

William Glyn-Jones <wibliom@yahoo.co.uk> wrote about Stonehenge on 11 October 2005 as follows:

"My suggestion is that the diagonal of the station stone rectangle represents diagrammatically the Earth's axis of rotation where the circular henge itself is the Earth. But I have not suggested an orientation of this diagram to the pole star, rather it is aligned so the Earth to Sun line is marked out by the line of the avenue towards midsummer Sun."

Andis Kaulins (then at akaulins@aol.com) wrote:

"In Stonehenge Decoded by Gerald S. Hawkins, his illustration at p. 108 clearly indicates that the line to the polestar (North Celestial Pole) did not pass through the diagonals running through the two mound Station Stones 92 and 94. Rather, as Hawkins states at p. 170:

"The reference azimuth is the line from the heel stone through the nearest sarsen archway and STNX [the center of the Sarsen circle]. From Lockyer's survey this azimuth is 51.23° east of north (The latitude of Stonehenge is 51.11 North). By ciné film measure of a sunrise, I obtained a value differing by only 0.15°; in this work I have used Lockyer's figure."

Since the diagonal meets that azimuth line at 45°, we have here a discrepancy of nearly 6 1/2° from your theory - a discrepancy by the way that I find in all of the major megalithic lines that I have been able to estimate for the ancient survey of the earth - they all diverge by somewhat more than 6° from true north. This has puzzled me for years. Why would that be? I now may have an answer, see further below.

Hawkins notes starting at page 94 with two diagrams at p. 95 that the daily journey of the sun combined with the spin of the earth around its axis makes it appear as if the Sun rises, moves around the celestial pole in a circle, and sets. The ancients would have seen this too and would have regarded it to be important, obviously.

Hawkins writes on p. 6:

"[R]emember that [the Sun] seems to move in a small circle around the polestar once every 24 hours, and as one moves north on the earth the polestar is higher overhead.  When the path of the sun is raised, it cuts the horizon closer to due north.... Therefore, the farther north you are, the more northerly the summer sunrise."

Accordingly, we have every reason to believe that the ancients would have marked the South and North celestial poles, as you suggest, as an integral part of solar observations. But where is the 6 1/2° difference? And that now is the remarkable thing!

We have always presumed that the ancients knew "exactly" where the north celestial pole in the heavens was. However, this may not be true. We have every reason to believe that they picked the nearest brightest star to where the "eye of God" was, and the star they appear to have used is in Ursa Minor, here, specifically, Kochab, which - according to my astronomy program, Starry Night Pro, in 1750 BC is about 7° removed from the actual North Celestial Pole, at that time marked exactly by no star at all. And that's pretty close.

And if Kochab was the star the ancients used  as their celestial north pole, then Kochab = Cheop(s).

See in this regard the discussion at http://www.grahamhancock.com/forum/BauvalR1-p1.htm 

P.S. We use the ancient Greek term Cheops as much more correct than the modern transliteration Khufu, which is clearly incorrect, assigning an "F" value where Old Kingdom Egpytian surely had no so letter. Now THAT is bad linguistics and bad archaeology. That the moderns think that their transliterations are more correct than ancient Greek renditions of a Pharaoh's name is amusing.

Culture More Important for Language Development than Linguistic Rules, Says Newest Research

Amina Khan at the Los Angeles Times reports on research in linguistics that Culture trumps biology in language development:

"Researchers construct evolutionary trees for four linguistic groups and conclude that cultures, not innate preferences, drive the language rules humans create – contrary to the findings of noted linguists Noam Chomsky and Joseph Greenberg."

The lesson here for linguists is that foolish consistencies are the hobgoblin of....

Read the full article.

A Single Original Language for All Humans Suggested in Just Published Article at the Journal "Science"

Gautam Naik at the Wall Street Journal in The Mother of All Languages reports on a recent article in the journal Science which covers a study pointing to one single original language for all humans.

The Alleged Ley Lines of Alfred Watkins and the Alleged Geodetic Alignments of his French Counterpart Xavier Guichard in France are Not the Same As Ancient Astronomical Megalithic Survey by the Stars

I have never been much of a fan of the way that traditional "ley lines" or similar alleged alignments are "researched", because the choice of reference points chosen by ley line adherents appears to be too arbitrary.

The fact is that if you draw a straight line anywhere on the map of any country it can easily pass through or near numerous locations of all kinds, modern, old or ancient, to which one can assign a chosen significance: for example, churches allegedly built on the location of ancient sites, etc.

There are millions of Earth locations.

An alleged line of alignment here or there alone proves nothing.

Land survey only works in an integrated system which has main triangulation points. I know. I surveyed land in my college days as summer work. If such ancient straight-line alignments existed it should be possible to reconstruct the triangulation system to which they belonged, and such a system would have to be consistent internally.

As an example, take a look at what appears to this observer to be a clearly trigonometric land survey Luvian (Luwian) symbol in Anatolia:

E

From the Minoan Aegean Sign Concordance we can see that mainstream Luvian scholars currently read that ancient sign as TANA, but we suggest to those scholars they take a look at Sumerian GANA "field, area (geometric figure)":

Is that Luvian symbol "evidence" of the use of trigonometry and geometry in land survey by the Luvians? It most certainly looks like it.

See surveyors.com for Land Survey Formulas.

The Luvian symbol is a simple triangulation grid, but nevertheless not unlike land survey by trigonometry in the modern period, as for example in this triangulation map of Great Britain (Ordnance Survey © Crown Copyright NC/2004/35281), as linked from Trig Tools (go to that site for a more detailed explanation):

As written at Heritage and History, 6500 triangulation pillars were erected for that survey in the modern era, not counting the half-a-million or so "bench marks and levelling points" of which about half have already disappeared, as the era of GPS has taken over.

Did the ancients do a comparable triangulation many years ago with the tools then at their disposal?

I do think, based on my research (see megaliths.net) that seafaring ancients surveyed the Earth thousands of years ago -- or at least parts of that Earth, but I think they did so by astronomy, via megalithic triangulation pillars as permanent markers and by the mathematics of trigonometry, which would have been "by calculation" and not by ley lines, which would otherwise have required "direct measurement" of the lines.

In Stars, Stones and Scholars I analyzed how an ancient astronomy-based land survey system could be reconstructed via the most ancient megaliths and megalithic sites.

My book had nothing to do with "leylines" and never mentions the term in the plural, only referring to two alignments, one of which, as I wrote, was "the famous "linear" ley line (leyline) site of  Mên-an-Tol" (not my naming), which I equated astronomically with the thread of the needle at the Cord of the Fish in ca. 3000 B.C.:



Traditional "Ley Lines", if they actually existed in ancient days, are a completely different animal than Menantol, and alleged by their proponents to relate to ancient trade routes, etc. and not to formations such as above. That this group of megaliths is seen as a ley line by some is not my creation.  This did not keep the anonymous bad archaeologists at the blog "Bad Archaeology" from libeling my person and alleging erroneously that I "accepted" ley lines, which I do not. See that story here.

In the English-speaking world Alfred Watkins is sometimes considered to be the father of the "leyline hunters" and I did a page about him quite number of years ago at lexiline.com.

A colleague recently made me aware of similar theories presented for France about the same time as Watkins by Xavier Guichard (that link goes to a detailed article), whose biography at the Wikipedia reads in short:

"Xavier Guichard (1870 – 1947) was a French Director of Police, archaeologist and writer.

Xavier Guichard appears in the novels of Georges Simenon as the superior of Jules Maigret.

His 1936 work Eleusis Alesia. Enquête sur les origines de la civilisation européenne is an early example of research into sacred geometry."

I hold the label "sacred geometry" to be inappropriate because it smacks of esoterism and begs the question in its name, i.e. it already makes a value judgment about the nature of things whose proof still awaits us. First prove that such lines existed, THEN prove that they were "sacred", which I doubt, because IF such lines existed, they initially served practical rather than religious purposes.

Alex Whitaker at his site "Ancient-Wisdom" writes about this practical purpose as follows:

"Similarly to Guichard (above), Watkins believed that the lines were associated with former 'Trade routes' for important commodities such as water and salt. He found confirmation in this through 'name-associated' leys. Even today the Bedouins of North Africa use the line system marked out by standing stones and cairns to help them traverse the deserts. A letter to the Observer (5 Jan 1930), notes similarities with Watkins theories and the local natives of Ceylon, who had to travel long distances to the salt pans. The tracks were always straight through the forest, were sighted on some distant hill, (called 'salt-hill'), and that the way was marked at intervals by large stones (called 'salt-stones'), similar to those in Britain. On the other hand, should the leys be ancient tracks then it should be possible to see one point from another. Also it is noted that there are many ancient 'tracks' across Britain, such as the Ridgeway, and none of them are dead straight."

Could such ancient paths of trade have existed?
Yes, of course. But they need not be ley lines.

Indeed, in my book, Stars, Stones and Scholars, I allege that the oldest remnants of the Great Wall of China follow the route of the extended Ancient Silk Road and that the landmarks used by travelers on that road were astronomical. The path of the stars, as it were, was duplicated on Earth as a road map. North of the Great Wall of China there is often nothing but vast expanses of empty, desolate territory, so that the original wall was hardly needed to protect against invading hordes. Rather, it was a main road, mapped by the heavens, later fortified. Simple enough.

There may be some overlap of ley lines with megalithic research, as in the case of the standing stones and cairns used by the Bedouins, but these are not the locations that I focus on in my work.

What I do is to examine known megalithic sites -- especially those involving gigantic multiple megalithic standing stones -- from the standpoint of ancient land survey by astronomy.

Land Survey, US Presidents as Surveyors, and Understanding the Land as a Prerequisite to Understanding History

Walter O'Brien, Staff Writer at the Asbury Park Press in Land surveyors take the measure of our lives | The Asbury Park Press | APP.com writes:

"Jeffrey Baldwin, a Hillsborough resident and licensed surveyor since 1991 who has been chief surveyor for the Somerset County Engineering Department for about six years, said that surveying is one of the world's oldest professions, dating to ancient Egyptians who mapped out parcels of land to assess taxes. Many historical figures, including George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson, have been surveyors.

'We like to look up at Mount Rushmore and say that it's three surveyors and some other guy,'' Baldwin joked."

There is a reason that America's greatest Presidents were previously land surveyors. You have to understand land to rule. I say that as someone who also worked on a land survey team in my college days. People who do not understand land survey can not understand the ancient past and that is one reason why archaeologists and similar professions are often far off the mark in their historical theories.

LANDs -- and not POTS -- were the guiding forces of history. Professions such as lawyers understand this.