| Time Rivers | Book | The Nile Decoded | Etemenanki

The Nile & ‘First Time’

Posted:  Sept. 12, '03

By Goro Adachi

Copyright © 2003 Goro Adachi
All rights reserved.

In The Orion Mystery (1994) and The Message of the Sphinx(1996), researcher Robert Bauval presented his groundbreaking 'Orion Correlation Theory' (OCT). As those who have read The Nile Decoded or the book The Time Rivers know, the OCT has much to do with my 'Time River Theory' (TRT). Although the TRT is not necessarily dependent on Bauval's findings, I have made it abundantly clear that the latter, the OCT, is an integral component of the grand 'time map' design - history carved in stone, so to speak - that I have uncovered.

At the heart of the this 'map' is the Nile River, which turned out to be a literal 'river of time'. The Nile also plays a major role in the OCT. Bauval has shown us that the alignment of the ancient river and its celestial counterpart, the Milky Way, is a key component of the archaeoastronomical design ('as above, so below') marking the epoch of c. 10,500 BC, purportedly the mythical 'First Time' of ancient Egyptian tradition.

Illustrated below is the OCT heaven-earth alignment found encoded in the Giza monuments, pinpointing the 'First Time' (c. 10,500 BC).

    Around 10,600 BC:

  1. Orion reached its lowest point at the meridian in its 26,000-year precessional cycle. (Precession slowly shifts Orion and other stars up and down the meridian, the imaginary north-south line drawn in the sky where the stars achieve their highest daily altitudes.)
  2. On the vernal equinox, the Great Sphinx, directly facing east, witnessed the rising of its two celestial counterparts – the sun and Leo.

    At the moment of equinoctial sunrise (c. 10,600 BC):

  1. Orion was positioned right at the meridian.

  2. In the southern sky, the Milky Way was seen roughly vertical and positioned in such a way that it appeared to be an extension of the Nile. Orion was situated just to the right of the celestial river – closely mimicking the configuration of the Giza pyramids and the Nile.

At the core of the Orion Correlation Theory is, of course, the idea that the layout of the three great Giza pyramids closely mimic that of the Orion Belt Stars, which subsequently gives rise to the above correlation scheme.

In the Time River Theory, the OCT 'First Time' date is assigned to the beginning point of the Nile - or the 'beginning of time' - at the equator where the river begins its long journey northward by flowing out of Lake Victoria.

Along with 2350 BC, which is another 'anchor date' derived from the Giza design, assigned to the northern peak of the Nile 'Great Bend' at latitude 19.5°N, Giza's archaeoastronomical scheme manages to turn the ancient river into a timeline. (See The Nile Decoded for more detail.)

This second 'anchor date' (2350 BC) is produced by the celestial alignments of the Great Pyramid's internal 'air shafts'. These shafts, as Bauval has pointed out (expanding on the theory of Alexander Badawy and Virginia Trimble), are targeted at the meridian (i.e. due south/north) and angled just right so that around 2400 BC they were aligned with key stars crossing the meridian ('transit') - namely  Alnitak (of Orion), Sirius, Beta Ursa Minor ('Kochab'), and Alpha Draconis ('Thuban', the ancient Pole Star).

Although Bauval himself comes up with the approximate date of c. 2450 BC from this, the date should in reality be more like 2350 BC. All the star-shaft alignments occurred at the latter time except for Orion's alignment with the upper southern shaft (c. 2490 BC). Actually, as Dr. Thomas G. Brophy (The Origin Map) has pointed out, even this shaft did come into alignment with the Galactic Center around the same date of 2350 BC.

In any case, using these two anchor dates/points - 10,600 BC at the equator and 2350 BC at 19.5°N - I was then able to decode the 'Nile timeline'. It was revealed that the Nile's various other key point would mark very significant dates:

  • The Khartoum confluence at 15.60°N. corresponds precisely to 4000 BC.
  • The Atbara-Nile confluence at 17.67°N. corresponds to 3124 BC.
  • Giza/Cairo at 30.00°N. corresponds to AD 2093.

The two ancient dates, 4000 BC and 3124 BC, happen to coincide with the beginnings of the two earliest and most mysterious civilizations - Sumer (c. 4000 BC) and ancient Egypt (c. 3100 BC)! (The third date is presumably forecasting some momentous future event.)

This was the TRT's first major breakthrough, in which the OCT played a major role by interacting flawlessly with this Nile timeline scheme.

Recently, however, there has been a new development, a slight revision of the OCT, having the implication of shifting back the OCT 'First Time' date by 1000 years or so. And I realized that this would directly affect the Nile timeline which uses the original 'First Time' date (10,600 BC) as the 'beginning of time'.

Let us then examine here the new archaeoastronomical observation that, according to Bauval, makes c. 11,500 BC (instead of 10,600 BC) correspond to the 'First Time'. Let's see if it's something that undermines the Time River Theory.

First, here is a slightly edited version of Bauval's article addressing the issue, titled ANGLE OF CONTENTION: Part IV:

[I]f we precess the sky back to about 11,500 BC, Sirius would not have been visible from Heliopolis. The reality of Precession and other factors such as proper motion, atmospheric refraction and natural haze on the horizon, show that Sirius was not visible there prior to c.11,500 BC. However, an observer at the same latitude but who had access to a higher point observation point, like the Giza plateau for example, would, in fact, have been able to see Sirius. This is because the declination (d) of the due-south horizon would drop at least 1° lower as one climbs up the plateau (about 60 m above sea level).

To the ancient Egyptians who practiced a sky/star religion, this phenomenon may have had very profound implications. [...] Egyptian civilization had a beginning somewhere in the remote past. This is a fact. But to use their own parlance, must call it the ‘First Time’. ‘Time’ in ancient Egypt was monitored and calibrated with the stars, and there is no question that Sirius was the most prominent for this purpose. It would thus be a scientific negligence - no matter what the bias may be against the idea of an older origins for the Egyptian civilization - not to look more closely at this idea of the ‘First Time’ in connection with Sirius. [...]

Today Sirius is located immediately on the ‘west’ side of the Milky Way and somewhere below Orion. But if we go back in time to, say 70,000 BC, we find that Sirius was on the ‘east’ side of the Milky Way. Thus Sirius ‘crossed’ the ‘sky river’, to emerge finally on the other ‘west’ bank. Calculations show that this last happened near c.11,500 BC.

But then, from Heliopolis, it began to disappear until eventually it was seen no more. It was as if the star had simply ‘died’. The explanation of this strange phenomenon is simple: while Sirius star was moving across the sky-landscape with its proper motion, the sky-landscape was also itself ‘moving’ because of the effect of precession. In c. 11,500 BC the declination of Sirius was -59° 49’, and thus just skimmed the south horizon as seen from Heliopolis. [...] But soon it must have been realized that all was not lost. For someone looking south from the vantage point of the high Giza Plateau, could, in fact, actually see Sirius just over the south horizon.

Could 11,500 BC be the origin of the ‘First Time’ i.e. the ‘time of Horus’? And could the Great Sphinx, itself an effigy of the Horus-king, be a marker to this cosmic event?

In our book Keeper of Genesis [The Message of the Sphinx in US], we noted that the ancient Egyptians spoke of the ‘First Time’, as being a golden age variously known as ‘the time of Re’, ‘the time of Osiris’, or ‘the time of Horus’.” Re was the sun and Osiris was Orion. But Horus, in his cosmic form, was also Horus-Spd i.e. Horus-Sirius. Horus was also one of the oldest deities. And although using the nadir Orion’s belt to determine the ‘First Time’ was justified, we now can see that Sirius would have been far more appropriate.

All that this means is that the date has to be pushed back from c.10,500 BC to [c. 11,500 BC]. This does not present a problem, for whether c.10,500 BC or c.11, 500 BC, the OCT theory remains the same. But when we look carefully at the actual sky-image in c.11,500 BC we shall see that something does change... for the better...

  © Robert Bauval

[T]he angle formed by the apexes of the First and Second Pyramid is... 43° 22’. Calculations show that in c. 11.500 BC, the angle formed at the meridian by the line joining the first two stars (Zeta and Epsilon) of Orion’s belt was near 45.5° +/- 1°. Thus the variance [is], as everyone agrees, a negligible amount. [So the Orion's angle was much closer to the the pyramid angle than in 10,500 BC].

But that is not all. Looking closely at the eastern sky when Orion’s belt sits on the south meridian, we immediately can see that the constellation of Leo is sitting due east –in the direct line of sight of its earthly counterpart, the Great Sphinx.

© Robert Bauval

The sun disc at this precise moment is some 14° below the horizon line, meaning that it’s dark enough for nearly all the stars in Leo, and certainly all the stars in Orion, to be still visible in the pre-dawn sky. Ground and sky indeed now make a ‘perfect match’ in that special epoch of 11,500 BC...

[end 'Angle of Contention' article]

So Bauval's new position is that the 'First Time' should be c. 11,500 BC rather than c. 10,500 BC (or more accurately 10,600 BC) that he originally used.

While I concur that there is indeed special archaeoastronomical significance attached to c. 11,500 BC, in my view Bauval is prematurely discarding the original c. 10,600 BC date. There is still just too much coherence produced by the latter. For example, the Orion Belt Stars' lowest meridian transit in the southern sky did pinpoint c. 10,600 BC; and this transit coincided with the sunrise of the vernal equinox due east.

My position is that what we have here is not an either/or situation. Indeed, indications are that both dates are valid. And I'm not going to fault Bauval for trying to come up with just one date - because he doesn't have the bigger context that I have, i.e. the Time River system. If he was familiar with the TRT, he would have quickly found out that the Nile timeline acknowledges both 10,600 BC and c. 11,500 BC.

As illustrated below, extending the Nile timeline southward creates a situation where Lake Victoria's southern border marks the epoch covering 11,500 BC through 11,900 BC. What's more, it turns out that the Giza pyramid angle and the Orion's Belt (meridian transit) angle matched more exactly around 11,800 BC, which corresponds to latitude 2.838°S. (Dr. Thomas Brophy gives the date 11,772 BC.) This latitude, as shown below, happens to be indeed one of the key positions marking the southern edge of Lake Victoria!

But why are there two narrow arms of the lake extended southward marking two slightly different dates/latitudes? Why the need to mark 3.09°S/11,907 BC in addition to 2.838°S/11,800 BC?

An answer to this question may be the following.

The Time River system, as discussed in my book, uses 33.0°E longitude as its 'anchor/center meridian'. For example, it is the longitude pinpointed by one of the timeline-anchor points assigned to the 'Great Bend' apex (19.5°N/2350 BC). As the above illustration shows, this 'anchor meridian' (33°E) is 'touched' by the longer arm extending from the lake at about 2.86°S latitude, corresponding to 11,810 BC on the timeline - i.e. practically the same date pinpointed by the shorter/western arm (2.838°S/11,800 BC). Obviously, this has the function of putting extra emphasis on that Giza-Orion 'perfect match' date.

Now, it is true that the eastern arm extends further southward. But there is a very sensible reason for this. (Though I'm not saying this is the only reason.) Its southernmost extremity happens to mark 3°S latitude (more precisely 3.09°S). This is important because it makes the length of the Nile - from Giza (30°N) to 3°S - exactly 33 degrees in latitude. Hence it corroborates the importance attached to the 33°E meridian and the date it has pinpointed, i.e. c. 11,800 BC.

[Note: Yes, the numbering of longitude is a man-made and quite modern system which happens to be anchored at Greenwich (0°). This seems to make the numerical significance of the 33°E meridian rather superficial. But actually I can use the above findings to strengthen the idea that it is in fact no coincidence that the Nile anchor meridian happens to bear the precise number '33'. That the 'anchor meridian' is today's 33°E is not at all dependent on the number itself, so it has no bearing on the significance of the 11,810 BC (2.86°S/33.0°E) date. And yet the southernmost point of the same arm involved extending from Lake Victoria happens to pinpoint latitude 3°S to produce the number '33' (i.e. 33 degrees away from the northern 'edge' of the Nile at Giza/30°N) as if to tell us it is by design that the number 33 is assigned to the 'anchor meridian' of the Nile.]

*          *          *

Instead of collapsing, therefore, we have witnessed that the timeline system of the Nile was readily anticipating the additional 'First Time' date! When this kind of unexpected confirmation takes place, you know you have something powerful. This is exactly what a valid theory does.

Indeed, at this point I feel confident enough to state that the Orion Correlation Theory probably will not progress forward in a very meaningful way until the theory is viewed within the context of the Time River scheme. Giza's archaeoastronomical design propounded by the OCT is meant to lead naturally to the grander design of the Egyptian river, the Nile, the chief 'Time River' flowing on this planet. Hopefully this will be something recognized more widely in the near future.

Back to TRT Main Page

Send email to trt-update@goroadachi.com to receive email update notifications.

Email Goro: contact@goroadachi.com

Copyright © 2003 Goro Adachi
All rights reserved.
This material may not be reproduced
without the permission of the author.

Welcome | Time Rivers | Book | The Nile Decoded | Etemenanki