Moses in the Hieroglyphs

Front Cover
AuthorHouse, 2006 - Egypt - 498 pages
0 Reviews
Joseph, Moses, Solomon & Sheba
The assertion that there are no ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic texts that make mention of the Hebrew Patriarchs Joseph, Moses, and Solomon and the Queen of Sheba is incorrect. There are unmistakable Hieroglyphic texts. The Nation of Khumry, who are misnamed as the "Welsh," are reliably traced back in time and distance as the "lost" Ten Tribes of Israel. Their deportation from Israel to Armenia around 720 - 700 BC was followed by their march west through Asia Minor to the Dardanelles. Half the Nation went to found Etruria around 650 BC, and the remainder sailed for Britain in c 504 BC. This means that before they arrived in Canaan to found Israel, they were in Egypt. A strange Khumric Triad notation of around 100 years ago indicates the Egyptian connection and specifically refers to the Hieroglyphic writings. The clear inference is that Khumric is the basic language of the Hieroglyphics. Professor Sir John Morris Jones wrote a Thesis in 1898 that demonstrated the identically of the complex Khumric Syntax and that of Ancient Egypt. Plus the fact that the same seven vowels - A E I O U W Y - were used in Ancient Egypt and the Khumry. Other 19th Century scholars including Bunsen were alert to this ancient Language connection. As there are well known huge chronological mismatches scattered all through the Histories of the ancient Nations of the Near East and the Mediterranean, and considerable confusions in the Ancient History of Egypt, it appears logical that there must be something wrong with the Historical Data. As there are thousands of Egyptian Hieroglyphic texts, there should be no problem with the order and chronology of the History, if these textsare read correctly. The fact that there is confusion indicates that the Texts have not been properly read and automatically this means that the present accepted method of reading the Ancient Egyptian History is used as the yardstick to establish the dates and full chronology of all the other Ancient Nations. Wars, royal intermarriages, treaties of alliance and trade agreements, and so on, are all "dated" by reference directly or indirectly to Ancient Egypt. As the present accepted order and grotesquely distorted. Historical gaps, and dark ages, of five, six, and even eight hundred centuries litter the scenario, and every investigator who has dared to step into this arena has pointed the finger directly at Egyptian chronology. Basic analysis shows that the concept that the Hieroglyphs were written in Coptic is not correct, and the "system" of decipherment mainly involves guesswork and speculation using a strange cocktail mix of Coptic, Hamatic, and Hebrew. The indications are that J F Champollion claimed much more than he actually achieved. If the Texts are not deciphered and read correctly then the information in the Texts is not correctly understood. It is a simple task to test the possibility that the ancient Language of the Khumry in Britain that can be traced back through Etruria, the Aegean, Asia Minor, and Assyria, to old Israel, is the basic language of the Ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphics. As a number of scholars have attempted to raise the issue of the chaos existing in the chronology of Ancient Egyptian History, and in 1990 Peter James and four other academic archaeologists published "Centuries of Darkness" and pointed out the historical mismatches, and later David Rohlpublished hi Pharaohs & Kings and made his TV series, and the problem of incorrect dates and order were clearly illustrated. Between 1950 and 1970 Immanuel Velikovsky published a series of books outlining the problems in "Ages in Chaos, in Ramesses II & His Time, Oedipus & Ahkenaten, The Peoples of the Sea, etc." Velikovsky was viciously attacked in a disgraceful exhibition of academic barbarism. Peter James et al and David Rohl, were quietly ignored. Nothing positive was done by the entrenched establishment who are willingly, deaf, dumb, and blind, to the situation.
The pre 307 BC Hieroglyphic texts can be read using the Khumric Language as their foundation. The results are consistent, coherent, and much more accurate than the Egyptospeak invented by Champollion. The order of the Egyptian Dynasties as currently presented is chaotic, and there are also many clear duplications. The indisputable fact is that the alleged 21st Dynasty of Egypt that is currently misdated at c 1050 - 950 BC is one and the same with the Family Dynasty of Alexander the Great in the 332 - 307 BC era. On this there can be no argument. The notion that there are no Hieroglyphic texts that identify Joseph, Benjamin, Moses, and Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, is a patent absurdity. These patriarchal figures have been shunted back in time from c 1550 BC to 2600 BC, from c 1350 BC to 22400 BC, and from c 950 BC to 1450 BC, and so on, and as a result they have been obscured.
Much of this disorder could and should have been resolved many years ago and there was a major scientific tool available to assist in this necessary process with the discovery of the Radio Carbon 14 dating techniques. Instead of puttingtheir house in order the denizens of the colleges and museums laboured mightily to discredit the Radio Carbon 14 dating methods, and it still is the common practice to discard and ignore the multitude of Radio CArbon 14 results that highlight the problems, and to claim that these readings "must be" contaminated or otherwise aberrant. The Researchers of this Project made their findings 20 years ago, beginning in 1984 when correct information cascaded out from readings of Hieroglyphic texts using Khumric, and only Khumric, as the base language. The savage treatment that was accorded to Velikovsky totally deterred them from making any of their work public. It is a sad fact that censorship does exist and persists as it has for centuries. Nonetheless there are clear Texts on Joseph, on Moses, and on Solomon & Sheba, and others. The rush to publish of the 19th Century has left a legacy of muddles and stagnation and it is time to allow a Defence to be heard against the unchallenged Allegation and Prosecution.

What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.

Other editions - View all

Bibliographic information