“JESUS DESCENDED FROM ET ENKI, HIS SON CAIN & KING DAVID” Sir Lawrence Gardiner, Royal Genealogist
Jesus, says philosopher Neil Freer, was a biological descendant of the Nibiran Enki, Chief Scientist of the goldmining expedition from the planet Nibiru to Earth. Freer writes “Jesus was an Essene as was his wife, Mary Magdalene, information the Catholic Church suppressed. Catholics instead perpetuated slave-code fear and subservience. They hid the truth of our hybridization and persecuted and brutalized the human-centered strain of the bloodline [that’s most of us].” [Gardiner, L., 2000, Bloodline of the Holy Grail; quote from Freer, 2004, Sapiens Rising]
JESUS AND THE ANCIENT ASTRONAUT THEORY Sir Laurence Gardner, Prior of the Celtic Church of the Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba, Le Chevalier Labhràn de Saint Germain and Preceptor of the Knights Templars of Saint Anthony
Extracted from <em>Nexus Magazine</em>, Volume 5, Number 6 (October-November 1998); forwarded by David H. Sandlin, email@example.com
The true Grail bloodline originated with the Anunnaki gods in southern Sumeria at least 6,000 years ago and was sustained by ingestion of an alchemical substance called ‘Star Fire’.
Bloodline of the Holy Grail is essentially concerned with the Messianic Bloodline as it has descended through the family of Jesus Christ down to the present day. It is also concerned with comparing the New Testament Gospels with the first- hand historical accounts of the era, as related in both the Roman and Jewish archives. In this regard, it details how the eventual Christian High Church corrupted and manipulated the early records to suit its own political agenda.
Despite the contrived doctrine that Jesus was born of a virgin and was the ‘one and only’ son of God (definitions that did not feature in the original pre-Roman texts), the New Testament Gospels of Matthew and Luke actually give details of Jesus’ descendant lineage from David of Israel and the Kings of Judah. This has led to the one question I have been asked more than any other during the past months. The question (in its various forms) asks quite simply: What was so special about this Bloodline in the first place?
Given that the dynastic succession from Jesus has been expressly prominent in sovereign and political affairs through 2,000 years – with the family constantly supporting constitutional democracy against control by the Church establishment – its status rests upon the fact that Jesus was a lineal descendant of King David.
But, what was it that made the line of David so important, and so different from any other? It was this very question which set me on the trail for my next book, Genesis of the Grail Kings, which tells the story of the Messianic line from the very beginning.
The Bible explains that the Bloodline story began with Adam and Eve, from whose third son, Seth, evolved a line which progressed through Methuselah and Noah, and eventually to Abraham who became the Great Patriarch of the Hebrew nation. It then relates that Abraham brought his family westwards out of Mesopotamia (present-day Iraq) to the land of Canaan (or Palestine), from where some of his descendants moved into Egypt. After a few generations they moved back into Canaan where, in time, the eventual David of Bethlehem became King of the newly defined Kingdom of Israel.
If viewed as it is presented in the scriptures, this is a fascinating saga; but there is nothing anywhere to indicate why the ancestral line of David and his heirs was in any way special. In fact, quite the reverse is the case. His ancestors are portrayed as a succession of wandering territory- seekers who are seen to be of no particular significance until the time of King David. Their biblical history bears no comparison to, say, the contemporary Pharaohs of ancient Egypt. Their significance, we are told, comes from the fact that (from the time of Abraham) they were designated as ‘God’s chosen people’. But even this leaves us wondering, because, according to the scriptures, their God led them through nothing but a succession of famines, wars and general hardship – and, on the face of it, these early Hebrews do not appear to have been too bright!
We are faced, therefore, with a couple of possibilities. Either David was not of this Abraham succession at all, and was simply grafted into the list by later writers. Or maybe we have been presented with a very corrupted version of the family’s early history – a version that was specifically designed to uphold the emergent Jewish faith, rather than to represent historical fact.
In consideration of this, I was reminded of precisely what I had found with the New Testament. The Gospel texts that have been in the public domain for centuries bear little relation to the first-hand accounts of the era. The New Testament, as we know it, was compiled by the 4th-century bishops to support the newly contrived Christian belief. But, what if the Jewish scribes had previously done exactly the same thing?
Clearly, I had to get back to the more ancient writings in order to find any anomalies. The problem was that, even if this were possible, the earliest Hebrew writings (which were rehashed many centuries later) were themselves only written between the 6th and the 1st centuries BC, so they were not likely to be that authentic in their telling of history from thousands of years before. Indeed, it was plain that this would be the case, because when these books were first written their express purpose was to convey a history which upheld the principles of the Jewish faith – a faith that did not emerge until well into the ancestral story.
Given that the first group of these books was written while the Jews were held captive in Mesopotamian Babylon in the 6th century BC, it is apparent that Babylon was where the original records were then held. In fact, from the time of Adam, through some 19 said generations down to Abraham, the whole of Old Testament patriarchal history was Mesopotamian. More specifically, the history was from Sumer in southern Mesopotamia, where the ancient Sumerians did indeed refer to the grasslands of the Euphrates delta as the Eden.
When researching for Bloodline of the Holy Grail, I found that good sources for some background information were the various Gospels and texts that were not selected for inclusion in the canonical New Testament. Perhaps, I thought, the same might apply to the Old Testament. The books of Enoch and Jubilees, for example, were among those not included.
A further book, to which attention is specifically drawn in the Old Testament books of Joshua and Samuel, is the Book of Jasher. But despite its apparent importance to the Hebrew writers, it was not included in the final selection.
Two other works are also cited in the Bible. The Book of Numbers draws our attention to the Book of The Wars of Jehovah. And in the Book of Isaiah we are directed towards the Book of the Lord.
What are these books? Where are these books? They are all mentioned in the Bible (which means they all pre-date the Old Testament), and they are all cited as being important. So, why did the editors see fit to exclude them when the selection was made?
In pursuing an answer to this question and in studying the substance of the Old Testament prior to its corruption, one fact which becomes increasingly clear is that in English-language Bibles the definition ‘Lord’ is used in a general context, but in earlier texts a positive distinction is drawn between ‘Jehovah’ and ‘the Lord’.
It has often been wondered why the biblical God of the Hebrews led them through trials and tribulations, floods and disasters, when (from time to time) he appears to have performed with a quite contrary and merciful personality. The answer is that, although now seemingly embraced as ‘the One God’ by the Jewish and Christian churches, there was originally a distinct difference between the figures of Jehovah and the Lord. They were, in fact, quite separate deities. The god referred to as ‘Jehovah’ was traditionally a storm god, a god of wrath and vengeance, whereas the god referred to as ‘the Lord’ was a god of fertility and wisdom.
So, what was the name given to the Lord in the early writings? It was, quite simply, the prevailing Hebrew word for ‘Lord’, and the word was ‘Adon’. As for the apparent personal name of Jehovah, this was not used in the early days, and even the Bible tells that the God of Abraham was called ‘El Shaddai’, which means ‘Lofty Mountain’. The apparent name ‘Jehovah’ came from the original Hebrew stem YHWH, which meant ‘I am that I am’ – said to be a statement made by God to Moses on Mount Sinai, hundreds of years after the time of Abraham. ‘Jehovah’ was therefore not a name at all, and early texts refer simply to ‘El Shaddai’ and to his opposing counterpart, ‘Adon’. To the Canaanites, these gods were respectively called ‘El Elyon’ and ‘Baal’ – which meant precisely the same things (‘Lofty Mountain’ and ‘Lord’). In our modern Bibles, the definitions ‘God’ and ‘Lord’ are used and intermixed throughout, as if they were one and the same character, but originally they were not. One was a vengeful god (a people-hater), and the other was a social god (a people-supporter), and they each had wives, sons and daughters.
The old writings tell us that throughout the patriarchal era the Israelites endeavoured to support Adon, the Lord, but at every turn El Shaddai (the storm god, Jehovah) retaliated with floods, tempests, famines and destruction. Even at the very last (around 600 BC), the Bible explains that Jerusalem was overthrown at Jehovah’s bidding and tens of thousands of Jews were taken into Babylonian captivity simply because their King (a descendant of King David) had erected altars in veneration of Baal, the Adon.
It was during the course of this captivity that the Israelites weakened and finally conceded. They decided to succumb to the ‘God of Wrath’, and developed a new religion out of sheer fear of his retribution. It was at this time that the name of Jehovah first appeared – and this was only 500 years before the time of Jesus. Subsequently, the Christian Church took Jehovah on board as well, calling him simply ‘God’ – and all the hitherto social concepts of the Adon were totally discarded. The two religions were henceforth both faiths of fear. Even today, their followers are classified as ‘God-fearing’.
So, where does that leave us? It leaves us knowing that within an overall pantheon of gods and goddesses (many of whom are actually named in the Bible), there were two predominant and opposing gods, known as ‘El Elyon’ and ‘Baal'; ‘El Shaddai’ and ‘Adon'; ‘Arhiman’ and ‘Mazda'; ‘Jehovah’ and ‘Lord'; ‘God’ and ‘Father’. But these styles are all titular; they are not personal names. So who precisely were they? To find the answer we have to look no further than where these gods were actually operative, and the old Canaanite texts (discovered in Syria in the 1920s) tell us that their courts were in the Tigris-Euphrates valley in Mesopotamia, in the Sumerian Eden delta of the Persian Gulf.
But what did the ancient Sumerians call these two gods? What were their personal names? We can trace the Sumerian written records back to about 3700 BC, and they tell us that the gods in question were brothers. In Sumer, the storm god who eventually became known as Jehovah was called ‘Enlil’ or ‘Ilu-kur-gal’ (meaning ‘Ruler of the Mountain’), and his brother, who became Adon, the Lord, was called ‘Enki’. This name is really important to our story because ‘Enki’ means ‘Archetype’.
The texts inform us that it was Enlil who brought the Flood; it was Enlil who destroyed Ur and Babylon, and it was Enlil who constantly opposed the education and enlightenment of humankind. Indeed, the early Syrian texts tell us that it was Enlil who obliterated the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah on the Dead Sea – not because they were dens of wickedness, as we are taught, but because they were great centres of wisdom and learning.
It was Enki, on the other hand, who, despite the wrath of his brother, granted the Sumerians access to the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life. It was Enki who set up the escape strategy during the Flood, and it was Enki who passed over the time-honoured Tables of Destiny – the tables of scientific law which became the bedrock of the early mystery schools in Egypt.
Many books talk about the hermetic school of Tuthmosis III of Egypt, who reigned about 1450 BC. But it is not generally known that the school he originally inherited was the Royal Court of the Dragon. This had been founded by the priests of Mendes in about 2200 BC and was subsequently ratified by the 12th dynasty Queen Sobeknefru. This sovereign and priestly Order passed from Egypt to the Kings of Jerusalem; to the Black Sea Princes of Scythia and into the Balkans – notably to the Royal House of Hungary, whose King Sigismund reconstituted the Court just 600 years ago. Today it exists as the Imperial and Royal Court of the Dragon Sovereignty, and after some 4,000 years it is the oldest sovereign Court in the world.
But what were the earliest aims and ambitions of the Order back in Pharaonic times? They were to perpetuate and advance the alchemical strength of the Royal Bloodline from Lord Enki, the Archetype. The kings of the early succession (who reigned in Sumer and Egypt before becoming Kings of Israel) were anointed upon coronation with the fat of the Dragon (the sacred crocodile). This noble beast was referred to in Egypt as the Messeh (from which derived the Hebrew verb ‘to anoint’), and the kings of this dynastic succession were always referred to as ‘Dragons’, or ‘Messiahs’ (meaning ‘Anointed Ones’). In times of battle, when the armies of different kingdoms were conjoined, an overall leader was chosen and he was called the ‘Great Dragon’ (the ‘King of Kings’) – or, as we better know the name in its old Celtic form, the ‘Pendragon‘. One of the interesting items from the archives of the Dragon Court is the origin of the word ‘kingship‘. It derives from the very earliest of Sumerian culture, wherein ‘kingship’ was identical with ‘kinship‘ – and ‘kin’ means ‘blood relative’. In its original form, ‘kinship’ was ‘kainship’. And the first King of the Messianic Dragon succession was the biblical Cain (Kain), head of the Sumerian House of Kish.
On recognising this, one can immediately see the first anomaly in the traditional Genesis story, for the historical line to David and Jesus was not from Adam and Eve’s son Seth at all. It was from Eve’s son Cain, whose recorded successors (although given little space in the Old Testament) were the first great Kings (or Kains) of Mesopotamia and Egypt.
Two more important features then come to light when reading the Bible again with this knowledge in mind. We all tend to think of Cain as being the first son of Adam and Eve, but he was not. Even the Book of Genesis tells us that he was not, and it confirms how Eve told Adam that Cain’s father was the Lord. Who was ‘the Lord’? The Lord was Adon, and Adon was Enki. Even outside the Bible, the writings of the Hebrew Talmud and Midrash make it quite plain that Cain was not the son of Adam. So what else have we been wrongly taught about this particular aspect of history? The Book of Genesis (in its English-translated form) tells us that Cain was ‘a tiller of the ground’. But this is not what the original texts say at all. What they say is that Cain had ‘dominion over the Earth’ – which is a rather different matter when considering his kingly status.
In fact, the Bible translators appear to have had a constant problem with the word ‘Earth’, often translating it to ‘ground’, ‘clay’ or ‘dust’. But the early texts actually referred to ‘The Earth’. Even in the case of Adam and Eve, the translators got it wrong. The Bible says: ‘Male and female he created them, and he called their name Adam.’ The older writings use the more complete word ‘Adama’, which means ‘of the Earth’. But this did not mean they were made of dirt; it means that they were ‘of The Earth’ – or, as the Anchor Hebrew Bible explains in absolutely precise terms, they were ‘Earthlings’.
There is a lot to be said about the story of Adam and Eve and of how they were the result of clinical cloning. Writers such as Zechariah Sitchin have written at some length in this regard, and my new book delves far more deeply into the subject. I shall not dwell upon this particular aspect now because I want to move more directly into the alchemy of the Messianic Bloodline of the Earthly Dragon Kings. What I will say is that the Sumerian records state that Adam and Eve (known then as ‘Atabba’ and ‘Ava’, and jointly as the ‘Adama’) were purpose-bred for kingship at the House of Shimti by Enki and his sister-wife Nin-khursag. In Sumerian, the word Shi-im-ti meant ‘breath-wind-life’. Nin-khursag was called ‘Lady of the Embryo’ or ‘Lady of Life’, and she was the surrogate mother for Atabba and Ava who were created from human ova fertilised by the Lord Enki. It was because of Nin-khursag’s title, Lady of Life, that Ava was later given the same title by the Hebrews. Indeed, the name Ava (or Eve) was subsequently said to mean ‘Life’. And there is an interesting parallel here, because in Sumerian the distinction ‘Lady of Life’ was Nin-tî (Nin meaning ‘Lady’, and tî meaning ‘Life’). However, another Sumerian word, ti (with the longer pronunciation, ‘tee’), meant ‘rib'; and it was by virtue of the Hebrews’ misunderstanding of the two words, tî and ti, that Eve also became incorrectly associated with Adam’s rib.
Both Enki and Nin-khursag (along with their brother Enlil, the later Jehovah) belonged to a pantheon of gods and goddesses referred to as the Anunnaki, meaning ‘Heaven came to Earth’. In fact, the Grand Assembly of the Anunnaki (later called the ‘Court of the Elohim’) is mentioned in Psalm 82 wherein Jehovah makes his bid for supreme power over the other gods.
According to the Dragon tradition, the importance of Cain was that he was directly produced by Enki and Ava, so his blood was three-quarters Anunnaki. His half-brothers Hevel and Satanael (better known as Abel and Seth) were less than half Anunnaki, being the offspring of Atabba and Ava (Adam and Eve).
Cain’s Anunnaki blood was so advanced that it was said that his brother Abel’s blood was ‘Earthbound’ by comparison. Cain, it was said in the scriptures, ‘rose far above Abel’, so that his brother’s blood was swallowed into the ground. But this original description was thoroughly mistranslated for our modern Bible, and we are now told that ‘Cain rose up against Abel and spilled his blood upon the ground’. This is not the same thing at all.
We can now progress our story by considering the oldest Grant of Arms in sovereign history – a Grant of Arms which denoted the Messianic Dragon Bloodline for all time. The Sumerians referred to this insignia as the Gra- al. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? From biblical history, however, we know it better as the ‘Mark of Cain’.
This ‘Mark’ is portrayed to us by the Church as if it were some form of curse. But, knowing what we now know, the Bible does not actually say this. What it says is that, having got into an argument with Jehovah over a matter of sovereign observance, Cain feared for his life. We are then informed that the Lord placed a mark upon Cain, swearing sevenfold vengeance against his enemies.
No one has ever really understood why Jehovah should decide to protect Cain when it was he who held the grievance against him. But the fact is that Jehovah did not make this decision. Cain’s protector was not Jehovah. As stated, the ‘Mark’ was settled upon Cain by the Lord – and the Lord (the Adon) was Cain’s own Father, Enki.
Few people ever think to enquire about the supposed enemies of Cain as defined in Genesis. Who could they possibly have been? Where would they have come from? According to the Bible, only Adam and Eve, with their sons Cain and Abel, existed – and Cain had apparently killed Abel. If we are to accept the text as it stands, there was no one around to be his enemy!
So, what was this Sumerian Gra-al which the Bible calls ‘the Mark of Cain’? It was an emblem dignified as the ‘Cup of the Waters’ or the Rosi- Crucis (the ‘Dew Cup’), and it was identified in all records (including those of Egypt and Phoenicia and in the Hebrew annals) as being an upright, centred red cross within a circle. Throughout the ages it was developed and embellished, but it has always remained essentially the same and is recognised as being the original symbol of the Holy Grail.
Another anomaly is presented soon afterwards in Genesis when we are told that Cain found himself a wife. Who on Earth were her parents if Adam and Eve were the only couple alive? Without confronting this anomaly at all, Genesis then proceeds to list for us the names of Cain’s descendants!
It becomes clear from all of this that some very important information has been edited from the Old Testament narrative. Clearly there were plenty of other people around at the time and it is not difficult to find their stories outside the Bible. Quite apart from the Sumerian annals, even old Hebrew and early Christian texts give us far more information in this regard.
In order to further enhance the succession from Cain, he was married to his half-sister – a pure-bred Anunnaki princess, Luluwa. Her father was Enki and her mother was Lilith, a granddaughter of Enlil. Although not giving the name of Cain’s wife, the Bible does name their younger son Enoch, while the Sumerian records cite his elder son and kingly successor, Atûn, who is perhaps better known as King Etana of Kish. Etana was said to have ‘walked with the gods’, and to have been fed from the ‘Plant of Birth’ (or the ‘Tree of Life’, as it is called in Genesis). Henceforth, the kings of the line were designated as being the twigs of the Tree – and the ancient word for ‘twig’ was klone (clone). In later times this ‘Plant’ or ‘Tree’ was redefined as a ‘Vine’, and so the Gra-al, the Vine and the Messianic Bloodline became conjoined as one in the literature of subsequent ages.
By virtue of their contrived breeding, this kingly succession was modelled specifically for leadership, and in all aspects of knowledge, culture, awareness, wisdom and intuition they were highly advanced against their mundane contemporaries. In order to keep their blood as pure as possible, they always married within a close kinship.
It was fully recognised that the prominent gene of the succession was carried within the blood of the mother. Today we call this the ‘mitochondrial DNA’. And so was born a tradition inherited by their kingly descendants in Egypt and by the later Celtic rulers of Europe. True kingship, it was maintained, was transferred through the female, and so kingly marriages were strategically cemented with maternal half-sisters or first cousins. Kingly succession was orally fed with bodily supplements from the early days. This practice continued for more than 1,000 years until the nourishment program became wholly scientific and alchemical.
Before getting into the detail of the kingly diet, it is worth considering why it was that the all-important Royal Bloodline which progressed from Cain and his sons was strategically ignored by the Hebrews and the Christian Church in favour of their promoting a parallel junior line from Adam’s son Seth. Why was it that the immediate Cainite dynasty was eventually shunned by the fearful disciples of Enlil-Jehovah? In the Old Testament Book of Genesis, the lines of descent are given from Cain and from his half-brother Seth, but it is of interest to note that through the early generations the names detailed in each list are pretty much the same, although given in a different order: Enoch, Yared, Mahalaleel, Methuselah and Lamech. In view of this, it has often been suggested that the line from Seth down to Lamech’s son Noah was (not very cleverly) contrived by the Bible compilers so as to avoid showing the true descent from Cain to the time of Noah. If this were the case, then something must have occurred during the lifetime of Noah to cause the ancestral story to be veiled by the later writers. The answer is to be found in the Bible itself.
At that stage in the family’s history, the vengeful Jehovah apparently warned Noah and his sons against the ingestion of blood – an edict which became expressly important to the later Jewish way of life. It has long been a customary Jewish practice to hang meat for blood-letting before cooking and consumption. But, in contrast, the Christian faith is especially concerned with the figurative ingestion of blood. In the Christian tradition it is customary to take the Communion sacrament (the Mass) wherein wine is drunk from the sacred chalice, symbolically representing the blood of Jesus, the lifeblood of the Messianic Vine. Could it be, perhaps, that the modern Christian custom is an unwitting throw-back to some distant pre-Noah ritual which Jehovah opposed? If so, then since it is known that the chalice is a wholly female symbol which has been emblematic of the womb from the earliest times, might this even have been an extract of menstrual blood? The answer to these questions is ‘Yes’. That was precisely the custom, but it was not so unsavoury as it might seem. Indeed, few of us think to enquire about the ultimate sources of many of today’s ingested medicines and bodily supplements, and those in the know would often be reluctant to tell us. The Premarin hormone, for example, comes from the urine of pregnant mares, while certain growth hormones and insulin are manufactured from E. coli, a faecal bacterium.
The blood extract in question was, in the first instance, not human but from the sacred Anunnaki lunar essence – that of Enki’s sister Nin- khursag, the designated Lady of Life. It was defined as the most potent of all life-forces and was venerated as being ‘Star Fire’. It was from the womb of Nin-khursag that the kingly line was born, and it was with her blood, the divine Star Fire, that the Dragon succession was supplementally fed.
NINHARSAG (NINMAH) WAS ISIS
In ancient Egypt, Nin-khursag was called ‘Isis’, and by either name she was the ultimate Mother of the Messianic line, for hers was the matriarchal gene which constituted the ‘Beginning’, the ‘Gene-Isis’, or, as the Greeks identified it, the Genesis. The biblical edict to abstain from blood came not from Enki the Wise but from Enlil-Jehovah – the God of Wrath who had instigated the Flood, had wrought havoc in Ur and Babylon, and had endeavoured to deceive Adam by saying that he would die if he ate from the Tree of Knowledge. This was not a god who liked people, and the Sumerian records are very clear in this regard. Hence, if he forbade the taking of blood, this was not likely to have been an edict for the benefit of Noah and his descendants – it was most probably to their detriment.
In strict terms the original Star Fire was the lunar essence of the Goddess, but, even in an everyday mundane environment, menstruum contains the most valuable endocrinal secretions, especially those of the pineal and pituitary glands. The brain’s pineal gland in particular was directly associated with the Tree of Life, for this tiny gland was said to secrete the very essence of active longevity, called soma, or, as the Greeks called it, ambrosia. In mystic circles, the menstrual ‘flow-er’ (‘she who flows’) has long been the designated ‘flower’ and is represented as a lily or a lotus. Indeed, the definition ‘flow-er’ is the very root of our modern word ‘flower’. In ancient Sumer, the key females of the Dragon succession were all venerated as lilies, having such names as Lili, Luluwa, Lilith, Lilutu and Lillette. In pictorial representation, the Messianic Dragon bore little relation to the winged, fire-breathing beast of later Western mythology. It was, in essence, a large-jawed serpent with four legs, very much like a crocodile or a monitor. This was the sacred Messeh whose name was ‘Draco’. Draco was a divine emblem of the Egyptian Pharaohs, a symbol of the Egyptian Therapeutate, of the Essenes at Qumran, and was the Bistea Neptunis (the sea serpent) of the descendant Merovingian Fisher-Kings in Europe. In the old Hebrew Bibles, all references to serpents are made by use of the word nahash (from the stem NHSH); but this usage does not relate to serpents in the way that we would know them – that is, as venomous snakes. It relates to serpents in their traditional capacity as bringers of wisdom and enlightenment, for the word nahash actually means ‘to decipher’ or ‘to find out’. Serpents, in one form or another, were always associated with wisdom and healing, and the Trees of Life and Knowledge are customarily identified with serpents. Indeed, the insignia of many of today’s medical associations is precisely this image of a serpent coiled around the Plant of Birth (Tree of Life) – a depiction shown in the clay reliefs of ancient Sumer to be Enki’s personal emblem. Another common emblem for medical relief organisations depicts two coiled serpents, spiralling around the winged caduceus of Hermes the magician. In these instances the true symbolism of the Star Fire ritual is conveyed, and this symbol can be traced back to the very origins of the alchemical mystery schools and gnostic institutions. The records explain that the central staff and entwined serpents represent the spinal cord and the sensory nervous system. The two uppermost wings signify the brain’s lateral ventricular structures. Between these wings, above the spinal column, is shown the small central node of the pineal gland. [Also, one can’t help but notice the resemblance to DNA-The Magus]
The combination of the central pineal and its lateral wings has long been referred to as the ‘Swan’, and in Grail lore (as in some yogic circles) the Swan is emblematic of the fully enlightened being. This is the ultimate realm of consciousness achieved by the mediaeval Knights of the Swan, as epitomised by such chivalric figures as Perceval and Lohengrin.
Most of you are probably quite familiar with the functions of the pineal and other glands of the endocrinal system. But for those who are perhaps not, the pineal is a very small gland, shaped like a pine cone and about the size of a grain of corn. It is centrally situated within the brain, although outside the ventricles and not forming a part of the brain-matter as such. The pineal gland was thought by the 17th-century French optical scientist René Descartes to be the seat of the soul – the point at which the mind and body are conjoined. The ancient Greeks considered it likewise, and in the 4th century BC Herophilus described the pineal as an organ which regulated the flow of thought. This gland has long intrigued anatomists because, while the rest of the brain is ‘double’, the pineal has no counterpart. In the days of ancient Sumer, the priests of Anu (the father of Enlil and Enki) perfected and elaborated a ramifying medical science of living substances, with menstrual Star Fire being an essential source component. In the first instance, this was pure Anunnaki lunar essence called ‘Gold of the Gods’, and it was fed only to the Kings and Queens of the Dragon succession. Later, however, in Egypt and Mediterranea, menstrual Star Fire was ritually collected from sacred virgin priestesses who were venerated as ‘Scarlet Women’. Indeed, the very word ‘ritual’ stems from this practice, and from the word ritu – which defined the sacred ceremony of the ‘Red Gold’. Endocrinal supplements are, of course, still used by today’s organotherapy establishment, but their inherent secretions (such as melatonin and serotonin) are obtained from the dessicated glands of dead animals and they lack the truly important elements which exist only in live human glandular manufacture.
In the fire symbolism of ancient alchemy, the colour ‘red’ is synonymous with the metal ‘gold’. In some traditions (including the Indian tantras), ‘red’ is also identifiable with ‘black’. Hence, the goddess Kali is said to be both ‘red’ and ‘black’. The original heritage of Kali was, however, Sumerian, and she was said to be Kalimâth, the sister of Cain’s wife Luluwa. Kali was a primary princess of the Dragon House, and from her Star Fire association she became the goddess of time, seasons, periods and cycles. Because of this, her name was the root of the word ‘calendar’ (kalindar), which is concerned with the divisions of seasonal time.
In the early days, therefore, the metals of the alchemists were not common metals but living essences, and the ancient mysteries were of a physical, not a metaphysical, nature. Indeed, the very word ‘secret’ has its origin in the hidden knowledge of glandular secretions. Truth was the ritu (the ‘redness’ or ‘blackness’), and from the word ritu stems not only ritual but also the words ‘rite’, ‘root’ and ‘red’. The ritu, it was said, reveals itself as physical matter in the form of the purest and most noble of all metals: gold. Hence, gold was deemed an ‘ultimate truth’.
Just as the word ‘secret’ has its origin in the translation of an ancient word, so too do other related words have their similar bases. In ancient Egypt, the word Amen was used to signify something hidden or concealed. The word ‘occult’ meant pretty much the same (‘hidden from view’), and yet today we use ‘Amen’ to conclude hymns, while something ‘occult’ is deemed sinister. In real terms, however, they both relate to the word ‘secret’, and all three words were, at one time or another, connected with the mystic science of endocrinal secretions. Since Kali was associated with ‘black’ (being ‘black but beautiful’), the English word ‘coal’ (denoting ‘that which is black’) stems also from her name via the intermediate word kol. In the Hebrew tradition, Bath-Kol (a Kali counterpart) was called the ‘Daughter of the Voice’, and the voice was said to originate during a female’s puberty. Hence, the womb was associated with the voice, and Star Fire was said to be the oracular ‘Word of the Womb’. The womb was, therefore, itself the ‘utterer’, or the ‘uterus’. The ‘Scarlet Women’ were so called because of their being a direct source of the priestly Star Fire. They were known in Greek as the Hierodulai (‘Sacred Women’) – a word later transformed (via mediaeval French into English) to ‘harlot’. In the early Germanic tongue, they were known as Horés – which was later Anglicised to ‘whores’. However, the word originally meant, quite simply, ‘Beloved Ones’. As pointed out in good etymological dictionaries, these words were descriptions of high veneration and were never interchangeable with such words as ‘prostitute’ or ‘adulteress’. Their now common association was, in fact, a wholly contrived strategy of the mediaeval Roman Church in its bid to denigrate the noble status of the sacred priestess.
The withdrawal of knowledge of the genuine Star Fire tradition from the public domain occurred when the science of the early adepts and later Gnostics (the true pre-Christian Christians) was stifled by the forgers of historic Christianity. A certain amount of the original gnosis (or knowledge) is preserved in Talmudic and rabbinical lore, but, generally speaking, the mainstream Jews and Christians did all in their power to distort and destroy all traces of the ancient art.
In addition to being the ‘Gold of the Gods’, the Anunnaki menstruum was also called the ‘Vehicle of Light’, being the ultimate source of manifestation, and in this regard it was directly equated with the mystical ‘Waters of Creation’ – the flow of eternal wisdom. It was for this reason that the Rosi-Crucis (the Dew Cup, or Cup of the Waters identified as a red cross within a circle) became the Mark of Cain, and the subsequent emblem of the kingly succession.
It was said that the Light remained quite dormant in a spiritually unawakened person but that it could be awakened and motivated by the spiritual energy of self-will, and by constant self-enquiry. This is not an obvious mental process, but a truly thought-free consciousness – a formless plane of pure Being.
Sir Laurence Gardner, Kt St Gm., KCD, KT St A., is an internationally known sovereign and chivalric genealogist. He holds the position of Prior of the Celtic Church of the Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba, and is distinguished as Le Chevalier Labhràn de Saint Germain and Preceptor of the Knights Templars of Saint Anthony. Sir Laurence is also Presidential Attaché to the European Council of Princes (a constitutional advisory body established in 1946), and Chancellor of the Imperial and Royal Court of the Dragon Sovereignty. He is formally attached to the Noble Household Guard of the Royal House of Stewart, founded at St Germain- en-Laye in 1692, and is the Jacobite Historiographer Royal by Appointment. By the 1880s, the governing establishments of Christendom were dreading the very word ‘archaeologist’. And so, archaeological digs were brought under strict control, and their funding and undertakings had to be approved by newly designated authorities. In short, this meant that if something was found which could be used to support the scriptural teaching, then we (the public) would be informed. Anything which did not support the Church interpretation of the Bible was not destined to see the light in the public domain.
Now we are going to take a look at one of the monumental finds from that era – a discovery about which very little is known to people at large. In fact, it is probably the most important biblical discovery ever made and it has stunning implications far beyond the discovery itself, for this is the ultimate story of the Phoenix and the Fire-stone.
Within the Book of Exodus, a significant biblical mountain is named. It sits in the extensive range of the Sinai Peninsula – the upturned triangular land-mass which lies above the Red Sea between the Gulf of Suez and the Gulf of Aqabah. In the Old Testament, the mountain is firstly called ‘Mount Horeb’, then it is called ‘Mount Sinai’, and is subsequently called ‘Horeb’ again as the story progresses.
The story, of course, is that of Moses and the Israelite exodus from Egypt. This was the mountain upon which, according to Exodus, Moses saw the burning bush; the mountain where he talked with Jehovah; and the place where he received the Ten Commandments and the Tables of Testimony.
Something that we should recognise at this stage is that at the time of Moses (roughly 1350 BC) there was no mountain called ‘Mount Sinai’. There was no mountain by that name even in the days of Jesus, nor even for another 300 years.
It should also be said that the Old Testament which is familiar to us today is a translation from a Hebrew text compiled only 1,000 years ago, and it is therefore a few centuries younger even than the canonical New Testament.
The mountain now generally known as Mount Sinai sits in the south of the peninsula, quite near to the bottom point of the upturned triangle. It was given its name in the 4th century AD by a mission of Greek Christian monks, 1,700 years after the time of Moses. It is now sometimes called ‘Gebel Musa’ (or ‘Mount of Moses’), and a small Christian retreat, St Catherine’s Monastery, still exists there. But, was this the Sinai mountain which the Bible calls ‘Mount Horeb’? Well, it transpires that it was not.
The Book of Exodus goes into some detail to explain the route taken by Moses and the Israelites from the Nile Delta land of Goshen, down across Sinai, across the wilderness regions of Shur and Paran, to the land of Midian (which is to the north of present-day Jordan). From this route it becomes very easy to identify the location of Mount Horeb. It sits a good deal north of Gebel Musa.
The word horeb simply means ‘desert’, and the great desert mountain which soars to over 2,600 feet within a high stone plateau above the Plain of Paran is today called ‘Serâbît’ – or, to be more precise, Serâbît el-Khâdim (the Prominence of the Khâdim).
In the late 1890s, the British Egyptologist Sir William Flinders Petrie, a Professor at the University College, London, applied to the Egypt Exploration Fund to take an expedition into Sinai. By January l904, he and his team were in Sinai, and in March of that year they took their expedition to the heights of Mount Serâbît.
In the following year, Petrie published the detailed results of his findings, but added to his report the fact that this information would not be made available officially to the Egypt Exploration Fund subscribers; they would receive only maps and a general outline. Furthermore, Petrie explained that even though he had taken previously funded teams into Egypt, from the time of that Sinai expedition his sponsorship by the Fund had been terminated. Why? Had he perhaps broken the binding rule of the Articles by divulging something which was contrary to Bible teaching? He certainly had.
In fact, Petrie had discovered the great secret of the sacred mountain of Moses – a secret which not only made sense of the Exodus portrayals, but which (in so doing) blew the lid totally from their common scriptural interpretation.
What the Bible does not make clear is that Sinai was not a foreign land to the Egyptians. It was actually regarded as a part of Egypt and came under Pharaonic control. So Moses and the Israelites had not left Egypt once they were east of the Nile Delta; they were still in Egypt, having the whole Sinai Peninsula to cross before they entered the Palestinian land of Canaan.
During the time of Moses, Sinai came under the control of two Egyptian officials: the Royal Chancellor and the Royal Messenger. This was the era of Egypt’s 18th Dynasty – the dynasty of the Tuthmosis and Amenhotep Pharaohs, along with Akhenaten and Tutankhamun. The Royal Messenger of those times was Neby, an official who was also the mayor and troop commander of Zaru in the Nile Delta region of Goshen, where the Israelites had lived before the exodus.
The position of Royal Chancellor was hereditary in the Hyksos family of Pa-Nehas, and Panahesy of this family was the official Governor of Sinai. We know him better from the Bible as Phinehas. He became one of the first priests of the new Mosaic structure, but previously he had been the Chief Priest at Pharaoh Akhenaten’s temple at Amarna.
Before we get back to Sir William Flinders Petrie, and to understand the root significance of his discovery, it is worth making a necessary distinction between the Israelites and the Hebrews of the Mosaic era. At that time they were not one and the same, as Bible teaching seems to indicate. The Hebrews were the family and descendants of Abraham, and their place of residence was, in the main, Canaan (or Palestine). The Israelites, on the other hand, were the family and descendants of one of Abraham’s grandsons, Jacob, whose name was changed to ‘Israel’. It was Jacob’s family alone who had moved into Egypt, and it was their descendants who eventually returned with Moses – to be reunited, after countless generations, with their fellow Hebrews.
The difference between the strains was, of course, that the Israelites had long been subjected to the laws and religions of Egypt and they knew very little about the customs of their cousins in Canaan. Through more than 400 years they had been in an environment with a whole pantheon of gods; and although they had developed a ‘One God’ concept within their own fraternity, that god was not the Jehovah of the Canaanite Hebrews.
The Israelites’ god was a faceless entity whom they called, quite simply, ‘the Lord’. In the Israelite language he was called ‘Adon’. This is one of the reasons why the names ‘Lord’ and ‘Jehovah’ were always separately identified in early texts, although they were brought under the wrap of the single God in later times to suit the emergent Jewish and Christian faiths. To the Egyptians, the name of this Lord (Adon) was quite similar; they called him ‘Aten’. From this derived the name of Pharaoh Akhenaten, meaning ‘Servant of Aten’.
So, when Moses and the Israelites made their exodus into Sinai, they arrived not as worshippers of Jehovah but of Aten; and it was for this very reason that they were given a whole new set of laws and ordinances to bring them into line with the Hebrew culture of their prospective new homeland.
When Moses and the Israelites left the Nile Delta, their obvious route to Canaan (where they were eventually headed) would have been directly across the wilderness of northern Sinai. So, why did they push southward into the difficult high country to spend some time at the Horeb mountain of Serâbît? This was a question that had long puzzled Petrie and his team.
So, what precisely did they find high on the Bible’s holy mountain? Well, to begin with, they found nothing very much. But on a wide plateau near the summit there were distinct signs of ancient habitation, and some pillars and standing-stones could be seen protruding above the ground- rubble. This rubble had been deposited, little by little, by wind and landslides over some 3,000 years. But when it was finally moved away, the truth of the Bible story emerged. Petrie wrote:
There is no other such monument which makes us regret that it is not in better preservation. The whole of it was buried, and no one had any knowledge of it until we cleared the site.
What they found was an enormous temple complex. Set within an enclosure wall was an outer temple, built over an expanse of 230 feet (approx. 70 metres). This extended outwards from an inner temple cut within a great cave in the mountainside. From the various cartouches, carvings and inscriptions it emerged that the temple had been in use from as far back as the time of Pharaoh Sneferu, who reigned about 2600 BC and whose immediate successors are reckoned to have built the pyramids of Gizeh.
The above-ground part of the temple was constructed from sandstone quarried from the mountain and it comprised a series of adjoined halls, shrines, courts, cubicles and chambers. Of these, the key features unearthed were the main Sanctuary, the Shrine of Kings, the Portico Court, and the Hall of the goddess Hathor (to whom the whole complex was dedicated).
All around were pillars and stelae denoting the Egyptian Kings through the ages, and certain Pharaohs such as Tuthmosis III (founder of the Rosicrucian movement in Egypt) were depicted many times on standing- stones and wall reliefs.
The adjoining Cave of Hathor was carved into the natural rock, with flat inner walls that had been carefully smoothed. In the centre (from about 1820 BC) stood a large upright pillar of Pharaoh Amenemhet III, the son- in-law of Esau. Also portrayed were his senior chamberlain and his seal- bearer.
Deep within the cave Petrie found a limestone stela of Pharaoh Ramesses I – a slab upon which Ramesses (who is traditionally reckoned by Egyptologists to have been an opposer of the Aten cult) surprisingly described himself as “The ruler of all that Aten embraces”. Also found was an Amarna statue-head of Akhenaten’s mother, Queen Tiye of Egypt, with her cartouche set in the crown.
In the courts and halls of the outer temple there were numerous stone- carved rectangular tanks and circular basins, along with a variety of curiously shaped benchtables with recessed fronts and split-level surfaces. There were also round tables, trays and saucers together with alabaster vases and containers, many of which were shaped like lotus flowers. In addition, the rooms housed a good collection of glazed plaques, cartouches, scarabs and sacred ornaments designed with spirals, diagonal squares and basketwork. There were magical wands of an unidentified hard material, and in the portico were two conical stones of about six inches and nine inches, respectively, in height.
The explorers were baffled enough by these finds, but they were further confounded by the discovery of a metallurgist’s crucible. Ever since, Egyptologists have argued as to why crucibles would have been necessary in a temple – while at the same time debating a mysterious substance, called mfkzt, which seemed to be related to the crucible and the conical stones and which had dozens of mentions in wall and stelae inscriptions.
Some have suggested that mfkzt might have been copper; many have preferred the idea of turquoise; and others have supposed it was perhaps malachite. But these are all unsubstantiated guesses, and there were no traces of any of these materials at the site.
Sinai is noted for its turquoise mines, but if turquoise mining had been a primary function of the temple masters over so many centuries then one would expect to find turquoise stones in abundance within the tombs of Egypt. But such is not the case. Hardly any have been found.
Another cause of wonderment has been the innumerable inscribed references to ‘bread’, along with the prominent hieroglyph for ‘Light’ found in the Shrine of the Kings.
The discovery which caused the most bewilderment, however, was the unearthing of something which was identified as the enigmatic mfkzt to which the ‘bread’ symbolism seemed to be related. Laying some inches deep in a storeroom was a considerable supply of the finest, pure white, unadulterated powder.
At the time, some suggested that the powder could be a remnant of copper smelting, but, as was quickly pointed out, smelting does not produce white powder; it leaves a dense black slag. Moreover, there was no supply of copper ore within miles of the temple, and the old smelting works were in any event apparent in the distant valleys. Others guessed that the powder was ash from the burning of plants to produce alkali, but there was no trace whatever of any plant residue.
For want of any other explanation, it was determined that the white powder and the conical stones were probably associated with some form of sacrificial rite, but again it was pointed out that this was an Egyptian temple and animal sacrifice was not an Egyptian practice. Moreover, there were no remnants whatever of bones or any other foreign matter within the mfkzt, which appeared for all the world like a hoard of sacred talcum-powder.
Some of the mysterious powder was taken back to Britain for analysis and examination – but no results were ever published. The rest (opened to the elements after 3,000 years) was left to become a victim of the desert winds.
What has become apparent, however, is that this powder was seemingly identical to the ancient Mesopotamian fire-stone or shem-an-na – the substance that was made into bread-cakes and used to feed the Light- bodies of the Babylonian Kings and the Pharaohs of Egypt.
This, of course, explains the temple inscriptions denoting the importance of bread and light, and this white powder (the shem-an-na) was identified with the sacred manna that Aaron placed in the Ark of the Covenant. In Egypt, the cakes made from this powder were called ‘scheffa food’, while the Israelites called them ‘shewbread’.
The Book of Exodus tells us that the Master Craftsman who made the original shewbread for Moses in Sinai was Bezaleel, the son of Uri Ben Hur. But Bezaleel was not a baker; he was a noted goldsmith – the very man who made the golden accoutrements for the Tabernacle and the Ark of the Covenant.
This conforms precisely with the function of the priestly Master Craftsmen in Mesopotamia. They were the great Vulcans and metallurgists of Tubal- cain, who manufactured the valuable shem-an-na from pure gold.
As for the crucible, the conical stones and the great array of tanks, tables and equipment which made the Sinai temple appear more like a gigantic laboratory than a church, it emerges that this is precisely what it was.
What Petrie had actually found was the alchemical workshop of Akhenaten and of the 18 dynasties of Pharaohs before him – a temple- laboratory where the furnace would have roared and smoked in the production of the sacred fire-stone of the high-spin shem-an-na. Quite suddenly, the words of Exodus begin to make sense as we read them again with a wholly new insight: And Mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke because the Lord descended upon it in fire, and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly.
In Exodus we read that Moses took the golden calf which the Israelites had made, and then burnt it in the fire and ground it to a white powder. This is precisely the process of a shem-an-na furnace, and it is evident that the Egyptian priests of the goddess Hathor had been working their fire for countless generations before the priests of Aten became involved in the time of Moses.
It was in fact Pharaoh Tuthmosis III who had reorganised the ancient mystery-schools of Thoth and founded the Royal School of the Master Craftsmen at Karnak. They were called the ‘Great White Brotherhood’ because of their preoccupation with a mysterious white powder. A branch of this fraternity became especially concerned with medicines and healing, and they became known as the Egyptian ‘Therapeutate’. In much later times, the Therapeutate extended its activities into Palestine, especially into the Judah settlement of Qumran where they flourished as the Essenes.
But what was so special about the goddess Hathor? Why was she the chosen deity of the Sinai priests? Hathor was a paramount nursing goddess, and as the daughter of Ra she was said to have given birth to the Sun. She was the originally defined ‘Queen of the West’ and ‘Mistress of the Netherworld’, to where she was said to carry those who knew the right spells. She was the revered protectress of womanhood, the ‘Lady of the Sycamore’, and the goddess of love, tombs and song. And it was from the milk of Hathor that the Pharaohs were said to gain their divinity, becoming gods in their own right.
On one of the rock tablets near to the Mount Serâbît cave entrance is a representation of Tuthmosis IV in the presence of Hathor. Before him are two offering-stands topped with lotus flowers, and behind him is a man bearing a conical cake of white bread. Another relief details the mason Ankhib offering two conical bread-cakes of shem-an-na to the king, and there are similar portrayals elsewhere in the temple complex. One of the most significant perhaps is a depiction of Hathor and Amenhotep III. The goddess holds a necklace in one hand, while offering the emblem of life and dominion to the Pharaoh with the other. Behind her is the treasurer Sobekhotep, who holds in readiness a conical cake of white bread. Sobekhotep is described as the “Overseer of the Secrets of the House of Gold, who brought the noble and precious stone to His Majesty”.
I mentioned earlier that, upon coming out of Egypt into Sinai en route to Canaan, the Israelites would have expected to be made familiar with the laws and ordinances of their new homeland. However, although this appears to have been partially the case, the situation was largely reversed on the religious front, with the Egyptian customs being introduced to the native Hebrews.
It was upon the mountain at Sinai that Jehovah first announced his presence to Moses. Being an Aten supporter, Moses asked this new lord and master who he was, and the reply was “I am that I am”, which in phonetic Hebrew became ‘Jehovah’. However, for the longest time afterwards, the Israelites were not allowed to utter the name ‘Jehovah’ – with the exception of the High Priest who was allowed to whisper the name in private once a year. The problem was that prayers were supposed to be said to this new godhead – but how would he know the prayers were said to him if his name was not mentioned?
The Israelites knew that Jehovah was not the same as Aten (their traditional Adon or Lord), and so they presumed he must be the equivalent of the great State-god of Egypt, even if not one and the same. It was decided, therefore, to add the name of that State- god to all prayers thereafter, and the name of that god was ‘Amen’. To this day, the name of ‘Amen’ is still recited at the end of prayers. Even the well-known Christian Lord’s Prayer (as given in the Gospel of Matthew) was transposed from an Egyptian original which began, “Amen, Amen, who art in heaven…”
As for the famous Ten Commandments (said to have been conveyed to Moses by God upon the mountain), these too are of Egyptian origin and they derive directly from Spell Number 125 in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. They were not new codes of conduct invented for the Israelites, but were simply newly stated versions of the ritual confessions of the Pharaohs. For example, the confession “I have not killed” was translated to the decree “Thou shalt not kill”; “I have not stolen” became “Thou shalt not steal”; “I have not told lies” became “Thou shalt not bear false witness”; and so on.
Not only were the Ten Commandments drawn from Egyptian ritual, but so too were the Psalms reworked from Egyptian hymns (though they are attributed to King David). Even the Old Testament Book of Proverbs – the so-called ‘wise words of Solomon’ – was translated almost verbatim into Hebrew from the writings of an Egyptian sage called Amenemope. These are now held at the British Museum, and verse after verse of the Book of Proverbs can be attributed to this Egyptian original. It has now been discovered that even the writings of Amenemope were extracted from a far older work called The Wisdom of Ptah-hotep, which comes from more than 2,000 years before the time of Solomon.
In addition to the Book of the Dead and the ancient Wisdom of Ptah- hotep, various other Egyptian texts were used in compiling the Old Testament. These include the Pyramid Texts and the Coffin Texts, from which references to the Egyptian gods were simply transposed to relate to the Hebrew god Jehovah.
In Bloodline of the Holy Grail I made the point that the modern style of Christianity, which evolved from the Roman Church in the 4th century AD, was actually a created ‘hybrid’ – a religion based on themes from numerous others, including, of course, Judaism.
Now it transpires that Judaism itself was no less of a hybrid in the early days, being a composite of Egyptian, Canaanite and Mesopotamian traditions, with the stories, hymns, prayers and rituals of the various and sundry gods brought together and related to a newly contrived ‘One God’ concept.
What is particularly interesting is that, historically, this was not fully contrived in the time of Abraham, nor even in the later time of Moses. It did not happen until the 6th century BC, when tens of thousands of Israelites were held captive by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. Until that time, the Hebrew and Israelite records referred to any number of gods and goddesses by individual names, and under a general plural classification of ‘the Elohim’.
Through some 500 years from the captivity, the scriptures existed only as a series of quite separate writings, and it was not until after the time of Jesus that these were collated into a single volume. Jesus himself would never have heard of the Old Testament or the Bible, but the scriptures to which he had access included many books that were not selected for the compilation that we know today.
Strangely, though, some of these books are still mentioned in the modern Bible text as being important to the original culture. They include the Book of the Lord, the Book of the Wars of Jehovah, and the Book of Jasher. Why were they not included? Quite simply because their content did not suit the new Jehovah-based religion that was being created. Jasher, for example, was the Egyptian-born son of Caleb; the brother-in- law to the first Israelite judge Othneil; and the appointed royal staff- bearer to Moses. It is generally reckoned that the Book of Jasher’s position in the Bible should be between the books of Deuteronomy and Joshua, but it was sidestepped by the editors because it sheds a very different light on the sequence of events at Mount Horeb in Sinai.
The familiar Exodus account explains that Jehovah issued instructions to Moses concerning masters and servants, covetousness, neighbourly behaviour, crime, marriage, morality and many other issues including the all-important rule of the Sabbath, along with the Ten Commandments.
But, in Jasher (which pre-dates the Exodus writings), these laws and ordinances are not conveyed to Moses by Jehovah. In fact, Jehovah is not mentioned at all. The new laws, says the Book of Jasher, were communicated to Moses and the Israelites by Jethro, High Priest of Midian and Lord of the Mountain. In effect, Jethro was the overall governor of the Sinai temple.
In Hebrew, the title ‘Lord (or Lofty One) of the Mountain’ was translated as ‘El Shaddai’, and this is particularly significant for that was precisely the name related to Moses when he asked the Lord to reveal his identity. The Lord said, “I am that I am. I am he that Abraham called ‘El Shaddai'”. “I am that I am” eventually became transposed to the name ‘Jehovah’, but, as related in Jasher (and as confirmed in Exodus when correctly read), this Lord was not a deiform god at all. He was Jethro the El Shaddai, the great vulcan and Master Craftsman of the Hathor temple.
Apart from the fact that we are taught about certain aspects of the Bible text, I think it is fair to say that not too many of us actually study the books ourselves. As a result of this, our perceived images are generally those conjured by picture-books and films. Hollywood, of course, has done us proud with its portrayals of Moses on the mountain and God blasting the words of the Ten Commandments onto two great, barely portable, granite slabs. In Exodus, however, there is no such depiction, and the Commandments are said to have been written down by Moses himself (at the dictation of the Lord) after he had broken the first tablets that he was given.
As for the other part of the Sinai package, the Tables of Testimony, these are stated in the teachings of the Kabbala and the Midrash to have been held within a sacred gemstone which Moses placed “in the palm of his hand”. This was the same Divine Stone of Wisdom said to have been inherited by King Solomon. In the earlier texts of Egypt it was called the ‘Tablet of Hermes’, which embodied the wisdom of Thoth.
According to the records of the ancient Dragon Court of Egypt (founded by Queen Sobeknefru in 1785 BC), an early guardian of the Table was Chem, the High Priest of Mendes. The word chem (or khame) means ‘blackness’, and from this root word derived the word ‘alchemy’ – the science of extracting light from the blackness. To us, Chem is perhaps better known as the biblical Ham, the grandfather of Nimrod, whose family was cursed by the Hebrews because his historical tradition was in conflict with the emergent Jehovah-based culture.
Readers of Gothic novels and books about sorcery will, of course, recognise the name Chem of Mendes. He is often symbolised by a goat, which was precisely the emblem of Ham in ancient Egypt. The only difference is that in latter-day Christian lore the goat is meant to be symbolic of the Devil. What we now discover, however, is that by following the story of Chem of Mendes we are led directly to the Sinai temple and to the white powder of gold.
Mendes was a major city of the Egyptian Delta, and Chem was the temple’s designated Archon of the 10th Age of Capricorn. It was in this Capricorn regard that his symbol was a goat, generally depicted by an inverted pentagram. This five-pointed star has two uppermost points, which are the horns of the Goat of Mendes. The two downward-sloping side points represent the ears, and the single base-point is the chin and beard.
When a pentagram is seen in this inverted position, it is regarded as a male emblem, but the pentagram star is, of course, a female device (a Venus symbol) and is usually shown with the single point uppermost.
In the pentagram’s male position, Chem is personally identified by an emerald jewel set centrally at the meeting of the horns. When turned about, the pentagram achieves its female status with the uppermost single point becoming the head of the goddess. The side points are now arms, while the twin points (once the horns) are now at the base, being the legs of the goddess, with the emerald jewel of Venus established in the vulval position.
Sometimes the inverted pentagram of Chem is shown with flames rising from the sacred jewel between the horns. These flames are traditionally referred to as ‘Astral Light’. But when reversed into the Venus position, the uterine flames are identified as ‘Star Fire’, the lunar essence of the goddess.
From the earliest times, whether representing Astral Light or Star Fire, the pentagram was indicative of enlightenment. It was associated with the pre-Jewish Sabbath – a ritualistic period of reflection and experience outside of general toil. For this reason, Chem of Mendes was called the ‘Sabbatical Goat’ – from which derived today’s use of the word ‘sabbatical’ in academic circles.
In view of this age-old tradition, it is hardly surprising that the pentagram and Sabbatical Goat became associated with heterodox Christians (like the Cathars of Languedoc) from medieval times. In contrast, the orthodox Christian Church endeavoured to overawe the old wisdom of the mystery schools by creating a hybrid religion based upon salvation from the unknown – a salvation that was only attained through people’s subjugation to the authority of the bishops. As an outcome, the spiritually based doctrines of the Gnostic movement (which sought to ‘discover’ the unknown) were declared blasphemous by the Inquisition, while the pentagram and the goat were denounced as symbols of black magic and witchcraft.
From those times (even to the present day in some circles), personal attainment and learning which does not conform to the bishops’ opinions has been considered heretical. And individually acquired wisdom became so feared that the Goat of Mendes has been decried as the epitome of the Devil himself. This is manifest in a wealth of trashy propagandist novels (by Dennis Wheatley and others) wherein crucifixes and holy water abound as the weapons used against the so-called emissary of Satan.
Ham (or Chem) is given in the Old Testament as a son of Noah, but in the oldest records he is correctly identified (along with Japhet) as being a son of the great Vulcan and goldsmith Tubal-cain who is better known to historians as King Meskalam-dug, the Hero of the Good Land.
In the early lore of Palestine, Chem was synonymous with a certain Azazel of Capricorn who (according to the Book of Enoch) made known to men “all the metals, and the art of working them, and the use of antimony”. Antimony is the black element otherwise known as ‘stibium’. This is an essential ingredient of the preparatory alchemical process when producing the Philosophers’ Stone. In the ancient Arab world, antimony was called kohl, from which derives the word ‘coal’, meaning ‘that which is black’. The related word ‘alcohol’ stems from the Arabic al-kohul – the highly refined ‘philosophical mercury’ prepared from spirits of wine rectified over antimony.
Azazel of Capricorn actually appears in the Bible, but not in the authorised English-language translation. In the Vulgate Book of Leviticus there is an early reference to the custom of Atonement, and it states that Aaron shall cast lots upon two goats, “one for the Lord, and the other for Azazel”. That which fell to the lot of the Lord was to be sacrificed as a ‘sin offering’, and the other was to be sent into the wilderness as an ‘atonement’.
The more familiar English translation is somewhat confusing, for the name ‘Azazel’ has been supplanted by the word ‘scapegoat’. The reason for the substitution was simply that the original sequence made it quite clear that Hebrew offerings were made both to Jehovah and to Chem- Azazel, while the Book of Enoch (which was excluded from the Old Testament) drew readers’ attention to the direct link between Azazel and hermetic alchemy.
In the tradition of the Rosicrucian mystery schools, the writings of Chem (the Tabula Smaragdina Hermetis) were recorded as “The most ancient monument of the Chaldeans concerning the Philosophers’ Stone”. Being associated with the wisdom of Thoth (or Hermes), they were defined as hermetic teachings, and they were directly linked to the fire alchemy of pyramid construction.
The very name ‘Hermes’ derives from the word herma, which means ‘a pile of stones’, and the Great Pyramid was called the ‘Sanctuary of Thoth’. The word pyr, from which derive ‘pyro-‘, ‘pyre’ and ‘pyramid’, actually means ‘fire’ – and the pyramids were so called because they were ‘fire-begotten’.
This leads us to one of the great unanswered questions: How did they build the pyramids? Were the thousands of massive blocks raised to great heights with such accuracy by hundreds of thousands of slaves using nothing but ropes and ramps over an undefined period of time, as is the common speculation? Certainly not. To construct an inclined plane to the top of the Great Pyramid at a gradient of 1:10 would have required a ramp 4,800 feet (approx. 1,463 metres) long, with a volume three times greater than that of the Pyramid itself.
As we saw earlier, the powder of the highward fire-stone is a monatomic superconductor. It is exotic matter with a gravitational attraction of less than zero. Recent experiments with this amazing white powder of gold have proven that, under certain conditions, the substance can weigh less than nothing and can be made to disappear into an unknown dimension. The most interesting quality of the powder, however, is that it rides upon the Earth’s magnetic field, so that when it is in a zero-gravity state it is capable of transposing its own weightlessness to its host, thereby facilitating levitational powers. This host might be a laboratory pan, a container, or a table – or it could just as easily be an enormous block of stone!
The age-old tradition relates that in the secret repository of the King’s Chamber within the Great Pyramid the builders had placed “instruments of iron, and arms which rust not, and glass which might be bended and yet not broken, and strange spells”. But what did the first explorers find, having tunnelled their way into the sealed chamber? The only furniture was a lidless, hollowed stone coffer, and it contained not a body but a layer of a mysterious powdery substance. This has been superficially determined to be grains of feldspar and mica, which are both minerals of the aluminium silicate group.
During the course of the recent white powder research, aluminium and silica were two of the constituent elements revealed by conventional analysis of a granular sample that was known to be a 100 per cent platinum-group compound.
Standard laboratory testing is done by striking a sample with a DC arc for 15 seconds at a Sun-surface heat of 5,500° Centigrade. However, with the white powder, a continuation of the burn-time way beyond the normal testing procedure revealed the noble platinum metals of which the substance truly consisted.
It is because of the limitations placed on the conventional testing sequence that five per cent by dry weight of our brain tissue is said to be carbon, whereas more rigorous analysis reveals it as the platinum metals iridium and rhodium in the high-spin state.
The King’s Chamber was, in fact, contrived as a superconductor, capable of transporting the Pharaoh into another dimension of space-time. And it was here that the Pharaoh’s Rite of Passage was administered in accordance with the Book of the Dead.
The key to this Rite of Passage is defined by a single conical inscription near the entrance to the Chamber. This hieroglyphic symbol – the only verifiable hieroglyph on the whole of the Gizeh Plateau, and the very same as appeared many times at the Sinai mountain temple – reads, quite simply, ‘Bread’.
In the context of this talk, we have stepped beyond the bounds of the Bible to witness the alchemical and scientific process which facilitated the genesis of the Grail Kings. This line of succession from Cain, through Egypt to King David and onward to Jesus, was purpose-bred to be the earthly Purveyors of the Light. They were the true Sons of the Gods, who were fed firstly on Anunnaki Star Fire from about 3800 BC and, subsequently, on ‘high-spin’ metal supplements from about 2000 BC. In short, they were bred to be leaders of humankind, and they were both mentally and physically maintained in the ‘highward’ state: the ultimate dimension of the missing 44 per cent – the dimension of the Orbit of Light, or the Plane of Sharon.
Only during the past 150 years or so, and more specifically during the past 80 years, have the great storehouses of Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Syrian and Canaanite record been unearthed from beneath the desert sands. First-hand documentary evidence from before Bible times has now emerged on stone, clay, parchment and papyrus, and these many tens of thousands of documents bear witness to a far more exciting history than we were ever told.
Had these records been available throughout the generations, the concept of a particular race enjoying a single Divine revelation would never have arisen, and the exclusivity of Jehovah – which has blinded us for the longest time, setting us in warlike fashion against those of other faiths who follow their own traditions – would never have taken such an arrogant hold.
Gradually, as new discoveries are made, it is evident that we are now emerging from the darkness of our preconceived but unfounded notions. Even so, our centuries of Church-led indoctrination make it very difficult to discard the restrictive dogma of inbred third-hand tradition in favour of a greater enlightenment from those who were there at the time.
The truly inspiring prospect is that the learning curve has still not ended. Just as a single glacier is but a continuation of age-old activity, so too are the ancient wisdoms that now fall to us one by one, with each new facet of learning ready to be stacked upon the former knowledge.
Fortunately, the dawn of consciousness is already behind us and, although some will choose to look backwards beyond its veil, many will step with vigour into the new millennium to witness a bright new sunrise – a revelation of unbounded possibility and a restoration of our true universal inheritance.
Sir Laurence Gardner, Kt St Gm., KCD, KT St A., an internationally known sovereign and chivalric genealogist. He held the position of Prior of the Celtic Church of the Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba, Le Chevalier Labhràn de Saint Germain and Preceptor of the Knights Templars of Saint Anthony. Sir Laurence is also Presidential Attaché to the European Council of Princes (a constitutional advisory body established in 1946), and Chancellor of the Imperial and Royal Court of the Dragon Sovereignty.