* (To Australian Original People please use caution viewing/reading this article, as it contains: images, voices, videos and mention of deceased persons.)

It has been nearly four weeks since we found out exactly what a highly credentialled Egyptian expert in hieroglyphs knew to be true when it comes to the three hundred engravings cut into sandstone walls near Kariong. We have heard and read so many stories, rumours and half-truths offered as explanations that dismiss the belief that this gallery at Kariong is actually an ancient Egyptian description of their arrival in Australia, which was carved by an Egyptian scribe over 4,500 years ago. According to Dr. Dia Abou-Ghazi (ex-Director, Department of Antiquities, Egypt), one of the foremost experts in the world on all things ancient Egyptian, she holds no doubt whatsoever that this is exactly what did happen. Her opinion is that the hieroglyphs are absolutely Egyptian, and more importantly, that this is the oldest record of the earliest form of hieroglyphs (Proto-Egyptian).

Photo by Ildi Budai

We now have over a dozen documents, half are handwritten replies penned by Dr. Dia Abou-Ghazi, which add so much more to what really happened. Once reading these documents it becomes very obvious why this charade of unsourced rebuttals was so hastily assembled by the authorities to immediately shut down any talk of ancient Egyptians sailing to Australia. What we will be directly quoting from stands in direct opposition to every accepted explanation that maintains the hieroglyphs at Kariong is just one huge ‘stitch-up,’ clearly an elaborate charade created for unknown reasons by unnamed culprit/culprits.

The Notorious Roll Call of Approved Perpetrators

According to the academics and relevant official records, there are four official candidates as to who was responsible for this bogus hieroglyphic distraction. The most popular of the four, if consulting official dispatches and denials, is a ‘deranged Czech.’ The story goes something along the lines of him standing between three sandstone walls with one chisel in hand. He held no reference book, ladder to reach glyphs that are over four metres high, no hammer to add force and penetration and no feasible reason for creating this gallery. Nevertheless, he was seen exiting, but never seen chiselling. It was assumed by a local council employee that this person, who it is claimed had reduced intellectual capacities, was solely responsible for creating this engraved stone testimonial. Apparently, due to his intellectual shortcomings, his name was never taken or recorded. He was chastised on the spot, send packing and the chisel was confiscated. End of story, it was all due to a crazy man bearing a chisel of mischievous intent engaged in an utterly pointless endeavour.

Second on the list is just as anonymous and equally lacking in a statuary declaration, signature, written confession, photograph or even anecdotal second-hand account from a student supposedly involved. A nameless aimless group of students, possibly from Sydney University, constructed this deceitful venture during the summer break in the mid-1960’s, under the direction of a lecturer. Despite the fact that there is no course at that university in any form Egyptian hieroglyphs, no financial or academic incentive to camp out in remote scrub manufacturing a hoax of monumental proportions, there are many who maintain this is exactly what did happen. Outside majoring in flagrant deceit and dishonesty, how can this fabrication be of any moral, ethical or educational benefit?

The third and fourth potential offenders are always used as back-ups, never as prime contenders, but more a matter of overwhelming the researcher with an avalanche of negativity. Yes, a returned veteran of WW1 did make a stone monument up near Palm Beach at northern edge of Sydney near the beach. It was dedicated to fallen comrades in Egypt, but no mention in his dairies, memoirs or correspondence was ever made of another venture some forty kilometres further up the coast. Nor was this ex-soldier reputed to have any passion, knowledge or record of any form of Egyptian hieroglyphs. And if it was a memorial to the departed under horrendous conditions, why select a location that was then so utterly remote, and still is? With no road, or even track, leading up to a steep climb, only the young and fit would embark on this expedition.

The final offering is barely worth mentioning or countering, that unnamed ‘new agers’ or ‘hippies’ are responsible. It is a ridiculous detour and merely thrown in with all the other mud to cloud the waters. Again, no name, written admission, hammer-less chisel, witness to the act of engraved vandalism or photograph, has been presented as proof.

The saddest missing contribution in the ensemble of non-witnesses and alleged vandals, is the total absence of local Original Elders. When it comes to the first step towards every pre-historical truth, consulting an Original Elder or spokesperson would be a rudimentary opening gambit. After all, if they have no record of these glyphs in their Lore or Dreaming stories, then it is a fake, end of story! It really is that simple, and for us a compulsory first step. But in this case not even a belated afterthought.

Aunty Beve and Uncle David Fitzgerald

What is compulsory practice for us, and to be honest we assumed the same regime applied to any Original archaeology once first discovered, is to begin proceedings by consulting the relevant Original Elders. To this day that was never entertained or even considered in passing, every rebuttal and explanation they have sanctioned has a non-Original signature. That is a travesty and immediately calls into question any findings or conclusions given. What only compounds the error is that the three most connected Elders to that site have all been extremely forthcoming in their authentication of the glyphs, and that has made absolutely no difference.

To hand out total denials towards to any claim that the hieroglyphs are genuine based on no name, signature, stat. dec. or public confession, yet deliberately ignore the wisdom of the last full descent Darkinoong Elder Aunty Beve Spears, or the Original sites NPWS Officer David Fitzgerald, is bad manners, appalling protocol and pathetic archaeology at every level. Both are adamant that the engravings are ancient and utterly sacred, and we know for a fact those who decide are fully aware of this and have no intention of considering or accepting.

To begin with, we had no specific interest in even viewing the glyphs. Former Senior Park Ranger of Brisbane Waters, John Gallard, had taken us to a variety of amazing Original engravings throughout the immediate area and it was only after we had completed days of trekking through the scrub examining so many sites, did he suggest we conclude with a visit to the notorious Egyptian engravings. Neither Evan or I were particularly keen to go, we knew of the site and drama, and even though we eventually agreed, it was moderated by a healthy dose of maybe. Even after seeing the walls and their ancient testimonials, we made no commitment or public comment. It wasn’t until after I spoke to and interviewed both Aunty Beve and David (Egyptians in Australia, Part 2) did we begin to appreciate the energy, presence, truths and magnificence of these walls and the many accompanying sites, engravings and artefacts.

True Business

Aunty Beve has always insisted the glyphs are genuine, and a lot more. She said that for millenia the women would go to the walls and coat them in women’s urine, apparently it preserved the engravings. But even the issue of the engraving’s heritage is far more complex and multi-lingual, in that Aunty Beve made it clear that apart from the Egyptian passage there is an “older language”(1) that is not Egyptian. What is significant is that there is more than one narrative and scribe involved, and the more ancient Original language is also part of this gallery.

Unlike Aunty Beve, while David Fitzgerald has no blood-line link to the resident Darkinooong tribe, he is a descendant of the great Original Eora warrior and Clever-fella Pemulwuy. David has lived in the Gosford area most of his life and was employed by the Brisbane Waters National Parks and Wildlife Service, of which his main role was the local Original Sites Officer. He first heard rumours of Egyptian hieroglyphs from those he worked with, but there was a very tight screen of silence applied and until he discovered a very important original engraving, it seemed no-one would ever see any further evidence beyond talk lacking in a location or tick from the top. David was very clever in demanding to see this mysterious site and in return, he would show them where a new site he found was. It took some time haggling over the trade-off before those in control relented and he was taken to the three walls on dusk, but only on the condition that he told no-one, ever. It was that simple and was made clear to him if he did speak up, his employment would be immediately terminated and his claims vigorously denied and ridiculed.

According to NPWS records, they first became aware of this site in the early 1980’s, but David is adamant his first sighting was in 1978, just three years after the so-called deranged Czech was applying his chisel, and that allegation becomes a massive inconsistency. David was instructed by his supervisor to clean the litter and huge accumulation of rocks, branches and assorted objects that had fallen in between the walls. David told us it took six men under his direction two full days to clean it up. In places the debris was close to three meters high, and David felt it would have taken decades to get this crammed. As for wandering freely with chisel in hand between the walls just three years earlier, that is utterly impossible, and according to David did not happen.

What did happen was that a literal ‘cone of silence’ was constructed around that site, and David soon found out that a ‘slush-fund’ was set aside with one aim, to make this all go away. There was talk of the Commonwealth Army using the site for artillery practise, blocking access, repeated attempts to fill up the back 10 metre tunnel with tonnes of rocks and other ploys were under consideration. All the responses and devious undertakings were centred around one task, to call into question its authenticity, and then construct alternative explanations no matter how tenuous and untrue.

The only truth both David and Aunty Beve know to be factual is that at the very least some of the glyphs on those walls were Egyptian in creation and are thousands of years old. The lies and anonymous distortions that followed only became public knowledge after the glyphs became known and whispered about. These two Original Elders were ignored because the truth they speak of is just too inconvenient, and after all neither are academic experts or officials from the NPWS. Now if someone high up one of the official pecking orders was to publicly confirm that the engravings were genuine, that would make a difference. Well, that would be the expectation, but alas in this particular Australo-Egyptian case, that still isn’t enough.

Two Non-Original Elders pre-1960

Both of the supporting witnesses cited gave accounts of people standing between the walls at a time well before the most popular fabrication of a ‘deranged Czech.’ The statuary declaration signed by Helen Cockburn Parks goes back further, in also refuting the possibility this is just some form of student prank/perverted academic pursuit.

In the statuary declaration Helen sent to us there are three truths that are essential reading. Of course, even though this witnessed report is far superior to the lack of names, signatures or any substantial fact, it still relies solely on the character and memory of the person recalling past events. I spoke to Helen a few times and what was very clear was that as her great-uncle virtually took over raising both Helen and sister from a young age, for all intents and purposes he was their surrogate father. The point Helen made often was that what she wrote about her Great-uncle had to be absolutely true, to lie about anything that included him was an act so degrading and insulting, she just couldn’t even consider concocting a betrayal of that depth.

Helen wrote that “as a ten-year old child in 1958 I was in attendance with my great uncle Mr. Raymond Dickens on many occasions during visits to numerous National Parks and Nature Reserves.”(2) As to why so many visits were made into the bush, the reason was not recreational nor picnicking, but primarily occupational. “These visits were made in relation to the Office of Secretary of the Fauna and Flora Protection Society of which Ray Dickens was the Secretary.”(3) This association is the pre-cursor to what will become the National Parks and Wildlife Service, and this gentleman sits at the ‘top of the totem pole.’ Surely the integrity and honesty of a person of this standing cannot be wilfully dismissed?

Especially so as it was Ray Dickens who took Helen to the gallery to see “walls with what I now know to be Egyptian style reliefs (with such details as the pheon cross) but which at the time in 1958 Uncle Ray could only say they were not Aboriginal.(4)” In 1958 the hieroglyphs were already there, so that automatically rules out any students or deranged people of all nationalities from 1958 onwards as being responsible for its creation. Surely this man would have known his subject matter and at no stage did he suggest or state to Helen that it was the product of deception or a fake. He felt that owing to it looking so exotic and Egyptian, his logic was that it couldn’t be a local product.

What was just as revealing is the last sentence in the statuary declaration where Helen shares with us another facet of Original Lore and the constancy of one overriding mantra, ‘as on top, so below.’ Yes, undeniably there is a real and present Egyptian influence on the walls, but there is much more, and it extends well into the night-time sky, and in particular, towards one star cluster called the Pleiades. Uncle Ray showed Helen “large flat rocks with animal symbols and one that Uncle Ray said was the Milky Way with little holes-each a star, from a very long time ago.”(5)

There was a second non-Original person who stood between the rock walls a few years earlier, it was, by our estimate, somewhere between two to three years before Helen and her great-uncle were trying to take in what this all meant. We had heard of the journalist Bob Cummings, and rumours of him being there in 1955 and had actually tried to make contact with him some time ago. We did track him down to somewhere in or near to Armidale, but got no further or closer.

Introducing Ray Johnson

It was totally unexpected, but there in one of the twelve letters and replies mention was made of Bob Cummings by a person investigating the glyphs whose name was Ray Johnson, and what really grabbed my attention was that he wrote that the year when Bob Cummings stumbled upon these glyphs was in 1955. Ray Johnson stated that Bob “told me that he and his father, along with another gentleman, visited the spot in 1955, and that the hieroglyphs on the rocks were only barely distinguishable.”(6)

It is possible that students, unhinged Czechs and others unknown may have traced over the faded worn outlines. Ray Johnson felt this retouching could have occurred, as he stated that “I found out that later on in 1964, that students from Sydney University had been in the area and had recurved the glyphs.”(7) It is feasible that students may have retouched what was already there under direction, and that a deranged Czech merely continued in that same tradition unsupervised. More has been added since then, mainly graffiti, but in some cases the glyphs themselves have been added to. In every instance, any and all additions are well after the original event.

Irrespective of when and whether more was added later, Helen is still present and very willing to talk to any authority or research group that is seriously trying to determine whether these glyphs, and at least four associated sites, are the real deal. As for the whereabouts and continued mortal existence of Bob Cummings, all we can say was that around five years ago we suspect he was still incarnated on earth, but as to whether the last years have seen a change in circumstances …

Of all the many who have seen and passed their opinion on the credentials of the Kariong glyphs, Ray Johnson was the first person to investigate impartially and properly in both working directly with Original Elders and keepers of culture of Australia, and equally, he sought out the very best expert available who was versed in Egyptian antiquities and ancient language.

Over a period of years spanning one and a half decades, Ray was in contact with Dr. Dia Abou-Ghazi. As Ray stated in a letter dated 21 July 1997 sent to the Gosford City Council, General Manager, that “I have been in contact with the Department of Antiquities, in Egypt, since 1979.”(8) This represents an eighteen span over which Ray was working directly with the Director of that institute, Abou-Ghazi, in compiling a proto-Egyptian hieroglyphic dictionary containing over 4,000 entries. However, critics of Ray’s work have reluctantly conceded Ray was in contact with this Egyptian academic, but they insist that not only was it brief and of no account, he was actually harassing and badgering her. Of course, in what is the norm in all the official dealings with this site, no quote or source is given supporting this criticism, it just keeps coming out of the same anonymous approved bucket. The truth is there was no strained relationship here, Ray and Abou-Ghazi were on the same page and they worked together for a long time. We know for a fact that all the work Ray did in deciphering the glyphs was enthusiastically accepted and indexed into the Egyptian library, and most importantly, the hand-written replies she made to Ray leave no doubt she is fully convinced and willing to help Ray in any way possible.

A selection of responses taken from Dr. Dia Abou-Ghazi’s hand-written correspondence sent to Ray only confirms that in this academic endeavour they are two colleagues united in achieving a common goal, which was to correctly decipher the Proto-Egyptian script engraved into the three sandstone walls near Kariong. Not only was this “discovery”(9) “under my study”(10) in 1997, even from the first notice sent by Ray in 1994,  Abou-Ghazi was extremely interested in this “discovery”(11) and “anxious to know other information.”(12)

It seems obvious Ray had also shared with her his justifiable concerns that the obfuscation, endless red tape and stream of denials and false rebuttals was a daunting, verging on impenetrable, barrier. Abou-Ghazi urged him not to despair or waver pleading that he “please try hard to preserve the hieroglyphs.”(13) She had no doubt that Johnson was on track and in the presence of a monumental archaeological find in “wishing you all success,”(14) reminding him that she was “ready for any possible help.”(15)

For any that still claim she was merely tolerating and humouring him in trying not to discourage his well-intentioned but utterly wayward research, they are completely wrong. Abou-Ghazi was totally convinced that the site is legitimate and there is an ancient Proto-Egyptian passage engraved on the walls, she was positive that in the near future “if a book appears on the discovery, it will be shortly out of print and draw thousands of visitors to the site. I will be thankful for any future information, with all wishes of success.”(16)

Well, the future information she sought was already past history, because in 1983 a fellow academic from Sydney University, with barely a 101 base in ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs in tow and no copy of Ray’s approved manual in hand to consult, declared that it was all a bogus creation and that ‘there is nothing to see here.’ So, we have two academics, one from Australia and another from Egypt holding fast to two opposing opinions/interpretations, and only one can be right. Sometimes reputed experts, even those chosen above their peers to be employed as Directors who are of Abou-Ghazi’s calibre, can make mistakes or unsound assumptions. When an error from the top is made, but no admission of a lapse in judgement is offered, what should happen is a colleague of equal standing should be called in to review the facts and give some form of verdict as to which opinion is correct. Irrespective of how rarely such level of accountability happens, and it certainly has never been part of every official statement in regard to Kariong, this is still best practice. And in the case of Dr. Dia Abou-Ghazi, that is exactly what did happen, twice.

Yousef Awyan and Mohamed Ibrahim

In combination the ancient Egyptian knowledge and familiarity with all forms of hieroglyphs held by these two men is extensive and well beyond any like partnership in Australia. Mohamed and Yousef  from Egypt and their expertise is in Egyptian Historical artefacts and hieroglyphs. They knew of the glyphs and the controversy it has created and felt the truth or deception of this site can be found on the walls, the trick is being conversant with the script. Which they are.

The three videos they did discussing this amazing site is a complete vindication of its integrity. Rather than list the dozens of reasons why they have no doubt about the authenticity of the engravings, we have provided links to the videos. However, it would be remiss not to highlight one recurring feature in the engravings and one deliberate separation in proceedings.

Both Mohamed and Yousef noted many examples in the sequencing and arrangement of these glyphs that is of a style exclusive to the Royal Court, it is not for the consumption of the general public. Of course, if it was that two of Khufu’s most favoured sons were on a journey to open negotiations between countries, it would be expected that the scribe would be of the highest pedigree as evidenced by the exquisite artistry and ever so steady hand. For more on their affirming research, we suggest viewing the entire video.

So convinced was Mohamed in the credentials of the Kariong glyphs he agreed to do some joint-presentations with us in Australia. Just before announcing dates and venues, Mohamed was informed by the Australian Government that he would not be issued a visa or entry. Despite challenges to this ruling, it was decided if allowed to come to Australia he could refuse to return and cause trouble in Australia. Ignoring that he had a family, full-time employment as an academic in a University and no political affiliations, the only threat he posed was giving an informed interpretation of the glyphs. What he would have done, if given the opportunity, is to confirm that Egyptians were in Australia over 4,500 years ago and that what the partnership of Ray Johnson and Dr. Dia Abou-Ghazi knew to be true, was just that.      

The Fourth Pair

And now here comes the empirical clincher in this ancient Original/Egyptian rock tale, up until now this has all been about what he and she said, and that inevitably allows each person the license to pick and choose. Irrespective of expertise or pedigree, opinions are subjective, as to who, why or when, unless there is a scientific analysis of high degree, there is no certainty. Fortunately, two artefacts found on site have been examined in considerable detail by the appropriate experts and the results leave no doubt whatsoever, and just cannot be ignored.

Both the bone and metal piece of what we feel is jewellery were both found beside the engraved walls and very close to the 10 metre underground tunnel by Original Elder Aunty Minnie Mace when accompanying Ray Johnson. When meeting us she made the decision to give both artefacts to us, primarily and thankfully for future protection. Never did we suspect at the time there was more on offer.

Photo by Samarah Wood

To begin with it was the organic contribution which Aunty Minnie felt was the femur bone of the son of Khufu, Nefer-Ti-Ru, that was our first objective. According to Ray’s translation his unfortunate death through repeated snake bites is part of the opening passage. So the proximity, very decayed exterior and shape all hinted at a human origin, but until examined by the appropriate professionals all we had was yet another opinion. Not long after the bone was given to us it was in the hands of the head of the Fractures Unit at the local District Base Hospital. He was confident it was a very old bone and most likely human, but felt a cat-scan would resolve any uncertainty. The immediate hurdle with that path is totally financial as we are entirely self-funded, but such was the impact this bone had on this medical professional he immediately rung the Director of the cat-scan unit and arranged to have the team and machines at our disposal for all of Monday morning and free of charge.

The bone was examined by a staff of five and given a radiation dosage six times above the maximum, because “the patient will not mind,”(17) and it didn’t. What followed was me acting as a bystander for the next fifteen minutes as the people who understand what was shown and detected tried to interpret and assemble what this all meant. They made it clear they have no familiarity with bones this old, and clearly could not give a date, but of two things they were certain. The bone has the same density and characteristics of a human bone, most probably the femur, and that it is was exceptionally old.

When it comes to its metal companion, it was only when the Head Scientist, Graham Lancaster, Southern Cross University, approached me directly requesting to do a full chemical analysis of the metal, did I even consider any form of investigation. I explained when asked that could only happen if I could first get permission from Aunty Minnie Mace, which was given.

Photo by Samarah Wood

 No-one, not even us, could ever suspect that the read-out would be unlike any that laboratory had seen or knew of, anywhere. Make no mistake, this is a very large scientific establishment with over thirty scientists working there, and the testing was supervised personally by Graham and he has made it very clear that this read out is no less than sensational.

There were three elements identified: aluminum 73%, copper 3% and an unidentified metal that has no match on any Earthly Periodic Table 24%. First up that 24% was the dominant and ever-present issue Graham raised when he first discussed the missing piece of this puzzle with non-Earthly undertones. He did mention they considered the possibility of some form of oxidisation, but that was soon ruled out. It was that simple, nigh on one quarter of what made up this artefact is a metal not found on this planet, and that is a pure unchallengeable chemical fact. So too it is true that this artefact was found between the walls and next to a script that is at least partially of ancient Egyptian origin.

But it didn’t end there, even the combination of the other two recognised elements that do reside within the Periodic Table, is not a recent manufacturing event and goes back thousands of years. Alloys of aluminum and copper carry a metallurgic time signature. All such alloys of recent times have a copper content ranging from ten to twelve percent, so this artefact cannot be a modern construct or plant. It is so much older, in fact the last time that copper content was that low goes back to beyond 3,000 years when the input is agreed to vary between two to four percent. This metal has a three percent register, which sits comfortably in the middle thus could supply a minimum date, but once the 24% is placed into the mix and furnace, there is nothing on this planet to compare against.

This artefact has no equal, that alone is of great significance, so too the fact that it was found beside a human bone that is agreed by medical experts to be ancient. Both relics from the past were unearthed on the dirt and rubble beneath over three hundred hieroglyphs, in combination the chances are high that this site, and others, are unique, special and deserving of World Heritage recognition yesterday. However, the direct opposite is regrettably occurring right now, today. These engravings are under direct threat at many levels, through a very recent change in government zoning, and the subsequent proposed massive residential subdivision situated only hundreds of metres from the three walls.

Above the politics and denial of Original truths and heritage, the facts remain that the issue with the bone that is human and very old, found as it was amongst so many ancient Egyptian goods, chattels and hieroglyphs, means that any reasonable mtDNA test will simply resolve whether or not this bone is yet another part of an Egyptian archaeological package found in Australia that runs all the way up the royalty chain. Our bet is that is exactly what will be revealed, which we are more than happy to have tested if allowed. Which alas, we are not. Despite these temporary obstacles, the testing will happen one day and the possibility that this bone was once part of the son of Khufu, most likely, Nefer-Ti-Ru, is incredibly high, simply because there is more out there in the bush very close by that is literally more of the same.

Why is it That …

Why is it that these four supporting archaeological sites, which are so clearly intricately connected to the three walls, were never considered or mentioned in every sanctioned denial of authenticity? What does confound us is that these sites, if using the engraved walls as the base point from which to measure, are one metre, fifty metres, eighty metres and just over a kilometre from this ancient site. Despite the proximity and similarity, no-one has factored in that when on sacred Original country nothing sits alone, as there is a web of interconnected sites that in totality give the complete story and reasons.

The tunnel of ten metres runs directly behind and towards the three exposed engraved walls, pulling up about a metre behind where it flares open into a much higher two-metre high opening you can actually stand in. The rest of the tunnel is less than a quarter of that height. It is not a product of nature, even the NPWS have abandoned that stock-reply, their latest dismissal cites the mindless activities of ‘vandals.’ Not only is this impressive piece of engineering with the removal of tonnes of sandstone a huge feat requiring days of heavy labour these hypothetical vandals did not tag the tunnel, were never reported nor was this construction filmed in progress.

There on the outer walls less than a metre from the tunnel, Ray is adamant that the upper panel details the death and internment very close by of the body of Nefer-Ti-Ru. It seems well past coincidental in finding an ancient artificial tunnel, one old bone and one exceptionally unusual metal object within metres of the entrance of the “back door/shaft,”(18) surely what we are witnessing here has a very clear ancient Egyptian imprint.

What only corroborates the unfortunate death and burial at this location and in this shaft, is another set of Egyptian hieroglyphs very close by. Knowing that these hieroglyphs are of the same Proto-Egyptian style, the question that needs to be asked is why is it that this site, which has replicas of some of the same engraved symbols found on the walls, is not part of any official discussion or verdict?

Photo By Ildi Budai

All of the script of the two panels is Proto-Egyptian, but the scribe was not a partner to anything recorded in the main galleries. The glyphs here are one third the size, of a much shallower cut and seems to be referring solely to the burial and location of the tomb. Of the glyphs easily recognisable, the topic of death is central, with hieroglyphs representing a coffin, direction and distance, back-shaft or backdoor and most importantly, the depiction of a staff that is a funerary accompaniment reserved for the Pharaoh and his chosen sons when they pass over.

When it comes to dating the two sites and their engravings, the difficulties are enormous because if including, as should be the case, this panel of sixteen hieroglyphs, that means we have to date the work of at least three separate scribes. Nevertheless, we do suspect when it comes to the upper panel on the first wall of the gallery, there is good chance it was engraved during the reign of Khufu at around 4,600 years ago.

Once again, the question must be asked why is that Sydney University did an analysis of an engraved star-map just fifty metres above and a bit north of the three hundred hieroglyphs and printed out a date of 2,500 BC, then lost all copies. Then, when asked for a copy of it they admitted that they had determined a specific date, but somehow misplaced every copy. Fortunately, soon after, a copy was sent to us and it is clearly from Sydney University. This engraved star map is the closest of hundreds of archaeological sites in the area to the Egyptian section, less than a ‘stone’s throw’ away. Since this date is a perfect match to when both sons of Khufu (Nefer-Djes-Eb and Nefer-Ti-Ru) were alive, and that Sydney University have actively and repeatedly stepped into the Kariong debate and have always been stridently negative, it becomes fairly clear why this star chart was accidentally lost in filing through inconvenience. The reason why the stars above were set into rock on a platform so close to the walls by Original people was to commemorate the arrival of two Egyptian boats and the two sons of the Pharaoh, and most importantly, the treaty they negotiated.

The first three associated sites are all found within one hundred metres of the three walls, and each testifies to the arrival of Egyptians a long time ago. But it would be a mistake to assume this is all about Egypt. If that was the only topic, the reason why they came from the top end of the African continent and sailed so far is not known, that would merely leave us with who, but never move forward in determining why. That brings us to the fourth site, which is not less than one hundred metres away, but more like one and a half thousand metres to the north-west, and on those two amazing rock platforms amongst close to one thousand engravings there is nothing remotely Egyptian on display. This one is all about, ‘as on top, so below.’

Two rock platforms, replete with an engraved whale of over twenty metres in length, plus many other animals make an impressive backdrop to a star chart made up of no less than eight hundred individual stars. We had over two full days in the intense mid-summer heat spending the entire day charting the position of nearly half the map. It goes without saying the Pleiades and Orion have been identified. It is by far the largest star chart on this planet. We do know that upon the first initiation for a young man he is given one of these stars as one of his totems. In fact, every site created on the ground must have an ‘as on top’ counterpart.

So, when the Egyptians came to Australia, they were seeking the wisdom and magic of Elders from Australia and those from the Pleiades. It is our belief that the Dreaming is the merging of ‘as on top’ (Aliens/Pleiadians) and ‘so below’ (the Original tribes of Australia).

With four sites close by connected, public access open and photographs supplied, in total they present another convincing reason to question why the hieroglyphs have neither been protected nor recognised. But what if every site, from the three walls through to each of the other sites/artefacts discussed, are actually either fake or we are mistaken in our take on what they mean? What if we are 100% wrong? Here is the sting in the tail-end of this ancient narrative of beginning times, it still doesn’t change anything as there is one last site that needs to be fully appreciated and venerated.

The site we stumbled upon is even closer to this proposed 70 lot subdivision than any of the locations discussed, it is no more than a few hundred metres away and is of such a unique nature and is surrounded by an absolutely beautiful display I am not at liberty to describe. This site was filmed then shown to Aunty Beve for guidance and some sort of explanation. She was aware of the site, and shared her surprise that three males saw, filmed and returned alive and unpunished. We still remember her telling us that in her opinion this is the most important women’s site in Australia.

Present at the meeting with Aunty Beve deciding what to do was Ryan Mullins, Gavin Bragg, Sean Vandenberg, Nina Angelo and others, and each person named will willingly testify to the truth of what was seen and directed. Sean still has the film, but such is the women’s sensitivity attached to this site, Aunty Beve insisted that the film can only be shown as proof when being formally listed through UNESCO. The point being that site is way too close to any proposed development, it is one of, if not the, most important Original women’s site in Australia and should be handled with the utmost care.  

In combination these four sites (plus one) must be seriously considered before deciding whether to deny or endorse credentials, and at present, that has never happened. That insult to Old Way protocol may be good politics, but it is appalling archaeology.

The Last Word

In concluding this comparison of sites nearby, it seems fitting to return to the hieroglyphs for one last comment from another named expert before concluding.

When Erich Von Daniken was last in Australia, he asked us to take him to the glyphs, which we did. Now it doesn’t matter whether you accept all, some or none of his conclusions, what cannot be disputed is that over more than half a century in the limelight he has seen a lot of places and spoken to experts near and far. So, knowing this man has an extensive archaeological reservoir to draw upon, I found his instantaneous and decidedly dismissive response to my summation of those who feel it is fake, extremely illuminating (since it never occurred to me) in offering a very scientific and unchallengeable way of resolving authenticity.

The mere thought, let alone an utterance, alleging that these engravings are recent was so ludicrous to Erich, simply because amongst the array of lichen growing across the walls and glyphs some needed centuries to reach their current state, it was just that obvious to him. And now to me, but only after Erich pointed out two types of lichen that just cannot be dated in two figures. Throw in the bone and off-word metal jewellery, and that makes three pieces of science insisting that something very special, sacred and sensational took place at this site. But alas, right now the bulldozers are moving in, and since this site is officially gazetted as bogus, there is nothing to stop the blades and trees dropping.     

Ten to None

There are two diametrically opposed sides to this archaeology, it is either a clever fake of massive proportions or an intriguing, paradigm shifting collection of archaeological sites and artefacts that change so much assumed as fact when it comes to global pre-historic times. We have ten experts or witnesses with names and addresses in the positive camp versus four unnamed, unsigned and unknown culprits of this hoax.

David told me that the Head Ranger had one primary imperative from which he never deviated, “we don’t want any f****** Egyptians in this park.”(19) It has been the same ever since. Just because someone walks in between the walls holding a metal blade with the intention to add, subtract or deface, that entry does not mean they alone did anything or everything.

The most distressing part of this debacle and cover-up is not that this site has been systematically lied about, that is second in line by some distance. What steps over every boundary is that neither Aunty Beve or Uncle David were consulted, approached or even given a courtesy phone call promising nothing. No, they were shunned when the site they knew more about than anyone else was thrown in the rubbish heap once it was officially pronounced to be the product of mischief. The pain, grief and recurring frustration this lie caused them was clear to see. Seriously, this cluster of sites is the ‘jewel in the crown’ and their first concern, and irrespective of what they did and said, no-one on high was listening. The deep offense caused to both Custodian Elders is unforgivable and deserving of an immediate apology and a promise to never repeat.

The answer as to what this means is simple, once hearing what the Elders said confirming the site is real, my stance shifted from maybe to without a doubt. They said it was there for a long time before Cook. After what they have said, nothing more needs to be said. That is the proper end of this story!      

For full references please use source link below