12th October 2012

By Steve Strong

Guest Writer for Wake Up World

In my previous article on this topic, my primary focus was to evaluate the credentials of some of the most popular hoax theories used to discredit the authenticity of ancient hieroglyphic engravings found on two sandstone walls near Kariong NSW, and establish the truth of an ancient Egyptian involvement with the Original people of the area.

But there is still one hurdle to overcome; when read in combination, the hieroglyphs don’t seem to make sense to today’s experts. Some of the glyphs aren’t recognizable, and others are not depicted exactly as they should be. Undeniably many characters are Proto-Egyptian, while quite a few are not. But the real problem here is not on the wall but within its observers. The critics are limited by their ethno-centric blinkers, and could never reverse their perceptual parameters to consider the possibility that some of these engravings were actually carved by Original hands.

But what if this is not an exotic copy or transcription but an example of the ancient style and script used by the Original people? With Aunty Beve adamant the older hieroglyphs were not Egyptian but Australian, and distinguished linguist Atilla Flinck absolutely convinced the Australian Root Language is the foundation base and geographic origin from which all other languages evolved, it starts to become obvious why the Egyptians (and others) sailed to this distant southern continent so long ago. They came to Australia as apprentices, seeking spiritual wisdom, to be educated by the people who spoke and wrote the first word. The historical truth known by ancient Egyptians, and others, was that this place and the nomads who inhabited it provided the inspiration for all the varying accounts of the ‘Garden of Eden’.

There is one section of the wall’s carvings that is distinctly Proto-Egyptian, and there are many other glyphs that are identical matches to known script. This consistency is augmented by a variety of iconic symbols (pyramids, the Sphinx, Suti, an Ankh, etc.) appearing on the walls, and the Original peoples’ testimonies of an Egyptian presence – on site with chisel in hand.

But there exists a more authoritative source from which to base any interpretation of the Kariong Glyphs, and one which all our translations and assumptions are based; Ray Johnson’s book Basic Hieroglyphica. Johnson re-sparked the debate and controversy surrounding the Kariong glyphs when he provided his interpretation of these carvings; he believes that the script is the earliest form of Proto-Egyptian hieroglyph. More importantly, once he realised the massive implications of this analysis, Johnson had the foresight to make direct contact with the Director General of the Cairo Museum, Dr. Abu Dhia Ghazi. After reviewing Johnson’s interpretations, Dr. Ghazi was more than satisfied that Johnson was correct, and his endorsement (along with his immense wisdom and integrity) indicates that Basic Hieroglyphica is the best of all publications from which to begin our attempt to fathom the ‘who, when and what’.

Much has been made of the apparent differences displayed on the Kariong walls; critics claim there are two distinct accounts depicted, as some engravings are the result of a much more delicate and skilful hand than others. After considerable comparison and consideration, my colleagues and I are inclined to agree with the doubters. But where we part company relates to timing. Some of the engravings look unworn and ‘recent’, and sceptics therefore see this assortment of relics, shafts and hieroglyphs as bogus. But the interviews we held with Darkinjung Elder Aunty Beve Spiers and Mr. David Fitzgerald (formerly of National Parks and Wildlife Services) amply explain why the carvings look so new; they shared knowledge of a recently-fallen rock roof which for centuries protected all the writings and provided close to a complete seal from the elements. They also described how the liberal application of Original women’s urine to the glyphs was used to aid their preservation.

Our understanding is that the roof, which is now the floor and very hollow-sounding when walked upon, collapsed no more than 40 years ago. This would also account for why the more exposed wall appears to be the most worn; this erosion and wearing of the glyphs only began once the roof gave way. We believe some of the writings, perhaps less than a third, are Proto-Egyptian and are most likely around 4500 – 4700 years old. That part is easy. But spread throughout the walls, with Ray’s manual as our guide, my colleagues and I found a pattern emerge that set us off on a tangent – one we had deliberately kept at arm’s length until now.

The glyphs depict 4 cartouches, which are oval symbols with a horizontal line at one end, used in hieroglyphs to indicate that the text enclosed within the oval refers to a royal name. Of the four cartouches, only one is correctly aligned, and three are reversed. And we noted that, around that one cartouche, over 90% of the symbols are readily recognisable and a comfortable match to glyphs Ray provided. The narrative – which names Nefer Djes-eb, his brother and their Egyptian lineage, and the snake encounter and encryption – is undoubtedly Proto-Egyptian, and we believe was written by Nefer Djes-eb’s scribe. But when we separate from the overall mix the carvings clustered around the tale of the two brothers, barely 50% of the remaining engravings are a comfortable match, and close to one third show nothing that is remotely similar.

And it is that unknown category that creates the greatest difficulties … and possibilities.

Both Ray Johnson and Dr. Hans Dieter von Senff, who based his work on Ray’s translation, acknowledge there were many symbols that had no obvious match. Dr. Hans stated in his paper that “by stringing … unknown glyphs together, work out their possible meaning and try to transliterate it … Only then, are you able to translate it into a commonly known language.”[i] With some symbols, educated guesses and assumptions were made. But for other glyphs, nothing was available for comparison, so Hans made note of the selective omissions and alerted the reader that “some of these glyphs, as discussed in the early part of this work, were left out.”[ii] The number is not small; it is in the dozens. And that fact alone presents a major obstacle when defining their content. Many glyphs have a variety of meanings, and the positioning of associated glyphs makes all the difference, even more so when the reader is unable to determine any meaning.

What only adds to the possibilities was Aunty Beve’s revelation that some of the glyphs were carved by Egyptians, and that even more ancient glyphs in this area are not Egyptian, but Australian. Could it be that Proto-Egyptian hieroglyphs evolved from the much more ancient local script, and that once this form of script left Australian shores the many differences and omissions emerged – reflecting the differences in culture and lifestyle? This would explain why there are two accounts and hands at work on these walls, and what motivated Egyptians (and others) to sail to these shores in ancient times.

My colleagues and I suspect an ancient Australian genesis is evident in the languages of all races, as proposed by linguist Attila Flink; a theory that is supported by some information we recently received from a Wake Up World reader, Mr. Christopher Basille. We are extremely thankful he took the time to contact us, as the comparison he supplied illustrates the antiquity of the Australo-Egyptian accord, and the initiator. “A few years ago I was doing research on djamu (modern spelling ‘jamu’) which is a Javanese term which refers to a range of traditional medicines/tonics … I  remember noting that the ‘Djamu’ appeared in two other seeming unrelated places.

1. ‘Djamu’ is “the name of the original ‘Aboriginal’ people in Sydney”
2. When supplying the Egyptian meaning of this same word the geography was difficult to ignore; Christopher made note that “djamu was a most holy location and considered to be the resting place of the original eight creator Gods.”

Two Narratives

Discounting the more recent correctly aligned cartouche and associated glyphs, it is our opinion that most, if not all, of the remaining 250 odd hieroglyphs are far more ancient. We have found repeated references to a more ancient civilisation, and in both cases the older script is used. Even though Ray Johnson’s Proto-Egyptian is derivative of the more ancient style which may well be Australian, it still provides links and potential clues. Such is the case with Figure 1 (shown below), which seems a fairly non-descript icon that has no identical match. The two closest glyphs in appearance (Figures 2 and 3 below) can be merged to create an exact copy of the engraving on the wall, and each symbol has virtually the same definition; the first represents a “prehistoric building,”[iii] the second is meant to depict “ancient ruins, ancient city.”[iv]

What is no less challenging and more indicative of some sort of non-Aboriginal ancient settlement are two glyphs found next to each other. The glyph on top (Figure 4 below) is a direct match to “street,”[v] while the icon below is less definite and slightly off-centre. Dr. Hans sees this as part of Nefer Djes-eb’s tale of woe and misfortune and assumes this glyph (Figure 5 below) is meant to be “land’s end.”[vi] The problem is that “land’s end”[vii] is a indeed a four armed cross but it was never enclosed with a circle. The circle was deliberately placed to seal the glyph on the wall, and as such, should not be assumed to define “land’s end.”[viii] However, there are three other candidates and each has a four-armed cross, one with a circle and four armed cross slightly off-centre (Figure 6 below), another is almost the same as that on the wall but the arms of the cross are slightly curved (Figure 7 below) and the other is exactly the same as “land’s end” (Figure 8 below). The only glyphs that have both a circle and a four armed cross represent either “city, community, settlement”[ix] (Figure 6 below), or “town, village, hamlet”[x] (Figure 7 below), while the glyph identical to “land’s end” can also depict a “fire festival.”[xi]

UFO’s or Jewellery

Now we come to the most controversial aspect and most repeated glyph icon on display. There are, depending on perspective and ‘blinkers’, up to 8 glyphs (Figures 9 below) that fall into the ‘UFO’ category. This label is not our term, but is the common label used by the general public, and describes a series of engravings which have been lambasted by doubters and used as evidence that the entire gallery is bogus. The ‘UFO’ icons have nine legs, seven, five and three legs, and all are of differing shapes and sizes. The deliberate variation in features is in contradiction with any standard ‘jewellery’ text, which demands uniformity. Every other repeated hieroglyph maintains the same form and size, and in this respect, these glyphs stand apart.

Of the ‘UFO’ glyphs, the most remarkable is a line of eight symbols (Figures 10 below) which my colleagues and I suspect to be the most important statement of intent and origin found on the two Kariong walls. We have seen other interpretations of this line, but all omitted the first four symbols. The deletion of two UFO glyphs, thus leaving one inconvenient inter-stellar craft to negotiate, is a crucial error in interpretation. Even with two UFO’s missing in action, the offending third craft and four accompanying glyphs have been misread as being “O holy shining ones,”[xii] – assuming that the “four extra arms were added to highlight the intensity of the glow.”[xiii] However no Egyptian scribe was allowed such poetic license, and to claim that these objects are actually pieces of jewellery is manifestly false. All jewellery glyphs (Figures 11-13 below) have a lower case semi-circle sealed off with a straight line, while all UFO glyphs have an upper case semi-circle/ellipse with no straight line. The positioning, size and number of arms are markedly different, and the reality is that there is much more separating than connecting the two symbols. Translation of that particular line, or rather the small section chosen, needs to factor in the presence of three distinct UFO icons and should therefore read, “O holy extra-terrestrials.”

Genetic Manipulation?

My colleagues and I believe these holy extra-terrestrials came from Pleiades. We agree on this distant location simply because, in Australia, there are quite literally no other candidates on offer. Aboriginal ‘Dreaming’ stories told throughout the country constantly refer to Pleiades (the Seven Sisters) as do many Elders and Keepers of Lore. Time after time, Pleiades has been nominated as the location from which their ancestors originated. As such, it is possible their Pleiadean ancestors may have actually been involved in the genetic development of one species of hominid: Homo Sapiens.

The opening set of hieroglyphs on the walls (Figures 14 below) is basically undecipherable, and most symbols do not appear in Ray Johnson’s manual. At the beginning is a front-on stick man. But all human bodies in Proto-Egyptian script contain, at the very least, a defined torso and are in profile. Just above and to the right are three stacked circles with two legs. There is nothing that comes close to this representation in standard text, but there is one other known symbol that does have three circles (Figure 15 below) and is used to define “chemical, mineral.”[xiv] Granted they are aligned horizontally and spaced apart, but there is nothing else remotely similar. Could it be the object or being depicted here has been created through some sort of chemical or genetic process? In what only adds to the possibilities, just below are two other three circled figures and both of these have also been given arms. Close by is yet another sequence of three circles, and on this occasion they are in the proper horizontal alignment but are bisected by a staff/sceptre. Is it possible this actually describes the manipulation of the hominid gene?

Around this cluster of unknown glyphs, a few conventional Proto-Egyptian hieroglyphs can be identified. This certainty seems to add weight to the interpretation that the glyphs represent genetic manipulation by those far more advanced. The two icons appearing like small flags denote “God,”[xv] another resembling a snake denotes “father,”[xvi] the seated person represents “majesty,”[xvii] and together they highlight the potential that there is something scientific and esoteric afoot.

Does this combination of known and unidentified glyphs give testimony to the emergence of a new improved species of hominid, contrived under the guidance and science of visitors from afar? We believe there is one misread glyph that tips the scales in the affirmative. Just below the lowest three circled person is a figure, apparently human, that many commentators have mistaken for “endure.”[xviii] The symbol for endure (Figure 16 below) is made up of two legs, two circles with an ellipse on top. But on the wall the ellipse is in the middle, positioned where the figures waist would be. With all the implied genetic manipulation above, could this figure actually depict the bearing by women (of either alien or Original stock) of the genetically engineered species? The figure certainly appears very pregnant, rather than a depiction of ‘endurance’.

Then to finalise this genetic equation is a glyph which is not even remotely similar to any standard text. Just to the right of this ‘pregnant’ woman is a complex set of shapes and lines that could, especially when placed into context with what surrounds it, signify some sort of laboratory.

In what was a huge surprise, a rather non-descript hieroglyph we assumed to be Proto-Egyptian representing “dj,” (thus forming part of the name of son of the Egyptian King, Lord Djes-eb) may also have the same genetic undertones. My colleague Sonya James forwarded on photographs of the glyphs to Yousef and Patricia Awyan, Co-Directors of The Khemit School of Ancient Mysticism in Egypt. It was Patricia’s response that led us to question whether the small section we accepted to be Proto-Egyptian was actually the younger form of script.

“Yousef  thinks the “dj” refers to ‘the seed of life’. We do believe that Egyptians at least as far back as the Old Kingdom DID go to Australia.” As do we. But the mention of the “seed of life” was unexpected, and only reinforced our belief that the occurrence of genetic manipulation is communicated on the Kariong glyphs. Together, these glyphs and expert analyses go some way towards explaining why Elder Aunty Beve repeatedly referred to this tribal estate as the “beginning country?”[xix]

While such a proposition may appear to be beyond the realms of fantasy, there is more to this genetic template than a few scratchings on two walls near Kariong. At Egypt’s Temple of Luxor, carved into the outside wall of the ‘Holy of Holies’, is a series of engravings that graphically illustrate the very first step taken toward the creation of a new genetically improved hominid. My colleagues and I believe this is a record of the collection of sperm from ‘Sky-Heroes’ with the assistance of a quite unusual device – consisting of a cup and some sort of staff/sceptre. In what only adds to the possibility of the depiction of such procedures, there are two cups attached to this elaborate shaft. One receptacle is obviously used to collect sperm. Could it be the other was used to store the human egg?

Before passing any judgment on the carvings on Kariong walls, my colleagues and I believe the site must be viewed in context. Original Elders and custodians of lore and history from all over the Australian continent have made it clear that Pleiades forms a central part of their ancestry, and spoke of older Original writings which could be interpreted (as we have) to be of Pleiadean inspiration. We have learned of many sites in various locations that affirm there was an ancient Egyptian presence in Australia. And although ‘white’ experts dismiss such notions as ridiculous, plainly, someone is wrong.

For more compelling evidence on this fascinating and important work, please pick up a copy of New Dawn magazine or visit newdawnmagazine.com.au

[i] Dr. Hans Dieter von Senff, Egyptians in Australia: The Translation of newly found Egyptian Hieroglyphs at Kariong in N.S.W.Sumpibus Publications, 2011.

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Johnson, Raymund and Runbel, Edith May, Basic Hieroglyphica, (1997), 63.

[iv] Ibid. 63a.

[v] Ibid. 61.

[vi] Ibid. 95.

[vii] Ibid.

[viii] Ibid.

[ix] Ibid. 63.

[x] Ibid. 66.

[xi] Ibid. 74.

[xii] Dieter von Senff, Dr Hans,  Egyptians in Australia: The Translation of newly found Egyptian Hieroglyphics at Kariong in N.S.W., (Sumptibus Publications, 2011).

[xiii] Ibid.

[xiv] Johnson, Raymund and Runbel, Edith May, Basic Hieroglyphica, (1997), 91.

[xv] Ibid. 73.

[xvi] Ibid. 49.

[xvii] Ibid. 4.

[xviii] Ibid. 86.

[xix] Spiers, Beve (Aunty), Egyptians in Australia Part 2, 2012.

About the Author

Steve Strong, with his son Evan, have co-written Constructing a New World Map, Mary Magdalene’s Dreaming and Forgotten Origin (published by University Press of America) and soon to be publishedShunned. He has written over a dozen articles on Original history and lore for the National Indigenous Times, with four articles in New Dawn. With close to 30 years of contact with Gumilaroi people and tribes of the Bundjalung Language Confederation, and the benefit of extensive consultation with many Elders, the history revealed is part of an Original narrative that was almost lost. For more informationForgottenOrigin.com