>>9766079

(Please read from the start)

“Reliefs

The handle of the knife is carved on both sides with finely executed figures arranged in five horizontal registers. The opposite side of the handle shows Mesopotamian influence[19] featuring the Master of Animals motif, very common in Mesopotamian art, in the form of a figure wearing Mesopotamian clothing flanked by two upright lions symbolising the Morning and Evening Stars (now both identified with the planet Venus). Robert du Mesnil du Buisson said the central figure is the god El.[20] David Rohl identifies him with Meskiagkasher (Biblical Cush),[21] who "journeyed upon the sea and came ashore at the mountains".[22]Nicolas Grimal refrains from speculating on the identity of the ambiguous figure, referring to it as a "warrior".[23] Modern scholarship generally attributes the back reliefs to Mesopotamian influence, and more specifically attribute the design of the clothed wrestler to the Mesopotamian "priest-king" Master of Animals images of the Late Uruk period.

This side of the handle also contains a "knob", a perforated suspension lug that would have supported the knife handle, keeping it level while resting on a level surface and also could have been used to thread a cord to hang it from the body as an ornament.”

>> Notice: “journeyed upon the sea and came ashore at the mountains”. Doesn’t that fit perfectly with Utnapishtin and Noah’s Ark resting on Mt. Ararat? Even though we’ve already finished the Mesopotamian section, once I’m done with this knife I’m going to take a look at the connection. I know I’m going to end up with the same findings, but it’s an additional evidence I want to add it with the rest.

“Similar knives

Today a total of 17 similar ceremonial knives with decorated handles are known. These knives comprise:

• The ritual knife of the Brooklyn Museum, discovered by Jacques de Morgan in the Tomb 32 at Abu Zeidan near Edfu, and similar in size to the Gebel el-Arak knife. The handle of the knife, made of elephant ivory, is decorated with 227 animals carved in 10 registers on both faces.[28] The figures are tightly packed and entirely cover the handle. They represent real animals, all depicted at approximatively the same size and arranged in processions by species: elephants (some walking on snakes), storks, lions, oryxes and bovids. Other less common animals interrupt the processions: a giraffe, a heron, a bustard and a dog chasing after an oryx. Finally, two electric cat fishes are represented on the outer margin of the handle. The only non-animal figure is a rosette, a royal symbol of mesopotamian origin found on Egyptian artifacts of the predynastic period and until the 1st dynasty, such as the Scorpion Macehead and Narmer palette.[1] The decoration of the handle is very similar to that of a predynastic hair comb, on display at the Metropolitan Museum of

>> Anyone apart me notice Jacques De Morgan.

• Page 139 –

>>9774996

(Please read from the start)

• “The Pitt-Rivers knife, bought in the mid 19th century by Reverend G. Chester from an antique dealer who reported finding it in Sheikh Hamada, near Sohag in Upper Egypt. The knife dates back to the late predynastic period, from ca. 3300 BC to 3100 BC,[30] and is now on display at the British Museum’s Early Egypt gallery, room 64, under the catalog number EA 68512.[31] The blade of the knife is virtually identical in style to that of the Gebel el-Arak knife, although slightly larger.[1] The iconography of the handle is similar to that of the ritual knife, comprising six rows of wild animals carved in raised relief. The animals include elephants walking on snakes, storks, a heron, lions followed by a dog, short and long-horned cattle, perhaps jackals, an ibis, a deer, hartebeests, oryxes and a barbary sheep.[32] Similar motifs are found on pottery and clay seals from funerary contexts of the predynastic and early dynastic periods, most notably in Abydos.

• The Gebel-Tarif knife, dating to the Naqada III period.[34] On one side, the handle of the knife shows two snakes encircling rosettes. The other side is arranged in four rows. The top and second rows depict scenes of predation with a leopard and a lion attacking ibexes. Beneath these is a domesticated heavy hunting dog wearing a collar pursued by a lion or another dog.[35] Finally the bottom row represents a griffin and an ibex[35] The knife is now in the Egyptian Museum under the catalog number CG 14265.”

>> This is the second piece where we see a Griffin (page 120).

• “Two worn and battered knives can be found at the Metropolitan Museum of Art[36] and at the National Archaeological Museum (France).

The perfect similarity between the blades of these knives and that of the Gebel el-Arak led scholar Diane L. Holmes to propose that the knives were all produced by a small number of workshops in one area and may be the product of a few craftsmen who practiced this extremely specialized skill over a period of a few generations.”

>> I would have agreed with Holmes on this one if we didn’t see men wearing the Koteka on the front side of the blade’s handle (page 130). If the single workshop was located in Mesopotamia, how did they know about the wear of Kotekas? Was it a special request order? It also means they knew about the Kotekas in Mesopotamia, which we haven’t found any traces of it there being used. Strange, no? If this was from a workshop from the Phoenician polis which had ties with both of Mesopotamia and Egypt, then the same argument can be made about the Kotekas. If this was an Egyptian workshop producing these knives, it explains the presence of the Kotekas, but it doesn’t explain the central figure standing between 2 lions. It’s important to mention the similarities between the central figure = the supposed king-priest, standing between the lions and the king-priest statuette from Mesopotamia (page 129). Can these be special requests? Is this influence in style from one civilization to another? Or could it be a common ancient knowledge shared by many civilizations and lost to us?

The reason why I’ve spent so much time on this specific knife handle was not just because of the Kotekas but also because of the boats on the reverse side of the handle. Remember the “Ship” palette mentioned before along with the Boat painting from Hierakonpolis mentioned in page 121? Now look closer to the boat design we have there and compare it to the boats designs we have on this knife handle. On the later, we have some sort of “pergola” or canopy for shade on the boats; while in page 121 boats the shape on the boat is far more different, same as the palette. It’s like there is a “structure” on them.

We need the last element = my next item; before talking about those boats with structures on them.

• Page 140 –

>>9775079

(Please read from the start)

Before I get to the next item anons, as declared before, I’m going to take a detour, back to Mesopotamia this time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh-ki-ang-gasher

“Mesh-ki-ang-gasher (Mèš-ki-áĝ-ga-še-er, Meš-ki-aĝ-gašer; also transliterated Mes-Kiag-Gasher, Mesh-Ki-Ang-Gasher, Meskiagkasher, Meckiagkacer and variants) was a Sumerian ruler and the founder of the First Dynasty of Uruk and the father of Enmerkar, according to the Sumerian king list. If a historical ruler, he would have flourished in ca. the 28th century BC (Early Bronze Age II).

"In E-ana, Meš-ki-aĝ-gašer, the son of Utu, became en and lugal; he ruled for 324 [variants: 325] years. Meš-ki-aĝ-gašer entered the sea and disappeared. Enmerkar, the son of Meš-ki-aĝ-gašer, the king of Unug, who built Unug [variants: under whom Unug was built], became king; he ruled for 420 years.”

“E-ana ("house of heaven") was the name of the temple to Inanna at Uruk. The entry thus has Mesh-ki-ang-gasher ruling the fortress or castle around which his son would build the city of Uruk, and which was to become the main temple to its patron goddess.”

>> Important = HOUSE OF HEAVEN. I think this is referring to a very specific Bloodline here anons. Not the Merovingian Bloodline, but another Bloodline, which I’m suspecting is important. This is only theory from my part for now.

“Unlike his successors Enmerkar, Lugalbanda, Dumuzid, the Fisherman and Gilgamesh, Mesh-ki-ang-gasher is not known from Sumerian epics or legends besides the King List. His nature as the son of the sun god, the founder of a major dynasty and his mysterious "disappearance" in the sea give him a mostly mythological flavour. His son Enmerkar is also called "son of Utu" in the Sumerian legend Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta — where, aside from founding Uruk, Enmerkar is credited with building a temple at Eridu and with the invention of writing.”

>> So here we have the ancestor of Gilgamesh who “mysteriously” disappeared in the sea. Notice how the names of the kings start with the letter “U” like Utnapishtin and Ubara-tutu (page 44).

“In David Rohl's system of identifications of Bronze Age individuals with characters in the Hebrew Bible, Mesh-ki-ang-gasher corresponds to Cush.”

>> Adding the Hebrew Bible to it is like putting a stick in a wheel and making it stop. This is why we don’t follow the Hebrew Bible in this thread, it’s not our guide, but the archaeological artifacts are.

• Page 141 –

>>9775116

(Please read from the start)

6 – The last item in the sculptures is this female figurine. They come in different material, different types of stone and even clay figurines (sometimes painted). And they are represented on this Vase from Naqada I period, found in a tomb in Abydos. The figurine doesn’t have any feet, only legs, always shaped downward, conic shape. With the absence of feet and the shape of the legs, there is no way this statuette could stand on its own, it needs some type of support. The torso is slightly bent forward. While both arms are lifted up but also bent on the elbow level. The head is small in comparison to the body’s proportions and the breasts are well marked.

Here is a link to a similar terracotta figurine displayed in the Brooklyn Museum, for more information and details: https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/opencollection/objects/4225

On the Vase I’ve attached the picture of, we can see representations of similar women designs. I said similar but not identical because there are minor changes. The male shapes on the vase are easily recognizable due to their genitals. The females, we don’t see the breasts, but it seems like they have a belly, making the one seeing this think they are pregnant. They’ve got something attached to their waist which extends to the back as a tail with some sort of “spikes”. These are some kind of feathered or floral garland. Same goes for the “horns” shape things we see on their heads: those are most probably feather crown or floral crown.

In some cases, it looks like the female figures on the vase are holding hands with a smaller figure, or they are directly holding the smaller figure. This, with the belly makes us think of “motherhood”, making us wonder if these are mothers either pregnant or with their children; maybe both. But in the same time, we do have ONE female figure standing up, with her legs and feet clearly drawn, in the same posture than those female statuettes.

What are these statuettes? There are many theories but I’m going to talk about the 3 main ones:

A – Some believe these are some type of fertility goddess; even going as far as saying this is an early form of the goddess Isis. We have many designs of fertility goddesses all over the world. The arms up in the air are considered as a gesture made for prayer = to pray to a heavenly/sky god – or the goddess is giving her blessing to the believers.

B – Some say these are dancers, throwing their arms in the air. Some say the dance is for religious ritual purpose while others say this is a celebration type of dance.

C – Some believed these are weeping mourner women we see in noble/royal funerals. We see similar female representations in ancient Greece and in Phoenicia as well. Dynastic Egypt was actually famous for having them walk among the dead Pharaoh’s procession, on his way to his final resting place. On King Ahiram’s sarcophagus, we have 2 sets of 2 mourning women: 2 with bare chests and pulling their hair, while the other 2 are hitting their bare chests in grief.

• Page 142 –

>>9771187

Mr. Donald J. Trump (and the men behind the scenes) will be remembered as the FOUNDING FATHERS of America’s Golden Age. Mark my words. This is how history books and the generations to come will see them. But the patriots need to work hard to get there. It’s not GIVEN, it should be EARNED. History is being made as we speak.