William Flinders Petrie
John Ora Kinnaman (1877-1961) was an American Bible archaeologist, who, among other claims to fame, maintained that he was one of the group who first entered the tomb of King Tutankhamen with Howard Carter in 1922(a). He also claimed to have known Sir William Flinders Petrie and having met him on a trip to Egypt began a 45 year relationship during which they spent 11 years working together on the Great Pyramid. None of this has ever been confirmed.
Even more serious was a claim during a private lecture in 1955 that he and Petrie discovered a secret entrance into the south face of the Pyramid. Stephen Mehler, another ‘maverick’ archaeologist(b), claims to have heard a recording of this talk in 1979 [Issue 10 of Atlantis Rising magazine]. I think it better to quote a small part of Mehler’s article;
“He casually mentions that he and Petrie discovered a secret entrance into the Pyramid, on the South face, quite by accident. The traditionally accepted entrance is the one on the north face. Dr. Kinnaman then describes several interior chambers in which were found ancient records from Atlantis and anti-gravitational machines, that were used by the Atlanteans to construct the Great Pyramid. Furthermore, Dr. Kinnaman declared that manuscripts they found stated the Great Pyramid was built over 35,000 years ago and was never intended to be a tomb for a king. This is a fact I have maintained as true for the last 20 years!”
Mehler, an ardent fan of Crystal Skulls, UFO’s and astrology (d) , understandably swallowed all this garbage, as it confirms his own weird beliefs. Andrew Collins has also commented(e) on Mehler and Kinnaman, advising caution. Even more revealing is an old article(f) by Jason Colavito who concluded it with a letter from Sharon Bochkay, a relative of Kinnaman’s
“I am a great niece of John Ora Kinnaman. He married my great Aunt Flossie. I spent time with him when I was young and my father was raised by John and Flossie in Georgia as a young boy. He was a very bright man and had many good qualities but unfortunately was not truthful about many things. He copied the works of others and took them on as his own. His biography is full of untruths, his travels to Europe and the Middle East for instance. My family and I are amazed at some of the things we have read. In his day people never checked facts: no computers, etc. When I log on to the Kinnaman Foundation and see how they are trying to get donations for this “research” it really bothers my family and myself. I hope all of these “theories” will be debunked. Thanks.”
Abydos, known locally as Umm el-Qa’ab, is a site in Upper Egypt that contains a variety of structures including the Osirion, which is alleged to be burial-place of Osiris, the Egyptian deity who was the father of Horus and the brother and husband of Isis. It was discovered in 1901/2 by Sir William Flinders Petrie (1853-1942) and Margaret Alice Murray (1863-1963)(c). The Osirion (Osireion) has a number of unusual features that have led some, such as John Anthony West(a) to conclude that it is from a much earlier period than the adjacent Temple of Seti I.
This view is based on at least three observations.
(i) The foundations of the Osirion are much lower than those of the Temple of Seti, a feature that would have been totally unprecedented. It is more likely that structure was originally designed to be built at ground level in a conventional manner. However, after construction, the ground level rose over succeeding years with the deposits of silt from the annual inundation by the Nile. Consequently, when the adjacent Temple of Seti was built, a considerable number of years later, it was erected on much higher ground beside a buried Osirion.
(ii) The Temple of Seti has an unusual unique outline being ‘L’ shaped instead of having the usual rectangular form. This would seem to suggest that during the construction of the temple, the builders discovered the buried Osirion and had to alter the original design.
(iii) For some, the most compelling reason for dating the Osirion differently to Seti’s Temple is that stylistically the structure is totally at variance with anything else from Seti’s era.
In 1995, Graham Hancock drew attention to this difference in style and in a 2019 article, Freddy Silva also commented on this incongruity(h)(k), but notes that while the Osirion at first sight does not appear to have any obvious astronomical alignment, “only in the epoch of 10,000 BC do connections begin emerge, for the constellation Cygnus appears in full upright ascent over the horizon in conjunction with the axis of the temple, the entrance framing its brightest star, Deneb.”
Silva added that the Osirion “represents a complete departure from standard temple design. However, a geological appraisal contradicts this opinion. In ancient times the level of the Nile was fifty feet lower than today, its course seven miles closer to and beside the Osirion. When North Africa was subjected to major flooding between 10,500-8000 BC, layers of Nile silt gradually compacted and rose inch by inch until they surrounded and covered the Osirion. In other words, the temple was originally a freestanding feature on the floodplain.”
For my part, the apparent absence of contemporary hieroglyphics in the Osirion seems to suggest a preliterate period for its construction. The Valley Temple and the Sphinx Temple at Giza show similiar construction techniques and are also devoid of inscriptions. As I see it, there is no unequivocal evidence on offer to demonstrate that the Osirion could not be much earlier than the nearby Seti Temple. Therefore, I would urge caution before hastily dismissing Hancock, Silva and others regarding this matter.
>The conventional view that Seti I was responsible for the building of both the Temple and the Osireion is expressed in a well-illustrated paper by Keith Hamilton on the Academia.edu website(j).<
This suggestion of an earlier date, such as in Ralph Ellis’ Thoth, the Architect of the Universe, has added weight to the more general claim that other Egyptian monuments such as the Sphinx and some of the lower courses of the Great Pyramid are also from a predynastic era. This is interpreted by some as evidence of an early civilisation that might be more in keeping with 9600 BC date in the story of Atlantis told to Solon by the Egyptian priests at Sais.
A sceptic’s view of the claimed early date for the Osirion can be read online(d).
Klaus H. Aschenbrenner has produced an Internet article, Giza and Abydos: The Keys to Atlantis, unfortunately in German only, which bravely promotes the idea of an 11th millennium BC date for parts of both Giza and Abydos.
Hieroglyphics in the Temple of Seti at Abydos have also been seized upon by proponents of ancient technology existing in prehistoric times and possible links to a hi-tech Atlantis. These carvings suggest the outline of a helicopter and a submarine! A refutation of this interpretation, by Margaret Morris(b) and others(e)(f) has demonstrated that the carvings have been reworked and that some of the plaster infill had deteriorated. Furthermore, there is clear evidence that images of the hieroglyphics circulating on the internet were digitally ‘tidied up’.
>Wayne James Howson offers some radical ideas concerning the Osireion in a 400-page book available on the Academia.edu website(l). Howson was influenced by the work of Jim Westerman(m).<
In November 2016, it was announced that a city was unearthed not far from the Abydos temples, where “it is believed the city was home to important officials and tomb builders and would have flourished during early-era ancient Egyptian times.(g)“
(b) See Archive 2727