1976 ends- and the articles for now of the ‘Atlantis Research Centre’ which after this is the ‘Atlantean Research Journal’ started by Clarke. The short name is ‘The Atlantean Journal’
The Sirius Mystery, By Robert
"When Thoth arrived on the Egyptian scene, in BC 6,111, he
brought with him an entire system of writing, the Hieroglyphs of
I consider as a possibility that the Dogon inherited the mysteries but not the academic background. Is this a viable assumption. Otherwise they would have taken over the Hieroglyphic writing and the Sothic periods of 1460/1 years.
Unfortunately this is only the beginning of our difficulties. We have
no less than four Dogon, Dagon, Dragon, centers: Sanchuniathon, writing in BC
1193, from Baalbek or Damascus, mentions that Ouranos/Oannes, sea King of the
Euphrates Delta, was known as Dagon, and also invented the Cup Compass, of
which he gave one to a Hercules. Ouranos also set up Baetulae, lodestone mark
stones, to assist travelers in his domains. Colchis, the present day Batoum,
did not become Egyptian until BC 2,300, when it was captured by Seostris
(Senusret 2nd). This was after the Voyage of the Argo, and it was
the knowledge of the vast mineral resources of the Caucasian region, dating
back to the original city of Tubal Cainland exploited by the full by the
Artificer Clans, of which the Dragon Clan was one, that impelled the Egyptians.
This portion of the Egyptian Empire was only tenable with good sea
communications, which they never had at any time, and within three centuries it
had passed out of their hands for ever. Both the Georgians and the Ossetians,
had stories in their own languages, of pre-Egyptian origin, referring to the
Argo. They also had one referring to Odysseus, whose participation in the
Egyptian blockade of Copchic seems to have been changed by Homer into an event
occurring much later, one of the sieges of Troy. The third center was at
Another point, which I query, is the Sumerian interest in Sirius. Their calendrical periods were mostly on a lunar basis and of relatively short length, such as the Saros which covered 18 years and 11 days (or ten days fi five leap years intervened). This was based on the fact that 233 lunation’s and 19 synodic revolutions are nearly equal, with a difference of 0.46 days. Sirius is certainly included in the Mul Apin (Star Lists) but without any particular emphasis. This does not upset the general theory but I feel that at this stage it would be safer to avoid Gilgamesh and te interlaced network of stories, which may not be a part of the Sirius story.
A slight clue is provided by Ptolemy in his Almagest, published 140 AD in which he refers to Sirius as The brightest and red star in the face called the dog. About 25 years before Ptolemy, Lucius Seneca remarked that the redness of the Dog Star was deeper.
Every observer since Ptolemy has called Sirius white, but here we have evidence that for a short time before Ptolemy, the Star Sirius was reddish in color. Is this fact in any way related to the thesis of Mr. Temple?
To recapitulate. I am quite happy about the Dogon ideas of Sirius. I am unsure whether they pre-suppose the need for and alien spacecraft landing, but if this was the case I would put it down at about BC 6,000 in Southern Arabia. The real problem with which we are faced is that, omitting the ideas of the sensation mongers, there are several happenings in our past history which indicate the possibility of a visit from outer space; probably due to the need for repairs or for fuel and provisions. I think it unlikely that any group ever made a second visit.
Omitting both the purely religious and the emotive sides, I think there is sufficient evidence available to justify further study.
While Mr. Temple may not be fully justified in all his assumptions, he has done sufficient fieldwork to justify really energetic research by other members of the younger generation. The real point at issue is that there have been visitors from outside our system in the past, we now have to work out where they came from, what effect they had on our culture and when the visits occurred.
At this juncture I feel that the possibility of any fusion of genetic strains between the visitors and our own people is too remote to be taken into consideration. E.S.
Webmaster Note- It is clear not of all Temple’s book was Sykes in agreement with. One has to remember Sykes was not inclined to claim something Alien of import unless it met some strict criteria’s due to the fact that at that time Atlantis as a subject was bombarded with quackery, or pseudo religious groups. Who did not have a direct interest in the establishment of Atlantis proof wise but its esoteric qualities mostly. It is not recourse of psychology to put down the subject either, if trying to debunk the subject due to schizophrenia associations, as Jung would have told them cosmic or genetic memory cannot be overlooked of catastrophe’s in men’s hearts and minds of the past. Reincarnation would be a equal weight in regards to the Psychologists methodology for that is a piece of the unknown they do not like to touch????? So, Sykes did not disagree with Cayce stuff because he felt that it was not the ARE’s intention to bring the subject up in the 1940’s to the world. At that time they felt it might have hurt Cayce if anything by bringing up the controversial subject of Atlantis and not vice versa as some Christian organizations have so claimed that that was its pseudo-science purpose. To go after Cayce they would have been better off going after Christian Scientists or the paper the Christian Science Monitor which are pretty docile groups. Sykes felt Cayce was about 50 % accurate and that is a pretty good score considering how long Sykes went after the subject. We hope that scientists and psychologists will one day see the legitimacy of the Atlantis subject as not a realm of hocus pocus but the realm of reality of some lost world or land. At least in light of Milton’s Paradise Lost, or the accounts of Moby Dick based on the Essex doomed ship. Myth from reality so to speak, as Plato’s point concludes. We may want to conclude Jules Vernes and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle were onto something by reminding us under the sea all things are possible as well as subconscious lost realms.
I conclude with this analogy:
Those who study for Atlantis type of Power
Those who study for Atlantis as a mental crutch
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Religion
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Treasure
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Myth
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Science
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Realm
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Art
Those who study for Atlantis as a Lost Geometry
Those who study for Atlantis as a Reality that was Lost to the Sea.
As you can see there are many reasons and that man could not make up the all the ways unless it was rooted in a very deep memory of what happens to the folly’s of man’s lack of guidance by any of the so above listed. In a way Atlantis is or was the tower of Babel, and we have to thank her for even ‘Exodus’ of the Bible, an appropriate name that is the biggest point of Genesis for no Genesis can exist without Noah’s Atlantis because if no survivors there would be no story to tell!!!!!!!
Written By Dean Clarke BLS Soc. Geog. Aug 2002 for Atlantisite.com ‘for the Sirius Researcher’