Something unusual really did take place in Egypt something between 13.000 and 12.000 B C. At four Isnan sites on the upper Nile – at Isna (from which the culture takes its name) 125 miles up river from Aswan – palaeontologists have unearthed clear evidence that these ancient people selected and grew their own cereal crops.

Stone sickle blades were used to reap the harvests, while grinding – stones were employed to extract the maximum amount of grain. Not only did the Isnan posses a primitive form of agriculture, they would also appear to have mastered animal domestication and to have possessed a highly advanced microblade technology.
For around 10.500 B.C the grinding – stones and sickle blades used in the production of cereals suddenly disappear without trace , only to be replaced by much cruder stone implements of the sort used by the other , less advanced culture of the Nile valley .Agriculture then totally disappears from Egypt …
Human evolution deems that, once you have invented something, you don’t go back to older, more primitive ways of life…
Yet how was it possible that the Isnan started evolving more quickly that anyone else in the Middle East. The easy answer is to suggest that they belonged to a mentally superior culture with the intellectual capacity to evolve faster than their rivals. Instead of simply having the intellectual capacity to learn faster than everyone else, perhaps the Isnan had been given their technological capabilities by an even more advanced culture …If so, and then who might this have been?
Was it possible that around the same time there existed in Egypt a superior race who begun disseminating some of their basic skills and technology to more primitive communities in exactly the same manner as the Watchers appear in the book of Enoch.
It would seem that a number of ate Predynastic graves in the northern part of Upper Egypt have yielded up “anatomical remains” “of a people whose skulls were of greater size and whose bodies were larger then the natives. Walter Bryan Emery , and eminent and very respected Egyptologist , made a detailed study of Predynastyc and early Dynastic society in Egypt , and was so moved by these important discoveries that , in 1961 book , Archaic Egypt , he concluded that :
…any suggestion that these people derived from the earlier stock is impossible. The fusion of the two races must have been considerable, but it was not so rapid that by the time of the Unification it could be considered in any way accomplished. for throughout the whole of the Archaic Period ( the first two Pharaonic dynasties , c 3100 – 2700 BC ) the distinction between the civilized aristocracy and the mass of the natives is very marked , particularly i n regard to their burial customs . Only with the close of the Second Dynasty do we find evidence of the lower orders adopting the funerary architecture and mode of burial of their masters.
So who were these “masters”, this race of great stature believed to have founded the royal line of Egypt and to have introduced new burial customs to the local population? Emery identified them with the Shemsu – Hor, the Companions, or Followers, of the Hawk headed god Horus who, according to one very ancient king – list preserved in Turin, dominated Egypt for an incredible 13,420 years before the ascent of Narmer and Hor – aha the first recognized Pharaohs.
Emery must have been aware of this fact when writing Archaic Egypt, so he was therefore implying that the most distant ancestors of the Egyptians had been tall in stature with large craniums. Emery also made it clear that: “The racial origin of these invaders is not known and the route they took in their penetration of Egypt is equally obscure “.
Is culture with that of ancient Iraq, hinting at a common origin for both civilizations
His book goes on compare the unique architecture of this culture with that of ancient Iraq, hinting at a common origin for both civilizations…
Further evidence of this clear relationship between the most ancient inhabitants of Egypt and the earliest city – states of Mesopotamia has come from the study of human skulls found in the Predynastic cemeteries excavated at Abydos in Upper Egypt during 1897 by the flamboyant French anthropologist , Jacques de Morgan .
Each cranium was examined by anthropologist named D.Fouquet , who reported that among them was a racial type entirely unlike any ancient or modern inhabitant of Egypt . These skulls were “big – headed” and of a so – called dolichocephalic shape, that is long and narrow.
Adding weight to this argument is the knowledge that “people allied in type to the big – headed Predynastic Egyptians are to be found buried in early Sumerian graves of Mesopotamia. For example, Long – headed skulls, entirely unlike the rest of the Sumerian race, are known to have been found at the excavation at Kish and Jemdet Nasr in Iraq .
They were found at thee lowest occupational levels, indicating that they are at least five thousand years old .In an important article written on this subject for the American Anthropologist in 1933, its author, Henry Field, concluded that these outsized skulls represented evidence of a “proto. Semitic “culture, who were the original founders of the pre – Sumerian city – states before they were overrun by an indigenous culture with a quite different skull shape sometime around 3000 BC.
Just who were these long – headed individuals? Might they have been the descendants of a culture who inhabited Egypt during its earliest stages of development?
Might some remnant of this culture have been responsible for the foundation of Sumer? The viper – like faces recorded in the connection with the fallen race would undoubtedly be seen by anthropologists as a classic feature of a long – headed individual, such as those found in the most ancient graves of both Egypt and Sumer.













