It tends to sit fairly low in the sky, and sometimes scintillates with the colors of the rainbow, due to atmospheric effects experienced visually while viewing near the horizon. We have already seen how it is strongly associated with ancient female deities, particularly the Egyptian goddess Isis.
What may be surprising to many is
that a certain astronomical aspect of Sirius is steeped in controversy, and
has been for centuries; namely, its color!
On the one hand, it is held that Sirius could never have been red, and that the quotes from the ancient literature were simply erroneous, and on the other hand it is held that this anomaly describes an intrinsic change in Sirius’ character as a star, that requires explanation.
Unfortunately, there is none. Sirius simply could not have changed color in this short time, least of all from red to white. A complete solution to this puzzle remains elusive, although much of the erroneous material clogging up the debate has been adequately dealt with.
I do not wish to
pin the strong case for the Dark Star Nibiru onto this poorly documented
anomaly without this proviso. Even so, it will become evident that it might
offer us a dramatic opportunity to establish Nibiru’s passage during Christ's life-time.
Whittet then analyses some of the proposed ways in which a star could change color temporarily and concludes that none of these fit the data about Sirius given our present understanding of astrophysics.
So he then attempts to discover an extrinsic cause, more due to the viewing conditions that the observers were subject to, and concludes that the reddening of the star observed was due to observers witnessing Sirius during its heliacal rising and setting (1, 2).
He also shows that the later recordings of ‘red Sirius’, particularly that of Ptolemy in 150AD, were down to plagiarism of traditional texts by other authors adding to his text:
The importance of Ptolemy’s astronomical catalogue, the Almagest, cannot be under-estimated, and for that reason the reference within it to Sirius’ redness became the most important piece of evidence for the argument that Sirius was once red.
But as important as the text is, it was subject to much
editing in the centuries after Ptolemy wrote it, and certain erroneous
interpolations have been noted. It seems likely that this is the reason for
the reference to a ‘red Sirius’ in the Almagest, especially as
himself made no reference to this anomalous color in the star catalogue in
his accompanying astrological text, the Tetrabiblos.
Accounts before Seneca seem a to have been composed in a rather more poetic fashion, particularly that of Cicero’s translation of Aratus, and were largely taken out of context. As noted above, later Greek accounts seem to rely heavily on a tradition of ‘red Sirius’ derived from Seneca.
But the 1st century Roman’s description is more difficult to explain away, as Ceragioli describes:
A few things should be noted about all of this. Other accounts roughly contemporary with Seneca describe Sirius as white, as we see today. Yet, during his discussion of fiery phenomenon in the sky, he chooses to describe Sirius’ piercing redness, described in the present tense. This tends to suggest a short-lived phenomena, picked up by only a few astronomers of that time. But also a very real one.
Would it not appear as a piercing red star? Is it possible that the brown dwarf’s brightness and fiery countenance effectively eclipsed the dominance of Sirius in that portion of the sky, causing observers at that time to conclude that Sirius was red? That Seneca misinterpreted its anomalous appearance as Sirius, setting in motion an erroneous tradition of ‘red Sirius’, that has perplexed astronomers ever since.
Whilst writing about fiery celestial phenomena in 25 AD, he rather bizarrely included Sirius, which he perceived at that point in time as red. Perhaps its unusual countenance was actually the reason he wrote this essay in the first place, in an attempt to explain why Sirius was now red.
But instead, unknown to
him, he was looking at the altogether brighter Nibiru in
Yet this ‘solution’ is problematic, as Sirius would still have been a bright, white star under normal viewing conditions, and therefore should have been described as such. The ancients may have had some unusual ideas, but they were not fools.
Ceragioli cites the German astronomer H. Osthoff as producing the strongest rebuttal to this scintillation and absorption theory, a theory that now holds sway among astronomers:
A tradition of Sirius appearing red formed from
despite other contemporary accounts identifying it correctly as white,
including many Roman texts that described it as ‘sea-blue’. The strength of
that tradition among 1st and 2nd Century astronomers, like Ptolemy, points
to the impact of the ‘red star’s’ description by Seneca, a significance
certainly not lost on the Egyptians. It may also have triggered the
resurgence of the cult of Mithras in the Roman Empire.
The Mesopotamian and Egyptian traditions which had managed to maintain the belief in the Winged Disc had been anxiously awaiting its reappearance since the time of Alexander the Great. It was late, and had overshot its average 3,600 year passage by about 5 generations.
The Messianic Star, Horus, was
overdue, and rumors of the appearance of the Messiah were raging in the
occupied lands of Israel and Egypt. They would surely not have made the same
mistake as Seneca. Carefully they watched the heliacal setting and rising of
Sirius for a sign of the return of the Winged Disc. Can it be that their
vigilance was rewarded in 25 AD?
If Nibiru appeared as a bright red star near
Sirius, then why didn't Seneca describe its bizarre retrograde motion across
the heavens, a movement that would clearly contra-indicate its
identification as Sirius?
put, the sighting may have occurred at the crucial point of the
disappearance of Sirius from the skies, during late Spring, denoting its
perihelion passage to be on the other side of the Sun (this may neatly
explain old North American mythology describing the gods as living on a
'planet behind the Sun'; but more on this another time).
Yet the new
discoveries of the orbits of extra-solar planets indicate that this need not
be so. Some of these giant worlds spin around their stars at great speed,
often in highly elliptical orbits. I suggest this is true of Nibiru also.
After all, it was not one of the Sun’s original planets, but an interloper
captured into an anomalous elliptical orbit, after a planetary collision of
Therefore, in half a Nibiruan orbit it will have traveled an awesome 5000 AU! So, Nibiru need only be traveling five times faster than Voyager’s current rate to achieve the kind of distances that would fit with Murray’s analysis. This is no sedate sojourn through the depths of space, I’ll admit, but it is in keeping with the extra-solar planet orbits, and appears reasonable compared to our own space-probe, Voyager 1. Now, at the perihelion point of its passage, Nibiru will be moving around the Sun at an even faster rate than this average, as is the case with the comets.
It won’t be hanging around in our skies, that’s for sure. This is also in keeping with the accounts of Anu’s state visits to Earth, as described by Sitchin, which were constrained to a tight time-table indeed, perhaps just a few weeks.
This indicates a short perihelion passage.
Could it be that the tense wait for its return was because of the fear of missing the appearance of the Winged Planet at this time? During the Pyramid Age, they positively worshipped Sirius as it achieved its heliacal rising from the Sun in mid June, reappearing above the horizon after this annual absence. Again, the significance of this might be totally due to the awaited reappearance of Horus, in the guise of the dark Sun god.
In other words, at any other time
of the year, Nibiru’s appearance would be clear to all and sundry as a bright red star moving backwards through the Duat region of the sky. But,
during those two months of Sirius’ absence, the risk was that no one would
actually be able to see Nibiru at all. It might come and go without note,
unless it was carefully watched for each year on those dates. Thus the
ancient Egyptian obsession with the heliacal setting and rising of Sirius.
Note that, for this to be the case, Nibiru must have been spotted near Sirius before its disappearance, not after. Otherwise the retrograde motion though Orion would have been clearly seen. If Nibiru appeared just before the crucial 2 months prior to Sirius's annual disappearance, then its observation as a stationary, rather than moving star, becomes plausible.
Sirius enters its 70 day period locked below the horizon as the Sun moves past the Hyades in the constellation of Taurus. It then re-emerges during its heliacal rising when the Sun is adjacent to Regulus.
During the Pyramid
Age, this coincided with the Summer Solstice
(5), placing the dropping of
Sirius below the horizon to two weeks after the Vernal Equinox. Given the
effects of precession of the equinoxes between the Pyramid Age and the time
of Christ, then the point of disappearance of Sirius occurred about
month later in the Christian era. This corresponds with April-May time. If
Nibiru was seen between Cancer and Canis Major before Sirius disappeared for
70 days, then this occurred at the time we now call 'Easter'.
If my reasoning is correct, this gives us an clear-cut astronomical observation of the Messianic Star in 25 AD, during the period of time preceding Easter. One notes this coincidence with the heretical Christian account of the Crucifixion. In DarkStar6, I cited Jean Cocteau's rendition of the Dark Star at the scene of the Crucifixion, which Picknett and Prince have linked to the teachings of the heretical society, the Priory of Sion. (6)
This heretical imagery becomes crystal clear when considering the above argument.
The Messianic Star, which had been anxiously awaited for hundreds of years, didn't appear over a lowly cattle shed in Bethlehem, but instead symbolically set the scene for the Messianic Crucifixion in Jerusalem.
This, I admit, is a staggering statement, and I do not make it lightly. For starters, it overturns my previous working assumption that the Messianic Star appeared in 4 BC. It extends that particular orbital period by 28 years to 3784 years, still further away from the Sumerians' ball-park figure of 3600 years for Nibiru's orbit.
Yet it explains a great deal:
Please note that I am not claiming that the timing of Nibiru's passage is coincidental with the actual crucifixion.
Rather that its appearance triggers the later events of the New Testament. The Crucifixion is analogous with the mysteries of the ‘god of the dead’, Osiris, so presumably relates to the movement of Nibiru through Orion. It is likely that this part of the perihelion passage occurred when this constellation was locked below the horizon, and went unnoticed by the people of Earth. It is probable, though, that the final aspect of Nibiru’s 1st century celestial passage was seen, and became embodied in the resurgence of the cult of Mithras. More about this in a moment.
However, of greater interest to us is the initial appearance of Nibiru. The ministries of John and Jesus came to fruition because the star appeared in Canis Major, as noted by Seneca in 25 AD.
The Winged Disc cults of the ancient world had been waiting for its return for hundreds of years, and the prophecies called for the return of a Messiah and Kingship on Earth. This miraculous rebirth of the dark star propelled the Isian-based rituals of John the Baptist to the forefront of Judean religious belief, dangerously competing with the monotheism of orthodox Judaism at that time.
Jesus continued this radical movement, and the rest is history.
The visit of the 3 Wise Men to the stable in Bethlehem is described in the Gospel of Matthew. The Church celebrates this important chapter of the Nativity story on the Epiphany on 6th January. Matthew is the only Gospel writer to describe the Nativity, leading one to suspect that its derivation lies in the recreation of the 'divine child' mythology.
Gilbert points out the connection with John:
Gilbert does not bring this point to our attention to create doubt in our minds that the Nativity was a later construction of the Roman Church.
But that is surely the effect.
The early Christian church described the baptism of Christ by John as the 'Day of Lights', and later incorporated the myth of the Magi's visit into this crucial date. Instead, the first appearance of the Divine Star occurred with the symbolic baptism of Jesus by John, initiating the Christ figure into the Isian rites associated with the Messianic Star.
Only later, when the connection of Christianity with pagan polytheism needed
to be exorcised, did the Church replace this initiating event with the
After all, this was caused by a Nibiruan passage 10,000 years in the past, disaster which 'cleansed the Earth' and brought about the destruction of the Annunaki's extensive operation on this planet.
It is not hard to see why the Egyptian ritual of Baptism would suddenly become highly fashionable in Judea as the Messianic Star reappeared.
By cleansing one's sins through full immersion in water,
the people of that time recalled the past destruction the brown dwarf
brought about, atone for their own sins, as well as hope that the same was
not about to happen again. Fear of this world-wide cataclysm lead the people
of the Middle East into the arms of the Baptist. His was the original
Messianic Movement of 1st Century Judea.
At this point, Nibiru dipped below the horizon, and its movement through the realm of the 'god of the dead', Osiris, was lost to viewers on Earth.
I will leave it to others
to verify the veracity of the Christian account. It may have happened
historically, or it might be mythology built upon the Dark Star astronomy,
like so much other ancient myth.
It is not the purpose of this essay to question the divinity of
Jesus Christ, but rather to place his story in the context of a wider
This is a problem particularly for Biblical scholars trying to pinpoint the historical appearance of this celestial object. As far as I know, this is one of the few times that the Star of Bethlehem has been explained by the actual appearance of an new star. Most other theories call for conjunctions of the planets, meteors, super novae or even UFOs. What is plain to all is that the Early Christians placed a great deal of importance on the vision of the Star, yet its appearance in contemporary records of that time was notable by its absence.
This proposed solution addresses this issue in a radical new way, pointing out the cultural difference between the dominant Romans and the subjugated people of Israel and Egypt.
The Romans, like the Greeks, were completely
ignorant of the Winged Planet, being a European culture, much younger than
the ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian
civilizations. As an astronomical
event, it was difficult to spot because of the time of year it appeared, and
Seneca erroneously noted its appearance as Sirius itself.
Gilbert describes what is known of the Roman version of this ancient Persian god:
Here we have a cult, which originated in Persia, suddenly taking hold in the Roman Empire around the same time as the emergence of the early Christian church.
Its focus was a fiery sun-god who was a divine child, born on 25th December, not dissimilar to the Egyptian messianic symbolism. It seems likely that Mithras became the Roman cult of Nibiru, based upon appearance of the fiery star noted by Seneca. The main aspect of the Mithras myth holds further clues. This god was famous for his sacrifice of the heavenly bull.
He seized the bull by the horns, and was then dragged until ‘the great beast collapsed’. He then picked it up by its hind quarters and pulled it back to his cave , where he sacrificed it.
If the heavenly bull is Taurus, and I am
correct in identifying Mithras as the Winged Planet moving through the last
stage of its visible perihelion, then this could allude to the retrograde
motion of the divine star through the constellation: Firstly moving directly
onto the horns of the bull, then dragged by them, then grabbing the flank
before disappearing into the darkness of the 'cave' for the sacrificial
rite. This would imply that the increasingly dim countenance of Nibiru was
followed by the Romans before it disappeared from Taurus into the primordial
deep. The Mithras mythology was invoked in cult-form following this
The Egyptian city of Alexander was one of the predominantly intellectual centers of the 1st Century world. Early Christianity thrived here, and this Jewish citizen wrote contemporary passages which seemed to allude to the connection between the Celestial and Human Messiah.
Gilbert describes his findings regarding Philo:
This research of Gilbert seems to confirm that the origin of the Messiah is indeed celestial, at least in the eyes of the Egyptians.
Combine this with the sudden phenomenon of the cult of Mithras in the Roman world, and the Messianic Star tradition in Christianity and a common thread is developing throughout the civilized world of that time.
It was a reaction to some event, and I propose that it was the partially observed perihelion passage of Nibiru, the Dark Star.
Seneca's essay on fiery celestial phenomena in 25 AD included an undeniable
reference to a 'piercing' red star in Canis Major, and this event may indeed
have triggered the writing of his document. Because he regards the star as
Sirius, it has been included in the dubious sack of astronomical 'old
chestnuts', the red 'Sirius' anomaly. Yet it stands alone as an irrefutable
piece of evidence of a truly anomalous event.
But for those familiar with Sitchin's work, and the arguments I have put forward in the Dark Star Theory, regarding the new astronomical evidence for Nibiru's identity as a brown dwarf, this ancient scientific evidence offers the possibility of pin-pointing Nibiru's last passage, and realizing its effect on the civilized world at that time.
Many of the mysteries of the events of 1st
century Palestine can be readily understood in this context, as well as
repercussions felt elsewhere in the Roman Empire. This hypothesis also
allows us to extrapolate into the future, to a point when Nibiru will appear