Graham,

> Yes you are right.
> Except that the 45 degree line is not 'arbitrary'
> as that too comes from Giza, is 2000c long on the
> ground and is lined up with the South West.

I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that I must dispute this. Your 45 degree angle doesn't come from Giza: it's an angle that, with no contemporary cultural support, you take between Giza and an arbitrarily chosen point on what ended up as a site that extended over a huge area. I posted the following quotation in an earlier post, but allow me to post it again:

Quote

"On the site itself, for all the utter destruction one point does emerge with
force - the sheer scale of the surviving precinct....The great platform in
the area of the obelisks lies within a larger enclosure wall, over a
kilometre east to west. The entire enclosure follows a roughly rectangular
line, cut across at the northwest corner, along the line that the canalized
river branch runs today. An internal wall running roughly east-west divided
this space. North of this wall may have been an area less sacred to the sun,
but just the acreage to the south covers an extent exceptional even by
ancient Egyptian standards." - "Cult of Ra", 91

I repeat: the temple precinct was over twice the area of Karnak.

Hermione
Director/Moderator - The Hall of Ma'at

Rules and Guidelines

hallofmaatforum@proton.me