Hello Joe,

Quote

SC: The role of the main Giza Pyramids is to indicate the particular star group - and in particular - a star within the Group (Mintaka/Menkaure).

JS: Proof of this is where, exactly?

SC: The arrangement of the pyramids at Giza presents to us a reasonable concordance with the Orion Belt asterism. Not perfect, but reasonable. Through C. Wayne Taylor’s work (Quarter-Base Theory) we find that pyramids G1 & G2 ‘focus’ on the SW quarter of G3. Why should this be? Well, when we use this ‘Taylor Point’ (TP) as the centre for G3, something very interesting occurs – the concordance with the Orion Belt stars is near perfect:



I have calculated the error to be only 1.56 arcmin which is an error margin quite invisible to the naked eye.

Now, what then happens when we use this G1,G2 and TP asterism is something quite astonishing. What we find is that this near perfect Orion Belt asterism allows us to reproduce the actual dimensions (length and breadth) of ALL THREE main Gizamids to a quite astonishing accuracy (scaled).

[www.scottcreighton.co.uk]

It would appear then that after the dimensions for the three main Gizamids were set using this technique, the positioning of either G3 or G2 (or perhaps both) was changed slightly thereby producing the larger error with the Orion concordance we observe today. There is a very logical reason for this repositioning which I shall address shortly.

So how is it that I observe Menkaure as being the ‘chosen’ star of the group? Well, to date the design using the stars requires that an astronomical alignment be made with one of the three Gizamids. By ‘recording’ this alignment, we can – through reverse precession – work out the date the astronomical alignment was made. The pyramid of Menkaure was used to make the astronomical alignment.

Menkaure is unique at Giza for a number of reasons:

1) It obviously stands out by being much smaller than the two other main Gizamids.

2) Its faces are a different colour than all the other pyramids (using red granite).

3) It stands out by virtue of being misaligned from the obvious diagonal of the other two Gizamids.

4) Menkaure has no equal on the Giza plateau. By that I mean all other pyramids have another structure of comparable size. G1 and G2 are comparable. The 2 cults are comparable. The 2 sets of ‘Queens’ are comparable. Menkaure alone has no equal at Giza. It is quite unique. It is the ‘chosen star’ - the star through which the 212* alignment (from Khafre centre) was made in order to date the design.

5) Menkaure forms the centre of the Centroid Alignment Theory.

Quote

SC: The role of the 2 sets of so-called 'Queens Pyramids' is to 'confirm' the three main pyramids as symbolic of Orion's Belt by demonstrating the orientation of said star group at maximum and minimum culmination.

JS: There isn't a shred of evidence that the AEs intended the Satellite pyramids for this purpose.

SC: Why should we expect there to be? The builder need not understand the grand scheme of the Architect. The AEs of the 4th Dyn. impressed their own cultural/religious ideas onto an ancient design (codex) that came to them from antiquity. This is to be entirely expected and natural but what we should also expect to see are echoes of the original Designer’s purpose for these structures (i.e. the concordance with Orion ) and we do find such ancient traces:

“O King, you are this great star, the companion of Orion... the sky has born you with Orion...” [PT882-3]

"The king has come that he may glorify Orion (sAH)..." [PT 925]

"The Duat has grasped your hand at the place where Orion is (sAH)... [PT802]

"May you (the King) ascend to the sky, may the sky give birth to you like Orion (sAH)... [PT2116]

"Live and be young beside your father (Osiris), beside Orion (sAH) in the sky..." [PT186]
Was there such ancient, architectural designs?


The temples of Philae, now rebuilt on the adjacent island of Agilkia, are first of a series of magnificent stone buildings that arose on ancient foundations at Kom Ombo, Edfu and Esna in Ptolemaic and Roman times as far as Dendera 115 miles to the north. These vast edifices in their huge proportions, their unstinted use of sandstone and granite, their elaborate floriated capitals, their astronomical ceilings, their scrupulous detail and technical triumphs, have a solemn grandeur. They were built according to an architectural plan which was supposed to have been revealed in a codex that fell from heaven at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep. The most complete of them is the temple of the falcon god Horus at Edfu, built between 237 and 57 BC, the most perfectly preserved monument of the ancient world. It's many inscriptions have bequeathed a wealth of information about the founding of such temples, their construction and use. the daily ritual, the festivals and their dates, the duties of various priests, even the dimensions of each chamber, its name and purpose, besides myths of very ancient origin.

- Aldred,’The Egyptians’, p. 31-32 (third edition, revised and updated by Aidan Dodson, 1998)

I find it remarkable that such a ‘codex’ fell at Saqqara – Saqqara where Imhotep built the first pyramid, the Step Pyramid for the Pharaoh Djoser. Why should such inscriptions at Edfu make reference to plans which, even by then, would have been ancient? To ‘legitimise’ the Temple of Horus at Edfu through an ancient connection with Imhotep is one thing but it does not detract from the fact that the inscription at Edfu references plans that were handed down from great antiquity.

Quote

SC: Thus we presently observe the belt almost vertical. In 500 years or thereabouts, they will have reached minimum culmination on the eastern horizon i.e. the point at which the 'pendulum swing' turns the star group back in the direction of the southwest (i.e. back to Menkaure and the horizontal alignment of the so-called Menkaure Queens).

JS: There isn't any way that I can see to align the Menkaure Satellites with Orion's belt. Are you just making this up as you go along?

SC: No:



This doesn’t strike you as a reasonable concordance with the 3 horizontal Menkaure Queens on the SW of the plateau?

Quote

SC: Some 12,500 years ago the belt stars were rotated 90* from their present vertical alignment on the SW horizon as depicted by the so-called 'Queens' Pyramids' there. The azimuth alignment of Menkaure (centred from Khafre) is 212*. When Mintaka (Menkaure's celestial equivalent in Orion's Belt) was last located at 212* and all belt stars were horizontal on the SW horizon (as depicted by Menkaure's Queens) the epoch was around c.10,500BC. The concordance is quite astonishing.

JS: Like Bauval, you are reduced to picking a time period for your alignment eons before the Giza pyraimds were built.

SC: Our theories use Orion, yes. Other than that they are quite different. Bauval uses ALL THREE main Gizamids as representing the arrangement of the Belt Stars on the meridian to obtain the remote c.10,500BC date. I disagree with Bauval’s dating method (but that is not to say that his method is wrong). I believe the dating of the ‘star clock’ is achieved much easier through the astronomical alignment of just one of the three main pyramids – Menkaure (with Mintaka at 212* azimuth) which is c.10,500BC. These two methods represent a quite fundamental difference to our respective theories. Furthermore, the concavities of Khufu and Menkaure allow us to determine – to the minute! – the precise time of day the ancients recorded the 212* azimuth measurement of the star Mintaka. This knowledge is absolutely crucial to dating the ‘star clock’ or ‘precession wheel’. And the Designers provided this absolutely essential information.

Quote

JS: Have you any concept of just how inconcievable it is to pass down any information through 7.500 years of history when there was no writing and no civilization to speak of and certainly no Ancient Egyptians on the scene?

SC: This has been discussed many times here on Ma’at. A small, scaled model of the pyramid arrangement we find at Giza would suffice. Were this to be crafted in granite or perhaps even in gold (or some other durable material), it would survive very well for tens of thousands of years. In terms of implementing the design on the ground at Giza, the AEs (who inherited this ancient ‘codex’) only needed to scale-up the model. No reading involved. The AEs built what they saw and impressed upon this ancient ‘codex’ their own cultural/religious ideas. This ‘codex’ was part of their most ancient culture.

Of course I have no hard evidence to support my theory here but my work explains such anomalies as the lack of Queens of Khafre and presents a purpose for the concavities of Khufu and Menkaure that is entirely consistent with the Orion concordance. The work I present though the Orion Design Technique for the pyramid dimensions, the GOCT, the concavities and the Centroid Theory cannot, IMO, be dismissed as all just coincidence.

Were there to be presented hard, documented evidence to explain why the Pharaoh Khafre did not build pyramids for his five Queens (in a simillar manner to his father and son) that contradicts my own reasoning, then I would have to take stock of such evidence and reconsider this proposal.

Regards,

Scott Creighton



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/24/2007 07:40AM by creigs1707.