reply to post by TheMythLives
Thanks for your questions which I shall try to answer as best I can:
TML: 1) If the Pyramids and the Sphinx where erected at different periods in time, how did the continuation of building the later pyramids
continue so accurately?
SC: In the colonnade of the Temple of Horus at Edfu there is a small inscription that tells us that the AE constructed their monuments from
architectural plans that came to them in a codex from the heavens at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep (3rd Dynasty). It is my contention that this
codex included a plan for the Giza site, crafted perhaps in a durable material such as granite and passed down from antiquity to the AE of the 3rd
Dynasty (Imhotep) who then initiated the pyramid-building age by constructing the Step Pyramid at Saqqara. The long-term objective was to make
manifest this ancient codex (model of Giza) but the AEs knew that they would first have to learn how to construct stable, smooth-sided pyramids. It
would be a considerable learning-curve with many failures and lessons to be learned with each pyramid construction.
When the AEs finally mastered the art of building stable, smooth-sided pyramids (the Red Pyramid at Dashur was the first), they then commenced with
the building of their ancient codex (a granite model of Giza perhaps) and during the 4th Dynasty this long-term objective was finally achieved.
Pyramid structures built thereafter would never compare with those at Giza and would serve only as a "homage". This can be seen in terms of the
much smaller scale of the later pyramid structures and their inferior construction.
So, with a 3D granite model, the Giza site could have been completed in stages (by the three Kings of the 4th Dynasty) and, quite possibly, parts of
the plan (such as the Sphinx) may actually have been constructed by the Designers of the codex which could, of course, explain why some scholars
consider the Sphinx to be considerably older than the date orthodox scholars ascribe to it.
TML: 2) Well I think this is a little important, if the belt is in accordance with Orions belt why did it leave out Orions 2 brightest stars? I
mean wouldn't that have been the first ones mapped? Two stars are Betelgeuse and Rigel. After looking at your notes I did not see these two stars
anywhere, which they should be present.
SC: Giza is a clock. Instead of the clock having 24 hours around its face, the Giza precession clock represents 26,000 years! The clock’s timing
mechanism is the regular motion of the stars. But WHICH STARS are we to track around this clock?
If there existed only ONE pyramid structure at Giza it would be quite impossible to know which star to track since one pyramid structure could
represent ANY star. With TWO stars (pyramids at Giza) the problem is much the same since any TWO stars (points) can create a straight line. With
THREE stars, however, the situation improves dramatically and especially so if the chosen triad of stars forms a very tight group and has a fairly
This is what we find with the Belt stars of the Orion constellation. We only require the belt stars for us to know which triad of stars are being
represented. Any other stars depicted in the design would be entirely superfluous to this requirement – they are simply not needed for the purposes
of allowing us to be able to identify the ‘precession marker' - Orion's Belt. Three stars in a tight group, forming a distinctive pattern are
sufficient to allow us to identify the precession marker – Orion’s Belt. Constructing other structures to represent other stars of the
constellation is simply not needed and would have created unnecessary additional work and costs. Three stars is the absolute minimum required to ibe
able to dentify a group of stars.
TML: 3) Why only a select few of pyramids? Why only focus on a few instead of the pyramids that were destroyed or the pyramids not finished? I
mean wouldn't they also be important to this idea?
SC: As I have explained above in point 1 – I see that Giza was the OBJECTIVE of the AEs (from an ancient, ‘sacred plan’). All structures prior
to Giza were a learning-curve, the goal of which was to learn how to construct stable, smooth-sided pyramids. If they collapsed they were abandoned
and the lesson of their failure hopefully learned. Thereafter, structures were less grand and of inferior construction, built merely as a homage to
the former greatness.
This is not to say that the Kings of Giza did not ‘utilise’ the structures they were building as tombs for themselves. Why shouldn’t they?
They did, afterall, build them and they were seen as the ‘vehicle that would carry them into the Afterlife’. It remains unclear, however, whether
the 4th Dynasty Kings that built Giza were themselves aware of the precessional knowledge that is clearly encoded within the Giza design.
Hope this helps.
[edit on 11/5/2009 by Scott Creighton]