Giza Diagonal and The Great Giza Circle

[Thanos5150]

8 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

G1-d and G2-a never seem to get much of a mention although I do hypothesize a very specific purpose for these in my last book. In fact, it was these two enigmatic pyramids (they have no chambers within or under them) that led me to the Great Giza Circle.

They both have T-shaped sub structures with the cross bar of the "T" being the chamber. Rigano argues, convincingly IMO, they were built contemporaneously.  

More: The Minor Pyramids of Giza, Part 1 GII-A, GI-D

G1-d:

G2-a:

Edited September 1 by Thanos5150

[Scott Creighton]

6 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

They both have T-shaped sub structures with the cross bar of the "T" being the chamber. Rigano argues, convincingly IMO, they were built contemporaneously.  

More: The Minor Pyramids of Giza, Part 1 GII-A, GI-D

G1-d:

G2-a:

Thanks Lee. That's good information.

SC

[Stokke]

Scott,

We find the same T-shaped interior in G3-a.

When we understand that G1-d, G2-a and G3-a are the same type of pyramids - Satellite pyramids (T-shaped interior) rather than "Queens" (L-shaped interior) - and compare them to each other, we notice something interesting.

At twice the size as the other two, G3-a sticks out like a sore thumb. There is no apparent reason for it to be so large if its sole purpose is that of a Satellite pyramid, and that begs the question:

Why did Menkaure build such an atypical massiv Satellite pyramid, if not because it had to mimic the size of its "twin" G1-a.

You can add this to your list of arguments in favor of a unified plan.

[Scott Creighton]

9 hours ago, Stokke said:

At twice the size as the other two, G3-a sticks out like a sore thumb. There is no apparent reason for it to be so large if its sole purpose is that of a Satellite pyramid, and that begs the question:

of pyramids - Satellite pyramids (T-shaped interior) rather than "Queens" (L-shaped interior) - and compare them

Why did Menkaure build such an atypical massiv Satellite pyramid, if not because it had to mimic the size of its "twin" G1-a.

You can add this to your list of arguments in favor of a unified plan.

Hi Stokke,

Nice observation. I like that.

Other than the Giza Diagonal, I think it would be important to 'lock' G1a and G3a together i.e. demonstrating that they are symbolic of the same Belt star. Without doing that we could never know which star was which and we would never then observe (via the implied Great Giza Circle) the inversion that occurs with the Belt stars from one triad of 'Queens' to the next. 

SC

Edited September 2 by Scott Creighton

[Scott Creighton]

On 8/6/2024 at 12:04 PM, Windowpane said:

On this forum, he [Scott Creighton] proposed that there was evidence suggesting that, before returning to Egypt in late 1836, Vyse had purchased scholarly books with information that would help him to forge cartouche names of Khufu.

There is more discussion of this proposal in this article.

Missed this (probably due to being on my ignore list). This is in reference to my contention that Vyse wrote in his private journal: "...our first Books..." (with capitalised mid-sentence noun 'Books').

That Vyse used capitalised 'Books' as opposed to 'books' (lower-case 'b') is not at all unusual as he would routinely capitalise this letter in many of his mid-sentence nouns (i.e. in words that he should have used the lower-case 'b'), as the examples below aptly demonstrate:

 

So, imo, "...our first Books..." is a perfectly reasonable reading and is not at all unusual for Vyse to have written like this.

SC

 

Edited September 2 by Scott Creighton

[Windowpane]

21 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

(probably due to being on my ignore list)

Well: as Scott has now told the forum that I’m on his “Ignore” list, I can rest comfortably in the knowledge that he will never read, or respond to, any of my replies to his points, so I can go ahead and write what I like! (But supposing what I write is wrong? How will Scott correct it, if he can never see it … ?)

Quote

Missed this

Now this is very strange: for two reasons.

First, as Scott will recall (or, there again, perhaps not … ), I emailed him at the beginning of August concerning his enquiry about a particular transcription of a word in Part IV of this very article. The word in question appears immediately before the discussion (SJHV IV, section “Money and Knowledge”) of Creighton’s reading of Vyse’s alleged phrase, “first Books.”  So does this mean that he read parts of the article, but not others ... ?  A mere 4½ weeks later, he appears to have completely forgotten that he had read the article! Or, at least, that part of the article discussing in detail the problems caused by attempts to decipher Vyse’s illegible scrawl.

Second, if I have the misfortune to be consigned to the outer darkness of Scott’s “ignore” list, how did he ever come to read #7 ?

Does he ignore me sometimes, but not others?

Well: although he will probably never see this, I’ll plough on and address his point anyway:

Quote

 

This is in reference to my contention that Vyse wrote in his private journal: "...our first Books..." (with capitalised mid-sentence noun 'Books').

That Vyse used capitalised 'Books' as opposed to 'books' (lower-case 'b') is not at all unusual as he would routinely capitalise this letter in many of his mid-sentence nouns (i.e. in words that he should have used the lower-case 'b'), as the examples below aptly demonstrate 

...

So, imo, "...our first Books..." is a perfectly reasonable reading and is not at all unusual for Vyse to have written like this.

 

Regrettably, Scott omits any dates or citations for the examples he includes, so it’s not easy to check his proposed transcriptions. But, more to the point: why does he not include an image of the alleged "...our first Books..." entry (D/HV; D121; 18^th October 1837) in question in either The Great Pyramid Void Enigma (2021) or Analysis of the Painted 'Quarry Marks' within the Stress Relieving Chambers of the Great Pyramid of Giza (2024)?

Setting that point aside, Scott’s argument is that Vyse routinely used an upper-case “B” at the beginnings of words where one would have expected a lower-case “b” to be used, which means that Vyse could have intended to write “books.”

But this is very odd.  SJHV IV does not dispute that the letter is “B.”   That is pointed out in the article.  Its being “B” does not validate the rest of Scott’s reading.  It does not turn the word-final “r” into an “s”.  It does not make an ampersand into “our”.   It does not turn “paid” into “first”.  It does not wish away the context (Vyse’s stay in Valletta) into which the SJHV reading fits better.

As pointed out in SJHV IV:

Quote

… the upper case B (omitted in Creighton’s reading) more logically refers to a possible proper noun, a name …

So Scott appears to have forgotten that he was never maintaining that Vyse used a lower case B. He shows Vyse’s entry with a lower case b:

Quote

Wrote notes from the Quarterly Review abt: Rosellini & Champollion, our first books, 69 dollars 14.7.6 in half crowns.

The SJHV IV reading of the phrase in question is quite different:

Quote

... & paid ?B–k[e]r 69 dollars 14.7.6. in half crowns

So “paid” instead of “first;.”  Interested readers with access to the manuscript version of Vyse’s diary notes would be able to compare the “p” of “paid” with the “p” in “Champollion” and “hospitable”.

This reading fits the context, i.e., Vyse’s activities in the port of Valletta, Malta (as discussed in detail in the rest of SJHV IV😞

Quote

Breakfast, to Sir F. Hankey [the de facto Governor of Malta], ?received from him 87£ for Mr. ?C. ?L—pel ?sent in 1/2 ?crowns, ?sent Mr. ?Warder 25£ in a ? ?bag.  ?D——d to repay him 2.1.8?p. ?sent in ?all.  18.15. for 10 dollars ?p. ?sent ?to ?Moritiy ?Wife, ?wrote ?to ?Sir ?F. Hankey, wrote notes from the Quarterly Review ab[ou]t: Rosellini & Champollion, ?& paid ?B–k[e]r 69 dollars 14.7.6. in half crowns, I dined in the Ward Room, & had a ?most ?hospitable ?dinner.

If only Scott were able to read my reply, I would ask him why Vyse had waited to reach Malta, some 15 months after first leaving England, before suddenly deciding to purchase expensive scholarly volumes.

But, alas, it seems that this will never happen ... 

[Thanos5150]

On 8/23/2024 at 8:56 AM, Thanos5150 said:

The Pyramids, Verner p302-303, p457: 

In addition, the location of the Unfinished Pyramid offers clues for situating it chronologically. The structure lies southwest of Neferirkare’s pyramid. As a precise geodetic measurement has confirmed, its northwest corner is on a line that already connected Sahure’s and Neferirkare’s pyramids and represented the basic axis of the pyramid necropolis in Abusir.*

* A similar axis existed in the necropolis at Giza. There it consisted of a line that connected the southeast corners of the pyramids of Khufu, Khafre, and Menkaure. Both lines, that of Giza and that of Abusir, are directed toward Heliopolis, where they cross. Their point of intersection was probably in the temple of the sun god Re (at the tip of the obelisk, which may have represented a “fixed point” in the world of the ancient Egyptians in that period).

The axes of the necropolises in Giza and Abusir were probably directed towards Heliopolis....

No Egyptologist would deny that the ancient Egyptians made use of their basic knowledge of astronomy in building their temples, pyramids, and other structures. However, Egyptologists also maintain that the royal pyramids in Giza not only are very precisely oriented astronomically, but also were built in such a way that the line connecting their southeast corners was aimed at Heliopolis. Similarly, the pyramids in the Abusir necropolis were built so that the line connecting their northwest corners is aimed at Heliopolis. Seen from Heliopolis, the pyramids in Giza as well as those in Abusir thus appear to stand one behind the other. 

Topography, astronomy and dynastic history in the alignments of the pyramid fields of the Old Kingdom.

An interesting feature exists in the layouts of the pyramids of Giza and Abu Sir: the presence of a “main axis” directed to the area where the ancient temple of the sun of Heliopolis once stood, on the opposite bank of the Nile. These axes are connected with a process of “solarisation” of the pharaoh which probably started with Khufu, the builder of the Great Pyramid. At Giza, the axis (already discovered in the 18th century) runs across the south-east corners of the main pyramids (Goedicke 2001, Lehner 1985a,b, Magli 2009a,b). In Abu Sir, a straight line connects the north-west corners of the pyramids of three successive kings (Verner 2002). However, the view to Heliopolis is blocked here by the rock outcrop of the Cairo citadel (Jeffreys 1998). This “alignment” is, therefore, quite mysterious: its intentionality and relationship with the cult of the sun are certain, but its aim seems to be failed. As a consequence, the very choice of the site of Abusir by the kings of the 5th dynasty remains unexplained (see discussions in Krejci 2001, Goedicke 2001).

Others have noted these alignments at Saqqara as well:

HERE

[Stokke]

19 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

These axes are connected with a process of “solarisation” of the pharaoh which probably started with Khufu, the builder of the Great Pyramid.

How did this solarisation manifest itself in Khufu's reign compared to the reigns of Sneferu and Djoser?

[Thanos5150]

2 minutes ago, Stokke said:

How did this solarisation manifest itself in Khufu's reign compared to the reigns of Sneferu and Djoser?

I am quoting Magli and have linked the paper. The interest to me is the the fact they are aligned to Heliopolis. 

[Stokke]

n/a

Edited September 3 by Stokke

[Stokke]

35 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

I am quoting Magli and have linked the paper. The interest to me is the the fact they are aligned to Heliopolis. 

My apologies, I thought it was your comment to what you quoted before that. I should have paid better intention.

So the only argument we are presented with for a supposedly shift in their religious beliefs, is the orientation towards Heliopolis.

I see a clear and consistent religious belief and practice from at least the time of Djoser, and all the way down to when Cleopatra unfortunately chose her destiny (except from the reign of Akhenaton of course). The monuments, the tombs, the writings - it all tell the same story. And what an elaborate, intriguing and exciting story it is.

The funeral procession first stopped at the Satellite tomb where the Tekenu was laid to rest, it proceeded to the Pyramid Temple where the opening-of-the mouth rituals were carried out for both the Tekenu and the Mummy, before the Mummy was interred in the main Pyramid. The proceedings was thus completed.

My next installment in my ongoing "Satellite Pyramids explained" will show how both the Tekenu and the Mummy received the Opening-of-the-Mouth treatment.

[Stokke]

On 9/2/2024 at 10:30 AM, Scott Creighton said:

Nice observation. I like that.

Glad you liked it.

I hope that you recognize this as an unbiased contribution from me - ergo, no need for generic name-calling next time I disagree with you.

Quote

Without doing that we could never know which star was which and we would never then observe (via the implied Great Giza Circle) the inversion that occurs with the Belt stars from one triad of 'Queens' to the next. 

What is this "inversion" you speak of? The pyramids/stars stay in their same order, right? G1-a is, in your plan, the same as G3-a?

[Scott Creighton]

2 hours ago, Stokke said:

What is this "inversion" you speak of? The pyramids/stars stay in their same order, right? G1-a is, in your plan, the same as G3-a?

You have to think of the implied Great Giza Circle as the horizon going 360 degrees around the Giza plateau.  The horizon is the point where we observe the sky and ground are closest to each other.

If we look at G1 'Queens' (see diagram below), we observe that G1a (coloured red) is closest to the horizon. However, when we now look at G3 Queens, we find that it is G3c that is now closest to the horizon. IOW, we are being shown the Belt stars flipping 180 degrees.

And it's why (imo) the trajectories of the GP's northern shafts present a 'cross-over' point while the southern ones do not (see image below):

The GP's 'star-shafts' are showing us the very same thing - the flipping of Orion's Belt by 180 degrees. (Of course, it's not the stars that turn over but rather the Earth itself). And this turning over of the Earth, according to the Surid 'legend', was one of the reasons why these pyramids were built in the first place. I go into this in more detail here: The Great Pyramid's Greatest Secret.

SC

Edited September 3 by Scott Creighton

[Kenemet]

On 9/3/2024 at 1:09 PM, Stokke said:

 

My apologies, I thought it was your comment to what you quoted before that. I should have paid better intention.

So the only argument we are presented with for a supposedly shift in their religious beliefs, is the orientation towards Heliopolis.

Not a shift.

Heliopolis (Iunu) was the capital city during the Old Kingdom and had the most famous temple (Per Aat) for the solar cult (Atum/Ra/Horus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliopolis_(ancient_Egypt))

Apologies; I'm too tired to go into it right now, but here's a paper about the importance (continuous) of Heliopolis: https://www.impulseegypt.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Nuzzolo_Krejci_AL_27_2017.pdf

[Kenemet]

On 9/3/2024 at 3:42 PM, Scott Creighton said:

The GP's 'star-shafts' are showing us the very same thing - the flipping of Orion's Belt by 180 degrees. (Of course, it's not the stars that turn over but rather the Earth itself). And this turning over of the Earth, according to the Surid 'legend', was one of the reasons why these pyramids were built in the first place. I go into this in more detail here: The Great Pyramid's Greatest Secret.

SC

The Earth didn't flip 180 degrees.

Didn't we have this conversation before?  The magical "tipping 180 degrees and then suddenly and for no reason tipping over again after an unspecified time period and with no other signs of inversion anywhere on Earth (like everyone in Australia starting to draw the Big Dipper)?"

[Scott Creighton]

2 hours ago, Kenemet said:

The Earth didn't flip 180 degrees.

Didn't we have this conversation before?  The magical "tipping 180 degrees and then suddenly and for no reason tipping over again after an unspecified time period and with no other signs of inversion anywhere on Earth (like everyone in Australia starting to draw the Big Dipper)?"

You're entitled to your view. I side with what many of our ancient forebears tell us happened. I side with the evidence that backs up what they tell us happened. Each to their own.

SC

 

[Stokke]

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

The Earth didn't flip 180 degrees.

Didn't we have this conversation before?  The magical "tipping 180 degrees and then suddenly and for no reason tipping over again after an unspecified time period and with no other signs of inversion anywhere on Earth (like everyone in Australia starting to draw the Big Dipper)?"

Yes, we would certainly have a multitude of sources telling us about it if the Earth flipped back and forth 180 degrees. I do not consider it possible at all.

I am however open to the possibility that the Giza Pyramids, for some reason, are placed according to a unified plan. G3-a is the reason for that - without it we could just dismiss the likeness of Khufu´s "Queens" and Menkaure`s "Queens" as a standard shape and size for that type of a pyramid. G3-a shows us that the appearance of this particular pyramid was important.

[Stokke]

7 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Not a shift.

I agree.

I see, as already mentioned, the same funerary beliefs throughout Ancient Egyptian History.

Changes in how those beliefs were practiced, for sure, but the core belief never changed.

[Thanos5150]

10 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Heliopolis (Iunu) was the capital city during the Old Kingdom and had the most famous temple (Per Aat) for the solar cult (Atum/Ra/Horus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliopolis_(ancient_Egypt))

 

Good grief. No it was not the capital city during the Old Kingdom, or ever, which of course was Memphis and before that Thinis in the early Dynastic Period. 

And as expected your source, Wikipedia, once again does not say what you claim it does but rather: 

Heliopolis (Jwnw, Iunu; Ancient Egyptian: 𓉺𓏌𓊖, romanized: jwnw, lit. 'the Pillars'; Coptic: ⲱⲛ; Greek: Ἡλιούπολις, romanized: Hēlioúpοlis, lit. 'City of the Sun') was a major city of ancient Egypt. It was the capital of the 13th or Heliopolite Nome of Lower Egypt and a major religious centre. 

And please don't tell us this is what you meant. So not only does it not tell us Heliopolis was the capital of Egypt in the OK or ever but only that it was the capital of the 13th nome and makes no mention of this occurring during the OK. Which makes sense as there are no attestations of a 13th nome until the late 5th Dynasty and Heliopolis was never acknowledged as the "capital" of it until the Ptolemaic Period. .  

Edited September 6 by Thanos5150

[Trelane]

On 9/1/2024 at 12:19 AM, Thanos5150 said:

They both have T-shaped sub structures with the cross bar of the "T" being the chamber. Rigano argues, convincingly IMO, they were built contemporaneously.  

More: The Minor Pyramids of Giza, Part 1 GII-A, GI-D

G1-d:

G2-a:

T-shaped structures???... the Gobekli Tepe connection is confirmed.

 

*runs out of room dodging thrown mummy parts.

[Thanos5150]

1 minute ago, Trelane said:

T-shaped structures???... the Gobekli Tepe connection is confirmed.

*runs out of room dodging thrown mummy parts.

The circle is near completion. Now all you need is to connect it all to Florida and we can close this forum and get on with our lives.  

[Trelane]

18 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

The circle is near completion. Now all you need is to connect it all to Florida and we can close this forum and get on with our lives.  

Challenge accepted! You know I will leverage every bit of rubbish, nonsense and purely made up stuff to make this work. 

 

However, I fully expect to be banished afterwards to play with my pots again.

Edited September 6 by Trelane

[Antigonos]

50 minutes ago, Thanos5150 said:

 Which makes sense as there are no attestations of a 13th nome until the late 5th Dynasty and Heliopolis was never acknowledged as the "capital" of it until the Ptolemaic Period. .  

The timing of which is interesting because the rise of Alexandria coincided with the importance of Heliopolis waning to the point that the Ptolemies were taking monuments from there to decorate their new capital. Some of which I believe Franck Goddio found offshore. Why make it the capital of a nome at that point? An interesting tidbit to look into for myself.

[Kenemet]

8 hours ago, Scott Creighton said:

You're entitled to your view. I side with what many of our ancient forebears tell us happened. I side with the evidence that backs up what they tell us happened. Each to their own.

SC

 

Actually, you side with Hancock's very bad research.

It was a belief held by only a handful of people.  

[Kenemet]

3 hours ago, Stokke said:

Yes, we would certainly have a multitude of sources telling us about it if the Earth flipped back and forth 180 degrees. I do not consider it possible at all.

I am however open to the possibility that the Giza Pyramids, for some reason, are placed according to a unified plan. G3-a is the reason for that - without it we could just dismiss the likeness of Khufu´s "Queens" and Menkaure`s "Queens" as a standard shape and size for that type of a pyramid. G3-a shows us that the appearance of this particular pyramid was important.

I have no doubt that there were plans, and that they used a basic architectural design ("how to make a successful pyramid")  But a lot of this speculation is done without consideration for the landscape (you can't just plop a building down anywhere at all) and supply chain.  If you set your lovely limestone pyramid in an area where you can't quarry good limestone, it's going to take lots longer to build (as an example.)

But I disagree that Khufu's architect stood at one corner of his pyramid, drew a circle that grazed the edge of that pyramid, and said "construct Orion's belt... only upside down... in this 1 kilometer area of ground."