Forum

Author of the Month

The Giza Doomsday Clock (cont.)
By Scott Creighton

Precession of the Queens

It is well understood that Khafre's pyramid at Giza (G2) has no Queen's Pyramids despite this Pharaoh having had 5 queens - more than the other two Giza Pharaohs combined. So why doesn't Khafre have any Queen's Pyramids beside his tomb like those of his father and those of his son? Are we happy to accept the conventional view that this was simply a matter of individual choice for Pharaohs as to whether they would provide pyramids for their queens or is there perhaps another explanation for this "anomaly" that might reasonably explain the absence of queens pyramids at Khafre's Pyramids? And, is it possible that such an explanation might also be connected with the Orion Belt Stars? It seems that there is.

In their book The Orion Mystery, Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert showed how the pyramids at Giza match (to a high degree of agreement) the alignment of the Orion Belt stars as viewed at the meridian c. 10,500BC (now updated to approx 11,500BC). Subsequently, in Keeper of Genesis/Message of the Sphinx with co-author, Graham Hancock, Bauval showed how the 3 Queens' Pyramids of Menkaure (G3) align with the setting of the Orion Belt stars also c.10,500BC (11,500BC) at the minimum culmination of the belt stars.

The culmination points of stars are significant moments in the precessional motion of the belt stars. Over time the belt stars would be observed setting further and further around the horizon towards the southwest. After approximately 13,000 years of this 'precessional drift' along the horizon, the stars will then seemingly STOP and change direction, precessing in the opposite direction along the horizon towards the west for the next 13,000 years. The moment when the stars seem to stop and change their direction of motion is the pivotal moment of the star's culmination and represents a unique and significant moment in its 26,000 year precessional cycle.

This would seem to be the very moment the Queens Pyramids of Menkaure are "reflecting". These structures sit horizontally on the SW of the Giza plateau (from Khafre centre). When the belt stars of Orion are viewed at their minimum culmination (c.10,500 BCE) they would be seen sitting horizontally close to the southwest horizon precisely in the manner the Menkaure Queens' pyramids have been laid out.

What is also significant is the azimuth position of the belt star Mintaka which at this time would be seen on the horizon at 212º azimuth. To further mark this unique moment in the precessional motion of the belt stars an alignment was made with the pyramid of Menkaure (from Khafre centre) with its stellar counterpart, Mintaka, at this significant moment in its precessional motion.

Thus we find that the apex of Menkaure's pyramid (from Khafre centre) is aligned at 212º azimuth, thereby marking the date (10,500BCE) when Mintaka set at this azimuth.

picture
Menkaure (G3) Centre Aligns with Mintaka c.10,500BCE

This may also explain why, of all the pyramids at Giza, Menkaure's pyramid is without equal. This is to say that all other pyramid structures at Giza have another structure that is of comparable size. Menkaure's pyramid is the exception to this and as such stands out from all the other pyramids. It is the 'key' sky-ground alignment.

The past alignments of the belt stars c.10,500BCE concord very well to the arrangement of Menkaure's Queens' pyramids and also, as we have seen, with the azimuth alignment of Menkaure at this remote epoch. But there is more.

If the ancient designers of this blueprint are demonstrating to us a cycle of the belt stars by marking on the ground in stone the time of their minimum culmination via the placement of the Menkaure 'Queens' pyramids, might not it be reasonable to expect that they would also demonstrate those very same stars as they would appear at the opposite end of their precessional cycle i.e. when the belt stars reach the pivotal moment of maximum culmination?

And amazingly, this is exactly what we find. Over a period of 13,000 years, the belt stars will rise on the eastern horizon, rotated 90º thereby mimicking the placement of Khufu's 'Queens' pyramids which are placed to the east (from Khafre centre) and rotated 90º - maximum ­culmination! Again this is the pivotal moment when the belt stars seem to stop their precessional drift along the horizon, change their motional direction and begin to precess in the opposite direction.

picture
The 2 Sets of Queens' Pyramids Serve as Max & Min Culmination Markers

This 'precession of the Queens' can be seen here:

The Precession of the Queens

All of which brings us rather neatly back to the question of Khafre's 'missing' queens pyramids. Just like the swing of a pendulum, in order to demonstrate the precessional 'swing' of the belt stars we need only be told of the pivotal moments of the cycle i.e. the end (culmination) points where the stars 'stop' and change their motional direction. There is no need to present any other information. Only the maximum and minimum culmination points need to be shown in order for us to understand what is being presented, hence the reason why there are no Queen's pyramids at Khafre's pyramid. Indeed, had such structures been placed at Khafre's pyramid these would only have served to confuse the precessional clock that is being presented.

There can be little doubt that the structures at Giza were designed and set out in a very careful manner to depict various aspects of the belt stars of the Orion constellation and it is now up to orthodox Egyptology to reconcile this quite compelling evidence with their long-held, contradictory, 'consensus opinion' that the structures bear no unified or underlying 'master plan'. To continue to view the structures at Giza as having been built on the "whim" of each Pharaoh as a "singularity" (i.e. with little or no regard of what went before or would come after), is simply now an untenable position.

These Queens Pyramids may well have served as tombs for the Pharaohs Queens of the early dynasties but it seems from the evidence presented here that the original and underlying function of these structures is - without doubt - to serve as max and min precessional time markers. These 'time markers' can be likened to the 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock hours on an analogue clock. This information is vital to the next part of how the Giza Astronomical Clock functions.

PreviousPage 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Next

Site design by Amazing Internet Ltd, maintenance by Synchronicity. G+. Site privacy policy. Contact us.

Dedicated Servers and Cloud Servers by Gigenet. Invert Colour Scheme / Default