To the Ancient Egyptians the stars of the heavens were an endless source of fascination and mystery; a theatre where the story of the birth of their civilisation was forever played out and where, in death, their ultimate destiny lay. But the eternal motion of the sun and the stars served a much more useful and practical purpose to this ancient civilisation.
Through meticulous observation of the motions of the celestial bodies, the astronomer-priests of Ancient Egypt could determine the hours of the day and the night, when the seasons of the year would change, when the Nile was due to flood, when to plant their seeds and when to harvest their crops etc, etc. In short, the motions of the heavens regulated many of the most important activities of the Ancient Egyptian civilisation, providing them with fore-knowledge of the Earth's cycles that was crucial for their very survival. In this capacity, the eternal clock of the heavens served as their constant guide, enabling them to make all necessary preparations in advance of forthcoming natural events and their religious festivals.
In this regard, understanding the regular motions of the sun and the stars was essential in order to chart and then predict the various cycles of the Earth. Mostly these cycles would be concerned with annual events as outlined above but there were other much longer term events, the cycles of which the AE charted through the motions of the stars. One of these longer term cycles related to the heliacal rising of the star, Sirius – a cycle of some 1460 years (Julian calendar).
But it seems that there is yet another cycle of even greater duration that is closely linked with the motion of the Belt Stars of the Orion constellation that the Ancient Egyptians seem to have known of and, through the eventual construction of the pyramids at Giza as a monumental 'alarm clock', are attempting to draw attention to in order that their descendants would have fore-knowledge of the timing (and nature) of this particular event. With such fore-knowledge their descendants could then make the necessary preparations for the arrival of whatever event is due to occur at the pivotal moment within this long cycle.
The pyramid structures at Giza, built by the 4th Dynasty Egyptians, were possibly based upon architectural plans that, according to the Building Texts in the Temple of Horus at Edfu, were contained within a more ancient 'codex' (blueprint) that supposedly came from the 'heavens' at Saqqara in the days of Imhotep. It will be shown in this article how the Pyramids of Giza function as a very precise, grand astronomical clock. It will also be shown that the 'alarm hand' on this astronomical clock points to a precise date in the coming astrological Age of Aquarius.
The Giza Astronomical 'Alarm' Clock
Every analogue alarm clock requires 5 key elements that work together to allow us to set the clock's alarm to trigger at a particular (future) time. These are:
- A clock-face.
- A calibrating point i.e. like the 12 O'clock position or the start position on a stop-watch.
- A reliable timing mechanism.
- Clock hands showing the current time.
- An 'alarm hand' to indicate a specific (future) time.
In order for us to understand how the Giza astronomical clock operates, it will help us to first identify each of these facets of time and its measurement within the Giza structures.
1) The 'Clock Face'
Like most analogue clocks, the Giza Astronomical clock face is formed from a circle. However, as most people who have studied the pyramids at Giza will know, there is no circular structure to be found at Giza. The circular Giza clock face was never built because it is not actually required. The circle for our clock face at Giza is implied by the structures themselves as seen in the diagram below.
The Satellite Pyramids at Giza are Placed in a 3-1-4 (Pi) Formation
The arrangement of the 8 satellite pyramids at Giza presents a 3-1-4 formation, these digits being the first 3 digits of the Pi constant. And Pi, naturally, implies a circle! And it is much more convenient and efficient to imply the clock face (circle) from a 3-1-4 arrangement of the satellite structures than it would be to physically construct a massive, monumental stone circle around the Giza site. Furthermore, a massive stone circle – had such been constructed – would most likely have been interpreted as merely a reflection of the shape of the moon or the sun – it would not have the implied knowledge that the 3-1-4 arrangement of the satellites presents to us i.e. the Pi constant. In this sense the 3-1-4 arrangement of the satellites serves as a beacon; it beckons us to look deeper.
Of course, it would be all too easy to consider this Pi arrangement of the satellite pyramids as purely the result of simple happenstance. But this is much less so when we consider the additional evidence at the site for this implied circle.
It is a geometric fact that a circle can be found that will connect any 3 non-linear, random points. This is to say that if 3 pebbles were thrown to the ground, no matter how many times, a circle will always be found that will connect those 3 randomly scattered pebbles. However, if 4 pebbles are randomly scattered to the ground, the chances of finding a circle that connects all 4 randomly scattered pebbles is very remote. If we then scattered 5 pebbles to the ground, the chances of a circle connecting 4 of those pebbles with the 5th pebble lying almost exactly at the centre of the circle is remote in the extreme. We would be throwing those 5 pebbles to the ground for a very long time indeed before finding an arrangement whereby a circle connects four of the points whilst the fifth lies in the centre.
And yet, remarkably, this is precisely what we find in the arrangement of the structures at Giza! Consider a circle connecting the 3 most outer points of the Giza pyramid field, the NE corner of G1, NE corner of G1a and SW corner of G3c, thus:
A Circle Connects the 3 Outer Points of the Giza Pyramids
Okay, no surprises here since we already know that for any 3 non-linear, randomly placed points a circle must exist that will connect those 3 points. However, looking closer at this circle that connects the 3 most outer points of the Giza pyramid field we find something truly remarkable. The Sphinx ALSO somehow manages to find itself connected to this circle, sitting precisely on the circle's circumference! This arrangement is equivalent to casting 4 random pebbles to the ground and finding a circle that connects all 4 of them. This is not something that can easily occur by random chance and thus bears the hallmark of intentional design.
Given that the conventional view of the Giza Pyramid field is that each structure was placed with little or no regard to what went before or would come after, this is a truly remarkable occurrence and calls into question the orthodox view of the Giza site.
The Sphinx Sits Precisely on the Implied Circle's Circumference
If this was not remarkable enough what we then find when we plot the centre of the circle is that the centre of the middle pyramid of Khafre (G2) stands within a fraction of the circle's centre!
The Centre of the Clock Face lies a Fraction from the Centre of G2
To put this discovery into perspective – imagine drawing a circle around the three most outer buildings of New York City. What then are the chances of finding that:
- The Statue of Liberty ends up sitting precisely on the circle's circumference.
- The centre of the Empire State Building lies within a fraction of the centre of the circle.
Very remote indeed! Furthermore, there is evidence to support the view of some Egyptologists that this pyramid (G2) was originally intended to be placed slightly further to the north which would have placed its apex even closer to, if not precisely on, the circle's centre.
So, that we have a Pi (3-1-4) 'beacon' implying a circle and then when we follow this 'instruction' by circumscribing the implied circle precisely around the 3 most outer points of the Giza pyramid field we find the Sphinx ends up precisely on the circle's perimeter and that the apex of middle pyramid (G2) lies within a fraction of the circle's centre. All of this is a strong indication of intentional (as opposed to random) design. Indeed, that such an outcome arises from so few pyramid structures at Giza is all the more remarkable. But there is more.
What are we to make of this implied circle around the Giza pyramid field? What clues might this implied circle present to us that might help us to uncover its purpose? Naturally the most obvious thing we can do in order to answer this question would be to measure the circle's properties. In so doing it might be possible, if significant values are found, to be able to determine the circle's purpose. And, intriguingly, after measuring this circle, this is what we find:
The Implied Great Giza Circle's Radius/Diameter = 1200/2400 AE Cubits
The radius of this implied circle around the Giza pyramid field is equal to 1200 AE cubits (diameter = 2400 cubits). In these values we are immediately reminded of the fact that there are 12 hours of night and 12 hours of light, making 24 hours in a day. It is not unreasonable then to consider that this implied circle is somehow connected with TIME; that the implied Great Giza Circle represents a 'clock face'.
Before leaving this aspect of the Giza ground plan, there is one more indicator here that hints that the purpose this implied circle is indeed connected with time – the circle's circumference. This is calculated thus:
Circumference = Diameter x Pi (22/7)
Circumference = 2400 x 3.142857 = 7543 AE Cubits
This circumference of 7,543 cubits might not, at first glance, appear to be a particularly meaningful value. However, that changes when we then convert this value into INCHES of which there are 20.618 inches to 1 AE cubit. Thus we have:
Circumference (in inches) = 7,543 AE cubits x 20.618 = 155520 inches (rounded).
This value (155520) is also inextricably connected with a particular aspect of Earth time – the phenomenon known as precession. Briefly, dividing this value by 12 provides the highly significant precession value of 12,960 which we will look at in more detail shortly.
There can be little doubt then that the implied circle around the structures of Giza is connected in some way with time. This is the Giza 'clock face'.
2) The Calibrating Point
Before we consider this aspect of the Giza Astronomical Clock, let us first consider the problem of determining the correct time from the following brief example:
What Hour is the Alarm Clock Set To?
And finally – what time is the alarm hand set to?
The Alarm Hand is Set at 10 O'clock
As can be seen in the above example, without a known hour (the 11 hour mark) imprinted on the clock face, it is quite impossible to determine the hour the alarm hand is set to. The calibrating point marks a known hour on the clock and when we know what that calibrating hour actually is (i.e. 11 o'clock), we can then determine the hour the clock's alarm hand is set to. We actually only require ONE calibrating point on the clock face in order to determine where the other hours should be placed relative to the calibrating hour.
That most analogue clocks and wrist watches have the numbers 1-12 imprinted around the clock face is done merely as a matter of convenience, allowing us to quickly recognise the correct time at any given moment. It is entirely possible to obtain the correct time, albeit with a little more difficulty, with a wrist watch that shows the position of just one hour e.g. the 12 o'clock position. However, without any numbers on the clock face and without the convention that generally places 12 at the top of the clock face, it is quite impossible to tell the correct time. This is the importance of the calibrating point e.g. the 12 o'clock position on a clock or the start position of an analogue stopwatch.
So, what unique marker might we find on the implied circle of the Giza clock face that would serve as the calibration point for the Giza astronomical clock – the 'known hour'? There can be but one candidate that serves as this unique marker – the Great Sphinx which, as we have seen already, sits precisely on the perimeter of the Giza 'clock face'.
The Great Sphinx Calibrates the Giza Astronomical Clock
But what evidence is there that might indicate this quite crucial and practical function of the Sphinx? Well, intriguingly, situated right between the paws of the Sphinx stands a stone tablet known as the Dream Stele.
The 'Dream Stele' Stands Between the Paws of the Great Sphinx
An inscription on the Dream Stele tells us that "…this is the place of the first time…" The 'first time' was known to the Ancient Egyptians as the Zep Tepi and some commentators have interpreted this inscription as referring to the beginnings of the AE civilisation. However, there is another, more obvious and logical meaning for this enigmatic inscription. The term "…the place of the first time…" – in terms of an analogue clock – could simply mean that the location of the Sphinx is the start time or the first 'position' of time on the Giza astronomical clock i.e. that the Sphinx marks the Giza Astronomical clock's calibration point!
And let us here consider for a moment – what defines Earth time? In simple terms it is determined by the various motions of the Earth, i.e. its daily (diurnal) rotation around its own axis gives us our 24-hour day, its orbit around the sun gives us our 365.25 day year. Central to all of this is the sun. Is it any surprise then that in Ancient Egyptian mythology the Sphinx was known as Re-horakhty, the sun as Horakhty, as well as Horemakhet, a name for Horus as the sun on the horizon. How fitting then that the Sphinx, as pointed out by Egyptologist, Richard Wilkinson, could take the form of a cosmic lion and as such marks time – the start point for the sun's journey around the astronomical clock.
3) The Timing Mechanism
Every analogue clock is fitted with either a mechanical or electronic timing mechanism that moves the clock's hands around the clock face at a consistent rate. The rate at which the clock hands move around the clock face is regulated to coincide with the time it takes the sun to rise and set and rise again (1 solar day). Two complete circuits of the clock's hands (midnight to noon to midnight) is equivalent to 1 solar day of 24 hours, sub-divided into 12 hours of night and 12 hours of light.
Of course, the Giza Astronomical Clock is not a simple 12/24 hour clock but is in fact a clock with a duration of 25,920 years around its 'clock face'! The timing mechanism of the Giza Astronomical clock is the eternal, regular (apparent) motion of the stars.
Each night we can easily observe the stars in the heavens drift across the night sky in an east to west direction due to the Earth's daily (diurnal) rotation. (Note: it is not, of course, the stars that are moving but rather it is the Earth that is turning, giving the illusion of motion of the stars). However, due to a slight wobble of the Earth's polar axis, the stars in the night sky actually drift (precess) in an imperceptibly slow west to east direction. In a circle of 360 degrees this slow west to east precessional drift equates to almost exactly 72 years for every degree of the circle (clock face). Thus, 72 years x 360 degrees equates to a precession clock length of 25,920 years! This is to say that approximately 25,920 solar years is equal to 1 Precession Year and, of course, 12,960 years in the precessional half-cycle.
But what evidence is there at Giza that proves, beyond reasonable doubt, that the structures there are associated with the stars and, more specifically, the precessional motion of the stars (to create a precession 'alarm clock')?
Orion Correlation Theory
In 1994, Robert Bauval and Adrian Gilbert published The Orion Mystery. In this book the authors presented evidence from the Ancient Egyptian texts that seemed to speak of a connection between the Pyramid, the Pharaoh and Sah. Some Egyptologists have identified Sah as the constellation of Orion (or a specific star within the Orion constellation). Bauval showed how the 3 Great pyramids at Giza seem to have been laid out in a very close (though not perfect) correlation to the pattern of the belt stars of the Orion constellation. This correlation together with numerous religious textual references identified by Bauval and Gilbert presented a strong case for the Giza-Orion hypothesis. Most Egyptologists, however, remained unconvinced, seeing Bauval's Giza-Orion correlation as being nothing more than the result of simple coincidence and largely ignored much of the textual evidence Bauval presented in support of his hypothesis.
However, more evidence has since come to light that proves, beyond reasonable doubt, that the belt stars of the Orion constellation did indeed serve as the 'template' for the design and placement of the Giza pyramids – the plan from the heavens i.e. the stars of Orion's Belt . Using a technique known as 'geo-stellar fingerprinting', it can be proved (beyond reasonable doubt), that the Giza-Orion correlation is sound.
To demonstrate this we must first ask ourselves the question – how likely is it that three random dots on a piece of paper can, using a simple geometric technique, create three bases whose dimensions proportionally match the dimensions of the three bases of the main Giza pyramids? Such an outcome is quite unlikely but, yet again, using the Orion
Belt stars (three points) and very simple geometry, three bases can indeed be created that proportionally match the base dimensions of the three main pyramids at Giza, thus:
As can be seen from the above presentation, the 'geo-stellar fingerprint' explains also the placement of the 2 sets of so-called Queens' Pyramids. This evidence proves – beyond reasonable doubt – that the belt stars of the Orion constellation formed the underlying design imperative for the base dimensions and placement of the main Giza pyramids and also the Queens' Pyramids.
If this was not evidence enough of an Orion Belt influence at Giza, further evidence presents itself in the placement of the 2 sets of Queens' pyramids.
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.
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.
The 2 Sets of Queens' Pyramids Serve as Max & Min Culmination Markers
This 'precession of the Queens' can be seen here:
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.
4) Current Time
Imagine that you want exactly 8 hours of sleep from when you go to bed. So, you are about to set the alarm hand on your analogue clock 8 hours forward from the current time but then realise that the clock has no hour or minute hands to show you the current time. So, since you do not actually know the current time, you cannot know if you will get your 8 hours sleep. If, by way of example, you assumed the time to be 12 midnight, you then point the alarm hand at the 8 hour position. Two hours later you are awoken with the alarm because the actual time was 6am and not midnight. In short, to get your 8 hours sleep you simply MUST determine the current time in order to know that the alarm time has been set 8 hours forward.
Now imagine that you look out the window to the night sky. You happen to know that on this particular date when a particular star in the sky reaches the centre of your window it is 3:30am. So, with this information you can now set the alarm hand 8 hours forward from the 3:30 position i.e. 11:30, thereby allowing you to obtain your 8 hours sleep.
This is similar to how time is set on the Giza Astronomical clock. It uses the culminations of the Orion Belt stars to (re)set the clock to the 'right' time (the right 'start' position) and, as stated earlier, this 'start time' is marked by the location of the Sphinx. Since the minimum culmination date of the belt stars is approximately 10,500BCE, this then becomes the 'start date' of the precession clock, marked (calibrated) by the location of the Sphinx sitting on the edge of the Giza astronomical clock.
The alarm hands of the precessional clock are then set the appropriate distance around the clock from the start date marker (i.e. the Sphinx) to set the alarm time. This is equivalent to setting the alarm hand in our example above 8 hours forward from the clock's 3:30 position as indicated by the star position in the window. In short the culmination of the belt stars of Orion are used to (re)set the clock's 'start time'. This is to say that when the belt stars reach maximum culmination c.2,500 BCE this date then becomes the clock's start date; it's first time marked on the clock by the location of the Sphinx just as the Dream Stele situated between its paws tells us, "…this is the place of the First Time….".
But when exactly is the Giza astronomical clock set to 'go off'? To answer this we must first find the alarm hands within the clock.
5) The Alarm Hands
We have now determined 4 components of the Giza Astronomical clock: the 'clock face', the calibration point, the timing mechanism and the clock's start time. To find the 'alarm hands' of the Giza Precessional Clock let us now return to the ground plan of Giza showing the astronomical clock:
Notice in the diagram above how the two sets of Queens Pyramids are aligned in near perfect horizontal and vertical rows. However, as we have seen, these structures also are representative of the belt stars (demonstrating their precessional max and min culminations). But, as we know, the least bright star of the belt stars – Mintaka – is slightly misaligned from the other two stars. Why then are we presented with an arrangement of near perfect horizontal and vertical alignments of the Queens' pyramids?
It is possible that these structures have been arranged in this fashion to 'point' to their intersection with each other, like so:
The Queens' Pyramid are Aligned to 'Point' to their Intersection Point
Had the Queens' pyramids been aligned more in keeping with the true appearance of the belt stars i.e. with one of the structures slightly off-set from the others then this concept of intersection would have been much less obvious. By setting the structures almost perfectly horizontal and vertical leads us to question why this should have been done and we can only logically conclude that they are then able to clearly point to their intersection. Indeed, this intersection of two pyramids (or sets of pyramids) reminds us of the Ancient Egyptian concept of the Akhet whereby the sun rises/sets on the equinoxes at the precise intersection of two pyramids:
The Akhet – When the Sun sits at the Midpoint (Intersection) of Two Mounds (Pyramids)
It would seem that the two cult pyramids may also have been placed for the same purpose – to present an intersection that marks a specific point (time) on the Giza clock face.
The Two Cult Pyramids 'Point' to their Intersection Point
We have now discovered the clock hands for the Giza astronomical clock. We now need to work out the times (dates) that the clock hands are pointing to.
We learned earlier in this article that the stars precess around the horizon at the rate of 1º every 72 years. Thus in 720 years the stars will have precessed around the horizon by some 10 degrees. Thus we can see that elapsed time can be measured in degrees of arc. To determine the dates the clock hands point to all we need do is measure their angle from the clock's start position i.e. its angular distance from the Sphinx 'First Time' calibration mark, thus:
Date 1 Measures 9.25º Distance from the Sphinx Calibrating Date
To convert the D1 angle of 9.25º (from the Sphinx calibrating date) into a value in years we simply multiply 9.25 x 72 = 666 years.
In other words, from the Sphinx to the first date marker (clock hand) 666 years will have elapsed. To convert this to a date relative to our calendar we simply subtract this value from the Sphinx calibrating date, thus:
10,500BCE – 666 yrs = 9,834BCE.
The date for the second clock hand can be calculated in precisely the same manner.
Date 2 Measures 34.5º Distance from the Sphinx Calibrating Date
To convert the D2 angle of 34.5º (from the Sphinx calibrating date) into a value in years we simply multiply 34.5 x 72 = 2,484 years.
And to convert this into a date relative to our calendar:
10,500BCE – 2,484 yrs = 8,016BCE
And now we have the two (past) dates the clock hands with the Giza astronomical clock are pointing to 9,834BCE and 8,016BCE – a start date and an end date. A cycle within a cycle.
What is intriguing about these dates is that they point to a time in Earth's 'recent' prehistory when significant changes were occurring all over the planet. During this time the large ice sheets that had been slowly retreating from America and Europe finally disappeared along with many animal and plant species. Why this occurred remains something of a mystery although some scientists have uncovered evidence of a catastrophic asteroid strike over North America around this time which may have influenced these cataclysmic events.
But this is not the end of the story. Not only does the clock show the minimum culmination of the belt stars, it also shows us the maximum culmination of these stars which occurs c.2,460BCE. The conclusion here is inescapable. This is when we are to (re)set the Giza astronomical clock using the maximum culmination date and begin the 666 year countdown again! If we needed any evidence of this cycle we need look no further than the Dream Stele.
Date 2 Measures 34.5º Distance from the Sphinx Calibrating Date
Notice the back-to-back sphinxes carved on the Dream Stele. Remember also that the Dream Stele stands between the paws of the Sphinx, at the precise centre of the Sphinx. Remember also that the Dream Stele tells us that "…this is the place of the first time…". Clearly, however, there is a Second Time as indicated by the second Sphinx portrayed on the Dream Stele and that this Second Time is a 'mirror' of the First Time position – much in the same way that 12 o'clock is 'mirrored' by 6 o'clock (and vice versa).
The significance of the 2 culmination points of Orion's Belt to set (and then reset) the calibration point of the astronomical clock cannot be overstated. These pivotal moments in the precession cycle (i.e. in time) are akin to the noon point in our daily clock or the zero point on a stopwatch. It matters not how much time passes between these two points in time – when the culminations are reached the time to 'set the clock' for its 666 year countdown has arrived i.e. at the culmination of the belt stars.
The Second Time
In the same way that the date of the First Time (c.10,500BCE) was set we can set the date for the Second Time in the same way. The calibrating point i.e. the Sphinx, is (re)set with the maximum culmination date of the Belt stars c.2,460CE. This becomes the new 12 o'clock position – the equivalent of resetting a stopwatch back to the zero mark. We know that the first alarm date occurs 666 years after the culmination date which presents us with the future 'alarm date' of 3,126CE – the beginning of some, as yet, unknown Earth cycle.
The next alarm date occurs 2,484 years after the calibration date which gives us the date 4,944CE – the end of the cycle.
Another way of achieving these dates would be to simply add 12,960 years (i.e. 180º x 72) to each of the First Time alarm dates thus 9,834BCE + 12,960 years = 3,126CE and 8,016BCE + 12,960 = 4,944CE.
The 'First Time' and the 'Second Time'
The structures at Giza can be shown to function as an eternal 'alarm clock' that uses the precessional motion of the stars as its timing mechanism. The clock seems to indicate two remote dates in the past (9,834 BCE and 8,016BCE) and two 'mirrored' dates in the future (3,126CE and 4,944CE) that are perhaps pointing to the beginning and end of an Earth cycle on some kind, a cycle that presently remains unknown to us. The nature of this cycle and how it might affect our planet may be related to the Earth's axial tilt and is beyond the scope of this article. (More on this can be read here: The Great Pyramid and the Axis of the Earth – Part 1 and here The Great Pyramid and the Axis of the Earth – Part 2)
What does seem clear is that whatever the nature of this cycle, it seems to have been of such importance that the ancients would design and later build a monumental clock that could withstand time itself in order that the cyclical timing knowledge it contains could be passed down to their descendants, allowing them to plan and prepare for the arrival of this cycle ahead of time.
Men fear time but time fears the pyramids –
Acknowledgements: Rob Miller, Scott Sacharczyk and Dennis Payne.