Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Hi GHMB,

If you haven't already read Part #1 of this (very long) thread, you can read it here.

Continuing now with the Coptic-Egyptian Sūrīd legend. If a pole shift event really did occur in remote times, as the legend appears to suggest, how did it affect Giza? Where was Giza formerly located, where did it end up and what evidence is there to support any of this?

Before exploring this further, I think the first thing I need to say is that it is not my wish here to bore the reader to an early grave with seemingly endless and pointless geometry along with a multitude of angles that seem to serve little or no practical purpose--I do understand and recognise that a lot of folks find such material intensely tedious and have little time for it.

What I would ask those readers to consider, however, is this: The only universal language available to any and all civilisations is the 'language' of mathematics (which, of course, includes geometry). This 'language' can convey thoughts and ideas that will maintain their meaning and integrity and continue to speak to us across immense barriers of time, irrespective of the creator's actual spoken language. It's my opinion that the Designers of Giza would likely also have understood this and that they actually utilised it, most particularly in the monuments there. And, of course, it stands to reason that if you wish to communicate your thoughts and ideas in the language of mathematics then the last thing you would want to do would be to distract your reader/audience by placing actual writings within any part of your design since these would likely become the entire focus of your intended audience to the detriment of your much more important mathematical message. Thus it would be complete folly to present any textual writings anywhere within your grand design (since they may never be understood). Put simply: let the mathematics do your talking.

Accepting this principle, if we are to fully understand what happened at Giza in ancient times, then we must try and understand what, if anything, this geometry (this universal language) on the ground at Giza is trying to convey to us. After all, the first and most striking thing any of us sees when we first arrive at Giza is the remarkable and unmistakable geometry of the monuments there. I doubt anyone can dispute that. The deeper question, however, is whether the geometry that we so easily observe in this sacred place is purely intrinsic to the pyramid form and the disposition of the monuments there (and thus completely arbitrary in nature), or whether there exists some underlying planned design and meaning to it all? In short, is the Giza complex entirely devoid of any encoded 'message' or was it designed in the manner we observe it in order to 'tell us a story' using the 'language' of mathematics?

It seems self-evident that the designers and builders of Giza believed this astronomical 'message' was of immense importance to pass on. We only have to look at the breath-taking monuments they left behind and consider the unimaginable effort it must have taken to successfully implement such a massive feat of engineering for us to realise that we would be wise to open our eyes and our minds and pay attention to what these monuments are perhaps conveying to us.

From my own perspective, I suggest that tangible and practical meaning can be extrapolated from the most basic geometry of these monuments and we can extract this 'data' today only because, imo, it was deliberately 'input' into the geometry of the monuments in the first place by the Designers as part and parcel of the 'mathematical message' they wished to convey. The key to unlocking it all, of course, is to try and determine the over-arching context in which the mathematics/geometry we so easily observe is to be placed and understood. In that regard we can thank Trimble, Bauval and some others for their pioneering work in observing that the underlying context of Giza very much appears to be one of astronomy. The Giza pyramids seem to be symbolic stars having their stellar counterparts in Orion's Belt and they present to us on the ground a highly peculiar motion of Orion's Belt i.e. they show us a highly peculiar motion of the Earth; they show us a pole shift.

The geometry within the Great Pyramid (and the wider Giza complex) demonstrates to us, in fairly plain (geometrical/astronomical) terms, how Giza was, quite literally, turned upside-down or, as the Coptic Sūrīd 'legend' states, became "overthrown". It paints for us--in quite vivid detail--the portrait of a pole shift, an abrupt and irregular (apparent) movement of the Belt stars of the Orion constellation and, by so doing, depicts for us the location and the relocation of Giza itself during this cataclysmic event that we are told from many ancient sources occurred in our prehistory.

For those of you who find geometry/astronomy tiresome (and I know there are many), in my next thread I present some of this data we find at Giza in a visual form using images and animated GIFs which I hope will better convey some of the more complex ideas being presented here and (hopefully) permit you to come to an understanding of what it all actually means and, of course, why it is immensely important, imo, that we try and understand it. You don't build something as immense and complex as Giza simply for kicks or to show how brilliant you are. The 'astronomical geometry' we observe at Giza isn't a mere play thing of the Designers - there is real, tangible and important meaning behind it all; a 'story' being told, presented in the only language that any future civilisations would have a chance of understanding.

And so, aside from the ancient eye-witness 'testimonies' of the Earth having turned over, of the sun rising in the west and setting in the east, of the seasons abruptly changing and other such phenomena associated with pole shift events, what evidence can we find at Giza itself that might lend support to such a controversial hypothesis? And if there are important data locked within the geometry of the Giza complex, where do we begin to try to uncover and make sense of it?

Giza's Former Latitude

It all begins really by knowing what we already know and that is that Giza's present latitude is almost exactly 30° north of the equator. However, in recent times two researchers, Jim Bowles and Jim Alison, provided what I consider to be yet another significant key that helps us on the road to unlocking this particular mystery of our long forgotten past. (You can read Jim Alison's full research here: [grahamhancock.com] ).

This ring of ancient sites (figure 2.1 below) seems to suggest that, at some time in great antiquity, Giza was not located at 30°N but was instead geographically located at (or within a few degrees of) the equator (along with, it seems, many other ancient sacred sites). If these ancient sites really were located close to (or directly on) the Earth's former equator, then this would position the Earth's former pole at this time within the southeast Alaska / Yukon region (the yellow dot in the circle's centre).


Figure 2.1. A circle of ancient sacred sites may have defined the Earth's former equator with the pole then placed in the region of SE Alaska / Yukon. (Image © Jim Alison. Reproduced here with kind permission).

Accepting this evidence as indicative of Giza having once been located at (or close to) the equator then, given its present latitude of ~30°N, it becomes self-evident that a pole shift of some description has occurred in the intervening time since Giza has clearly been shifted quite considerably from its former latitude close to the equator to its present higher latitude today. But just how close was Giza to the Earth's former equator?

The answer to this may lie within the internal architecture of the Great Pyramid. If we now consider some of the key features of the Great Pyramid (and other Giza monuments), we find in those features that there are two particular angles that are repeated time and time again (figure 2.2).


Figure 2.2. The angle ~26.5 and ~6° are repeated again and again within the Great Pyramid.

As we can see in figure 2.2 above, the angles of ~26.5° and ~6° are repeated again and again (note also: ~53° / 2 = ~26.5°). Of course, theoretically and depending on the data reference points used, we could find these two angles just about anywhere we cared to look in these monuments. However, these particular angles in figure 2.2 (above) are not found in obscure places using arbitrary or cherry-picked data reference points but are observed in what can reasonably be considered as some of the Great Pyramid's key features; precisely where one might expect such important and meaningful data to have been 'placed' in order that it might easily be found and studied. There is no pi, or phi or e constants here--or any other complex numerical expressions or functions--just simple angles to be observed, measured then placed into and interpreted within an astronomical/geodetic context. Essentially these angles can be considered as the pyramid's key 'mathematical words' and are the key data, imo, to understanding the underlying 'mathematical/astronomical message' I believe is being conveyed through the layout of the GP's internal chambers along with the disposition of the Giza monuments.

What we find within the internal architecture of the Great Pyramid is the Queen's Chamber (QC) perhaps symbolically representing Giza's former latitude close to the equator, being raised in latitude along its vertical axis by ~26.5° and 'offset' along its horizontal axis by ~6° to a new geographic position upon the Earth, as perhaps symbolically represented by the higher 'offset' position of the King's Chamber at ~6° from the pyramid's central axis. In short, what we may be seeing here is Giza (symbolised by these two chambers) being relocated (raised) by ~26.5° to now sit at ~30° from the equator (figure 2.2).

If this interpretation of the Great Pyramid chambers is correct, then we can easily check where a line from Giza through the present Arctic Sea pole, extended by a further 26.5° (the amount of latitudinal change at Giza as symbolised by the key angles of the pyramid's internal architecture) takes us (figure 2.3):


Figure 2.3

Remarkably, a line from Giza through the present Arctic Sea pole and extended by a further 26.5° (Giza's latitudinal change as perhaps denoted by the Grand Gallery angle between the QC and KC), we end up in southeast Alaska, very close to the focal point of the Bowles-Alison ring of sacred sites and the possible former equator (see figure 2.1). What is also notable here (figure 2.3) is the lateral shift of ~6°, (the east-west 'Secondary Migration' between the Alaskan and Arctic Sea poles) which is the very same secondary angle we find repeated again and again in the key features of the Great Pyramid (figure 2.2).

What all of this internal pyramid geometry is perhaps saying is that, while Giza was seemingly raised along its north-south axis by ~26.5°, there was also a secondary ~6° east-west lateral shift that likely relocated the Earth's equinoctial point (as observed at Giza in the northern hemisphere by ~6° to the south of east and is perhaps symbolised by the niche in the east wall of the Queen's Chamber which is offset from the east wall's central axis by ~6° south of east). If this interpretation is correct, then it seems that Giza was once located ~3.5° from the Earth's former equator and was raised by ~26.5° to a new latitude of ~30° from the equator. (Note: A shift of this type isn't a simple tipping over of the Earth's polar axis in space but rather one whereby the Earth's outer crust is migrating (relatively quickly) over the planet's inner core - Earth Crust Displacement or ECD - while the poles themselves remain in place relative to the fixed stars).

However, if Giza was raised by 'only' 26.5° of latitude (3.5°N to 30°N), then that doesn't explain many of the ancient sources that tell us the Earth turned over, the sun rose in the west and set in the east, the seasons were changed etc? If those ancient stories are more than 'legend' and actually occurred, then Giza (i.e. the Earth) must also have flipped over 180°. This may, of course, sound unrealistic and fanciful but if the monuments at Giza are showing us what I believe they are showing us, then the reality of such a dramatic pole shift event may actually be founded more in fact than fiction.

Continued in next thread.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 15-Jul-21 16:35 by Scott Creighton.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 282 Scott Creighton 14-Jul-21 13:42
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 60 michael seabrook 14-Jul-21 20:43
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 46 Scott Creighton 15-Jul-21 16:34
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 45 michael seabrook 15-Jul-21 21:56
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 53 cjcalleman 15-Jul-21 18:48
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 55 Scott Creighton 16-Jul-21 08:51
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 56 Martin Stower 16-Jul-21 09:37
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 64 cjcalleman 16-Jul-21 17:55
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 52 Martin Stower 23-Jul-21 23:23
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 71 mhgaffney 15-Jul-21 23:08
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 49 Scott Creighton 16-Jul-21 08:40
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 44 drew 16-Jul-21 03:59
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2). 46 Spiros 16-Jul-21 15:25
Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2) and a Palm Leaf 44 Reagent 18-Jul-21 00:35
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2) and a Palm Leaf 50 Merrell 18-Jul-21 09:31
Re: Giza: Portrait of a Pole Shift (Part #2) and a Palm Leaf 59 Reagent 18-Jul-21 20:30


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.