Yorkshire shows the Egyptians how to do it!

Thornborough Henge Central 3

Image by postman

nigelswift Mar 13, 2004 08:45:15

There seem to be a lot of websites promoting the Orion alignment of the pyramids as a definite , whereas the extablishment now dismisses the idea. The argument seems to be stuck in the same situation as Thornborough - how persuasive is the level of accuracy?

I read that the Beebs Horizon programme said a 9 degree error at Giza "proved" it wasn't deliberate. I've re-done it more carefully and it seems Thornboro is more accurate than that. http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/25391

So now what? If Giza is real, Thornborough is more competent. If Giza isn't real, Thornborough might still be.

(This might be a good selling point for Thornborough George - "represents Orion to a level of accuracy that puts the Ancient Egyptians to shame" !)

BlueGloves Mar 13, 2004 09:14:54

Replying to nigelswift

Professor Glob writes -

'Further evidence for this seems to be provided by a hazel stick 30.9 inches long which was found close to the northern side of the coffin and which had notches cut along its side. Measuring from one end, the first and second notches were at intervals of six inches, the third notch being twelve inches from the second and six from the far end. There can be little doubt it was a Bronze Age measuring rod marked out in feet, which was used in the construction of the coffin and possibly also in the the laying out and erection of the mound.' - P.V. Glob (1973) The Mound People - Danish Bronze-Age Man Preserved, published by Gylendahl.

It's odd how separate strands of academia continue separately but I wonder how the bands of surveyor builders communicated with each other. Possibly it was by a form of horn semaphore, possibly by smoke signals.

Steve Gray Mar 16, 2004 09:22:53

Replying to nigelswift

Graham Hancock made a big thing about the fact that the Orion alignment of the pyramids would have been much more accurate in the past that it is today, owing to the Earth's precession. This may have been perfectly valid. However, he projected back for the best alignment and came up with a date of 10,500BC, which doesn't match any of the other evidence for the date of construction. He was duly ridiculed by the establishment.

It would be interesting to do the same projection for Thornborough. If the best alignment coincides with the accepted chronology for the construction of the henges, then the case is strengthened considerably.