From http://www.earthmatrix.com/ancientsites.

html

The Geometry of Ancient Sites

by Charles William Johnson

Dedicated to Carl P. Munck

Table of Contents
The Geometry of Ancient Sites
Introduction
The Problematic
The Geography and the Geometry
The Corridors/Pathways on a Timeline
The Great Pyramid Design
Observations

Introduction
Today, we think of art and science as representing two diametrically opposed fields of human endeavor. With counted
exceptions, the people who are dedicated to one field or the other are at opposite ends of the personality chain. One
either does science or art, but seldom both. The artwork of the ancient past is thought to be wholly on the side of art,
with little or nothing to do with science. At best, it may be conceded that some architectural constructions may have
required a high level of engineering skill, but even that is thought to have been within the realm of technology and not
science as such. Furthermore, there are those who persistently refuse to consider any contribution to science by the
ancient cultures.
In our studies of science in ancient artwork, we have come to realize that we know very little about the inner workings
of the ancient past. We have no knowledge of the computational math behind much of the ancient artwork and ancient
reckoning systems. Such documents as the Rhind Papyrus, deal with common household computations, although it is
cited as an example of the computational math involved in mathematics of ancient Egypt. Hardly anything is known
about the mathematics of other cultures, such as the maya system.
The absence of such knowledge does not impede the dissemination of wide held views about the worth (or lack of
worth) of ancient science. In fact, the very concept of science is all but thought to have been non-existent then by most
scholars now. There are many exceptions, whereby scholars and laymen alike are attempting to unveil the way in which
ancient cultures functioned, not only at the level of archaeological digs, but at the level of abstracted, theoretical
thinking.
Many theories and ideas exist regarding a possible relationship among the different archaeological sites around the
world embracing many different cultures. Those societies that constructed pyramidal structures are often thought to
have come from the same source. The reasoning questions the coincidence of all those pyramids having been built
without there having been some kind of shared source of knowledge. Simply, why did all those ancient cultures think
of building pyramids; why didn't some of them build structures into the ground instead of upwards to the sky; or, why
didn't some of them build vast flat platforms as far as the eye could see; and so on. The similar characteristics of the
pyramidal structures around the world cause one to think that they all came from the same school of thought.
For that reason many of these structures are researched in an isolated fashion, as of the culture in which they exist,
without relating a structure of one culture with another from a distinct culture. Comparative analyses are made at times,
but usually with the purpose of denying any relationship among the cultures being compared. Exceptions, however, do
exist, as we shall review briefly below.
No historical evidence exists that proves these ancient pyramidal structures were related to one another, other than the
historical fact that they all existed in the framework of the ancient past. But, the shared trait of having existed in the
past is nothing more than circumstantial evidence to many scholars, ergo, meaning no evidence at all.
The first person we ever heard speak about a grid system for the entire planet was Hugh H. Harleston, Jr, back in 1974
in Mexico City. His analysis of the site of Teotihuacan and the subsequent discovery of markers placed throughout the
Western Hemisphere, lead him to propose the idea that theTeotihuacan site, in fact, was based on a geodesic grid. In
our analyses of the Teotihuacan site some twenty-odd years later, we visualized a grid system based on the geometrical
designs within the pyramidal structures of that site. More recently, we have published other considerations regarding
basic designs of a grid system within the Teotihuacan site and that of Giza. (Cfr., Earth/matriX, Essay Nos. 83, 85).
Our analyses are based mainly on the numbers of the series of perfect right triangles (Cfr., Earth/matriX, Essay No. 64:
"the 3-4-5 Perfect Right Triangle: 5-12-13 and 6-8-10). The perspective that we have followed is that of considering
the pyramidal structures within a specific site to other pyramidal structures within that same site. We have compared
this internal view of the layout of the structures, without any regard to the placement of the sites on the longitudinal and
latitudinal coordinates of the planet.

Carl P. Munck, in his work entitled, The Code, analyzed and compared the coordinate system of the different pyramidal
sites around the world. In his analysis, he has assigned the site of Giza, of ancient Egypt (kemi) the starting point for his
grid system or, pyramidal matrix as he refers to it. In time, his work is being recognized as having posited the idea of a
matrix corresponding to the layout for all or most of the major pyramidal sites around the world, irrespective of the
particular culture involved. Personally, I know of no one else who has studied in detail the maps of these sites and
related their coordinates on the globe in the manner in which Carl P. Munck has done so.
We shall examine, in a much less detailed manner, possible relationships and characteristics among some of the ancient
pyramidal structures and sites around the world. Even if one shows the pyramidal sites to be related as of the geometry
of a circle and a sphere (in terms of degrees, radians and the concept of pi), the logic of numbers is insufficient to
convince most readers of the conscious design behind the placement of those sites. In our discussion, we shall rely
more on the geometry of design than upon the mathematics to discern possible relationships among the different sites.
Obviously, we cannot prove that the ancient sites were related, but the discussion may be suggestive of the need for
such a proof. Most scholars believe that the different sites are unrelated to begin with, and therefore need no proof.
The Problematic
In order to write this essay, we had to confront a series of problems, which may not have been solved as such. The main
problem is to write about relationships in space-time/movement on a single plane while conceptualizing the shape of a
sphere and elements upon the surface of that sphere: the Earth. The problem concerns one of perspective. We shall be
viewing a series of lines on a flat surface, when the surface is actually spherical in shape. In this sense, any relationship
that we may ponder may easily be misunderstood simply by not assuming the suggested perspective. The suggestion to
the reader, then, is to look at the illustrations as they appear here on paper, then imagine them as best one can on a
sphere. That is no easy task. And, just as we are quite unable at times to do such imagining, we can further imagine just
how difficult this must have been for the ancient peoples who did not benefit from the knowledge of knowing that the
Earth is not a perfect sphere. For this concept of visualizing the Earth's surface, one is thereby referred to Cahill's
Butterfly World Map, in which the world is divided into 4 lunes or, eight curvilinear triangles. [Cfr. Greenwood,
p.120.]
Carl P. Munck (The Code), as we mentioned earlier, has discerned a pyramidal matrix which links most of the
pyramidal sites around the world through a grid system based on the numerical division of the Earth's spherical-like
shape. Mr. Munck's work has proven to be quite extensive and intensive, reflecting nonetheless the difficulties in
conceptualizing such a system for the planet Earth. Devising such a grid system based on a number series and constants
poses at times insurmountable problems.
1) The measurement of the Earth does not accommodate numbers easily because planet Earth is not a perfect sphere.
Therefore, the detailed sequential ordering of coordinate points on the Earth enters into conflict with this numerical
straight jacket.
2) The very act of measurement itself defies the characteristics of space-time/movement in terms
of carrying numbers to ten-place decimal endings and beyond. In other words, there comes a physical point where
things/events cannot be measured as such.
3) Numbers can be related, as of the logic of numbers themselves, without any relationship actually existing in reality
in terms of space-time/movement.
4) The procedure in The Code produces relational numbers as of the concept of (3.1415926535). The author takes
double (6.283185307) as a given or constant. Then, he further relies upon the cube root of double pi (1.845270149).
This choice of numbers stems from the belief that the ratio of the perimeter-to-height of the Great Pyramid of Giza is
foretelling of a double pi relationship. However, part of the problem in discerning ancient reckoning is to know the
height of the Great Pyramid, about which we can only speculate at this late date given the deteriorated condition of the
Great Pyramid itself. Therefore, one of the sought-after results of research in ancient artwork is to discern the height of
this particular pyramid; to begin the analysis with a given figure (480.3471728 feet) weakens the analysis.

5) The procedure of The Code employs symbolic numbers selectively discerned from the ancient artwork itself. For
example, the number "nine" is chosen (representing "4 sides, 4 lower corners and apex" to the Great Pyramid) in order
to propose using the base number 1.845270149 to the 9th power (= 248.0502134). This number then becomes the
constant for the entire grid system of The Code. The 248.0502134 number (the cube of double pi), serves then as a way
of making all numbers relational within the grid system. Understandably, any number could have been used in this
manner with similar results.
6) The Code also begins its analysis with the perimeter measurement of the Great Pyramid (3018.110298 feet), which
obviously does not result from measurement, but from computations based on pi and double pi considerations of the
presentation. This can be easily understood when we then observe how this number when divided by the given height
of 480.3471728 just happens to produce exactly the 6.283185307 figure for double pi.
7) All numbers are filtered through the double pi cube number (248.0502134), and therefore are relational in terms of
pi itself. The numbers of longitude and latitude are multiplied times this particular constant (2pi-cube).
8) The grid system is then made to float by changing the coordinate of the Great Pyramid so that it occupies the 00o 00'
00"0 coordinate on the grid itself. All coordinates of the system are then modified accordingly by adding/subtracting to
them the original coordinate of the Great Pyramid (31 o 08' 00"8).
9) The Code obtains numbers (measurements) by multiplying unlike elements and dividing degrees and minutes into
decimal place numbers in order to obtain supposedly exact representations of seconds then to be expressed in the
degree-minute-second system. Consider the procedure for the vector of Teotihuacan:
Example: 55043.7314 divided by 38 degrees divided by 39 minutes equals 37.14151916 minutes, which is expressed as
follows in The Code:
55043.7314 : 38o : 39' = 37.14151916"
It is impossible to divide a decimal-like number (55043.7314) by the degree-minute sixty-based number (38 degrees
and 39 minutes) in order to obtain once more a decimal-like number expressed now in minutes (37.14151916"). In any
case, the latter expression is generally written as: 38o 39' 37"14151916, without the seconds being expressed to such
incommensurable decimal places.
10) The Code takes for granted that the ancients utilized only a system based on the 360-degree circle. In our studies,
we have seen that a circle may have been divided into any number of reckoned numbers (260c, 364c, 365c, 374.4c,
378c etc.). This possibility also has implications for the concept of pi, which may have been relational and proportional
in these different instances, whereby the Nineveh number 2268 may have been a fractal expression for pi on a 260c
circle. For, the fractal number 2.268 is relational to pi as of a 260-degree/segment circle.
11) The Code also posits the fixed idea that there is only one answer for each computation. Our studies have shown that
the ancient reckoning system may have been relational, with multi-layered meanings to a given element. Depending
upon the perspective assumed, a single element may have enjoyed many different meanings. Instead of a fixed grid
system, the system may have been flexible, relational and, proportional. Precise meanings are avoided in such a system.
In other words, there is no single answer to a particular computation; all meanings become inter-dependent.
In spite of all of these negative-sounding observations, we offer them in a positive tone. We do believe and affirm that
Carl P. Munck has discovered the reasoning behind the pyramidal matrix of the ancient archaeological sites around the
world. We do consider his work to represent the mathematical basis of computation that may have been involved in
situating the different sites around the world.
Professor Carl P. Munck's numbers are certainly correct to a degree as of his detailed computations. And, were he to
consider the possibility that the ancients also employed a 260-degree circle/sphere, a 378-degree circle/sphere, or even
a 374.4-degree circle/sphere, then all of the numbers would change accordingly. The pyramidal matrix of the ancient
past was undoubtedly much more complex than we may imagine. Depending upon whether one is computing sidereal

orbital times or, synodic orbital times, the abstracted circle/sphere involved could undergo a theoretically distinct
division of segments (i.e., degrees). Contemporary society has grown up with an inherited 360-degree circle/sphere,
and it is difficult for us to imagine any other option. In fact, when we imagine such an option in grade school, our
teacher would invariably suppress that by telling us "a sphere has three-hundred-and-sixty degrees". That is what we
have always been taught. The ancients appear to have been more flexible in their outlook. The historically chosen
numbers coming out of their reckoning systems allow for computations that are more flexible and seem to have been
based on other day-counts (i.e., 260c, 364c, 378c, 374.4c, etc.).
Many more comments could be in order, but the theme that occupies us at the moment is not how others have
attempted to resolve the interrelationships of the ancient sites around the world, but how we might view them from the
perspective of geometry. Obviously, geometry and mathematics march hand in hand; one is implied in the other.
Nonetheless, given the very monumental nature of the ancient structures and the obvious geometrical designs therein,
we shall concentrate on distinguishing relationships based on interconnecting points, lines, circles, triangles, etc., which
might exemplify the underlying designs of the ancient artwork itself.
No doubt we are all attempting to lay bare those suspected designs behind the ancient artwork. It is inconceivable for
anyone to think that structures such as the pyramids of Giza and Teotihuacan, and those of so many other sites, were
constructed without any pre-conceived design in mind. All of us are attempting to comprehend the apparent design
elements in order to understand better the very intentions of those who built the pyramidal structures. We suspect that
these structures mean something, and we all want to know what those meanings represent. And, as in any search, we
must explore each and every pathway until the search is complete. In the following procedure, surely many mistakes
are ignored by this author, but we are confident that by reviewing our visualization of the theoretically abstracted lines
and inter-relationships of the design elements, we may conclude at least one thing. These monumental structures
around the world were constructed with a definite purpose in mind, and possibly a common or shared purpose.
So many scholars have attempted in the past to convince the world of the inter-related nature of past accomplishments
in different ancient societies and cultures. But, resistance has been tenacious. Few wish to admit the obvious; many
cling to the fixed idea that the different ancient cultures were completely separated from one another by the distances
separating them on this immense planet. Most authors are convinced that the ancient societies never came to even know
the extent of the planet, its spherical boundaries. The only way that this idea can continue to be fixed in our minds is to
continue to believe that all of the ancient populations and their monumental works were each one an isolated example
of the human being facing its environment alone.
If it were the case that each ancient structural site were an isolated example of human ingenuity created and re-created
as a response to that environment, then, one would expect to find a completely unrelated existence for each site. No two
sites should have any kind of visible relationship between themselves. As writers like Harleston and Munck have
attempted to show, each in his own reasoning and analysis, the many varied sites are related, but at times in most
unsuspecting ways. Aside from the mathematics of it all, the abstracted geometry may offer a distinct insight into the
math. Carl P. Munck has made triangulations among the different sites in his extensive work. We shall build upon such
triangulations in a similar manner, although without the specifics of the math. Hopefully, that would be an aspect that
professor Munck may soon lay bare in his writing.
The Geography and the Geometry
In the Earth/matriX series of essays and extracts we have offered our share of analyzing the numbers of the ancient
reckoning systems. In this essay, we wish to concentrate on a visualization of the inter-relationships of the ancient sites
identified around the globe. Our analysis, from the start, does not purport to reflect any preciseness developed to the
umpteenth scale of points and lines. For all of the preciseness that the construction of the Great Pyramid reflects, the
ancient system would appear to be based on approximations of varying degrees and relationships. For example, the
concept of a connecting-line, in fact, would appear to be rather the idea of a path or corridor, and not a line limited to
the molecularly narrow thin line imagined by infinite numerical preciseness. The idea of a precise point (dot) or line,
taken to the contemporary view of the concept of a singularity, leads one to an abstracted point/line that is virtually
incommensurable.

One has only to recall that the monuments of ancient sites generally are grouped together within a specific boundary or
complex. Even the site of Giza is bordered six miles to the north by the Pyramids of Abu Roash and about eight miles
to the south by the Pyramids of Abusir. Although one may measure points and lines to an infinite minute level, it is
understood that the space occupied by the site is itself significant. An entire site or group of sites may represent a
corridor, a path for the forces thus conceived.
In this sense, there is no single, all-determinant point or line, which may be defined to the minute degree. Rather, each
point and line are determined as of the relationships invoked. And, a single point or line may function as one meaning
in relationship to a particular design element, while functioning with another meaning in relation to some other design
element. The same point may be conceived as the center at one moment and on the perimeter at another moment. "The
Center" does not exist as such, but exists in and of each particular event and relationship discerned.
In this way, the ancient artwork appears to reflect all things conceived, which means that any one event-point or eventline may have been conceived in every imaginable way, which means that all other imaginable and unimaginable ways
of conceiving that event still remain.
For our analysis, we shall employ an outline drawing of the continents and land masses on a Mercator map of the
world. We have shown only some of the ancient sites and a few of the main rivers of the world. We shall speculate with
specific relationships by drawing interconnecting lines among the ancient sites, and discuss possible meanings thereof.
We shall be discussing some numerical relationships, but only insofar as they are related to the geometry of the
abstracted points and lines. The geometrical illustrations are simply approximations and represent an attempt to offer an
overall view of the possibility that the different ancient sites were relationally placed as of a grid system or matrix.
Let us begin our presentation with a connecting line between the Poverty Point area within the state of Louisiana, near
the Mississippi River basin, and the Giza site of ancient kemi, near the river basin of the Nile.
Poverty Point and Giza (1)

A discerning feature of these sites is that they are both situated near a major river basin. And, if we consider them to be
situated along a latitudinal pathway, although not on the exact same coordinate, an apparent straight line may be drawn
to connect them, with each of the nearby river basins forming a windmill image. One could even envisage this
geometrical pattern to be reflective of the ollin design for movement that is profusely employed in ancient
Mesoamerican artwork.

Easter Island (Chile) to Giza (2)

In the previous illustration, we have simply connected the site of Easter Island to the site of Giza, understanding that
this may represent another pathway or corridor along the grid. It should be noted that this pathway runs almost parallel
to another major river basin, that of the Amazon River.
Now, let us draw a line at a right angle to the site of Poverty Point towards the line between Easter Island and Giza.
From the perspective of geometrical concepts, the very idea of a right triangle is commonly found in many of the
designs of ancient artwork, and should not surprise us to represent a viable concept on the planetary grid system or
matrix. At first, one might think that the drawing of such a line is entirely arbitrary, given the fact that it breaks with the
idea of having a relationship to a major river basin area. Yet, as we shall see below, its conceptualization is significant
for other dividing points and lines along the relationships of the two continents of the Western Hemisphere.
A Perpendicular Line between Poverty Point and the Easter Island/Giza Corridor (3)

The Counterclockwise Motion of the Flow of the Three Major River Basins (4)

Counterclockwise direction of flow of river currents

From the previous illustration, one may observe the direction of flow of the three major river basins involved in the
design. The flow of the currents of these three rivers establishes a counterclockwise motion on the face of the planet
along the different lines of the corridors drawn between the sites.
Now, let us draw a line from the area of Poverty Point to the site of Easter Island, along with another perpendicular line
from the line between Easter Island and Giza to the area of Poverty Point.
Connecting Lines between Poverty Point Area, Easter Island, and Giza (5)

As we mark off the mid-point of the perpendicular line on the previous illustration, we then observe how another
perpendicular line would pass across the tip of the southern continent of the Western Hemisphere as indicated in the
following illustration. It seems all too apparent that by joining these three ancient archaeological sites, with
interconnecting lines, and marking off the perpendicular lines as shown, one would not expect to see any geometrical

relevancy to the natural landscape of the continents. However, as may be observed, the abstracted geometry fits
extremely well with natural cut-off points such as the tip of the southern continent. Too many elements seem to
coincide in this illustration to call them mere coincidences obtained through happenstance or chance. The placement of
the sites in relation to one another, not only reflect a relevancy in numbers as determined by the analyses of Carl P.
Munck, but the natural function of geometrical figures is entirely reflected in these same sites and their interconnected
lines.
The Mid-Point between Poverty Point Area and the Easter Island/Giza Corridor (6)

Now, let us extend the line of the corridor joining the Poverty Point area and the site of Giza beyond to the East. The
extended corridor between Poverty Point and Giza passes along the mouth of the river basin of the Euphrates River,
traverses the river basin of the Ganges River, and runs along the basin and into the mouth of the Yangtze River in
China. And, furthermore, if we now draw a line between the area of the mouth of the Yangtze River and aster Island,
we see that other major river basins lie upon this widen corridor. The mouth of the Ganges River in Bangladesh and the
mouth of the Niger River in Nigeria fall almost directly within this particular corridor.
The Extended Corridors of Poverty Point, Easter Island and the Mouth of the Yangtze River (7)

The Four Main Corridors and Their Relation to the Major River Basins of the Area (8)

From the previous illustrations, simply from the perspective of abstracted geometry, one obtains the impression that
what writers like Hugh H. Harleston, Jr., and Carl P. Munck have been stating for decades now in mathematical terms
is certain. Some kind of geodesic or matrix design exists within the placement of the different archaeological sites
around the world. Furthermore, the geometrical designs reveal that the paths or corridors between the different sites
appear to have relevancy for the natural make-up of the continents. In other words, the humanly determined sites reflect
features and characteristics apparent in nature. In the previous cases we have seen how the geometry appears to reflect
a direct relationship with the major river basins of the world.
Now, if we extend some of these geometrically relevant lines (paths or corridors) even further, then we may observe
more relationships with other features of the planet Earth. For example, if we extend the mid-point line as drawn below,
we may then see a relationship appear with pre-historic sites within Spain and Europe.
The Extension of the Mid-Point Line Toward Pre-Historic Sites in Spain (9)

Besides the relationship, then, with other sites throughout ancient history, we may also observe how these lines (paths
or corridors) reflect the tectonic patterns of Earth. In other words, the corridors appear to reflect the inert movement of
the tectonic plates of the continents. Consider the following.
Nazca lies between Easter Island and Giza. The base of the triangle, it should be noted, aligns the sites of Easter Island,
Nazca and the Giza complex on almost a straight line. The baseline of the triangular alignment appears to fall between

the Nazca-Palpa region and Lake Titicaca, in Peru. Further study is required to illustrate the relationship, then, of the
Nazca-Palpa region to the other sites around the world and hydrography.
The Extension of the Mid-Point Line of Poverty Point Area in Relation to Easter Island and Giza (10)

by Charles William Johnson

Now, let us draw parallel lines to the previous mid-point line, thereby establishing lines that appear to reflect the
general angle of inclination of the outline of the continents. From this angular view, one should note as many relevant
relationships as possible. For example, notice how Easter Island aligns with the natural cut-off point of the
northernmost tip of the northern continent (around Alaska). Also, notice the angular relationship between Greenland
and the western tip of Africa, and the western coast of the United States with the southern tip of South America. The
abstracted geometrical design easily follows the sense of movement of the tectonic plates in their apparent formation
patterns.

Geometrically Abstracted North Northeast/South Southwest Angle of Inclination of Continents (12)

In the previous view, similar corridors of relevancy appear. For example, notice the relationship between the eastern
border of Greenland and the southern tip of South America; the alignment of the western part of continental Europe
with the Western tip of Africa; and, the alignment between the easternmost tip of Russia near the Bering Strait in
relation to the eastern side of the continent of Australia. These corridors are suggestive of the angle of inclination of the
Earth's axis. A composite view of the two previous illustrations would be reflective of the interplay of the Earth's axis
as follows.

Geometrically Abstracted Angles of Inclination of the Continents (13)

Further visualizations become available, however, there are far too many to illustrate in such a short essay. Consider,
nevertheless, the axis-like path running along the major river basin of the Mississippi River (along the path of Poverty
Point), as it traverses the southernmost tip of the continent of South America. That same pathway on a parallel line in
traversing the other major river basins shown would yield the following view. One can only note how the many sites
along the corridor of England (UK) lies along the pathway of the mouth of the Niger River, along with other relevant
cases, far too many to mention here.
Angle of Inclination of Poverty Point Area Corridor (14)

Angle of Inclination of Easter Island/Giza Corridor (15)

In the previous view, further relationships make their appearance as of the angle of inclination achieved by the corridor
between Easter Island and the Giza area. One can observe the relationship between the southernmost tip of the
continent of Africa and the northern tip of the Antarctic around Bransfield Strait.
Were we to continue the abstracted geometrical reasoning within the implied design, then one could imagine drawing a
line between the eastern side of Greenland and the western tip of the African continent, which would intersect with the
angle of inclination from the Poverty Point line. Then, from that point of intersection, a line could be drawn towards
Eastern Island, which would basically traverse the southern tip of South America. One thereby obtains the view of
specific corridors mapped out in nature, which are being identified by the placement of the ancient sites.
Extended Corridors as of the Basic Design Implied by Ancient Sites (16)

The additions of other lines/corridors within the logic of the abstracted geometrical figure could then be triangulated on
the grid delineated by the different sites. Innumerable relationships develop, which are far too many to discuss at this
point.
The Corridors/Pathways on a Timeline
One may further visualize the geometry of design as of a timeline, whereby we conceive of the spinning Earth,
revolving on its axis. In this manner, a particular corridor or pathway between the different sites may be extended until
it reaches its own starting point. Therefore, we may visualize the corridor running from the Poverty Point area to the
area of Giza, and onward to the Yangtze River area. For that we should repeat the map of the Earth in order to see what
kind of visual geometrical patterns obtain.
The Poverty Point/Yangtze River Area Corridor (17)

Now, if we were to mark off the corridors from the area of the Mesoamerican sites to the Giza site, which would
represent roughly one-third of the distance around the globe, then one could visualize drawing three circles along these
corridors as follows.
The Basic Unit of Measurement between Mesoamerican Sites (El mirador) and the Giza Area (18)

Carl P. Munck points out the site of El mirador (Guatemala), as being exactly one-third of the distance of the globe
from Giza ["120 degrees of longitude separate Guatemala from Egypt and 120 is 1/3rd of the 360o earth", from The
Code Newsletter #51]. The previously drawn illustration could exemplify this particular case. Although exactness is

wanting in our own illustration, the geometrically abstracted idea is therein reflected. The significant point would be to
find the path marked by the dividing line of the two circles between Giza and El mirador as shown by the
perpendicular line crossing the corridor.
By employing other units of measurements between different sites, other geometrically abstracted patterns would
obtain. For example, consider the Vesica Piscis pattern that obtains from the Easter Island Giza relationship.
Basic Unit of Measurement Easter Island/Giza: Vesica Piscis (19)

The Nazca-Palpa site in relation to Giza produces a distinctive geometrical pattern based on an ecliptic-like pattern.
The Nazca-Palpa Site/Giza Site Basic Unit of Measurement (20)

The Teotihuacan/Giza basic unit of measurement produces another Vesica Piscis pattern.
Teotihuacan/Giza Basic Unit of Measurement (21)

The Poverty Point area and the Easter Island corridor, when serving as the basic unit of measurement, produce another
ecliptic-like image.
Poverty Point/Easter island Basic Unit of Measurement (22)

The most interesting point about these geometrically abstracted designs is that they all mark off either the Tropic of
Cancer or the Equator, at the point of intersection. Again, we may thus observe how the placement of the sites and their
relationship by interconnecting corridors or paths may be designating significant forces in nature. One may
conceptualize the reflection of certain force fields, as they may be termed today.
The Great Pyramid Design
Our work in the series of essays and extracts of Earth/matriX: Science in Ancient Artwork, has been mainly concerned
with the basic designs within the ancient artwork itself. We have not contemplated, as in this essay, the relationship
among the different sites. However, if we were to take the geometrically developed patterns illustrated as of the
patterns coming out of the corridors from the different sites, we just might visualize the basic design of the Great
Pyramid.
For this illustrated view, let us take the basic unit of measurement the distance of the corridor between the Poverty
Point area and the Giza plateau. As we mark off circles using this basic measurement, a series of circles may be drawn
on the time-line. We may then connect the points where the circles intersect among themselves. And, then, we may
further draw a triangle in the following manner.

The Great Pyramid Design as of the Basic Unit of Measurement of the Corridor Poverty Point/Giza Plateau (23)

We have drawn the triangle so that the center-point is Giza itself, i.e., the Great Pyramid sits at the very center of the
design. Furthermore, the angle of inclination of the triangle drawn in this illustration approaches that of the Great
Pyramid itself (ca. 51.5 degrees).
A Series of Great Pyramids on a Timeline (24)

Observations
The ancient sites appear to be placed on a geodesic grid or matrix that encompasses the entire globe in such a manner
as to establish a relationship with the natural features of planet Earth. With a line drawn from the mouth of the
Mississippi River to the mouth of the Yangtze River, and another line drawn from the mouth of the Yangtze River to
the mouth of the Amazon River the relationship of proportional distances takes on significant meaning.
The mouth of the Amazon River appears just below the 1/3:2/3 mark on the corridor between the Mississippi and Nile
basins. The flow of the Nile River appears to cut the corridor between the mouths of the Yangtze and the Amazon in
half. The Euphrates River points towards dividing that same line into a 1/3:2/3 proportion. And, the Niger River divides
that same line between the mouths of the Amazon and the Yangtze into a proportion of 1/3:2/3 as well.

The Proportional Distances in Relation to the Major River Basins (25)

Our study of the visual patterns established by abstracted geometrical lines drawn between the different ancient sites
causes us to consider our own system of evaluation of mathematical data. Generally, if the mathematics do not fit, then
one is hesitant to conclude that a particular proposal may be scientific in nature. We rely on numbers to confirm the
behavior of matter and energy. Yet, when the numbers match, as in the case of studies such as Carl P. Munck's work,
The Code, or, in works such as those of Hugh H. Harleston, Jr., the findings are not always accepted. On the one hand,
we depend upon the mathematics to confirm our knowledge. And, on the other hand, we sometimes ignore the
mathematics when the outcome is unexpected.
However, the abstracted geometrical lines that we have drawn in the previous illustrations may be easily traced on
maps or even on a spherical globe for all to see. The alignment of the sites with specific characteristics of nature on our
planet is a visible feature of the ancient system. For all of these cultures to have aligned their sites in a haphazard
manner, coincidentally establishing specific geometrical relationships in the manner in which we have observed above,
without any contact among themselves, seems highly unlikely.
The work of Hugh H. Harleston, Jr. revealed the predictive nature of the mathematics that he applied in locating
isolated markers throughout the Western Hemisphere. The mathematics of Carl P. Munck reflects a predictive feature
of suspecting relationships among the different sites. And, the geometry that has been illustrated in these drawings may
be translated into those mathematical postulates with little effort. The relationships that have been illustrated in the
previous drawings imply other relationships, far too many to discuss in this brief essay. However, the extension of the
previously illustrated lines implies many other relationships with other sites. The relationships of the pathways or
corridors are not simply abstracted in geometry, but are visibly in relationship to natural features of the Earth (v.gr., the
major river basins, plate tectonics, the Earth's axis or angle of inclination, etc.).
The lines, that is, the corridors may possibly be reflecting fields of different forces underlying the Earth's make-up.
Many authors have postulated the idea that the ancient sites are situated near certain force fields, such as underground
water sources. Just exactly what might those forces be remains to be discerned. But, for the most part we may surmise
that the ancient sites were not randomly placed around the globe. The fact that we do not know, or ignore the possible
reasons for their placement should not serve us as a reason to deny the possibility of a conscious design or matrix for
the ancient sites. Some analysts have gone so far as to suggest that the Great Pyramid, along with all the other pyramids
of different ancient sites, are situated so as to maintain the proper revolution and rotation of the Earth on its cosmic
orbit within our solar system.
One could envision a scenario where we might unknowingly alter the make-up of these ancient sites and pyramidal
constructions to such a degree as to alter our very existence. By then, as we find ourselves whirling haphazardly out

into space, we could then see ourselves finally recognizing the reason for the existence of the pyramidal matrix.
Naturally, we are being somewhat mischievous in our argument, but exactly how mischievous no one really knows, yet
---except maybe Hugh and Carl.

Bibliography
BARRAT, Krome, Logic & Design in Art, Science & Mathematics, Design Books, New York, 1980, 325pp.
GREENHOOD, David, Mapping, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1964, 289pp.
HARLESTON, Jr., Hugh H., El Universo de Teotihuacan, Editorial Orion, Mxico, 1987, 182pp.+
MUNCK, Carl P., The Code and The Code Newsletter, P.O. Box 28, Galloway, West Virginia, 26349.