Orion ConnectionThe Orion Enigma
by Bill Stanley and Woodlock
Is monumentation on the Martian surface depicting the constellation of Orion evidence of an Egypt, Mars, Orion connection? In the months since their startling discovery, independent researchers Bill Stanley and Woodlock struggled daily with the prospect of introducing their find on the Internet. After much deliberation, they are presenting now, a preliminary evaluation of anomalous structures on the Red Planet. The mathematical probability of landforms on the Martian surface (imaged by the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft) randomly duplicating the positions of numerous stars in Orion and adjacent constellations seemed to be astronomical. Several years back, author and Egyptologist Robert Bauval noticed a correlation between the stars in the "belt" of Orion and the orientation of the Giza Pyramids in Egypt. His theories were recently detailed in his best-selling book, The Orion Mystery. Is it possible an ancient trail-head of clues on the Giza Plateau, in fact lead to an even more profound mystery ... on Mars - a path mankind was destined to follow?
A Position Statement Regarding The So-Called 'Wider Plan' Of The Star-Pyramid Correlation Theory
By Robert Bauval, July 24, 1998
I am the author of The Orion Mystery (co-authored with Adrian Gilbert) and the author of Keeper of Genesis (co-authored with Graham Hancock). Some critical questions have recently been raised in connection with the so-called "wider plan" of the Orion-Pyramids correlation theory presented in the above mentioned books for which I would like to formally and publicly state my present position on this matter. The core of the Orion-Pyramids correlation theory, which I started to develop in 1983, was based on the pattern of the three stars forming the Belt Of Orion, namely Al Nitak, Alnilam and Mintaka (Zeta, Epsilon and Delta Orionis). This theory was presented during 1983 to 1986 to various eminent Egyptologists and other academics, including Dr. I.E.S. Edwards, Dr. T.G.H. James, Dr. Jaromir Malek, Dr. Cathleen Keller and others. It was subsequently submitted to Dr. Alessandra Nibbi, editor of the Oxford journal Discussion In Egyptology in 1988 and published in Vol. 13, 1989, pp. 7-18 under the title A Master Plan For The Three Pyramids Of Giza Based On the Configuration Of The Three Stars Of The Belt Of Orion. In this article I conclude that "A Master Plan with intent to correlate the great pyramids of Giza with the pattern of the Belt of Orion appears very likely indeed. A question which must follow is: does this master plan include a wider correlation between the geomorphic of the sky landscape about Orion (three belt stars) and the landscape about the Giza necropolis? Raising this question is justified, for the Pyramid Texts indeed confront us with complete celestial topography onto which actual terrestrial natural and man-made features are imagined to exist."
In the same article I bring to attention that "it is worth noting, therefore, that the relative position of the Belt of Orion to the Milky Way also correlates to the relative position of the Giza pyramids to the Nile." The DE vol.13 article does not mention other pyramids or other natural features in the so-called 'wider' plan hypothesis other than the Nile River adjacent to the Giza region. Much later, in 1994, in my book The Orion Mystery (first by published by William Heinemann in February 1994 ) I suggested that the pyramid of Zawyat Al Aryan and the pyramid of Abu Ruwash were reprenting stars in the constellation of Orion, namely Bellatrix and Saiph, and that the two pyramids of Dahshur correlated to two stars in the Taurus-Hyades constellation, namely Aldebaran and Epsilon Tauri. These supplementary correlation to the core theory of Giza Pyramids/Orion's Belt theory became known as the 'wider plan' when Prof. Vivian Davies, curator of the Egyptian Antiquities Department at the British Museum coined the phrase on the BBC2 Everyman Special documentary The Great Pyramid: Gateway To The Stars (based on The Orion Mystery). Prof. Davies, too, stated that he did not agree with this 'wider plan' because he had great difficulty in considering the possibility that the ancient Egyptians could mark the position of stars on the ground over distances of several kilometres. This was a fair and reasonable comment which was also reiterated by Dr. Jaromir Malek, Director of the Griffith Institute at the Ashmolean Museum in his review of The Orion Mystery (see DE vol. 30, 1994, pp. 101-114).
It must be pointed out that the 'wider plan' hypothesis does not in any way alter the core element of the Orion-pyramid correlation theory presented in DE 13, 1989, namely that the three large Pyramids of Giza and their relative position to the meridian axis of the Nile correlate with the three stars of Orion's belt and their relative position to the meridian axis of the Milky Way. This Giza/Orion's belt correlation is strongly buttressed by the various passages in the Pyramid Texts (viz. PT 802, 820 etc..) and, of course, the alignment of the southern shaft of the King's Chamber in the Cheops pyramid with Orion's belt (precessed to the epoch c.2500 BC).
There is much doubt among Egyptologists, even today, as to whether the 'unfinished' pyramid of Zawyat Al Aryan belonged to the IV Dynasty or to the III Dynasty. The 'pyramid' itself, as seen today, is but a large underground infrastructure cut into the natural rock and leaves much doubt over its originally intended dimensions or, indeed, whether the project was 'abandoned' before beginning the superstructure with quarried limestone blocks. As for the Abu Ruwash pyramid, most Egyptologists seem to agree that it belonged to the IV Dynasty king, Djedefre (a son of Cheops), although very little remains of the superstructure of this pyramid, and it, too, may have remained 'unfinished'. It is also noteworthy that towards the end of the Ivth Dynasty, the king Shepseskaf departed from the classical pyramid structure completely and opted to construct a structure of a quite different nature in the shape of a giant mastaba. All this, and the positional discrepancy first pointed out by Dr. Jaromir Malek in 1994 of these two pyramid in relation to the Giza/Orion's belt datum compels me now to discard them as part of the overall star correlation plan instigated at Giza or assume, at best, the possibility that the 'unfinished' state of these pyramids reflects their ' inaccurate ' astronomical positioning relative to Giza.
As for the two Dahshur pyramids, these are known with a reasonable degree of certainty to have belonged to the pharaoh Snefru, father of Cheops. I maintain my view that these two pyramids strongly appear to represent the two principal stars of the Taurus-Hyades constellation, although not necessarily tied to the datum or node of Giza. Here at Dahshur the same applies as Giza, notably the meridian 'misalignment' of the two Dahshur pyramids (a similar clue as the misalignment of the Menkaure pyramid at Giza) and their relative position to the axis of the Nile river. Other textual clues are discussed in great detail in The Orion Mystery chap. 8).
