Welcome to the brand new Arthive! Discover a full list of new features here.

In the year of the dragon. Where is the dragon's tomb? (continued)

Vasily Beregovoi • Drawings and illustrations, 2024
About the artwork
This artwork has been added by an Arthive user, if it violates copyright please tell us.
Subject and objects: Literary scene
Technique: Pencil
Materials: Paper
Date of creation: 2024
Region: Luts'k
Location: Vasily Beregovoi

Description of the artwork «In the year of the dragon. Where is the dragon's tomb? (continued)»

("Dragon Rise Temple") and Ryumonji 龍門寺 ("Dragon Gate Temple"). Further, we find temples of dragon horns (Ryukakuji 龍角寺), belly (Ryufukuji 龍腹寺), mouth (Ryukoji 龍口寺) and head (Ryutoji 龍頭寺). Moreover, the temples of Dragon Cloud (Ryuunji 龍雲寺), pond (Ryuenji 龍淵寺 and Ryutanji 龍潭寺) are mentioned, sea (Ryukai-in 龍海院), valley (Ryukeiji 龍渓寺), spring (Ryugenji 龍源寺), river (Ryusenji 龍川寺), palace (Ryuguji 龍宮寺), canopy (Ryugaiji 龍蓋寺), flower (Ryugeji 龍華寺), treasure (Ryuhoji 龍寶寺), happiness (Ryufukuji 龍福寺), rest (Ryuanji 龍安寺 and Ryuonji 龍穩寺(院)), prosperity (Ryutaiji 龍泰寺), justice (Ryusho-in 龍正院), greatness (Ryugonji 龍厳寺), etc.п. Buddhist monks often had similar names; Ryūzan 龍山 ("Dragon Mountain") and Ryūshū 龍洲 ("Dragon Island") are particularly frequent. Further, we find Ryusui 龍水 ("Dragon Water"), Ryusen 龍 川 ("Dragon River"), Ryutaki 龍 澤 ("Dragon Falls"), Ryuchi 龍 池 ("Dragon Pond"), Ryu-en 龍淵, and Ryu-shu 龍湫 ("Dragon Pool"), Ryūshin 龍深 ("Dragon's Deep"), Ryūshō 龍渚 ("Dragon Island"), Ryūden 龍田 ("Dragon's Rice Field"), Ryuto 龍登 ("Dragon Rise"), Ryuho 龍峯 ("Dragon Peak"), Ryubi 龍尾 ("Dragon Tail"), Ryumin 龍眠 ("Dragon Dream"), etc.п. The large number of names mentioned in this chapter is a strong proof of a fact often mentioned in legends, i.e., the great popularity of the three varieties of dragons, Japanese, Chinese, and Indian, in ancient Japan." The drawing of the dragon from the Kitora mound shows the dragon's neck almost like the seal from Mohenjo-Daro, only in the other direction, but the head has no horn. And here a thought occurred to him. Perhaps the pyramid of Ryu is at the point where the constellation of the Dragon as if bifurcates, or something. After all, the seal from Mohejo-Daro shows two heads and necks of the Dragon constellation raised upwards. The star at the end of the neck of the Dragon constellation and would probably indicate the location of the Pyramid of Ryu (虬龍 kyu:ryu:). After a nerve-wracking internet search for the name of this star, while noting that if they were going to continue to explore the planet Mars in 2024, why was it so hard to find the name of a star in any constellation, he was able to identify this star as ε Draconis (epsilon of the Dragon). In doing this search, he came across some interesting references: "The constellation Neck is the second of the 28 Xu of the Chinese Zodiac. Chinese calendar of good luck. Element of the constellation Neck: Metal. Day: Friday. Planet: Venus. Animal: dragon. Kang is the neck of the Azure Dragon, the second constellation to appear from behind the horizon ...", "The constellation Neck is the second of the 28 Xu of the Chinese Zodiac. Chinese Luck Calendar. Neck is also the second constellation in the Eastern Palace, the Azure Dragon megastellation Tsang-lung. There are 4 stars in the constellation Neck, including Lambda and Mu Virgo ...". The information came across this type of information: "ε Draconis (epsilon Draconis)
Altitude: 71.2° Azimuth: 1.3° Direction: North
ε Draconis is a variable and double giant star in the constellation of Draco.
ε Draconis visual magnitude is 3.83. Because of its moderate brightness, ε Draconis should be easily visible from locations with dark skies, while it can be barely visible, or not visible at all, from skies affected by light pollution.
The proper motion of ε Draconis is 0.082 arcsec per year in Right Ascension and 0.037 arcsec per year in Declination and the associated displacement for the next 10000 years is represented with the red arrow.DSS2 image of ε Draconis. The red arrow shows the motion of ε Draconis during the next 10000 years (13.67 arcmin in Right Ascension and 6.17 arcmin in declination);Key aacts about ε Draconis
Color of ε Draconis⬤
Magnitude of ε Draconis3.83
Class Giant
ε Draconis (epsilon Draconis) is above the horizon from Greenwich, United Kingdom edit_location_alt.
Altitude: 71.2°
Azimuth: 1.3°
Direction: North
Celestial coordinates and finder chart of ε Draconis
ε Draconis is situated close to the northern celestial pole and, as such, it is visible for most part of the year from the northern hemisphere. Celestial coordinates for the J2000 equinox as well as as galactic coordinates of ε Draconis are provided in the following table:
Right Ascension J200019h 48m 10s
Declination J2000+70° 16' 04"
Galactic Longitude102.43°
Galactic Latitude20.83°
The simplified sky map below shows the position of ε Draconis in the sky:Visibility of ε Draconis from your location
Location: Greenwich, United Kingdom edit_location_alt
Latitude: 51° 28' 47" N
Longitude: 0° 00' 00" E
Timezone: Europe/London
ε Draconis (epsilon Draconis) is circumpolar and transits at 12:06 UTC (altitude: 71.2°)
Distance of ε Draconis from the Sun and relative movement
ε Draconis is distant 145.54 light years from the Sun and it is moving far from the Sun at the speed of 3 kilometers per second.
Distance (parsec)44.64 pc
Distance (light year)145.54 ly
Heliocentric radial velocity3 km/s
Proper Motion RA0.082 arcsec/year
Proper Motion Dec0.037 arcsec/year
Spectral properties of ε Draconis
ε Draconis belongs to spectral class G7 and has a luminosity class of III corresponding to a giant star.
Absolute magnitude0.58
Spectral TypeG7III
Color Index (B-V)0.89
Temperature of ε Draconis5023K
The red dot in the diagram below shows where ε Draconis is situated in the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram.H-R diagram showing the position of ε Draconis. Attribution: Richard Powell / CC BY-SA
ε Draconis star system properties
ε Draconis is a visual double star which can be observed with the help of small or medium telescopes. The table below shows key information about the ε Draconis double sysyem:
Main star magnitude3.83
Secondary star magnitude7.03
Magnitude difference3.2
Separation3.2 arcsec
Alternative designations of ε Draconis
Bayer designationε Draconis
(epsilon Draconis)
Flamsteed designation63 Draconis
Henry Draper CatalogueHD188119
SAO CatalogueSAO9540
SAO CatalogueSAO9540
Hipparcos CatalogueHIP97433
Durchmusterung CatalogueBD+69 1070
General Catalogue of Variable Stars12465
Aitken Double Star CatalogueADS13007
Epsilon Draconis (Tyl, 63 Draconis) é uma estrela binária na direção da constelação de Draco. Possui uma ascensão reta de 19h 48m 10.21s e uma declinação de +70° 16′ 04.2″. Sua magnitude aparente é igual a 3.84. Considerando sua distância de 146 anos-luz em relação à Terra, sua magnitude absoluta é igual a 0.59. Pertence à classe espectral G8III.
Translated by the translator: "ε Draconis (epsilon of the Dragon)
Altitude: 71.2° Azimuth: 1.3° Direction: North
dragon's ε is a variable double giant star in the constellation Dragon.
The visual magnitude of ε Draconis is 3.83. Because of its moderate brightness, ε Draconis should be easily visible from places with dark skies, while it may be barely visible or not visible at all from skies subject to light pollution.
The proper motion of ε Draconis is 0.082 angular seconds per year in direct ascent and 0.037 angular seconds per year in declination, and the corresponding displacement over the next 10,000 years is shown by the red arrow. Image of ε Draconis in DSS2. The red arrow shows the motion of ε Draconis over the next 10,000 years (13.67 angular minutes in direct ascension and 6.17 angular minutes in declination);
Color ε Draconis⬤
The value of ε Draconis3.83
ε Draconis (Dragon epsilon) is above the horizon from Greenwich, UK edit_location_alt.
Altitude: 71.2°
Azimuth: 1.3°
Direction: North
Celestial coordinates and search map of the ε Dragon
ε Dragon is located near the world's north pole and is therefore visible from the northern hemisphere for most of the year. The celestial coordinates of the equinox point J2000 and the galactic coordinates of ε Dragon are shown in the following table:
Direct ascent J200019h 48m 10s
Declination J2000+70° 16' 04"
Galactic longitude 102.43°
Galactic latitude20.83°
Draco Constellation
The simplified sky map below shows the position of ε Draconis in the sky: visibility of ε Draconis from your location.
Location: Greenwich, UK edit_location_alt
Latitude: 51°28'47″ north latitude.
Longitude: 0° 00' 00" East
Time zone: Europe/London
ε Dragon (Dragon epsilon) is near polar and transits at 12:06 AM Universal Coordinated Time (altitude: 71.2°).
Dragon's distance ε from the Sun and relative motion
ε Dragon is 145.54 light-years away from the Sun and is moving away from the Sun at a rate of 3 kilometers per second.
Distance (parsec)44.64 pc.
Distance (light-year)145.54 light-years
Heliocentric radial velocity3 km/s
Right motion RA0.082 arc sec/year
Right motion Dec0.037 arc sec/year
Spectral properties of ε Draconis
ε Draconis belongs to spectral class G7 and has luminosity class III, corresponding to a giant star.
Absolute magnitude0.58
Spectral typeG7III
Color index (B-V)0.89
Temperature ε Draconis5023K
The red dot in the diagram below shows where ε Draconis is located in the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram. The HR diagram shows the position of ε Draconis. Attribution: Richard Powell / CC BY-SA
ε Properties of the Dragon star system
ε Draconis is a visual double star that can be observed with small to medium telescopes. The table below provides basic information about the ε Draconis double system:
The magnitude of the main star is 3.83
Secondary stellar magnitude 7.03
Magnitude difference3.2
Separation3.2 arc sec.
Alternative designations for ε Draconis
Bayerε Draconis designations
(Dragon epsilon)
Flemstid63 Draconis designation
Henry Draper CatalogHD188119
Catalog SAOSAO9540
Catalog SAOSAO9540
Catalog HipparcoHIP97433
Catalog DurchmusterungBD+69 1070
General catalog of variable stars12465
Eitken's Double Star CatalogADS13007
Dragon Epsilon (Teal, 63 Dragon) is a binary arrow pointing toward the constellation Dragon. It may re-ascend at 19 hours 48 minutes 10.21 seconds and declination at +70° 16′ 04.2″. Its magnitude is 3.84. Given its distance of 146 degrees from Earth, its absolute magnitude is 0.59. Pertension of the highest class G8III.
The phrase: "possible re-climbing" led him to think of the correct image on the "Composition of signs in the form of a "coat of arms". Handwriting impression print. Approx. 3.5 cm x 3.5 cm . State Museum, Bhopal" of this star, (as two necks with two heads of one-horned dragon are shown) defining the location of the pyramid of Ryu. And the "declination at +70° 16′ 04.2″" led him to believe that the image on the Mohenjo-Daro tablet of two dragon heads with necks tilted upwards at an angle of 70° as well.
That said, on the Wikivand site, under the information about the Dragon epsilon star, perhaps by accident, but at the bottom were a number of pictures, including a picture of a pyramid: "The pyramid of Nyuserre" translated: "The pyramid of Nyuserre". And what was important to him here was that it was not the pyramid he was looking for, but what was depicted on the plan of the pyramid. Namely, the pyramid as the head of the constellation Dragon became clearly visible for him, and the "pyramid temple" and the "road" going from it to some other rectangular construction on the plan as the tail of the constellation Dragon. But here the slope of all this did not correspond to the desired 70 degrees. So he continued to look for information about the connection of the pyramids with the star epsilon of the Dragon as well as the plans of all ancient Egyptian pyramids. Almost immediately after the link: "The connection between the Alpha of the Dragon and the pyramids ...", he found on the Internet an article that interested him: "The mysteries of Angkor and the Giza plateau - the pendulum of Orion and the Dragon are revealed. Apocalypse today? 03.02.2016 65733 166 618 Igor (Vyatka, Russia) INTRODUCTION Familiarizing with information about Angkor Wat on the Internet found that almost everywhere written the same thing, simply put, written from the same source, but many for some reason do not indicate this source, as if they wrote. I will use the same source, but I will also indicate the primary source, which many do not indicate. The primary source is a book by author Graham Hancock and Santa Faya, "The Mirror of Heaven, or the Search for a Missing Civilization." The connection between Angkor and the sky was made by John Grigsby, who worked with Hancock in 1996. I will cite the original source so that anyone can read more on this subject if they wish, but I will just give excerpts and comment a bit. ANGKOR - A HOLY CITY IN CAMBOGA Name (Wikipedia source): The name 'Angkor' is most likely derived from the word 'nagara' (Sanskrit : नगर) meaning 'city'. In Khmer it reads 'noko' (Khmer : នគរ - "kingdom, country, city"), but in common parlance Khmers are much more comfortable pronouncing 'ongko'. The latter is very consonant with the concept of harvest close to the peasants, and can be, literally, translated as 'harvested grains of rice'. The name (source "Mirror of Heaven ..."): "Angkor" although considered a corruption of the Sanskrit word "nagara" ("city"), has the exact meaning "the god of Gor lives" in ancient Egyptian. There are also possible translations of the phrase Ankh-Khor: "Let Horus live", "Horus lives", and "Life is to Horus". (source "Mirror of Heaven ..."). Geography: The precise referencing of lines of longitude in the grid we use today is a political matter. By convention, adopted universally only in the 19th century, the first line of this grid, zero degrees of longitude, the so-called "prime meridian," passes through the Royal Greenwich Observatory in London. The pyramids of Giza stand 31.15 degrees east of the Greenwich meridian, ancient Heliopolis at 31.2 degrees east longitude, and the temples of Angkor Wat at 103.5 degrees. That is, the distance between the sacred land of Giza - Heliopolis, where ruled the wise men that marched astronomical "road of Horus", and the holy land of Angkor, whose name "Ankhor" literally means "the god of Horus lives", is with a slight rounding geodesically important value of 72 degrees of longitude (103 ° - 31 ° = 72 °). THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE DRAGON AND ANGKOR. Let us now mentally soar even higher above the sacred complex to encompass with our gaze all its 300 square kilometers. The large rectangle of Angkor Wat and the four times larger square of Angkor Thom are located on the western side of the landscape spread out beneath us. Within 25 kilometers to the east and 15 kilometers to the north, surrounded by jungle but still distinguishable, are the ruins of many other temples built by the same Khmer gods who erected the larger monuments. Small or large, these temples repeat in their outlines the geometry of the cosmic mandala, or yantra. Are they related to each other? Maybe we should consider them together as a kind of mandala, reproducing on a large scale some cosmic outlines? Among the surviving triumphal inscriptions of Jayavarman VII, the Khmer king who built Angkor Thom and Bayon in the 12th century A.D., a mysterious phrase was found on a stele dug up on the territory of the royal palace: "The country of Kambu (Cambodia) is similar to the sky". (Here is a very interesting point, since Egypt is also analogous to the sky. In the hermetic text known under the name "Asclepius" there are words, quote: "Don't you know, Asclepius, that Egypt is an image of the sky or, to be more exact, that everything ruling and moving the sky descended to Egypt and stayed there? Truly our earth is a universal temple"). A person who is aware of the ancient Egyptian heaven-earth dualism naturally wonders if it does not reflect the practice of erecting architectural models or "copies" of specific celestial stars or constellations on earth In 1996, John Grigsby, a 25-year-old doctoral candidate, while compiling a database on Angkor for us, made a brilliant discovery. It turns out that just as the three Great Pyramids of Giza in Egypt model the stars of the Belt of Orion's southern constellation, so the main structures of Angkor model the undulating spiral of the northern constellation of the Dragon. The temples of Angkor exactly replicate the constellation of the Dragon! There is no need to doubt this correlation: the correspondence between the main stars of the constellation of the Dragon and at least 5 main temples-pyramids of Angkor is too clear to call it anything else. Moreover, this correspondence extends to a number of other neighboring constellations located in the same part of the starry sky. Therefore, the only question that needs to be answered is whether this correspondence is a coincidence or the result of conscious activity. But, as Grigsby points out, "If it is a coincidence, it is an absolutely marvelous one. And it consists not only in the fact that the stars of the Dragon are located like the temples of Angkor, taking into account the orientation on the sides of the world, the distance between the stars correlates as the distance between the temples, and with high accuracy, given that all this is the result of a fairly complex process, which had to rely not on detailed photographs of the constellation and hand-drawn maps. There is a certain tolerance for error, with which a person draws the stars on a map, and then transfers this map to a complex terrain of hundreds of square kilometers, without being able to control the construction from the air. With this in mind, the likelihood that the Dragon Stars served as a template for the layout of Angkor is even more likely," and here he paused to report that one of the Mohenjo-Daro tablets he had translated reported, "The time of the Brahmans - people fly. And he continued reading: "Not only the Dragon stars, but also the nearby Alkaid and Kohab, which form a direct line in the sky with Tuban - which also has an 'accidental' analogy on Earth - and Deneb in the constellation of the Swan, to which corresponds the temple in West Mebon. It is also noteworthy that these temples were built over a period of about 250 years, and there is evidence that the sites of older structures (e.g. Bayon, Bafuon and Fimeanakas) were used. Therefore, it is possible that the positions of the temples were mapped when the construction was already underway". But here is the question: when was it planned? In search of an answer to this question, we came across a rather extraordinary mystery. To test Grigsby's hypothesis about the connection between the Dragon and Angkor, we used the same computer program "Skyglobe 3.6", which revealed the astronomical "template" on which the three Great Pyramids and the Great Sphinx were erected in Giza. The main advantage of this program is that it allows you to calculate the effect of precession on the position of the stars and accurately simulate the picture of the starry sky, which makes it possible to observe it as it would look from any point on the surface of the Earth, at any epoch with the accuracy of a particular month, day, hour and minute. Grigsby did not address the question of the date when the Dragon-Angkor correlation could have been performed, he simply mentioned that it was general in nature and evident in all epochs. It seemed to us, however, that if it objectively exists, it should be dateable. We reasoned that if the placement of the temples on Earth was indeed the result of a conscious action to reproduce the position of the Dragon stars, then precessional calculations should answer our question as to exactly what sky the temples were copying - in other words, the sky of what epoch. There is indisputable archaeological and textual evidence that the temples of Angkor were built by specific and prominent Khmer monarchs, almost all of whom ruled during the four centuries between 802 and 1220 CE. We therefore hypothesized that if the correlation is conscious rather than random, it must correspond to the sky pattern during these four centuries; since precessional changes over such a period are almost indistinguishable, we can assume that the sky is almost unchanged from the beginning to the end of the four-hundred-year period. We began our study with the date of 1150 AD, when Suryavarman II, "Protected by the Sun," the Khmer divine monarch who erected Angkor Wat as his funerary temple, passed away. And, since Angkor Wat is by far the largest and most complex structure in the entire Angkor complex, the "main temple," we have chosen to pay special attention to its firm and uncompromising east-west orientation, which marks it out as "equinox" (in the same sense that the Sphinx is "equinox" - that is, aiming and in a sense signifying, proclaiming the exact direction of sunrise and sunset on the day of the vernal equinox). The deliberate shift of the axis of Angkor Wat by 0.75 degrees south of the purely easterly direction and the same 0.75 degrees north of the westerly direction is part of the overall design of the temple and serves as a "three-day warning" to the observer of the onset of the equinox. This effect was well described in Science magazine: On the day of the vernal equinox, an observer standing at the southern edge of the first stretch of road (just before the entrance to the western gate) could see the sun rise directly over the top of Angkor Wat's central tower. Three days later, the sunrise directly over the central tower can already be observed from the middle of the road leading to the west gate... This accurate observation of the sun on the day of the vernal equinox is extremely important. Since we were familiar with this reasoning, we decided that we should pay attention to the sky over Angkor at dawn on the day of the vernal equinox in 1150 A.D. It seemed to us that such an approximation would be a good test for the Dragon-Angkor correlation. If it was at this very, very remarkable moment that the correspondence actually took place, then Grigsby's point would receive new confirmation. On the other hand, if the correlation was not performed over Angkor on the day of the vernal equinox in 1150 CE, it would seem to reduce the likelihood that the development was deliberately made according to an "astronomical template". The dragon is a northern constellation, near polar in high latitudes. As such, it moves slightly eastward or westward during its nocturnal journey. Rather, it slowly orbits around the north celestial pole. Hence, it follows that to observe the constellation of the Dragon, the observer's gaze must be turned to the north. It also follows that if the temples of Angkor were designed as a "replica" of the Dragon on Earth, then they too should be observed looking north. Generally speaking, ideally, the test of the validity of the proposed correlation should be made at the moment when the observer, positioned strictly south of Angkor, could at dawn look directly north and "see" (of course, in the imagination) the great geometric walls and temples and, directly above them, in the northern sky, spread along the meridian serpent-dragon constellation Dragon. Clearly, such a "mental image" could only have been strengthened by the certainty, inherent in experienced astronomers, of the exact position of all the stars in the sky, whether they were visible or not, at noon or at midnight, at sunset or at dawn. In other words, although all the stars in the sky are "swallowed" by the light of the rising sun at least half an hour before the actual moment of sunrise, we were prepared to assume that astronomers with the kind of expertise that provided the orientation of Angkor Wat could well, like their modern counterparts, calculate the exact position of the Dragon in the sky at the moment of sunrise on any given morning. So, the Skyglrub takes us back to 1150 AD, the day of the vernal equinox. 6:23 a.m.! Half of the sun's disk peeks out from the horizon in the east. At this moment, the Dragon is prostrate on the meridian at what astronomers call the "upper culmination" of its nightly route - but not in the position we had hoped for. Compared to the sprawling temples of Angkor on the ground, the constellation appears, oddly enough, "upside down," that is, rotated 180 degrees. We made the program scroll through the entire diurnal cycle of the sky in search of the time when the Dragon will be in the same position as the temples. Such a moment comes 12 hours later, at exactly 6.23 pm, the exact time of the constellation's "lower culmination". Alas, there is no correlation at this time either. Occupying the "correct" position, the Dragon is now (at 6.23 pm) far below the horizon line, that is obviously out of sight. We decided to give the correlation another chance and ran through the program first the whole year 1150, and then the whole epoch from IX to XIII century to see if there was a single moment when the Dragon was above the horizon in the lower culmination. With some surprise we found that there was no such moment, and for a quite simple reason: in the epoch in question, the ascension (height above the horizon) of the constellation was too low, so that the lower culmination always occurred below the horizon. In other words, during the period when, as far as we know, the temples of Angkor were built, there were no instances at all - including on the days of the vernal equinox - that the Dragon was above the northern horizon line in its lower culmination. Our first instinctive reaction was to regard this as evidence that the correlation was most likely in the nature of a coincidence. Whether it is coincidental or not, however, it is very difficult to ignore the fact that the temples accurately reproduce the mutual location of the main stars of the constellation of the Dragon at its lower culmination, and the fact that all these stars were in the sky above Angkor (and certainly on the meridian) at dawn on the day of the vernal equinox in 1150. The problem, though, is that they were at their upper culmination, i.e. "upside down" at that time. How serious is this problem? And is it really an argument in favor of the correlation being random? Do you find it too strange that all the stars and temples correspond exactly to each other except that the celestial "template" is rotated exactly 180 degrees with respect to the "model" on Earth? Precession is the engine that very slowly "rotates the sky", with a period of 25,920 years; just as slowly at the same time it changes the altitude at which the stars cross the meridian. Could it not be that a computer search would find an era when the Dragon was at a higher altitude and therefore could be above the northern horizon (rather than below) in such a way that the temples correspond exactly to it? How not to think of Giza, where the correlation between Heaven and Earth was not at all perfect in 2500 BC, when, as it is supposed, the pyramids and the Sphinx were built, but as the computer simulation shows, the complete analogy was observed at dawn on the day of the vernal equinox in 10,500 B.C. And how not to remember that the pyramids and the Sphinx are as if specially designed to lead to the understanding of the grandiose changes that the heavens undergo during the long precession cycle. Do you remember that this cycle progresses at a rate of 1 degree in 72 years? Now remember that Angkor is 72 degrees east of Giza, where the pyramids and the Sphinx stand. And while there is absolutely no archaeological evidence that there was any construction going on at Angkor in 10,500 BC (or indeed that people were living there), we felt we just had to check out what the sky looked like in that distant era. Since sunrise on the day of the vernal equinox in 10,500 BC falls at the moment when the whole picture of the earth and sky comes into exact correspondence, including the location of Orion on the meridian, we gave the computer the task: to simulate the sky over Angkor exactly at dawn on the day of the vernal equinox in 10,500 BC. b.C. And we were not mistaken: as ordered, Orion was exactly in the south, on the meridian - exactly as in Giza; the only difference was the change in perspective caused by the lower latitude of Angkor - 13 degrees 26 minutes north compared to 30 degrees 3 minutes Giza. And, as if on cue, the Lion was exactly in the east, directly above the rising sun, just like at Giza. The only difference was the slight tilt of the constellation due to the change in latitude. Then we instructed the computer to look to the north, although we had never paid attention to the northern sector of the sky over Egypt and did not expect to see anything special there. And we were surprised to find that at the moment of sunrise on the day of the vernal equinox in 10,500 BC the constellation of the Dragon was exactly in the north in the middle of the sky, extending on the meridian high enough above the horizon and exactly reproducing in the sky the location on Earth of the main temples of Angkor. Thus, here, as at Giza, there is also a certain moment of the precessional cycle when there is an exact correspondence between the terrestrial and celestial pictures, and quite remote in the past. Remarkably, in both cases this moment coincides! It is also interesting that the temples of Angkor do not model any random constellation, nor do they replicate the two constellations used at Giza, namely Orion and Leo, which marked south and east in the dawn sky on the day of the vernal equinox in 10,500 BC; instead, they model the snake-like wriggling constellation of the Dragon, which is exactly north at this very moment. So at Giza stand the "temples of Orion" in the form of the Great Pyramids, which looked like Orion in 10,500 BC, and the "temples of the Lion" in the form of a Sphinx with a lion's body and adjoining structures, replicating the Lion of the same year. And if there is some secret connection between Giza and Angkor, would it not be quite logical for the latter to continue this line, imitating in several hundred square kilometers the constellation of the Dragon, the "Old Serpent," as it looked in 10,500 B.C.? EXCERPTS FROM "FOOTPRINTS OF THE GODS" BY G. HANCOCK BUWEL STARS AND WEST STONES the location of the pyramids of Giza and the constellation of OrionIn 1993, a stunning discovery was made that showed that we still had much to learn about ancient Egypt. And made it, by the way, not some inveterate archaeologist, diligently sifting through the dust of the centuries, but an outsider, a specialist in a completely different field. It was Robert Buvel, a Belgian civil engineer with a penchant for astronomy, who discovered in the sky what was overlooked by specialists accustomed to look only at the ground beneath their feet. And what Buvel saw was the following: at the moment when the stars that make up Orion's belt cross the meridian of Giza, they are located in the southern sky, although almost in a straight line, but not quite. The two lower stars, Al-Nitak and Ap-Nilam, form the perfect diagonal of the square, and the third, Mintaka, appears to be shifted to the left of the observer, that is, to the east. And what is curious: as we saw in Chapter 36, this is exactly how the three mysterious pyramids are placed on the Giza plateau. Buvel found that on the plan of the Giza necropolis, Khufu's Great Pyramid corresponds to the position of Ap-Nitak, the Second Pyramid (Khafra) takes the place of Ap-Nilam, and the Third Pyramid (Menkaure) is offset to the east in relation to the diagonal formed by the other two, thus completing what gives the impression of a huge diagram of a section of the starry sky. Do the pyramids of Giza really play such a role? I knew that Buvel's recent work, which has been very warmly received by mathematicians and astronomers, confirmed his suspicions. He had shown (see Chapter 49 for more on this) that the three pyramids are indeed a kind of accurate map of the three stars in Orion's belt, not only accurately showing their relative positions, but also characterizing by their relative sizes their stellar magnitudes. Moreover, this map has a continuation to the north and south, including a number of other objects on the Giza Plateau, and again with unmistakable accuracy. However, the most surprising part of Buvel's astronomical exercise lies ahead: although some features of the Great Pyramid are related astronomically to the Pyramid Age, the Giza monuments as a whole are so placed as to form a map of the sky (which is known to change its appearance as a result of the precession of the equinoxes) not as it looked in the IV Dynasty around 2500 BC, but as it looked (and only as it looked!) around 10450 BC. West's evidence relates to several key structures, namely the Great Sphinx and the Temple of the Valley at Giza and, much further south, the mysterious Osirion at Abydos. He argues that the surfaces of these desert monuments show unmistakable signs of water erosion; water, as the medium causing erosion, could only have been present in sufficient quantity for this process during the wet, "rainy" period that accompanied the massive melting of the ice in the eleventh millennium BC. The consequence of the discovery of this characteristic fast-moving type of erosion is that Osirion, the Sphinx and other related structures were erected before 10,000 B.C. One English investigative journalist characterizes the situation thus: West is a real nightmare for the academic world; imagine some nutter from the outside comes in with his elaborate, well-presented, coherent theory, full of data they can't refute, and pulls the rug out from under their feet. What are they left to do? They ignore the whole thing. They think it will go away...and it doesn't. The reason the new theory could not "go away" despite being rejected by the herd of "competent Egyptologists" is that it had gained widespread support from scientists in another specialty - geology. Dr. Robert Schoch, professor of geology at Boston University, was instrumental in confirming West's estimates of the true age of the Sphinx, "and his position was supported by nearly 300 attendees at the annual conference of the Geological Society of America in 1992. From that point on, a heated debate between geologists and Egyptologists began to unfold, mostly in secret from the general public. And while very few could participate as actively as John West, the debate essentially centered on a complete reversal of views on the evolution of human civilization. According to West: We are assured that the evolution of human civilization is a straightforward process of development from the stupid cave dweller to us - the smart ones, with all our hydrogen bombs and striped toothpaste. But the evidence that the Sphinx is many thousands of years older than archaeologists think, and that it in particular appeared many thousands of years earlier than dynastic Egypt, means that once upon a time, in the far, far past, there must have been a highly advanced and sophisticated civilization - as all the legends claim. My own travels and research over the past four years have opened my eyes to the staggering possibility that these legends could be true; that's why I returned to Egypt to meet West and Buvel. I was shocked to see how their hitherto independent research had convincingly converged on the astronomical and geological traces of a missing civilization that may (or may not) have originated precisely in the Nile Valley, but seems to have been present here in the eleventh millennium BC. Shoch concluded his speech at the Association's meeting by saying: It is well known that the trench around the Sphinx in the particular conditions of the Sahara desert fills with sand very quickly, over a period of several decades. It has to be periodically shoveled out. And this has been the case since ancient times. And still you have the opportunity to observe this characteristic erosion profile on the walls of the trench. To explain this, there is no other way but to agree with my logic: this characteristic wear and tear on the body of the Sphinx and the trench dates back to those distant times when there was more rainfall in this region, higher humidity, more frequent rainfall on the Giza Plateau. Schoch admitted that he was not the first geologist to note the "anomalous weathering pattern of the Sphinx body associated with precipitation." He was, however, the first to engage in a public discussion of the implications of this discovery for historical science. He stressed, however, that his business was geology: I am told again and again that, as far as we know, the people of Egypt had neither the technical nor the organizational capacity to carve the Sphinx out of the rock in pre-Dynastic times... I believe that this is not my problem, because I am a geologist. I am not trying to absolve myself of responsibility, but it is actually the job of Egyptologists and archaeologists to find out who carved the Sphinx. If the results of my findings contradict their theory of the development of civilization, then maybe it's time for them to reconsider that theory. I'm not saying the Sphinx was made by Atlanteans, or Martians, or aliens from outer space. I'm just following the path that science leads me down, and it's leading me to the conclusion that the Sphinx was made much earlier than believed... The roots of Buvel's discoveries at Giza go back to the 1960s, when Egyptologist and architect Dr. Alexander Badawi and American astronomer Virginia Trimble showed that the southern shaft of the king's chamber in the Great Pyramid was, like a cannon barrel, aimed at Orion's belt during the Pyramid Age - around 2600-2400 B.C. The Sphinx was not the same as the Sphinx.e. Buvel decided to check the southern shaft of the queen's chamber, which Badawi and Trimble had not investigated, and found that it was aimed at Sirius in the Pyramid Age. This was confirmed by German engineer Rudolf Gantenbrink through measurements made with the Upuat robot in March 1993. This is the same robot that detected the lifting flap door blocking the shaft at a distance of about 60 meters from the queen's chamber. With the help of a state-of-the-art on-board clinometer, the little machine was able to measure the inclination of the shaft for the first time with high accuracy: 39°30'. As Buvel explains: I did the calculations, and they showed that the mine was aimed at the passage of Sirius through the meridian at an epoch close to 2400 BC. There can be no doubt about that. I have also recalculated Badawi and Trimble's data regarding Orion's Belt, taking into account the measurements of the southern shaft of King Gantenbrink's chamber. According to his measurements, the angle of inclination is exactly 45 degrees, while Badawi and Trimble used Flinders Petrie's somewhat coarser measurements (44°30'). The new data allowed me to refine Badawi and Trimble's results. In doing so, I found that the mine was precisely aimed at Al-Nitak, the lower of the three stars in Orion's Belt, which crossed the meridian at 45° around 2475 BC. Up to this point the conclusions of Buvel do not contradict chronological calculations of orthodox Egyptologists, who usually dated the erection of the Great Pyramid 2520 BC. That is, it turns out that Buvel's data even point to a slightly later construction than is commonly believed," - here he paused to insert his commentary: "or to the catastrophic shift of the axis of rotation from the constellation of the Dragon to the constellation of the Little Bear," - and continued reading: "As the reader already knows, Buvel has made another discovery, capable of disturbing much more. It, too, has to do with the stars of Orion's Belt: They are tilted southwestward on the axis of the Milky Way, while the pyramids are also tilted southwestward on the axis of the Nile. If you look closely on a clear night, you can see that the smallest of the three stars, the one at the top, which the Arabs call Mintaka, is slightly offset to the east of the straight line on which the other two stars lie. This pattern is reproduced on Earth, where the pyramid of Menkaure is similarly offset east of the straight line formed by the pyramid of Khafra (the analog of the middle star, Al-Nilam) and the Great Pyramid, which represents the star Al-Nitak. It is obvious that the three monuments are placed on a single plan, which with high accuracy modeling the location of these three stars ... Thus in Giza depicted on Earth Belt of Orion. And then there's more. Using the complex computer program capable to define caused by precession changes in inclination of all visible stars in any part of the world in any epoch, Buvel has established that position of pyramids approximates reproduces position of stars of the Belt of Orion always, but precisely corresponds to it only in one case: In 10450 BC. - and only! - the position of the pyramids on the Earth exactly reflects the position of the stars in the sky. I mean perfect correspondence, unmistakable, and it cannot be accidental, since the whole complex correctly displays two rather unusual celestial phenomena that occurred only at this time. First, absolutely by chance, the Milky Way, as it was seen at Giza in 10450 B.C., exactly reproduced the meridional direction of the Nile valley; second, to the west of the Milky Way, the three stars of Orion's Belt were at minimum altitude according to the precession cycle, with Al-Nitak, corresponding to the Great Pyramid, crossing the meridian at an angle of 11°08'. The reader is already familiar with how precession of the Earth's axis makes the sunrise on day of vernal equinox migrate on zodiacal circle with period about 26 thousand years. The same thing happens with the inclination, of all visible stars, causing, in the case of the constellation of Orion, a gradual but noticeable change in altitude. Thus, from the highest point of the meridian passage (58° 11 above the southern horizon at Giza) for 13 thousand years Al-Nitak descends to the lowest point, last recorded in 10450 BC, which is immortalized in stone on the Giza plateau - that is, 11°08'. Over the next 13,000 years, the Belt stars will slowly rise again until Al-Nitak returns to 58°11'; in the next 13,000 years, they will descend again to 11°08', and so on. This cycle is eternal: 13 thousand years up, 13 thousand years down, up and down, up and down, and so on forever. At Giza, we see the exact configuration of 10450 BC. - as if some architect came here in that era and decided to make a huge map of the Earth using natural and man-made objects. On this map, the Nile valley directed along the meridian depicts the Milky Way in its then direction. The three pyramids represent the three stars - exactly as they looked then. And he placed the three pyramids relative to the Nile valley the way the three stars are placed relative to the Milky Way. It turned out to be a very clever, very ambitious and very precise way of marking an epoch - if you want to freeze a specific date in architecture...", - an interesting conclusion on the activity of dragon officials before the catastrophe, he made a remark, continuing to read: "FROM "THE MIRROR OF THE HEIGHTS" The builders of Angkor worked according to some single project that came from outside, which for some reason they had to realize within a certain period of time. The existence of a similar project at Giza in 2500 BC could also explain the mystery of the sudden appearance of the great Egyptian pyramids and related smaller structures at Saqqara (this is the same pyramid of Djoser built by Imhotep, information about which is in the book Sensei IV) with the Pyramid Texts. These tremendous cultural achievements of Dynasties IV, V, and VI had no precedent or subsequent counterparts. And just like the pyramids, temples, bas-reliefs and inscriptions at Angkor, they were completed over a period of about 420 years (from 2575 to 2152 BC). Jayavarman II may have brought this design with him when he arrived in Cambodia "from across the seas" in 800 AD. Or he may have received it from a learned brahmin "skilled in magic" who initiated him as a god-king in 802. We can only speculate. His forty years of "circling" around the site, like the behavior of subsequent monarchs, is consistent with the implementation of the project. In general, it seems that each of the Khmer rulers made a contribution corresponding to his own capabilities: some of them limited themselves to a single temple built in one place or another, while others - especially Suryavarman II and Jayavarman VII - erected a series of large monuments in a relatively short period of time. Moreover, few of these monarchs were able to enjoy peace: most had to defend their borders against invasion by hostile barbarian hordes and at the same time continue to erect 72 major structures in the Mekong floodplain in accordance with the prescription, which allowed Cambodia to be rightly called the land "Like the Sky". The number 72 is found in Angkor and in another form, I will not dwell on it in detail, my task is to cite passages linking Angkor with the sky and Egypt. The beginning of the construction of Angkor is clearly associated with the appearance of the Hidden Man, who apparently gave Jayavarman II or one of his close associates, perhaps a Brahmin, the very "Star Map", which is mentioned in the book "Sensei IV. The Native of Shambhala" and on which Imhotep built. The excerpt was given in the topic "Human Energy Construction. A truncated pyramid with a top", I will not duplicate it. Life and works of Jayavarman VII deserve special study. During the 38 years of his reign, he purposefully and energetically built not only a huge wall enclosing Angkor Thom, but also the temples of Ta-Prom, Banteay-Kidei, Neak-Pean, Ta-Som, Sra-Srang, the so-called Elephant Terrace and the Terrace of the Leper King (both on the territory of Angkor Thom), Krol-Kro, Pra-Palilai, Prasat-Suor-Prat, Pra-Khan and, last but not least, Bayon. One can understand scholars who declare Jayavarman to be a megalomaniac and the motivation behind his gargantuan building program to be the sweet call of a hypertrophied ego: "inexhaustible willpower in the service of mania", as one critic puts it. Yet among his constructions are so many that correspond to the major stars of the constellation of the Dragon that it could hardly be explained by mere chance. Moreover, several objects are earthly reflections of notable stars from the neighboring constellation of the Little Bear - and in the position they occupied at dawn on the day of the vernal equinox in 10,500 BC." - or before the catastrophe, the aftermath of which is evidenced by the gigantic "backfill" of Angkor, and which forced the people to leave it, he remarked, and went on to read: "The complex of structures erected by Jayavarman VII and representing heaven on earth includes Angkor-Thom, Ta-Prom (1186.), Banteay-Kidei (believed to be the earliest of his temples), Neak-Pean, Ta-Som, Sra-Srang, Pra-Khan (1191) and most recently, the striking and imposing Bayon, completed in 1219 just before his death. Modern historians who explain this feverish building program as megalomania call it "a building orgy with a brief but intense period of titanic, almost frenzied architectural activity." Though in the inscriptions we have quoted in the previous chapters, Jayavarman does not appear to be a self-centered lunatic at all. On the contrary, he makes it clear that his temples were part of a grand plan to extract the 'ambrosia of immortality' for 'all those struggling in the ocean of existence'. It is also known that he considered the monuments of Angkor to be an effective tool in this quest, due to their special qualities as "mandalas of the mind." It is easy to see how the behavior and cosmic functions of Orion and the Dragon resonate from the point of view of the ancients. This, by the way, is confirmed by scientific observations, which state their connection through the great cosmic swings of the precessional cycle, which swing up and down like the pendulum of Time. A computer simulation spanning thousands of years shows us how, as Orion rises in the southern meridian, Dragon steadily descends in the northern meridian. When the Dragon reaches the extreme lower position, Orion reaches the extreme upper position. Then the second half of the cycle begins as the Dragon rises and Orion descends. The "up" movement lasts just under 13,000 years, the same length of time the "down" movement lasts. And so it goes on - up and down, 13,000 years there, 13,000 years back, according to its own eternal purposes and laws. What is particularly intriguing is that the celestial-terrestrial layouts of Angkor and Giza recorded the highest point of the Dragon's trajectory and the lowest point of Orion's trajectory, in other words, the end of one half of the precession cycle and the beginning of the other. This was observed, as we know, about 10,500 B.C.; at that epoch the north pole of the ecliptic was exactly north of the celestial north pole at dawn on the day of the vernal equinox, and the then arrangement of the stars was taken as a model for placing the monuments of Angkor and Giza on the Earth. That golden age is long gone. Since then, the stirrer of precession has managed to rotate the celestial pole by half a circle relative to the pole of the ecliptic. The Orion-Dragon pendulum has swung almost to the extreme in the opposite direction, and today Dragon is near its lowest point and Orion is near its highest point. In other words, as in 10,500 B.C., standing at the gates of immortality, the clock of celestial time is ready to start counting down. Anyone who is familiar with the hermetic formula "at the bottom as at the top" should take this situation as a sign that great changes are coming; whether they will be for the better or for the worse depends largely on humanity's own choices and behavior. Good words from the author in the last paragraph, aren't they? Intuition is a good thing. In CONCLUSION It is possible to summarize a little under all above written: In Egypt on a plateau of Giza the star map of a site of the sky with constellation Orion is designated; On 72 degrees to the east there are temples of Angkor which also display a site of the sky of constellation Dragon (snake); Orion in the south rises, and Dragon in the north lowers. The cycle is about 13,000 years. Then Orion descends, the Dragon ascends. This cycle is eternal and this cycle was known thousands of years ago; Scientists have found that during this cycle the 3 stars of Orion's "belt" are always sliding along the meridian: then they are located at the top, gaining height above the horizon, then at the bottom - losing height above the horizon at the moment when they pass the meridian. In this cycle, the lowest point corresponds to 10,500 BC, but the highest point can be observed after 2000 AD; the Sphinx also points to 10,450 BC (Edgar Casey claimed that the Sphinx was built between 10,490 and 10,390 BC); (!!!) The structures on the Giza Plateau and in Angkor point to the same date, or the interval 10500-10450 BC. What is this date, why was it so eager to be marked? It is possible that approximately every 13 thousand years on the earth there are some changes, global scale, cataclysms, earthquakes, floods, volcanic eruptions. They are somehow connected with the Orion-Dragon pendulum. Accordingly, we were designated the zero point, the time of the last cataclysm, indicated the cycle by building structures in Egypt and Cambodia, so that we, looking into the sky, determined the zero point and, knowing the cycle, could assume when we should wait for the next such global changes. You can rewrite the history of mankind even a hundred, even two hundred times, but the stars in the sky are not under the control of the Archons, their hands are short; (!!!) There is 0, there is a time period, there is an instruction with the help of which you can avoid a global catastrophe ... what else do you need!? Here is another excerpt from the book "Sensei. The Primordial Shambhala" - Well, how, if humanity as a whole was evaluated as a spiritually progressive community, it was preserved. And if it is dominated more from the beast, that is, material essence, then the same history of "global cataclysms" that happened to some other previous civilizations is repeated. And for the "breeding" of matter for the souls of the next civilization was left no more than 1/10th of the total number of people... Mankind chooses its own way, and the actions of Shambhala are only the consequences of this choice. (book "Sensei. Shambhala's Primordial")" - about the latter he made another remark - and always artists survived to start from scratch.

Continuation follows. Beregovoy V.I. "In the Year of the Dragon. Where is the Tomb of the Dragon?"