27. The Definitive 2008 Satellite (GPS) Survey of Woodhenge conducted by the Jenks' brothers. Modern surveys like this, are made possible by the monument's excavator, Maud Cunnington, who stripped the site bare in 1926/28 and had concrete posts placed to represent where timber posts once stood in Bronze Age times.
Most people think that the plan of Woodhenge made by Professor Alexander Thom, is the authoritative version. But we dismiss Thom's plan as criminally corrupt.
28. This is the result of the Jenks' survey, and there is none more accurate.
Maud Cunnington's colour scheme, which she had painted on top of the concrete posts, lacks sufficient clarity for computer screens. A new colour scheme, more suitable for purpose, is offered as seen above.
Woodhenge consists of six eggs with six extra posts, painted black. Professor John North named these black posts, 'Supernumerary's.'
This is the moment in 2008 when Professor Mick Aston of the Time Team learned from me that Woodhenge had been surveyed by the Jenk's brothers.
From my booklet, Woodhenge, Mick learnt that it was a moon-egg with geometry that proved the Megalithic Yard. He also learnt, and despaired of the corruption that was willingly adopted by his colleagues. Mick Aston 1946/2013.
29. The first Woodhenge Mandate was to produce six eggs based on near-Pythagorean, triangles. The second mandate was for every egg to be aligned on the northernmost rising moon. That is because Woodhenge, like the moon, was considered female by Stone Age folks.
30. The third mandate was to describe the profiles of its six eggs using massive timber uprights, whilst also obeying the Stone Age 10-degree rule. That is why the profiles of its eggs appear inaccurate, when in fact, it was deliberate.
31. The excavator, Maud Cunnington, numbered the posts her way. Professor Thom numbered them another way still. But that was before anyone realised that the Beaker Folk had to respect the 10-degree rule and the cardinal points of the compass. Consequently, the plot of Woodhenge has had to be numbered yet again!
Starting with the equinox, the East to West line was fixed in place by supernumerary S1, together with B16, F1, C1 and B1. This line passes centrally through the three-and-a half-year-old-girl-child's grave at centre.
32. The founding geometry of Woodhenge's outer Egg A. Triangles are not quite Pythagorean. Not that the designers would have known it.
Egg A is founded on three circles, which makes it easy to determine this egg's axis of symmetry as being about 40-degrees from north. (39.5 in the next diagram)
33. The real solstice corridor.
Maud Cunnington was the first to notice that a pair of supernumerary posts seem to suggest the presence of a corridor that points towards the summer solstice. What Maud failed to realise is that many posts serve to pin down Woodhenge's 50-degrees axis. Note how the child's grave is framed by a pair of 50-degree lines.
So, we now have a proper corridor with an exact azimuth of 50-degrees, which passes centrally over the grave. Note also how high-power sunrays, due to a sun having escaped earth's atmosphere, slices right through the moon-axes of this and the other eggs, before going on to illuminate the child's grave.
The fact that Woodhenge was meant to be a moon-egg, and that the Neolithic moon is proven female, shows Maud to be correct in saying that the burial was that of a girl, and, despite what you might have been told on TV, she was contemporary with the monument.
Bear in mind too that the timber posts, which probably stood up to four metres high, would further have restricted the width of the corridor to around half a megalithic yard -- perhaps only eighteen megalithic inches -- just like Stonehenge.
34. Woodhenge Hypothesis. Such complexity boils down to something as simple as a Moon-aligned egg, intended to be fertilised by the sun at solstice. The implication for the Stonehenge Hypothesis is for something equally as simple...... A baby sun!
35. WOODHENGE: one of two keys which unlock the hypothesis of Stonehenge. Photographed on summer solstice morning, 2009.
The white tape on the right, very nearly marks Maud Cunnington's postulated solstice corridor. The tape is seen to aim to the right of Sidbury Hill. It also takes in Silk Hill, but Silk Hill is not resolved in this photo.
The tape on the left marks the axis of symmetry of Woodhenge's two outer eggs and this points to the left of Sidbury and to the northernmost moonrise. This axis was first found by making folded tracings and were later proved correct on CAD.
Woodhenge was a moon-egg intended to be fertilised by intense sunlight passing down stated corridor. So, what do you think Stone Age folks hoped to get by building it?
Regarding Maud's suggested corridor.
Maud thought the corridor aimed 50.5-degrees from north. That is why I state it as 50.5 in the above picture, which I produced years ago. But we now know that the corridor is 50-degrees, because it adheres to the 10-degree rule.
Sunrise 4,500 years ago was almost one-degree further north than it is today -- to the left as seen in the photograph -- making it well clear of earth's atmosphere before entering Woodhenge's egg-fertilising corridor.
36. Sidbury Hill and Silk Hill are not too clear in the previous picture, so we have moved a few hundred metres further north and took this picture in broad daylight from the top of the Durrington Walls Henge. The dished shape of the henge, in this picture, which was not taken with a fish-eye lens, is obvious.
When archaeologists excavated the top of Sidbury Hill they found that water-rolled stones, probably taken from the Avon, had paved its crest. Some believe that the stones were placed as a way of turning the world upside down. Remember the inverted tree found in the middle of the timber structure known as Seahenge in Norfolk?
We have comprehensively shown that Woodhenge's eggs are aligned on the moon. So why do archaeologists still ignore the facts. As an answer, let's consider how and why Professor Alexander Thom made such a mess of his Woodhenge survey. And in his own hand-written notes.
37. This is how the lying Professor Alexander Thom turned his survey of Woodhenge into gobbledegook to hide its true purpose.
Please do not try to understand it, because it is way over the top.
The picture of Thom's handwriting, seen on the right, says.....
"Survey was made with a tape having a stretch of 0.6% (to 0.5 at 50 feet). Hence the megalithic fathom would have measured 5.44 divided by 1.006 or 5.41 feet. Hence 5.41 feet is the unit used in setting out this diagram. It is thus applicable to the survey plotted with no stretch correction."
Also note his pencilled correction of ?0.4% when AT wonders if 0.4% might be better than 0.6%. Thom's diagram on the left says...
"Tape stretch 0.6% on 100 feet, 0.5% on 50 feet. Note: The plot is of the raw material, therefore, any measurements taken from the plot must be increased by 0.6% or as shown above.
As you can see, AT complained that he had measured Woodhenge with a stretchy tape and claims to have estimated exactly how much was needed to be deducted from his measurements to put things right. This is a distinct lie because he is known to use steel tape.
Quote. "A very careful survey, using a steel tape and theodolite, was made of the concrete posts (Avebury) which the excavators placed in the post-holes in the chalk." Megalithic Sites In Britain. A Thom, Oxford University Press, 1967.
The concrete datum post in the centre of Woodhenge is a modern fixture for survey. It was probably specially placed there for Professor Thom's sole use. Thom took his measurements from the centre of this post, which remains on-site to this very day. Thom, living in Oxford, at the time, could easily have taken the short trip to Woodhenge to put matters right. One single measurement check could have solved everything. But he didn't even bother!
So, the conclusion has to be that Professor Alexander Thom deliberately distorted his plan of Woodhenge by making an undersize plot of it.
Thom's plot of the outer egg (Thom himself called Woodhenge an egg) is proven by CAD to be 12.6 inches undersize (0.32 Metres). And If all this wasn’t bad enough, he skewed the solstice 'round a bit' to make it look as if its six eggs were aligned on the sun, when they are not.
Professor Thom, a highly skilled engineer with an Oxford University Department of Engineering named after him, was not capable of such obvious mistakes, but clearly had an ulterior motive for abandoning his cherished Megalithic Yard.
The images seen above are from Alexander Thom's notebook which was gratefully provided by Edinburgh Museum. The museum also provided me with Thom's co-ordinates, which when plotted on computer, give a plot of Woodhenge that is upside down.
There is no getting away from the fact that Professor Thom was a good guy until he came to Wiltshire and met some archaeologists. This would have been in the 1950's.
Thom started off, like so many of us, by becoming fascinated by our Stone Age monuments and their purpose. Living in Dunlop in Scotland in his formative years, AT was a keen and qualified engineer, who set out to prove that Scotland's many stone circles, flatted circles, and egg-shapes, were all measured out using one common standard of length. He named this standard - The Megalithic Yard.
Dismayed archaeologists protested strongly against Thom’s discovery that Woodhenge was a geometric moon-egg based on his Megalithic Yard. They wanted Woodhenge and Stonehenge to be maintained as profitable mysteries, whereas Thom’s survey gave away the whole Stone Age hypothesis in one go! Hence, archaeologists requested, nay, insisted he disguise the truth and distort his Woodhenge plan out of all recognition.
So, despite the years of hoping to gain acceptance for his Megalithic Yard, Sandy Thom complied with the request and produced a corrupted plan by deducting 0.06% off every one of his measurements. He also twisted the plot of this egg clockwise to point at the mid-June sun.
However, Sandy made one big mistake. One post of Ring A, being unadulterated, escaped the 0.06% treatment. That post - like a signature of deceit - identifies Thom's survey as corrupt for being the only post in its proper place!
My folded tracings which I made in 2007, proved Woodhenge to point at the moon, as did the 2008 GPS survey made in 2008.
Thom's 'Yard' came under much criticism from the establishment, and he was told - despite having surveyed some 400 of the things - to go away and find further proof by measuring still more of them!
Well he did, he went for the Biggy - Avebury. Not that it did him, or us, much good.
Apparently, I am not the first to make folded tracings of Woodhenge that prove the monument to be aligned on the moon. A certain Mr Musson, an architect writing in the appendix of Professor’s Wainwright and Longworth’s book ‘Durrington Walls,’ (And Cunnington's Woodhenge) had already made tracings in 1971 to prove that Woodhenge points at the moon. He too was silenced.
Quote. Some objections to Thom’s propositions have been advanced by Wainwright and a purely visual study of the published plans made during the preparations of these notes raises further doubts about some of Thom’s analysis. In this study as smooth a line as possible was drawn through each ring of post holes: this was then copied on tracing paper, reversed, and adjusted over the original drawing until the closest fit was judged to have been obtained: the long axis of the rings – as actually dug – could then be found by simple graphical method. The orientations so obtained were as follows:
Axis of rings (Cunnington’s Woodhenge) AB 36.5, CF 40.5, and DE 43.5 degrees.
Axis of rings (Thom’s) AB 44.0, CF 47.0, and DE 48.5 degrees.
C. R. Musson 1971 (architect) Durrington Walls 1966-1968. Society of Antiquaries, London 1971, p374.
Averaging Musson’s results gives 43.33-degrees, which is some 6.5-degrees to the north of the solstice, and therefore in an area of sky impossible for the sun to visit. Even so, what Musson would have given for my computer!
From the above, we can see that archaeologists knew the truth about Woodhenge at least as long ago as 1971. How many more lies and corrupt archaeology do we have to suffer?
This is an affront to science that prevents us from moving on!
38. Using one-megalithic-yard-diameter timber posts, Ring C is based on a pair of 6.5 by 20.5 by 21.506 non-Pythagorean triangles.
39. Bearing in mind that folding's are not an exact science: A folded tracing suggests Ring C to be aligned 40.6-degrees, which could be 40 clockwise from north. So Ring C is aligned slightly in advance of, and in preparation for the coming of the Major Standstill.
40. Ring D aligned on moon
41. Ring E. With an azimuth of 46-degrees, Ring E is aligned midway between the sun and moon, just like Avebury's Cove. The colour-coded arrows represent the moon as blue, the axis of Ring E as black, and red for the solstice.
This egg aims straight at the heart of Sidbury Hill.
42. Ring F. Azimuth 44-degrees midway between sun and moon. Position of child's grave, almost certainly that of a 4-year old girl, is also shown. This ring also aims at the heart of Sidbury Hill - taking the girl-child, or perhaps just her spirit with it!
43. This image appears by kind permission of Hugo Jenks who noticed that a 10-degree sighting line could be made between sides of opposing pairs of timbers in Ring C. This idea developed out of Hugo's work on Stonehenge.
This image harks back to the Arminghall Henge and the way Arminghall divided the sky into 10-degree steps too. Who was it that said Beaker People arrived too late to be the technicians that designed Stonehenge?
Maud Cunnington was the first to notice a preference for ten's when she excavated Woodhenge in 1926-8. I'm not sure how she came by it, though! More proof of an astronomy in tens, will be provided in the next image and also when we consider Stonehenge's lozenge's of gold, as found in the moon-aligned Bush Barrow of Stonehenge. And that's not to mention the now destroyed, moon-aligned prehistoric track, that once passed by the Bush Barrow.
44. Further thought convinced me that perhaps Hugo's alignments ought to pass right through and out the other side of every one of Woodhenge's six eggs. So, I thought I might give it a go and see what happens. Above is the result.
45. Taking a Mallet to Crack an Egg.
From the archaeological report PDF. A Massive, Late Neolithic Pit Structure associated with Durrington Walls Henge. Gaffney et al.
Archaeologists recently found a series of at least 20 pits to surround the Durrington Walls henge. It isn't known for sure how many of these pits are man-made, natural sink-holes, flint mines, something to do with the military, or a mixture of all.
I think Pit 1A might be the man-made hollow that goes by the name of Ratfin. Either way, I am going to assume that all 20 posts are man-made prehistoric .
Relying heavily on archaeologists published plans, which appear to be accurate, layering their figures 3, 4 and 23 in CAD, tells us a lot about the circuit of the Durrington Walls Henge. Especially those pits lying to the south.
One thing is very clear, Durrington Walls started off by following the rules laid down by the Arminghall henge, but on a massively larger scale. As at Arminghall, some posts were accurately aligned on the cardinal points of the compass, north, east, south and west, whilst other pairs divided the horizon into steps of 10-degrees. Avebury subdivided some 10's to make 5's. See Beckhampton's Cove.
The difficulty of placing posts accurately over such large distances was addressed by a having a second series of posts on what would one day become Durrington Wall's bank. These post more than halved the distance and made them visible. (I show two of them in red).
The posts beneath Durrington Wall's southern bank have been known about for some time, the southern bank largely levelled years ago by medieval ploughing. Archaeologists announced the discovery of some underground anomalies in this area which looked like a row of stones. A small rectangular dig was conducted by Professor Pearson to investigate. Pearson considered these anomalies to be timber posts.
After setting out the pits and placing massive timber posts at their centres, what appear to be wattle fence arcs were run between them. These arcs are another express of growth. The three known arcs were found to run from posts 9A to 5A as seen above, right.
These arcs were found to scale at 375, 750, and 1,500 megalithic yards, giving an expression of growth.
The 1,500 megalithic yard arc, (3,000 MY diameter), is twice Avebury's largest (What did you expect from Stonehenge?). But the 1,500 arc is concave to the circuit, which also might tell us something about Avebury! This idea will be put to you later.
Please press the Stonehenge Gold button.