Woodhenge

The Jenks brothers surveyed Woodhenge by GPS in 2008.

Hugo Jenks is seen placing a prism on top of a post to mark its position for the Total Station operated by his brother.

Modern surveys like this are made possible by the monument's excavator, Maud Cunnington, who stripped the site bare between 1926 to 1928 and had concrete posts placed to represent where timber posts, fashioned from whole tree trunks, 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 can dismiss Thom's plan as criminally corrupt.

50. This image appears with the kind permission of Hugo Jenks, who noticed that a 10-degree sighting line could be made between sides of opposing pairs of timbers in Egg C. This idea developed out of Hugo's work on Stonehenge.

This image also relates to the Arminghall Henge and how that henge divided the sky into 36 steps of 10 degrees as long ago as 3.150 BC. Who said Beaker folk arrived too late to be the technicians that designed Stonehenge? They were present all along! Beaker pots did not build Stonehenge. People did!

Maud Cunnington was the first to notice a preference for ten's when she excavated Woodhenge in 1928, but I wonder how she came to this conclusion! More proof of astronomy in tens will be provided in the following image and when we consider Stonehenge's lozenges of gold, as found in the moon-aligned Bush Barrow of Stonehenge.

And that's not to mention the moon-aligned prehistoric track, now destroyed, which once passed by the Bush Barrow.

36. Woodhenge, built by Beaker Folk.

The first Woodhenge mandate was to produce six timber eggs based on Pythagorean, or near-Pythagorean, triangles.

The second mandate was for those eggs to be aligned on the northernmost rising moon because Woodhenge, like the moon, was considered female by Stone Age folks.

The third mandate was to leave a passageway through Woodhenge to admit high-power sunlight to enter and fertilize the egg.

The fourth mandate was to leave open a more northerly exit through the ditch and bank for the newly fertilized egg to exit and illuminate that part of the night sky the "real" moon never gets to visit.

38. Woodhenge renumbered.

The excavator, Maud Cunnington, numbered the posts her way. Professor Thom numbered them his way. But that was before anyone realized that Beaker Folk respected the 10-degree rule and the cardinal points of the compass. Consequently, the plot of Woodhenge has had to be numbered yet again!

As seen above, the new count starts with black supernumerary S1, which, together with B16, F1, and C1, pins down east-west with a 90/270-degree line. It also passes through the three-year-old girl's grave, with cleft skull placed near the center. Despite archaeological suggestions to the contrary, this child’s burial is contemporary to the monument.

40. Woodhenge 50-degree solstice corridor.

Maud Cunnington was the first to notice two supernumerary posts that suggest the presence of a corridor that points towards the summer solstice, and she marked its angle as 50.5 degrees from the north. However, that was before we learned of the 10-degree rule.

From the above, we can see that many posts serve to pin down this axis, and it is not 50.5 but 50. Also, note how these 50-degree lines frame the child's grave.

Note also how high-power sunrays, due to the sun having escaped earth's atmosphere, slice right through the axes of every egg before illuminating the child's grave.

The fact that Woodhenge was meant to be a moon egg and the Neolithic moon was considered female proves 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, some of which probably stood up to four meters high, would further have restricted the width of the corridor to around half a megalithic yard -- perhaps only eighteen megalithic inches -- just like Stonehenge.

42. Woodhenge summer solstice.

One of two keys that unlock the hypothesis of Stonehenge. This Photograph was taken on summer solstice morning, 2009.

The white tape on the right accurately marks Maud Cunnington's postulated solstice corridor. This tape is seen to aim to the right of Sidbury Hill. It also takes in Silk Hill, which, unfortunately, is not resolved in this photo.

The tape on the left marks the axis of symmetry of Woodhenge's two outer eggs, which point to the left of Sidbury and the northernmost moonrise. This axis was first found by making folded tracings and was later proved correct on CAD.

Woodhenge was a moon egg intended to be fertilized by intense sunlight passing down a 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 the 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 genuinely 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 -- i.e., to the left of that seen in the photograph.

So the sun cleared the earth's atmosphere before entering Woodhenge's egg-fertilizing corridor.

********

43. Sidbury Hill and Silk Hill are not too evident in the previous picture, so we have moved a few hundred meters 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 is clear to see.

When archaeologists excavated the top of Sidbury Hill, they found that water-rolled stones, probably collected from the river 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 in the middle of the timber structure known as Seahenge in Norfolk?

44 This is how Professor Alexander Thom corrupted his survey of Woodhenge to hide its true purpose.

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 why Professor Alexander Thom made such a mess of his Woodhenge survey. And in his hand-written notes.

Please don’t try to understand it, for it is way over the top.

Thom's handwriting, seen on the right, says.....

"Survey was done with a tape stretching 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 penciled 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 flexible tape and claimed to have estimated precisely how much was needed to be deducted from his measurements to put things right.

This is a blatant lie because he is known to use steel tape.

Quote. "A 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 center of Woodhenge is a modern fixture for surveys. It was probably placed there for Professor Thom's sole use. Thom took his measurements from the center of this post, which remains on-site.

When living in Oxford, Thom could have taken the short trip to Woodhenge to put matters right. But he did not bother. One single measurement, taken as a check, could have resolved it.

So, the conclusion must be that Alexander Thom deliberately distorted his plan for Woodhenge by making an undersized plot.

Thom's plot of the outer egg (Thom himself called Woodhenge an egg) is proven by CAD as 12.6 inches undersize (0.32 Metres). And if all this wasn’t bad enough, he skewed his plan to make it look like its six eggs were aligned with the sun when they were 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 had an ulterior motive for abandoning his cherished Megalithic Yard.

The images seen above are from Alexander Thom's notebook, which Edinburgh Museum gratefully provided. The museum also provided me with Thom's coordinates, which, when plotted on a computer, give a plot of Woodhenge that is upside down.

There is no escaping the fact that Professor Thom was a good guy until he came to Wiltshire and met the archaeologists researching Stonehenge. This would have been in the 1950s.

********

Living in Dunlop in Scotland in his formative years, AT was a keen and qualified engineer who proved that Scotland's many stone circles, flatted circles, and egg shapes were all measured 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 the Megalithic Yard. They wanted Woodhenge and Stonehenge to be maintained as mysteries for profit, whereas Thom’s survey of Woodhenge gave away the whole Stone Age hypothesis in one go!

Hence, archaeologists requested, nay insisted, that he disguise the truth by distorting 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 a small amount from every one of his measurements. He also twisted the plot of this egg clockwise to miss the moon and point at the mid-June sun instead.

However, Sandy made one big mistake. The position of one timber post of Ring A escaped the treatment. Like a signature of deceit, that post 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.

Thom's 'Yard' came under much criticism from the establishment and was told - despite having surveyed more than 400 stone circles - to go away and prove it by measuring even more!

Well, he did; he went for the biggy - Avebury. Not that it did much good.

******

I’m not the first to make folded tracings of Woodhenge that prove the monument to be aligned on the moon. C. R. Musson, an architect, writing in the appendix of Wainwright and Longworth’s book ‘Durrington Walls,’ (Also Cunnington's Woodhenge), had already made tracings in 1971 to prove that Woodhenge points at the moon. Unfortunately, Musson, too, was ignored.

Quote...

Wainwright has advanced some objections to Thom’s propositions, and a purely visual study of the published plans made during the preparations of these notes raises further doubts about some of Thom’s analyses. 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 (From Cunnington’s book of 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, p 374.

Averaging Musson’s results give 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. What would Musson 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. So how many more lies and corrupt archaeology do we have to suffer?

I'm convinced that Professor Thom behaved like a man who took a bribe yet left sufficient clues for some keen investigator to see through this charade and finish his work for him. -- namely to prove the Megalithic Yard - which hardly needs proving - and to show how and why he cunningly omitted to adopt the Yard himself.

45. Woodhenge Egg C

This egg was built from sixteen one-Megalithic Yard diameter posts to give two rings that increase by two megalithic yards to express growth -- three with a profile that passes through the center of the posts. This egg is based on a pair of 6.5 by 20.5 by 21.506 triangles. Egg C's tracings suggest its axis be aligned 40.6 degrees from the north.

So, this ring is aligned slightly in advance of the Major Standstill. I.e., the moon at Major Standstill will surpass it by 0.6 of a degree.

52. Taking a Mallet to Crack an Egg.

Archaeologists recently found at least 20 pits to surround the Durrington Walls henge. It isn't known how many of these pits are natural sinkholes, flint mines, something to do with the military, or a mixture of all.

I think Pit 1A might be the artificial hollow that goes by the name of Ratfin. Either way, I will assume that all 20 pits are 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 'Super circuit' surrounding the Durrington Walls Henge. Especially those to its south.

One thing is obvious, Durrington Walls started by following the rules laid down by the Arminghall henge, but these pits place it on a massively larger scale.

As at Arminghall, some posts were accurately aligned on the cardinal points of the compass, while other pairs divided the horizon into steps of 10 degrees.

Avebury subdivided some of their 10's into 5's -- See the report on Avebury’s second cove at Beckhampton, which comes later.

The difficulty of placing posts accurately over such large distances was addressed by having a second series of posts on top of Durrington Wall's bank. These posts more than halved this great distance by making the outer posts visible. (I highlight two of the henges posts in red).

The posts beneath Durrington Wall's southern bank have been known for some time, the southern bank being leveled years ago by medieval plowing.

Further, Professor Pearson discovered some underground anomalies beneath Durrington's bank, which he believed to be a row of stones. He investigated these anomalies, which turned out to be the remains of timber posts.

Wattle fences, making large arcs, were found to run between some posts as expressions of growth. Three large arcs, in particular, were found to run from posts 9A to 5A, as seen above in the image on the right. These arcs scale to 375, 750, and 1,500 Megalithic Yards.

From the archaeological report PDF. A Massive, Late Neolithic Pit Structure associated with Durrington Walls Henge by Gaffney et al.

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 might tell us something about Avebury's unresolved north-eastern arc!

Please press the Stonehenge Gold button.

Stonehenge gold