Part 3: Poussin's Code: the 'Two Points in the Cycle'
By Gary Osborn
Written by Gary Osborn, 2004.
Copyright © Gary Osborn 2004. All Rights Reserved
Again, today’s estimates for the 26,000-year Precessional cycle is around 25,776 years, although my own estimates make it 25,758 years.
What we find is that Poussin had encoded both points in the precessional cycle.
Using the round figure of 26,000 years he pinned the Alpha-Omega ('beginning and end') point of this cycle at the beginning of the Age of Leo, which began roughly 13,000 years ago – i.e., 11,000 BC. I estimate the year of the beginning of the Age of Leo to be 10,704 BC, but its unlikely that Poussin and others would have known this.
In his calculations 2000 AD - 13,000 years later - would then be the halfway point in the cycle.
These are the two dates Poussin encoded by using the changing angle of the constellation of Orion – i.e. how it would have looked during these two epochs.
How do we know that Poussin encoded the 11,000 BC Orion alignment?
Easy, we take the staff held against the left shoulder of the young shepherd in red. We then orientate our picture of Orion – i.e., twist it or skewer it to the left so that the right shoulder line of Orion at this time matches the angle of the staff.
Figure 1: The angle of the left shoulder of Orion around 11,000 BC.
This again is Orion’s left shoulder, and explains why the three staffs in Poussin’s painting were leaning against two left shoulders and one right shoulder.
It also explains why Poussin did not use the staff held by the shepherd in red to give the angle of the left shoulder of Orion in 2000 AD. If he did this, then we wouldn’t have had our attention brought to this 11,000 BC part of the code.
By first having discovered the first three alignments made to Orion by the legs and right shoulder of the shepherd in rose-white, we would have looked harder for the fourth alignment and logically, we would have found the angle by mirroring the staff held by the bearded shepherd against his left shoulder. After this, only the staff held by the young shepherd in red remained, and knowing that this too represents Orion’s left shoulder we would have then made the logical step of twisting Orion over to the left so that both angles of these 'left-shoulder lines', lined up exactly – discovering how Orion would have looked around 11,000 BC.
But how could Poussin have known how Orion looked in 11000 BC?
Again, simple. If we take it that Poussin had been told that the three pyramids of Giza were reflections of the three stars of Orion’s Belt, but that their orientation goes back to the beginning of the precessional cycle, then all he would have to do is take the picture he had of Orion in 2000 AD (which doesn’t look much different to how Orion looked in his day) and skewer or twist the constellation to the left until the first two stars in Orion’s Belt – Al-Nitak and Alnilam – both align precisely on a 45 degree angle – roughly the same angle as the two large pyramids at Giza which represent these stars.
If we do the same, we note again that the angle of the left side of the body and shoulder of Orion now matches the angle of the staff held by the shepherd in red.
However, I should again point out that by my new calculations, the precessional cycle as regards the lowest point on the Giza Meridian for Orion, really begins on the morning of the Vernal Equinox of the year 10704 BC, and moves on up to its highest point on the morning of the Vernal Equinox in 2175 AD. So then if we accept that Poussin worked to the 11,000 BC, alignment, Orion would have been 8 degrees away from its lowest point in the cycle. In other words it was still on its way down – taking 500 years before it began to rise again. So perhaps Poussin and others were mistaken that 11,000 BC was the ‘First Time’ - but close enough.
Yes, and not just the 2000 AD position, but also the 11,000 BC position!
(Note how the lines cross each other at the centre and on top of the tomb
In Poussin’s painting, the bottom line of Orion in 2000 AD is the angle of the top edge of the stone sarcophagus.
The top line of Orion in 11,000 or 10,000 BC is the bottom edging of the angled edge of the stone sarcophagus, merely showing us that the 11,000-10,000 BC position on the Giza meridian is below the 2000 AD position, which it is.
The bottom line of Orion around 11,000-10,000 BC begins from the left eye of Isis and ends at the tip of the staff held by Osiris – his left shoulder. These are the stars Rigel (left foot of Orion as marked by the left eye of Isis) and Saiph (right foot of Osiris.)
However, the tip of his staff is the left shoulder of Orion, being Bellatrix.
The ancients referred to the star Bellatrix as the “female warrior” or the “Amazon Star”, which could be applied to Isis, however, it was also known as the “Roaring Conquerer” and the “Conquering Lion” – epithets that could easily be applied to Horus the young ‘Lion King’, being the reincarnation of Osiris, and it was he that took revenge on his uncle Set and conquered him. So we are being told that this star on the left shoulder of Orion is also the left eye of Horus and the left eye of Isis – both of which are connected to the right brain of wisdom.
As regards the alpha-omega point, one immediate thought would be, was this the time when the pyramids were built?
After all, the approx 45-degree orientation of the three pyramids match the 45-degree orientation of the three stars in Orion’s belt for both 11,000 or 10,000 BC. Well my answer is ‘No, or at best ‘not likely’ – although the time of 11,000 BC is important as it seems to mark the beginning and end point in the precessional cycle.
Was this the time when the axis first tilted?
Again, No, not necessarily, as the theory put forward by Allan and Delair (see here also) could be the right one – i.e., that the axis first tilted between 10,000 and 9,500 BC and from this time the precessional cycle began. Again, this would mean that this cycle has only existed for the duration of less than half a revolution – i.e., 11,500 years.
But its also possible that this lowest point of Orion on the horizon at Giza, marks the point in the cycle when the precessional cycle first began and after the axis first tilted, and this first moment when time began – the ‘First Time’ – as marked by Orion’s position, could also have been many precessional cycles ago.
In his own code, Poussin was really only bringing attention to an ancient code, which appears to be pointing to a 'Golden Age' in our past and before a worldwide cataclysm – the same information that appears to have already been encoded in the architectural layout of the Giza complex.
In any case, when all is said and done, the above really places the “cat amongst the pigeons”, because 1), it provides supporting evidence that there is a definite connection between the pyramids of Giza (I will reveal this connection which has been hiding in the painting in my book Axis of God) and Orion, which goes some way to validate Robert Bauval and his Orion Correlation Theory, and 2), somehow Nicolas Poussin knew about it . . . But again, how could he have known?
Well my conclusion is that Poussin had learned this from Athanasius Kircher and/or “others” who were “in the know”.
Kircher was an adept astronomer who would have known about Precession.