Not far up the river Avon from Stonehenge is a less famous, but equally important site, that of Woodhenge. And the difference from Stonehenge is just like it sounds…Woodhenge was made from timbers and Stonehenge is constructed of stone.
There is a theory that believes that the difference in the construction elements of these two sites was intentional and meaningful. This theory holds that Woodhenge was constructed from timbers as symbols representative of life or the living and that Stonehenge was constructed out of stone, a non-living or ‘dead’ material and thus represented death. With new techniques and technology there have been new discoveries. One of the discoveries that connects these two sites is the finding of ‘Avenues’ leading from both sites toward the river Avon and thus connecting both. Therefore, the theory draws a conclusion that this was a funeral ritual conducted that commenced at the Woodhenge and proceeded to the Avon, down the river to the ‘Avenue’ to Stonehenge.
I would argue that one issue with this theory is that to date there has been NO significant finds of the remains of this ritual. Which is the same paradox that occurs in another very famous ancient site that is stated as the tomb of ancient leaders and their ‘partners’ or Queens. And the comparisons are more than just the missing dead!
Where is this other famous site! It is the Giza Necropolis. As we have shown in previous posts that ‘fact’ that the Pyramids were tombs does not hold water when common sense is applied. However, if we look in comparison, between, not just the Woodhenge-Stonehenge relation to Avon, but also the ‘Avenue of the Dead’ in Teotihuacan, which while not in proximity to a river, contained large pools of water down the center of the avenue, we find similar details.
All three sites have very specific astronomical alignments. The alignments not only correspond to the Sun rise on certain days, such as the Summer Solstice in the case of Stonehenge and Giza, as well as, Teotihuacan being aligned 15.5 degrees East of due North (possibly cause it was the position of the Sun rise ‘on the certain day of summer‘), but also the lay out or the locations and the inclusions of elements within the sites.. There are also comparisons that could be argued, between the layout of Giza with the position of elements of the skies, as well as, the correspondence between the layout of Pyramids along the Avenue of the Dead at Teotihuacan, with other elements of the skies closer to Earth.
Focusing on Giza, we find incredible causeways that lead to or from the river Nile, depending on your point of view or maybe on the time of year or ritual that might be being preformed. We see the alignment of the Pyramids with the cardinal points, as well as, the Sphinx facing the rising Sun on the Summer Solstice. Other comparisons include the similarity between the lay out of the Pyramids with the stars of Orion’s belt; and the shafts within the Great Pyramid that seem to point at other certain stars of mythological importance to the Ancient Egyptians. There is also the fact that another very important site of ritual of Ancient Egypt is like Woodhenge to Stonehenge, the site of Heliopolis is located down the river Nile from the Giza Necropolis. While Heliopolis was believed to be the place of worship of the Sun God, Ra, and it was the ‘Cult of Horus’ held the constellation Orion in high regard as the place of Horus in the Sky; we must remember that Orion was the celestial location of the pharaohs in their afterlives. Horus was the son of Isis and Osiris, the son and daughter of Geb and Nut, the son and daughter of Shu and Tefnet, whom were created by Ra. Thus there is not a clear separation of Ra and Horus as some scholars would imply. Furthermore, both gods are associated with rebirth, the afterlife, the cycle of life. So it would appear that there is more connection than distinction between Heliopolis and Giza, just as we see between Woodhenge and Stonehenge.
It would seem that, our linear view of time and life have blurred our ability to understand the view of our ancestors, whom seem to have understood the cycle or endlessness of existence better than we do. It, also, appears that, with regard to the commonalities between the skies and ancient monuments, past civilizations were more knowledgeable about our place in the universe than we seem to be. It is ironic that we seem to need computers and high powered telescopes to see what our ancestors saw; and that we also need advanced math and physics to contemplate the vastness that they took as just what was!