Grid of the Gods (21 page)

3. Devereux and the Possibilities of a Deeper Physics

For Devereux, all of this is a manifestation of the continuance within various local lore and tradition in Great Britain of the ancient Druidic philosophy of the
prime matter
, the physical medium itself.
²⁹
The Druids, it seems, laid out all their sacred sites along straight lines, much as did Chinese practitioners of the geomantic art of
Feng Shui.
³⁰
Like Hancock and Faiia, whom we encountered in the previous chapter, Devereux began to understand that he was looking at more than just a philosophy confined to megalithic sites in northwestern Europe and Great Britain:

At these monuments we are in the presence of
technology
, the impressive remains left by a group of races who were the founders of what has become today’s ‘Western culture’, which has put its stamp, indeed has stamped, over most of the world.
³¹

For Devereux, this technology was designed to manipulate some “life force,” the power of the physical medium itself: “It could be accumulated and controlled to some extent, and esoteric technologies were developed to this end.”
³²

In short, we are looking at an
alchemical
technology, an alchemical
architecture
whose very blueprint is the entire grid itself.

But to understand just how intricate and carefully planned that grid was, and how that planning is further evidence of
a coordinated effort
on the part of a group or groups possessing the knowledge and techniques to do so, we must, inevitably, do a little mathematics, for it is in the numbers and measure of the placement of these sites, as well as the numbers inherent in the structures placed upon them, that we begin — at first dimly, then with growing light and illumination — to perceive just how deep the physics embodied in them might actually be, and how high a civilization actually left them.

C. Munck and the Grid

Grid researcher Carl P. Munck has been investigating the intricacies of the world grid with a mathematical precision that is unparalleled both in its breadth and in its depth, leaving almost no relationship unfathomed between virtually each place on that Grid and every other place on it. Indeed, Munck himself would object that his approach is not so much mathematical as it is arithmetical.
³³
For Munck, who calls himself an “archaeocryptographer,” numbers are indeed the code that links and decodes each component structure on the global matrix, not only in terms of its own unique position and purpose, but also in terms of decoding its relationship to the other localities on the grid. In this approach to the primacy of numbers as the key to the Grid system, Munck is not alone, as we shall see, but he is certainly alone in the degree to which he has carried out detailed calculations.

While more will be said in a moment about the details of Munck’s method in decoding this complex numerical relationship embedded in the Grid, one component of it has already been mentioned in the
previous chapter in our examination of Hancock’s and Faiia’s study of Angkor Wait, and it must again be highlighted here: for Munck, as for other Grid researchers,
the Grid only makes arithmetical or numerical sense if one first uses Giza, or rather, the apex of the Great Pyramid itself, as the prime meridian of the ancient world,
³⁴
and secondly, only makes arithmetical and numerical sense if one uses — astonishingly — the British imperial system of measures and not the metric one.

When this is done, an astonishing set of precisely placed relationships between various sites on the world Grid emerges, between such seemingly culturally unrelated sites as:

1)  The largest North American Indian mound at Grave Creek, Moundsville, West Virginia, and Sillbury Hill in England;
³⁵

2)  Chichen Itza in southern Mexico and Giza;
³⁶

3)  Teotihuacan, outside of Mexico City, and Giza;
³⁷

4)  The Florida circles and the Avebury circle in England;
³⁸

5)  Uxmal and Tikal in Meso-America, and Giza;
³⁹

6)  The Nazca lines in Peru, and everything else, for according to Munck, this very old and strange monument — only visible from the air! — is a kind of Rosetta Stone to the global Grid system;
⁴⁰

7)  Tikal in Central America, and everything else, for according to Munck, this site, like the Nazca Lines in Peru, is a kind of “directory” to the world Grid;
⁴¹

And on and on we could go, almost endlessly uncovering new relationships, so long as the apex of Giza’s Great Pyramid is used as the prime meridian. And to this we may add, as we saw in the last chapter,

8)  Angkor Wat, and Giza.

At most of these sites, one encounters one of two types of construction: either a pyramid (or an earthen mound), or a stone or earthen circle.

When one estimates the total number of such structures throughout the world one obtains a rather astonishing figure: “85 in Egypt so far, more in the Sudan, over 100 in China, hundreds in Mexico, several dozen in Gautemala, several (unexplored) in Ecuador, estimates for 400 in Peru (all destroyed), the Akapana in Bolivia and reports of a super pyramid in Tibet.”
⁴²
To that, we may now add yet another, recently-discovered pyramid in Bosnia, unknown at the time Munck wrote his book.
⁴³
When one adds to this number all the various mounds of effigies or totems of various animals and the various stone henges and earth circles, one is looking at literally tens of thousands of monuments, all precisely placed on a huge global matrix.
⁴⁴
The purpose of all this placement according to Munck was, in part, precisely to
mark
significant locations on the matrix, but the reasons for doing so “are only partially clear at this time.”
⁴⁵

There are, however, clues, and Munck, like Devereux, is not oblivious to the fact that something deeper is going on besides merely marking various locations on an abstract grid system. For Munck, the question is not
who, when, and how
these monuments were built, but “
why
they were built as they were, and
where
they are.”
⁴⁶
Citing the famous case of the submerged pyramid in Rock Lake, Wisconsin, Munck notes that this site — like some of the megalithic sites in Great Britain investigated by Devereux — is the home to
consistent reports of unusual phenomena. For example, local residents report seeing huge rocks
floating on the surface
of the lake, or outboard motors on boats that will not work at certain times, or how divers attempting to approach and film the submerged pyramid with their underwater cameras suddenly find they have malfunctioned. Munck even notes that some divers report a strange sense of dread as they prepared to dive to photograph the pyramid.
⁴⁷
For Munck, the clue to the resolution of this riddle may lie in the fact that another submerged structure in the lake, a triangle-shaped stone called the “Delta,” encodes the number 5.337 in its placement on the Grid, a number close to the frequency of 5.34 MHz, which is a frequency in turn that its known to be able to alter the emotional state of an individual.
⁴⁸
In short, Munck, like Devereux, hints that at least part of the purpose in the placement of such structures might be
the alchemical transformation of consciousness.

This possible hidden microwave engineering in such structures also becomes, for Munck, a physics rationalization behind the Tower of Babel story. Assuming the story to be true, Munck reasons that perhaps the builders simply built a structure that, when it reached certain dimensions, acted like a gigantic microwave collector and reflector, literally transforming the brainwave activity of the builders and as a result, confusing the tongues!
⁴⁹

While the microwave explanation is a speculative possibility, as we shall see in subsequent pages, the precision engineering of so many of these structures suggests strongly that the designers of them, if not the builders, were at least aware of the power of such structures to manipulate energetic radiations, making such an “accidental” explanation of the “Tower of Babel Moment” unlikely, and the biblical version of some sort of intervention from political motivations much more probable.
⁵⁰

In addition to all this, Munck, like Hancock and Faiia at Angkor Wat, concludes that at least one of the major sites on the world Grid,
Teotihuacan in Mexico, shows all the signs of several epochs of construction.
⁵¹
This, suggests Munck, argues for a much earlier dating of the site than conventional archaeology would allow, placing the beginning epoch of construction to around 8000 BC, the same era as some alternative dating for Stonehenge.
⁵²
While this is not yet the place to evaluate the specific arguments for such an early dating of Teotihuacan, it is worth noting that such a date and extended period of construction implies the presence of some group, an elite, with specialized knowledge and a long term agenda, an agenda considered to be so important that construction could not be abandoned over the long years of its undertaking.

1. Munck’s Methodology

With all this in mind, a closer look at Munck’s methodology is in order, for many aspects of it will form crucial components of our own examination of certain sites and structures in the remaining parts and chapters of this book. While Munck’s voluminous work does examine the earthen mounds and earthen and stone circles of other megalithic sites, our focus is on his methodology in examination of pyramidal sites.

The first of these methods is to “reverse-engineer” each pyramidal structure as it “came off the drawing boards of remote antiquity.”
⁵³
But in Munck’s hands this implies two very specific, and crucial observations:

1)  True pyramids are five-faced objects, one side forming the base and the other four faces forming the sides of the structure. Thus, the only
true
pyramids in the world are the smooth-faced earthen pyramids in China, and the smooth-faced stone pyramids of Egypt.
⁵⁴
All other pyramids are “corruptions” of this basic form through the additions of staircases, terraces, ornamentation, rectangular “temples” on
their apexes or elsewhere on the structure, and by offsetting terraces on some structures;
⁵⁵

2)  
Thus, when “reverse-engineering” a pyramid, it is important to count all the corners and faces, even on “corrupted structures.”
When this is done, a certain series of numbers will
inevitably
emerge from any
smooth-sided
pyramid as a universal geometric law:

1 — An apex at the top.

3 — Each side of a true pyramid is actually a triangle with 3 sides or 3 corners.

4 –Ground corners, or number of sides…

5 — Total of 4 ground corners and the apex.

8 — All ground corners and all sides.

9 — Above 8 features plus the apex.
⁵⁶

Before commenting on the implications of this sequence of numbers, it is important to point out in the clearest possible terms the enormous implications of Munck’s method,
for as wesh all see in the final chapter , this method of counting corners and faces is a clue to a profound and deep hyperdimensional physics and the formal mathematical and geometrical techniques employed to describe it.

If the last comment seems odd or even far-fetched, look closely again at the
first two
numbers embodied in a smooth-sided pyramid: one, and three, the very numbers we saw emerge in the previous chapter
in the topological metaphor contained in the Hindu cosmology and in Hermetic texts, the very first two numbers that emerge as functions of the differentiated physical medium contained in the metaphor.
As we shall see in our subsequent examination of the cosmology of Egypt, the other numbers of a pyramid enumerated above by Munck, also emerge in that exact sequence within Egyptian cosmology! Egypt’s preoccupation with smooth-sided pyramids would appear, then, to be anything but an accident, as it would also
appear to have little to do with entombing dead pharaohs. It has everything to do with their view of physics and the physics of the information-creating, transumtative, alchemical physical medium itself. As we shall also discover in our examination of the Mesopotamian component of this mystery, it also has everything to do with
music, with sound.

3)  The next crucial component in Munck’s methodology is his classification scheme of ancient monuments. We have seen one component of this scheme already, in the distinction between