How Amrith Temple Laid out Using Cord

By
Robert Kerson

1/23/2015

Malcart 4th century b.c.e court flooded with water from sacred string running out from under central
cella. Have courtyard which can be considered a square with a small rectangular forecourt.

Fig. 1

(Figures are from the internet from a small unlabeled google image. My lines are added off of relevant
parts of this image.)
( See fig. 1 for the following.) The square ,actually a parallelogram) close to a square, is drawn in red.
Some of the measures occur because the lines are not truly at right angles with each other. But each
triangle is drawn at right angles to its respective base line defined by the rows of upright standing
stones. The area inside the red lines would have been the sacred area. Each side measured 80 Royal
(large) Cubits where 52.5 cm = 1 Cubit). I measure a little less, but this is the only measure that seem to
have been the intended size. This is the same unit of measure seen in all the other temples which is an
important observation because this is a fact of similarity with all the other temples. The gateway here
was on the north side, but the other temples all have gateways on either the east or west sides.
The northeast corner of the parallelogram is not marked by any stone, only the two southern corners
are at cornerstone. In other temples such as at Jerusalem this corner was very important as discussed in
my Jerusalem temple papers.
Three stones are spaced inside the spacing of the two stones on either side. I have drawn them on the
eastern, southern, and western sides in red and labeled them (s). I have numbered the row of stones.
The (s) stones are either not counted (0) or are counted as (15) as shown. The triangular corner stones
are not counted, since only the flat stones are being counted. Then we get two groupings of stones
numbering 1 14 or 1 15 as shown. A third grouping can be counted if we add the remaining 5+2+5+2
stones to number 1 -- 14. These numbers match the number of days for the moon to change its size
completely.
The other temples have the main structures off center because they utilize either the central line of
the triangle or Point (I) on a triangle (1/4 the length of a long side). Jerusalem temple, the Israelite
temple at Arad, and the Ein Dara temple all have the axis running through Point I. Palmyra and Baalbek
use the center line bisector to bisector of two triangles instead. But all temples make use of Point I.
Note Fig. 1. on which I have drawn the full complement of eight triangles, having two right angled
triangles on each of the four corners. Note the black circled points. I have circled the intersections of
two triangle lines, all drawn as solid red lines with these black circled points. The diagonals are drawn as
small dashed red lines. Notice how many are on or just to the side of the outer edge of the cella. A
three line intersection is also on an inner wall of the cella. The northern edge of the cella has the most-four circles in which these four intersections could have defined the northern edge of the cella. Also the
northwest corner of the cella is defined by the intersection of a diagonal and a triangle line. Small red tic
lines mark Point (I) on all triangles. A number of point (I) are on or very close to various other lines. Two
corners of the cella are on a diagonal line. Note how close the intersection of three triangle lines are to
the center of the figure, labeled Point (V) in all my other papers. A diagonal line passes through this
three line intersection.
Note the black dashed lines all passing over the apex shown circled of the eight triangles. These lines
run from either the corners or (s) stones or a single adjacent (s) stone. There are a few Points (I) on
these lines shown circled. The southeast corner of the cella is one of these lines by a diagonal line.
The lengths of the northern, western, and southern outside walls of the cella, are all equal in length.
This includes the southern wall which does not make a right angle.
This next section is a major confirmation for the use of surveying by 5:8:8 triangles in this and in other
related sacred spaces such as in the temple in Jerusalem. There is a strange non alignment seen in Fig.

1the cella was not on the Central Axis Line but was shifted to the east. The Central Axis Line is drawn
as red + and black + crosses. It run through the center of the gate and defines the cella niches western
wall, then terminates at the southern (s) stone. The cellas Mid-Axis Line shown as a black line
terminating in red lines with solid red circles, seems to have been determined by two intersections of
four triangles which are shown circled in red. This line is east of the Central Axis Line. This shifting of the
Cellas Mid-Axis Line eastward, can account for the entire cella being shifted off of the central axis line of
the temple. Also note that the center of the courtyard, shown as a red X with diagonal small red dashed
lines is exactly midway between the two axis lines.

(See Fig. 2 for the following.)

Fig. 2. (Only relavent lines are drawn to simplify)

Fig. 2 shows equal length lines which seem to relate the triangle with the archeological remains of this
temple. The distance of these lines all measures 36.5 Royal Cubits (52.5 cm = 1 Cubit). This distance can
be found in the measure from the southwest cornerstone to a point I of one triangle. Also, the line can
measure along one of the diagonals to a point I. Note that all four corners of the cella can be measured
using this distance from an upright stone. Two corners of the cella can be measured from (s) stones. An
isosceles triangle having angles of 38, 71, 71, can be seen from the southeast corner of the cella.
One line terminates at an (s) stone. The intersection of two triangles creates another length of line.
Both the southeast corner of the cella and the south west corner have lines terminating on the sixth
upright stone counting southward from two (s) stones. ( these are the same stones seen in Fig. 1 making
bisectors of two triangles.)

It is true that random line lengths terminating at corners of the cella could measure from a number of
upright stones, but the number of lines which can measure from two (s) stones is very limited. The
lengtth which can measure from corners of the cella to (s) stones is the same length which can measure
to Point (i) and intersections. These are either all remarkable coiincidences or they are deliberatethe
corners of the cella were deliberatly surveyed to be where they are by this survey technique which I am
demonstrating to be also at other sites around the mid east.
This temple dates from after Jerusalem, Isralite temple and Ein Dara temple , but before Palmyra and
Baakbek temples.
I believe measuring cords of the proper length would have first been staked on the ground to get an
idea where the leveling should occur, then the area leveled and restaked out on the leveled surface.
Features in stone could then be placed at the correct intersections of cords, and at correct distances
measured at the ends of the various cords. The resulting design in stone would then be a reflexion of the
cord survey.
The backdrop of this outdoor temple would have been the rise in ground level on its southern side. Any
sky object would have appeared to be moving in an arc in back of the raised scarp cut behind the cella.
The northern edge would have been on level ground.
The following is a compelation of what I believe are similarites and differences between the various
temples.
1. Jerusalem temple was fixed from an axis line passing near the summit of the hill and a point on the
eastern edge of the rock plummiting down into the Kidron Valley to the east. A square of 500 Cubits was
then worked out by the use of a 5:8:8 triangle.
The temple at Arad and at Ein Dara were worked out in similar fashion but from the entire summit of
the hill or from a specific cubit size.
The temples at Baalbek and Palmyra seem to have been worked out from a specific center point around
all the 5:8:8 triangles. In Palmyra this point is just before the temples doorway. At Baalbek this point is
to the left of the stairway into the temple of Jupitor.The square was 330 Cubits on each side.
The temple at Amrith woas worked out using 5:8:8 triangles from a point on the spring over which the
cella was constructed. The size of the sacred area was dezned to be 80 Cubits.
2. All the temples except the Amrith one, have gateways on either the eastern or the western sides.
The Amrith temple had its gateway on its northern side.
3. All the temples have a border on 1,2,or 3 sides at the apexs of the triangles except the Amrith one
which had borders of stone far short of the apexs.
4. All the temples except the Amrith one, were not centered on the center of their squares, but off to
the side because their temples were not worked out from the center of the triangles.
5. All the temples would have had an irregular inner octagon with an irregular outer 8 pointed star. The
sesign also had 16 parts.