Edmond Furter wrote the book Mindprint, the subconscious art code (2014, Lulu.com), to demonstrate five layers of recurrent features in 200 artworks of all cultures and Ages, revealing the archetypal core content of culture. His second book, Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities (2016, Four Equators Media), expands demonstrations of the subconscious expression of archetypal structure to houses, temples, monuments, pyramid fields, geoglyphs, villages, cities and regions. The same structure also appears in mythology, such as Babylonian building rituals; and in reflexology points in our hands and irises, thus in nature. Stoneprint also demonstrates that the periodic table is a kind of natural 'culture', and that culture is a natural 'species' of behaviour. The structure in our works is as rigorous as grammar or DNA.
The books Mindprint, and Stoneprint, and editions of the structuralist anthropology periodical, Stoneprint Journal (some of which are available on Lulu.com), draw on extensive research in iconography, archaeology, history, esoterica, astronomy, art history and structuralist anthropology, spanning 26 years.
The core content of culture includes about 100 recurrent features of the sixteen main types, their sequence, five polar markers, and a time-frame orientation, that nature, individuals and societies subconsciously and compulsively express in all media. The mindprint or stoneprint model of structuralist anthropology has several major implications for all the human sciences, and offers a theoretical bases for a holistic approach to the study of the cultural record. Edmond Furter works as a freelance researcher and editor in Johannesburg.
Order the book Mindprint at $30, or the book Stoneprint at $30, or editions of Stoneprint Journal at $5, plus postage, on edmondfurter at gmail dot com; or Mindprint, or Stoneprint Journal editions on Lulu.com
Our huts, houses, kivas, circles, pillars, fortune bowls, art, game boards, temples, pyramids, cities, constellations, geoglyphs and graves, say much more about us that we ever knew. Structuralist analysis reveals the universal repertoire in our subconscious behaviour. The structure also says more about culture and nature than we ever knew, but had glimpsed in nature. We imprint a natural, abstract structure of five layers, including sixteen characters in sequence, on an axial grid, in all our complex artefacts. The same structure appears in the periodic table, and in reflexology points in our hands, eyes, ears, and teeth. A similar structure informs bio-chemistry and DNA. The archetypal expression in our works, in the cultural record is now readable, with significant implications for cultural crafts, and for the human sciences of art history, archaeology, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, sociology and communication science.
The formerly ‘invisible’ layers of our perception and expression, or human code, now offer the opportunity to integrate the conscious and subconscious halves of crafts, sciences, and culture.
Our works re-express nature, and our place in it. Culture does not ‘come from’ any of our media, but from archetype, the potential that enables nature to express self-replicating and mutating energy. Our re-expression of archetypal structure could be named stoneprint, the human code.
Structure is never invented, developed, imitated, learned, taught, or lost, despite its moderate inherent variety, and the wide range of styling that we feel compelled to add when we claim culture for our society. We use it to claim and exploit natural resources, including places and times.
Archetype, structure, and culture existed before we did, and before the universe, and will outlive the cycles of its expression intact. We have grown into our place in nature, adding transformation and multiplication to the place that nature reserves for us.
Whether we are few, as when we built the houses illustrated in the Ice Age chapter; or many, as when we built the pyramid fields and cities illustrated in the historic chapters; we express all the core content of culture in all our media, with as much apparent variety as possible. Stylistic differences fade when the core content of culture is revealed. We all build, draw, talk, trade, count, strategise, pray and fight the same.
Stoneprint reveals the size and shape of the blinkers in our conscious perception and assumptions. This book lifts the ‘beam’ of self-deception from our works, and from our supposedly scientific eyes. The revelation starts with a testable definition of the subconscious structure in art and buildings. Then we query each esoteric craft, and each human science, on the abstract elements in culture and nature; and test the structure of 130 artworks, geoglyphs , buildings, temples, pyramid fields and cities.
We will continue designing art and buildings by intuition, but we will never see or study our works with half our brains again……… [order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com ]……..
Gobekli Tepe houses A, B, C and D (not built in that order) are inside the later level IIA terrace wall, and avoided by later buildings. Level III has fifteen more structures. Circle E on the southwest plateau may be the floor of a Level III structure similar to circle C, dated later, however it could be a quarry trial erection before its pillars were moved to the hill, a procedure used on some other sites, such as much later at Stonehenge (see Furter 2016; Stonerpint, Stonehenge chapter).
Larger and more elaborate houses may be earlier, while smaller circles and rectangular houses or rooms may be later. However many sites are known where the stoneprint structure unfolded over years, even centuries (see Furter 2016; Stoneprint, chapter on Egypt’s Kings Valley and Queens Valley. And see Stoneprint Journal 2; Crop circles are natural artworks. Active fields unfold stoneprint over about 18 seasons).
Asymmetry of the outline of the potential Gobekli hill stoneprint, raises the possibility that the still covered structures could express a second, adjacent stoneprint, ‘geared’ to the excavated sector’s stoneprint, perhaps by sharing types 13, 14, 15, and/or 1 (see several double stoneprints in Furter 2016; Stoneprint, Mayan or Mexican chapter).
Dominant typological themes in the excavated houses at Gobekli Tepe, reveal a larger encompassing structure in the hill complex. Identifications, and the axial grid, may change as excavation proceeds. The tentative sequence is:
1 Builder; West rectangle.
2 Builder; House B.
3 Queen; House A, engraved ovids (ovid 3).
4 King; Undetected? Probably rectangular?
5 Priest; Undetected?
6 Exile; A south-east feature, unexcavated. Probably near the axial centre (ingress)?
7 Child; Undetected?
7g Galactic Centre; A wall cairn?
8 and 9 Healer; ? May be crammed against perimeter wall.
10 Teacher; Unexcavated?
11 Womb; Traces of an oval? Unexcavated.
12 Heart; Lion (felid) engraving on the east pillar of a rectangular house?
13 Heart; Lion (felid) engraving on the west pillar of a rectangular house; and a large house, unexcavated.
14 Mixer; House D; and a distant feature, unexcavated.
15 Maker; Very large house near D, on the hill summit; and a double (doubled 15) house, unexcavated, within later terrace walls.
The axial centre may be on House C. However this feature is usually unmarked, or marked by a feature different from the periphery of types, thus the site grid identification above may be premature.
Orientation of the potential site stoneprint, flips around the orientation of the stoneprint in most houses. Village houses expressing types 11 Womb and 12/13 Heart are on the north, while most houses’ pillars expressing types 11 Womb and 12/13 Heart are south-south-east. Or to be more accurate, types 11 and 12/13 are expressed here by benches between certain pillars, parallel to the way that artworks express type 11 Womb on a midriff, and type 12/13 Heart with their invisible axial lines on a chest, instead of eyes as of the other type characters.
Two of the most interesting examples of this of regular ‘exception’, is in Egypt’s Valley of the Kings, where the hidden tomb entrances form two adjacent stoneprints, while types 11 Womb (of Hatshepshut as a regnant queen among the kings) and 12/13 Heart axes are on tomb chambers; and in the Valley of Queens, where the tomb chambers from two adjacent stoneprints, while types 11 Womb and 12/13 Heart axes are on hidden tomb entrances. These axial grids could now be verified by archaeological maps and GPS, but they were built over centuries, without a master plan, each covered by slope scree before the next was begun, with at least one accidental breach into an older tomb (see Furter 2016; Stoneprint, and an extract in another post). Gobekli half-sunken or kiva-type houses, typical of the Ice Age and Younger Dryas, were apparently infilled before or while others were built. Older houses are on the south-west slope, with a good but hidden view of game animal movements in a north-south gully east of the hill, where they were trapped as they moved to and from Harran plain. Gobekli hill also has a view of this fertile and strategic plain. Later houses are on and over the hill summit, perhaps ritual or memorial, or with diplomatic functions, similar to the Apollo temple precinct and treasuries at Delphi (see Delphi campus stoneprint, and a tentative Delphi landscape stoneprint, in the paper Blueprint on http://www.edmondfurter.wordpress.com)
Order the book Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings, and cities, including structuralist analyses of four Gobekli houses (an extract is included in another post), and three Gobekli pillar engravings, at$30 plus postage, from Four Equators Media via edmondfurter at gmail dot com.
Order the book Mindprint, with 200 examples of subconscious expression of archetypal structure in art and rock art of all cultures and eras, including two Gobekli pillar engravings, on Lulu.com.
Kiva-shaped houses on a low hill near Sanliurfa and Haran in eastern Turkey, are a halfway house to civilisation, between caves and cities, but with the full cultural repertoire………. Carvings in House B feature two snakes, two foxes, a quadruped, and an unidentified figure. B is small, with an outer diameter of about eleven metres. The floor is terrazzo. Most of the pillars were probably moved, and the house remodelled, like all the round houses so far excavated. The sequence of archetypes in House B is (noting archetypal features):
1 Builder/Sacker or Taurus; SW pillar. Headless. Propped on slabs. Lizard or snakes? Back edge; snakes (like adjacent 15). (Tag B14)
3 Queen or Aries; WSW pillar south edge (the north edge expresses type 4. Two-headed is more typical of 6). Flush on the wall. Central hole. (Tag B15)
4 King or Pisces; WSW pillar north face edge (the south edge expresses type 3). Flush on the wall. Central hole. (Tag B15)
5 Priest or Aquarius; West pillar. Propped on slabs (like 1). Rear outer edge; snakes. (Tag B16)
6 Exile or Capricornus; NNW pillar
7 Child or Sagittarius; North pillar. The pillar is slightly rotated, or the map is inaccurate. (Tag B34)
8 Healer or Scorpius; NNE pillar
10 Teacher or Libra; ENE pillar south edge. Flush on the wall
11 Womb or Virgo; East bench (87% womb) 11p Galactic Pole; SE pillar. (Tag B8)
13 Heart or Leo; ESE bench (85% heart).(Tag B8-B7)
14 Mixer or Cancer; SSE pillar. (Tag B7)
15 Maker or Gemini; South pillar. Rear edge; lizard over snakes (more typical of adjacent 15g Gate. As at 1). (Tag B6).
The ecliptic pole or axial centre is probably unmarked (55%).
The celestial pole could be on the central east pillar, at the jumping fox jaw (limb-joint), or on the pillar corner (limb-joint).
The celestial south pole could be on the central west pillar, at the jumping fox shoulder, over the small graffito of a boar or rodent. These markers may place summer in Virgo, thus spring and the time-frame in Age Gemini.
The general theme in House B is type 1 Builder /Sacker or Taurus, consisting of decans Auriga and Orion, typical of rain, thunder, churns, towers, and ruins; adjacent to the galactic gate, typical of churn groups and snakes (see the formal churn group emblematic tradition in Indian art, in Mindprint p234, 236, 239; and in Egyptian ‘lung and windpipe’ churns between Horus and Seth with papyrus ropes).
The stoneprint analysis score in House B is ….
[order the book Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities, at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com]……………
If these houses or pillars were conscious astronomical mapping, then certain other features should be prominent:
 celestial alignments, north-south and/or east-west?
 solstice alignments, between 25 to 35 degrees ENE/WSW or ESE/WNW?
 long sight-lines to horizon markers?
 levelled terrain?
 artworks with consistent geometry and motifs?
 buildings of consistent geometry?
There is no evidence of any of these, except perhaps the holed stone in House D, pillar 5, on a potential celestial north, slightly west of modern north.
However the D5 hole is set low, and part of Gobekli hill is in the way of a potential north transit sightline. Considering extensive evidence for the consistent presence of all five layers of stoneprint, as in all the buildings in this book; and as in all artworks (see 200 examples in Mindprint [since expanded to 600 examples], and two Gobekli Tepe artworks below), subconscious expression is more likely to explain all cosmic features, except for very basic calendric observations.
Complexity alone is not evidence for conscious science, rather for inspired art. There is no reason to assume that the work is proto-science (see Stonehenge, and Magdalenburg, in the Prehistoric Europe chapter, where some astronomical functions co-exist with the standard subconscious expression)……………….
[order the book Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities, at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com ]……………
Gender of characters in cultural media, adds a range of natural and social nuances to other typological categories, which have emerged from structural art analysis statistics. This paper compares the small range of genders to the wider range of attributes in cultural media, to demonstrate some aspects of the rigorous ‘grammar’ or ‘DNA’ of behaviour as embedded in artefacts.
The wider aim of typology is to develop a terminology and baseline for the study of categorically recurrent motifs in artefacts, and thus to revive the structural approach to conceptual anthropology.
[This paper by Edmond Furter, author of Mindprint (2014), and Stoneprint (2016), was first published in the anthropology journal Expression, edition 15, March 2017, by Atelier Etno].
Several rock art studies have confirmed that gender in art is not just a binary (male or female) category. Archetypal structural analysis confirms that typology in cultural media is more complex, yet more globally consistent, than artists, viewers or cultures could consciously manipulate. Typology, including gender attributes, is an innate or compulsively subconscious expression of perception, thus of natural structure and archetype itself. Typology requires specific terms, images and tables to describe and study. The core content of culture consists of certain predictable characters, recognisable by their attributes; and their peripheral sequence; and the precise relative positions of their eyes as pairs of opposites; and two consistent exceptions to eyes; and certain average frequencies of certain attributes of types. In this cumulative or over-determined definition, each pre-condition is a multiplication factor of identity, eliminating the role of conscious imitation, or chance.
The highest frequency of archetypal expression in culture thus far identified is type 11, expressed as a pregnant womb, at 87% on average worldwide. [Subsequent to this paper, statistics from 45 building sites confirmed that builders express 11 Womb or ‘Virgo’ as an interior 81%, mother 61%, tomb 13%, water feature 11%, library 11%, wheat 6%, law 6% [see the updated list based on a larger sample, in later posts]. Churches or statues of St Mary are typical of the type 11 axis on Western building sites].
Among tens of thousands of rock art characters in the Cedarberg and southern Drakensberg regions in Southern Africa, Lauie (2015) categorised male, indeterminate, or female, and noted a few hermaphrodites. In the Kimberley region of Australia, Holt and Ross (2016) categorised unsexed, male, homosexual, female, bisexual, or ambiguous. They noted that artists express gender by primary [natural] keys such as genitalia, and/or secondary [social] keys such as relative size, dress, items and context. Several studies have revealed the relative dominance of male characters, and the surprising rarity of categorically female characters in rock art. Beltran (1966) noted males as more common and diverse (in terms of non-gender attributes). Lauie (2015) reported only about 5% (or one in 20) categorical females in Southern African rock art. Holt and Ross (2016) reported only 8.3% (or one in 12) females in Wanjina art; and only 11.8% females in Painted Hand styling. They found 50% females in Argula and Jillinya rock art, however the subjects are local nature spirits or angels (which in most cultures are female or non-male). Poor technique and styling conventions may obscure the intended gender of some rock art characters. Holt noted “a large proportion of figures classified as unsexed… because of the lack of iconographic standardisation in each style [in the same area].”
Even extreme stylisation, typical of polities in potential territorial contest, does not overrule the core content of archetypal typology that all artists, mythographers and ritualists express in all media (Furter 2016. Expression 14). If researchers shared the same definition of gender categories, and took account of related factors of typology, statistical results would be identical worldwide, in all eras and media, including amateur and professional art. However some of the subtleties of cultural media remain beyond words, requiring images and tables to reveal.
Media, such as myth, emblems, ritual (Furter 2014), and building features (Furter 2016. Stoneprint), confirm gender as a limited range of attributes, inherent in larger sets, such as status (god, ancestor, parent, adult, peer, juvenile); or posture linked to a social function (such as rainmaker, hero, monster, emperor, king, priest, nature guardian, strength, creation, healer, trader, mother, prophet, creator); or genera (particularly bovid, avid, equid, caprine, feline, reptilian, canine, and piscine). In art, characters express gender in the context of a panel or group, and sub-groups (such as peers; enemies; tutor-pupil; hunter-quarry; parent-child which may be merged in a pregnant female; human-animal which may be merged in a therianthrope).
Type 11 is a womb on an axial grid
In any coherent artistic grouping of about twelve to about 22 characters, there is usually one pregnant female; and her womb is always between type 10 Teacher or Libra and type 12/13 Heart or Leo; and her womb is always on the invisible axial grid that connects the eyes of the opposite pairs of types, as if her womb were an unborn eye; and these combined conditions apply at an average of 87% of artworks, irrespective of continent, ‘culture’, styling, age, media or technique. The adjacent type 12/13 Heart or Leo always (85%) has his chest (heart) on the axial grid. On building sites, the type 11 Womb is often a mound, platform, dome, or building dedicated to a young mother (such as Mary); and type 12/13 Heart or Leo is often a bastion, platform, armoury, tomb or cenotaph (Furter 2016, Stoneprint). Type 11 Womb or Virgo could be any species (often a bovid, horse, giraffe, hippo or human), usually visibly pregnant (Mindprint demonstrated this in 100 rock art examples, 100 art examples, and listed 200 more. Stoneprint demonstrated 130 building sites. See some examples in Expression editions 9, 10, 13 and 14 [see later posts based on larger samples]).
Here is the sequence of the twelve basic archetypal characters (four of which usually unfold into two each, thus usually sixteen), with mythical labels added to enable memorisation (noting that typology does not derive from myth or astrology, which are equally archetypal); with their usual genders, and known features:
There is clearly no conscious design in the range of recurrent attributes; or genders, or their sequence; or the axial grid of eyes; or the average frequencies; or the polar and temporal structure at the centre (which is outside the scope of this paper); or the consistency among cultures and eras, including Ice Age and modern art and buildings. Complexity and consistency both indicate that recurrent attributes in art are subconscious, collective and thus archetypal.
Myth and astrology ascribe three decans, or adjacent sub-types, to each of the twelve major types, however the four large types have four sub-types, making a total of about 36 or 40 decans. Constellation Virgo’s traditional decans are Spica (Corn Ear); Corvus (Crow); and Hydra (Water Snake). She shares Coma Berenices (Hair of Berenice, at the galactic north pole); and Crater (Grail), with adjacent type 12 Heart or Leo. Part of her slice of sky (since astrology is an imperfect expression of archetype) is occupied by most of Bootes (Herdsman, a decan of adjacent type 10 Teacher or Libra), whose attributes of ecological and spiritual balance, justice, and wheel of fortune she often takes on, to express physical Justice or Fortune. Artists often express type 11 Womb or Virgo with flora, notably a wheat ear in Medieval art. Flora and pregnancy invite the interpretation of a semi-conscious symbol or metaphor of agriculture, as Mateu (2002) did in Spanish Levantine rock art. Mateu speculated: “Females were represented carrying out tasks such as clearing fields, harvesting, sowing, herding… and… production of sons and daughters… The politico-ideological strategy is to hide, and give limited social value to females in relation to… social life.” Mateu’s study aimed at ‘fragmentation’ (perhaps intending a kind of deconstruction), but succeeded only in imposing certain fundamental, ideological and ‘evolving’ motives on artists and on recurrent artistic motifs. There is more reliable and more accessible philosophy available in classic iconography, including the Tarot trumps. If symbols and metaphors were logical and defined, there would be no need for variant versions of myth, art, ritual and ‘non-functional’ architecture. However conventional methods of art analysis, including attempted ‘psychological’ methods, have failed to explain, and even failed to describe recurrent motifs in art.
Art is rigorously structured
Structural study of art revealed the eternal female as an archetype expressed in natural and cultural media. She is not a relic of a supposed stage of socio-economic development, or a stage of conscious philosophy. Archetypes, or rather the set of archetype (since all the parts imply the whole, and are expressed in their complete context), is a pre-existent potentiality that informs nature and culture, including myth, art, ritual, and buildings. Archetypal structure enables interchange between natural and cultural media, including the myth maps that all cultures impose on constellations. The nature-culture interchange is particularly notable in categories of species, and of genders. Archetype thus is structurally logical, and not a symbol or metaphor of any aspects of nature or culture. Conscious symbolism shares in some aspects of archetype, such as plants and wombs as dual sustenance of life. However conscious logic differs from archetypal logic. Common sense does not account for consistently recurrent motifs, or their layered structure, or their consistent frequencies. Thus archetype requires scientific study. The revelation of archetypal expression in the art of all cultures and eras is still a novelty in science and esoterica, despite the efforts of structural anthropology over several decades to reveal natural logic in artefacts and rituals. Decline in the popularity of structuralism and depth psychology, are among the indications of the eternal divorce between our conscious and subconscious minds, and of the tendency of science to serve practical and broadly political ends. We prefer to pretend that we invented and developed culture into many different ‘cultures’ (as discussed in Expression 14 under the theme of colonisation). Yet the prevalence of typology confirms structure as self-motivated, inherent, and compulsive to culture, as it is to nature. No amount of styling could change cultural structure, which remain rooted in archetype. No amount of conscious manipulation of ‘symbols or metaphors’ could have made cultural media as subtle, nuanced, and rigorously structured as they are. Science has been less successful in the study of culture, than the study of nature, where the periodic table predicts reactions, and parts of protons have cracked under nuclear physics since it developed optional pairs of labels, such as ‘charmed or strange’. The study of culture has fallen behind the study of nature.
The natural rules of subconscious behaviour are relevant to the disciplines of conceptual anthropology, cognitive archaeology, sociology, psychology, art history (particularly iconography) and semiotics. The humanities in general should resume the incomplete work of structural anthropology and depth psychology, in a multi-disciplinary or trans-disciplinary (Td) context. Further research into cultural expressions of gender, should study all typological factors, in the context of global, archetypal, subconscious expression. Typological analysis of artworks and building sites, may resolve the gender of some characters or features, notably type 11 as an unborn child in a female; types 4, 8/9, 10 and 12/13 usually male; type 7 often juvenile; type 15 often a pair or couple; types 1 /2, 3, 5-20/5-21, 6 and 14 often of intermediary genders.
This paper was first published in the anthropology journal Expression, edition 15, March 2017, by Atelier Etno.
Sources and References
Beltrán, A. 1966 Sobre Representaciones Femeninas en el Arte Levantino. CANIX, 90-93. Saragosa University
Boeyens, J.C.A. 2014 Number theory and the unity of science. South African Journal of Science, 110, PP. 11-12
Furter, E. 2014 Mindprint, the subconscious art code. Lulu.com, USA
Furter, E. 2015 Rock art Where, When, to Whom. Ed. E Anati. Atelier Etno, Italy
Furter, E. 2015 Rock art expresses cultural structure. Expression 9. Atelier Etno, Italy
Furter, E. 2015 Structural rock art analysis. Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists (ASAPA) conference, Harare. Univ. of Zimbabwe, in press
Furter, E. 2015 Art is magic. Expression 10, Dec. Atelier Etno, Italy
Furter, E. 2016 Abstract signs in art as shorthand for cultural structure. Expression 13, Atelier Etno, Italy [the magazine layout scrambled captions and text, to be corrected in the book: Meaning of abstract signs]
Furter, E. 2016 Colonial artists re-style the same characters. Expression 14, Atelier Etno, Italy
Many chemists chart the periodic table on a spiral. Most tables
introduce gaps at certain intervals, to account for gaps in the
progression of stable properties along the progress of atomic numbers (Z-numbers, usually equal to electron numbers). Maurice Peyroux’s periodic table introduces gaps from 2He Helium to 3Li Lithium; 10Ne Neon to 11Na Sodium; and 18Ar Argon to 19K Potassium. He extends the fields for 1H Hydrogen, 4Be Beryllium, 12Mg Magnesium, and 21Sc Scandium. Similar adjustments continue among the heavier metals, to align some atomic properties in radial columns.
By making four slight tabulation adjustments in the standard gaps, the Peyroux table core forms a 6×5 squared spiral of elements:
10Ne Neon and 18Ar Argon move across the artificial transition to the left;
11Na Sodium moves into part of the large 12Mg Magnesium field;
18Ar Argon displaces 19K Potassium into the Sc21 Scandium field;
20Ca Calcium moves into part of the 21Sc Scandium field.
Here is Peyroux’s periodic table spiral as a squared grid, with elements over their atomic numbers (number of protons, or number of electrons):………….[tables are omitted in this extract]……….
Elements in the same rows are seven or eight protons apart, thus one electron orbital apart; here marked [v]. Gaps _ appear from 7N to 8 O; and from 15P to 16S. The periodic table compares directly with the stoneprint types: axial opposites are seven or eight types apart; higher magnitudes are fifteen types apart. Two galactic and two polar points intervene in ‘gaps’. Here is Peyroux’s periodic spiral table of elements, over atomic numbers (identical to stoneprint type numbers), over seasons or myths or constellations: ……..[tables are omitted in this extract]…………
Four gaps (marked =) coincide with two galactic and two polar features: 7g Galactic Centre [Galax]
11p Galactic Pole [pGal]
15g Galactic Gate [Gate]; Electrons [e-]?
4p Galactic South Pole [pGs]; NO GAP, but some tables do place a gap between 19K Potassium and 20Ca Calcium.
The four transitions at top and bottom, coincide with four semi-types:
2c Basket; 2He to 3Li, gas to solid
5c Basket Tail; 5:20Ca to 6C, silt to fuel
9c Basket Lid; 9F to 10Ne, reactive to inert gas
13c Basket Head; 13Al to 14Si, metal to rock.
These four structural points, and four semi-types, were first isolated in art and rock art analysis; then confirmed in organ reflexology points; and tabulated by seasons; then confirmed in buildings and site analyses; then tabulated among elements. Thus nature confirms cultural structure. In hindsight, this study should have started with natural structure. However the result is the same: structure is pervasive, enabling creation and perception, including ‘thought’. One of the differences between the cultural stoneprint spiral, and the natural periodic table spiral, is that the atomic spiral is contracted, or more tightly rolled, introducing a coil of ‘opposite’ types between lower and higher magnitude versions of the double-layered types. Here is a comparison ……………….[extract from Stoneprint, 2016]
[order the book Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities, at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com].
Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities (Edmond Furter, 2016, Four Equators Media, 400 pages, 170mm x 295mm, 130 illustrations) resolves the mysteries of correspondences between ancient cultures. The book reveals the core content and ‘grammar’ or ‘DNA’ of culture. We have an innate subconscious compulsion to express a specific, complex, archetypal set of features, in sequence, and on an axial grid, in all our works.
The book demonstrates the innate universal structure in our works, including art, rock art, houses, kivas, temples, villages, sacred sites, monuments, pyramids (Egyptian, Chinese, Olmec as well as Mayan pyramid fields), and cities.
The examples range from the Ice Age thaw at Gobekli Tepe, Malta, and Scotland; to prehistoric sites such as Babylon; semi-historic sites such as the Giza, Avebury and Stonehenge landscapes; historic sites such as Ephesus, Rome, Axum, Quebec, and Cape Town; and across all continents and cultures, including Africa, the far east, south America (including Nazca) and North America (including Mystery Hill).
Among the cultural media that carry the human code, and camouflage it from our conscious mind until revealed by structural analysis; are rock art, ‘fine’ art, ritual, myth, poetry (such as two examples of Babylonian building rites, and two poems by William Blake) buildings, sites and region (such as Babylonia).
Nature also express archetypal structure. Stoneprint reveals several direct links between subconscious cultural expressions, and the periodic table (when charted on a spiral as by Maurice Peyroux); chemical elements; reflexology charts of our palms, irises, teeth, earlobes and inner ears. Our eye-hand-mind co-ordination expresses the same universal structure in building sites, even by different architects, and different generations of rulers and builders.
Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities, now enables conscious access to our subconscious behaviour, which is revealed as standarised, rigorous, universal, eternal, complex, yet measurable.
The book places the discovery of subconscious behaviour (first reported by the author, Edmond Furter, in Mindprint in 2014), in the context of the esoteric crafts of alchemy, kabbalah, cosmology, astrology, and art; as well as the context of each human science: art history, archaeology, anthropology (with a humorous detour into popular archaeology), psychology, and sociology.
The implications of the discovery of the universal stoneprint structure, for popular culture (including various schools of popular archaeo astronomy) , and for the human sciences, are significant.
Order the book Stoneprint, in Europe at E30 plus postage, from Four Equators Media via [edmondfurter at gmail dot com], payment on Paypal.
Order the book Stoneprint in the USA at $30 plus postage, from Four Equators Media via [edmondfurter at gmail dot com], payment on Paypal.
Order the book Stoneprint in South Africa at R300 (including free postage to any Postnet account in South Africa; or plus R30 postage; or plus R60 per courier), from Four Equators Media via 011 955 6732 or [edmondfurter at gmail dot com], payment on Paypal.
The index indicates the broad scope and depth of 28 years of research reported in Stoneprint. Each relevant craft and science is placed in context. Natural expressions are compared to cultural expressions. Each building site is illustrated by a map, and at least two pages of detailed structural analysis.
2 Architecture reveals our subconscious building code
3 The Five levels of structure in cultural media
3 The sixteen archetypes, in sequence
4 The axial grid of focal points
6 The four borderline types
7 The two galactic gates or cross-points
7 The polar clock of Ages
8 The six polar points
9 Structural analysis example of a site sketch plan
The cultural context of the human code
11 Alchemy: Crafts reveal chemistry
13 Chemistry reveals biology
15 Kabalah: Natural philosophy correspondences
17 Poetry: Blake’s London- Jerusalem- Golgonooza
21 Poetry: Blake’s Tyger describes expression
22 Poetry: The Stoneprint rhyme
24 Astrology: Calendars reveal divination
27 Cosmology: Direction is everywhere
The scientific context of the human code
31 Art History: Perception reveals gestalt
37 Archaeology: The World Archives challenge
42 Anthropology: Artefacts reveal structure
47 Popular Anthropology: Who did it?
52 Psychology: Behaviour reveals archetype
57 Philosophy: The universe reveals archetype
60 Communication Science: Structure is the message
63 Sociology: Behaviour reveals our self-image
66 Science and esoterica: our split consciousness
70 Why I wrote Stoneprint
73 [Chapter A] Natural elementary maps
74 The periodic table reveals atomic structure
80 Nuclear particles reveal atomic polar structure
81 Compounds confirm the axial pairs
82 Constellations chart our cosmos and myth
84 Astronomical poles in our cosmos
86 A crop circle solar system implies two grids
92 Earth imprints a motto: ‘I oppose artifice’
94 Trails of architecture in two crop circles
95 Numbers have character
96 Mars ‘face’ geology invites human gestalt
99 [Chapter B] Natural body maps
100 Our hands carry the imprint
102 Our eyes are windows to the body and structure
104 Our minds carry the imprint
106 Dental reflexology: the ‘boneprint’ in our cave
111 Our outer ear lobe reflex map
112 Our inner ear reflex map
113 Eye, palm, teeth, ear and organ map
114 Limb joints mark six poles
115 [Chapter C] Natural culture maps
116 Piacenza bronze liver double circle of gods
120 The sixth layer of culture is style conformity
121 Three sets of Etruscan gods integrated
121 Planets express poles and gates, not types
122 Gods or liver maps, which came first?
123 Piacenza city and its walls are cultural stoneprints
125 [Chapter D] Culture maps
126 The Maikop silver bowl paradise
128 Paradise, Fall, and Babel in a nutshell
129 Mapungubwe’s gold foil oracle reconstructed
130 A Venda divination bowl
132 An Italian Goose game board
134 Pedra Pintada engraving oval, and pentagons
138 The Bulgarian Karanovo tablet answers questions
139 [Chapter E] Ice Age sites
140 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe house C, polar boars
147 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe house D, type 14
150 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe house B, type 2
152 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe house A, type 3
154 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe excavation and radar maps
156 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe pillar D43, a culture portrait
158 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe grey pillar
159 Babylonia: Inana huts, Nevali Cori kiva, Kurdish huts
160 Turkey: Gobekli Tepe site perspective
161 China: An Iron Age T-shaped silk drape
162 A Greek healing pillar, and Shinto dressed pillars
163 Spain: Malta’s Mnajdra double stoneprint
164 Spain: Malta’s Gigantija double stoneprint
167 Spain: Hal Saflieni’s underground stoneprint
168 Scotland: Skara Brae plans
169 Scotland: Jarlshof wheelhouses and recycling
170 Spain: A Menorcan taula reconstruction puzzle
171 [Chapter F] Early civil sites in Sumeria
172 Babylonia was a stoneprint in clay brick
174 Babylon city, a vortex of dispersion
176 Two mythical gates
177 King-priest Ur Nanshe builds a temple
178 He built sixteen shrines
179 His crafts reveal subconscious method
180 He casts the circle of eternity, or polar ring
181 He was a visionary like Solomon
182 He works magic: as below, so above
184 He was an inspired architect, like Hiram of Tyre
185 He did not understand the building plan
188 He taxed the clans for construction
190 His allies and contractors
191 He surveys eight rooms, and erects eight doors
193 He set up six slabs as poles
194 An, Enlil, Enki: three equators to survey the site
195 Assyria: T-pillars and Y-tents in an army camp
296 Egypt: Narmer’s camp, and a school camp
197 [Chapter G] Early civil sites in Egypt
298 Sakkara, first royal campus, and a stepped pyramid
200 Teti’s pyramids form a stoneprint in Sakkara
201 Giza pyramid field stoneprint
204 Giza pyramid field is also a polar map
206 Kings Valley tombs are underground stoneprints
212 Queens Valley entrances lost and found
214 A ‘Syrian’ queen in a womb among wombs
216 Edfu temple is a double churn
218 Senmut’s ceiling stoneprint is half zodiac, half duat
220 Duats and decans are arch mutators
221 [Chapter H] Civil outpost sites
222 Nubia: Meroe pyramids speak with their doors
224 Egypt: Nabta Playa slab field counts four Ages
226 Egypt: Hawara labyrinth in Kircher’s Gnostic vision
228 Nubia: The cornucopia of minister Huy
230 Palestine: Jerusalem temple mount hybrid
233 Patriarchs, pharaohs, and kings
234 Palestine: Jerusalem, womb of three religions
236 Judea: Masada, a military stoneprint
238 Turkey: Nemrut hill, crossroad of Persians and Greeks
242 Australia: Elivna rock pavement engraving
244 Ethiopia: Axum is an ark of spiritual mysteries
247 Ethiopia: Lalibela temple field of bedrock ‘hearts’
249 Ethiopia: Lalibela’s Mary church; womb in a womb
250 Ethiopia: A reverse rock imprint spells ‘Rotas’
251 [Chapter J] Prehistoric European sites
252 Ireland: Drombeg house, a cosy double stoneprint
254 England: Avebury and Silbury landscape
256 England: Stonehenge counted three ages
263 England: Damerham circles in radar scan
264 England: Stonehenge landscape radar scan
266 England: Stanton Moor landscape; boulders and ‘ladies’
268 Greece: Phaistos palace, the other Greek labyrinth
270 Germany: Magdalenburg mound graves
273 Scotland: Stennes stone circle
274 Scotland: Cochno stone concentric engravings
275 [Chapter K] African sites
276 Zimbabwe: Great Zimbabwe, landscape with a womb
278 Zimbabwe: Great Zimbabwe queen’s yard with a womb
280 A kudurru boundary stone calendar spring bird
281 Egypt: Dendera zodiac summer bird
282 Zimbabwe: Nhunguza and Penhalonga metallurgy floors
283 South Africa: San Bushman painted stoneprints on rock
284 Mali: Nature and culture on a Dogon mud wall
286 South Africa: Lydenburg concentric engravings boulder
287 [Chapter L] Eastern sites
288 India: Buddhist wheel of life landscape panorama
289 India: Sanchi temple gate pagoda engraving
292 Nepal: Kathmandu palace square temple complex
294 China: Beijing Temple of Heaven park, an Aquarian cosmos
295 China: Choukungmu pyramid fields need more research
296 Japan: Nara Basin Horyuji temple, galactic manifestation
297 Japan: Todai temple, a living site
298 Japan: Himeji, Shirasagi-jo temple, White Heron nests
299 [Chapter M] Mexican sites
300 Izapa pyramid field and stelae, new world, same stoneprint
302 Izapa cacao tree ritual stele, a third layer of structure
304 La Venta pyramid field, spire eyes, platform womb
306 Monte Alban double stoneprint works with the landscape
309 Coba, a triple Stoneprint with interlocking ‘galaxy’
310 Uxmal was contested by a witch, a dwarf, and a king
312 Chichen Itza has temples to planets, and a stoneprint
314 Chichen Itza village scene, a busy day
315 Teotihuacan mountain stream, and rain woman mural
316 Teotihuacan pyramid avenue, Leo sun, Virgo moon
318 El Tajin pyramid field, double thunder
320 Palenque lid cosmic tree and double stoneprint
322 Palenque pyramid field, chaos among order
323 [Chapter N] North and South American sites
324 Peru: Machu Picchu, Mayan capital in the clouds
326 Bolivia: Tiahuanaco island’s Sun Gate is the sun type
328 Chile: Atacama geoglyphs with Aquarian tailcoats
330 Peru: Nazca plain geoglyphs express ecological structure
332 Peru: Cuzco’s Coricancha constellations reveal an update
335 USA: California’s Painted Rock, theatre of time
340 USA: Lower Colorado River geoglyphs has a calendar clock
342 USA: Hopi kiva 5mT2, and its village, hinge on a womb
344 USA: Colorado’s Mystery Hill metallurgy plant or tech school
346 USA: Crow Canyon kivas Block 100 has two missing features
347 [Chapter P] Historic Western sites
348 Italy: Rome, eternal city with an Age update
350 Italy: Rome’s gates and bridges are eloquent
352 Italy: Rome’s Capitol Forum, contested but constant
354 Italy: Rome’s Quirinal forums for spiritual order
356 Italy: Rome’s Vatican City, a stoneprint inside type Aries
360 Italy: Brescia has Mark’s lion, Mary’s womb, John’s bull
362 Turkey: Ephesus, former city of Amazons and Artemis
363 Icons: Serapis and Ophiotaurus, half-monsters
366 Spain: Santiago de Compostella, of a son of thunder
367 Spain: St James and Hercules, hybrid planetary characters
370 Canary Islands: Las Palmas governor’s house facade
372 Canada: Quebec, Victorian ideals in stone
374 South Africa: Cape Town’s Dutch forts claimed a footprint
376 [Chapter Q] Structural analysis formats
376 Kinds of media in the 130 examples
376 Commission impossible: design a stoneprint site
377 Emblems, icons, constellations and Tarot trumps
382 [Appendices] Structural analysis formats
382 How to find the subconscious structure on a site plan
382 The structural analysis format
384 About the author
385 Sources and references
Popular anthropology in general follows the conscious and material paradigm of culture, particularly diffusion. Authors and readers assume the transfer of culture from ‘developed’ peoples to ‘savages’, as concluded by early schools of anthropology.
De Santillana and Von Deschend (1969) were among many scientists who saw a problem in culture transfer: “Coincidence of details in cumulative thought, have led to the conclusion that it all had its origin in the Near East. It is evident that this indicates a diffusion of ideas to an extent hardly countenanced by current anthropology.”
However most popular authors see no problem with diffusion. Even the two professors who criticised correspondence theories, presented myth as degraded science, or ‘broken telephone’ diffusion. They imply that better terminology, records, and transmission, would have delivered ancient Icelandic astronomy intact to the rest of the world.
Of artefacts and buildings, De Santillana and Von Deschend wrote: “Original themes could flash out again, preserved almost intact, in the later thought of the Pythagoreans and of Plato… tantalising fragments of a lost whole.” Their premise is that a traumatic astronomical event or episode was recorded, mythologised, and gradually lost or scrambled. Thus culture is supposedly a sum of fragments. TS Eliot evokes the popular view of culture in his famous line: “These rags have I shored against my ruin.”
Archaeologists also find the illustrations of myth in art to be “apparently fragmentary”. Spiritual elements in art are understood as hallucinations that are “construed in trance”, recalled, and “no doubt formalised as they were painted.” (Lewis-Williams and Pearce 2012). These fragments are the playground of popular science. Examples of the supposedly ‘lost whole’ are rare.
The range of views in popular anthropology could be summarised as a list of hypotheses on where culture comes from. Some views gain dominance in turn, each imposing its paradigm on science or culture, or both. Nature, gods, heroes, ancestors, evolution, technology, Phoenicians, subconscious, secret societies, aliens, mutants, astronomy, drugs, trance, or a super race? Some of these could be combined, some not……. [order the book Stoneprint, at $30 plus postage, from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com using Paypal]……..
The discovery of stoneprint in ancient and modern buildings, is the second call on the human sciences, and on popular culture, to replace the fundamental and supposedly ‘common sense’ paradigm of culture as ‘developed and evolved’, with the paradigm of subconscious structural expression. The first call on popular culture was in the book Mindprint (2014), focusing on structural analysis of art and rock art, with one example in literature (a Mishnah verse on hours and religious symbols). The first call on archaeologists was made in a paper presented at the ASAPA conference in Harare in 2015 (UZ, in press, due 2017). The first call on anthropologists was in the rock art magazine Expression (2015 editions 9 and 10; 2016 edition 13).
Stoneprint in 2016 expanded the demonstration of the human code, or subconscious expression of archetypal structure, to buildings and cities, again supported by examples in literature (two Blake poems, and two Babylonian ritual praise poems on temple building projects, integrating liturgy, economy, philosophy, morality, and architectural features).
Demonstration of archetypal characters, and their clusters of motifs, and the nest of spatial structure, rests on recurrence. Birenbaum (1988) wrote; “A motif can be identified, for practical purposes, simply as any detail that recurs: a kind of character, place, structure, animal or plant, or any feature of the narrative process as it unfolds.” Recurrence and variation are the basic dual mechanisms of abstraction, expression, and meaning in culture and in nature (see protons, electrons, shells and compounds in the Natural Stoneprints chapter). Recurrence and variation enable rhythm, language, art, architecture, society, and music (especially after Bach’s popularisation of the current western scale, which allows modulation between keys). Art characters may seem too varied, and building elements may seem too repetitive, to compare to one another, or to myth. Yet stoneprint now reveals that art is sufficiently repetitive, and building elements are sufficiently varied, to express the same human code. The building blocks of culture are the five abstract layers, like the building blocks of nature are elements, their properties, combinations, and reactions; from indestructible electrons to fragile self-replicating creatures. Our replications or ‘creations’ are equally over-determined………..
[order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com].
See the archetypal structuralist analysis of the triple imprint in the artwork featured here, in another post.
Bio-chemistry is a structural science, now becoming a technology, reaching into the machinery of nature to switch mutations on or off. Our customary husbandry only used to mimic environmental factors to prompt natural mutation.
Yet we have always been capable of divining the structure of invisible aspects of nature. Some prodigies have seen visions of a double helix (as in some Jiroft carvings) millennia before Francis Crick and James Watson deducted a ball-and-stick model of the double helix of DNA. However it requires a high population density, specialization, and specialized equipment to turn visions into theory, and tests, and results, applications, technology, production, sales, and profit. Without all these enablers, new knowledge would gain little currency, and remain ‘secret’. Most people, including scientists, see the maturity cycle of material culture as ‘evolution’ in cognitive ability or consciousness, which it is not. Building methods have changed since Gobekli Tepe, about BC 8000, but our bodies, minds, behaviour, and societies have not ‘evolved’ in the intervening 10 000 years. We intuitively use abstract concepts in many media, such as building, art, language, and ritual. Nature does the same, but her ‘abstractions’ are combinations of particles and forces……..
[order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com]
The sequence of features in the Stonehenge landscape periphery as revealed by excavations and radar (noting archetypal features):
1 Builder or Taurus; One of two clusters (cluster).
2 Builder or Taurus; A bell barrow; on its axis was a large rectangular feature.
2c Basket or Algol; Bush barrow row on the field edge; and Normanton Down barrows group. Southward lies North Kite enclosure.
4 King or Pisces; A cluster (under fields, near road A303); and Stonehenge; and a long barrow. This axis is opposite type 11 Durringon Walls, the largest feature.
4p Galactic South Pole on a group forming a rectangle (typical of 4 and 5).
5a Priest or Aquarius; Winterbourne-Stoke cluster, varied (varicoloured), large (large).
5b Priest or Aquarius; A barrow and a pit (varicoloured).
6 Exile or Capricornus; Fargo henge bell barrow, near the cursus west end; near the invisible axial centre (ingress); near road A344.
7 Child or Sagittarius; A group of circles; and the Lesser Cursus. 7g Galactic Centre; Cursus centre, and cursus group of bell barrows, and a bell barrow (compare to the Axum terraces, in the Civil Outposts chapter).
8 Healer or Scorpius; Durrington Down long barrow.
9 Healer or Scorpius; A cluster (more typical of 2 opposite); to the north is Larkhill.
9c Basket Lid or Lupus; A cluster and a pond barrow.
10 Teacher or Libra; A circle.
11 Womb or Virgo; Durrington Walls, a large round walled village (interior). Its opposite in this landscape is at type 4 Stonehenge. North-east lies Durrington village. 11p Galactic Pole; Old King barrows; on its axis east is Woodhenge.
12 Heart or Leo; A long barrow south of the Woodhenge series, near the Durrington south road; and a large feature, perhaps concentric, near road A345.
13 Heart or Leo; A circle?, near road A345.
14 Mixer or Cancer; A small cluster.
15 Maker or Gemini; New King barrows row; ENE lies Vespasian’s camp; east lies Amesbury; SW lies the river end of the procession. 15g Gate near the Avenue past the 15 row; and as a bell barrow.
The ecliptic pole or axial centre is apparently unmarked as usual. The celestial pole is on a barrow. The celestial south pole may be west of the invisible axial centre, placing summer in Leo-Cancer, thus spring and the cultural inspiration in Age Taurus-Aries, about BC 1500, long before most of the work (see dating issues below).
After Roman evacuation, Britons harked back to Celtic culture and sites (Fergusson 1872), but with a Roman eye for civil grandeur. Their Norse conquerors built most of these structures, perhaps with Pict labourers, as they did in Orkney (Wickham-Jones 2011). Stonehenge’s last phase expresses Age Aries-Pisces (see the Stonehenge monument analysis above), thus the last work may be after BC 80.
The general theme in the Stonehenge and Durrington Walls landscape is type 4 King or Pisces, typical of sun, monuments (see Tarot trump 4:19, Sun, with twins at a wall or furnace), fields, and kings (see Tarot trump 4, Emperor). The Tarot is not Celtic or Norse, but medieval Italian, and capable of any styling…………[extract from the book]
[order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com]