The Great Circle

https://zenodo.org/records/19212669 


It has been suggested that "many of the world’s most celebrated ancient monuments", Giza, Nazca, Easter Island, Persepolis, Mohenjodaro, and others, appear to lie near a single great circle on Earth’s surface. This idea has circulated in popular literature for over two decades (Alison, c. 2001; Hancock, 1995).

Recently, a paper by one Elliot Allan has appeared that claims to be a 'Statistical Analysis of Ancient Monumental Site Distribution Along a Proposed Great Circle: Evidence from Five Archaeological Databases and a Hemisphere Decomposition',  March 24, 2026.  Reducing something to a statistical table tends to obscure the realities behind it.  

We may list the sites that are mose frequently claimed as part of this phenomenon:*

Directly on the Great Circle (6 sites):

Easter Island (Rapa Nui): c. 1200–1500 CE; Ceremonial centres and ancestral veneration.

Nazca lines: c. 200 BCE – 600 CE; Geoglyphs for ritual processions or water-related ceremonies.

Ollantaytambo: c. 1440–1530s CE; Royal estate and ceremonial fortress.

Paratoari (Pyramids): Age debated (natural or man-made); Probably natural formations but some claim are ancient agricultural mounds.

Tassili n'Ajjer: c. 6000 BCE – 1st century CE; One of several concentrations found across the Sahara Desert of rock art sites and prehistoric settlement. 

Giza (Great Pyramid): c. 2580–2560 BCE; Royal tomb and funerary complex.

Within 1/10th of a degree (6 sites): 

Petra: c. 400 BCE – 100 CE; Nabataean capital and trade hub.

Perseopolis: c. 515–330 BCE; Ceremonial capital of the Achaemenid Empire.
Khajuraho: c. 950–1050 CE; Hindu and Jain temple complex.
Pyay (Sri Ksetra): c. 2nd – 9th century CE; Pyu city-state and Buddhist center.
Sukhothai: c. 1238–1438 CE; Capital of the first Thai Kingdom.
Anatom Island (Aneityum): "Traditional Melanesian cultural site".

Within 1/4th of a degree (6 sites):

13. Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu c. 1450–1572 CE; Royal retreat and astronomical observatory. 

14. Cuzco  c. 1200–1533 CE; Imperial capital of the Inca Empire.

15. Siwa (The Oracle) c. 7th century BCE; Religious pilgrimage and oracular site.

16. Mohenjo Daro, Pakistan  c. 2500–1900 BCE; Major urban center of the Indus Valley Civilization.

17. Ganweriwala, Pakistan  c. 2600–1900 BCE; Unexcavated Indus Valley city.

18. Prasat Preah Vihear, Cambodia  c. 9th – 12th century CE; Hindu temple dedicated to Shiva. 

Within 1 degree (3 sites):

19. Ur; c. 3800–500 BCE; Sumerian city-state and religious center (Ziggurat).

20. Angkor temples (Cambodia): c. 9th – 15th century CE; Capital and state temples of the Khmer Empire.

21. Prasat Phimai Temple, Thailand: c. 11th – 12th century CE; Khmer administrative and religious outpost.

There is one obvious problem with this whole notion.  The earliest site "on" this so-called Great Circle are the petroglyphs of nomadic neolithic pastorialists at Tasili n'Ajjer (c. 6000 BCE) which are there because that is (a) where the rock outcrop they are on is, and (b) are particularly well known among all the others because of the work of Henri Lhote, then we have (of course) the Giza pyramids [but none of the others] (3rd mill BC), then Ur, Mohenjo Daro, and Ganweriwala (3rd-4th mill BC) [but again none of the contemporary sites of the same urban network]. Then two millennia later there were some other sites built on or near this imaginary "line":  Perseopolis, Petra. The Shiwa Oasis and Anatom Island (Aneityum) settled on a Lapita voyage c. 900BC are where the oasis and island are. Petra is where the Nabateans could have built Petra. 

The gaps are filled in beyond the edges of the ancient world:  Pyay (Sri Ksetra), Nazca lines and Easter Island, the monumental architecture of the SE Asian states (there's quite a lot of them): Khajuraho, Sukhothai, Preah Vihear, Angkor temple complex, Phimai Temple. Then some pretty late structures from the Americas: Ollantaytambo, Machu Picchu, and then some made-up sites too (Paratoari pyramids). 

It is not clear to me how the proposnents of this idea deduce it would have worked. If the Neolithic pastoralists had got together with the 4th dynasty pyramid builders at the Giza head office, they'd not have made a "circle", adding some Sumerians at Ur (but not any other Sumerian metropolis) and the Mohenjo-Darans still makes a long line - and despite what the proponents say, a pretty crooked one. Then two or so millennia later several other random sites were built on (but then other islans, oases, route hubs etc were being built on, all over the place). Then, by magic over in SE Asia a whole load of Buddhists were, we are urged to believe, persuaded to join the project, and on the other side of the world, some Incan rulers. I'm not buying this. This is mumbo-jumbo with no justification than "it looks like". 

References

Alison, J. (2001). The prehistoric alignment of world wonders.

Anon A NEW LOOK AT AN OLD DESIGN THE PREHISTORIC ALIGNMENT OF WORLD WONDERS: THE GREAT CIRCLE, Objective History: System of Ancient Monumental Constructions 2024 [warning: a Russian site, coould be anonymous disruptor-bots] .

Hancock, G. (1995). Fingerprints of the Gods. Crown Publishers.

*Note, I've not checked all the dates given here, there may be some errors though the general pattern is clear.