Pennsylvannia Avenue
Three Segments Pennsylvania Avenue, the most important street in the capital, has become the ceremonial axis of Washington, D.C.. In L'Enfant's words,"The first of these avenues, and the most direct one, begins at the Eastern Branch and ends over Rock Creek at the wharves at Georgetown". Looking at the path of Pennsylvannia Avenue, we see three distinct segments, 1) one running from northwest DC (Georgetown) to the White House (WH), 2) another from there to the Capitol Building (CB), and 3) a third from there to the Eastern Branch. As David Ovason points out ("Secret Architecture" page 331) "Pennsylvania Avenue has been built (in accordance with L'Enfant's map) as three sections which run at different angles to one another". If we overlay a straight line from the northwest to the river, we notice that it agrees with the original until it reaches the WH, but that the two diverge until they meet again at the same point on the river's edge. Had the Capitol Building been located a few hundred feet to the south, Pennsylvannia Avenue would have been a "straight shot" all the way to the river, and all the resulting angles would have been different; or the same, actually. Unfortunately Ovason fails to realize this, and sees things differently; pointing out (on page 330) that, "the western extension (north and west of the White House, the straight section) is subtended three degrees to the north on L'Enfant's map". That is, it turns up three degrees from the angle formed by the middle segment. In other words, he is making the section between the WH and CB the straight segment. Why the Bend? The question that arises is why is there a bend in Pennsylvannia Avenue? That is, why did the planners not lay it out as a straight line? Ovason's basic assumption is that the "aligment" of middle segment of PA was intentional. On page 331 he states that, "It appears that L'Enfant, and Ellicott (who adjusted the Frenchman's maps slightly - even in regard to this angle of Pennsylvannia Avenue), wanted this stretch of the avenue ... to orient differently from the rest". And, "Why did Andrew Ellicott measure the length of Pennsylvania Avenue in such a way that it's central portion, between the Capitol and the White House, ran at an angle diiferent from the rest?... he did this in order to orient this stretch to a particular sunset". (page 332) The thesis of his book is that this segment of the avenue aligns to the sunset around August 10th, and while he continues to point to this "one day or sunset", he fails to remind us that the sun also sets there in early May. If you think about it for just a second, it will be clear to you that this three degrees does not make much difference in where the Virgo constellation is seen in the eveneing sky in August in Washington DC. I dare say that if you went out and looked three nights in a row, that you couldn't even notice the diference. Ovason's claim about one day keeps appearing weaker and weaker. Topography I take a different view of things. I recommend that L'Enfant would have liked to have made the avenue straight, but that he simply "ran out of hill" on which to put the Capitol Building. Just take a look at a topographic image of the Capitol Hill, or Jenkins Heights as it was called in 1791. Note that closely placed lines indicate a rapid change of elevation, while an absence of lines indicates a relatively flat area. As you can see, the CB was placed on the crest of the hill, overlooking a steep drop off to the west; and there are three points further to the east that are 40 feet higher (red "x"'s ) on which the building could have been placed, had a prominent position on the hill been the first concern of the planners. The image below is an out-take from the August 1791 "line-map" by LeEnfant, depicting his choice of the position for the Capitol; a point which was, L'E thought, "a pedestal waiting for a monument". (Arnebeck page 51) Ellicott did not agree. As a matter of fact, his major objection to L'Enfant's map was about the location chosen for the Capitol Building. His complaint was that "This last defect is so obvious, that I do not remember to have met with one person who did not immediately see it, when on the ground." (Arenebeck Through a Fiery Trial, page 115) He wanted to move the building 600 feet to the east, because 1) it was too close to the edge of the hill, 2) the foundation there would be doubtful , and 3) to the east 20-30 feet of earth blocked the view, as you can see from the above map with the red x's. Washington made the final desision that the building would not be moved and that "the hill to the east should stay". Note that the fact that Ellicott expressed his disapproval of the location of the CB, and that he wanted to move it 600 feet to the east, does not fit with what Ovason claims about Ellicott being the person who laid out the section of Pennsylvania Avenue between the WH and CB. Here is a topographic image which features the modern landscape, as well as elevation numbers (circled in red). This image (below) consists of the topo map overlaid with the straight line of the "ideal" path of PA (from the second image on the page), with the alternate location of the CB marked with a blue rectangle. Note how close the topo lines are at this location, indicating a rapid rise in elevation, and an impossible place on which to build the Capitol. The fact of the matter is that at this distance from the White House, the location for the Capitol Building that would have made Pennsylcania Avenue a straight line, was on the side of a steep hill. L'Enfant made a decision; instead of moving it to the southeast to preserve a straight line, he moved it to the north. As has been pointed out, the alignment of PA between the CB and WH is 19.5 degrees south of due east. The sine of 19.5 degrees is .33333, meaning that the ratio of the distance between the WH and Wash Mmt and that between the WH and CB would have been 1:3, something that Masons could readilty understand. The White House The following is an illustration of the topography of the entire DC area, with the relative high places high-lighted in red. Note that by "realtive" high areas, we mean the highest point in a given location, that is realtive to it's immediate surroundings. Next we zoom in on the White House area. You can see that in spite of the fact that "historians" tell us that both the WH and CB were located on "hills", which evokes a mental image of a building showcased above the surrounding landscape, neither of the two is actually placed on a relative high place. The White House, like the Capitol, was placed adjacent to a prominence that was at least 40 feet higher than the location chosen for it. According to Bob Arnebeck (in "Through a Fiery Trial page 53), "On June 28 (1791)... Washington went with L'Enfant and Ellicott to see if he liked where L'Enfant had put the president's house. He did not". At Suter's Tavern, on the 29th, Washington declared that the diagonals "would not be so numerous", and that the president's house would be more to the west "for the advantage of the higher ground". While some of the diagonals were removed, the White House reamined in the same spot, raising more questions about who was responsible for what in the map. The Pyramid Image The question that confronts us now is, if L'Enfant was not concerned with the WH and CB being on one of the highest and most prominent spots on the hill, why did he place them where they did? That is, why did he place the CB on the crest of the hill, rather than in a more prominent position? And why was the WH not positioned on the obvious high place to the west? If you have read my pages concerning the Pyramid Image concealed in the DC map layout, you will know that my answer to that question is that the concern for depicting the pyramid cross-section image was as important as showcasing the buildings. My thesis is that the City Planners utilized the cross-section image of the Great Pyramid at Giza as one of the templates for the layout of the city streets, and that the White House, Washington Monument and the Capitol Building were positioned so as to represent elements in the Pyramid Image. Looking at the image of the pyramid cross-section merged with the DC map, we can see that the "fit" is less than perfect between Pennsylvania Avenue and the Ascending Passage, due to the fact that the avenue has a crook or "dog leg" in it. Had the planners been able to place the CB just a little bit to the south, Pennsylvannia Avenue would have been a straight line and served as a better representation of the Ascending Passage and the Grand Gallery, and the CB would have been positioned closer to the junction of the Gallery and the passage to the Queen's Chamber. Let's take a look at the DC map with a straightened Pennsylvannia Avenue and compare it to the pyramid cross-section. First with a few streets, the canal, and a couple of orientation points emphasized. Then with the pyramid image overlaid on it. With the position of the Capitol moved, and Penn. Ave. straightened we see three of the main passages in the Pyramid Image accounted for almost perfectly; but what of the so-called "well" shaft? The Shaft and Canal See the image below and note the path of the canal marked in blue, a feature that was removed following the War Between the States. Comparing with the preceeding image shows the canal to be a less than perfect representation of the shaft. Refering again to the topographic image we can ascertain the reason for the discrepency; the canal was planned to conform with the lay of the land, which, once again, was the simplest method and required the least amount of landscaping. Recall that the canal was dug to control the Tiber. When you consider the broad open area located where the canal splits and compare to the "grotto", located at ground level in the Pyramid Image, you will see that the one branch of the canal forms a pretty good representation of the shaft. DC Symbols HOME

Pennsylvannia Avenue

Three Segments
Pennsylvania Avenue, the most important street in the capital, has become the ceremonial axis of Washington, D.C.. In L'Enfant's words,"The first of these avenues, and the most direct one, begins at the Eastern Branch and ends over Rock Creek at the wharves at Georgetown".
Looking at the path of Pennsylvannia Avenue, we see three distinct segments, 1) one running from northwest DC (Georgetown) to the White House (WH), 2) another from there to the Capitol Building (CB), and 3) a third from there to the Eastern Branch. As David Ovason points out ("Secret Architecture" page 331) "Pennsylvania Avenue has been built (in accordance with L'Enfant's map) as three sections which run at different angles to one another".

If we overlay a straight line from the northwest to the river, we notice that it agrees with the original until it reaches the WH, but that the two diverge until they meet again at the same point on the river's edge. Had the Capitol Building been located a few hundred feet to the south, Pennsylvannia Avenue would have been a "straight shot" all the way to the river, and all the resulting angles would have been different; or the same, actually.

Unfortunately Ovason fails to realize this, and sees things differently; pointing out (on page 330) that, "the western extension (north and west of the White House, the straight section) is subtended three degrees to the north on L'Enfant's map". That is, it turns up three degrees from the angle formed by the middle segment. In other words, he is making the section between the WH and CB the straight segment.

Why the Bend?
The question that arises is why is there a bend in Pennsylvannia Avenue? That is, why did the planners not lay it out as a straight line?
Ovason's basic assumption is that the "aligment" of middle segment of PA was intentional. On page 331 he states that, "It appears that L'Enfant, and Ellicott (who adjusted the Frenchman's maps slightly - even in regard to this angle of Pennsylvannia Avenue), wanted this stretch of the avenue ... to orient differently from the rest".
And, "Why did Andrew Ellicott measure the length of Pennsylvania Avenue in such a way that it's central portion, between the Capitol and the White House, ran at an angle diiferent from the rest?... he did this in order to orient this stretch to a particular sunset". (page 332)
The thesis of his book is that this segment of the avenue aligns to the sunset around August 10th, and while he continues to point to this "one day or sunset", he fails to remind us that the sun also sets there in early May.
If you think about it for just a second, it will be clear to you that this three degrees does not make much difference in where the Virgo constellation is seen in the eveneing sky in August in Washington DC. I dare say that if you went out and looked three nights in a row, that you couldn't even notice the diference. Ovason's claim about one day keeps appearing weaker and weaker.

Topography
I take a different view of things. I recommend that L'Enfant would have liked to have made the avenue straight, but that he simply "ran out of hill" on which to put the Capitol Building. Just take a look at a topographic image of the Capitol Hill, or Jenkins Heights as it was called in 1791. Note that closely placed lines indicate a rapid change of elevation, while an absence of lines indicates a relatively flat area.
As you can see, the CB was placed on the crest of the hill, overlooking a steep drop off to the west; and there are three points further to the east that are 40 feet higher (red "x"'s ) on which the building could have been placed, had a prominent position on the hill been the first concern of the planners.

The image below is an out-take from the August 1791 "line-map" by LeEnfant, depicting his choice of the position for the Capitol; a point which was, L'E thought, "a pedestal waiting for a monument". (Arnebeck page 51)

Ellicott did not agree. As a matter of fact, his major objection to L'Enfant's map was about the location chosen for the Capitol Building. His complaint was that "This last defect is so obvious, that I do not remember to have met with one person who did not immediately see it, when on the ground." (Arenebeck Through a Fiery Trial, page 115)
He wanted to move the building 600 feet to the east, because 1) it was too close to the edge of the hill, 2) the foundation there would be doubtful , and 3) to the east 20-30 feet of earth blocked the view, as you can see from the above map with the red x's.
Washington made the final desision that the building would not be moved and that "the hill to the east should stay".
Note that the fact that Ellicott expressed his disapproval of the location of the CB, and that he wanted to move it 600 feet to the east, does not fit with what Ovason claims about Ellicott being the person who laid out the section of Pennsylvania Avenue between the WH and CB.
Here is a topographic image which features the modern landscape, as well as elevation numbers (circled in red).

This image (below) consists of the topo map overlaid with the straight line of the "ideal" path of PA (from the second image on the page), with the alternate location of the CB marked with a blue rectangle. Note how close the topo lines are at this location, indicating a rapid rise in elevation, and an impossible place on which to build the Capitol.
The fact of the matter is that at this distance from the White House, the location for the Capitol Building that would have made Pennsylcania Avenue a straight line, was on the side of a steep hill. L'Enfant made a decision; instead of moving it to the southeast to preserve a straight line, he moved it to the north.

As has been pointed out, the alignment of PA between the CB and WH is 19.5 degrees south of due east. The sine of 19.5 degrees is .33333, meaning that the ratio of the distance between the WH and Wash Mmt and that between the WH and CB would have been 1:3, something that Masons could readilty understand.

The White House
The following is an illustration of the topography of the entire DC area, with the relative high places high-lighted in red. Note that by "realtive" high areas, we mean the highest point in a given location, that is realtive to it's immediate surroundings.

Next we zoom in on the White House area.

You can see that in spite of the fact that "historians" tell us that both the WH and CB were located on "hills", which evokes a mental image of a building showcased above the surrounding landscape, neither of the two is actually placed on a relative high place. The White House, like the Capitol, was placed adjacent to a prominence that was at least 40 feet higher than the location chosen for it.
According to Bob Arnebeck (in "Through a Fiery Trial page 53), "On June 28 (1791)... Washington went with L'Enfant and Ellicott to see if he liked where L'Enfant had put the president's house. He did not". At Suter's Tavern, on the 29th, Washington declared that the diagonals "would not be so numerous", and that the president's house would be more to the west "for the advantage of the higher ground".
While some of the diagonals were removed, the White House reamined in the same spot, raising more questions about who was responsible for what in the map.

The Pyramid Image
The question that confronts us now is, if L'Enfant was not concerned with the WH and CB being on one of the highest and most prominent spots on the hill, why did he place them where they did? That is, why did he place the CB on the crest of the hill, rather than in a more prominent position? And why was the WH not positioned on the obvious high place to the west?
If you have read my pages concerning the Pyramid Image concealed in the DC map layout, you will know that my answer to that question is that the concern for depicting the pyramid cross-section image was as important as showcasing the buildings.
My thesis is that the City Planners utilized the cross-section image of the Great Pyramid at Giza as one of the templates for the layout of the city streets, and that the White House, Washington Monument and the Capitol Building were positioned so as to represent elements in the Pyramid Image.

Looking at the image of the pyramid cross-section merged with the DC map, we can see that the "fit" is less than perfect between Pennsylvania Avenue and the Ascending Passage, due to the fact that the avenue has a crook or "dog leg" in it.

Had the planners been able to place the CB just a little bit to the south, Pennsylvannia Avenue would have been a straight line and served as a better representation of the Ascending Passage and the Grand Gallery, and the CB would have been positioned closer to the junction of the Gallery and the passage to the Queen's Chamber.
Let's take a look at the DC map with a straightened Pennsylvannia Avenue and compare it to the pyramid cross-section.

First with a few streets, the canal, and a couple of orientation points emphasized.

Then with the pyramid image overlaid on it.

With the position of the Capitol moved, and Penn. Ave. straightened we see three of the main passages in the Pyramid Image accounted for almost perfectly; but what of the so-called "well" shaft?

The Shaft and Canal
See the image below and note the path of the canal marked in blue, a feature that was removed following the War Between the States. Comparing with the preceeding image shows the canal to be a less than perfect representation of the shaft.

Refering again to the topographic image we can ascertain the reason for the discrepency; the canal was planned to conform with the lay of the land, which, once again, was the simplest method and required the least amount of landscaping. Recall that the canal was dug to control the Tiber.

When you consider the broad open area located where the canal splits and compare to the "grotto", located at ground level in the Pyramid Image, you will see that the one branch of the canal forms a pretty good representation of the shaft.

DC Symbols HOME