Norman Lockyer (1836 - 1920) began exploring the orientations of Stonehenge after his first highly successful astro-archaeological expedition to Egypt in the 1890s.
A brilliant self-taught astronomer, Lockyer was a pioneer in astrophysical research on the sun, but his interests were not limited to this problem. In his now classic educational astroarchaeological work "Dawn of Astronomy" (1894), he recalls how he first became interested in early astronomical orientation: “… It so happened that in March 1890, during a short vacation, I went to the Levant. I went there with a good friend of mine who once, when we were visiting the ruins of the Parthenon, and again when we were in the temple of Eleusis, lent me his pocket compass. The curious orientation of the Eleusis foundation, discovered during the French excavations, was so striking and suggestive that I thought it prudent to establish its coordinates in order to determineis there a possible astronomical origin of the direction, which I told about …"
Lockyer was by no means the first to be interested in possible astronomical orientations in Greece and the Middle East. But since he was not a specialist scientist, like most French and German archaeologists, or an encyclopedist who had previously dealt with this issue, he was able to spread his network much wider. In his study of the orientations of the Greek temple, he attracted the archaeologist F. K. Penrose, who headed the British school in Athens in the 1880s. Penrose carried out a special study of Greek temples even before Lockyer turned to him, and he himself pondered the problem of their possible astronomical orientations [9].
Lockyer's success in researching Egyptian and Greek temples prompted him to continue this work. He guessed that by finding possible astronomical orientations in Britain at a latitude more northerly than Egypt, he would be able to calculate changes in the ecliptic (the Sun), since during this period such changes are more clearly traced in northern (or southern) latitudes.
With the help of Penrose and others, Lockyer began his work at Stonehenge in 1901. They measured the orientation to the summer solstice point, and this allowed them to find an error in the early calculations of Flinders Petrie. The date, calculated by Lockyer and Penrose on the basis of measuring changes in the inclination of the ecliptic, made it possible to attribute the origin of Stonehenge to distant prehistoric times. According to their calculations, the date of its construction was –1680 (± 200 years).
When Edmond Halley visited the monument in 1720, he sagaciously guessed from the general appearance of the stones that the structure must be at least 3000 years old. In his work Celtic Druids (1827), Godfrey Higgins, based on astronomical data, suggested an even earlier date - 4000, but before Lockyer and Penrose no one really believed that this monument was much older than Celtic-Roman times. Lockyer and Penrose sent a message about their discovery to the Royal Society, and in order to popularize Lockyer wrote a book "Stonehenge and Other British Monuments."
When measuring the orientation to the summer solstice, Lockyer, like his predecessors, faced a problem: which parts of the monument should be chosen to find the middle line of the avenue - the axis defined by stone circles or the Heel Stone? The middle line of the avenue and the axis were located at approximately the same azimuth, but due to the general destruction (and partial subsequent restoration) of the monument, the definition of the true axis and geometric center was very arbitrary, in addition, individual parts of the monument had different central points or central lines.
The so-called centerline is considered to be a line passing midway between stones 55 - 56 (central trilith), through the midpoint of stones 30 - 31 and 15 - 16 (outer circle of sarsen). Having measured the azimuth of the middle line of the avenue and obtained a value of 49 ° 35'51“, Lockyer decided instead to take for the azimuth 49 ° 34'18 ”, which determined the average axis of Stonehenge through the benchmark of the military topographic survey on Silbury Hill, located 13 km (8 miles) northeast and on the same line that passed through Grovely Castle 10 km (6 miles) southwest. Lockyer's choice of azimuth for the avenue was subsequently criticized many times, and even now it is not universally recognized.
Promotional video:
Taking an azimuth from the avenue, Lockyer ignored the Heel Stone, which was centered 1.8 m (6 ft) east of the middle line of the avenue. Although, as seen from the centerline within the stone circles, the Sun is now rising (approximately) over the Heel Stone. In ancient times, due to changes in the inclination of the ecliptic, it rose to the north of it (Fig. 10). Despite this, whatever the significance of the Heel Stone as a dubious ancient solar marker point, there seems to be no doubt that it was actually used as a kind of stellar marker point.
After examining what he called "orientation theory" using the Heel Stone and Stonehenge Avenue, Lockyer decided that there were other considerations to take into account. He wondered if there was an earlier circle in this construction. Then, after examining the "mounds" and base stones, he noted that the line drawn from stones 91 - 93 indicated sunset around May 6 and August 8, and in the opposite direction - at sunrise around February 7 and November 8. In his opinion, these dates represented the quarterly average days of the year, or approximately 45 days before and after the solstices. Line 91 - 93 runs almost centrally defined by the large sarsen circle and located approximately 1 m (3 feet) north of the center defined by the Aubrey circle. However, in his reflections on base stones, he did not take into account those significant discoverieswhich were made by his followers. If he paid attention to the possible connection of the monument with the Moon, as the already published work of Godfrey Higgins "Celtic Druids" and other sources suggested to him, he would certainly check the lunar hypothesis.
As for the question of the possible existence of an earlier circle in Stonehenge itself or somewhere nearby, Lockyer took into account the opinion of the geologist J. V. Judda, who believed that the blue stones were taken from an earlier circle located in some area near Stonehenge, and delivered either as spoils of war or as a sacred treasure of some nomadic tribe. But since these blue stones were deemed alien to the Salisbury Valley, their presence there demanded an explanation, if not to take into account the apocryphal history of Gottfried of Monmouth. Judd leaned towards the glacial theory. In the middle and at the end of the 19th century, everyone was well aware of the enormous transporting power of the glacier when they saw the debris of rock brought in during the Ice Age and scattered throughout the British landscape. They stayed there after the last great glaciers retreated north. Everyone agreed that the glacier could bring huge masses of rocks from their deposits in the mountains, and then scatter them for hundreds of miles. Naturally, according to the prevailing opinion at that time, the presence of these alien stones was attributed to the action of the glacier. Judd summed up the problem as follows: “I can assume that when the early inhabitants of this island began to build Stonehenge, the Salisbury plain was densely covered with huge masses of white sarsen stones (" gray rams ") and much less densely with darker blocks (the so-called" blue stones”), the last relics of the glacier drift, which almost melted. It was from these two types of material that the stones were chosen, suitable for the construction of the intended temple. It is possible that it is the abundance of these two materials thatso sharply contrasting in color and appearance, at some particular moment could not only determine the place, but also to a certain extent suggest the noble features of the architecture of Stonehenge."
Figure: 10: a) View northeast from the center of the Stonehenge sarsen circle about four minutes after the first rays of the rising Sun appeared on June 20 at two different eras. Notice how the random choice of different parts of the Sun (dotted line b), that is, the first glimpse of a half-ascending and half-ascending Sun, is at least 2,000 years apart at the significant point in the horizon azimuth. Note that the azimuth point at which the Sun is currently in mid-summer is moving east along the horizon by about 1 ° at 4,300 years. However, the opinion of modern archaeologists is at odds with Judd's plausible glacial version, especially with regard to the origin and presence blue stones. There are indications that a more fundamental criterion worked, such as latitude selection,which made the builders of the Neolithic times choose this very place for the construction of Stonehenge.
Lockyer's exploration of the various orientations convinced him that Stonehenge was closely associated with the ancient cult of the May period. This thesis is constantly found in all his works on megalithic monuments and has become almost an obsession. In his opinion, there was ample evidence that at Stonehenge the cult of May preceded the cult of the solstice. He hastened to draw comparisons between Stonehenge and the megalithic structures of Karnak in Brittany. As in Stonehenge, many orientations of the menhirs of Karnak turned out to be associated with the solstice. In support of his ideas, Lockyer cited the work of F. Gaillard, one of the pioneers in the development of what is now generally known as Karnak's theory of orientations.
One of the more interesting sections of Lockyer's book on Stonehenge is the two chapters on "Astronomical Clues for Archaeologists," where he sets out what he believed to be the model principles that researchers of megalithic structures should adhere to. In them, he explains his views on the possible stellar orientations of ancient structures in Northwestern Europe, similar to orientations to the stars, which, he believed, he proved during his previous work with Egyptian monuments, and Penrose, in his opinion, proved in Greece.
He wrote: “In continuation of my work in Egypt in 1891 and the work of Mr. Penrose in Greece in 1892, I will now try to prove the presence in Britain of any traces of stellar observatories, including those associated with the cult of the Sun at certain times of the year. We both found that stars far from the sun's orbit were being watched at dawn, especially in Egypt, as forerunners of the sun - "foretelling stars," so that the priests had time to prepare for sacrifice to the sun. To do everything properly, such a star had to rise at a time when the Sun was still about 10 ° below the horizon. There is also reason to believe that the stars rising near the point to the north also served as stellar clocks and made it possible to determine the time at night in the same way,as in the daytime it can be determined by the position of the Sun.
Since then, Lockyer has been dominated by the obsession with finding traces of the Beltine cult. [10] The main and final parts of his book on Stonehenge are mainly devoted to the elements of folklore and its theories. He believed that Beltane's cult faded after the rebuilding of the monument in 1680.
Lockyer wondered if it was possible to prove that Stonehenge and other British stone circles were used as observatories for observing the portentous stars, then the date of the creation of such observatories could probably be determined with an accuracy of 200 years. This is possible because the relatively fast motion of the stars in declination is caused by the precession of the equinoxes. Changes in the declination of the Sun caused by a change in the inclination of the ecliptic are relatively slow. However, Lockyer's speculations about the foreshadowing stars were too far-fetched, which he later realized. Associated with this problem are several factors that introduce uncertainty and confusion. For example, first you need to guess the date of the monument in order to then accurately determine the given star. It is quite possible to demonstratethat several bright stars may correspond to a specific orientation at different epochs.
Lockyer was very optimistic about the fact that the method of dating by stars had tremendous advantages over the method of dating by the sun. At the time, no one attempted to apply this method as a strictly scientific instrument, although some used similar methods to the stars of the southern hemisphere in an attempt to date the origin of constellation configurations.
Lockyer described how, in various parts of Britain, he obtained accurate evidence of facilities used for night work and facilities built in connection with the May period, which, as he repeatedly emphasized, was a major theme throughout Europe in ancient times and is still traced. when determining the start days of quarters in Scotland. In his book, he tried to demonstrate the methods used by the ancient British "priest-astronomers" to observe the stars.
According to Lockyer, the easiest way for the astronomer priest to observe the stars from the stone circle is to erect a stone or mound pointing towards the place on the horizon where the star will rise and it will be visible from the center of the circle. If the stars observed at dawn are the messengers of summer, then such a stone or mound may be visible. Lockyer believed that there is a good reason why they should not be too close, and on this occasion remarks with a grin: "… in a solemn ceremony, the less visible its mechanism, the better."
In the dark, such stones and mounds will be illuminated by lights placed near them. Later, Tom also voiced this idea. Lockyer noted that special bowls filled with fat or oil were used to illuminate such stones, but this is possible only in good weather, in the absence of wind. In his opinion, in windy weather a cromlech or some similar structure was built to shelter the priest.
Pointing to the necessity and importance of accurate plans, Lockyer emphasized: "and not those carelessly drawn up plans with which Fergusson and many others supplied us." He recommended the use of old military topographic maps with a scale of 25 inches (1 mile), which, in his opinion (very optimistic), indicated the position of the menhirs quite accurately, and the azimuths could be calculated from them with an accuracy of one minute.
Lockyer insisted on an accurate determination of the declination of the stars, as they gave constantly changing values due to precessional shifts. Now the table of such precessional shifts is much easier to find than in Lockyer's time, and for specific stars they are easy to calculate using simple tables in standard astronomy textbooks. Lockyer used methods of both azimuth and amplitude, angular distance from north (or south) points, and angular distance between east and west points, respectively. Nowadays, a surveyor in the field will use the simple method of measuring azimuth from True North by turning clockwise from 0 ° to 360 °. This use of azimuth is common among surveyors, navigators and engineers. In astronomy, the azimuth is usually taken by the value of the angle to the horizon,when the zero point is the observer's true south and the angle increases to the west.
Lockyer left enough practical advice for future astroarchaeologists. He compiled a whole set of clear graphs to determine the declination of the star (for latitudes 49 ° to 59 °) from a certain azimuth (Fig. 11). He rightly noted the importance of the horizon line and how refraction affects the calculations. In his opinion, the horizon line can be roughly determined by contour lines on 1-inch military topographic maps or their equivalents. Other useful numbers are the declination changes of the brightest stars found in the calculations of the ancient astronomer priests. They show changes in stellar declination (associated with precession) calculated over the period from –2150 to –150. The study of these numbers highlights one of the problems that was already mentioned earlier (above), that is, you first need to know the approximate date (s),when exactly was any star observation done. For example, if star # 26 (Spica, alpha Virgo) and star # 25 (Betelgeuse, alpha Orion) were at a considerable distance from each other in their declination of –2000, then at about –650 their declination values were the same.
Being very optimistic about the use of stars in determining the dates of the construction of the megalith, Lockyer later admitted that there was a certain problem here when he wrote: in a given declension on different dates. In that case, which of these stars should be taken into account?"
According to Lockyer, we should choose the star (or stars) that are most conveniently located for determining the time at night, or those that could be used as warning (foreshadowing) stars. He lists dates that may be critical for the solstice, such as May (May period), August, November, and February. (Note that Lockyer names different stars for different epochs and months. See Figure 12 for a map of stars.)
Lockyer also considers the question of observing the Sun, and here we immediately encounter one of the most insoluble and controversial problems concerning orientations to both the Sun and the Moon (especially at Stonehenge): which part of the lunar or solar disk should indicate the azimuth in time of rise or set: upper limb (first flash) or upper tangent; center (half sphere) or lower limb (lower tangent or full sphere)? It seems that Lockyer himself did not feel any doubts about this when he wrote: “It is often thought that in order to determine the exact place of the rising or setting of the Sun, in its connection with these ancient monuments, we must take into account the center of the Sun, which we do, when the sun is half up. In fact, we must take into account that part of the solar limb that is shown first above the horizon. The first glimpse of the upper limb of the Sun is taken into account, say, when the visible limb is at a height of 2 ', and we must carefully consider the height of the hills above which the Sun appears.
Figure: 11. Lockyer diagram for graphical determination of the declination of the star for latitudes from 49 ° to 59 °
Lockyer also left us with a convenient number for finding the azimuth at the summer solstices between 47 ° N and 59 ° N.
To expand and develop his astroarcheology work begun at Stonehenge, Lockyer visited many of the megaliths scattered throughout Britain. Some of these archaeological sites were subsequently carefully studied by followers of the theory of astro-orientations, in particular by Alexander Tom.
One of the more interesting sites that Lockyer has visited on several occasions is Herlers, located 8 km (5 miles) north of Liskeard in Cornwall. In his work on Egypt, Lockyer claimed to have traced the precessional changes in the rising and setting of a particular star, which were reflected in the axes of the temples. He now assumed that similar changes in observation lines could be found in the three stone circles of the Herlers complex. In those places they are widely known as "cheese presses", and this name has taken root in Southwest Britain in connection with the megalithic circles and similar field monuments.
On the plan, Herlers consists of three large circles of large granite stones, oriented almost in a straight line on the north-north-east and south-south-west lines. The middle circle is the largest at 40.5 m (135 ft) in diameter. The northernmost circle is 33 m (110 ft) and the southern one is 31.5 m (105 ft). These three circles have now been severely damaged, and at least half of the stones have been displaced from their original positions. Tom, who later carried out a topographic survey of this object, classified them within the framework of his own theories as type II egg-shaped circles (Fig. 22).
Early research at Herlers convinced Lockyer that there could be line of sight for Arcturus (Bootes's alpha) at –2170, –2090, and –1900; behind Antares (alpha Scorpio) at –1720; behind Betelgeuse (alpha Orion) at –1730; behind Sirius (Big Dog alpha) at –1690; for the summer solstice; for the November sunset and November sunrise. Lockyer suggested that Arcturus was used as a "clock star" and served as a star for the month of August and perhaps, as he believed, "also the Cornish Harvest Festival."
In keeping with the idea that folklore could provide a confirmatory answer, Lockyer became familiar with the lives of all local saints, as "the local festivities of the old days were often associated with local saints." Looking at the calendar of the Institut de France, "since Cornish saints are common to both Cornwall and Brittany," he noted that the days dedicated to Saints Justin and Claire fell on 9 and 12 August. This, according to Lockyer, was compelling evidence to suggest that the Herlers monument included at least one star, foreshadowing the August holiday.
Lockyer also used the Herlers to validate his idea of the significance of the May period, this time using a clear orientation towards Antares from the northernmost circle to a mound approximately southwest of it. He added his conclusions to those observations that he and Penrose made earlier in Egypt and Greece, noting: "Then we were able to confirm the third case of astronomical use of a star to predict sunrise in the morning at Beltane."
Lockyer's attempts to solve the problems of megaliths also covered the avenues of the megaliths, in particular those located in Dartmoor. These megalithic avenues could be marked with one, two or more rows of stones, some straight, others curved. They can follow in different directions of the compass, and sometimes their number can reach several within the same monument. Early French work on orientations in Brittany convinced him that there were monuments associated with the worship of the Sun in May. According to Lockyer, this was the earliest attempt by ancient man to measure a calendar year from the Sun after the Moon was found to be unsuitable for measuring time. By applying his ideas to Dartmoor and using the comparative method (which became quite popular in the 19th century among anthropological pioneers such as Taylor and Fraser),he concluded: “Equivalents of Brittany's orientations are not so common in Britain. They are much more common in Dartmoor, where I recently traveled to research them. The conditions of Upper Dartmoor are very specific. These areas are characterized by dense, enveloping fogs, which often descend without warning. In its structure, all this land is cut by streams. There are many stones everywhere. Then I discovered, as had already been done before me, that, owing to the conditions which I have enumerated, the directions marked by the rows of stones served quite different ceremonial purposes. Therefore, their origin was probably different. It was very important to carefully distinguish between these types of orientations and try to sort them out. My main task, naturally, was to determinehow similar they are to their Brittany equivalents and whether they might be of astronomical origin. First of all, it was necessary to determine which of them were built for worship, and which for practical purposes."
Figure: 12. Map of stars and constellations. Note that the extreme circumpolar groups of stars are not indicated here. The month names at the top show which stars are on the 20:00 meridian at different times of the year in a given era.
Lockyer then weeded out as non-astronomical those rows of stones and avenues that were too long, twisted and followed in several directions. He suggested that on some occasions they were useful guiding landmarks at night, in fog, in difficult terrain crossed by many streams. However, he cautiously suggested that their potential use could not be judged solely by the current soil structure or current stream beds. Indeed, since the Neolithic period, ground conditions have changed significantly due to the climatic optimum that occurred in the village. –4000.
On the question of the shape of the avenues, Lockyer believed that those that were astronomically oriented did not have to be exclusively straight. In his opinion, straightness can be achieved only on a flat surface, but if the avenue passes through hills and ravines, then when determining the azimuth, it is necessary to take into account the height of the horizon.
Lockyer was at a loss (as we are now) about the actual practical purpose of some of these branched avenues, although he wrote everywhere: "We know how such avenues were used in Brittany to worship the Sun." Lockyer was also quite puzzled as to why avenues and circles were found in the vicinity of mounds and burial sites.
It was at this moment that Lockyer issued a warning regarding stone orientations to future field explorers and, in addition, a sharp criticism against the authorities, which have not lost their relevance today. He wrote: “We should not assume that these rows of stones now have the same appearance as their creators left them. The appalling disregard of the government for our national antiquities, as I was convinced on the spot, was vividly demonstrated both by the authorities of Devonshire and by other, less important authorities, and in fact by everyone who needs to pave a road or build a wall. From this we can conclude that any of these rows of stones could once have been much longer and have a clear practical purpose, and those stones that are now absent in these circles could once have been used for ceremonial processions near temples.disappeared by now”.
Among the several avenue structures that Lockyer has explored and which illustrate his method of work are the two famous double vertical stone avenues at Merrivale (near Wokhampton, Devonshire). These double rows of stones run parallel from west to east (azimuth 82 ° or 262 °). The northern row was 181.8 m (600 ft) long and the southern one was 263.8 m (870 ft). Both were closed with triangular stones at the eastern end (Fig. 13). Almost in the center of the southern row was a rounded mound, surrounded by a circle of stones. From the southwest corner of this mound in a southwest direction another single row of stones led to a distance of 42.7 m (140 ft). South of the last row of stones was a 91 m (300 ft) circle of stones and a single stone nearby. There were several other mounds nearby. The sizes of the stones that made up the avenue ranged from 0,5 to 1 m (2 to 3 feet), in each row the stones were spaced 1 m (3 feet) apart, and the distance between the rows was 24 m (80 feet).
It should be remembered that, according to Lockyer, a long avenue, directed towards the point of rising of the star and passing on uneven ground, does not have to be completely straight. And if two avenues of different eras are directed towards the rising point of the same star, then they cannot be parallel. Lockyer used these two factors to refute what he called "the curious arguments of the critics of astronomical theory." These critics insisted that the lack of parallelism clearly contradicted the fact that these avenues were once used for astronomical purposes. At Merrivale, both avenues are clearly not parallel, and there is a clear curve in the orientation of the southernmost one.
According to Lockyer, in Merrivale the Pleiades (Seven Sisters) were once used as stars, foreshadowing the rise of the May Sun at an azimuth of 75 - 82 °. Azimuth variations can be caused by a different horizon height for the observer, to which the lines of his observation are directed. At Merrivale, Lockyer determined the horizon height to be 3 ° 18 '. Then, assuming that the Pleiades were the forerunner stars in question (which foreshadow the May sunrise), and armed with military topographic maps ranging from 25 inches to 1 mile (and additional topographic data provided by Worth), he obtained the results that gave him reason to believe that the idea with the Pleiades is proven. In addition, this was confirmed by the fact that, according to various Greek stellar orientations determined by Penrose,Hecatompedon at Athens was also oriented towards the Pleiades in –1495. Lockyer noted that cursus at Stonehenge was nearly parallel to Merryvale Avenue, and therefore decided that, like Merryvale Avenue, cursus was used as a road for processions to contemplate the rising of the Pleiades. The stone at the east end of Merrivale has been called the "blocking stone," and Lockyer suggested that it was used as an aiming stone. He noticed that the stones at the end of the avenues were longer than the others, and felt that this would help to find a clue to the true direction of other avenues.that it was used as an aiming stone. He noticed that the stones at the end of the avenues were longer than the others, and felt that this would help to find a clue to the true direction of other avenues.that it was used as an aiming stone. He noticed that the stones at the end of the avenues were longer than the others, and felt that this would help to find a clue to the true direction of other avenues.
Figure: 13. Avenue, circles and stones at Merrivale near Wokhampton, Devonshire, showing Lockyer's assumed astronomical orientation (according to Lockyer).
Summing up the results of his research on the Cornish and Dartmoor monuments, Lockyer posed several questions and expressed the hope that in the future they will be studied in detail by orientation specialists. For example, he wondered if the two-row avenues of stones were a reflection of the Sphinx Avenue in Egypt. Was there double worship in the avenue and the circles at the same time? Are all the piles of stones and cysts on the avenue later additions? He commented on it this way: “I have always believed that these ancient temples and even the long and chambered mounds that complement them were intended more for the living than for the dead … After a place acquired the status of sacred, it was quite reasonable to hold burials there, and since then it could happen there regularly. The most probable period may be from 1000 BC. e.up to very recent times, which archaeologists will consider possible."
Lockyer did not dismiss objections to his astronomical theory from contemporary critics, who strongly opposed the idea of oriented avenues because there were too many of them. One critic even counted fifty. To this Lockyer replied that, in his opinion, in different periods of the year these avenues were intended for different purposes, "some for practical, others for religious." He wrote in support of his astronomical theory: “… the results obtained in Devon and Cornwall are surprisingly similar … Of all the heavenly variety, from which opponents suggest that I choose any star, currently only six stars deserve attention, two of which are definitely were used both in Egypt, for timing, since they were hidden behind the northern horizon, and in Athens. These six starsas the planetary precession globe suggests, they are exactly those stars, the "morning stars" that the astronomer priests needed to prepare for the moment of sunrise at critical points in the period of May or the solstice."
Lockyer's ideas have come under constant criticism from both archaeologists and astronomers, but it is his unbridled and hyperspecific excursions into the jungle of prehistory and folklore that have come under the most aggressive attacks. He devoted much of his book on Stonehenge to a hectic discussion of how folklore and tradition shed "dim light on the use of stars in antiquity."
Today, such a modus operandi is virtually unknown to a physical scientist who is supposed to use scientific methods in his work and will represent a disastrous methodology, perhaps with only minor exceptions. Lockyer, as the undisputed editor of Nature, never faced the challenge of meeting the demands of the critical, anonymous scientific reviewers appointed by scientific editors. Therefore, he was not limited by anything and often allowed his ideas to transform into unscientific flights of fantasy. Today many archaeologists, unfamiliar with his enormous contribution to the pioneering science of the sun and the stars, classify him as a "lunatic," in the company of Velikovsky and von Deniken.
At the same time, it can be argued that Lockyer's excursions into mystical folklore speak only of the versatile interests of this seeker of truth in the traditions of the great 19th century scientist and thinker Humboldt. From the 1890s onward, Lockyer's research as an astroarchaeologist was only a small part of his immense interest in space. For example, in 1903, the busiest year of his life, when he was at the height of his scientific fame, he was mainly interested in meteorology.
Lockyer had a subtle sense of humor, a quality that does not often go alongside those who cannot tolerate stupidity. A typical example of his humor is this beautiful sarcastic remark: "I thought that changing the slope of the ecliptic was the most beautiful leisurely movement we know, so the Sun should definitely learn a thing or two from a print shop."
As one of the world's greatest pundits, Lockyer made a huge impression on Tennyson. In turn, Lockyer himself was shocked by the breadth of the poet's knowledge and his close acquaintance with astronomy. One day Tennyson enthusiastically wrote to Lockyer: "… in my anthropological spectrum you are colored like a star of science of the first magnitude." Lockyer's broad interests were evidenced by the writing, together with his daughter Winifred, of a book (his last) entitled Tennyson as a Scientist and Singer of Nature, which aimed to show the public the breadth and depth of the poet's scientific knowledge.
Lockyer never limited himself to studying only the obvious factors of any problem and collected any evidence that might be relevant to it. Do not forget the intellectual atmosphere in which Lockyer had to work at the beginning of the 20th century. Not long before this, there had been a violent revival of interest in folklore and mysticism, mainly driven by the powerful and comprehensive scientific knowledge of Taylor, Fraser and Max Müller, and especially the latter, whose theory of solar myths echoes today. Anthropology was a completely new science that had not yet defined its directions and boundaries. It was not systematized like the other traditional natural sciences we inherited from the Hellenic world.
Fraser was a pioneer of an interdisciplinary approach. At the height of his fame, he was called the leader of the "new humanism". He broke into several scientific fields to root out the facts he needed. Like Lockyer, Fraser firmly believed that in the process of learning, ignorance of a particular discipline should not prevent a person from taking her by the throat and listening to what she had to say about herself. He was often criticized for his "library approach" to anthropology, and because he was sensitive to such criticism, he considered him the greatest compliment ever addressed to him when a visitor from distant shores left his home one day exclaimed in admiration: “Why do you know my birthmarks? better than myself!"
Following his methodology, Fraser imagined himself as an intellectual savage who faced the problem of explaining natural and humanitarian phenomena to himself. The latter led to his approach being called “If I were a horse,” following the example of the apocryphal story of an American farmer who lost his horse (see below). Other parallels can also be drawn with the method that Conan Doyle popularized in his Sherlock Holmes: “You know my methods in such cases, Watson. I put myself in the place of a man and, first connecting his intellect, I try to imagine what I would do in such circumstances."
From an academic point of view, Fraser is now in oblivion, but his "Golden Bough" in abbreviated form and softcover was the most widely read work in anthropology [11]. For a long time it remained a book that must be read by everyone who declares their knowledge of literature. Freud and others borrowed a lot of factual material from Fraser, but interpreted it in their own way. Fraser also translated Ovid's Fasti, which contains some of the early literary references to astronomical phenomena. However, Fraser always admitted his little knowledge of astronomy. His emphasis on the plant element in mythology, which Andrew Lang later called the Covent Garden school of mythology, was especially criticized.
The methods Lockyer used in Egypt, Stonehenge and other British megaliths offer valuable historical perspectives for astroarcheology. Anthropology, under the guise of ethnographic parallels, is again coming into vogue as an auxiliary scientific tool of astroarcheology. Although Lockyer was often mistaken, he was undoubtedly a pioneer in this field. When he began his British research, he said: "My task is not to sort out the facts of folklore and traditions, but simply to pick out accurate conclusions from known sources regarding the questions before us …"
One of his first tasks was to establish the meaning of temporal relationships, in particular the quarters of the year - four important components of the Gregorian, Greek and Roman calendars. Lockyer drew attention to the fact that all these dates were located approximately halfway between the solstices and equinoxes, and later he linked them with megalithic orientations.
Lockyer, like Aubrey and Stuckley before him, had a strong interest in Druidic ideas. He said that the earliest information about the days of festivities in Great Britain can be obtained from Cormac, Archbishop of Cashel, in the 10th century (Hazlitt's Dictionary of Beliefs and Folklore), and Vallancey says that “at that time four huge bonfires were kindled during the four greatest festivals of the Druids, namely in February, May, August and November."
Most of Lockyer's theses were borrowed from Fraser's Golden Bough. Lockyer acknowledged his great debt to Fraser, and wrote in the chapter on “sacred fires”: “Mr. Fraser’s excellent selection of facts on this topic collected in his Golden Bough makes it unnecessary for me to go into the details of this part of my research..
Lockyer then summarizes the fire festivals:
1. In February, May, August, and November of the original May year.
2. In June and December, during the longest and shortest days during the solstice periods …
3. Bonfire for Easter.
Straight from the Golden Bough, the reader is presented with a chapter on Sacred Trees, Sacred Wells and Streams, preceding a chapter on the origins of the British cult and the similarities between Semitic and British cults.
Lockyer is free to use the comparative method. He found out that the Semitic Baal is also characteristic of Western Europe. Its equivalents are supposedly Bel, Beal, Balor Balder and Phol, Fal, Fail, and the first King of Orkney also bore the name Balus. The May Day festivities of the Belten of the Druids are now a well-known topic for readers of Fraser's Golden Bough.
Continuing the May theme, Lockyer considered the cursus of Stonehenge and Dartmoor Avenue to be evidence of ceremonial and social processions, and suggested, It is 10,000 feet long and 350 feet wide, and occupies a valley between two hills, allowing thousands of spectators to attend at the same time, and our horses are still wearing holiday harnesses at Beltane.”
Studying the origins of the British cult, he imagined that ancient explorers who followed the coast to Britain in search of tin might have traded in Cornwall as early as -2500. Referring to the similarity between the languages of the Middle East and the Celtic language and other supporting evidence provided to him by his contemporaries anthropologists, Lockyer concludes: "… the main population of these islands before the arrival of the Celts spoke dialects similar to those of North Africa."
Lockyer's ideas about contacts between the cultures of the Eastern Mediterranean and Britain did not stray too far from the theory of Gordon Child, whose influence on British prehistory in more modern times was enormous. Gordon Child (among others) believed that there is very strong evidence of contacts between the culture of Wessex and the culture of Mycenae: "… their similarity, which can sometimes be accidental, is generally too obvious to be ignored …" Although contacts between these cultures are clearly took place, it is useful to remember that now their value is considered relatively small. Despite this, some archaeologists still argue that the final development of Stonehenge (Stonehenge III) was, according to some sources, due to the significant contribution of Mycenae.
In the final chapter of Stonehenge, Lockyer summarizes his ideas by comparing the discoveries he made in Egypt with those he made in Britain and Brittany. He says that British observations were based on his research of many monuments over three or four years in various regions with the help of many friends who enjoyed doing it in their free time.
These studies numbered over a hundred possible orientations, which Lockyer summarized in the following table:
Lockyer called his evidence "exhaustive" and believed that blind luck had nothing to do with the definition of different orientations, since, as he noted, they fit perfectly into certain groups. However, he did not subject his work to any kind of statistical analysis, as Hawkins and Tom did with their own discoveries at a later time.
Lockyer believed that the avenues and cromlechs were chronologically of an earlier, primitive stage, while stone circles appeared later, personifying more advanced practically astronomical knowledge. The avenue had a single purpose, and it could only be oriented towards the sunrise (or sunset) of a single astronomical object, while the circles, along with several external, auxiliary objects, had multiple purposes and could mark various astronomical phenomena. The earliest observations of sunrise were associated with May, a growing season associated with growth and fertility, which Lockyer believes was probably the first solar orientation of Paleolithic humans on the distant horizon. Much later, these orientations were associated with the solstice period, which begins in June. Lockyer suspected that Stonehenge had once had circles associated with May and preceded the current circle associated with the solstice. Thus, Stonehenge could probably have started as a temple to May, such as British Memphis, and ended as a temple to the Solstice, like the temples of Amun-Ra at Thebes, in line with Lockyer's Egyptian ideas.
Lockyer correctly concluded that British circles were fully functional "more than a thousand years before the Aryans or Celts appeared on the scene." At the same time, he assumed that the druids of Caesar's time were undoubtedly the descendants of the priests-astronomers of more ancient times, and therefore, on their example, the achievements of the early priests-astronomers can be studied.
There is no doubt that some of Lockyer's interest in the Celtic Druids was due to the fact that French archaeologists told him about the Lockyer line, supposedly descended from the Ligurians, an early Celtic people who settled near Ouse. The temptation to ascribe some astronomical knowledge to his direct forefathers was, perhaps, subconscious, but at the same time it still gave his ideas about the Celts a certain flavor.
In the period between Lockyer's pioneering work and the appearance of Hawkins' new work, "Solving the Mystery of Stonehenge", little was done in Stonehenge itself to further develop Lockyer's ideas. His work was criticized from all sides, but it was his later and rather extravagant reasoning that deprived him of almost all support. Lockyer's early work in Egypt and Stonehenge really attracted many supporters, even among archaeologists like Wallis Budge, Flinders Petrie and Gaston Maspero. Prominent scholars such as Max Müller and J. G. Fraser, saw much in Lockyer's practical fieldwork in support of their own library research on mythology and folklore. Fraser considered confirmation of his own ideas about summer fire mythology,when he read with admiration in The Dawn of Astronomy by Lockyer: “… just as the temple at Karnak once pointed to the setting of the sun during the summer solstice, so the temple of Stonehenge pointed almost to the rising of the sun during the summer solstice… Observations told the priests that the new year had begun, and then, probably, fires were kindled to spread this message throughout the country. Thus, we finally have the opportunity to trace the origin of the mid-summer bonfires … "we finally have the opportunity to trace the origin of the mid-summer bonfires … "we finally have the opportunity to trace the origin of the mid-summer bonfires …"
After the first edition of his book on Stonehenge was published in 1906, Lockyer persuaded the Royal Society to create a committee to conduct an astronomical study of Britain's ancient monuments. Although he considered himself too old for such work, it was during this period that he became interested in the stone circles of Wales and immersed himself deeply in the study of Celtic mythology.
These mythological studies went far beyond what most archaeologists and astronomers today consider to be in the realm of astroarcheology. His exaggerated ideas about the ancient connection between Britain and Egypt were quite interesting, but did not have enough real evidence. His belief that a class of priest-astronomers familiar with Egyptian methods had existed in Britain since c. -3600, and the Druids were the direct ancestors of the Semitic people who migrated to Britain, was imbued with the Stuckley scent of 18th century romance, but lacked the cautious skepticism one would expect from a Nature editor and influential Royal Society. His broad, holistic approach, integrating archeology, astronomy and mythology, was innovative and commendable so muchhow it corresponded to the framework of scientific methods. His early supporters were quite ready to share his idea that the Egyptians and ancient Britons oriented their buildings and monuments to celestial bodies, but the Druidic motives, which he adopted from Aubrey and Stuckley, were much more difficult to perceive.
Lockyer died in 1920. Shortly thereafter, one of his friends and biographer wrote: “The sun is our supreme historian, and the astronomer is his prophet. Lockyer's astronomical interpretations, often theoretical, sometimes based on incorrect measurements and obtained at best during weekend work, represent a legacy left by the great theorist of the Sun itself to future archeology and anthropology researchers that they simply cannot ignore.
From the book: “Stonehenge. Mysteries of megaliths”. Author: Mezhevitinov Evgeniy
