- Part one -
Near-horizon observatory
The word "observatory", of course, is known to everyone: this is the name of a scientific institution located in a building of a special design and equipped with special instruments for systematic observations - astronomical, meteorological, magnetic and seismic.
The ancient world knew observatories of a special kind - they are not being built now. They are called daytime astronomical, or near-horizon, observatories of the Sun and the Full Moon. They were not equipped with sophisticated instruments, which simply did not exist at that time, but they nevertheless made very accurate observations; high precision was the hallmark of this kind of structure.
How were they arranged? I will try to briefly explain the "physics of the process".
The horizon is the only place in the sky where the sun can be observed with an unprotected eye. Moreover, you can look at the Sun at the horizon through the theodolite lens without a filter. In the years of the active Sun, spots on the Sun are clearly visible at the horizon, they can be counted, observed their movement along the disk and the angle of inclination of the axis of the rotating star can be seen. And all this can be observed even with the naked eye.
The horizon is a special place in a person's field of vision: the gaze facing it undergoes a distortion of linear perspective. Our perception magnifies, as it were, all objects close to the horizon and on the horizon; The moon and the sun look larger near the horizon than at higher points in the firmament, and the reason for this is not at all optical effects due to the state of the atmosphere (these effects exist, but they manifest themselves in a completely different way - for example, flattening and trembling of the lower edge of the star), but psycho-physiological reasons. Quite simply, a special structure of the human brain. Even Aristotle knew about this. And this truth is perfectly confirmed by instrumental measurements. A drawing of the horizon from nature will be very different from a photograph: the drawing is more prominent and has more detail. This property of human perception dictates special conditions for archaeoastronomical observations: you need to work not with photography or, say, video recording, but necessarily “on location” - in the same place and in the same way as ancient colleagues worked.
The procedure for the rising (and setting) of a daylight lasts about 4.5 minutes in our latitudes and takes about one degree of its arc on a calm, even horizon. Important points of observation are the appearance of the first ray, that is, the highest point of the solar disk, and the separation of the fully ascended disk from the horizon. It is not easy to decide which of these two points was preferred by ancient astronomers. In theory, not simple, but in practice, the preference of the bottom edge for those who tried to do this is beyond doubt. (The preference of this point is all the more obvious when it comes to observing the lunar disk.)
Promotional video:
If strictly from one and the same place we observe the rising and setting of the Sun, marking along the lower edge of the disk (let's call the very moment of separation of the disk from the horizon or touching it “event”), then it is easy to find that every morning and every evening an event occurs at different points horizon. During the year, the event point moves along the horizon, first in one direction, then in the opposite direction, but within the same sector. Starting observations in the spring, in March, we will see that the Sun rises almost exactly in the east, but from day to day the point of the event moves more and more to the left, that is, to the north, and rather quickly: every morning almost to the diameter of the disk. To be convinced of this, you need to put on the horizon landmarks marking the place of the event.
The movement of the event point to the north will continue throughout the spring, but the diurnal variation will gradually decrease and by the beginning of the calendar summer, in June, it will reach a barely noticeable value of one minute of the arc. In the period close to June 22, the diurnal course of the event will decrease to half a minute of the arc, after which the movement of the event point will go in the opposite direction. This moment is called the summer solstice; this word is still in use, but meanwhile it came into everyday language from the practice of near-horizon astronomy.
The southward movement of the event point lasts all summer, and its diurnal variation increases by September again to the size of the disk. And after passing the moment of the autumnal equinox (September 21; at this time, the point of the event is exactly in the east), the progress slows down again until it stops altogether at the beginning of winter, December 21: the winter solstice will come. From here the movement will again go to the north and by the spring will reach the point of the east … So it was and will always be so.
The strict repeatability of this process was noticed by ancient astronomers and was adopted, as they say, into service. The points of the summer (in the northeast) and winter (in the southeast) solstice, due to their strict fixation, were of especially great practical importance. First of all - for accurate orientation in space. In the language of the ancient Greeks, there were even geographical terms that meant directions to summer sunrise and winter sunrise.
The importance of the extreme points of the event is determined by the need for an accurate calendar. The fact is that observation of events on the horizon is the only real and accessible way for ancient astronomers to determine the length of the year. Even to keep a calendar with daily accuracy, they needed near-horizon observatories, which would make it possible to record astronomically significant events with the utmost accuracy for the naked eye.
The number of clearly recorded astronomically significant events associated with the observation of the Sun is very small - there are only four of them: two extreme points of solar rise in the year and two - sunset. There are only four points for the entire flow of time lasting a whole year. There were some other significant milestones in the rhythm of life itself. For example, the equinox points: in practical life they were probably even more noticeable than the solstice points, for they recorded the beginning and end of the biologically productive season in northern Eurasia.
Therefore, the attention of ancient astronomers was naturally attracted by another heavenly body.
The moon moves across the sky (from the point of view of an earthly observer) twelve times faster than the sun. But the movement is more complicated. "Hunt for the Moon" is perhaps the most interesting and exciting activity in the history of astronomy. It is very difficult to comprehend the order and natural beauty in its daily sunrises and sunsets - its movement, to an unenlightened eye, is impetuous and unpredictable. Nevertheless, in the observatories near the horizon, from time immemorial, they knew how to unravel the hare loops of the mistress of the night.
The first step to take is to recognize that the phase of the full moon is most convenient for observing lunar events. Second: among all the full moons, you need to choose only those that follow immediately after significant events of the Sun - this is necessary to correlate in a single stream of real time two calendars - the lunar and solar. The most difficult problem of observing the moon is that the onset of the full moon very rarely coincides with the time of the appearance of the star above the horizon: this usually occurs when it either has not yet risen, or is already high enough in the sky. It is usually impossible to fix the moonrise point directly on the horizon by direct observation; various indirect methods are being developed to find it. Suppose, however, that we have already learned how to do this. Then long-term observation (one event per month, and significant ones - four times a year) will reveal the laws of motion of lunar events on the horizon. And these are the laws.
First, full moons approaching the time of the summer solstice are observed near the point of the winter solstice and vice versa. This "on the contrary" can be regarded as the basic rule in the relationship between the Sun and the Moon in our firmament.
The second law: the events of the Moon migrate from year to year near the corresponding ("opposite") points of the Sun in a narrow sector. The migration cycle is about 19 years. When an event occurs at the northernmost point of a sector, then astronomers speak of a "high" moon; when it moves to the extreme southern point, they speak of a "low" moon. The time interval from low to high moon is over 9 years.
Once the boundaries and rules for the movement of the points of the moon have been established, observers can begin "aerobatics" in near-horizon astronomy technology. A truly virtuoso technique and jewelery precision, combined with pedantic diligence, requires the observation of precession.
Dictionaries define precession (as an astronomical concept) as the slow motion of the earth's axis along a circular cone. (Similar movements are performed by the axis of the gyroscope, or - the most graphic for the uninitiated example - the axis of a running children's top. Therefore, the term "precession" is used not only in astronomy.) The axis of this cone is perpendicular to the plane of the earth's orbit, and the angle between the axis and the generatrix of the cone is 23 degrees 27 minutes. Due to the precession, the vernal equinox moves along the ecliptic towards the apparent annual motion of the Sun, passing 50.27 seconds per year; while the pole of the world moves between the stars and the equatorial coordinates of the stars are continuously changing. In theory, the offset should be 1.21 degrees in five thousand years, that is, less than one and a half minutes in 100 years. Hence,For forty years of continuous and scrupulous observations (is it possible for a longer observation period within the framework of one human life?), an astronomer devoted to his vocation can detect a precession in just half a minute! At the same time, the inviolability of the points and sectors of the equinoxes will be revealed.
The reader, far from astronomical worries, will probably have little to say about these degrees, minutes, seconds, expressed, especially in numbers with decimal fractions. They will hardly ever be useful to him in organizing his practical affairs, and the author will no longer need them here to substantiate any conclusions. But, I think, they were still worth citing here at least to show how much refined observation, ingenuity, skill, diligence, ability for spatial imagination and for large-scale generalizations was necessary for ancient astronomers to successfully use the capabilities of the near-horizon observatory.
I will add, without resorting to additional argumentation, that during the year such an astronomer was given (by the very mechanics of celestial bodies) 18 astronomically and calendar-significant events (one could say otherwise: strictly fixed reference points to which he could tie his other observations) - nine sunrises and nine sunsets. In each nine, three events are related to the Sun and six to the Moon (three are "high" and three are "low"). Here is such a "periodic table" or, better, an astronomical "alphabet", in which, by the way, each such event has its own symbolic designation. But we don't need to go that far here.
Astroarcheology has accumulated many facts indicating that throughout ancient history, starting from the Paleolithic era, various peoples of the Earth built near-horizon observatories to observe the rising and setting of the stars. Only usually they were extremely simple: the observatory was tuned to only one (out of eighteen!) Significant event. Until now, we have known only one case of using several events on one observational “instrument”. This case is called Stonehenge.
Arkaim's class is much higher!
Arkaim as an astronomical instrument
In order for a near-horizon observatory, in principle, to serve as an instrument of astronomical observations, for which it was created, it needs to have three constituent elements: an observer's workstation (RM), a near sight (BV) and a far sight (RV).
Without a far sight on the horizon, the required accuracy cannot be achieved. Any natural or artificial detail of the landscape that clearly fixes the point of the event and does not allow confusing it with any other point on the horizon can serve as such a sight. It can be the top of a mountain or a hill, a detached rock, a large stone. You can also put a large post, arrange an artificial stone slide, cut a clearing in the forest, or, on the contrary, plant a tree on a treeless horizon; you can fill a mound - then archaeologists will take it for a burial ground and begin to dig it, searching in vain for a burial chamber … Much is possible. But, by the way, on the horizon of Stonehenge, no objects were found that could be unambiguously identified as long-range sighting lines,nevertheless, this circumstance did not prevent many from recognizing the near-horizon observatory in the monument.
It is easier with the near sight: it is installed only tens of meters from the observer and, if done "according to the mind", it is easily distinguishable. They can be used "in combination" by some other design detail. But something else is important here: that the working (upper) edge of the sight from the point of view of the observer coincides with the horizon line on which the distant sight is located.
As for the observer's workplace, the requirement for it is the simplest: it needs to make it possible to reliably fix the position of the observer - especially his head, even, perhaps, his eyes - at the moment of observation. And more - no wisdom.
The situation as a whole is exactly like aiming with a gun: the sight with a butt is the observer's workplace (RMN), the front sight is the near sight (BV), the target is the long-range sight (DV).
Poleva archaeoastronomy usually solves two problems: astronomical - calculating the azimuth and corrections (at least seven) to it - and archaeological: detecting and verifying parts of the "device" - sighting devices and RMN.
The example of Stonehenge creates a precedent: in his example, we see that ancient astronomers could set up observatories to observe several events from one place. It also turns out that the "tool", which is generally understood, is equipped with a whole series of details, the purpose of which has remained unknown to us until now. Now we get the opportunity to look for clues on Arkaim.
Stonehenge - Arkaim: two incarnations of the same principle
The most noticeable part of Stonehenge's structure is the cromlech - a kind of "palisade" of giant stone monoliths exhibited in a circle. Monument researcher Gerald Hawkins managed to “collect” 15 significant events (out of 18 possible) on the Stonehenge cromlech. In this case, however, none of them can be represented with an accuracy of one minute of arc. In the best case, we can talk about tens of minutes, because there are no distant sighting devices.
There are 10 workplaces in the Hawkins layout, 12 close sightings (in some cases, opposing workplaces are also used as sightings). A total of 22 elements, allowing 15 events to be observed. This is a very rational and economical solution. After all, usually near-horizon observatories were set up to observe one event and needed for that - each - in three elements.
Arkaim's design is such that observation of the horizon here can only be carried out from the walls of the inner circle, both RMN and BV must be placed on them: after all, the walls of the outer circle from the upper level of the citadel will look much lower than the horizon. Here we identified four RMNs and eight BVs, as well as 18 DVs, but the layout was solved so rationally that these elements were enough to observe all 18 significant events!
The observation of 9 sunrises was carried out from two places located in the western part of the ring wall of the inner circle. One of them was located strictly on the latitudinal line of the geometric center of this circle. And on the same line there was one of two places to observe the approaches. Lunar events were evenly distributed across the observation towers - three for each.
In addition to four RMNs, seven fixed points were used as BVs on the wall of the inner circle and one on the wall of the outer one (after all, as archaeologists say, there was a high gate tower). All twelve close-sight sights are verified in design with an accuracy of a minute of arc and can be represented as points, the physical dimensions of which do not exceed the thickness of a peg with a diameter of less than 5 centimeters. At the same time, long-range sights are located on the prominent parts of the line of the visible horizon - as a rule, on the tops of hills and mountains, which, moreover, were additionally equipped with artificial signs - embankments or stone calculations. More than half of these signs are well preserved.
All the details of the Arkaim observatory complex are at the same time fixed points of a complex - already in many ways, although not yet fully understood - its geometric structure. It is reasonable to assume that acting as an instrument for astronomical observations was not the only or even the main function of the structure. This conclusion follows from the fact that not all of the identified structural elements of the "city" and signs on the horizon around it are identified as parts of an astronomical "instrument". Hence, we can conclude that the performance of astronomical observations was only one necessary facet of the complex, complex function that the settlement of the ancient Aryans performed among a spacious valley in the depths of the great Ural-Kazakhstan steppe. What was this feature? To answer this question convincingly,it is necessary to study in more detail the construction of Arkaim itself, and to more fully compare everything that becomes known about this monument with analogous objects that are found in different parts of the world.
However, let us leave pure archaeological and historical riddles for the relevant specialists; Let us summarize at least what we know quite reliably about Arkaim as an archaeoastronomical monument.
First of all, the structure, as it turned out, is geodesically strictly oriented to the cardinal points. Signs are displayed on the horizon to within a minute of an arc, marking the latitudinal (West-East) and meridian (North-South) lines passing through the geometric centers of the structure. (The geometrical centers of the outer and inner circles lie on the same latitudinal line and are 4 meters 20 centimeters apart from each other, with the outer circle shifted relative to the inner to the east.)
In terms of orientation accuracy, only some of the pyramids of Egypt can compete with Arkaim in the entire ancient world, but they are two hundred years younger.
The meridian and latitude line of the geometrical center of the inner circle are used as the natural rectangular coordinate system in which the horizontal projection of the entire structure is built. When constructing a construction plan in this coordinate system, the same values of azimuths of radial foundations were repeatedly used, on which the walls of the foundations of the premises of the inner circle were erected. Moreover, in the same coordinate system, the annular parts were marked with the given values of the radii. From all this geometry, by means of complex calculations, the Arkaimov measure of length is established.
The editor reasoned that the reader does not need the methodology of these calculations, and besides, it would take us far beyond the topic. As for the very concept of "Arkaimov measure of length", then, firstly, it should be noted that the measure of length is not random in any system of measurements: arshin, cubit, verst, mile, inch, meter - all these are modules of certain vital dimensions. Sometimes, as can be seen even from the names themselves - "elbow", "foot" (from the English foot - a foot) - they are tied to the parameters of the human body: rather shaky, it must be admitted, the starting point. It is much more reliable if they are based on astronomical measurements: this is the "meter" - originally it was measured from the earth's meridian; the Arkaim measure should also be considered in this series. But, as it turned out with the accumulation of facts, each of the large astroarchaeological monuments was based on its own measure of length:experts talk about the Stonehenge measure, about the measure of the Egyptian pyramids …
Arkaimsk measure of length - 80.0 centimeters.
The recalculation of the dimensions obtained when measuring the construction plan opens up unexpected possibilities. It turns out that the outer circle is constructed with the active use of a circle with a radius of 90 Arkaim measures. This result provides a basis for comparing the foundation plan with the ecliptic coordinate system used to represent the sky. "Reading" Arkaim in this system gives amazing results. In particular, it is found that the distance between the centers of the circles is 5.25 Arkaim measure. This value is surprisingly close to the angle of inclination of the lunar orbit (5 degrees 9 plus or minus 10 minutes). By bringing these values closer together, we get a reason to interpret the relationship between the centers of the circles (and the circles themselves) as a geometric expression of the relationship between the Moon and the Sun. Strictly speaking, here the relationship between the Moon and the Earth is recorded,but for the terrestrial observer, the sun moves around the earth, and the observatory was created to observe the motion of the sun; hence, what today's astronomer perceives as the orbit of the Earth, for the Arkaim observer was the orbit of the Sun. Hence the conclusion: the inner circle is dedicated to the Sun, and the outer one - to the Moon.
Another result is even more impressive: the area of the inner circle is outlined by a ring with a radius of 22.5 to 26 Arkaim measures; if this value is averaged, it turns out somewhere around 24 measures. And then a circle with such a radius can represent in the ecliptic coordinate system the trajectory of the pole of the world, which it describes around the pole of the ecliptic over a period of 25920 years. This is the precession described above. The precession parameters are reproduced in Arkaim's design, firstly, correctly, and secondly, exactly. If we agree with this interpretation of its design, then it is necessary to radically change the usual understanding of the qualifications of ancient astronomers and make a significant amendment to the history of astronomy, where it is believed that the precession was discovered by the Greeks of the classical period, and its parameters were calculated only in the last century. Undoubtedlyknowledge of precession is a sign of a high level of civilization.
By the way, having applied the ecliptic coordinate system to the Stonehenge structure, we came to the conclusion that the main, if not the only function of this structure was to store information about precession.
Continuing the analysis of the Arkaim construction, we find other astronomical symbols in its geometry. So, in the radius of the inner wall of the structure, calculated in the Arkaim measure, a number is guessed that expresses the height of the pole of the world above Arkaim; it also means the geographical latitude of the location of the monument. It is interesting (and hardly accidental) that Stonehenge and Arzhan burial mound in Altai are located at approximately the same latitude …
In the layout of the premises of the inner circle, a complex harmonic basis is guessed for the embodiment in architectural forms of ideas about the creation of the world and man.
The considered methods by no means exhaust astronomical symbolism, constructive wealth and variety of methods used by the great - without exaggeration - architects.
The experience of working on Arkaim leads to the conclusion that we are dealing here with an extremely complex and flawlessly executed object. The particular difficulty of studying it is explained by the fact that it rises before us from the depths of the centuries in all its splendor at once, and behind it are not visible monuments that are simpler, as if leading to it along the stairs of evolution. Hopefully, this difficulty is temporary. Although it is clear that there are not many brilliant things.
Arkaim is more difficult than us, and our task is to climb to its heights without destroying the incomprehensible and not understood.
The presence of skeptics is necessary in such a case, their opinion is known ahead of time - it has been repeatedly expressed about, say, the Egyptian pyramids or Stonehenge: there is always, they say, there is a measure (in this case, Arkaim), which is convenient to operate; there will always be something to divide and multiply into, in order to end up with the coveted astronomical values expressing the relations of the Sun, Earth, Moon, etc. And in general, these mysterious ancient structures - are they really astronomical institutions? Maybe these are just our today's fantasies?..
The incredibly high level of astronomical knowledge in ancient times removes, if not all, then many of these questions. There were ancient observatories, and there were the results of the finest and longest astronomical observations. It makes sense to remember that in ancient Babylon they could accurately calculate the eclipses of the Sun and the position of the planets relative to each other. In Sumer, the moon's orbital time was known to within 0.4 seconds. The length of the year, according to their calculations, was 365 days 6 hours and 11 minutes, which differs from today's data by only 3 minutes. Sumerian astronomers knew about Pluto - the most distant planet of the solar system, discovered (it turns out, not for the first time) by modern scientists only in 1930. The orbital time of Pluto around the Sun is, according to today's data, 90727 Earth days;in the Sumerian sources the number 90720 appears …
Mayan astronomers calculated the length of the lunar month to the nearest 0.0004 days (34 seconds). The time of the Earth's revolution around the Sun was 365.242129 days. With the help of the most accurate modern astronomical instruments, this number was specified: 365.242198 days.
Examples can be multiplied, and they will all be amazing … Some researchers seriously believe that Stonehenge rings exactly simulate the orbits of the planets of the solar system, that even the weights of stone blocks were not chosen by chance - they recorded the arrangement of elements in the periodic table, the speed of light, the ratio masses of a proton and an electron, the number p … Something similar is said about the pyramids …
It's hard to believe.
Nevertheless, there are several structures on our planet that have baffled modern science: Egyptian pyramids, giant drawings of the Nazca desert, Stonehenge in England, Callanish in Scotland, Zorats-Kar in Armenia and, it seems, our Arkaim …
It is difficult to explain why and how our ancestors built these amazing structures. But they cannot be ignored. American researcher Gerald Hawkins claims that it took at least one and a half million man-days to build Stonehenge, which is a huge, simply incalculable waste of energy. What for? Why Arkaim is the largest and, as K. K. Bystrushkin shows, the most perfect near-horizon observatory - to primitive, semi-wild, as was commonly believed, people who lived almost five thousand years ago in the South Ural steppes?
Why are there Stonehenge and Arkaim - we still cannot figure out the dolmens: they seem to be the simplest structures, a kind of poor stone birdhouse. And yet they certainly have astronomically significant orientations and are, in fact, the most ancient calendars of mankind.
So, maybe we do not quite objectively assess the ancient past of mankind? Maybe in the ecstasy of the consciousness of our own civilization (isn't it imaginary?) And knowledge (isn't it seeming?), We exaggerate the degree of their "primitiveness"? What if our ancestors were not more primitive than us, but simply lived differently, according to laws unknown to us? And what if K. K. Bystrushkin is right, asserting that Arkaim is bigger than us, and if we want to understand him, we should be able to rise to its heights?..
Konstantin Bystrushkin, astroarchaeologist
- Part one -