A high-tech mechanism discovered at the beginning of the twentieth century near Crete is one of the arguments for the assertion that our history textbooks on the question of human development contain many blank spots.
The discovery, ignored by historians for decades, has only now presented the world with shocking arguments that the technological progress of our civilization is not at all what we imagined it to be.
In 1900, the Greek sponge diver Elias Stadiatos, while working near Antikythera Island, accidentally stumbled upon the remains of a ship on the seabed. This discovery became possible only thanks to a happy coincidence. The diving took place two days before Easter, with quite intense excitement.
Strong waves have exposed the remains of a sunken ship near a small island. The wreck of the ship was 50 meters long and was at a depth of 43 meters. Diving to such depths in those days without professional equipment was a rather unsafe activity.
This find piqued the interest of the Greek authorities. At the site of this shipwreck, many valuables were discovered: boxes of coins, jewelry and marble statues. The dating of the discovered objects did not present any great difficulties for archaeologists. The ship sank in the 1st century BC. on a flight from Rhodes to Rome.
During the recovery of these treasures, one in ten divers died, and two others paid with their health. When the famous explorer Cousteau found himself in this place many years later, there was practically nothing to look for. Almost everything that could be raised from the sunken ship by the Greek authorities.
But the artifact that caused so much controversy was discovered later. During a careful sorting of objects raised from the bottom, archaeologist Valerio Stais on May 17, 1902 drew attention to pieces of bronze covered with limestone, which did not fit anywhere and, at first glance, looked like fragments of some large clock. Stais suggested that it could be an ancient astronomical clock, and at one time even wrote a scientific work on this. This publication was not well received by the Greek archaeological community. Many accused him of deception, an obscene person in an important position in the museum.
Promotional video:
Stais's critics simply could not reject the established position on the use of sundials in Greece. No one could even imagine that such complex mechanical devices existed in those days. It was generally accepted that the ancient Greeks, who had great mathematical knowledge, designed devices for scientific purposes, but the mechanisms of these devices were characterized by simplicity of execution. Devices similar to those raised from the bottom of the Aegean Sea at Antikythera were known to the Greeks in ancient times, but their use for such complex astronomical calculations contradicted historical data.
Set aside "under the cloth"
The scientific paradox of the early twentieth century led to a contradiction: "The Greeks could have created this, but, however, they did not." Can we now recognize the words of Stais, widely quoted in the press, that “this is the most complex fragment of the scientific mechanism of antiquity”, as a manifestation of scientific fantasy, since it is too tempting to be true?
The case of the Antikythera find was, as often happens, put “under the rug” so that over time someone could look at it more impartially. In 1958, historian Derek J. de Solla Price stumbled upon a strange artifact and decided to choose it as the object of his scientific research, the results of which were later published in the pages of the scientific journal Scientific American. The scientist understood that he was dealing with something unusual, which was repeatedly sounded in his statements. With the participation of a group of specialists, he initiated a project to reconstruct this object and establish its purpose.
Dr. Price in an interview expressed his sincere surprise and understanding that in this case you have to deal with an unprecedented find. “Nowhere else in the world has any such instrument been preserved,” he said openly. “We do not know anything that we could compare with him from ancient written sources. Quite the opposite. Everything that we know about the science and technology of the Hellenistic era, in general, contradicts the existence of such a complex technical device at that time. The discovery of such an object can be compared, perhaps, with the discovery of a jet plane in the tomb of Tutankhamun."
The preliminary results of Dr. Price's research left no doubt that the device was designed to calculate short and long astronomical cycles. This in itself was a sensation. It is well known that in European civilization, differential mechanisms appeared only in 1575 in the watches of Eberhard Baldwin. The ancient origins of such a device were difficult for the scientific world to accept, and Dr. Price was well aware of the implications of such dating. But the time when he conducted his research was favorable enough for an in-depth study of the essence and functions of this mechanism.
Astronomical connotations
At least twenty gears have survived, including their mountings, eccentrically placed on the rim. Two rotating rollers, well preserved in the device, indicated the differential nature of the mechanism. The individual elements of the entire gear structure were made from a single piece of low copper bronze. The cogwheels were attached on one side to a bronze plate. A shaft passed along the side of the body, which rotated the wheels. Initially, the mechanism was enclosed in a small rectangular wooden box with built-in doors.
Dr. Price and his variant of the device reconstruction
Attribution of the function of calculating the motion of stars and planets to this complex device was not purely speculative. Price noted that the front dial had been preserved well enough to indicate the function of the device. “It has two scales, one of which was stationary and contained the signs of the zodiac,” said Dr. Price. - The second, placed on a movable ring, showed the months of the year.
Both scales are carefully marked with divisions (…) Of course, this dial showed the annual movement of the Sun in the Zodiac. As for the other designations on the disk, the impression arose that the device was calculating calendar rises and sets of bright stars and constellations throughout the year."
Dr. Price realized that the device was centuries ahead of its era and science had to revise the historical knowledge of the era more than one and a half thousand years ago. The facts about the ancient origins of the device were stubbornly striking. The main historical evidence of this was the preserved Greek inscriptions on the mysterious artifact.
In the matter of translating the surviving inscriptions, Price was helped by the epigraphy George Stamirez. To quote Dr. Price: “Some of the plaques bore barely recognizable inscriptions in 1st century BC Greek. They themselves already indicated the astronomical purpose of the device. The scientific community was left to either defiantly ignore the results of Dr. Price's research, or simply pretend that this find simply does not exist.
Looking for Greek Scientists
The amazing mechanism from Antikythera, in addition to its unprecedented nature, somehow nevertheless fit into the historical framework in which it could be found corresponding. The research instruments that were used in astronomy are mentioned in their writings by Cicero and Ovid. The first, who lived in the 1st century BC, spoke of an instrument “designed by Posidonius, which was a reconstruction of a planetarium that indicated the positions of the sun, moon and five planets.
A similar mechanism was allegedly designed by Archimedes and, plausibly, was stolen in 212 BC. by the Roman general Marcellus when Archimedes was killed in the Sicilian city of Syracuse. For many years this device was kept as a relic in the family of Marcellus."
But despite these written references, scientists had great doubts, about which Dr. Price put it as follows: “Even the very complex devices described by the ancient authors were based on simple transmission. For example, a taximeter used by the Greeks to measure distances, in its work used pairs of gears to obtain the required coefficient of movement. Can it be argued that since the Greeks were familiar with the basics of drive mechanics, were they able to construct such a complex device as a mechanical planetarium?"
We do not know what the machines designed by Archimedes looked like, but from the written descriptions we can judge that these devices were not compact. They served more decorative functions than they served for calculations. The Antikythera mechanism is definitely a scientific apparatus in which technical knowledge was involved. This device went far beyond the constructive abilities of the ancient Greeks. Price emphasized this quite accurately, arguing that even today it would be difficult for modern people to explain the meaning of such a device.
Despite all this, there is no doubt that someone possessed such advanced knowledge that was used to create such a complex device. Who, then, could have created such a technically advanced design? One of the suspects in this may be Gemin - an astronomer, mathematician and philosopher in one person, a student and follower of Posidonius. Geminus lived in 135-51 BC, was a stoic, belonged to the philosophical school founded by Zeno. Rhodes has been a very important center for astronomical research.
The device from Antikythera in theory fits perfectly into the context of knowledge of Stoic philosophy, mainly mathematical. Gemin would be the perfect candidate here. And, importantly, he lived in a suitable time for this. Significant here is the date on which the Antikythera device was tuned, and which was indicated by several scientists who investigated it - according to the position of its pointers and dials.
It was 86 BC. - a special year in the context of an astronomical theme. At this time, there were as many as five planetary conjunctions. It was the perfect time to build some kind of astronomical calendar. However, it is not known whether this "calculator" was installed on such a date much earlier.
Theories point to Egypt?
The theory of astronomical clocks is quite interesting, but according to researcher Maurice Schatelin, there was something very significant missing in all this - namely, logic. Chatelaine argued: “If someone wants to create an astronomical device in the form of a calculator powered by gears, the first condition is to calculate the number of cycles required to obtain the exact number of days. Some of these cycles are fairly easy to set up, but a lot will be nearly impossible here."
Each of the gears is one cycle, this is how clockwork works. Seconds are converted to minutes, minutes to hours, last to days, and then to longer cycles. To create such a clock, their designer must not only have an idea not only about each of such cycles, but also about their ratios, that is, how many seconds are in a minute (60: 1), minutes in an hour (60: 1), hours in days (24: 1) and so on. The design of such a calendar based on the solar year is a challenge. And here it is worth noting that the calculator from Antikythera also counts the cycles of the Moon and the five nearby planets. It is not surprising that scientists were skeptical about the statement that this device was only … a device.
The genius of the mechanism designer from Antikythera was far ahead of the knowledge of ancient Greek science and many other older civilizations, as he was able to calculate the cycles of so many celestial bodies. The so-called Meton cycle used by the Greeks, according to Chatelaine, did not correspond to the level of knowledge used in the Antikythera calculator.
According to Chatelaine, only the Egyptian calendar could be used as a basis for such a calculator, and it may have been one of the foundations used to create the Antikythera device.
Not everyone, however, shares Schatelin's opinion. Certain doubts about this are associated with one of the inscriptions preserved on the device: "76 years, 19 years." This refers to the Callippus cycle, in which four methonic cycles were shortened by one day. In other words, the 76-year cycle was 940 lunations and 27,759 days.
The next mark contains the number "223", which refers to the eclipse cycle of 223 lunar months. Dr. Price himself admitted that "with the Meton cycle, it was easy to design a mechanism in which one revolution would indicate the annual cycle on the dial and simultaneously generate the revolutions of the disks showing the sidereal, synodic and draconic months."
Similar cycles have been known in many other cultures. Arithmetic calculations were used, among other things, in Babylonian astronomy. This knowledge was later instilled in the Hellenistic worldview back in the period BC. There is no doubt that the cycles used were not of Greek origin. But the question remained: were the Egyptians or the Babylonians the source of this knowledge?
Dr. Price's research has awakened interest in the Antikythera find among other scholars. Along with technological progress and the advent of the computer era, attempts to reconstruct the device in subsequent years became more promising.
In 1993, Australian programmer Allan J. Bromley from the University of Sydney, together with watchmaker Frank Percival, attempted to reconstruct the movement. In this case, X-rays of the interior of the find, made with the help of Michael Wright of Imperial College London, were of great help. Even then, Bromley and Percival were surprised by the unusual precision of the mechanism.
Shocking was the opening of the locking mechanism in the device, which prevented the teeth from slipping and jamming while the gears were moving. Also of interest was the delay mechanism discovered, used to simulate the moon's irregular orbit.
John Gleave, who later joined the group, completed the final design of the device. Its reconstruction showed the annual movement of the Sun and Moon in the Zodiac, consistent with the Egyptian calendar. However, to remain neutral in the debate over the origin of the mechanism, John acknowledged that the upper dorsal regulator is four-year and is integrally related to the Meton cycle. The lower rear regulator indicated a single synodic month, while the lower scale on the regulator referred to the lunar year, which consisted of twelve synodic months.
Another renovation was carried out in 2002 by Michael Wright of the Science Museum in London. In November 2006, he published an article in the scientific publication "Journal Nature", where he confirmed the presence of tools in the device for predicting solar and lunar eclipses. Wright highlighted Dr. Price's contribution to the study of the Antikythera mechanism, but also acknowledged that "its interpretation cannot be fully accepted."
New research confirmed that this machine, designed for complex astronomical calculations, had a main dial at the front with two scales: the Greek and Egyptian calendars. At the back, two dials showed lunar cycles and eclipses. Previous claims that the device served to predict eclipses were still only a hypothesis. Now, after reconstruction and computer simulations, there is no longer any doubt about this.
Moreover, studies have shown that the movement is the product of very sophisticated engineering at a very high level. For example, the presented lunar cycle correctly reflects the Moon's orbit while maintaining its complex ecliptic characteristic of a satellite. To make such calculations, the designer of this device had to apply very advanced variational systems in the position of the gears.
The group of scientists also managed to recognize a larger number of texts placed on the device, such as: "Venus" and "stationary", which indicated that this instrument was able to take into account the oncoming motion of the planets.
Wright concluded that the Antikythera Mechanism was not a one-off device. It could be a mass product. Perhaps it was an improved model of earlier designs that have sunk into oblivion without a trace. The only surprise is the fact that such an advanced technique did not find continuation in subsequent eras. It is paradoxical that the development of such analytical machines died out in one place in order to revive again more than a thousand years later.
Translated from Polish - V. Gaiduchik