Civilization One: The World is Not as You Thought it Was Read Online Free Page B
Author: Christopher Knight, Alan Butler
Tags: Civilization One
laid down by the late Professor Alexander Thom still remained. In our opinion there were only two main possibilities:
1. Thom’s data gathering and/or his analysis were flawed, and the Megalithic builders did not use the Megalithic Yard as a standard system of measurement.
2. Thom’s data and his analysis were both correct. The Megalithic builders did use this standard unit of measurement and it was applied with great accuracy.
‘Stick to Facts, sir!’
It is a matter of record that the academic establishment prefers a gentle evolution to revolution in its thinking. No academic authority enjoys having its finely-tuned paradigm challenged. But it is time to put the Megalithic Yard to the test. So, was there a way forward to resolve the authenticity or otherwise of Thom’s findings? Was it possible to investigate the suggested Megalithic Yard? The problem was that there was still a relative absence of informed opinion regarding this subject. The situation brought to mind the words of Mr Gradgrind in Charles Dickens’ Hard Times:
‘Now, what I want is, Facts... Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them… Stick to Facts, sir!’
Facts can be tricky things, as the point of view of the observer will always have a bearing on them. However, we came to the view that the only way to resolve the matter was to try to put some more facts on the table: facts that could help everyone concerned to have a more informed view. To do this we decided that we needed to try and discover how the Neolithic people could have produced the Megalithic Yard to such a high degree of accuracy across so large a geographical area and over such a long period of time. If we could find a realistic explanation of how the Megalithic unit of 0.8296656 metres could be created, it would justify a reappraisal of the existing paradigm of prehistory and potentially repair a substantial hole in the Great Wall of History.
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/975360.stm
2 http://nabataea.net/items.html
3 http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/Ancient-Africa/mad_ancient_egypt.html
4 Knight, C. and Lomas, R.: Uriel’s Machine. Arrow, London, 2000.
5 Thom, A.: Megalithic Sites in Britain. Clarendon Press, London, 1967.
6 Thom A.: ‘A statistical examination of the Megalithic sites in Britain’. (1955) Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, A118, 275-91.
7 Thom and Thom: Megalithic Remains in Britain and Brittany. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1978. Chapters 3, 4, 6, 7 & 8.
8 Thom, A.: Megalithic Sites in Britain. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1968.
9 Heggie, D. C.: Megalithic Science: Ancient Mathematics and Astronomy in Northwest Europe. Thames and Hudson, London, 1981. See also: Renfrew, C. & Bahn, P. G.: Archaeology: Theory, Methods and Practice, Second Edition. Thames and Hudson, London, 1996.
10 Heggie, D. C.: Megalithic Science: Ancient Mathematics and Astronomy in Northwest Europe. Thames and Hudson, London, 1981.
11 Mackie, E. W.: July 30th 2003, see: http://www.dealbhadair.co.uk/athom.htm
C HAPTER 2
The Turning Earth
Does it really matter if Professor Thom was right about the Neolithic builders having used the finely-defined standard unit of length that he called the Megalithic Yard? Yes – it matters a great deal. If he was wrong, the subject of statistics needs a fundamental reappraisal; but if his findings were reliable, the subject of archaeology needs equally careful reassessment. Further – if Thom was right, the development of human civilization may have to be rewritten! We wanted to know, one way or the other: were Alexander Thom’s findings real?
The truth and the Earth
There were two possibilities: either Professor Thom’s Megalithic Yard was a genuine unit once used by Neolithic builders or it was an accidental consequence of statistical manipulation without any historical
1. Thom’s data gathering and/or his analysis were flawed, and the Megalithic builders did not use the Megalithic Yard as a standard system of measurement.
2. Thom’s data and his analysis were both correct. The Megalithic builders did use this standard unit of measurement and it was applied with great accuracy.
‘Stick to Facts, sir!’
It is a matter of record that the academic establishment prefers a gentle evolution to revolution in its thinking. No academic authority enjoys having its finely-tuned paradigm challenged. But it is time to put the Megalithic Yard to the test. So, was there a way forward to resolve the authenticity or otherwise of Thom’s findings? Was it possible to investigate the suggested Megalithic Yard? The problem was that there was still a relative absence of informed opinion regarding this subject. The situation brought to mind the words of Mr Gradgrind in Charles Dickens’ Hard Times:
‘Now, what I want is, Facts... Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them… Stick to Facts, sir!’
Facts can be tricky things, as the point of view of the observer will always have a bearing on them. However, we came to the view that the only way to resolve the matter was to try to put some more facts on the table: facts that could help everyone concerned to have a more informed view. To do this we decided that we needed to try and discover how the Neolithic people could have produced the Megalithic Yard to such a high degree of accuracy across so large a geographical area and over such a long period of time. If we could find a realistic explanation of how the Megalithic unit of 0.8296656 metres could be created, it would justify a reappraisal of the existing paradigm of prehistory and potentially repair a substantial hole in the Great Wall of History.
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/975360.stm
2 http://nabataea.net/items.html
3 http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/Ancient-Africa/mad_ancient_egypt.html
4 Knight, C. and Lomas, R.: Uriel’s Machine. Arrow, London, 2000.
5 Thom, A.: Megalithic Sites in Britain. Clarendon Press, London, 1967.
6 Thom A.: ‘A statistical examination of the Megalithic sites in Britain’. (1955) Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, A118, 275-91.
7 Thom and Thom: Megalithic Remains in Britain and Brittany. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1978. Chapters 3, 4, 6, 7 & 8.
8 Thom, A.: Megalithic Sites in Britain. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1968.
9 Heggie, D. C.: Megalithic Science: Ancient Mathematics and Astronomy in Northwest Europe. Thames and Hudson, London, 1981. See also: Renfrew, C. & Bahn, P. G.: Archaeology: Theory, Methods and Practice, Second Edition. Thames and Hudson, London, 1996.
10 Heggie, D. C.: Megalithic Science: Ancient Mathematics and Astronomy in Northwest Europe. Thames and Hudson, London, 1981.
11 Mackie, E. W.: July 30th 2003, see: http://www.dealbhadair.co.uk/athom.htm
C HAPTER 2
The Turning Earth
Does it really matter if Professor Thom was right about the Neolithic builders having used the finely-defined standard unit of length that he called the Megalithic Yard? Yes – it matters a great deal. If he was wrong, the subject of statistics needs a fundamental reappraisal; but if his findings were reliable, the subject of archaeology needs equally careful reassessment. Further – if Thom was right, the development of human civilization may have to be rewritten! We wanted to know, one way or the other: were Alexander Thom’s findings real?
The truth and the Earth
There were two possibilities: either Professor Thom’s Megalithic Yard was a genuine unit once used by Neolithic builders or it was an accidental consequence of statistical manipulation without any historical
Readers choose
Stacey Lynn
RaeAnne Thayne
Thorarinn Gunnarsson
Eve Vaughn
Jacqueline Kelly
Ainsley Booth
Anne C. Voorhoeve
Kylie Walker