Contributions to the discussion on ancient astronomy: the unwritten evidence

Abstract

A. H. A. Hogg ( Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments in Wales and , Aberystwyth) referred to Professor Thom’s hypotheses. These were not inseparable; some could be accepted while rejecting others. There was, for example, nothing inherently unlikely in the existence of markers related to astronomical events which could be observed during a single adult life, but it was very hard to believe that in an illiterate society numerical information could be stored up and transmitted to successive generations. The credibility of a theory could properly be taken into consideration, as well as the statistical evidence. For example, a very significant statistical correlation appeared to exist between the occurrence of severe earthquakes and the position of Uranus (Tomaschek 1959), but few people would accept this as other than accidental. Turning to particular points, he said that, even after Professor Kendall's demonstration that a quantum of 5.44 ft apparently existed, he still felt some doubts. To accept the existence of an approximate quantum was not difficult; what seemed incredible was the extreme accuracy with which it was established, a few hundredths of an inch - and which was supposed to have been maintained over several centuries. He asked what standard deviation for the quantum was indicated by the new investigation j* and whether the appearance of a quantum could perhaps arise out of the occurrence of a relatively few circles set out using some standard unit, mixed with a larger number where no standard was used. Referring to ‘flattened circles and eggs . the apparent ratio of 3:1 for the ratio of circumference to major diameter did not necessarily imply that the builders were aiming at this. Any slight flattening, for whatever reason, would cause the ratio to approach 3:1. Similarly, the wide range of possible geometrical constructions and of Pythagorean or near-Pythagorean triangles, combined with the inevitable uncertainty of setting-out a ring of large stones, would almost always make it possible to fit some ‘ theoretical layout to the remains ( Archaeologia Cambrensis 1968).