No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
In the last few decades, several writers have drawn attention to indications of the existence of science in nonliterate, Neolithic societies. One proponent of that idea is Alexander Thom, who has carried out extremely exact measurements of Neolithic stone monuments in Britain. Thom maintains that perhaps the main purpose of several megalithic monuments was to serve as astronomical observatories-that the exact sightlines they provide would make it possible to predict eclipses by observing extremely slight perturbations in the moon's movements along the horizon. Though there is little doubt that some megalithic monuments (e.g., Stonehenge) indicate solstices and extreme "lunistices," I argue that it is unlikely that the Neolithic observers went beyond that. My argument is as follows: (1) They did not need extreme accuracy; eclipses could be predicted with a fair chance of success by much simpler means. (2) Only one relevant moonrise in five or ten would be observable with the necessary accuracy. Moreover, since the relevant moonrises recur with a periodicity of 18.6 years, many centuries would pass before enough observations had been gathered. (3) Such a long period of observation would require permanent and exact records. (4) Even if data were collected and preserved, an ability would be needed either to draw diagrams or to handle large numbers. The indications from anthropology are that large numbers were not handled accurately before the advent of writing or equivalent symbolization. I conclude that science, in the sense of numerate science, is not likely to have existed in Neolithic or Early Bronze Age Britain.
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.