14 replies to this topic

[tonyh]

I'm not quite sure how to broach this question..

I was reading about the Old English Lunar Year and the article said that it survived until the Tudor times. Which begs the question - When did it start?.

My understanding is that Neolithic Monuments are aligned to the Solstices and therefore the Solar Calender.

But have I got that wrong?. Can anybody sheds some Light on this for Me? (Pun intended).

It doesnt seem practical having two calenders runing at the same time.

Tony

[Maju]

Could you post a link to the article you read (assuming it's on the net)?, that would help us to contextualize the issue.

I am not knowledgeable enough on British archaeoastronomy to say but Iberian findings (of Megalthic context) appear (at least to some eyes) to be mnemotechniques to trace the lunar cycles. I have read (in a book) that many different types of marks (abstract decorations on stone plates, antler subdivisions on deer cave painitings and labyrinth designs engraved on rock, these from later age) are kind of lunar claendars based on the numbers 19 (normally depicted as 10-9 or 9-1-9) and also 4. Allegedly these mnemotechnical calendars would help the astronomers from the Chalcolithic and later ages to predict every single lunar ecclipse, though they would not be able to know which ones were visible in their area.

[tiompan]

tonyh, on 7 November 2008, 14:21, said:

I'm not quite sure how to broach this question..

I was reading about the Old English Lunar Year and the article said that it survived until the Tudor times. Which begs the question - When did it start?.

My understanding is that Neolithic Monuments are aligned to the Solstices and therefore the Solar Calender.

But have I got that wrong?. Can anybody sheds some Light on this for Me? (Pun intended).

It doesnt seem practical having two calenders runing at the same time.

Tony

Hello Tony ,
                     Just noticed this thread . There are just as many alignments to lunar events as solar and from the same period and area . So it is quite confusing and difficult to prove a sun or moon cult for a certain time frame or region . The presence  of either doesn't neccessarily indicate a calendar .

               George

[tonyh]

Thanks to You both..

I was trying to find more about the English Lunar Year when I saw this reference to it ending in the Tudor period.
The Roman conquest would have brought Us the Solar Year and I was wondering when the Lunar Year would have started.

I suppose I was wondering if the Populous had reverted back to early systems or later People had brought the Lunar calender with them.

"There are just as many alignments to lunar events as solar and from the same period and area . So it is quite confusing and difficult to prove a sun or moon cult for a certain time frame or region . The presence of either doesn't neccessarily indicate a calendar" .


Looks like it could go either way...

Thanks anyway..

Tony

[tiompan]

tonyh, on 11 November 2008, 16:44, said:

Thanks to You both..

I was trying to find more about the English Lunar Year when I saw this reference to it ending in the Tudor period.
The Roman conquest would have brought Us the Solar Year and I was wondering when the Lunar Year would have started.

I suppose I was wondering if the Populous had reverted back to early systems or later People had brought the Lunar calender with them.

"There are just as many alignments to lunar events as solar and from the same period and area . So it is quite confusing and difficult to prove a sun or moon cult for a certain time frame or region . The presence of either doesn't neccessarily indicate a calendar" .


Looks like it could go either way...

Thank anyway..

Tony

The Greeks had a lunar calendar circa 450 BC , Aristophanese mocked in the Clouds  " Nevertheless you do not reckon the days correctly and your calendar is naught but confusion."

  George

[tonyh]

tiompan, on 11 November 2008, 17:15, said:

tonyh, on 11 November 2008, 16:44, said:

Thanks to You both..

I was trying to find more about the English Lunar Year when I saw this reference to it ending in the Tudor period.
The Roman conquest would have brought Us the Solar Year and I was wondering when the Lunar Year would have started.

I suppose I was wondering if the Populous had reverted back to early systems or later People had brought the Lunar calender with them.

"There are just as many alignments to lunar events as solar and from the same period and area . So it is quite confusing and difficult to prove a sun or moon cult for a certain time frame or region . The presence of either doesn't neccessarily indicate a calendar" .


Looks like it could go either way...

Thank anyway..

Tony

The Greeks had a lunar calendar circa 450 BC , Aristophanese mocked in the Clouds  " Nevertheless you do not reckon the days correctly and your calendar is naught but confusion."

  George

Thanks for that George..

Brilliant

[Paulus]

Intriguing query this one.  As 'time' appears linked (in our modern perception) to celestial motions relative to our position on Earth, what do folk think to the notion of 'time' in early or traditional cultures being based on the perception, made first by women, of lunar or menstrual, cyclical time?  Has the notion of 'linear time' always been the way? Need we take menstrual cyclical rhythms into consideration if/when we assess archaic culture's notions regarding 'time'?  Do synchronous menstrual/lunar rhythms have a bearing on early perceptions of cosmological rhythms?  What's the importance/origin of those cultures who deemed time to be measured by night, not day?

[tiompan]

Paulus, on 25 May 2009, 13:58, said:

Intriguing query this one.  As 'time' appears linked (in our modern perception) to celestial motions relative to our position on Earth, what do folk think to the notion of 'time' in early or traditional cultures being based on the perception, made first by women, of lunar or menstrual, cyclical time?  Has the notion of 'linear time' always been the way? Need we take menstrual cyclical rhythms into consideration if/when we assess archaic culture's notions regarding 'time'?  Do synchronous menstrual/lunar rhythms have a bearing on early perceptions of cosmological rhythms?  What's the importance/origin of those cultures who deemed time to be measured by night, not day?

  A rarely appreciated fact about the Aubery holes is that they were records of the casualty dept. of the hospital (Stonehenge A& E ) which had peaks at the full moon ,particularly when it coinicided with home games against Avebury .

George

[Paulus]

tiompan, on 25 May 2009, 16:55, said:

A rarely appreciated fact about the Aubery holes is that they were records of the casualty dept. of the hospital (Stonehenge A& E ) which had peaks at the full moon ,particularly when it coinicided with home games against Avebury .

Now - now! Stop being so daft!  The Aubrey Holes were nothing of the sort.  Mi old mate Lao Tzu told me (honest!) he and a bunch of Chinese mates were over here on holiday, trying to explain to these druid local-types he met, what an abacus woz.  They couldn't get their heads round it, so, after overdoing it a bit on the old Manchurian ginseng, they ended up spinning round and round, quick as y' like, casting I Ching twigs in a circle to get 'em to count.  Trouble is, the druids had been on the old datura-mix and Lao Tzu knew how they wouldn't remember what they'd been telling 'em; so they dug a little hole in a ring where the I Ching twigs had fallen and left some wooden counting sticks (I've got one of 'em here, in mi library!) to remind them of the emergence of linear thinking.  That's what the Aubrey Holes were about!

Honest!

[tiompan]

Paulus, on 26 May 2009, 13:40, said:

tiompan, on 25 May 2009, 16:55, said:

A rarely appreciated fact about the Aubery holes is that they were records of the casualty dept. of the hospital (Stonehenge A& E ) which had peaks at the full moon ,particularly when it coinicided with home games against Avebury .

Now - now! Stop being so daft!  The Aubrey Holes were nothing of the sort.  Mi old mate Lao Tzu told me (honest!) he and a bunch of Chinese mates were over here on holiday, trying to explain to these druid local-types he met, what an abacus woz.  They couldn't get their heads round it, so, after overdoing it a bit on the old Manchurian ginseng, they ended up spinning round and round, quick as y' like, casting I Ching twigs in a circle to get 'em to count.  Trouble is, the druids had been on the old datura-mix and Lao Tzu knew how they wouldn't remember what they'd been telling 'em; so they dug a little hole in a ring where the I Ching twigs had fallen and left some wooden counting sticks (I've got one of 'em here, in mi library!) to remind them of the emergence of linear thinking.  That's what the Aubrey Holes were about!

Honest!

It's a while since I read Redgrove and I don't really remember him going in to too much detail about calendrical stuff .
One problem that has always bugged me is the precision , there may well be a connection , the moon keeps it's side of the deal but the menstrual cycle
is far from as regular which is hardly surprising considering it is part of an open system liable to be affected by the enviroment .  The synchronisiing phenomena noted  where groups of women work together also makes it difficult to relate to the luanr cycle although whether that impact would have been evident in prehistory is debatable .
George

[Paulus]

tiompan, on 26 May 2009, 17:49, said:

It's a while since I read Redgrove and I don't really remember him going in to too much detail about calendrical stuff.  One problem that has always bugged me is the precision , there may well be a connection , the moon keeps it's side of the deal but the menstrual cycle is far from as regular which is hardly surprising considering it is part of an open system liable to be affected by the enviroment.  The synchronisiing phenomena noted  where groups of women work together also makes it difficult to relate to the luanr cycle although whether that impact would have been evident in prehistory is debatable .
George

When calendars came into existence we had defined precision.  But pre-dating this, cyclical rhythmic periodicity would have predominated.  I think one of the errors we have to move beyond is the notion we always seem to have of 'wanting precision', where none can be had.  The problem with this approach, of course, is the multitude of sloppy thinking systems which arise as a consequence of the false appreciation of what non-precision implies. In a way I s'ppose we have the same quandry with the mythic origins of calendrical systems and notions of time as the old quantum physicists first had when they found notions of perfect replicability are non-operative in the quantum zoo!  Nature seemingly abhors the same thing twice - anywhere!  Whether this notion would have been evident (or prevelant even) in the cosmology of early pre-xtian cultures we obviously can't say for sure; but I think the distinct lack of common precise notations - be it with time, measurement, architecture, etc - shows that the application of linear thinking and precision is less likely. As we know: despite the grand efforts of Thom (with his excellent ground-plans & all), much of the calendrical precision and astronomy he hoped for was more fortuitous than deliberate.  Hence bringing us back to 'where does the notation/system/structure underlying calendrical forms originate?'

In Hamlet's Mill, de Santillana & von Deschend go to the usual suspect of the heavenly bodies; though time emerged as a cyclical phenomena - an issue argued by Eliade, Campbell and that bunch!  Chris Knight takes us back into the menstrual flow; along with Grahn, Stone, Harding, etc.  It seems to make sense to me - especially if there's synchronous blood flows.  The first people who'd notice this, and become aware of its defined regularity would obviously be women.  The monthly or lunar cycle would be the common theme (after night & day) eliciting a pattern which seems unchanged.  Men don't have this in such a prominent manifest way.  Nor would the women necessarily inform the men of this 'cyclical patterning' underscoring their co-existence with the world they seem more closely related to.  I think the discovery of Time, by men, was something that took many centuries for us to catch up on.  But it's a big subject and not summat I expect to be able to do any justice to here.

[tiompan]

Paulus, on 27 May 2009, 1:25, said:

tiompan, on 26 May 2009, 17:49, said:

It's a while since I read Redgrove and I don't really remember him going in to too much detail about calendrical stuff.  One problem that has always bugged me is the precision , there may well be a connection , the moon keeps it's side of the deal but the menstrual cycle is far from as regular which is hardly surprising considering it is part of an open system liable to be affected by the enviroment.  The synchronisiing phenomena noted  where groups of women work together also makes it difficult to relate to the luanr cycle although whether that impact would have been evident in prehistory is debatable .
George

When calendars came into existence we had defined precision.  But pre-dating this, cyclical rhythmic periodicity would have predominated.  I think one of the errors we have to move beyond is the notion we always seem to have of 'wanting precision', where none can be had.  The problem with this approach, of course, is the multitude of sloppy thinking systems which arise as a consequence of the false appreciation of what non-precision implies. In a way I s'ppose we have the same quandry with the mythic origins of calendrical systems and notions of time as the old quantum physicists first had when they found notions of perfect replicability are non-operative in the quantum zoo!  Nature seemingly abhors the same thing twice - anywhere!  Whether this notion would have been evident (or prevelant even) in the cosmology of early pre-xtian cultures we obviously can't say for sure; but I think the distinct lack of common precise notations - be it with time, measurement, architecture, etc - shows that the application of linear thinking and precision is less likely. As we know: despite the grand efforts of Thom (with his excellent ground-plans & all), much of the calendrical precision and astronomy he hoped for was more fortuitous than deliberate.  Hence bringing us back to 'where does the notation/system/structure underlying calendrical forms originate?'

In Hamlet's Mill, de Santillana & von Deschend go to the usual suspect of the heavenly bodies; though time emerged as a cyclical phenomena - an issue argued by Eliade, Campbell and that bunch!  Chris Knight takes us back into the menstrual flow; along with Grahn, Stone, Harding, etc.  It seems to make sense to me - especially if there's synchronous blood flows.  The first people who'd notice this, and become aware of its defined regularity would obviously be women.  The monthly or lunar cycle would be the common theme (after night & day) eliciting a pattern which seems unchanged.  Men don't have this in such a prominent manifest way.  Nor would the women necessarily inform the men of this 'cyclical patterning' underscoring their co-existence with the world they seem more closely related to.  I think the discovery of Time, by men, was something that took many centuries for us to catch up on.  But it's a big subject and not summat I expect to be able to do any justice to here.

                 For me it's gotta be the solar and possibly the more complex lunar cycles against something that is not necessarilly that "regular" , we could be sure of that whilst the more anthro aspect is conjecture . Hamlets Mill " , which was more about precession than calendars , was a good read but I don't buy it  ,I havn't read "Blood Relations " but am aware of the theory  , marxism seems central to a lot of that stuff particularly the "strike"

[archaeo]

Paulus, on 25 May 2009, 13:58, said:

... 'time' appears linked (in our modern perception) to celestial motions relative to our position on Earth ...  Has the notion of 'linear time' always been the way? ... What's the importance/origin of those cultures who deemed time to be measured by night, not day?

Lunar calendars allows for precision.  Eclipses are one form of clocking lunar periodicity, by tracking the synodic alignment of sun, earth, and moon.  This is a geocentric phenomena.  Another accurate and more fundamental observation is lunar orbit, observed by stellar reference as is earth rotation in space.  Astronomers need more precision than ordinary time keepers, and use these cycles.

Those of us who live, or lived, in regions without electricity, living by hunting, fishing, gathering, keep track of the moon to plan activities.  You need to know when you can see at night, and when it is pitch dark, or you may go hungry.  For example, fishing at night you want moonlight, and then to hunt from the canoe, you wait until the moon sets and start drifting downstream in total darkness, listening for game lapping water.  Keeping track of the moon is necessary for planning these activities, or simply to know when you can walk the jungle trails from house to house so you can plan your social affairs.

[Maju]

Not sure if it'll be of any help but I recall a very interesting article on Iberian Megalithic archaeoastronomy that suggested that they used numerical counts to 19 (normally depicted as 9+1+9 or as 10 and back) that seemingly served to estimate Lunar cycles with great precision. According to the paper these calendars (allegedly engraved or painted in Megalithic era stone plates and rock art, notably deer antlers) allowed the astronomers of the age to predict every single lunar eclipse - but they were not able to say if it'd be visible in their area (only 60% are). They apparently also used the number 4 (not sure how exactly) and were able to derive larger numbers as those of the synodic period, always according to that paper.

So guess the lunar theory makes sense, though maybe they had a parallel solar calendar too, needed to estimate seasons with exactitude decade after decade. We don't use lunar calendar as such anymore but the remnants of it are very apparent in both weeks (roughly a lunar quarter) and months (full moon cycles).

[harry sivertsen]

Hi people,

Ancient calendars are not really so much of a mystery.  A calendar can have many different connotations but most become self evident. There is quite a bit about various calendars in my two books Measurements of the Gods and Deluge from Genesis to Atlantis which are available to read online or buy at

http://www.completel...m/authors/20580

Perhaps the one that most miss is the beginning of the year at the first new moon after the winter solstice which of course was a lunar calendar.  This was in use at Stonehenge as is clearly seen in my analysis in Chapter 8 of Measurements of the Gods and in fact was in use in India and most if not all Middle Eastern countries pre circa 1000BC. It is evident in the Bible pre Solomon. The Metonic cycle can also come into play as it does at Stonehenge.

In India there was a calendar of 2700 years emulating the sidereal month…This commenced in 6676 BC

It is a fascinating subject area with numerous variations.

Cheers

Harry