close
more_vert

Hey Fourwinds (or can I call you *windy-pops* like Holy McG ;))
I posted a message in reply to gfergs post of 25th Nov enquiring about the megalithic yard. I had read in 'Uriels Machine' a great theory about the origin of the megalithic yard- something along the lines of;
366 sun rises in one full cycle of the sun. If you placed a pole at each of the 366 degrees of a circle, you could time a bright stars trajectory across the sky. Using a pendulum to beat 366 times between these 'megalithic degrees' it was found that the pendulum length was exactly half that of a megalithic yard. Thom had apparently doubled his original measurement to make it similar to the yard we use today.
Having not actually tried this for myself, I can't say if it works, but it makes interesting reading. Also, the book deals with the magickal significance of the number 366, but can't remember off the top of ma heid,
Cheers,
Martin

Hi Martin, if you wish to receive the same slap-upside-da-heid that the Holy McG will get when I next see him then please call me Windy-Pops :-)

I have read the calculation for Thom's megalithic yard and I too posted the details in that last thread. I really want to try it sometime ...all that string and poles and things. However, I just think that the moon was far more significant that the stars. It is much easier to get the time of year by counting moon cycles and nights as a division.

I do believe in Thom's yard, but I feel that the 366 degrees may be predated by 364 & an adjustment. The Greeks certainly did this and as we all know when the original Celtic tribes came to Europe they split some coming west and some going south to Greece and Italy. It was noted by Julius Caeser that the language in Britain around 60 BCE was 'a primitive form of Latin'. Obviously, we do not know when the mathematics in Britain advanced to the stage that they could have dropped the old 364 day year, but for the Greeks it was around 3000 BCE. The Egyptians actually went for a 360 day (12 equal months) year with 5 extra days added on. It is more than likely that the change was Europe wide and therefore by the time stone circles and many other temples were built that a 366 day year had been adopted.

Perhaps my 13*28 day lunar cycle year was the first attempts at a calendar. In fact Julius Caeser actually adjusted the year by some considerable amount (by having three months extra in one year I believe) in his great reforms. So until then the Roman year had been slipping considerably implying that they did not use 365 days in a year.

Thom's therories are based on the conjecture that somebody did place 366 poles in the ground somewhere. From what I remember no one has found evidence that this was ever done.

The moon is just too big, reliable and obvious to ignore as a timekeeper. Look at the now famous quest for Longitudinal calculation. Many tried it with star charts and failed due to the amount of instruments and charts that were needed to use the technique successfully. The thing that won was a reliable timepiece ... just like the Moon.

These simple facts and it's constant association with the Mother Goddess in many cultures seems to being ignored in the light of maths and scientific speculation.