Knowth as part of the complex called Bru Na Boinne, resides
in a shallow flood plain at an elevation of approximately 60m above
sea level. It has the most extensive art decoration and settlement activity
beyond its two sisters monuments, Newgrange and Dowth. Here
we will try to outline settlement scenarios for your choice. Since we have already dealt with the Zenith post it is only
mentioned above as a reference point. This is the scenario that would please the Archaeologists
as it incorporates not just the confluence of C14 dates centring
around 2600bc but blends the site in chronology with Newgrange
and the pottery styles seem to suggest Iberian influence along
with some of the art work iconography found incised on the 400
or so stones of Knowth and stratographic analysis of mound
construction materials. As mentioned earlier the Monument
phases have been subsequently set further back in time to
approximately 3300 BC at the earliest. However not all parameters seem to fit this activity.
There was habitation settlements in and around Site I (large mound)
that show palisades, huts, pits and fuachta fia (fireplaces). The
large mound has a curious feature of 17 smaller mounds ( discussion later) ringed
around it, with their entrances facing into the main mound. Two of these smaller
sites ,13 and 16, have been suggested as predating Site1, i.e.
earlier than 3300 BC and the timber structured settlements were
placed just outside the circle of smaller mounds with some
encroaching right on Site 1's kerbstone delimiters. Evidence of
grain and animal bones shows up a farming community but the
archaeologists have stated that the earliest date for this type of
settlement is suggested as 3800 BC.(Note 7) The number of unique features assigned to Knowth includes the
extensive artwork on stones, which have been broken down
by classification into various separate styles, the most curious
being 'rectilinear' seen on the opposing entrances stones K 11 and
K 74 and back-to-back passageways. Inferences have been
made to foreign influences with regard to the artwork, coming
mainly from Spain and Portugal. But it has been pointed out by
the archaeologists themselves that the quality of artwork is poor in Iberia and the
quantities found, small.The lack of spiral ornamentation on the continent,
brings up another area of questionable origins. It may seem to be
a question of survivability of particular mound complexes in Ireland
as opposed to their continental counterparts which would show up as skewed
evidence. Certainly each separate location had its own worrisome
deterioration. Then again more evidence is coming to light that
later settlements ,at Knowth, postdating the 2900 BC time engaged in wholesale
destruction of the monuments in and around the Boyne Valley utilizing stones for possibly
defensive purposes and/or to build territorial boundaries. So indeed
Bru na Boinne may have been already considerably decimated
in terms of mound clusters and concentrations well BEFORE
archaeological excavations were undertaken. If that isn't confusing enough, let me throw in the 4885bc C14
date ala Burenhult style, which the archaeologists cite as a proto-
mound under the main Site 1. It would seem that further evidence
could be forthcoming to hopefully clarify the situation. So for the
meantime let's look at scenario two. If a Gnomon/Zenith post was erected at or near Knowth then
obviously a farming/pastoral settlement began there. Hard evidence has
not come up yet, critics would say that it never existed in the first
place but our archaeologists have given us one hope on this.
The so called proto-mound dating to 4885bc +/- 110.
Someone was
there that far back in time and the current mound subsumed the
prototype within its structure, that's according to the archaeologists.
Just because I've shown tables on the Sun/Moon system going
back to 5100 BC, because the pillar/kstone construct works, it can also
work forward and backwards in time regardless of when it was erected. The Astronomy points to 5520 BC as a possible start date for
community farming but then again the so called 'farms' could have
been scattered about the Boyne valley, evenly distributed and
the Zenith post area off limits to housing settlements, rather like
zoning laws today. The fact that hut post holes have not been found
yet, does not necessarily mean the units didn't exist. If we agree
with this scenario we are catagorically stating two important
precedents. Firstly that the megalithic artwork originated in Ireland
and was overtly exported to the European mainland where only
fragments, traces now exist. That would place Bru na Boinne and
Knowth specifically, at the forefront of Megalithic stonework in all Europe. Secondly, you run up against one huge question, what about
the confluence of later Carbon 14 dates discovered within Site 1's
construct(2600bc). As readers to this article, we all reside in some form
of dwelling, be it house, apartment, castle etc. Buildings usually
constructed of timber or brick, or both, or metal, metal? Over time cracks would appear in your fixed abodes, pipes would
leak, plaster fall off walls and subsidence generate faultlines
through the walls and foundations. So naturally you start to repair
the problems before they cause your dwelling to collapse, well
some of us do. Pause a moment, a stone structure is no different,
stone structures can decay over time. Ask yourself this question, what is
the main function of archaeological work? Its to preserve that which
was formerly in decay besides gaining knowledge of the past.
But preservation is key. All national monuments in all countries
are protected from decay and vandalism by trusts and private/public
monies or they should be. Then it seems no great leap of faith to suppose that the
Neoliths behaved likewise, repairing and conserving their important
ritual structures, from damage done by time, gravity, foreign invasion,
and possibily even local earth tremors. That may have meant fresh deposits
of turf vegetation on Knowth in place of old worn out materials. The
straightening of orthostats in passageways, new lintels replacing
cracked ones. This would be paramount if your monument was in
continuous long ritual usage or usage that may have seen intermittance
over centuries or a millennium.This is generally not a favoured idea
and not truly welcome to anybody, so if you choose this path you would
have an unhill struggle to convince anyone that the neoliths did this.
But it has to be said, we don't know for sure.It is not beyond the bounds of
reason. Since archaeologists can only Carbon14 date organic material
and not inorganic stone carvings, we cannot be wholly certain our
acceptable timeframe is a true one.I am not denigrating Archaeological
work here, I am simply stating the possibility that the C14 dates for
circa 2600bc, may show some attempt at renovation work by Neolithics. C14 analysis
is not suspect here, it is a reliable measure for dating purposes,scientifically proven,
but it may not be wholly reliable for stating origins of some sites.
I have discovered new information that can reconcile both scenarios above.
Dr. George Eogan has produced new tentative suggestions that
some of the decorated orthostats in the Western passage at Knowth may
come from a prior mound structure (aha!). It seems they were placed upside down
in Site 1. Curious behaviour that is being explained as an attempt to
incorporate parts of the prior mound structure into the new Site1 in Neolithic
times as a means to enhance ritual/sacred continuity.Note 9 Would it not
then be possible that these replaced orthostats were also part of a
proto-mound passageway? aligned East-West? We may never know
for certain, but I consider it highly probable. The prior mound discussed
must be our proto-mound otherwise we are back at Scenario One
again. The orthostats in the Western passage average 80 cms in
height, this may give us a clue as to the size of our proto-mound.
We can only estimate that it may have been between 1/4 and 1/2
the size of Site 1, that's strickly my own estimate and may not
concur with others. We must also be talking about a proto-mound
that includes the 4885bc C14 date and therefore indicates that
there was a mix of materials between the proto-mound and Site 1
when Site 1 construct was being engaged in.
I hope to gain further information on this unusual feature, such as
which orthostats were considered from the proto-mound and their
possible number. Also we must face the fact that some decorated
orthostats belonging to the proto-mound categorically show
megalithic artwork well ahead of anything surviving on the European
mainland.This is highly important.
SCENARIO ONE
SCENARIO TWO
SCENARIO ONE
SCENARIO TWO
Reconciliation of Scenarios One and Two
Recently I came across a wonderful article on the web from the American Astronomy magazine, "Sky and Telescope" called "In Search of the First Constellations" by a Russian Academy of Sciences, Professor Alexander Gurshstein. He is a vice director for the institute for the History of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, vice president for the European Society for Astronomy in Culture and a visiting professor at Mesa State College in the US. As an extension(Note 8) of his theory into the origins of the Zodiac, in particular, when the Zodiac constellations first became known by humans, Alexander has outlined an expansion of his theory to encompass the known 88 constellations. I cannot go into too much detail here, but the related information to our Zenith Post idea is sensational to say the least!! His idea is that some form of first astronomical knowledge was gained by Cro-Magnon man in 30,000 BC - 26,000 BC!! As we move further closer to our own time, various constellations and calendar markers became known and were utilized. When Alexander came to Neolithic times, he states that the progression from hunter-gatherers to farmers required the precise fixing of where and when the Equinoxes and Solstices occurred to ensure survival. To this end he proposed that in 5600 BC, probably in ancient Babylon, four distinct constellations were used to mark these important seasonal changes i.e. Gemini, Virgo, Pisces and Saggitarius. These are 4 of the 12 zodiac signs.
The date struck me immediately. I had completely ignored constellations as I didn't believe Neolithic or Mesolithic peoples would know about them. I concentrated, instead, on luminous objects on the horizon, the Moon, Sun, and Jupiter and two quite bright Zenith stars, Vega and Arcturus to calculate the equinoxes and solstice points. Eagerly I looked again, this time for the constellations on the horizon. I was stunned to find, the Moon in Pisces for the Winter Solstice point, and in Virgo for the Summer Solstice under the Vega Zenith star. In fact these two constellations cradled the Moon all throughout my calculations. There was better news to come.!!
The Moon sits in Sagitarrius for the True East readings (90°) and it sits in Gemini for the True West readings (270°) along with Jupiter setting all that year in Gemini. Voila, the Gnomon/Zenith post idea just came alive!!
The more I thought of Vega in conjunction with Arcturus, the
more I believed that my idea must have credence elsewhere in the
world besides Knowth in Ireland. If farming had started by this
method in Neolithic times, was its knowledge widespread or not.
This is a profoundly important question, just where would this
knowledge have originated from. In order to see if other world
centres had Vega/Arcturus markers I checked various latitudes for
different millenia and surprisingly came up blank on the great
classical areas of Egypt and Babylon.The two stars could not
reach Zenith point. In fact they would not even be circumpolar
in some cases. Other locations also drew up blanks. I was
resigned to conclude that the only area this phenomenon could
occur would lie within an extremely narrow latitude band in the
Mid Northern latitudes of the world. If Vega/Arcturus shifted more
than 1° off the Zenith, it may have been noticable somewhat
affecting the Mesoliths measurements of seasonal markers.
One degree either side of Knowth is the narrowest range of
latitude you could use.The constructed table below is even more
surprising to me. (see below)
It shows catagorically that all the large passage complexes that have survived in Ireland lie securely within this 1° latitudinal zone from Knowth.There are no sites outside this range, even South of the Seefin/Tourant cluster.The spread of complexes must therefore reside within fertile cultivating grounds. The theory fits well, better than I thought.This is highly intuitive when you think about it. With cultivated settlements over generations there had to be cemeteries to house the departed community.This would explain the constant building and rebuilding of mounds OVER one another, showing clearly long durations of ritual worship and community cohesion that an agricultural complex would acquire over time. The lands between Loughcrew and Carrowmore are low Drumlin and Esker ridges, rich in alluvial soil and heavily farmed even today!! However it can also be argued that this distribution came about by migration from Scotland through the narrow straits off Northern Ireland.Then again there are equally rich soils SOUTH of Seefin/ Tourant, right to the bottom of the country?(see diagram below).
Now here's the challenge, if this works for Ireland, there must
be other land belts across the mid latitude zone I laid out, in other
world areas. Areas that hold fertile soils, that would have supported
farming communities in Mesolithic times around 5518 BC to 5542 BC.
Calling on anybody out there, especially fellow Archaeoastronomers,
Paleobotanists, or Paleoagriculturalists or anybody else, can you find
any evidence of first farming settlements within the North latitude range
53° to 55°? This would support the theory well and leave
no doubt that the knowledge would not have originated alone in Babylon
using just the 4 constellations mentioned, but instead the Moon and Sun
primarily would have been chosen with Vega/Arcturus in Ireland.
© Paul Griffin 1999