The dawn of astronomy: A study of the temple-worship and mythology of the ancient EgyptiansLockyer, Norman, Sir
Religion
The dawn of astronomy: A study of the temple-worship and mythology of the ancient Egyptians
Lockyer, Norman, Sir
Astronomy, Egyptian; Sun -- Mythology; Sun worship; Temples -- Egypt
All the temples in Egypt, however, are not oriented in such a way that
the sunlight can enter them at this or any other time of the year. They
are not therefore solar temples, and they cannot have had this use.
The critical amplitude for a temple built at Thebes so that sunlight
can enter it at sunrise or sunset is about 26° north and south of east
and west, so that any temples facing more northerly or southerly are
precluded from having the sunlight enter them at any time in the year.
It is imperative to be perfectly definite and clear on the question
of the amplitudes above 26° at Thebes. I repeat, therefore, that any
amplitude within 26° means that up to that point the sun at sunrise
or sunset could be observed some day or days of the year--once only
in the year if the amplitude is exactly at the maximum, twice if the
maximum is not reached. But in the case of these temples with greater
amplitudes than 26°, it is quite clear that they can have had nothing
to do with the sun.
This being so, we have the problem presented to us whether or not
temples were built so that starlight might fall along their axes in
exactly the same way that the sunlight could fall along the axes of the
solar temples when the sun was rising in the morning or setting in the
evening.
It is abundantly clear that temples with a greater amplitude than 26°
were oriented to stars if they were oriented at all by astronomical
considerations. How can this question be studied? What means of
investigation are at our disposal?
Suppose that the movements of the stars are absolutely regular; that
there is no change from year to year, from century to century, from
æon to æon; then, of course, the question as to whether or not these
temples were pointed to a star, at rising or setting, would be easily
and sufficiently settled by going to see; because if the stars did
not change their apparent places in the heavens--accurately speaking,
their declinations--and, therefore, the amplitudes at which they appear
to rise and set, then, of course, a temple consecrated to Sirius ten
thousand years ago would view the rising or setting of Sirius now as it
did then.
But, as a matter of fact, astronomy tells us, as we have seen, that the
apparent positions of the stars are liable to change. The change is
much greater in the case of the stars than it is in the case of the
sun, referred to in Chapters VI. and XI.; but still we have seen that
the latter is one which has to be reckoned with the moment it becomes a
question of inquiry into any time far removed from the present.
Hence, although in the case of the sun, there is, of course, no
processional movement, and although a temple once oriented to the sun
would remain so for a long time; still, after some thousands of years,
the change in the obliquity of the ecliptic would produce a small
change in the amplitude at which a solstice is observed.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account