druids' knowledge of astronomy?

What is known of the ancient druids' knowledge of
astronomy? And that of the peoples that preceded
them in the British Isles, e.g. those responsible
for Stonehenge and other stone circles?

And do modern druid organizations require their
members to have some degree of astronomical knowledge?

--
David Dalton http://www.nfld.com/~dalton (home page)
http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/nf.html Newfoundland&Labrador Travel & Music
http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
"Here I go again...back into the flame" (Sarah McLachlan)

On Feb 11, 6:46*am, David Dalton wrote:
What is known of the ancient druids' knowledge of
astronomy? * And that of the peoples that preceded
them in the British Isles, e.g. those responsible
for Stonehenge and other stone circles?

And do modern druid organizations require their
members to have some degree of astronomical knowledge?

--
David Dalton *http://www.nfld.com/~dalton(home page)http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/nf.htmlN...dland&Labrador Travel & Musichttp://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.htmlSalmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
* *"Here I go again...back into the flame" (Sarah McLachlan)

Like most other ancient terms that find themselves in modern usage,the
idea of a druid is now diluted down so much that it is effectively
meaningless or even damaging to the original status.

http://www.libraryireland.com/Brehon-Laws/Druids.php

As a Christian,the division between science and religion via mutual
consent is catastrophic as science is a facet within faith just like
every other productive and creative endeavor is ,men may wish it
otherwise but as the wider world has already seen,this artificial
division is extremely corrosive to the fabric of a civilization.The
word practical doesn't often get associated with this class of
individual yet whether it be the Neolithic astronomers or the ancient
Egyptians,they always kept the link open between the individual and
the Universal as opposed to the current bunch who want to speak for
the Universe on their own terms.

"David Dalton" wrote in message
...

What is known of the ancient druids' knowledge of
astronomy? And that of the peoples that preceded
them in the British Isles, e.g. those responsible
for Stonehenge and other stone circles?
================================================== ======
Stonehenge was constructed 2000 years before the druids ran for the hills
from the advancing Roman army that invaded Britain in 43 AD.
Some modern hippies that dress up in robes and fancy themselves as druids
didn't build stone circles either.



And do modern druid organizations require their
members to have some degree of astronomical knowledge?
================================================== ===
About as much as Facebook and Twitter organisations do of
software engineering.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway.
When the fools chicken farmer Wilson and Van de faggot present an argument I
cannot laugh at I'll retire from usenet.

On 11/02/2013 05:46, David Dalton wrote:
What is known of the ancient druids' knowledge of
astronomy? And that of the peoples that preceded
them in the British Isles, e.g. those responsible
for Stonehenge and other stone circles?

They were pretty well clued up with empirical observational knowledge of
the position of sunrise and lunar months and clearly a had a working
understanding of the calendar in relation to these observed phenomena.
Probably still the best book on the subject although in parts
speculative and now dated is Stonehenge Decoded by Gerald S Hawkins.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Stonehenge-D.../dp/0880291478

The alignments at the solstices are a clear demonstration that they
really knew what they were doing and the post holes are suggestive of a
means of doing other computations and tracking calendar date.

Certainly stonehenge can be used to compute eclipses and track the Saros
but deciding whether or not the druids did this is hampered by the fact
that they did not leave us any written records.

The Babylonians did and so get the credit for discovering prominent
eclipse cycles (which were later named Saros by Halley)

Woodhenge is much less famous but probably more useful if you want to
play about making astronomical observations with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodhenge

Stonehenge is a heavily policed tourist trap next to a huge car park. It
may be a world heritage site but it isn't all that nice to visit.

And do modern druid organizations require their
members to have some degree of astronomical knowledge?


Most of them don't even know which way is up.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Feb 11, 10:22*am, Martin Brown
wrote:


And do modern druid organizations require their
members to have some degree of astronomical knowledge?

Most of them don't even know which way is up.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown


Spoken like a true homocentrist - there is no 'up',there is,however,a
celestial arena out there in which all motions and the relationship of
bodies to each other are interpreted.Of course the idea of 'out there'
is alien to you and the mathematical modelers although the
geocentrists knew this perspective along with the original Western
astronomers who first understood the reasons why the Earth moves
through watching the behavior of planets.

The druids were a class of people which are almost closer to our era
than they were to the neolithic monument builders of Stonehenge or
Newgrange but empiricists have no respect for history or more like a
dysfunctional regard for the development of human achievements.

Remember Brown,there is no celestial sphere and no 'up'.

Notice how carefully Oriel, over a period of some years, has avoided
explaining exactly where his views and the views of other members of
this group differ. He writes whole paragraphs - sometimes nultiple
paragraphs - hundreds of times a year but refuses to explain something
as basic as this.

He also refuses to answer any questions designed to identify what the
difference might be.


As an example - Oriel, if you look due south at midnight on July 1st
and again at midnight on January 1st of the next year will you see the
same stars in the same places.


Yes or no?

On Mon, 11 Feb 2013 02:16:22 -0330, David Dalton
wrote:

What is known of the ancient druids' knowledge of
astronomy? And that of the peoples that preceded
them in the British Isles, e.g. those responsible
for Stonehenge and other stone circles?

Virtually nothing is known of the Druids. Essentially everything that
we associate with them today is some sort of modern reconstruction.
Nevertheless, one thing that is consistently seen in all
pre-technological societies is a basic understanding of the movement
of the stars and of the seasons, and it's highly likely that the
Druids understood these things as well.

Nothing is known of the astronomical knowledge of earlier people in
the British Isles except what can be gleaned from the various henges
and burial chambers that have been unearthed. They clearly understood
something of the solstices and equinoxes, and perhaps something of the
long term motion of the Moon. Beyond that, it gets pretty speculative.
Some claim to detect complex astronomical capabilities like eclipse
prediction in the position of stones or posts in henges, but I think
that's unlikely.

On Feb 11, 4:27*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:

and burial chambers that have been unearthed. They clearly understood
something of the solstices and equinoxes, and perhaps something of the
long term motion of the Moon. Beyond that, it gets pretty speculative.
Some claim to detect complex astronomical capabilities like eclipse
prediction in the position of stones or posts in henges, but I think
that's unlikely.

Let me tell you what is absolutely certain in this post technological
society and what the ancient astronomers did and did not
understand.For thousands of years it has been understood that to keep
the days fixed to the solstices and equinoxes that the daily cycle is
not a consecutive 365 days but an extra day/rotation must be added to
keep the proportion closely balanced.The most inviolate of all
astronomical principles is that days/years transfer directly into
daily rotations/annual circuits and here we have an entire society
screaming that one day and one rotation fall out of step -

"The Earth spins on its axis about 366 and 1/4 times each year, but
there are only 365 and 1/4 days per year" NASA

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...rs/970714.html

It is impossible to link cause and effect without the correspondence
which keeps the 24 hour AM/PM cycle in sync with the Lat/Long system
and no society,no matter how savage or crude,has ever,ever descended
to a point that you and your empiricist buddies have.The hippies are
harmless,you unfortunately are not.

On Feb 10, 11:02*pm, oriel36 wrote:

As a Christian,the division between science and religion via mutual
consent is catastrophic as science is a facet within faith just like
every other productive and creative endeavor is ,men may wish it
otherwise but as the wider world has already seen,this artificial
division is extremely corrosive to the fabric of a civilization.

Wow!

I had suspected this sort of thing was an element in your thinking
from previous posts; but you don't realize just how dangerous this
notion is to the continued existence of effective scientific research.

Empiricism allows scientific ideas to be tested against reality, and
quickly discarded if they are wrong. You would replace science with
empty speculation, hobbled by imperfect human religious understanding
which by its very nature is impossible to test. Science and astronomy
would run around endlessly in circles, instead of building solidly on
the progress of the past.

John Savard

On Feb 11, 3:06*am, oriel36 wrote:

Remember Brown,there is no *celestial sphere and no 'up'.

Whether or not there is a celestial sphere, at each point on the
Earth's surface there is a (local) up. When one is standing up, it
usually is approximated by the direction from one's feet to one's
head.

As I suspect both you and nearly all pretending Druids know - except
for the ones temporarily stoned out of their minds.

John Savard