Transcriber's Notes

Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected. Variations in hyphenation and accents have been standardised but all other spelling and punctuation remains unchanged.

Several tables have been rearranged to improve clarity and constrain width. In particular the table of star signs on p 401 was printed horizontally with vertical names and has been rotated. The reference to 'the upper list' has been changed to 'the left hand list'.

The names Shesu-Hor and Hor-shesu are used, apparently, interchangeably and have not been rationalised.

The first two errata have been implemented, the third is erroneous.

THE DAWN OF ASTRONOMY

THE TEMPLE OF AMEN-RĀ, LOOKING FROM THE SANCTUARY TOWARDS THE PLACE OF SUNSET AT THE SUMMER SOLSTICE.
(From a Photograph by the Author.)

THE
DAWN OF ASTRONOMY

A STUDY OF
THE TEMPLE-WORSHIP AND MYTHOLOGY
OF THE
ANCIENT EGYPTIANS.

BY
J. NORMAN LOCKYER

Fellow of the Royal Society; Correspondent of the Institute of France, the Society for the Promotion
of National Industry of France, the Royal Academy of Science, Göttingen, La Società degli
Spettroscopisti Italiani, the Royal Academy of Palermo,
Natural History Society of Genera, the Franklin Institute, Philadelphia,
and the Royal Medical Society of Brussels;
Member of the Royal Academy of Lincei, Rome, and the American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia;
Honorary Member of the Academy of Natural Science of Catania, Literary and Philosophical
Society of Manchester, Philosophical Society of York, and Lehigh University;
Member of the Committee on Solar Physics, and Professor of Astronomical Physics in
the Royal College of Science

CASSELL and COMPANY Limited
LONDON PARIS & MELBOURNE
1894
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PREFACE.

The enormous advance which has been recently made in our astronomical knowledge, and in our power of investigating the various bodies which people space, is to a very great extent due to the introduction of methods of work and ideas from other branches of science.

Much of the recent progress has been, we may indeed say, entirely dependent upon the introduction of the methods of inquiry to which I refer. While this is generally recognised, it is often forgotten that a knowledge of even elementary astronomy may be of very great assistance to students of other branches of science; in other words, that astronomy is well able to pay her debt. Amongst those branches is obviously that which deals with man's first attempts to grasp the meaning and phenomena of the universe in which he found himself before any scientific methods were available to him; before he had any idea of the origins or the conditionings of the things around him.

In the present volume I propose to give an account of some attempts I have been making in my leisure moments during the past three years to see whether any ideas could be obtained as to the early astronomical views of the Egyptians, from a study of their temples and the mythology connected with the various cults.

How I came to take up this inquiry may be gathered from the following statement:—

It chanced that in March, 1890, during a brief holiday, I went to the Levant. I went with a good friend, who, one day when we were visiting the ruins of the Parthenon, and again when we found ourselves at the temple at Eleusis, lent me his pocket-compass. The curious direction in which the Parthenon was built, and the many changes of direction in the foundations at Eleusis revealed by the French excavations, were so very striking and suggestive that I thought it worth while to note the bearings so as to see whether there was any possible astronomical origin for the direction of the temple and the various changes in direction to which I have referred. What I had in my mind was the familiar statement that in England the eastern windows of churches face generally—if they are properly constructed—to the place of sun-rising on the festival of the patron saint; this is why, for instance, the churches of St. John the Baptist face very nearly north-east. This direction towards the sun-rising is the origin of the general use of the term orientation, which is applied just as frequently to other buildings the direction of which is towards the west or north or south. Now, if this should chance to be merely a survival from ancient times, it became of importance to find out the celestial bodies to which the ancient temples were directed.

When I came home I endeavoured to ascertain whether this subject had been worked out: I am afraid I was a nuisance to many of my archæological friends, and I made as much inquiry as I could by looking into books. I found, both from my friends and from the books, that this question had not been discussed in relation to ancient temples, scarcely even with regard to churches outside England or Germany.

It struck me that, since nothing was known, an inquiry into the subject—provided an inquiry was possible for a stay-at-home—might help the matter forward to a certain extent. So, as it was well known that the temples in Egypt had been most carefully examined and oriented both by the French in 1798 and by the Prussians in 1844, I determined to see whether it was possible to get any information on the general question from them, as it was extremely likely that such temples as that at Eleusis were more or less connected with Egyptian ideas. I soon found that, although neither the French nor the Germans apparently paid any heed to the possible astronomical ideas of the temple-builders, there was little doubt that astronomical considerations had a great deal to do with the direction towards which these temples faced. In a series of lectures given at the School of Mines in November, 1890, I took the opportunity of pointing out that in this way archæologists and others might ultimately be enabled to arrive at dates in regard to the foundation of temples, and possibly to advance knowledge in several other directions.

After my lectures were over, I received a very kind letter from one of my audience, pointing out to me that a friend had informed him that Professor Nissen, in Germany, had published some papers on the orientation of ancient temples. I at once ordered them. Before I received them I went to Egypt to make some inquiries on the spot with reference to certain points which it was necessary to investigate, for the reason that when the orientations were observed and recorded, it was not known what use would be made of them, and certain data required for my special inquiry were wanting. In Cairo also I worried my archæological friends. I was told that the question had not been discussed; that, so far as they knew, the idea was new; and I also gathered a suspicion that they did not think much of it. However, one of them, Brugsch Bey, took much interest in the matter, and was good enough to look up some of the old inscriptions, and one day he told me he had found a very interesting one concerning the foundation of the temple at Edfû. From this inscription it was clear that the idea was not new; it was possibly six thousand years old. Afterwards I went up the river, and made some observations which carried conviction with them and strengthened the idea in my mind that for the orientation not only of Edfû, but of all the larger temples which I examined, there was an astronomical basis. I returned to England at the beginning of March, 1891, and within a few days of landing received Professor Nissen's papers.

I have thought it right to give this personal narrative, because, while it indicates the relation of my work to Professor Nissen's, it enables me to make the acknowledgment that the credit of having first made the suggestion belongs, so far as I know, solely to him.[1]

The determination of the stars to which some of the Egyptian temples, sacred to a known divinity, were directed, opened a way, as I anticipated, to a study of the astronomical basis of parts of the mythology. This inquiry I have carried on to a certain extent, but it requires an Egyptologist to face it, and this I have no pretensions to be. It soon became obvious, even to an outsider like myself, that the mythology was intensely astronomical, and crystallised early ideas suggested by actual observations of the sun, moon, and stars. Next, there were apparently two mythologies, representing two schools of astronomical thought.

Finally, to endeavour to obtain a complete picture, it became necessary to bring together the information to be obtained from all these and other sources, including the old Egyptian calendars, and to compare the early Babylonian results with those which are to be gathered from the Egyptian myths and temple-orientations.

It will, I think, be clear to anyone who reads this volume that its limits and the present state of our knowledge have only allowed me really to make a few suggestions. I have not even attempted to exhaust any one of the small number of subjects which I have brought forward; but if I have succeeded so far as I have gone, it will be abundantly evident that, if these inquiries are worth continuing, a very considerable amount of work has to be done.

Of this future work, the most important, undoubtedly, is a re-survey of the temple sites, with modern instruments and methods. Next, astronomers must produce tables of the rising and setting conditions of the stars for periods far beyond those which have already been considered. The German Astronomical Society has published a table of the places of a great many stars up to 2000 B.C., but to carry on this investigation we must certainly go back to 7000 B.C., and include southern stars. While the astronomer is doing this, the Egyptologist, on his part, must look through the inscriptions with reference to the suggestions which lie on the surface of the inquiry. The astronomical and associated mythological data want bringing together. One part of that work will consist in arranging tables of synonyms like those to which I presently refer in the case of the goddesses. My own impression is that this work will not really be so laborious as the statement of it might seem to imply. I have attempted to go over the ground during the last two years as well as my ignorance would allow me, and I have arrived at the impression that the number both of gods and goddesses will be found to be extremely small; that the apparent wealth of the mythology depends upon the totemism of the inhabitants in the Nile valley—by which I mean that each district had its own special animal as the emblem of the tribe dwelling in it, and that every mythological personage had to be connected in some way with these local cults. After this work is done, it will be possible to begin to answer some of the questions which I have only ventured to raise.

I am glad to take this opportunity of expressing my obligations to the authorities in Egypt for the very great help they gave towards the furthering of the inquiries which were set on foot there. Many of my own local observations would, in all probability, never have been made if my friend Major A. Davis, of Syracuse (New York) had not invited me to join him in a cruise up the river in the s.s. Mohamet Aly and practically given me full command of her movements. My best thanks are due to him not only for his hospitality, but for sympathetic aid in my inquiries.

Dr. Wallis Budge and Captain Lyons, R.E., have rendered continual help while this book has been in progress, and I cannot sufficiently thank them; to the first-named I am especially indebted for looking over the proof sheets. I am also under obligations to Professors Maspero, Krall, and Max Müller for information on certain points, and to Professors Sayce and Jensen for many valuable suggestions in the chapters dealing with Babylonian astronomy.

J. NORMAN LOCKYER.

CONTENTS.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

ERRATA.

Page 34, inscription to illustration: for Iris read Isis.

Page 83, inscription to illustration: for Sā-el-lager read Sa-el-Hagar.

Page 327, line 8 from top: for Dies read This.

THE
Dawn of Astronomy.

CHAPTER I.
THE WORSHIP OF THE SUN AND THE DAWN.

When we inquire among which early peoples we are likely to find the first cultivation of astronomy, whatever the form it may have taken, we learn that it is generally agreed by archæologists that the first civilisations which have so far been traced were those in the Nile Valley and in the adjacent countries in Western Asia.

The information which we possess concerning these countries has been obtained from the remains of their cities, of their temples—even, in the case of Babylonia, of their observatories and of the records of their observations. Of history on papyrus we have relatively little.

Not so early as these, but of an antiquity which is still undefined, are two other civilisations with which we became familiar before the treasure-houses of Egypt and Babylonia were open to our inquiries. These civilisations occupied the regions now called India and China.

The circumstances of these two groups are vastly dissimilar so far as the actual sources of information are concerned; for in relation to China and India we have paper records, but, alas! no monuments of undoubtedly high antiquity. It is true that there are many temples in India in the present day, but, on the authority of Prof. Max Müller, they are relatively modern.

The contrary happens in Egypt, for there monuments exist more ancient than any of the inscribed records; monuments indicating a more or less settled civilisation; a knowledge of astronomy, and temples erected on astronomical principles for the purposes of worship, the astronomers being called "the mystery teachers of Heaven."

We go back in Egypt for a period, as estimated by various authors, of something like 6,000 or 7,000 years. In Babylonia inscribed tablets carry us into the dim past for a period of certainly 5,000 years; but the so-called "omen" tablets indicate that observations of eclipses and other astronomical phenomena had been made for some thousands of years before this period. In China and in India we go back as certainly to more than 4,000 years ago.

When one comes to examine the texts, whether written on paper or papyrus, burnt in brick, or cut on stone, which archæologists have obtained from all these sources, we at once realise that man's earliest observations of the heavenly bodies in all the regions we have named may very fairly be divided into three perfectly distinct stages. I do not mean to say that these stages follow each other exactly, but that at one period one stage was more developed than another, and so on.

For instance, in the first stage, wonder and worship were the prevalent features; in the second, there was the need of applying the observation of celestial phenomena in two directions, one the direction of utility—such as the formation of a calendar and the foundation of years and months; and the other the astrological direction.

Supplied as we moderns are with the results of astronomical observation in the shape of almanacs, pocket-books, and the like, it is always difficult, and for most people quite impossible, to put ourselves in the place and realise the conditions of a race emerging into civilisation, and having to face the needs of the struggle for existence in a community which, in the nature of the case, must have been agricultural. Those would best succeed who best knew when "to plow and sow, and reap and mow;" and the only means of knowledge was at first the observation of the heavenly bodies. It was this, and not the accident of the possession of an extended plain, which drove early man to be astronomically minded.

The worship stage would, of course, continue, and the priests would see to its being properly developed; and the astrological direction of thought, to which I have referred, would gradually be connected with it, probably in the interest of a class neither priestly nor agricultural.

Only more recently—not at all, apparently, in the early stage—were any observations made of any celestial object for the mere purpose of getting knowledge. We know from the recent discoveries of Strassmaier and Epping that this stage was reached at Babylon at least 300 years B.C., at which time regular calculations were made of the future positions of moon and planets, and of such extreme accuracy that they could have been at once utilised for practical purposes. It looks as if rough determinations of star places were made at about the same time in Egypt and Babylonia.

This abstract inquiry is now practically the only source of interest in astronomy to us; we no longer worship the sun; we no longer believe in astrology; we have our calendar; but we must have a Nautical Almanac calculated years beforehand, and some of us like to know a little about the universe which surrounds us.

It is very curious and interesting to know that the first stage, the stage of worship, is practically missing in the Chinese annals; the very earliest Chinese observations show us the Chinese, a thoroughly practical people, trying to get as much out of the stars as they could for their terrestrial purposes.

In Babylonia it is a very remarkable thing that from the beginning of things—so far as we can judge from the records—the sign for God was a star.

We find the same idea in Egypt: in some of the hieroglyphic texts three stars represented the plural "gods."

I have already remarked that the ideas of the early Indian civilisation, crystallised in their sacred books called Vedas, were known to us long before either the Egyptian or the Babylonian and Assyrian records had been deciphered.

Enough, however, is now known to show that we may take the Vedas to bring before us the remnants of the first ideas which dawned upon the minds of the earliest dwellers in Western Asia—that is, the territory comprised between the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea, the Indus, and the waters which bound the southern coasts—say, as far as Cape Comorin. Of these populations, the Egyptians and Babylonians may be reckoned as the first. According to Lenormant—and he is followed by all the best scholars—this region was invaded in the earliest times by peoples coming from the steppes of Northern Asia. Bit by bit they spread to the west and east. There are strange variants in the ideas of the Chaldæans already recovered from the inscriptions and those preserved in the Vedas. Nevertheless, we find a sun-god[2] and the following hymn:—

"Oh Sun, in the most profound heaven thou shinest. Thou openest the locks which close the high heavens. Thou openest the door of heaven. Oh Sun, towards the surface of the earth thou turnest thy face. Oh Sun, thou spreadest above the surface, like a mantle, the splendour of heaven."

Let us consider for a moment what were the first conditions under which the stars and the sun would be observed. There was no knowledge, but we can very well understand that there was much awe, and fear, and wonder. Man then possessed no instruments, and the eyes and the minds of the early observers were absolutely untrained. Further, night to them seemed almost death—no man could work; for them there was no electric light, to say nothing of candles; so that in the absence of the moon the night reigned like death over every land. There is no necessity for us to go far into this matter by trying to put ourselves into the places of these early peoples; we have only to look at the records: they speak very clearly for themselves.

But the Vedas speak fully, while as yet information on this special point is relatively sparse from the other regions. It is wise, therefore, to begin with India, whence the first complete revelations of this kind came. Max Müller and others during recent years have brought before us an immense amount of most interesting information, of the highest importance for our present subject.

They tell us that 1,500 years B.C. there was a ritual, a set of hymns called the Veda (Veda meaning " knowledge"). These hymns were written in Sanskrit, which a few years ago was almost an unknown language: we know now that it turns out to be the nearest relation to our English tongue. The thoughts and feelings expressed in these early hymns contain the first roots and germs of that intellectual growth which connects our own generation with the ancestors of the Aryan races—"those very people who, as we now learn from the Vedas, at the rising and the setting of the sun, listened with trembling hearts to the sacred songs chanted by their priests. The Veda, in fact, is the oldest book in which we can study the first beginnings of our language and of everything which is embodied in all the languages under the sun." The oldest, most primitive, most simple form of Aryan Nature-worship finds expression in this wonderful hymnal, which doubtless brings before us the rituals of the ancient Aryan populations, represented also by the Medes and Persians.

There was, however, another branch, represented by the Zend-Avesta, as opposed to the Vedas, among which there was a more or less conscious opposition to the gods of Nature, to which we are about to refer, and a striving after a more spiritual deity, proclaimed by Zoroaster under the name of Ahura-Mazda, or Ormuzd. The existence of these rituals side by side in time tends to throw back the origin of the Nature-worship of both. Now, what do we find? In the Veda the gods are called Devas, a word which means "bright"; brightness or light being one of the most general attributes shared by the various manifestations of the deity. What were the deities? The sun, the sky, the dawn, fire, and storm. It is clear, in fact, from the Vedas that sunrise was, to those from whom the ritual had been derived, the great revelation of Nature, and in time, in the minds of the poets of the Veda, deva, from meaning "bright," gradually came to mean "divine." Sunrise it was that inspired the first prayers of our race, and called forth the first sacrificial flames. Here, for instance, is an extract from one of the Vedas. "Will the sun rise again? Will our old friend the Dawn come back again? Will the power of Darkness be conquered by the God of Light?"

These three questions in one hymn will show what a questionable stage in man's history is thus brought before us, and how the antithesis between night and day was one of the first things to strike mankind. We find very many names for Sun-gods—

• Mitra, Indra (the day brought by the sun),
• Sûrya, Vasishtha, Arusha (bright or red);

and for the Dawn-gods—

• Ushas, Dyaus, Dyotanâ,
• Ahanâ, Urvasīī.

We have only to consider how tremendously important must have been the coming of the sun in the morning, bringing everything with it; and the dying away of the sun in the evening, followed at once by semi-tropical quick darkness, to cease to wonder at such worship as this. Here is an extract from one hymn to the Dawn (Ushas):—

"(1) She shines upon us like a young wife, rousing every living being to go to his work; when the fire had to be kindled by men she made the light by striking down darkness.

"(2) She rose up spreading far and wide, and moving everywhere, she grew in brightness, wearing her brilliant garment [the mother of the cows (the mornings)], the leader of the days, she shone gold-coloured, lovely to behold.

"(3) She, the fortunate, who brings the eye of the gods, who leads the white and lovely steed (of the sun), the Dawn, was seen revealed by her rays, with brilliant treasures, following everyone.

"(4) Thou art a blessing when thou art near.... Raise up wealth to the worshipper, thou mighty Dawn.

"(5) Shine for us with thy best rays, thou bright Dawn....

"(6) Thou daughter of the sky, thou high-born Dawn...."

In addition to the Sun and the Dawn, which turn out to be the two great deities in the early Indian Pantheon, other gods are to be met with, such as Prithivī, the Earth on which we dwell; Varuna, the Sky; Ap, the Waters; Agni, the Fire; and Maruts, the Storm-gods. Of these, Varuna is especially interesting to us. We read:—

"Varuna stemmed asunder the wide firmament; he lifted up on high the bright and glorious heaven; he stretched apart the starry sky and the earth."

Again—

"This earth, too, belongs to Varuna, the king, and this wide sky with its ends far apart. The two seas (the sky and the ocean) are Varuna's loins."

Finally, the result of all this astral worship was to give an idea of the connection between the earth and the sun and the heavens, which are illustrated in later Indian pictures, bringing before us modernised and much more concrete views of these early notions, ultimately transformed into this piece of poetic thought, that the earth was a shell supported by elephants (which represent strength), the elephants being supported on a tortoise (which represents infinite slowness).

This poetical view subsequently gave way to one less poetical—namely, that the earth was supported by pillars; on what the pillars rested is not stated, and it does not matter. We must not consider this as ridiculous, and pardonable merely because it is so early in point of time; because, coming to the time of Greek civilisation, Anaximander told us that the earth was cylindrical in shape, and every place that was then known was situated on the flat end of the cylinder; and Plato, on the ground that the cube was the most perfect geometrical figure, imagined the earth to be a cube, the part of the earth known to the Greeks being on the upper surface. In these matters, indeed, the vaunted Greek mind was little in advance of the predecessors of the Vedic priests.

CHAPTER II.
THE FIRST GLIMPSES OF EGYPTIAN ASTRONOMY.

THE ROSETTA STONE.
(In the British Museum.)

In the general survey, which occupied the preceding chapter, of the records left by the most ancient peoples, it was shown that Egypt, if we consider her monuments, came first in the order of time. I have next to show that in the earliest monuments we have evidences of the existence and utilisation of astronomical knowledge.

It is impossible to approach such a subject as the astronomy of the ancient Egyptians without being struck with surprise that any knowledge is available to help us in our inquiries. A century ago, the man to whom we owe more than to all others in this matter; the man who read the riddle of those strange hieroglyphs, which, after having been buried in oblivion for nearly two thousand years, were then again occupying the learned, was not yet born. I refer to Champollion, who was born in 1790 and died in the prime of his manhood and in the midst of his work, in 1832.

Again, a century ago the French scientific expedition, planned by the great Napoleon, which collected for the use of all the world facts of importance connected with the sites, the buildings, the inscriptions, and everything which could be got at relating to the life and language of the ancient Egyptians, had not even been thought of; indeed, it only commenced its labours in 1798, and the intellectual world will for ever be a debtor to the man who planned it.

I know of no more striking proof of the wit of man than the gradual unravelling of the strange hieroglyphic signs in which the learning of the ancient Egyptians was enshrined; and there are few things more remarkable in the history of scientific investigation than the way in which a literature has been already brought together which is appalling in its extent; and yet it may well be that, vast as this literature is at present, it is but the vanguard of a much more stupendous one to follow; for we are dealing with a nation which we now know existed completely equipped in many ways at least seven thousand five hundred years ago.

It forms no part of the present work to give an account of the unravelling to which I have referred, one which finds a counterpart in the results achieved by the spectroscope in another scientific field.

But a brief reference to one of the most brilliant achievements of the century may be permitted, and the more as it will indicate the importance of one of the most valued treasures in our national collections. I refer to the Rosetta Stone in the Egyptian Gallery of the British Museum. It was the finding of this stone in 1799 by Boussard, a captain of French artillery at Rosetta, which not only showed the baselessness of the systems of suggested interpretations of the hieroglyphics which had been in vogue from the time of Kircher downwards, but by its bilingual record in hieroglyphic, demotic and Greek characters, paved the way for men of genius like Thomas Young (1814) and Champollion (1822). The latter must be acknowledged as the real founder of the system of interpretation which has held its own against all opposition, and has opened the way to inquiries into the history of the past undreamt of when the century was young. Chateaubriand nobly said of him, "Ses admirables travaux auront la durée des monuments qu'il nous a fait connaître."

The germ of Champollion's discovery consisted in the bringing together of two sets of characters enclosed in cartouches. One of them is in the Rosetta inscription itself; the other, on the plinth of an obelisk in the island of Philæ. The name of Cleopatra was associated with the one inscription, and that of Ptolemy with the other. It was clear that if the two names, written

and

, were really Ptolemaios and Cleopatra, they must include several identical signs or letters; in Ptolemaios the quadrangular figure □, being the first, must stand for P, and this in Cleopatra was found to occur in the right place, standing fifth in order. The third sign

in Ptolemaios must be an o, and the fourth

an l. Now the lion for l occurs second in Cleopatra, and the knotted cord for o fourth. In this way, proceeding by comparison with other names, that of Alexander, or Alksantrs, was next discovered,

and by degrees the whole Egyptian alphabet was recovered.

What had come down the stream of ages and were universally recognised as unsurpassed memorials of a mysterious past were the famous pyramids, successively described by Herodotus, Diodorus and Pliny among classical, and Abd el-Latîf among Arabian, chroniclers.

Although the rifling of the most important of these structures for the purpose of finding treasure dates at least as far back as 820 A.D., the Khalîf El-Mamun being the destroyer, the scientific study of their mode and objects of construction is a work of quite modern times, and may be said to have been inaugurated by Colonel Howard Vyse in 1839.

Much that has been written has been wild and nonsensical, but from the exact descriptions and measures now available, it is impossible to doubt that these structures were erected by a people possessing much astronomical knowledge. The exact orientation of the larger pyramids in the pyramid-field of Gîzeh has been completely established, and it is not impossible that some of the mysterious passages to be found in the pyramid of Cheops may have had an astronomical use.

Let us, to continue the subject-matter of the present chapter, come to the year 1820. It was about then that were gathered some of the first-fruits of the investigations carried on by the Commission to which I have referred; that some translations of the inscriptions had been attempted, and that, some of the new results were discussed by the members of the French Academy, while at the same time they astounded and delighted the outside world.

TEMPLE OF EDFÛ, LOOKING EAST: SHOWING PYLON AND OUTER COURT.

From the point of view which now concerns us, it may be said that the new discoveries might be arranged into three different groups. First of all, the land had been found full of temples, vast and majestic beyond imagination; among these the temples at Karnak were supreme, but there were others on a par with them in points of architectural detail. But besides these, then as now, above ground and inviting inspection, there were many others which were then—as undoubtedly many are still—more or less buried in the sand; some of these have since been unearthed to reveal the striking features of their structure.

I shall show subsequently that, on the evidence of the ancient Egyptians themselves, these temples were constructed in strict relation to stars; they, then, like the pyramids, must be taken as indicating astronomical knowledge.

If we deal with the general external appearance of the temples, they may be arranged architecturally into two main groups. Edfû is the most perfect example of the first group, characterised by having a pylon consisting of two massive structures right and left of the entrance, which are somewhat like the two towers that one sometimes sees on the west front of our English cathedrals.

In Denderah we have an example of the second group, in which the massive pylon is omitted. In these the front is entirely changed; instead of the pylon we have now an open front to the temple with columns—the Greek form of temple is approached.

GREAT COURT OF HEAVEN, AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE HATHOR TEMPLE AT DENDERAH.

Associated with many of the temples, frequently but not universally in close proximity to the propylon, were obelisks, often of gigantic proportions, exceeding one hundred feet in height and many hundreds of tons in weight, which it has since been discovered were hewn out of the syenite quarry at Aswân, and floated down the river to the various places where they were to be erected.

It is not necessary to go to Egypt to see these wonderful monoliths, for they have been carried away from their original temple sites at Thebes and Heliopolis to adorn more modern cities in the Western world. London, Paris, Rome, and Constantinople are thus embellished. It is obvious to anyone acquainted with astronomical history and methods, that some of these structures, at all events, may have served as gnomons.

TEMPLE GATE WITH PROPYLON AND OBELISKS.

Sometimes these temples, instead of being entirely constructed of stone on a level surface, were either entirely or partly rock-hewn. Of the former class, the temple of Abu Simbel is the most striking example; of the latter, the temple of Dêr el-Bahari at Thebes.

HATHOR TEMPLE OF DÊR EL-BAHARI. (As restored by M. Brune.)

The second revelation was that the walls of these temples, and of many funereal buildings, were, for the most part, covered with inscriptions in the language which was then but gradually emerging from the unknown, its very alphabet and syllabary being still incomplete. Hence there was not only a great wealth of temple buildings, but a still more wonderful wealth of temple inscriptions.

THE CENTRAL PORTION OF THE CIRCULAR ZODIAC OF DENDERAH.

There was even more than this, and something more germane to our present purpose. In several temples which were examined, zodiacs—undoubted zodiacs, representing a third group of finds—were discovered; these, also, were accompanied by inscriptions of an obviously astronomical nature.

At the first blush, then, it seemed to be perfectly certain that we had to deal with a people of an astronomical turn of mind; and here was the opportunity for the astronomer, which indeed the French astronomers did not fail to make use of. Where the philologist was for the moment dumb, it seemed as if the astronomer could be of use, giving explanations, fixing probable dates on the one hand; while, on the other, he would certainly be gaining a fresh insight into, and possibly filling a tremendous gap in, the history of his science.

The figure on the preceding page gives an idea of the method of presentation generally employed in these zodiacs.

I shall show in the sequel—for I shall have to deal with this part of my subject at full length in a subsequent chapter—that many of the animal forms represent at once mythological personages and actual constellations.

CHAPTER III.
THE ASTRONOMICAL BASIS OF THE EGYPTIAN PANTHEON.

It will be abundantly clear from the statements made in the foregoing chapter that, as I have said, the main source of information touching things Egyptian consists no longer in writings like the Vedas, but in the inscriptions on the monuments, and the monuments themselves. It is true that, in addition to the monuments, we have the Book of the Dead, and certain records found in tombs; but, in the main, the source of information which has been most largely drawn upon consists in the monuments themselves—the zodiacs being included in that term.

It has been impossible, up to the present time, to fix with great accuracy the exact date of the earliest monuments. This should not surprise us. We must all feel that it is not a question of knowing so little—it is a question of knowing anything at all. When one considers that at the beginning of this century not a sign on any of these monuments was understood, and that now the wonderful genius of a small number of students has enabled Egyptologists to read the inscriptions with almost as much ease and certainty as we read our morning papers: this is what is surprising, and not the fact that we as yet know so little, and in many cases lack certainty.

But we already know that probably some of these monuments are nearly 6,000 years old. This has been determined by the convergence of many lines of evidence.

TABLET OF KINGS AT ABYDOS.

One of the many points already profoundly investigated by Egyptologists has been the chronology of the kings of Egypt from their first monarch, whom all students recognise as Mena or Menes. All these inquirers have come to the definite conclusion that there was a King Mena, and that he reigned a long time ago; but with all their skill the final result is that they cannot agree to the date of this king within a thousand years; one reason among many others being that in these early days astronomy was a science still to be cultivated, and therefore the early Egyptians had not a perfect mode of recording; perhaps even they had no idea of a hundred years as we have. We are told that all their reckonings were the reckonings of the reigns of kings. This is difficult to believe, and the statement may be a measure of our ignorance of their method of record. We now, fortunately for us, have a calendar which enables us to deal with large intervals of time, but still we sometimes reckon, in Egyptian fashion, by the reigns of kings in our Acts of Parliament. Furthermore, Egypt being then a country liable to devastating wars, and to the temporary supremacy of different kingly tribes, it has been very difficult to disentangle the various lists of kings so as to obtain one chronological line, for the reasons that sometimes there were different kings reigning at the same time in different regions. The latest date for King Mena is, according to Bunsen, 3600 years B.C.; the earliest date, assigned by Boeckh, 5702 years B.C.; Unger, Brugsch, and Lepsius give, respectively, 5613, 4455, 3892. For our purpose we will call the date 4000 B.C.—that is 6,000 years ago—and for the present consider this as the start-point for the long series of remains of various orders to which reference has been made, and from which alone information can be obtained.

We come now to deal with the ideas of the early inhabitants of the Nile valley. We find that in Egypt we are in presence absolutely of the worship of the Sun and of the accompanying Dawn. Whatever be the date of the Indian ideas to which we have referred, we find them in Egypt in the earliest times. The ancient Egyptians, whether they were separate from, or more or less allied in their origin to, the early inhabitants of India, had exactly the same view of Nature-worship, and we find in their hymns and the lists of their gods that the Dawn and the Sunrise were the great revelations of Nature, and the things which were most important to man; and therefore everything connected with the Sunrise and the Dawn was worshipped.

HARPOCRATES.

Renouf, one of the latest writers on these subjects, says:[3] "I fear Egyptologists will soon be accused, like other persons, of seeing the dawn everywhere," and he quotes with approbation this passage from Max Müller relating to the Veda:—

"I look upon the sunrise and sunset, on the daily return of day and night, on the battle between light and darkness, on the whole solar drama in all its details, that is acted every day, every month, every year, in heaven and in earth, as the principal subject."

But we must now go somewhat further into detail. The various apparent movements of the heavenly bodies which are produced by the rotation and the revolution of the earth, and the effects of precession, were familiar to the Egyptians, however ignorant they may have been of their causes; they carefully studied what they saw, and attempted to put their knowledge together in the most convenient fashion, associating it with their strange imaginings and their system of worship.

Dealing with the earth's rotation, how did the Egyptians picture it? How was this interaction, so to speak, between the earth and the sky mythologically represented? They naturally would be familiar with the phenomena of dawn and sunset, more familiar certainly with the phenomenon of dawn than we are, because they had a climate much better suited for its study than ours. There can be no doubt that the wonderful scenes which they saw every morning and evening were the first things which impressed them, and they came to consider the earth as a god, surrounded by the sky—another god.

RA. MIN-RĀ. AMEN-RĀ.

I have next to point out that, the sun being very generally worshipped in Egypt, there were various forms of the sun-god, depending upon the positions occupied in its daily course. We have the form of Harpocrates at its rising, the child sun-god being generally represented by the figure of a hawk. When in human form, we notice the presence of a side lock of hair. The god Rā symbolises, it is said, the sun in his noontide strength; while for the time of sunset we have various names, chiefly Osiris, Tum, or Atmu, the dying sun represented by a mummy and typifying old age. The hours of the day were also personified, the twelve changes during the twelve hours being mythically connected with the sun's daily movement across the sky.

SEBAK-RĀ. CHNEMU-RĀ.

We often find Rā compounded with other names, and in these forms of the god we possibly get references to the sun at different times of the year. Amen-Rā, Sebak-Rā, and Chnemu-Rā are cases in point. The former undoubtedly refers to the sun at the summer solstice. Min-Rā is an ithyphallic form.

ANUBIS, OR SET.

ANUBIS-OSIRIS.

The names given by the Egyptians to the sun then may be summarised as follows:—

Hor, or Horus, or Harpocrates, and Chepera (morning sun).

Rā (noon).

Tum or Atmu (evening sun).

Osiris (sun when set).

I have not space to quote the many hymns to the Sun-gods which have been recovered from the inscriptions, but the following extracts will show that the worship was in the main at sunrise or sunset—in other words, that the horizon was in question:—

"Thou disk of the Sun, thou living God! There is none other beside thee. Thou givest health to the eyes through thy beams, Creator of all beings. Thou goest up on the eastern horizon of the heaven to dispense life to all which thou hast created—to man, four-footed beasts, birds, and all manner of creeping things on the earth where they live. Thus they behold thee, and they go to sleep when thou settest."

OSIRIS (AS A MUMMY).

Hymn to Tmu—

"Come to me, O thou Sun,

Horus of the horizon, give me help."

Hymn to Horus—

"O Horus of the horizon, there is none other beside thee,

Protector of millions, deliverer of tens of thousands."

Hymn to Rā-Tmu-Horus—

"Hail to thee of the double horizon, the one god living by Maāt.... I am the maker of heaven and of the mysteries of the twofold horizon."

Hymn to Osiris—

"O Osiris! Thou art the youth at the horizon of heaven daily, and thine old age at the beginning of all seasons....

"The ever-moving stars are under obedience to him, and so are the stars which set."

OSIRIS SEATED.

Hymn to Rā—

"O Rā! in thine egg, radiant in thy disk, shining forth from the horizon, swimming over the steel (?) firmament.

"Tmu and Horus of the horizon pay homage to thee (Amen-Rā) in all their words."

So far we have dealt with the powers of sunlight; but the ancient Egyptians, like ourselves, were familiar with the powers of darkness or of the underworld. The chief god antithetical to the sun was variously named—Sit, Set, Sut, Anubis, Typhon, Bes; and a host of other names was given to him. As I shall show, the idea of darkness was associated with the existence of those stars which never set, so that even here the symbolism was astronomical.

VARIOUS FORMS OF BES—AS WARRIOR, MUSICIAN, AND BUFFOON.

The contrast between the representations of Bes and of the other forms suggests that the former was imported. In the form of Typhon the goddess Taurt is represented as a hippopotamus, while for Anubis the emblem is a jackal.

In all illustrations of funeral ceremonies the above-mentioned figure largely. In the Book of the Dead we find that in the representations of the judgment of the dead, besides Osiris we have Anubis, both responsible for the weighing of the soul.

With the moon we find two gods connected—Thothlunus and Khons-lunus—though the connection is not a very obvious one.

Thoth is also associated with the Egyptian year, and is variously represented; all forms, however, are based upon the ibis.

For the stars generally we find a special goddess, Sesheta.

KHONS-LUNUS. THOTH-LUNUS. THE GODDESS SESHETA.

Thoth as the sacred scribe and Sesheta as the star-goddess are often represented together engaged in writing.

Associated with the phenomena of morning and evening we find the following divinities. The attributes stated are those now generally accepted. This is a subject which will occupy us in the sequel.

Isis represents the Dawn and the Twilight; she prepares the way for the Sun-god. The rising sun between Isis and Nephthys = morning.

THE WEIGHING OF THE SOUL BY HORUS AND ANUBIS IN PRESENCE OF OSIRIS.

Nephthys is the Dawn and the Twilight, sometimes Sunset.

Shu is also the Dawn, or sunlight, Tefnut represents the coloured rays at dawn. Shu and Tefnut are the eyes of Horus. Shu was also called "Neshem," which means green felspar, in consequence of the green colour observed at dawn. The green tint at dawn and sunset are represented further by the "sycamore of emerald." Sechet is another goddess of the Dawn, the fiery Dawn.

THOTH AND SESHETA WRITING THE NAME OF RAMESES II. ON THE FRUIT OF THE PERSEA.
(Relief from the Ramesseum at Thebes.)

The red colours at sunset were said to be caused by the blood flowing from the Sun-god when he hastens to his suicide. A legend describes Isis as stanching the blood flowing from the wound inflicted on Horus by Set.

CLEOPATRA AS THE GODDESS ISIS.

Hathor is, according to Budge, identified with Nu or Nu-t, the sky, or place in which she brought forth and suckled Horus. She is the female power of Nature, and has some of the attributes of Isis, Nu-t, and Maāt.

ISIS (SEATED).

We next have to gain some general idea of the Egyptian cosmogony—the relation of the sun and dawn to the sky; this is very different from the Indian view. The Sky is Nu or Nu-t, represented as a female figure bending over Seb, the Earth, with her feet on one horizon and her finger-tips on the other. Seb is represented by a recumbent figure, while the sky, represented by the goddess Nu-t, is separated from the earth by Shu, the god of air or sunlight. The daily journey of the sun is represented by a god in a boat traversing the sky from east to west. The goddess Nu-t is variously symbolised. Sometimes there is a line of stars along her back, which clearly defines her nature, but sometimes she is represented by a figure in which the band of stars is accompanied by a band of water. This suggests the Jewish idea of the firmament. We read of the firmament in the midst of the waters, which divided the waters from the waters, the waters above being separated from the waters below the firmament.

THE RISING SUN HORUS BETWEEN ISIS AND NEPHTHYS.

It would seem that it was not very long before the Egyptians saw that the paths of the sun and stars above the horizon were extremely unequal: in the case of the sun, at different times of the year; in the case of the stars, depending upon their position near the equator or either pole. In this way, perhaps, we may explain a curious variant of the drawing of the goddess Nu-t, in which she is represented double, a larger one stretching over a smaller one.

Not only the Sun-gods, but the stars, were supposed to travel in boats across the firmament from one horizon to the other. The underworld was the abode of the dead; and daily the sun, and the stars which set, died on passing to the regions of the west, or Amenti, below the western horizon, to be born again on the eastern horizon on the morrow. In this we have the germ of the Egyptian idea of immortality.

THE GODDESS NU-T.

Among other gods which may be mentioned are Chnemu, the "Moulder," who was thought to possess some of the attributes of Rā; and Ptah, the "Opener," who is at times represented with Isis and Nephthys, and then appears as a form of Osiris.

We can now begin to glimpse the Egyptian mythology.

Seb, the Earth, was the husband of Nu-t, the Sky; and the Sun-and Dawn-gods and-goddesses were their children, as also were Shu representing sunlight, and Tefnut representing the flames of dawn.

Maāt, the goddess of law, was the daughter of Rā.

THE GODDESS NU-T REPRESENTED DOUBLE.

VARIOUS FORMS OF SHU.

We know several points regarding Egyptian customs independently of the astronomical inscriptions, properly so-called, to which I have called attention. We know that there were sacrifices at daybreak; we know that stars were watched before sunrise, and heralded the dawn; we know that these observations were among the chief duties of the sacrificial priests, and it is obvious that a knowledge of star-places, as well as star-names, must have been imperative to these morning watchers, who eventually compiled lists of decans—that is, lists of belts of stars extending round the heavens, the risings of which followed each other by ten days or so. These are the exact equivalents of the moon-stations which the Indians, Arabians, and other peoples invented for the same purpose. We also find, more or less indeterminately from inscriptions in some graves at Thebes, that the daily risings of the chief stars were observed very carefully throughout the year. Unfortunately the inscriptions in question are very difficult indeed to co-ordinate. There have been various efforts made to connect them with certain stars, but, so far, I am afraid they have resisted all efforts to get a complete story out of them, though certain very important points have been made out. These points I shall consider later.

FORMS OF PTAH, THE GOD OF MEMPHIS.

It is not too early to point out here that there is evidence that the Egyptian pantheon, as I have stated it, had not a simple origin. There are traditions that many of the gods came from a region indeterminately described as the land of Pun-t. Among these gods are Chnemu, Amen-Rā, Hathor, and Bes. On page 28 I have associated Bes with Typhon, following several authorities, but if they are right it is very difficult to understand his rôle. It may also be added that the temple-evidence supports the view of his foreign origin.[4]

When one comes to consider the Rig-Veda and the Egyptian monuments from an astronomical point of view, one is struck by the fact that, in both, the early worship and all the early observations related to the horizon. This was true not only of the sun, with which so far we have exclusively dealt, but it was equally true of the stars which studded the general expanse of sky.

In Egypt, then, as in India, the pantheon was astronomical and, to a very large extent, solar in origin. I shall have to show that the remainder—nearly the whole of it—had its origin in stellar relations.

CHAPTER IV.
THE TWO HORIZONS.

It is not only of the first importance for our subject, but of great interest in itself, to study some of the astronomical problems connected with this horizon worship, which in the previous chapter we have found to be common to the early peoples of India and Egypt.

APPARENT MOVEMENT OF THE STARS TO AN OBSERVER AT THE NORTH POLE.

We must be perfectly clear before we go further what this horizon really is, and for this some diagrams are necessary.

The horizon of any place is the circle which bounds our view of the earth's surface, along which the land (or sea) and sky appear to meet. We have to consider the relation of the horizon of any place to the apparent movements of celestial bodies at that place.

We know, by means of the demonstration afforded by Foucault's pendulum, that the earth rotates on its axis, but this idea was, of course, quite foreign to these early peoples. Since the earth rotates with stars, infinitely removed, surrounding it on all sides, the apparent movements of the stars will depend very much upon the position we happen to occupy on the earth: this can be made quite clear by a few diagrams.

APPARENT MOVEMENT OF THE STARS TO AN OBSERVER AT THE EQUATOR.

An observer at the North Pole of the earth, for instance, would see the stars moving round in circles parallel to the horizon. No star would either rise or set—one half of the heavens would be always visible above his horizon, and the other half invisible; whereas an observer at the South Pole would see that half of the stars invisible to the observer at the northern one, because it was the half below the N. horizon. If the observer be on the equator, the movements of the stars all appear as indicated in the above diagram—that is, all the stars will rise and set, and each star in turn will be half its time above the horizon, and half its time below it. But if we consider the position of an observer in middle latitude, say in London, we find that some stars will always be above the horizon, some always below—that is, they will neither rise nor set. All other stars will both rise and set, but some of them will be above the horizon for a long time and below for a short time, whereas others will be a very short time above the horizon and a long time below it.

THE CELESTIAL SPHERE VIEWED FROM A MIDDLE LATITUDE.
AN OBLIQUE SPHERE.

At O we imagine an observer to be in latitude 45° (that is, half-way between the equator in latitude 0°, and the North Pole in latitude 90°), hence the North Celestial Pole will be half-way between the zenith and the horizon; and close to the pole he will see the stars describing circles, inclined, however, and not retaining the same distance from the horizon. As the eye leaves the pole, the stars rise and set obliquely, describe larger circles, gradually dipping more and more under the horizon, until, when the celestial equator is reached, half their journey is performed below it. Still going south, we find the stars rising less and less above the horizon, until, as there were northern stars that never dip below the horizon, so there are southern stars which never appear above it. D D′ shows the apparent path of a circumpolar star; B B′ B″ the path and rising and setting points of an equatorial star; C C′ C″ and A A′ A″ those of stars of mid-declination, one north and the other south.

A TERRESTRIAL GLOBE WITH WAFER ATTACHED TO SHOW THE VARYING CONDITIONS OF OBSERVATION IN A MIDDLE LATITUDE.

Wherever we are upon the earth we always imagine that we are on the top of it. The idea held by all the early peoples was that the earth was an extended plain: they imagined that the land that they knew and just the surrounding lands were really in the centre of the extended plain. Plato, for instance, as we have seen, was content to put the Mediterranean and Greece upon the top of his cube, and Anaximander placed the same region at the top of his cylinder.

We can very conveniently study the conditions of observation at the poles of the earth, the equator, and some place in middle latitude, by using an ordinary terrestrial globe. The wooden horizon of the globe is parallel to the horizon of a place at the top of the globe, which horizon we can represent by a wafer. In this way we can get a very concrete idea of the different relations of the observer's horizon in different latitudes to the apparent paths of the stars.

We have next to deal with the astronomical relations of the horizon of any place in connection with the worship of the sun and stars at the times of rising or setting, when, of course, they are on or near the horizon; and in order to bring this matter nearer to the ancient monuments, it will be convenient to study this question for Thebes, where they exist in greatest number and have been most accurately described.

To adjust things properly we must rectify the globe to the latitude of 25° 40′ N., or, in other words, incline the axis of the globe at that angle to the wooden horizon.

It will be at once seen that the inclination of the axis to the horizon is very much less than in the case of London. Since all the stars which pass between the North Pole and the horizon cannot set, all their apparent movement will take place above the horizon. All the stars between the horizon and the South Pole will never rise. Hence, stars within the distance of 25° from the North Pole will never set at Thebes, and those stars within 25° of the South Pole will never be visible there. At any place the latitude and the elevation of the pole are the same. It so happens that all these places with which archæologists have to do in studying the history of early peoples, Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, China, Greece, &c., are in middle latitudes, therefore we have to deal with bodies in the skies, which do set, and bodies which do not; and the elevation of the pole is neither very great nor very small. In each different latitude the inclination of the equator to the horizon, as well as the elevation of the pole, will vary, but there will be a strict relationship between the inclination of the equator at each place and the elevation of the pole. Except at the poles themselves the equator will cut the horizon due east and due west. Therefore every celestial body which rises or sets to the north of the equator will cut the horizon between the east or west point and the north point; those bodies which do not set will, of course, not cut the horizon at all.

The sun, and stars near the equator, in such a latitude as that of Thebes, will appear to rise or set at no very considerable angle to the vertical; but when we deal with stars rising or setting near to the north or south points of the horizon they will seem to skim along the horizon instead of rising or setting vertically.

Now it will at once be obvious that there must be a strict law connecting the position of the sun (or a star) with its place of rising or setting. Stars at the same distance from either of the celestial poles will rise or set at the same point of the horizon, and if a star does not change its place in the heavens it will always rise or set in the same place.

Here it will be convenient to introduce one or two technical terms. Every celestial body, whether we deal with the sun, moon, planet, or star, occupies at any moment a certain place in the sky, partly, though not wholly, defined by what we term its declination, i.e., its distance from the celestial equator. This declination is one of the two co-ordinates which are essential for enabling us to state accurately the position of any body on the celestial vault; and we must quite understand that if all these bodies rise and set, and rise and set visibly, the place of their rising or setting must be very closely connected with their declination. Bodies with the same declination will rise at the same points of the horizon. When the declination changes, of course the body will rise and set in different points of the horizon.

Next we define points on the horizon by dividing the whole circumference into four quadrants of 90° each = 360°, so that we can have azimuths of 90° from the north or south points to the east and west points.

Azimuths are not always reckoned in this way, navigators preferring one method, while astronomers prefer another. Thus azimuth may also be taken as the distance measured in degrees from the south point in a direction passing through the west, north, and east points. On this system, a point can have an azimuth varying from 0° to 360°.

SHOWING AMPLITUDES RECKONED FROM THE EAST OR WEST POINTS TO N.P., NORTH POINT OF HORIZON, AND S.P., SOUTH POINT OF HORIZON.

It is next important to define the term amplitude. The amplitude of a body on the horizon is its distance north and south of the east and west points; it is always measured to the nearest of these two latter points, so that its greatest value can never exceed 90°. For instance, the south point itself would have an amplitude of 90° south of west (generally written W. 90° S.), or 90° south of east (E. 90° S.), while a point 2° to the westward of south would have an amplitude of W. 88° S., and not E. 92° S.

We can say then that a star of a certain declination will rise or set at such an azimuth, if we reckon from the N. point of the horizon, or at such an amplitude if we reckon from the equator. This will apply to both north and south declinations.

The following table gives for Thebes the amplitudes of rising or setting (north or south) of celestial bodies having declinations from 0° to 64°; bodies with higher declinations than 64° never set at Thebes if they are north, or never rise if they are south, as the latitude (and therefore the elevation of the pole) there is nearly 26°.

Amplitudes at Thebes.

The absolute connection, then, between the declination of a heavenly body and the amplitude at which it rises and sets is obvious from the above table: given the declination we know the amplitude; given the amplitude we know the declination.

Suppose we were dealing with a sea horizon: all the bodies rising or setting at the same instant of time would be in a great circle round the heavens, for the plane of the sensible horizon is parallel to the geocentric one.

But there are some additional points to be borne in mind. Ordinarily we should determine that the amplitude being so and so, the declination of the body which rose or set with that amplitude would be so and so, taking the horizon to be an all-round horizon like a sea one. But that would not be quite true, because we generally see the sun, to take an instance, some little time before it really rises and after it has set, owing to refraction. So that if we see the sun setting, say, north of west, we know that when we see it setting it appears really a little further to the north than it actually was at the moment of true sunset, because refraction gives us the position of the sun just below the true horizon. That is one point that we have to consider. Another is that, of course, we as a rule do not deal with sea horizons. Here we find a hill, there some other obstacle; so that it is necessary to make a correction depending on the height of the hill or other obstacle above the sea-or true-horizon at the place. Only when we take these things completely into consideration, can we determine absolutely the declination, or distance from the celestial equator, of the body at the moment of rising or setting. Still, it is worth while noting that when only approximations are required, the refraction-and hill-corrections have a tendency to neutralise each other in the northern hemisphere. Refraction will tend to carry the sunrise or sunset place more to the north, hills will cause the body to appear to rise or set more to the south.

DIAGRAM SHOWING THE VARIOUS AMPLITUDES AT WHICH STARS OF DIFFERENT DECLINATIONS RISE AND SET IN DIFFERENT LATITUDES.

It is important to point out that these corrections vary very considerably in importance according to the declination of the star with which we have to deal. With a high north or south declination the amplitude increases very rapidly, and the more it increases the more the corrections for refraction and elevation above the true horizon to which I have referred become of importance. In all cases the correction has to be made so that the amplitude will be increased or decreased from the true amplitude by this effect of refraction, according as the body—whether sun or star—is seen to the north or south of the equator.

In the diagram given on page 49, the various amplitudes are shown at which bodies of different declinations appear to rise and set in places with latitudes ranging from 19° to 51° N. It is a diagram to which frequent reference will be made in the sequel.

CHAPTER V.
THE YEARLY PATH OF THE SUN-GOD.

Let us, then, imagine the ancient Egyptians, furnished with the natural astronomical circle which is provided whenever there is an extended plain, engaged in their worship at sunrise, praying to the "Lord of the two Horizons." The rising (and setting) of stars we will consider later; it is best to begin with those observations about which there is the least question.

In the very early observations that were made in Egypt and Babylonia, when the sun was considered to be a god who every morning got into his boat and floated across space, there was no particular reason for considering the amplitude at which the supposed boat left or approached the horizon. But a few centuries showed that this rising or setting of the sun in widely varying amplitudes at different parts of the year depended upon a very definite law. We now, more fortunate than the early Egyptians, of course know exactly what this law is, and with a view of following their early attempts to grapple with the difficulties presented to them we must pass to the yearly path of the sun, in order to study the relation of the various points of the horizon occupied by the sun at different times in the year.

Not many years ago Foucault gave us a means of demonstrating the fact that the earth rotates on its axis. We have also a perfect method of demonstrating that the earth not only rotates on its axis once a day, but that it moves round the sun once a year, an idea which was undreamt of by the ancients. As a pendulum shows us the rotation, so the determination of the aberration of light demonstrates for us the revolution of the earth round the sun.

We have, then, the earth endowed with these two movements—a rotation on its axis in a day, and a revolution round the sun in a year. To see the full bearing of this on our present inquiry, we must for a time return to the globe or model of the earth.

To determine the position of any place on the earth's surface we say that it is so many degrees distant from the equator, and also so many degrees distant from the longitude of Greenwich: we have two rectangular co-ordinates, latitude and longitude. When we conceive the earth's equator extended to the heavens, we have a means of determining the positions of stars in the heavens exactly similar to the means we have of determining the position of any place on the earth. We have already defined distance from the equator as north or south declination in the case of a star, as we have north latitude or south latitude in case of a place on the earth. With regard to the other co-ordinate, we can also say that the heavenly body whose place we are anxious to determine is at a certain distance from our first point of measurement, whatever that may be, along the celestial equator. Speaking of heavenly bodies, we call this distance right ascension; dealing with matters earthy, we measure from the meridian of Greenwich and call the distance longitude.

The movement of the earth round the sun is in a plane which is called the plane of the ecliptic, and the axis of rotation of the earth is inclined to that plane at an angle of something like 23½°. We can if we choose use the plane of the ecliptic to define the positions of the stars as we use the plane of the earth's equator. In that case we talk of distance from the ecliptic as celestial latitude, and along the ecliptic from one of the points where it cuts the celestial equator as celestial longitude. The equator, then, cuts the ecliptic at two points: one of these is chosen for the start-point of measurement along both the equator and the ecliptic, and is called the first point of Aries.

We have, then, two systems of co-ordinates, by each of which we can define the position of the sun or a star in the heavens: equatorial co-ordinates dealing with the earth's equator, ecliptic co-ordinates dealing with the earth's orbit. Knowing that the earth moves round the sun once a year, the year to us moderns is defined with the most absolute accuracy. In fact, we have three years: we have a sidereal year—that is, the time taken by the earth to go through exactly 360° of longitude; we have what is called the tropical year, which indicates the time taken by the earth to go through not quite 360°, to go from the first point of Aries till she meets it again; and since the equinoctial point advances to meet the earth, we talk about the precession of the equinoxes; this year is the sidereal year minus twenty minutes. Then there is also another year called the anomalistic year, which depends upon the movement of the point in the earth's orbit where the earth is nearest to the sun; this is running away, so to speak, from the first point of Aries, instead of advancing to meet it, so that in this case we get the sidereal year plus nearly five minutes.

The angle of the inclination of the earth's plane of rotation to the plane of its revolution round the sun, which, as I have said, is at the present time something like 23½°, is called the obliquity of the ecliptic. This obliquity is subject to a slight change, to which I shall refer in a subsequent chapter.

In order to give a concrete idea of the most important points in the yearly path of the earth round the sun, let us imagine four globes arranged on a circle representing the earth at different points of its orbit, with another globe in the centre representing the sun, marking the two practically opposite points of the earth's orbit, in which the axis is not inclined to or from the sun but is at right angles to the line joining the earth in these two positions, and the two opposite and intermediate points at which the north pole of the axis is most inclined towards and away from the sun.

A diagram will show what will happen under these conditions. If we take first the points at which the axis, instead of being inclined towards the sun, is inclined at right angles to it, it is perfectly obvious that we shall get a condition of things in which the movement of the earth on its axis will cause the dark side of the earth and also the light side represented by the side nearest to the sun, both being of equal areas, to extend from pole to pole; so that any place on the earth rotating under those conditions will be brought for half a period of rotation into the sunlight, and be carried for half a period of the rotation out of the sunlight; the day, therefore, will be of the same length as the night, and the days and nights will therefore be equal all over the world.

We call this the time of the equinoxes; the nights are of the same length as the day in both these positions of the earth with regard to the sun.

EARTH AND SUN AT THE EQUINOXES.

In the next figure we have the other condition. Here the earth's axis is inclined at the greatest angle of 23°½, towards, and away from, the sun. If I take a point very near the north pole, that point will not, in summer, be carried by the earth's rotation out of the light, and a part equally near the south pole will not be able to get into it. These are the conditions at and near two other points called the solstices.

EARTH AND SUN AT THE SOLSTICES.

On each of these globes I have drawn a line representing the overhead direction from London. If we observe the angle between the direction of the zenith and that to the sun in winter we find it considerable; but if we take the opposite six-monthly condition we get a small angle.

In other words, under the first condition the sun at noon will be far from the zenith of London, we shall have winter; and in the other condition the sun will be as near as it can be to the zenith at noon, we shall have summer. These two cases represent the two points in the earth's orbit at which the sun has the greatest declination south and north. With the greatest north declination the sun will come up high, appear to remain at the same height above the horizon at noon for a day or two, as it does at our summer solstice, and then go down again; at the other point, when it has the greatest southern declination, it will go down to the lowest point, as it does in our winter, stop, and come up again—that is, the sun will stand still, so far as its height above the horizon at noon is concerned, and the Latin word solstice exactly expresses that idea. We have, then, two opposite points in the revolution of the earth round the sun at which we have equal altitudes of the sun at noon, two others when the altitude is greatest and least.

DIAGRAM SHOWING POSITION OF THE SUN IN RELATION TO THE ZENITH OF LONDON AT THE NORTHERN WINTER SOLSTICE.

DIAGRAM SHOWING POSITION OF THE SUN IN RELATION TO THE ZENITH OF LONDON AT THE NORTHERN SUMMER SOLSTICE.

We get the equal altitudes at the equinoxes, and the greatest and the least at the solstices.

These altitudes depend upon the change of the sun's declination. The change of declination will affect the azimuth and amplitude of the sun's rising and setting; this is why, in our northern hemisphere, the sun rises and sets most to the north in summer and most to the south in winter. At the equinoxes the sun has always 0° Decl., so it rises and sets due east and west all over the world. But at the solstices it has its greatest declination of 23½° N. or S.; it will rise and set, therefore, far from the east and west points; how far, will depend on the latitude of the place we consider. The following are approximate values:

At Thebes, Lat. 25° 40′ N., representing Egypt, we find that the amplitude of the sun at rising or setting at the summer solstice will be approximately 26° N. of E. at rising, and 26° N. of W. at setting.

These solstices and their accompaniments are among the striking things in the natural world. At the winter solstice we have the depth of winter, at the summer solstice we have the height of summer; while at the equinoxes we have but transitional changes; in other words, while the solstices point, out for us the conditions of greatest heat and greatest cold, the equinoxes point out for us those two times of the year at which the temperature conditions are very nearly equal, although of course in the one case we are saying good-bye to summer and in the other to winter. In Egypt the summer solstice was paramount, for it occurred at the time of the rise of the Nile, the beginning of the Egyptian year.

Did the ancients know anything about these solstices and these equinoxes? Were the almost mythical Hor-shesu or sun-worshippers familiar with the annual course of the sun? That is one of the questions which we have to discuss.

CHAPTER VI.
THE PROBABLE HOR-SHESU WORSHIP.

At the end of the last chapter I referred to the Hor-shesu or followers, that is worshippers, of the Sun-god Horus. I shall have to refer to the traditions relating to them at a later stage, but it is well that I should state here that those personages who preceded the true historic period are considered by De Rougé and others to represent "le type de l'antiquité la plus reculée."

Let us for the moment accept the truth of the various traditions relating to them, and suppose that they left traces of their worship; what, in the light of the last chapter, should we expect to find? The thing most likely to remain would be ancient shrines in all probability serving for the foundation of nobler structures built in later times.

This brings us to the question as to the probabilities of temple-building generally in relation to the heavenly bodies; but before I deal with it, it is important to consider a view first put forward, I believe, by Vitruvius, and repeated by all since his time who have dealt with the question, that the temples were built purely and simply to face the Nile.[5]

The statement is so far from the truth that it is clear that those who have made it had not studied the larger temple-fields. Indeed, we have only to note the conditions at Karnak alone to determine whether there is any truth in the view that the temples face the river. We see at once that this idea cannot be true, because we have the chief temples facing in four directions, while the Nile flows only on one side.

Other archæologists who have endeavoured to investigate the orientations of these buildings have found that they practically face in all directions; the statement is that their arrangement is principally characterised by the want of it; they have been put down higgledy-piggledy; there has been a symmetrophobia, mitigated perhaps by a general desire that the temple should face the Nile. This view might be the true one, if stars were not observed as well as the sun.

With regard to all the temples of the ancient world, whether they are located in Egypt or elsewhere, we must never forget that if astronomy is concerned in them at all, we have to deal with the observations of the rising or setting of the heavenly bodies; whereas the modern astronomer cares little for these risings or settings, but deals only with them on the meridian.

The place of rising or setting would be connected with the temple by the direction of the temple's axis.

Now, the directions towards which the temples point are astronomically expressed by their "amplitudes"—that is, the distance in degrees from the east or west point of the horizon. For instance, a temple facing east would have an amplitude of zero from the east point. If we suppose a temple oriented to the north, it would have an amplitude of 90°; if half-way between the east and north, the amplitude would be 45° north of east, and so on. So that it is possible to express the amplitude of a temple in such a way that the temples in the same or different countries or localities, with the same or equivalent amplitudes, may be classified; and the more temples which can be thus brought together, the more likely is any law relating to their structure to come out.

Let us take this, then, as a general principle. Now how would it be carried out?