Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T01:29:27.583Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Megaliths and Mathematics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Alexander Thom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is becoming apparent that megalithic man possessed and used a considerable knowledge of geometry. As more of his constructions are unravelled, we obtain an increasing appreciation of his attainments. Undoubtedly he also observed the heavenly bodies and used them to tell the time of day or night and to tell the day of the year. To take geometry first, let us look at the various shapes which, in his hands, a ring of stone could take. To understand these rings fully it is necessary to appreciate that he used extensively a very precise unit of length—the megalithic yard (MY). The exact length of this unit has become known to us by an examination of simple circles and flattened circles. When the author produced the first batch of circle diameters there was no universally accepted statistical analysis for the determination of the reliability of a quantum such as the suggested value for the megalithic yard. Then Broadbent produced two papers providing exactly the methods required to find, from a set of measurements, the most probable value of the quantum and the probability level at which it could be accepted [1,2]. This last is very important because Hammersley had shown that almost any random set of (say) diameters will yield an apparent unit of some sort.

Type
Research Article
Information
Antiquity , Volume 40 , Issue 158 , June 1966 , pp. 121 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

[1] Broadbent, S. R., ‘Quantum Hypothesis’, Biometrika, 42, 1955, 45 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

[2] Broadbent, , ‘Examination of a Quantum Hypothesis Based on a Single Set of Data’, Biometrika, 43, 1956, 32 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

[3] Thom, A., ‘The Megalithic Unit of Length’, J. R. Statist. Soc. A., 125, pt. 2, 1962, 243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

[4] Thom, , ‘A Statistical Examination of the Megalithic Sites in Britain’, J. R. Statist. Soc. A., 118, 1955. 275 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

[5] Thom, , ‘The Geometry of Megalithic Man’, Math. Gazette, 45, 1961, 83 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

[6] Thom, , ‘The Egg-Shaped Standing Stone Rings of Britain’, Arch. Int. d’Hist. des Sciences, No. 56–7, 1961 Google Scholar.

[7] Thom, , ‘The Solar Observatories of Megalithic Man’, J. Brit. Ast. Soc., 64, No. 8, 1954, 396 Google Scholar; ‘Megalithic Astronomy: Indications in Standing Stones’, in A. Beer (ed.), Vistas in Astronomy, VII, 1.

[8] Hawkins, G. S., ‘Stonehenge: a Neolithic Computer’, Nature, 202, 1964, 1258 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

[9] Neugebauer, P. V., Tafeln zur Astronomischen Chronologie, Leipzig, 1912 Google Scholar.