July 1, 1886.] 



KNOVSTLEDGE 



265 



ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE ^ ' 

 !E^IE,IITERATURE.& aB 



LONDON: JULY 1, 1886. 



THE UNKNOWABLE. 



By Richard A. Proctor. 



WORSHIP OF THE HEAVENLY BODIES. 

 {Continued from page 23.5.) 

 is not necessaiy, however, to consider the in- 

 direct evidence derivable from Hebi-evr litera- 

 ture to recognise the way in which in eariy 

 ages the heavenl}' bodies were worshipped. 

 We have direct evidence sufficiently decisive to 

 leave no manner of doubt on this point. I do 

 not here refer to the astrological ideas of 

 ancient races, clearly though these show that men regarded 

 the heavenly bodies as influencing the fates and fortunes of 

 men, and therefore as deities. The e\-idence derived from 

 the direct association of astronomical observations with 

 religion is more significant still, though scarcely more 

 decisive. When we tind that ceremonies manifestly relating 

 to the religion of a people were conducted with special refer- 

 ence to the movements of the heavenly bodies, that struc- 

 tures as manifestly connected with religion were employed 

 for astronomical observations of various kinds, that even the 

 fears and aspirations of men with regard to a future life 

 were associated with the movements of the heavenly bodies, 

 we cannot doubt that the sun and moon, the planets and the 

 stars, were the objects of religious venei-ation. 



There may be reason to question the astronomical signifi- 

 cance of many among the structures whose ruins are found 

 in Egypt, Assyria, ilexico, Peru, and elsewhere ; yet we find 

 among them many so obviously astionomicjil in character 

 while yet so obviously religious that they would suffice 

 to establish the connexion between religion and astronomy 

 in those ancient days when the movements of the heavenly 

 bodies were unexplained and seemed inexplicable. It is, 

 however, when we turn to the pyi-amids of Egypt that all 

 doubt is finally dispelled, and that we are thus enabled to 

 turn to other structures which, considered by themselves, had 

 seemed to give less satLsfactory evidence, and accept in turn 

 what these also teach. 



I am not concerned that many Egyptologists deny the 

 astronomical character of the pyramids, because on this 

 point the opinion of Egyptologists is worth very little un- 

 less they happen to be also astronomers. No astronomer 

 acquainted with the evidence can for a moment doubt that 

 all the p\Tamids of Ghizeh were oriented astronomically, or 

 that, at any rate, while this process was in progress — that 

 is, while the building was lieing raised from base to mid- 

 height — each pyramid was in fact an astronomical ob- 

 servatory. Of course, an astronomer may lielieve, if he 

 likes, that though thus of necessity an observatory (even 

 that it might be built of the desired shape and in the 

 desired position) the'Great Pyramid, or any of its fellows, 

 was by no means an observatory for any other purpose. 



So any one observing that a telescope was mounted equa- 

 torially in so exact and perfect a way as to show that its own 

 magnifying power must have been employed to secure the 

 accuracy of its adjustment, might nevertheless assume, if he 

 liked, that that was the sole end for which the telescope had 

 been emploved. The power which some men, even among 

 astronomers, have for adopting unlikelj" explanations, where 

 simpler ones are obviously suggested by the evidence, must 

 be admitted, since it has been rejjeatedly manifested in sur- 

 prising ways. It may be admitted as a conceivable, how- 

 ever unlikely, thought that men took an immense amount of 

 trouble to make the Great Pyramid a perfect observatory 

 for no other purpo.'^e than that they might square and orient 

 the building as such a building would have had to be oriented 

 in order that it might be a perfect observatory. As we can 

 imagine no other purpose which the exact adjustment of the 

 building in astronomical respects could possibly fulfil than 

 that it should fulfil astronomical relations and be available 

 for carrying out special astronomical work (of some sort), the 

 theory that the exact adjustment was arranged only that the 

 adjustment might be exact, and with no further end in view, 

 will always delight a certain order of minds. But even so, 

 we have at least this fact obvious to every astronomer, that 

 the pyramids, and especially the Great Pyramid, must for a 

 I time have been astronomical observatories, even were it only 

 that they might be built on the plan to which they unques- 

 tionably correspond. 



So much is certain, let Lepsius and all other non-astro- 

 nomical Egyptologists say what they will, leaving their own 

 department to talk of what they do not under.staud. But 

 let not us fall into their mistake, however, but accept their 

 opinion unhesitatingly when they speak with one accord of 

 what they do understand. It is as idle for the astronomer 

 to deny that the pyramids are one and all tombs, as it is for 

 the Egyptologist to deny their astronomical charactei-. Of 

 course, a paradoxical enthusiast may entertain the theory 

 that an exception is to be made in the case of the gi'eat 

 pyramid, and find even the sarcophagus in its interior to be 

 no sarcophagus at all, but onlj' a measure of capacity, stored 

 where it could never be seen, and where, as a matter of fact, 

 it was not understood until it was no longer in such a state 

 that its ftipacity could be measured. It would be enough 

 that the Egyptologist, here on his own gi-ound, asserts this 

 view to be utterly untenable, and that the Great Pyramid was 

 unquestionably a tomb, to overthrow the theoiy absolutely', 

 even if it were probable in itself ; but in reality it is ante- 

 cedently improbable, and is supported by no evidence of the 

 lea-st weight. 



Finding, then, that the pjTamids were certainly astrono- 

 mical, and were as certainly tombs, we may infer with full 

 confidence that they were temples especially intended for 

 such ceremonial observances as belong to the worship of the 

 heavenly bodies. For, on the one hand, astronomy meant in 

 those days the worship of the host of heaven with astro- 

 logical observances for the ceremonial of that Sabaistic 

 religion ; and, on the other hand, the tombs of the ancient 

 Egyptians were as altars during the lifetime of their future 

 tenants, and all the ideas connected with the entombment 

 of the body were associated with religions. The pyramids 

 were altars set in the midst of the vast templs whose roof is 

 the star-lit sky ; and within that temple the gods themselves, 

 sun and moon and planets and stars, were ever present. 



I would not be understood to assert here that all p}Tamidal 

 structures were astronomical in plan and purpose. On the 

 contrary, I recognise the justice of the opinion maintained 

 by archaeologists (and especially by students of Egyptian 

 archaeology), that pyramids were originally mere, tombs. So 

 were the mounds of which the pp-amids in Egypt and the 

 towers of Assji-ia were the developments. The astrono- 



