pyrenean stone circles, Cromlechpyrene, astral religion

Studies of the Pyrenean stone circle initiated by the author in August 1986, have gradually taken the shape of three documents:

On the significance of the Pyrenean stone circle (Preliminary notes) 1990.
25 copies of this document were printed out directly from the computer. This is a 43-page document printed on DIN A-4 paper which, after having stated that all Pyrenean stone circles represent stars, goes on to provide an interpretation-classification based on a hypothetical comparison of certain groups with a series of constellations. A closer look made it seem natural and logical that, if we had come to the conclusion that the stone circles represented stars, in the shape of a group, they must therefore be comparable with present-day constellations. Our success in this respect can be virtually considered as non-existent: a half success and the odd partial approximation based on shaky foundations were the results of the 22 groups in question, and the proposal was met with total silence.
On the Pyrenean Stone circle (The Astronomic Decoding of a Forgotten Religion) Editorial Txertoa, San Sebastián (1998),
616 pages in which:
– I believe that the stone circle = star theory has been thoroughly demonstrated as a result of interpreting 70 groups and having carried out a reasoned comparison of a total of 322 stone circles –only one group can in fact be considered, two years later, to have been wrongly interpreted, that of Pagolleta 0100-03-24 (this misinterpretation, in view of stone circles in other hydrographic basins, should actually have been dealt with in a different manner).
– I therefore propose a decimal classification for the groups of stone circles based on the application of strictly physical geographical criteria, which are turning out to be very useful.
– There is underlined the importance of the place names in the Basque language, which often make it possible to establish an astronomic meaning for more than one group or recover the vernacular name of more than one constellation and prove the sacred nature of some of these groups at the time in question.
– It was considered that, in general, groups of stone circles follow a series of topographic alignments related to those of the representative mountains standing in the same area as the sites. This observation in fact reveals nothing new since, on referring to other places and monuments, Alfred Watkins, as early as 1925 in The Old Straight Track, already mentions the existence of alignments between prehistoric monuments, which he called "leys".
–Lastly, this work suggested the idea that the historical background, once the stone circle had been astronomically decoded, would permit us to learn the true intention of these monuments. This search would have to take place in Babylon, Egypt, and among the secrets of classical mythology, based both on the signs found during an initial contact with the stone circle and on a bit of dabbling in Pyrenean toponymy, amateur efforts that faithfully coincide with the fact that the Pyrenean stone circle is undoubtedly a matter of the first millennium BC.
All of this is said in the work, as if it wasn't confused enough already, together with a splattering of personal feelings and opinions born throughout the research, and which, although they had been and continue to be the driving power behind fourteen years of continuous learning, confuse the reader a little on appearing in a document which, although based on scientific foundations, does not follow the usual rules for presenting this kind of report.
The Pyrenean Stone circle and the Road to Santiago, a conference given on 30th April 1999 at Salamanca University on invitation from the since-deceased chairman of the Spanish SEAC, Dr. Jaschek. This was a confusing talk in a style not unlike that of the book, from which most of the toponymic meditations could easily have been deleted. It did however include some good shots at interpreting the two groups presented during the talk, together with the suspicion that the original pilgrimage towards the west, which was centuries later, after laudable syncretism, to become the pilgrimage to Santiago, actually takes its origins from the Pyrenean stone circle and its mysterious beliefs. Later research on a wider basis permits these affirmations to be made more coherently while advising that disciplines should not be mixed and that the discussion be reinitiated in the style demanded by scientific publications.

All attempts made to date at spreading the stone circle = star theory and at passing on all of the information put together on the subject at once with the baton of research to institutions or people who are qualified and interested in taking it further, have sadly failed. It is not a question of putting the blame on any one person, not even on the "unlicensed private eye", who has nevertheless doggedly continued his research, thus providing a wealth of new arguments with which to back the solidity of this proposal. But our man now wants to stop for breath in order to try and improve communication on his findings and make a new attempt at finding reliable collaboration on such a wide-ranging subject.

Dr. David S. P. Dearborn, in News from the Center of Archaeoastronomy, in his article A Professor of Our Own quotes the words of Dr. Clive L.N. Ruggles: << "Throughout my career I have striving to place archaeoastronomy on firm theoretical and methodological foundations, so that ground-breaking work in the field is taken seriously by our academic peers in the very different mainstream disciplines to which it relates. I have felt for a long time (and I am not alone) that we archaeoastronomers need to be talking rather less to each other and far more to our anthropological, archaeological, historical, and astronomical colleagues. But they need to be persuaded to listen. […]"

In his lectures (available on the Web) Clive has characterized archaeoastronomy as "a field with academic work of high quality at one end but uncontrolled speculations bordering on lunacy at the other.">>

I am no expert in academic means, nor have I requested permission from the authors to quote them, which I mention not as a sign of disagreement with their writings, but in order to avoid misunderstanding, since having mentioned these authors in no way implies their recognition of a work they do not know. This said, I do find both paragraphs highly interesting and deserving of attention, since I have often over the years made several of the mistakes stated by Dr. Ruggles and, even more so, have been unable to find one single person with whom to exchange my opinions, thus giving me the unpleasant impression of talking to myself. On the other hand, and in reference to the Pyrenean stone circle, I understand that, apart from the above-mentioned specialists, colleagues, let's say academics, we should be able to count on the collaboration of linguists who could seriously study the toponymy of the entire Iberian Peninsula in an attempt to concentrate on the first millennium BC, by way of a sort of Basque "namer". Above all, and although we should watch out for "uncontrolled speculations bordering on lunacy", it is nevertheless essential to carry out "controlled speculation" –as controlled as we want in fact– but on ethereal and entirely esoteric matters which, despite the fact that they do not correspond to any of the academic rules we may care to establish, have nevertheless succeeded in throwing open the doors of possible meaning and mystery of the stone circle to which academic rigor has been unable to find the key.

My impression is one of having made progress with a work packed with a series of vestiges, of having suddenly found myself surrounded by elements of difficult classification, and that the premature definition of what are no more than intuitions can make it difficult to finally resolve and understand the problem. Archaeoastronomy versus archaeology-astronomy, anthropology, topography, history, linguistics, etc., with their respective rules, of course. But watch out, despite the fact that it is related to these subjects, the background of the Pyrenean stone circle is not to be found in these academic disciplines, but rather in:

The countryside, when considered from a point of view that seems strange to us today –from that of the builders of the stone circles–, but in situ, not sitting at an office desk. The alignments and layout of the mountains.
Seen through the eyes of Arato – to quote but a name– in the celestial roll of the simultaneous rising and settings of the said stars on the horizon in question.
The mythology of Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome, etc.
The classic authors, almost without distinction, who make the odd specific mention of recognisable astronomic ephemerides in certain groups of stone circles, such as Hesiod in certain verses of Works and Days. Or other authors who, surreptitiously, like Homer in the enigmatic tale of the grotto of Ithaca [Odyssey, canto XIII 102-112], the esotericism of which is highlighted by Porphyry –Tyre 234 AD-Rome 305 AD– no less than seven centuries later, in The Caves of the Nymphs of the Odyssey, and which somewhat specifies the eschatology which could correspond to that of the people who built the stone circles, in turn related to that expressed by Franz Cumont in Astrology and Religion Among the Greeks and Romans (1912), Kessinger Publishing Company, Montana, page 167 and following.
In authors who are more or less contemporary like the said Cumont, Valentia Straiton, J. Norman Lockyer, Adrian Gilbert, etc., whom, among other mistakes –except for Cumont, who is extremely reliable and well documented– throw out ideas that "fit in" both with the stone circle and with the dark and relegated time when the celestial religions reigned. Even a careful reading of Pierre A. Riffard's L'ésotérisme –qu'est-ce que l'ésotérisme? Anthologie de l'ésotérisme occidental– Éditions Robert Laffont, S.A., 1990, reprinted for the 4th time in 1996, together with the references quoted in the book, gives a fairly precise idea, without even mentioning the subject, of the religious meaning of the stone circle. Thus, on page 335, "The 'Chaldeans' – in reality the priests of Babylon- were the first to forward the theory of an analogy between planets and souls.", a piece of information which, according to the author, comes from Philon of Alexandria –13 BC, 54 AD–; on page 467, he says: "On the other hand, orphism and pitagorism have developed an astral mysticism. For the ancient Greeks, souls came down to earth from heaven during the summer solstice through the door of Cancer, the so-called door of men, and returned to heaven during the winter solstice, through the door of Capricorn, known as the door of the gods (Porphyry, "The Caves of the Nymphs of the Odyssey").>>

In short, on avoiding "uncontrolled speculation bordering on lunacy", one is nevertheless unable, on delving deeper into knowledge of the stone circle, to escape a certain amount of 'controlled speculation': speculation on subjects related to the stone circle, controlling and rectifying as required. The stone circle-star comparison is largely demonstrated with the help of classical astronomy, although approximation to the real meaning and to why these representations exist obliges us to take a much closer look at forgotten knowledge and feelings. This could perhaps be due to the mysterious nature of that religion which, to some extent, gives the impression of being close to certain mysteries of the period: the Eleusinian Mysteries, the Dionysian Mysteries...?, which, as a work hypothesis, I would call 'natural mysteries' that are still impossible to specify, but on the subject of which we can find well founded, completely non-esoteric, scientific documents which in some way link together and make sense of Franz Cumont's documented studies on 'astral mysticism'. This expression and concept was already developed by the same author in chapter V –page 139– in the above-mentioned Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans, which begins by showing surprise at the success of an arid and abstruse religion based on the theories of celestial mechanics... "The answer is that this potent system, which set itself to satisfy intelligence, made a yet more effective appeal to emotion. If the cults of the East pretended to answer all of the questions which man asks concerning the world and himself, they also aimed at starring his emotions, at arousing in him the rapture of ecstasy." [...] Reiterating at a later point, "... this 'cosmic emotion' which every man feels and transformed it into a religious sentiment." The underlining is mine. I would say that Cumont, just like the stoics of the past not long after the stone circle builders, gives the key so that, once the "uncontrolled speculations" and the emotions they produce have been brought under control, at least in some people, the contemplation of nature, including the celestial vault, the coming closer and intuiting of the trance which must have been experienced by the 'inventors', firstly of astral religions, and later of the artistic expression specified in the Pyrenean stone circle, is the fruit, both of a polished astronomic technique and of the knowledge of a territory, that can only be used as the basis of a work of art under the influence of emotions which, while not endeavouring try to define them, must have existed. Why not then go after them, at the risk of bordering a loss of control, but in the hope of discovering the "why" of these constructions which, in relation to pure astronomic technique, are an authentic and veritable delight?

In the above mentioned work, Cumont gradually leaves traces right from the very first page, which are easy to fit in with the forgotten religion that may have been the inspiration behind the stone circle, at least as a basic work hypothesis. We can take from this work:

On page 21: on quoting Jastrow, Die Religion Babyloniens und Assyriens, ii., p.432 << The science of the observation of the heavens, which had been perfected little by little by the priests, became in their hands a body of astral doctrine, which never lost the flavour of the school, but which nevertheless permeated the entire Babylonian religion, and at least in part transformed it.>>
On page 23: << Prof. Jastrow, the best judge of these matters, does not hesitate to regard the truly sidereal cult, which grew up at Babylon under the influence of the learned theories developed by the priestly caste, as a new religion.>>
On page 24: << The new doctrines were reconciled or combined, after a fashion with the old creds by placing the abode of the gods in the stars, or by identifying them with the latter.>>
On page 26: << It may be regarded as proved that this astral religion succeeded in stablishing itself in the sixth century BC.>>

We have still got an enormous way to go, although the idea is to complete this task in the future, in order to quote all of the classical references to the belief in two doors for the passage of souls, one at birth, the northern door, and the other for the return of man after death to the sky through the side on which the road of the planets crosses the Milky Way from Scorpio to Capricorn. Right now it seems more important to carry out a series of clarifications arising from the references already studied. In the first place we have preferred to call them the celestial doors of Macrobius instead of giving them the name of a more ancient author, since we understand that Macrobius' Commentary on the Dream of Scipio by Cicero probably gives the most precise explanation of these doors, and is likewise the reference most commonly quoted by authors on the subject. In the second place, we must underline the lack of precision between the different authors on the position of these doors in the sky. They all agree that these doors are located on the stretches of the ecliptic that intersect the Milky Way, but differ widely and go into excessive detail when specifying an exact spot on these stretches. Macrobius, for example, states: " It is through the door of men or Cancer that souls leave on their way to the earth; it is through the door of Capricorn, or of the gods, that the souls rise towards the host of their own immortality, and where they are going to take their place in the name of the gods; and this is what Homer wanted to represent in the description of the Ithaca cave." Precisely locating the doors on the solstice points of the Cancer and Capricorn period, although he continues only a few lines further on: " The first African also says to the young Scipio, on talking about the souls of the blessed, and showing him the Milky Way: 'These souls have left from this place, and to this place shall return.'" And, without going into detailed lists of different authors, by way of a contrast, we have copied part of Adrian Gilbert's text The Magi on the subject of the Agiña stone circles: Page 341: " In The Mayan Prophecies I underlined, courtesy of Hamlet's Mill, the widespread belief throughout the ancient world that both 'ends' of the Milky Way had a door leading to the stars."

According to Santillana and Dechend, these doors were located at the point where the ecliptic, or annual path of the Sun, intersected the Milky Way. The southern door was near the tail of Sagittarius and the northern door at Gemini, near the position of the 'handshake' on Orion. This idea was well known during the Roman period and is mentioned by Macrobius, a writer from the early 5th century BC.>>

These statements by Macrobius, like those of Santillana and Dechend prove that the doors for the entrance and departure of souls to the skies had a somewhat elastic location, which has to be stressed due to the fact that they are drawn with this same elasticity in the Pyrenean stone circle. This said, at least until the present time, they always fall within the stretch which, corresponding to the northern door, runs from Taurus to Gemini and for the southern door, from Scorpio to Sagittarius. We will have to return to this subject both when dealing individually with the groups and in the summary containing an analysis on similarities and differences between the different groups.

Meanwhile, we should clarify the chronology of certain events, the exact determination of which is essential for their acceptance as such. We are attempting to establish religious justification for a number of stone circles built somewhere around 600 BC on the basis of a series of Greek-Latin documents written several centuries later, thus implying that the execution of the stone circles by way of a material religious expression took place several centuries prior to being given shape in writing, at least in Greek. On closer examination, this undertaking would only have grounds if it were to come from principles not generated in Greece itself, but having become fashionable before subsequently taking on a certain amount of strength. One of the pioneers of Greek astrology is considered to be Beroso –340-290 BC– a Mesopotamian, and Chaldean priest of Bel in Babylon who wrote a work comprising three books in Greek on the history and culture of Babylon. Beroso was widely used by later Greek compilers. In his first book, Beroso described the land of Babylon until the time that the half-man half-fish Oannes and other divinities who had risen from the sea (like Ea, who was already mentioned on decoding a certain group?) introduced civilisation, and the history of creation in keeping with the primitive legend that leads to a report on Chaldean astrology. Beroso's second and third books contain the chronology of Babylon and Assyrian decline. Cuneiform texts written in the Akkadian language –Assyrian-Babylonian– have largely corroborated Beroso's writings. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the original names of the seven predecessors of civilisation according to Beroso (Oannes and his brothers) are included in a late Babylonian tablet found at Uruk (today's Warka). Many of Beroso's now reduced writings give a certain amount of philosophical and even etymological backing, as has been studied in certain groups, to the latter explanation of the Pyrenean stone circle; these writings likewise contribute to guiding the stone circle with foundation and an adapted chronology towards its origins in the Middle East. And this, independently of the fact that its present bibliographical support, considering the disappearance of the Library of Alexandria, and despite the help of certain Babylonian tablets that have already been decoded, has to take its basic backing from Greek and Latin writings occasionally dating from very much later than the stone circle. Among these, the writings of Beroso could form one of the many links which, more than lost, are not connected to one another in this beautiful story.

In Orgarata, seven years ago, something personal was said which I would like to repeat:

Several years have gone by since I copied with applause and later published these observations by Webb, but now I can see that I had forgotten them, that I had put them to the back of my mind somewhere along the way, and that I have not been consistent and faithful to my beliefs. I have spent a great deal of time on the heels of astronomers and archaeologists, believing that they could hold the key to possible recognition of the stone circle = star theory. In fact, I even started addressing these notes to them, but now realise that I was making the same mistake. Professor Clive Ruggles started to sow the retarded effect seeds of doubt with his: 'uncontrolled speculations bordering on lunacy'. He was obviously right but does anybody consider himself a priori qualified to control the speculations of others? Can rules be applied to the unknown? Did theories that have proven themselves to be valid or correct with time not always arise as a result of speculation? As far as the Pyrenean stone circle is concerned, there is a general official belief, expressed both actively and passively in textbooks and taught to high school and university students, that these constructions are no more than burial monuments. Who can rectify the error, or rather indifference, of a well-known, reliable and prestigious professor? "Hey, listen! For a start we're not going to talk about anything complicated, but about the Three Magi of Orion who are represented here, there and..." nothing, there's nothing to be done, they don't listen, they know, but now I understand, they think it's just another mad guy making uncontrolled speculations.

Well, the El Dorado of archaeoastronomy or whatever it is called –without underestimating the subject– is not to be found in Egypt or in South America, it is here, in the Pyrenees. The small village of Arano in Navarre, thanks to the conservation of the monuments it houses and their geographical position, could be, with Okabe, the perfect centre from the didactic point of view, and productive from the economic point of view for starting to recover the still recoverable Pyrenean stone circle.

–And who are you to make this kind of statement?

–A nobody in these disciplines, a person who is incapable of making one single reliable and accredited person interested in his efforts, but who continues to search for a critical person, with no preconceptions, of renowned international prestige in archaeoastronomy (?) – or simply a hard working student, a lover of nature, of the truth... Someone who will likewise, apart from their cultural values, draw attention to the priceless economic interest of these demonstrable realities for the inhabitants of vast areas of the Pyrenees.