Please note that this item is copyright Richard Alexander. It may be freely copied for non-commercial use, provided this copyright notice remains attached and the text is not altered without my permission. Commercial use of the text is forbidden without agreement as to payment. (Normally I will accept the usual wordage rate.)

Knight, Christopher And Butler, Alan. "Civilisation One: The World is not as you thought". Watkins, London, 2004. Hbk xi, 258pp. Illus, index. ISBN 1-84293-095-8 £16.99 / $24.95

This book comes with a cover blurb from Colin Wilson saying that this book is "one of the biggest breakthroughs of all time …". Sadly, on my reading, this isn't a breakthrough of any sort at all, merely the now familiar piling up of unproven theories on top of unverified speculations to produce a mountain of nonsense.

The authors take great pains in the introductory pages to persuade anyone with a logical mind, or people expecting a linear argument, to put the book down, as this isn't for them. Well, that's something I can agree with them on.

So what is this breakthrough supposed to be then? Well, by comparing the unproven Megalithic Yard and the theoretical construct of a megalithic geometry based on circles with 366 degrees, each of 60 minutes, each then subdivided into 6 seconds with weights and measures (again not all proven) from Minoan Crete and ancient Sumerian civilisations, they claim all manner of unlikely evidence of a previously unknown superior civilisation. Beyond that, that the earth (and the solar system) have been deliberately constructed with certain numerical ratios embedded in them which humans can then discover to reveal the existence of some sort of deity that is responsible for all this. Oh and the Masons were heirs to all this but then forgot it all. Allegedly.

Now before I pull the book apart more, I'd better point out that it isn't without its good points. There is an interesting discussion of attempts by various French, British and American rationalists to bring all the weights and measures into a unified system, to replace the previous imperial systems, based on, ultimately, the believed circumference of the earth This lead to the creation of weights and measures which, on their evidence, have some similarity to ancient equivalents. However to deduce that the ancient Sumerians or the megalith builders of the European Atlantic seaboard knew what the circumference was (or even, later, what the weight of the entire planet was - and all this due it being passed down by a superior civilisation) seems utterly implausible.

The piece de resistance of implausibility has to go to their attempt to construct the dimensions of the Megalithic Yard from the movement of the planet Venus. Firstly, of course, there is the small problem that few archaeologists take the "Megalithic Yard" as discovered (invented?) by Alexander Thom seriously. That megalithic sites were often laid out with regard to the surrounding landscape and various alignments with solstice sunrises and sunsets and so forth seems highly likely. However, none of these would actually require the sites to be built with any regularity regarding dimensions. Accurate and regular sightings marked out, originally, with simple wooden structures would have been more than adequate for the job. Further we have no archaeological evidence of the megalith builders having any knowledge of advanced geometry. Indeed we don't know what number base they used for there numerical systems (the Sumerians used a combination of base 10 and base 6 for example.) Actually we don't even know what language they used or whether any form of writing was in use. Yet the authors are quite happy to start their argument with the assumption that they had circles with 366 degrees and not the 360 degrees used elsewhere.

Yet the method they employ to construct a Megalithic Yard initially depends on the construction of a circle divided into 366 equal lengths along its circumference. This they suggest (on page 40) could be done "trial and error". (You might like to try it if you a few days to spare!!) Or it can be achieved by constructing the circle with a diameter of 233 units (the length of the unit is purely arbitrary at this point as all that is required is the necessary angles are produced.) And then once you've done that and marked it out exactly (on a wide open, wind-swept moor for preference) you then mark off around the circumference with a length of 2 of the arbitrary units. (I'll leave it to you to work out whether you use a wheel of the correct circumference and measure along the circle or you create chords of the correct length from a point along the circumference.)

Now you have to construct two uprights with a rectangular framework joining them. The inside of the framework being exactly the length of 2 units (or 1 Megalithic degree) This you have to position where Venus will appear, as seen from the exact centre of the circle (oh you'll have to make sure the observer stays perfectly still and is positioned with their eye over the exact centre spot of the circle). Note this can't be done on any old day of the year. No, you have choose the correct day so that Venus is moving at exactly the correct speed relative to the observer. The authors state that you have to do this when Venus is moving at its fastest. (Again I'll let readers experiment to find out when this is)

Anyway the great day arrives and the apparatus is erected and then you have to make sure the weather is perfect. Apparently the weather 4- 5, 000 years ago was warmer and wetter than it is now, so along the Atlantic seaboard we can expect even more cloud than we get now. I.E. lots of it. So choose your evening well. You will also have come with a simple pendulum made of a stone on the end of some twine. The observer is then situated in the centre of the circle (I suggest tying them to a large upright stake to make sure they can't move and covering one eye to avoid problems with parallax.) So, with fingers crossed that it remains cloudless as Venus enters the framework, you start swinging the pendulum and start counting. Now why would anybody want to do this you might wonder? Well, to get you megalithic yard to have to get a pendulum of such a length that it swings exactly 366 times in the time it takes Venus to transit the inside of the framework you've erected. Now, it's unlikely you'll get it right first time so you have to make adjustments to the length of the pendulum. Too many swings and the pendulum had to be shortened and too many meant it had to be lengthened.

Now, of course, Venus doesn't stop or even return to the start of the frame whilst you're doing this. So it might be an idea to erect quite a few of these or else you may need to keep coming back every time you had worked out Venus was at its fastest. But eventually, and don't forget some monuments were being built (and rebuilt) over a thousand years or more, so I expect there was a lot of trial and error despite their assumed prowess at trigonometry, you'd end up with a pendulum that was half a megalithic yard long. And now you could now lay out your stone circle, or whatever, incorporating this measurement just so authors a few thousand years hence could write books like this one.

As I mentioned above, despite some highly implausible stuff, there are some interesting factoids produced in this book. In their discussion of Sumerian weights and measures they make a good case (don't confuse it with proof but it looks plausible) that some Sumerian weights for barley seed were produced by standardised measuring devices and that these were the basis of measuring liquids. One thing that I hadn't seen before is that they claim that the volume of barley seed you can get in a cube is larger than the volume you can get in a cylinder of exactly the same volume. They account for this by the way the seeds distribute themselves in the respective containers. However, I don't know if this is true for all volumes are just the ones they were testing. (Again, an experiment you can try at home!)

The book comes with several appendices where they discuss related topics. Actually some just look like plugs for other books they have written, especially Christopher Knight's books on Freemasonry and Alan Butler's book on an alleged Minoan ready-reckoner, the Phaistos disk. The latter looks interesting but again highly speculative. To round off the package, not only there is the website of the book but you can also get the soundtrack too. Yes, besides looking at weights and measures Knight and Butler write about their discovery of the ancient basis of music, using the megalithic yard. Not only that but the principles they deduced were passed on to a band called De Lorean (auspicious!) and you can hear the resulting noise on the full CD called "Civilisation One - The Album". Sadly the review copy lacks this so I was unable to review the music.

So, is it worth buying this book? Personally, I'd wait until you find it on sale on a second hand bookstall. Is it worth reading - well that all depends on how far you're prepared to suspend your critical faculties and be taken along for the ride. As they say, this isn't for this expecting logical arguments and empirical proofs. It's aimed squarely at the "golly gosh, isn't it amazing what you can prove by playing with numbers" brigade. As for their putative "Civilisation One"? There simply isn't any empirical evidence for it at all, it's all inference.

Not utterly worthless, but equally not recommended!

4/10

Richard Alexander