Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Stars, Stones and Scholars: The Decipherment of the Megaliths as an Ancient Survey of the Earth by Astronomy Paperback – July 6, 2006
See the Best Books of 2018 So Far
Looking for something great to read? Browse our editors' picks for the best books of the year so far in fiction, nonfiction, mysteries, children's books, and much more.
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
However, this book neither reaches nor does it prove any conclusions concerning archaeology
I am revising this to say that Kaulins is not nuts, he is a very clever man who spends so much time blogging that it seems unlikely that he has time to conduct actual archeological research. Be sure to read his threatening reply to my review. True enough, I only skimmed through this book, but why would I want to read the work of a guy who spends so much time bad-mouthing credentialed scientists? A scientist would not threaten people who merely quoted a few of his controversial ideas. His scholarship has been criticized by Eric C. Cline (From Eden to Exile,) and researchers at the University of Chicago: [...] Kaulins may have a few valid ideas about depictions of astronomy by ancient man and the importance of the Baltic languages, but they're getting lost in his shrill denunciations of mainstream academia. Read his bio, his own academic background is in law, not linguistics or archaeology.
From his Lexline journal:
"I am still working on my formal write-up of my Gobekli Tepe decipherment which will show that Göbekli Tepe is astronomical in nature and oriented to the stars ca. 3800 B.C.
I conclude that this location near Urfa is where the Hebrew Calendar began. Gobekli Tepe is only 12 kilometers (about 7.5 miles) from Urfa (currently called Sanliurfa or Edessa), the legendary birthplace of the Biblical Abraham, and only 38 kilometers (23.75 miles) from his later residence at Haran. (see Am Anfang war Anatolien)
I initially dated the installation of the standing stones by what I have deciphered to be the relief depiction of the appearance of Halley's Comet on one of the stones, which by its location on that stone can only be ca. 3800 B.C."
"My interpretations of Stonehenge by astronomy date the large megaliths at Stonehenge to 1749 BC."
"I have been able to decipher several of the Balkan Danube Scripts (ca. 4000-3000 BC) from Transylvania (Romania), Karanovo (Bulgaria) and from Thracian Greece as astronomy. In addition, I have been able to decipher the Djer wooden and ivory tablets from Abydos and Saqqara (ca. 3000 BC) - also as astronomy. In my view, this resolves the question of the origin of Pharaonic writing - it derives from what are today called the Danube Scripts, whatever their provenance may be."
"The identity of Tutankhamun can be explained as follows:
In my opinion, the evidence is incontrovertible that King Saul = Echnaton (Akhenaten), King David = Sethos and King Solomon = Ramses II with Shishak = Ramses III.
Accordingly, Tutankhamun can only be ATON, i.e. JON-ATHON ("young Aton, young Adonis, "Jaun-(IE)donis"), one of the sons of Saul in the Bible. Saul was Echn-ATON viz. Akhen-ATEN ("old Aton", old Adonis, "Vec-(IE)Donis"). The other brother was Semenchkare, Biblical Ish-Boshet, who served a short time as Pharaoh before being executed."
So there you have it- you decide, based on his own words, about the quality of his scholarship. Needless to say, he doesn't accept carbon dating. There's also a strong streak of "the Europeans/Hebrews did it first" in his theories. (From his correspondence: "I really do think that the Jews originally were what the Lithuanians now call the GUDDA, i.e. "White-Russians"." )
See also: Megaliths, Man and the Cosmos, Implications for both Archaeology and Pseudoarchaeology by Chelsee Arbour, May 31, 2007 and The Skeptic 2000 Vol 20. No. 1, in which Mark Newbrook, PhD, refers to Kaulins as a "fringe historical linguist."
He accepts untenable ideas about the past, such as the existence of ley lines, a fantasy dreamed up in the 1920s by the Herefordshire businessman Alfred Watkins and thoroughly debunked in the 1980s by Tom Williamson and Liz Bellamy in Ley Lines in Question. He finds cup-and-ring marks on stones that supposedly depict constellations in the southern hemisphere (such as Musca) that were not defined until the sixteenth century: remember that constellations have no objective reality in the sky, that they are arbitrary groupings of unrelated stars and that different cultures make different groupings. His mangling of linguistics allows him to state that the name of Merlin - who is identified as a genius behind megalithic carvings that no-one else has yet recognised! - can be derived from a root "MER- meaning "measure, survey" in ancient Indo-European" when it comes from Welsh Myrddin, probably derived from the Brittonic placename Moridunon, now Carmarthen (Caerfyrddin in Welsh), meaning "sea fort".
There is little point in trying to do a detailed, point-by-point rebuttal. The evidence simply does not stack up. While Andis Kaulins is evidently an accomplished lawyer and translator, I find nothing in his excursions into archaeology, ancient history and biblical exegesis that is really worth spending time on.