Hipparchus, according to modern scholarship, was the discoverer, just over 2000 years ago, of the "Precession of the Equinoxes" - that astronomical phenomenon involving our Earth apparently retrograding clockwise around the Zodiac during a cycle of some 25,920 years.  Yet, according to his contemporaries, Hipparchus was himself of the opinion that the (Chaldeo) Assyrians had kept detailed general astronomical records going back over 270,000 years* - in which case it seems highly unlikely that they themselves were not already well aware of  it.

We otherwise know from Herodotus that the Egyptians had likewise kept detailed astronomical records going back over at least 52,000 years before his time, for they told him that during this period,"....The Sun has four times risen contrary to his wont; he has twice risen where he now sets and has twice set where he now rises...."^# - a clearly veiled reference to Precession.  The Brahmanic traditions of ancient Indo-Persia (Aryavarta) appear far older still because they reckoned their sacred knowledge to have been handed down over one million years ago.

At a time when modern archaeology believes that human urban development only commenced just over 10,000 years ago, with the somewhat arbitrarily designated "homo sapiens sapiens" (supposedly) appearing only about 120,000 years ago, these traditions of an early astronomical science might seem altogether absurd - suggesting that the Ancients were either consummate liars or otherwise had no real sense of time.  However, Darwinian theory and its many related assumptions as regards the supposed evolution of man from the ape (and the associated time frame for his subsequent cultural development) is as full of holes as a kitchen cullender.  The remarkable work "Forbidden Archaeology" by Michael Cremo and Richard Thompson has to some extent confirmed this and thrown modern archaeological and anthropological theory into severe disarray⁺ - even though mainstream science and scholarship seem oblivious (wilfully or otherwise) of the fact.  It becomes increasingly obvious that much of the modern "orthodox" doctrine in these areas is based on a structure of mere supposition and (prejudiced) wishful thinking.  But had scholars and scientists studied rather more carefully what the Ancients had to say - in their metaphorical and allegorical terms - on the subject of the creation of the (local) universe and man"s divine origins, such confused modern thought might not have arrived at its present illogical impasse.

All this may be very interesting in its own right; but there are several other issues which are even more fascinating.  The concept of astronomical Precession is but one of them and it is well worth examining in greater detail because it throws up all sorts of other suggestions as to the knowledge of the Ancients relative to that of modern scientific orthodoxy.  But one or two other auxiliary issues should perhaps be mentioned first.  For example, "Big Bang" Theory - which is also full of holes that astrophysicists are constantly trying to plug with new supporting sub-theories.

"Big Bang" is fundamentally based upon "Red Shift" observations which were interpreted as supposedly showing that the whole universe had originated from a single point and that every sidereal body was thus theoretically getting further and further apart.  Nobody seems to have pointed out that "Red Shift" effects also apply to orbiting celestial bodies which cyclically move apart and then closer together again (so producing "Blue Shift"), as in the case of the planets in our own solar system.  The Ancients, however, took the view that the visible cosmos was merely the objectively complementary (and only partial) counterpart of a noumenal kosmos which was far more real and of far greater magnitude - and that what could be seen consequently involved an ever existent process of constant mutation, which had no Beginning and no End.  Furthermore, they seem to have progressed the concept of axial and orbital motion of stars and star groups as an universally applicable principle throughout Space.  But these observations were expressed by them in the form of allegorical myths, the stars themselves being expressed in esoteric metaphor as gods and goddesses, the former often chasing the latter and sometimes visually catching up, sometimes never quite doing so.

*  Proclus.  "Commentary on the Timaeus" Book 1

#  Herodotus. "The Histories" p.149 (Transl. By H. Carter.  OUP)

+  By indicating (through the evidence of artefacts and other constructs found buried deep under natural geological strata) that creatively intelligent human culture in fact existed well over ten million years ago.

TWO

Rather interestingly - in view of "Big Bang" proponents now having arrived at the idea that the supposed "Bang" must itself have been preceded by some sort of "field" or "fields", the Ancients held the view that all celestial bodies and groups of celestial bodies were themselves enclosed within spheroidal fields of Divine Being, these being eternal in nature and pre-existing the stars, planets, etc. to which they cyclically gave birth and subsequently maintained in existence by a process of self-emanation.  These celestial "firmaments" or "horizons" were seen as maternally generative "World Souls", populated by hierarchies of Divine Intelligences - including the "Divine Spark", the highest overshadowing aspect of man"s own subjective nature, which had "fallen" into it from a yet greater kosmic sphere of Being.  Hence we constantly find in the Egyptian Pyramid Texts, the statement "I possess a spirit in the horizon". 

Now it was Johannes Kepler in the 18^th century who worked out the modern theory of the planetary orbits around the Sun being elliptical rather than circular.  However, the Ancients themselves described the formation of the "world container" (in both planetary and sidereal terms) as an egg-shaped "crystal" sphere, produced (in the Egyptian tradition) by the great god "Ptah" - whose name is merely an occidentally varied version of the phonetically identical "Buddha" (the Dhyani-Buddha of the Indo-Tibetan tradition).  But our solar system is itself elipsoidally "egg-shaped" in its course through Space, as is also the electro-magnetic force field of the Earth (the magnetosheath) in its own elliptically orbital travel around the Sun.

The axial turning of this "crystal sphere" (the "World Soul" of the celestial body in question) was therefore regarded by the Ancients as the real factor which actually induced the axial and orbital rotation  in the motion of the planetary or stellar bodies contained within it, these latter therefore being a merely secondary phenomenon.  Correspondingly, these celestial spheres were seen as involved in constant motion around each other according to a scheme of Universal Law (Ma'at in Egypt) operated by superior hierarchies of divine Intelligence (the DemiUrgos) through a process of meditational direction. This celestial activity was contained within a web of invisible influence created and sustained by the principle embodied by the (metaphorical) goddess Net,* which thereby ensured the maintenance of Celestial Order - through forcing upon Kosmic Chaos the generation of (mathematically) definable and operative cycles of sidereal activity.

Now modern western thought may regard itself as too intellectually "streetwise" and sophisticated to believe in the operative forces in Nature being guided by "angels", "gods" or "demigods", notwithstanding the fact that the by now commonly accepted Gaea principle, if naturally extended into the kosmos,  makes of the whole universe a living organism, necessarily invested with and driven within a vast spectrum of Being and Consciousness - by Intelligence.  But Science itself has so far not managed to come up with any even faintly viable alternative which might rationally explain the raison d"etre behind the fact that Celestial Order appears to operate throughout the known universe.  So, at the very least, the issue must remain an open one. But the activity of the metaphorical goddess Net is surely not so far divorced from answering science"s queries concerning the organised  nature of "Dark Matter".

Curiously, although planets revolve around suns and some suns/stars are known to revolve around binary stars, little thought appears to have been given to the suggestion that our Sun (and its solar system) might itself be involved in a constant orbit of this same nature.  In recent years there have been occasional suggestions in this direction - by equally occasional astrophysicists - that we might be part of a binary system.  However, nobody has ever properly identified our own location in Space (i.e. as part of a particular nebula or constellation) and so this suggestion has constantly been shelved.

Returning to the issue of Precession, modern astrophysical theory has it that this phenomenon is due to a "wobble" in the Earth"s axis - the reason for the supposed "wobble", however, having never been proved beyond attribution to the pulling and pushing motions induced by the Moon, Sun and planets.  In support of this idea, astrophysicists have come up with a succession of aggregate mathematical calculations, which themselves, however, appear to be of an approximate nature, reflecting the constant fluctuations involved in planetary motions and solar energy levels.  The philosopher-scientists of the ancient world had seemingly, however, tackled this same problem (and many other related ones) and come up with a meta-physical answer, recognising that a purely physical theory made no overall sense.  Nevertheless, because no other "practical" scenario has been advanced, modern science has completely disregarded the views of antiquity and accepted the purely mathematical approximations, assuming without further question that here must lie the obvious answer.

* Hence the English word "net", meaning a woven mesh of some or other material, intended as a restraint, or trap.  In this particular context, it would undoubtedly involve electro-magnetism.

THREE

Dealing with the actual modus operandi of Precession, we find certain anomalies in modern theory.  To begin with, it is a known fact that our planet (as also the other planets too) travels more slowly in Space around the Sun than does the Sun itself in its own forward motion, the actual directional nature of the latter as yet not being fully understood by astronomical science.  However, if we hypothesise for a moment that our Sun actually does travel in orbit around a parent star, it would logically follow that the parent star would likewise be travelling at even greater speed than our Sun.  Thus the relationship would be somewhat as shown in Fig. 1 - the actual orbital cycle as seen from Earth (relative to the Zodiac) being 25,920 years.

From this viewpoint, as our Sun travels along in its own elliptical orbit, so it passes the zodiacal constellations along a quite steeply inclined plane of alignment which we call the "Ecliptic".  But these same zodiacal constellations were regarded by the Ancients as also being in axial movement within their own celestial sphere (which concentrically enclosed the others as well) - hence the "sphere of fixed stars" which one keeps coming across in old hermetic texts.  Inevitably therefore, the zodiacal sphere - and thus the zodiacal constellations - would have been revolving axially even faster than our Sun's parent star's orbital motion.   Consequently, because of the progressively slower motion of each sidereal body or group relative to the next greater one, the phenomenon of visual regression would become inevitable - not least of all as seen by an observer on Earth.

Now, bearing in mind that our Earth travels both anti-clockwise around the Sun in its orbit and also anti-clockwise around the overshadowing ring of Circumpolar Stars, how could it be that it travels visually clockwise - simultaneously, in exactly the opposite direction - relative to the Zodiac?  One cannot travel in two opposite directions at the same time unless there is a visual illusion involved.  Quite clearly then, the Earth appears to travel backwards (clockwise) through the Zodiac purely because it is moving more slowly than the Sun and the Sun is likewise moving more slowly than its parent star, etc. within the zodiacal plane.  The visually operative circumference of the ring of circumpolar stars, however, is itself determined by the Ecliptic Path travelled by our solar system during every 25,920 year cycle and curiously appears to be of similar size.

Fig. 1 displays another issue of some significance.  It is that the reason for the Spring Equinox on Earth being regarded, throughout recorded history, as having a primary astrological (and thus spiritual) importance, is because at this time the Earth is always sandwiched between its own Sun and the Sun's parent star.  Consequently, the Earth might be regarded as partaking simultaneously of both the purely psycho-physical vitality of the former whilst also of its higher, spiritual counterpart in the latter.  This was seemingly regarded by the Ancients as responsible for the existence of the dualistic principle of Consciousness itself appearing on Earth in the first place - particularly as expressed in the intelligence of humankind.

The inevitable question following on from all of this is "What is the name of our Sun's parent star?"  And the immediate answer that would be expected to fall from a thousand lips is "Sirius".  But, notwithstanding the huge importance of Sirius in their mystic systems, this is clearly not what the Ancients themselves seemed to think, for the following reasons.

First of all, the 25,920 year cycle was originally known as "The Great Year of the Pleiades"* and only latterly as the mere "Great Year" or "Platonic Year".  Secondly, it has been simplistically  assumed by scholars and scientists that the reason for the bull or ox playing such a primary role in ancient religions all around the world derives from the (again assumed) idea that proper civilisation only commenced - in the Middle East - during the zodiacal Age of Taurus, some 2000-4000 years BCE. But bearing in mind that the Seven Sisters of the Pleiades (located in the "neck" of Taurus and once commonly regarded as the centre of the local universe and the seat of immortality)^# were seen as esoterically "married" to the Seven Rishis of Ursa Major, itself otherwise classified as the "Leg" of the unseen "Bull of the Heavens" (which had been bitten off by the cosmic crocodile), the orthodox assumption provides by no means the only available alternative.

*  "Star Names" (p. 393) by  R. Hinckley Allen.   Dover Publs.

#  Ibid  p. 400

FOUR

Thirdly - specifically with reference to ancient Greek mythic tradition - it would appear that our own solar system is actually the "missing seventh Pleiad".  In support of that idea we find that the youngest Pleiad (Merope*) was married to a demi-mortal named Sisyphus, son of Aeolus, god of the Wind (i.e. the "Divine Breath"), whilst the actual fate of Sisyphus provides us with the astronomical key to the ancient knowledge of Precession, long before Hipparchus.

Sisyphus - after betraying one of Zeus"s infidelities to his goddess wife Hera - found himself consigned in revenge to the Underworld.  However, his punishment was modified by the Three Judges of the

Dead (Minos, Rhadamanthys and Sarpedon) to that involving his eternally having to push a large rocky "boulder" up a steep hill in the Underworld, only to have it incessantly fall back upon him when almost at the very top and thereafter to roll all the way back down to the bottom of the hill.  This, however, is clearly an esoteric allegory referring to the cyclic movement of our Sun and solar system up and down the slope of the Ecliptic Path.  The fact that Merope - ashamed at her husband being consigned to a fate of eternal "hard labour" disappeared after this and was never seen again, implies that she became subsumed within the auric nature (the "horizon" or "akhet" of Egyptology) of our solar system itself.

All this necessarily points to the suggestion that our solar system is actually located in the outer field of the Pleaides nebula, within the constellation of Taurus.  Returning, however, to the question "What is the star around which our Sun and solar system orbit?" the answer would appear to be "Alcyone" - the central and brightest star of the Pleiades nebula.  But in support of that - and dealing otherwise with the associated  role of Sirius - we find a number of additional ancient (allegorical) myths and legends which suggest that we and the whole of our localised part of the "home universe" actually revolves around Orion.  Some of these were described in my last book on ancient Egyptian culture, "Land of the Fallen Star Gods".  However, they (and others) are rather more fully dealt with in my new book "KHEMMEA - The Sacred Wisdom Tradition of Ancient Egypt", just published in the UK in late October this year. 

* A name derived from the Sanskrit root word "Mr-t", meaning death through altruistically motivated self-sacrifice (not suicide, per se).  Hence the Vedic "Marut" gods and also -Myrrh", the plant essence commonly used in funerary arrangements in ancient times.  The same root word also appears related to the Egyptian "Meru", the heavenly -mountain" from which the "Watchers of Pe" looked down upon Earth - hence "Meru-Pe", which became the Greek "Merope".

John Gordon is the author of "Self-Consistent Kosmos" (1996),"Land of the Fallen Star Gods" (1998), "Astrology of the Path of Return" (1999) both published by Orpheus Publishing House, Guildford, England,  whose E-mail address is:  orpheuspubl.ho@btinternet.com