The following is my translation of an article called: Astronomie der Vorzeit von Dr H Hein. It appeared in a German popular science magazine, Kosmos Handweiser für Naturfreunde 1921, Heft 2, Seiten 34-38. The original article is adorned with graphic depictions of a highly erotic nature and, rather than risking the moral corruption of the international community, I've stuck them on the walls and ceiling of my private chamber. While parts of that sentence aren't perhaps true, the illustrations aren't included with this article.
I'm not aware of any previous translations.
Trevor Dykes.

Astronomy of Prehistory by Dr H Hein
It was not so very long ago that the culture of Ancient Greece and Rome was held to be the soul foundation of our present cultures. The other nations were viewed through their eyes, and they counted them as barbarians, but our discoveries have shown us that the arrogance and vanity of the Greeks and Romans had given us a false picture, and the achievements of, eg. the Egyptians and Babylonians, were absolutely not of less worth.

With each newly discovered culture, with the rich scientific findings, on again began to underestimate the achievements of further peoples from whom we have no written records, and only a few preserved cultural remains. The prehistoric research in Northern Europe has gradually discovered that the verdict about the Ancient North Europeans needs to be drastically revised. Should, for example, the Bronze Age technology in metal-free Schleswig-Holstein and Mecklenburg be considered in the context of the primitive methods available then, in terms of style and skill, it has not been bettered. The Ancient Gauls possessed mowing machines which the learned among the Celts, the druids, required twenty years of study in order to understand them: the learning of medicine, law, natural sciences, mathematics, astronomy all points to a higher level of culture than is -on account of the lack of written records- known to us.

That research has sometimes succeeded in removing the covers from secrets of prehistory can be seen, for example, from one of the most famous monuments.

Stonehenge (Illustrations 1 and 2) lies in the English county of Wiltshire. 30 mighty sandstone columns, each with a height of five metres, form a circle with a diameter of some 30 metres. 30 horizontal stones link these columns with each other. An inner circle is built from numerous stones of between 1.5 to 1.8m in height, which stand free of one another. In the middle of that circle, five massive double columns rise into an arc shape, and each is linked by a lintel block. The entire structure is enclosed by a further horseshoe form surround built from smaller rocks*.
(* See Dr Hopf, Stonehenge in Handweiser, 1913 p.458 and Ein Steinkalender, 1916 S.207. Additional note: Translations of both articles are (or will be) available in the translations archive.)

This monument is built to reflect a line pointing to the beginning of sunrise on the longest day of the year. That the direction has changed a bit over the course of the years is shown by comparing the present line, and the deviation between that and its time of building indicates an age of about 1,800 years BC.

Over the years, the surrounding population has carried off many stones, especially the smaller inner ones, and the site has now become the object of careful reconstructions. The plan of such a reconstruction is shown by Illustration 3.

This plan has been somewhat simplified for the purposes of our examination here. As it is known with absolute certainty that the outer circle was constructed from thirty columns, the fallen stones and broken ones have not been included. The same applies for remnants of the double columns.

This is permissible, but the situation is entirely different for the arrangements of smaller stones. One cannot allow one's self the danger of leaving remains of these out, should one want to examine those circles more closely.

The number of pillars in the outer circle is known without doubt. The same applies for the number of five double columns and their arrangement into an arc shape.

However, the reconstruction of the inner circle is not completely beyond doubt. The reconstruction assumes, as one can count, that 48 stones were used as 48 = 4x12, and 12 is a number often associated with stone monuments. But this would mean the northwestern half of the circle contained 23, and the southeastern 23. As the monument is otherwise entirely symmetrical, this appears curious. And if the reconstruction is carefully executed, then a stone must stand closely by another at point F, or even on the axis. That fits in poorly with 48 stones, as 24 would have to stand to either side of the axis for the axis to run freely between the stones, precisely as with line AA'. It would have to be achieved with either one stone too many or one too few.

(Additional note: The following paragraph requires a diagram to follow what's written, so you might like to draw one.)
If we now measure the preserved distances to the sides of the axis: UT and U'T', TR and T'R', DR and D'R'. And we use the same distance and arrangement for all absent stones. But AD and A'D' would not conform; the distances would require four absent stones to the left and five to the right. One stone too many has obviously been assumed.

Therefore, the circle had 47 stones.

Agreement prevails concerning the innermost stone arrangement. It is horseshoe shaped and runs for 17 stones from P to the still standing P': it has eight stones either side of the axis and one, the central one, on the axis.

Should one want to explain the significance of the monument, then it is not improbable to assume that the builders must have evaluated and measured the design and dimensions of the individual parts. That would suggest the following stages:

1. The five massive double columns
2. The thirty outer columns connected by lintels
3. The circle of 47 stones
4. The horseshoe of 17 stones.

The explanation for this remarkable monument may be found in astronomy, and specifically with the Moon:

The lunar eclipse is limited by a period. Therefore, calculating lunar eclipses is very much easier than most might imagine. This period consists of 223 orbits of the Moon, so called synod months of 29.5 days as measured between one full moon to the next. All natural peoples count months like this and so, evidently, did our ancestors.

A suitably careful observation reveals, to even the simplest of natural peoples, that lunar eclipses can only occur at most each six months (lunar months!). Based on such a realisation, one or another prehistoric astronomer will have certainly dared to have predicted a lunar eclipse. They would soon have discovered that the figure only remained valid for about 3 years. Then there would come an interruption of some 11 months, or even 18 months, during which there was not a single eclipse. The precise comprehension of the laws governing this irregularity would certainly not have been the work of a single observer. Rather, various groups of observers would have gradually found the period involved. One has to take into account that the Moon is always only visible to one half of the Earth. An eclipse can only take place when the Moon is shining onto the hemisphere, and does not disturb the rest of the observing population. However, that does not create any great difficulties for calculating the period, as can be seen from the example of the Babylonians who, thousands of years before Christ, had already worked it out, and probably received their knowledge from the Sumerians, their predecessors in astronomy.

When one constructs a series of intervals between eclipses (measured in months), one receives:
6666617 - 666617 - 6666617 - 6666611 - 6666617
It is virtually regular. It can be divided into five segments of groups of months:
47, 41, 47, 41, 47
Each segment can be reduced into a longer period, with an eclipse every other six months, and a shorter one with no eclipses 30+17, 30+11, 30+17, 30+11, 30+17.
One sees that there is a difficulty only with the second segment, as it should really be 24+17. Alternatively, one could have: 30+17, 24+17, 30+17, 24+17, 30+17.
That would move the violation into the fourth segment.
What must also now be very apparent is that these numbers are the same as found with Stonehenge: 5, 30, 47, 17.
Is that a coincidence?

If so, then it is a very remarkable one! What is certain, is that Stonehenge can still be used as a lunar eclipse calendar today and, when one considers that the recognition of these periods only required some careful observations by a few tribes and some degree of sense, then it is definitely possible that this monument was built as an eclipse calendar prior to 3,700 years ago.

In order to see how the process ran, a modern sketch of the layout may be consulted (Ill. 4).

At the start of a period, a marker can be attached to the first double column. This remains in place until the first segment of the period has finished. During this time, a further marker could be moved around the outer ring of thirty stones. It could be sent a column further for each month. When it reaches the sixth, twelfth and etc columns, so it would show that an eclipse is possible.

When the thirtieth column is reached, then that particular segment has ended. During the shorter segments, the marker could be moved along the less impressive 17 stones of the inner horseshoe.

At the beginning of the second segment, the second double column could be marked with a separate symbol. It would move further until the 24th pair, and then could be transferred to the inner arc. The second segment only has 24+17=41 months.

The process then repeats itself as appropriate from the third columns, and so on.

One notices now how the assemblage of the parts is appropriate for their significance. Other than for the irregularity of the 4th (or 2nd) segment, the period is symmetrical: 47, 41, 47, 41, 47. How well this is reflected by the symmetrical layout of the five double columns, and their symmetrical construction into an open arc! And there are the end columns, which represent the first and the final segments of the period, both of which have 47 months, standing opposite of each other. The same applies for columns II and IV. And these opposing positions suggest they have the same importance, and their diagonal plane shows they are in contrast to the columns I, III and VI! How beautifully this depicts the advance of the period towards its high points, and its descent by the horseshoe form, but also with the lowly heights of the columns I and V, the somewhat taller II and IV, and III in the middle that has the greatest height! And how, to go further, the number of 30 (24) months between the more obvious times of eclipse is reflected in the outer circle, and time of less profound eclipses are signified by the innermost arc of smaller stones! And finally: this bisection of each segment is not just clearly signified by the double columns, but is not the unity of the pair wonderfully represented by the lintel stones connecting the two columns?

The only exception to the regularity of each period was perhaps not recognised during those times, or if it were, then it is not difficult to be reminded of it by column II (or IV).

But why did the circle have 47 stones? That would have been entirely unnecessary. Also, at that time, one would have preferred to kill two birds with one stone. Stonehenge cannot have been built purely in order to calculate the eclipses of the Moon. The direction of its axis in relation to the solstices of the Sun shows it was connected with the Sun as well. Bringing the solar year and the orbit of the Moon into connection has been the objective of all makers or calendars since the earliest times. A possibility is provided by the fact that, every 19 years, the full moon always falls on the same day of the year. When, for example, a full moon occurs on a solstice day, then this will also be the case 19 years later. 19 years is the same as 235 orbits by the Sun. 235=5x47! One only had to count the 47 stones five times in order to keep track of this 19 year period. The number five can be marked by a special symbol on the five double columns**.
(** Stone circles with 19 stones occur frequently in England. One is also found at Odry near Konitz (West Prussia).)

The solar calendar, which is of critical importance to the human economy, was probably also the purpose of the stone circle of Avebury in the same county. Its great significance is shown by its massive dimensions: the diameter amounts to 400 metres! This monument, which today has almost disappeared, allowed a simple method of keeping track of the year, and this required a leap day every eight years. Such a method of counting the years was, for example, far superior to the correction techniques used by the Ancient Babylonians.

Additional comments
As I haven't included the illustrations, parts of the article are harder to follow. To rectify the situation, readers are invited to equip themselves with a copy of the original. I'm not totally convinced as to the significance of all the numbers alluded to be the author but, even so, the main point is that Stonehenge does work as a calendar. Furthermore, the people who built it knew and understood that better than any modern researcher. And sensible modern researchers would have to agree on that final point.

An index of more of my translations of old Kosmos articles can be found at:

Kosmos Translations Archive

A number of Mesozoic (and post-Mesozoic) location summaries can be found at Localities.