I agree that they hardly could see the southern cellestial pole. (Albeit of remembering their legendary sea voyages down south it may not be so impossible).
BUT. The question is not in defining the position of the cellestial pole. In defining the cardinal point on the horizon.
During the day it may be defined by the Sun. Exactly southern direction, not northern. However, it is labourous, and not very precise.
At night, on the other hand, it can be done with a good precision by the same method described in Kate's paper, with plumber'd level (pendulum).
I'd say, there might be a certain logic in defining due south first. After all it is the direction of the Sun culmination.
And if we remember the solar irregular movement (time equation) and annual cycle, there might be an interest in defining the due south well before all the pyramid constructions, for any other sacred purposes.
So, if there was a pair of bright stars culminating at the same moment in the southern cellectial hemisphere, they could be used as well. The very same way as the pair Kate has suggested.
And it doesn't really matter that the pole is under the horizon - cardinal point would be defined. That is what they were after.
Thanks for references. This Illig is an eye sore, but by far less then Fomenko, and definitely not that arrogant.
It is rather symptomatic that Russia and Germany happened to be the most susceptible to this crap. Social developments and public sentiments do have much in common for these two. I wonder, if there is anything like that in other countries being in similar circumstances?
24 Ноября 2000 (06:31:34)
125. Wally Orientation and dating of the Great Pyramids (+) 17-Ноя (15:46)