Advertisement

Best Practice for Evaluating the Astronomical Significance of Archaeological Sites

  • Clive L. N. Ruggles
Reference work entry

Abstract

Most practitioners of archaeoastronomy would argue that paying due attention to social theory and the broader cultural context does not obviate the need for careful attention to be given to methodological considerations such as the fair selection of data. Notwithstanding the complexities and subtleties that can arise when archaeoastronomical evidence is duly considered in a broader context, this chapter addresses a number of basic issues of best practice, with data selection methodologies at the fore. It focuses particularly upon three types of evidence most commonly considered by archaeoastronomers – structural orientations, light-and-shadow effects, and symbol counts – as identified in  Chap. 24, “Nature and Analysis of Material Evidence Relevant to Archaeoastronomy”. It does not address field survey and data analysis techniques as such; these are covered in  Chaps. 26, “Techniques of Field Survey” and  27, “Analyzing Orientations”.

Keywords

Structural Orientation Tourist Medium Cultural Significance Material Evidence June Solstice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Atkinson RJC (1966) Moonshine on stonehenge. Antiquity 40:212–216Google Scholar
  2. Aveni AF (1988) The Thom paradigm in the Americas: the case of the cross-circle designs. In: Ruggles CLN (ed) Records in stone: papers in memory of Alexander Thom. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 442–472Google Scholar
  3. Aveni AF (ed) (2008) Foundations of new world cultural astronomy: a reader with commentary. University Press of Colorado, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  4. Aveni AF, Hartung H, Buckingham B (1978) The pecked cross symbol in ancient America. Science 202:267–279ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boutsikas E, Ruggles CLN (2011) Temples, stars, and ritual landscapes: the potential for archaeoastronomy in ancient Greece. Am J Archaeol 115(1):55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradley RJ (2009) An archaeology of natural places. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Brennan M (1980) The Boyne Valley vision. Dolmen Press, PortlaoiseGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlson JB (1987) Romancing the stone, or moonshine on the sun dagger. In: Carlson JB, Judge WJ (eds) Astronomy and ceremony in the prehistoric Southwest. Papers of the Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, no. 2. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology, Albuquerque, pp 71–88Google Scholar
  9. Cotte M, Ruggles CLN (2010) Astronomical heritage in the context of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention: developing a professional and rational approach. In: Ruggles CLN, Cotte M (eds) Heritage sites of astronomy and archaeoastronomy in the context of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention: a thematic study. ICOMOS–IAU, Paris, pp 261–273Google Scholar
  10. Edwards ER, Belmonte JA (2004) Megalithic astronomy of Easter Island: a reassessment. J Hist Astron 35:421–433ADSGoogle Scholar
  11. Freeman PR (1982) The statistical approach. In: Heggie DC (ed) Archaeoastronomy in the old world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hadingham E (1981) The lunar observatory hypothesis at Carnac: a reconsideration. Antiquity 45:35–42Google Scholar
  13. Hawkins GS, White JB (1965) Stonehenge decoded. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Heggie DC (1981) Megalithic science: ancient mathematics and astronomy in northwest Europe. Thames and Hudson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Heggie DC (1982) Megalithic astronomy: highlights and visions. In: Heggie DC (ed) Archaeoastronomy in the old world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoskinson T (2005) Calendric investigations of a complex petroglyph panel at a Gila River archaeological site in Arizona. In: Fountain JW, Sinclair RM (eds) Current studies in archaeoastronomy: conversations across time and space. Carolina Academic Press, Durham, pp 169–179Google Scholar
  17. Hutton R (1991) The pagan religions of the ancient British Isles. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. Kintigh KW (1992) I wasn’t going to say anything, but since you asked: archaeoastronomy and archaeology. Archaeoastronomy and Ethnoastronomy News 5(1):1&4Google Scholar
  19. Kirch PV, Ruggles CLN (n.d.) Heiau sites of Kahikinui and Kaupō (manuscript in preparation)Google Scholar
  20. Lockyer JN (1909) Stonehenge and other British stone monuments astronomically considered, 2nd edn. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Malville JM (2011) Astronomy and ceremony at Chankillo: an Andean perspective. In: Ruggles CLN (ed) Archaeoastronomy and ethnoastronomy: building bridges between cultures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 154–161Google Scholar
  22. Penrose FC (1893) On the results of an examination of the orientations of a number of Greek temples with a view to connect these angles with the amplitudes of certain stars at the time the temples were founded, and an endeavour to derive therefrom the dates of their foundation by consideration of the changes produced upon the right ascension and declination of the stars by the precession of the equinoxes. Philos Trans R Soc Lond A184:805–834ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pereira QG (2011) La Horca del Inca – an astronomical observatory? In: Ruggles CLN (ed) Archaeoastronomy and ethnoastronomy: building bridges between cultures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 128–134Google Scholar
  24. Petrie WMF (1883) The pyramids and temples of Gizeh. Field and Tuer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Ruggles CLN (1981) A critical examination of the megalithic lunar observatories. In: Ruggles CLN, Whittle AWR (eds) Astronomy and society in Britain during the period 4000–1500 BC, BAR British Series 88. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, pp 153–209Google Scholar
  26. Ruggles CLN (1982) A reassessment of the high precision megalithic lunar sightlines, 1: backsights, indicators and the archaeological status of the sightlines. Archaeoastronomy 4(Supplement to the Journal for the History for Astronomy 13):S21–S40Google Scholar
  27. Ruggles CLN (1983) A reassessment of the high precision megalithic lunar sightlines, 2: foresights and the problem of selection. Archaeoastronomy 5(Supplement to the Journal for the History for Astronomy 14):S1–S36Google Scholar
  28. Ruggles CLN (1999) Astronomy in prehistoric Britain and Ireland. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  29. Ruggles CLN (2005) Ancient astronomy: an encyclopedia of cosmologies and myth. ABC–CLIO, Santa BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  30. Ruggles CLN (2007) Cosmology, calendar, and temple orientations in ancient Hawai’i. In: Ruggles CLN, Urton G (eds) Skywatching in the ancient world: new perspectives in cultural astronomy. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp 287–329Google Scholar
  31. Ruggles CLN (2011) Pushing back the frontiers or still running around the same circles? ‘Interpretative archaeoastronomy’ thirty years on. In: Ruggles CLN (ed) Archaeoastronomy and ethnoastronomy: building bridges between cultures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  32. Ruggles CLN, Saunders NJ (1993) The study of cultural astronomy. In: Ruggles CLN, Saunders NJ (eds) Astronomies and cultures. University Press of Colorado, Niwot, pp 1–31Google Scholar
  33. Schaefer BE (2006) Case studies of three of the most famous claimed archaeoastronomical alignments in North America. In: Bostwick TW, Bates B (eds) Viewing the sky through past and present cultures. Pueblo Grande Museum Anthropological Papers, No 15. City of Phoenix, Phoenix, pp 27–56Google Scholar
  34. Sofaer A, Zinser V, Sinclair RM (1979) A unique solar marking construct. Science 206:283–285ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sofaer A, Sinclair RM, Doggett LE (1982) Lunar markings on Fajada Butte, Chaco Canyon, New Mexico. In: Aveni AF (ed) Archaeoastronomy in the new world. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 169–181Google Scholar
  36. Sofaer A, Price A, Holmlund J, Nicoli J, Piscitello A (2011) The Sun Dagger interactive computer graphics model: a digital restoration of a Chacoan calendrical site. In: Walker WH, Venzor KR (eds) Contemporary archaeologies of the Southwest. University Press of Colorado, Boulder, pp 67–92Google Scholar
  37. Soper R (1982) Archaeo-astronomical Cushites: some comments. Azania 17:145–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thom A (1971) Megalithic lunar observatories. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  39. Thom A, Thom AS (1978) Megalithic remains in Britain and Brittany. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  40. Towrie S (2013) Orkneyjar: the Crantit Cairn, St Ola. http://www.orkneyjar.com/history/tombs/crantit/crantit3.htm. Accessed 2 Apr 2013
  41. Urton G (2001) A calendrical and demographic tomb text from northern Peru. Latin American Antiquity 12(2):127–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Urton G, Brezine C (2009) Khipu database project. http://khipukamayuq.fas.harvard.edu/. Accessed 2 Apr 2013
  43. Williamson T, Bellamy L (1983) Ley lines in question. World’s Work, TadworthGoogle Scholar
  44. Zeilik M (1985a) The ethnoastronomy of the historic Pueblos, I: calendrical sun watching. Archaeoastronomy 8(Supplement to the Journal for the History of Astronomy, 16):S1–S24Google Scholar
  45. Zeilik M (1985b) A reassessment of the Fajada Butte solar marker. Archaeoastronomy 9(supplement to the Journal for the History of Astronomy, 16):S69–S85Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Archaeology and Ancient HistoryUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations