Abstract
Clive Ruggles has been one of the founders of modern Archaeoastronomy, a discipline which is soundly based on the scientific method – so that, for instance, a rigorous application of statistics is required – but is also strictly related to Archaeology and, eventually, other sciences of the humanities such as Ethnoastronomy. We owe to Ruggles’s approach the overcoming of many prejudices on the side of Archaeology, for example, on the role of Astronomy in the interpretation of monuments as important as Stonehenge. We also owe to Ruggles his insistence on the use of solid tools to investigate the plausibility of new theories by employing the null hypothesis, such as a thorough analysis of the possible presence of selection effects. These kinds of methods have today become standard tools for the professional Archaeo-astronomer. Thus, a volume celebrating Ruggles’s achievements through a series of interesting contributions is most welcome.
The volume is divided into three parts: methodology, case studies and heritage. Each part contains contributions which, besides being worthy reads on their own, highlight the role that Professor Ruggles has played in developing key aspects of Archaeoastronomy. The first section devoted to methodological issues includes the problem of the correct definition of equinox in a cultural astronomy context (Belmonte and Steele) and rigorous approaches to concepts such as horizon markers (McCluskey and Lopez). In part 2, case studies treating the Neolithic period are offered by Prendergast’s paper on Irish passage tombs and González-García’s on the Chabola de la Hechicera dolmen. The relationship between architectural orders and Greek temple orientation is analysed by Boutsikas. Shiple considers the Greek Geographers; Hannah examines the role of the stars in Greek life and religion. Methodology in textual approaches is well exemplified in the contributions on the ‘cultural history’ of the Pleiades by Ray P. Norris and Barnaby R. M. Norris and on lunar series and eclipse cycles in late classic Mayan records by Iwaniszewski.
The section on heritage addresses a third and equally important contribution by Ruggles to the field of Archaeoastronomy. Indeed, in his service as president of commissions and collaborator with ICOMOS and IAU on world heritage and astronomy, Ruggles has long been devoted to the preservation of astronomical heritage. The main goal of these efforts was to inscribe sites of astronomical significance for their astronomical significance (some relevant sites in this context being previously inscribed for other reasons, such as Stonehenge or the Pantheon). This goal has been nicely achieved with the inscription of sites like Risco Caldo and the sacred mountains of Gran Canaria. In this section, Cotte describes some of these efforts, whose milestone was the two volumes of ICOMOS-IAU thematic studies on astronomical heritage co-edited by Ruggles. In the same section, Wolfschmid describes the cultural heritage of observatories in the context of the IAU–UNESCO initiative. 1 The section concludes with a lengthy paper by Ghezzi on the site of his joint work with Ruggles, the Chankillo complex in Peru. Chankillo is a paradigmatic example of a place where calendrical observations were combined with ancient religious views of the cosmos. The paper convincingly demonstrates the presence of solar alignments incorporated into the design of a peculiar structure of 13 ‘towers’ at the site and makes a strong case for the use (with all due nuances) of the term ‘observatory’.
Professor Ruggles started his career in Archaeoastronomy by applying rigorous mathematical methods to the impressive and pioneering work produced by Alexander Thom on hundreds of megalithic sites in Europe and this book might have been a suitable occasion also to underscore the scientific relationship between these two important scholars. Nonetheless, the volume is definitively worth reading, especially for young researchers.