All of these points introduce doubts in the interpretation of the Abri Blanchard bone as a lunar calendar. It is possible to address them by increasing the complexity of the explanation: for example, the left-to-right sequences contain more marks and can be taken to represent the days from full moon to new moon in the popular sense. But the potential for speculative argument seems endless. Indeed, the underlying microscopic evidence that the engravings represent tally marks or some other form of notation in the first place has been vigorously questioned.
And yet the underlying idea—that certain people in the Upper Palaeolithic would have recognized the phase cycle of the moon and may have attempted to record it—seems plausible enough. One approach would be to try to ascertain, hypothetically, how easy we would find it to “recognize” patterns in sets of markings that were in fact unintentional (for instance, caused by people sharpening tools) or had other meanings entirely. The conclusions could then be used as the basis for a formal statistical test. Yet even if lunar tallies or calendars were quite commonplace in the Upper Palaeolithic, they may not have been recorded at all consistently, in which case any attempt to identify sets of calendrical tallies recorded in a systematic way would be doomed to failure.
Studies of some of the many other Upper Palaeolithic engraved artifacts may clarify the issue. One example, another bone fragment known as the Tдi plaque, has been interpreted by Marshack as a more sophisticated lunar calendar. And yet more complex designs give us greater flexibility in interpretation. This is not to say that such explanations are necessarily misguided, but rather that assessing them is no trivial matter. Identifying a methodology that will satisfy both scientists and social scientists is a challenge that has yet to be met by archaeologists.
See also:
Methodology; Palaeoscience. Aboriginal Astronomy; Presa de la Mula. Lunar Phase Cycle.
References and further reading
d’Errico, Francesco. “Palaeolithic Lunar Calendars: A Case of Wishful
Thinking?” Current Anthropology 30 (1989), 117–118, 494–500.
Knight, Chris. Blood Relations. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991.
Marshack, Alexander. The Roots of Civilization. New York: Weidenfeld and
Nicolson, 1972.
———. “The Taп Plaque and Calendrical Notation in the Upper Palae
olithic.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1 (1991), 25–61.
Accuracy
See Precision and Accuracy.
Acronical Rise
Alternatively spelled “acronychal,” for example, in British usage. See Heliacal Rise.
Acronical Set
Alternatively spelled “acronychal,” for example, in British usage. See Heliacal Rise.
Alignment Studies
Archaeoastronomy owes its emergence in the 1970s largely to the furor caused by the controversial and often spectacular claims made by Alexander Thom and others about astronomical alignments at British megalithic monuments. Although archaeoastronomy itself soon grew to encompass a much wider range of evidence, “alignment studies” remain at the heart of a great many archaeoastronomical investigations, particularly those concerning prehistoric Europe.
Where we are searching for evidence of astronomical concerns in prehistory, alignments of monumental architecture remain at the forefront of most investigations. Yet alignments can arise fortuitously, since every oriented structure must point somewhere. Hence the importance of repeated trends, which can be identified and/or verified statistically; good exemplars are the short stone rows in western Scotland and the recumbent stone circles in eastern Scotland. (The stone circle at Drombeg in Ireland provides a cautionary case study.) On the other hand, where other types of evidence are available to us (such as written documents or ethnohistory), studies of the significance of particular alignments may be carried out in a broader context with little or no need for statistical verification. A good example of this is the alignment of the so-called Governor’s Palace at the Maya site of Uxmal.
The term alignment studies is not limited to the architecture of large monuments and public buildings but also includes studies of the layout of cities, as in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica (Teotihuacan, for example) or the ancient classical civilizations, and their possible relationships to celestial objects.
See also:
Archaeoastronomy; “Brown” Archaeoastronomy; “Green” Archaeoastron
omy; Methodology; Thom, Alexander (1894–1985).
Drombeg; Governor’s Palace at Uxmal; Recumbent Stone Circles; Short
Stone Rows; Teotihuacan Street Grid.
References and further reading
Aveni, Anthony F. Skywatchers. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2001.
Ruggles, Clive. Astronomy in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland. New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1999.
Altitude
Altitude is the vertical angle between a given direction—such as the direction toward a particular point on the horizon from a given place—and the horizontal plane through the observer. A positive altitude indicates that the point being observed is above the observer; if it is below, then the altitude will be negative. Thus the altitude of a horizon point level with the observer is 0°. That of the summit of a high or nearby hill might be as much as 5° or 10°, but that of a sea horizon viewed from a high place might be –0.5° or –1°.
One can also speak of the altitude of a star in the sky, but this will not generally be the same as the angle of the star above the horizon, since the horizon altitude will not normally be 0°.
There is considerable confusion between the terms altitude and elevation. Elevation is normally taken to mean the height of a given place above sea level, but the two terms are quite often transposed, for example when pilots speak of the altitude of an airplane to mean its height above sea level and use an altimeter to measure it, while some engineers and astronomers use “elevation” to mean “altitude” as we have defined it here.
See also:
Compass and Clinometer Surveys; Field Survey; Theodolite Surveys. Azimuth.
References and further reading
Ridpath, Ian, ed. Norton’s Star Atlas and Reference Handbook (20th ed.), 4.
New York: Pi Press, 2004.
Ruggles, Clive. Astronomy in Prehistoric Britain and Ireland, ix, 22. New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1999.
Ancient Egyptian Calendars
The kingdom of Ancient Egypt existed for over three millennia and for much of this time was remarkable in having two different calendars in simultaneous operation. Each arose in response to different social needs and developed a distinct function. At least, this is the standard interpretation of the evidence.