MAYA CALENDAR AND MESOAMERICAN ASTRONOMY

MAYA CALENDAR AND MESOAMERICAN ASTRONOMY

A BRIEF HISTORY OF MAYA TIME The Mayan com­mu­ni­ties of pre­sent-day Mexi­co and Cen­tral Ame­ri­ca deve­lo­ped an intri­ca­te calen­dar with ori­g­ins as ear­ly as the eighth cen­tu­ry BCE. Though many today first encoun­ter it through tabloid covera­ge of sup­po­sed pre­dic­tions the calen­dar makes about the “end” of time, its fame in the histo­ry of sci­ence rests in part on the tech­no­lo­gi­cal, social, and poli­ti­cal sophisti­ca­ti­on the calen­dar reve­als was requi­red to relia­bly track his­to­ri­cal time. Anci­ent Mayan cul­tures are best known in con­tem­po­ra­ry popu­lar cul­tu­re by repre­sen­ta­ti­ons of the archaeo­lo­gi­cal sites of Tikal, Palen­que, Copan and Chich’en Itza. Along­side their “pyra­mid temp­les” the­se sites are often reco­gni­zed for the cal­end­ric records found in num­e­rous hie­ro­gly­phic inscrip­ti­ons. And while Mayan com­mu­ni­ties still thri­ve and strugg­le in sou­thern Mexi­co and Cen­tral Ame­ri­ca, and while the con­tent of the inscrip­ti­ons is now unders­tood to com­pri­se mul­ti­ple lite­ra­ry gen­res, this is likely all overs­ha­dowed in modern popu­lar cul­tu­re by the apo­cryphal inter­pre­ta­ti­ons of the “end of the Mayan calen­dar” in the year 2012. When we get past the­se straw man inter­pre­ta­ti­ons, howe­ver, and con­sider the calen­dar and its com­ple­xi­ty within its his­to­ri­cal con­texts, we encoun­ter a rich histo­ry of sci­ence, influen­ced by poli­tics, reli­gi­on, and social chan­ge over time.

aca​de​mia​.edu

Astro­no­my in Mesoamerica

Astro­no­my in Meso­ame­ri­ca deve­lo­ped in appa­rent iso­la­ti­on from the cul­tu­ral tra­di­ti­ons out­side of the Ame­ri­cas, and its uni­que advance­ment pro­vi­des an important com­pa­ri­son with par­al­lel deve­lo­p­ments of astro­no­mic­al sci­ence else­whe­re in the world. Con­tai­ning hundreds of distinct eth­nic groups and indi­ge­nous lan­guages, the Meso­ame­ri­can cul­tu­re area extends south from cen­tral Mexi­co into Beli­ze, Gua­te­ma­la, Hon­du­ras, El Sal­va­dor, and Nica­ra­gua. While high­ly diver­se, many of the cul­tures and lan­guage groups in this regi­on share inno­va­tions such as inten­si­ve mai­ze agri­cul­tu­re, stra­ti­fied urban deve­lo­p­ment, mega­li­thic archi­tec­tu­re, and an ela­bo­ra­te cal­end­ri­cal sys­tem con­sis­ting of a uni­que, repea­ting cycle of 260 days, and a cycle of 365 days that esti­ma­tes the length of the year. Tog­e­ther, the­se cycles com­bi­ne to form the 52-year Calen­dar Round, his­to­ri­cal­ly shared by more than fif­ty lin­gu­i­stic groups in Mesoamerica.

aca​de​mia​.edu

Notes on the Cor­re­la­ti­on of Maya and Gre­go­ri­an Calendars

In the 1722 K’i­che’ Calen­dar A the­re are a num­ber of calendar-round dates that are cor­re­la­ted with Gre­go­ri­an dates. The­se dates pro­vi­de a signi­fi­cant and hither­to unex­ami­ned argu­ment in sup­port of the Goodman-Martinez-Thompson (GMT) cor­re­la­ti­on (cor­re­la­ti­on con­stant = 584,283 days) of the Maya and Euro­pean calen­dars (Thomp­son 1935). This paper by Chris­ti­an Pra­ger and Frau­ke Sach­se was ori­gi­nal­ly published as Appen­dix 2 in: Weeks, John M., Frau­ke Sach­se and Chris­ti­an M. Pra­ger: Three Calen­dars from High­land Gua­te­ma­la. 221 pp. Bould­er: Uni­ver­si­ty of Colo­ra­do Press, 2009, pp. 176 – 184. This is the MANUSCRIPT ver­si­on, for cita­ti­on plea­se refer to the book ver­si­on. Pra­ger, Chris­ti­an M., and Frau­ke Sach­se (2009) Notes on the Cor­re­la­ti­on of Maya and Gre­go­ri­an Calen­dars. In: John M. Weeks, Frau­ke Sach­se and Chris­ti­an M. Pra­ger (eds.), Maya Day­kee­ping: Three Calen­dars from High­land Gua­te­ma­la; pp. 176 – 184. Bould­er: Uni­ver­si­ty Press of Colorado.

aca​de​mia​.edu

Using Astro­no­mic­al Imagery to Cross-Date an Alma­nac in the Bor­gia Codex

In a 1992 artic­le, V. Bri­cker and H. Bri­cker detail their his­to­ri­cal approach to dating and deco­ding codi­cal alma­nacs in the Maya codi­ces that lack expli­cit Long Count dates. Astro­no­mic­al and sea­so­nal imagery are the key to their metho­do­lo­gy. In honor of their work, I app­ly their method to an alma­nac in the high­land Mexi­can Bor­gia Codex. After a dis­cus­sion of Venus ico­no­gra­phy iden­ti­fied in the Maya and Bor­gia Group codi­ces, I dis­cuss how simi­lar astro­no­mic­al imagery in the alma­nac on Bor­gia 49a-52a, 53b can be used to pro­po­se a model that situa­tes the instru­ment in real time.

aca­de­mia

A Com­men­ta­ry to Chris­ti­ne Hernández’s astro­no­mic­al inter­pre­ta­ti­on of Sky­bea­rer Alma­nac in Bor­gia 49a-52a

In her paper “Using Astro­no­mic­al Imagery to Cross Date an Alma­nac in the Bor­gia Codex”Hernández (2006:126) attempts to “place the sky­bea­rer alma­nac [in  Bor­gia  49a-52a] in real­time” by using ico­no­gra­phy and tonal glyphs as refe­ren­ces to sea­so­nal or astro­no­mic­al cycles.She also uses the alma­nac on B53-B54 for the rst risin­gs of mor­ning Venus, which have been­cor­re­la­ted by V. Bri­cker (2001, Table 2) for the years 1473 to 1506. Important­ly, the ope­ning­da­te of this second alma­nac — 1 Cipact­li — is cal­cu­la­ted by V. Bri­cker to be 31 August 1473,whereas the Con­ver­ter I have deve­lo­ped cal­cu­la­tes 1 Sep­tem­ber 1473 (Gre­go­ri­an proleptic,see Patrick Enci­na 2013). Within that 24-hour peri­od mor­ning Venus actual­ly made a heli­a­cal­ri­sing. That is per­haps the sin­gle event that both the dating sys­tem used by the Bri­ckers (theGMT cor­re­la­ti­on and its vari­ants) and the one published by me (Patrick Enci­na, 2013) find con­ci­lia­ti­on. Dates some 140 years ear­lier — like the ones on B49a and B49b — pro­du­ce 35days of error with the GMT cor­re­la­ti­on, and so are unable to cap­tu­re the astro­no­mic­al event.Dates some 20 years later have 5 days of error with the GMT cor­re­la­ti­on. The error of theGMT is its mis­cal­cu­la­ti­on for leap days. My cor­re­la­ti­on does not accu­mu­la­te such a leap-day­re­la­ted error and so reco­vers the actu­al astro­no­mic­al event on any Long Count or Calen­dar­Round date.

aca­de­mia

Ever­y­thing we thought we knew about the anci­ent Maya is being upen­ded
The world the Maya made has been shrou­ded by jungle for cen­tu­ries. Now, a tool cal­led lidar is reve­al­ing its stag­ge­ring sca­le and sophistication.

The two archaeo­lo­gists, both Natio­nal Geo­gra­phic Explo­rers with rese­arch posts at Tula­ne Uni­ver­si­ty, had coll­ec­tively spent deca­des working in the jungles of Cen­tral Ame­ri­ca. Grue­ling heat and humi­di­ty, as well as encoun­ters with dead­ly wild­life and armed loo­ters, were inex­tri­ca­bly part of dis­co­ve­ring the tre­asu­res of the anci­ent Maya, a civi­liza­ti­on that flou­ris­hed for thou­sands of years and then mys­te­rious­ly vanis­hed beneath the den­se forest. And so, it see­med iro­nic — almost unfair — that their big­gest dis­co­very would come while huddling around a com­pu­ter in an air-con­di­tio­ned office in New Orleans. While his col­le­ague Fran­cis­co Estra­da-Bel­li loo­ked on, Mar­cel­lo Canu­to ope­ned an aeri­al image of a tract of forest in nor­t­hern Gua­te­ma­la. At first, the screen show­ed not­hing but tree­tops. But this image had been made with a tech­no­lo­gy cal­led lidar (short for “light detec­tion and ran­ging”). Lidar devices moun­ted on air­craft shoot bil­li­ons of laser bursts down­ward and then mea­su­re the ones that reflect back. The small frac­tion of pul­ses that pene­tra­te the folia­ge pro­vi­de enough data points to assem­ble an image of the jungle floor.

natio­nal­geo­gra­phic

0
Lost Giants The Crusades Crescent & the Cross

Keine Kommentare

No comments yet

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert