Maya calendar reform? Evidence from orientations of specialized architectural assemblages (original) (raw)
Related papers
THE ROLE OF SOLAR OBSERVATIONS IN DEVELOPING THE PRECLASSIC MAYA CALENDAR
Latin American Antiquity, 2017
Intervals of 260 days are recorded by architectural orientations at a number of Maya sites, a pattern that may have developed early at sites such as Nakbe. The 260-day calendar, emphasizing sets of 13 and 20 days, dates back to the Middle Preclassic, when early E-Groups in the Maya area were used for solar observations. These observations were probably linked with a maize cycle spanning 260 days. By the end of the Late Preclassic, however, most E-Groups were abandoned or modified for a different function, serving as a stage for rituals performed by rulers at a time when the Long Count calendar was being developed. The changing role of E-Groups relates to the rise of royal rituals associated with the detailed historical records documented in Maya Long Count inscriptions. En varios sitios en el área maya se registran, a partir de las orientaciones arquitectónicas, intervalos de 260 días. Este patrón pudo haberse desarrollado de forma temprana en sitios como Nakbe, Petén, Guatemala. El calendario de 260 días, que enfatiza los conjuntos de 13 y 20 días, data del preclásico medio, cuando se utilizaron los primeros grupos conmemorativos en el área maya para realizar observaciones solares. Estas observaciones probablemente estuvieron vinculadas con un ciclo del maíz que dura 260 días. Sin embargo, a finales del preclásico tardío, la mayoría de los grupos conmemorativos fueron abandonados o modificados para servir una función diferente. Estos grupos fueron utilizados como escenarios para rituales llevados a cabo por la realeza en el periodo durante el cual se desarrolló el calendario de cuenta larga. El nuevo papel de los grupos conmemorativos se relaciona con el aumento de los rituales reales. Estos mismos son asociados con los detallados registros históricos documentados en inscripciones mayas que usan fechas de cuenta larga.
NEW LOOK AT THE MODERN CODIFICATION OF THE MAYAN CALENDAR (full text)
Mayan calendar analysis is quite impressive and greatly exceeds what many scholars and professors alike currently believe. I am particularly impressed with the alternative numerical relations, and he clearly appreciates the importance of the 364d sidereal ecliptic partitioning". Abstract This document first introduces the Mayan calendar and then explains new ideas about the Mayan calendar that may have appeared in a missing codex. These ideas are influenced by a similar calendar used in central Asia and obtained through the oral tradition of Kazakh nomads. This calendar which uses a 273-day cycle instead of a 260-day cycle is explained in detail. This gives rise to the idea that the Mayan calendar had a 364-day cycle and this idea is explored in detail. In particular the idea that the Mayan long count used multiples of 364 days instead of 360 days is explored with respect to astronomical events. In particular, the author codifies the Mayan calendar with the help of "amal", consisting of 9.1 days (for Kazakhs) and 18.2 days (for Maya), which are divided into 273 and 364 days without a remainder. From the set of equations given in this document, one can see the close relationship of the Mayan calendar with the sidereal and synodic rotations of the planet of the solar system, the eclipses of the Moon and the Sun, and also the coverings (occultation) of the Pleiades by the Moon. Personal introduction I do not speak or write in English. This is my main flaw. There was a little doubt that the translators accurately translated my words and thoughts first from Kazakh into Russian, and then into English. Therefore, I apologize in advance to the readers for the incorrectly translated expressions, as well as for ambiguous words, which I wanted to express in another way. Nevertheless, I believe that the topic of the article is quite interesting and excites many people, especially those who are engaged in studying the Mayan calendar. I always expected that one of the world-renowned scientists would write on this topic as I had assumed about Mayan calendars. But, the years go one by one, but no one has written about it. But I forced myself to drop all fears aside and take a pen and write it myself. I write this article in the hope that at least someone will pay attention to it. Arguing about the mistakes made deep in the roots of the study of the Mayan calendar, which began more than a century ago, I think so: There is nothing so good that there were no mistakes in it. After all, without errors we will never know the truth... MODERN CODIFICATION OF THE MAYAN CALENDAR Quotation on the topic: The famous astrologer John Dee used an Aztec obsidian mirror to see into the future. We may look down our noses at his ideas, but one may be sure that in outlook he was far closer to a Maya priest astronomer than is an astronomer of our century. J. Eric S. Thompson [1] Mesoamerican civilization
Origins of Mesoamerican astronomy and calendar: Evidence from the Olmec and Maya regions
Sprajc, Inomata, Aveni
Archaeoastronomical studies have demonstrated that the important civic and ceremonial buildings in Mesoamerica were largely oriented to sunrises or sunsets on specific dates, but the origin and spread of orientation practices were not clear. Using aerial laser scanning (lidar) data, we analyzed orientations of a large number of ceremonial complexes in the area along the southern Gulf Coast, including many recently identified Formative sites dating to 1100 BCE to 250 CE. The distribution pattern of dates marked by solar alignments indicates their subsistence-related ritual significance. The orientations of complexes built between 1100 and 750 BCE, in particular, represent the earliest evidence of the use of the 260-day calendar, centuries earlier than its previously known use in textual records.
MAYA CALENDAR AND MESOAMERICAN ASTRONOMY
Encyclopedia of the History of Science, 2022
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.
2011
"This brief essay introduces eight papers in a thematic volume of Archaeoastronomy devoted to research into the Maya calendar, creation mythology, prophecy, and the 2012 phenomenon. It includes six new and expanded discussions of research presented at the special session “The 2012 Phenomenon: Maya Calendar, Astronomy, and Apocalypticism in the Worlds of Scholarship and Popular Culture,” which was part of the Ninth “Oxford” International Symposium on Archaeoastronomy (IAU S278) held in Lima, Peru, January 5–9, 2011. These eight papers, including a brief introduction (immediately following) by Mark Van Stone to the Maya calendar and the Long Count in particular, address research interests within six categories of investigation, including several caveats outlined here."
2020
Since the dates recorded by solar orientations in Mesoamerican civic and ceremonial architecture cluster in four agriculturally significant seasons and tend to be separated by calendrically significant intervals (multiples of 13 and 20 days), it has been argued that the alignments allowed the use of easily manageable observational calendars intended to facilitate the scheduling of agricultural activities and related ceremonies. Furthermore, at a number of sites prominent mountain peaks on the local horizon correspond to the positions of the Sun on the dates frequently marked by architectural orientations; consequently, the location of many important buildings must have been conditioned by a combination of astronomical and topographical criteria. As the alignments to horizon prominences can be measured with much greater precision than architectural orientations, they are particularly suitable for studying certain details of observational techniques. The results of analyses presented in this study suggest that, during the Preclassic, the dates were largely determined by observing the upper limb of the solar disk on the horizon, while in later periods the observation of the whole orb tangent on the horizon became a predominant practice. These time-dependent variations may have been related to the increasing use of architectural elements for observing light-and-shadow effects.
Notes on the Correlation of Maya and Gregorian Calendars
Three Calendars from Highland Guatemala, 2009
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.