Advancing Studies of Cultural Astronomy in South Africa

Astronomy, Indigenous Knowledge, and Interpretation: Advancing studies of Cultural Astronomy in South Africa Jarita Holbrook University of the Western Cape Abstract: Cultural astronomy is the study of the The International Society for Archaeoastronomy and use of astronomical knowledge, beliefs, Astronomy in Culture (ISAAC) Oxford X conference or theories to inspire, inform, or influ- came to Africa for the first time in 2014. Oxford X ence social forms and ideologies, or exposed South African students and researchers to cul- any aspect of human behaviour. Cul- tural astronomy data collection and analysis methods, as tural astronomy also includes the mod- well as to potential mentors to further the goal of advancing the field. Cultural Astronomy studies in South ern disciplines of ethnoastronomy and ar- Africa, however, remain in a nascent stage, which in cheoastronomy. some ways can be said for the entire field, but especially when it comes to studies of Africa. An overview of the Here considered part of Cultural As- debates within the field of cultural astronomy since the tronomy, Archaeoastronomy is defined by 1980s is presented along with ideas for advancing cul- Dictionary.com as “the branch of archae- tural astronomy in South Africa. ology that deals with the apparent use by prehistoric civilizations of astronomical Keywords: South Africa, Cultural Astron- techniques to establish the seasons or the omy, Indigenous Knowledge, Astronomy cycle of the year, especially as evidenced in the construction of megaliths and other rit- Introduction ual structures.” Ethnoastronomy, in turn, Cultural Astronomy is the study of humans is “the branch of astronomy concerned and their relationship to the sky. These re- with the astronomical beliefs and practices lationships include practical things such as of specific cultures.” Within this broader timekeeping, weather prediction, seasonal formulation, the discipline of cultural as- calendars for agricultural activities, and tronomy has roots going back hundreds of navigation; artistic inspiration such as years, though the term itself was first used songs, poems, myths, stories, paintings, in the late 1980s. Scholars trace the disci- sculptures, etc.; and metaphysical beliefs pline to Athanasius Kircher (1635; cf. such as celestial deities, astrology, the loca- Fletcher 1970) who worked to understand tion of the Christian heaven and other re- the time keeping devices of the ancient ligious connections; as well as human rela- world. Later, Charles Dupuis (1794) stud- tionships regarding the scientific studies of ied the astronomical symbolism found in astronomy, astrophysics, space sciences, religions, and Sir Norman Lockyer (1894) atmospheric science, and planetary sci- measured alignments of ancient structures, ence. Included is the study of the history such as the Egyptian pyramids, to celestial and evolution of all of these and more bodies. within regions, cultures, and sub-groups. A Scientific meetings focused on cultural formal definition of cultural astronomy astronomy were held with some regularity, was put forth by Nicholas Campion (1997): Journal of Astronomy in Culture 1(1), 2016, pp. 1-7 Copyright © International Society for Archaeoastronomy and Astronomy in Culture 2 Table 1. “Oxford Conferences” sponsored by ISAAC Year Theme Location 1981 Archaeoastronomy United Kingdom 1986 World Archaeoastronomy Mexico 1990 Archaeoastronomy in the 1990s Scotland 1993 Astronomical Traditions in Past Cultures Bulgaria 1996 Conversations Across Space and Time USA 1999 Astronomy and Cultural Diversity Spain 2004 Viewing the Sky Through Past and Present Cultures USA 2007 Astronomy and Cosmology in Folk Traditions and Heritage Lithuania 2010 Archaeoastronomy and Ethnoastronomy Building a Bridge Peru 2014 Astronomy, Indigenous Knowledge, and Interpretation South Africa starting in 1981 with an inaugural confer- “New World” divide. Monuments with as- ence on archaeoastronomy held at Oxford tronomical symbolism and alignments are University. Since then, an “Oxford” con- found across the continent, such as Great ference sponsored by the International So- Zimbabwe, Namorotunga in Kenya, and ciety for Archaeoastronomy and Astron- the pyramids of Egypt (Bent and Swan omy in Culture (ISAAC) has been held 1892; Doyle 1997; Robbins and Lynch every few years at different locations 1983). But there are also studies of the around the world (Table 1). The confer- large number of indigenous peoples with ences advance the field by creating a cadre living traditions throughout Africa (Ben- of scholars that contribute articles, provide nett 1899; Ruggles 1987; Snedgar 1997; a peer review network, and establish jour- Turton and Ruggles 1978). Connected to nals. this division was the methodological issue At the early Oxford meetings, partici- of statistical approaches versus ethno- pants debated assumptions, data collection graphic approaches. Since we have few or methods, and analysis techniques. These no records from the people who con- approaches seemed to be divided into two structed many astronomically aligned camps that focused on the differences of monuments and megaliths across Europe, studying archaeoastronomy in two differ- researchers studying these structures de- ent global regions: “Old World” and “New pend upon amassing statistics to show re- World.” Originally put forth by Anthony gional patterns. The larger the dataset, the Aveni (1989), Old World archaeoastron- more robust the statistics and, hence, the omy focused on the study of astronomical greater the evidence of intentionality. In alignments in ancient monuments and contrast, researchers working with living megaliths (mainly in Europe) and was cultures tend to focus on one group of peo- heavily reliant on the archaeological rec- ple which they study deeply rather than ord and statistical analyses of the sites. New broadly (Aveni 2003; Ruggles 2011); thus World archaeoastronomy was focused on with living cultures, astronomical living indigenous cultures in the Americas, knowledge is established through directly relying heavily on historical and ethno- questioning people. graphic records, as well as anthropological Debates ensued about which of these studies. A subset of the latter approach two approaches is more “scientific” evolved into what we call ethnoastronomy. and/or more rigorous. Further arguments The case of Africa, however, does not ensued about whether or not having strong fit comfortably within the “Old World” vs statistical results was evidence enough to Holbrook, J. 3 prove the intentionality of celestial align- Africa, and it fostered collaborations be- ments without having supporting evidence tween researchers within South Africa. from artifacts, written records, or religious artifacts (Aveni 2006a, 2006b; Schaefer Advancing Cultural Astronomy in 2006a, 2006b). South Africa Oxford X, held at the South African Cultural astronomy in South Africa en- Astronomical Observatory in Cape Town compasses a range of projects, from the in 2014, was the first Oxford conference history of astronomy and the study of hosted in Africa. Titled “Astronomy, In- South African astronomers, to archaeol- digenous Knowledge, and Interpretation” ogy, folklore, art history, and interdiscipli- the conference sought to push the bounda- nary pursuits such as gender and indige- ries of how statistical and other data are in- nous studies. Modern astronomy and as- terpreted in cultural astronomy. Although trophysics in South Africa began with the this was the first “Oxford” meeting held in establishment of the South African Astro- Africa, two related conferences were held nomical Observatory (originally the Royal in South Africa over the previous decade: Observatory of the Cape of Good Hope) in the African Astronomical History Symposium 1820. The history of the South African As- Symposium in Cape Town, 2005 and the Re- tronomical Observatory has been studied emergence of Astronomy in Africa conference at in some detail, but this is not the case with the Cradle of Man, 2012 (Du Plesis and Boyden Observatory near Bloemfontein Masilela 2013; Glass 2005). (established by Harvard University in In previous Oxford conferences, dis- 1927) and other observatories across South cussions emerged about the problems Africa (Gill 1913; Jarrett 1971; Laney raised when interpreting celestial align- 1996a, 1996b; Warner 1995, 2008). Stud- ments at archaeological sites without con- ies of indigenous South African astronomy ducting background research on the his- include broad overviews and compiling in- tory, culture, and beliefs of the people that formation found in historical records and built the site. This raised concerns about early ethnographies, such as the Bleek and how we project the way we think today Lloyd Collection (Alcock 2014; Bergland back onto ancient cultures and onto other 1976; Bleek and Lloyd 2001, 2007; Breutz cultures; about over-interpreting existing 1969; Snedgar 1997, 1998). Very little re- data; and about not considering the mate- search is being done on the indigenous as- rial remains associated with the site. When tronomical knowledge of past and present faced with these issues, the cultural astron- South African cultures (Holbrook and omy community responded by promoting Prada-Samper n.d.). To advance cultural collaborations with archaeologists, histori- astronomy in South Africa, the Oxford X ans, anthropologists, and others to conference introduced South Africans to strengthen the rigour of interpreting their archaeoastronomical techniques

Load more