Finally, Something We Can't Accuse Mel Gibson Of (a post about Mesoamerican astronomy)

Nobody has ever accused Mel Gibson of historical accuracy. There's one victory for him. Nobody has ever accused him of anthropological accuracy either. That's two victories to his credit. He's having a good day. Next thing we know nobody will accuse him of having chosen a timeless '80s hairstyle way back when, or of wisely choosing the Lethal Weapon sequels, or of his soothing way with words. Now it's time to not accuse him of appreciating Mesoamerican astronomical technology. Here's the image, and I'll explain what this has to do with anything below.

Cinema Non-Verite
On the occasion of the newly released Apocalypto, we can say that Gibson's portrayal of Mayan society, while very Jared-Diamond-esque, might leave a little to be desired.* In particular, and as the bridge for this post from Gibson to Mesoamerican astronomy, he does what I've been doing for many a year, which is to conflate Mayan and Aztec history and lore. Even more, I'm still not sure where Teotihuacan came from, and apparently the Aztecs didn't know either. So, if Gibson cannot be accused of hewing to the historical cultural record, then his sense that the Mayans were culturally regressive, as compared to the Spaniards, is akin to suggesting that the monumental, overwhelmingly impressive astronomical pursuits at Teotihuacan were, in a half-word, "meh?" No, they were not just "meh?" They were beyond belief impressive.

The Heights of Civilization
Studying the history of science and technology, and maybe more precisely social and cultural histories, usually brings with it a sense of awe, the awe from realizing that people have been pretty smart for a long time. As a poem I posted a while ago alluded to, every age lives with the belief that they live at the summit of history. In keeping with this, I included a unit on ancient science and technology in a past course on the social history of technology that sought to get away from only the Greeks and Romans**. We discussed, as well, other global accomplishments, such as those of Mesoamerican and Incan and Chinese and Assyrian cultures.

(Customary World's Fair Aside: You should see these Hanging Gardens of Babylon, and notice the irrigation screw that may have helped them exist. There's a minor debate about whether the Assyrians had Archimedes Screw long before Archimedes did. See here , for a *.pdf of an article from Technology and Culture about the debate, and here. What I like about the debate is that the Assyrian culture did not value personal ascription in the same way the Greeks did. Thus, it is far less likely that anyway would take credit for having developed an irrigation screw there. In Greece, though, where they did promote the individual genius, they would likely have sent out their P.R. people to have Archimedes on Oprah, on Letterman, on The Daily Show. So, it's not surprising we've heard of Archimedes screw, but not Sennacherib's.)

The City as Observatory
Long story short, I've long been fascinated by the architectural-astronomical combination of Teotihuacan. The overall layout of the city had astronomical significance. That is, the city itself was a technology it was an observatory in its structure and design. It was technology-as-nature, instead of technology-as-controlling-nature. The placement of several temples and the alignment of the Avenue of the Dead, it's main avenue, aligned with certain celestial bodies at certain times of the year. And patterns of light at dusk and dawn would shine straight down the right street at the right building at the right time, to signify annual milestones/holidays/sacrifices/who knows. There was an article about this in National Geographic many a year ago (March 1990), and places like this and this.

And to think, all of this text just to give me a chance to include the pictures above.

* What's great here is that I'm spinning from a minor point I heard only off-handedly about the film about historical and archeological fidelity, and I'm not even of the type who thinks quality cinema and historical accuracy have to be synonymous (they don't, because they do different, and importantly different, things), and every now and then you just have to use Gibson as the hook for a post about something else. They teach you that at blog school.

**Used to say here: "The course sought to get away from only the 'look-at-those-Roman-roads-and-viaducts and how-about-those-Greek-Ionics-and-Dorics? reviews' to discuss other global accomplishments," but Patrick got mad at me.