Archaeoastronomy: CAN PRODUCE SOLID ANSWERS? PRESENT CASES

[STAL]

Archaeoastronomy (also spelled Archeoastronomy) is, as the name implies, the combination of astronomical and archaeological studies.
Specifically, it covers the intersection between the two.

One aspect of this is the use of the historical record prior to the genesis of the modern astronomical discipline in order to study past astronomical events.

It also may involve the use of astronomical knowledge and extrapolation to further our understanding of the historical record.

SEE for more infos:http://www.le.ac.uk/archaeology/rug/
Clive Ruggles' Archaeology Resource is a great site for lessons, links, and hundreds of images relating to archaeoastronomy.


The subject of this topic is to examine mainly SPECIFIC CASES with Archaeoastronomy tools e.g. astronomical data recorded in ancient texts to prove the validity of these astronomical observasions and by this verify the chronological dates of these observasions.

The case here is NOT the study of solar, lunar, and stellar alignments of historical monuments. Just the study of astronomical data recorded in ancient texts.

OPEN NOW TO COMMENT ON SPECIF CASES.
PRESENT THE CASE (citing ancient text) PUT THE QUESTION and COMMENT

[Maksutov]

Thank you STAL blue and welcome to the BABB. :-k

[Eroica]

I voted Yes, but only if the archaeoastronomy is in the hands of an astronomer! :D

Archaeologists are generally so ignorant of matters astronomical that they are liable to draw conclusions that don't hold water. Egyptian chronology is a case in point. Many archaeologists were convinced that Sothic datings had finally solved the riddle of ancient Egyptian chronology, when in fact they had only turned an already muddled situation into one of complete confusion.

[Fram]

The study of ancient texts has little to do with archaeology. I mean, you can find them by archaeology, or by rummaging through abbey archives, or any other means, but the study of them is the realm of history and paleography. Wouldn't this better be called histoastronomy? Archeoastronomy would in my view be essentially non-text based (as primary object of study).

[Swift]

The study of ancient texts has little to do with archaeology. I mean, you can find them by archaeology, or by rummaging through abbey archives, or any other means, but the study of them is the realm of history and paleography. Wouldn't this better be called histoastronomy? Archeoastronomy would in my view be essentially non-text based (as primary object of study).
I took a history course back in college in about 1984 on "The History of Visual Astronomy" (astronomy up to the invention of the telescope). Even back then, archeoastronomy was a serious field. There seemed to be two major focuses, finding astronomically significant geometries in ancient structures and using archeological investigations to discovery ancient astronomical data (as Fram is describing above). To my un-expert opinion, there has been good work done on both, though I have not kept up with the field.

Welcome to the board STAL, though I'm not sure what your question is.

[Nereid]

Certainly an interesting field of study, and - in principle - one where the scientific method (which one?) could be (and likely has been?) applied.

My vote was 'I Don't Know', because a) what's 'reliable'? and b) I know too little about the field.

One thing I'm curious about - are there any reliable records of intense meteor storms (think of the Leonids, 1833, only more intense), in written records from 2k years, or more, ago?

[eburacum45]

I am more than a little skeptical about some of the rock carvings supposedly depicting stars; they always look like dots to me.
http://www.megaliths.co.uk/glasghu.htm

Similarly I am not convinced by alignments of antiquities which supposedly reproduce (for instance) the constellation Orion, as at Thornborough near where I live; other sites supposedly reproduce this asterism, and other asterisms, in various places round the World, but I am not convinced. Particularly unconvincing is the alignment of the Pyramids to reflect the stars; I-don't-think-so.

On the other hand the science of astronomy was very well advanced in early historical times, in Mesopotamia and Egypt, as I understand it; by the time of the Farnese atlas
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~gtosiris/page11-8a.html
it was very sophisticated. The Mayans too were very clever at astronomical calendar creation.

So it is entirely possible that prehistoric societies had skills in astronomical matters; I just think it is very difficult to determine what those skills were. Even the alignments of stones within the various megalithic henges and so on in this country and elsewhere do not prove anything conclusive about the religious practices of the time; the stars might have been used simply as guides during the construction process (which would have taken a long tiome, long enough for astronomical events to repeat many times)

I am confused by the original post, however; if it refers to written records, that is not really archaeology.

[Psi-less]

On one of the South American archaeology mailing lists there's been quite the discussion about a **possible** correlation between Jupiter and Saturn retrogrades and the endings of K'atuns (and the subsequent raising of stelae). A paper that's been written on it seems to take it for granted that there is a correlation. As someone else posted to the list, "sounds like an attempt to add meaningful correllation where there is only co-occurrance", a very valid argument. I see no problem accepting obsrvational data where it's recorded: the passage of a comet say, or the observation of a supernova. Trying to discern the intent or use that information may have been put to by a long-dead civilization seems to me to be much murkier waters. But, hey, I'm just an armchair archaeologist! :D

Psi-less

[Monique]

I vote yes, but very guarded yes. Archeology is sometime very difficult subject. One can not measure past events in direct way. One can, however, make conservative inference from careful analysis of indirect data: tree rings, core samples, writings of times, many other.

[STAL]

I am more than a little skeptical about some of the rock carvings supposedly depicting stars; they always look like dots to me.
http://www.megaliths.co.uk/glasghu.htm

Similarly I am not convinced by alignments of antiquities which supposedly reproduce (for instance) the constellation Orion, as at Thornborough near where I live; other sites supposedly reproduce this asterism, and other asterisms, in various places round the World, but I am not convinced. Particularly unconvincing is the alignment of the Pyramids to reflect the stars; I-don't-think-so.

Certainly, I am not convinced too about the so-called "alignments" -- too much speculation about them. Instead, antiquities like Pyramids is far more convincing by its very structure about possible (but not proved yet) hi-tech of the ancient peoples.


I am confused by the original post, however; if it refers to written records, that is not really archaeology.

Let me clarify:
I am focusing on the texts (basicaly ancient Greek texts, like HOMER, ISIODOS etc). In these, there are a lot of specific astronomical data recorded.
Are they valid?
That means that since the earth horizon is always there, would an astronomer verify that an observasion about a star (initially taking as given that the ancient record of observation is true not imaginery) happened at one particular date (or several concrete dates).

If an astronomer verify that record, at least one archaeological discovery will be accoblished by astronomical science means:

What discovery?
Namely that: Someone in the very ancient past was there at a spesific geografical site and OBSERVED the astronomical Event at a concrete date /or altenative dates.

This information passed in the ancient Greek texts. Was the writer the observer? Initially, this does not really matter. What is matter from astronomical perspective is to verify the observation of the recorded astronomical Event and specify the probable date or dates that the Event occured.

This certainly does not prove much, but it is a solid indication that: at least a person was THERE at that PARTICULAR time and OBSERVED the event.

This may push the timeline of pre-histroy much more beyont the limit of 10.000 bc and open solid perspectives for archaeological research.

I dont know if astronomers follow this forum but I have several cases from ancient Greek texts that needs astronomical verification.
I suppose that some of you with that interest would present some cases too...

[STAL]

The study of ancient texts has little to do with archaeology. I mean, you can find them by archaeology, or by rummaging through abbey archives, or any other means, but the study of them is the realm of history and paleography. Wouldn't this better be called histoastronomy? Archeoastronomy would in my view be essentially non-text based (as primary object of study).
I took a history course back in college in about 1984 on "The History of Visual Astronomy" (astronomy up to the invention of the telescope). Even back then, archeoastronomy was a serious field. There seemed to be two major focuses, finding astronomically significant geometries in ancient structures and using archeological investigations to discovery ancient astronomical data (as Fram is describing above). To my un-expert opinion, there has been good work done on both, though I have not kept up with the field.

Welcome to the board STAL, though I'm not sure what your question is.


Swift,
I agree with your comment on FRAM's opinion.
The study of ancient texts is a MUST in archaeology. And when I talk about ancient texts I prefer to narrow the focus on ancient greek texts - not because I underestimate the significance of other ancient texts, for practical reasons. These texts are -at least - guides for archaeological discoveries.

Anyway, the question was only about recorded astronomical events in ancient Greek texts. Would be verified by current astronomical tools or not?

[Fram]

No, the study of texts as a means to find archaeological sites is of course a possibility. But the study of ancient texts to get astronomical information is not archaeology but history (or if you prefer histoastronomy).
But I have a feeling that this will only be a minor point we disagree on, as I see bigger issues looming at the horizon.
And I don't see how you get your opinion out of Swift's reply, which makes me wonder about the way you interpret those ancient Greek texts as well. Oh well, I'll wait until you give some examples of the things you are talking about (pushing the limit of the prehistory beyond 10.000 BC?).

[STAL]

see correction bellow

[STAL]

Thank you Fram for your reply.

As you pointed out "this will only be a minor point we disagree on".
Anyway, I may or may not correctly get my opinion out of Swift's reply. Happens all the time writing in rush in these fora.

But let me tell you that the issue is not about the way I interpret those ancient Greek texts. In fact, the interpretation is not really the case.
Not because I can easily read and understand the ancient Greek text in the original language since Greek is my native language.
Not because there are scientifically valid English translations of ancient Greek text that anyone would read (see Collections at the Perseus Project, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/).
So the question is hardly about the interpretation of the texts. We don't care about interpretation but narrow our search only to the texts providing answers for two issues:
Firstly, does the ancient text provide the necessary terms of references sufficient to do the astronomical search or not?
Secondly, given the necessary terms, does this recorded Event in the text happens or not and if yes when?

There is not so big deal, just simple calculations using astronomical tools.

As for “pushing the limit of the prehistory beyond 10.000 BC” --- let’s not talk about this. It is a NOT proved opinion of mine which is not worth to discuss about.

[Fram]

I don't doubt you can read and understand the texts. That doesn't eliminate the need for interpretation. But I'll pass that as well for now.
Are there any cases you want to discuss specifically, or are you waiting until someone else comes along and make a case? I fear you may be waiting a long time if that's the case, and that would make this thread rather pointless.

[Sticks]

Item 1)
Stan I find it hard on the eye to read your posts, as they are in blue and in bold on a blue grey background. Please can you post in straight forward text, like this is in, as this improves readability.

Item 2)
Some of your points are covered in the book, "God's in the Sky" by Dr Allan Chapman. (See Amazon to see if you can get a copy)

[STAL]

Are there any cases you want to discuss specifically, or are you waiting until someone else comes along and make a case? I fear you may be waiting a long time if that's the case, and that would make this thread rather pointless.


Fram,
I suppose you are right about waiting a long time...
For a start I will post some very easy cases for astronomical checking of recorded event. I will try to identify the english translation of the ancient Greek text in foreign universities collections so there will be no problem in that respect (if this is a case of dispute).

Anyway, I was waiting hoping to appear in the forum an expert either in the field of astronomy or arhaeoastronomy.

[Fram]

I think once you ask concrete questions or give concrete examples, the experts will be more tha willing to answer, along with the amateurs like me. But you can hardly expect people to proclaim "allright, I'm here, you can start".
And thanks for using black instead of blue.

[STAL]

To initiate the presentation of cases by participants let me start with a more or less easy case.

In this case the ancient text provide the necessary terms of references sufficient to do the astronomical search so may proceed to check if the recorded event happens or not and if yes when.

Here it is a part of Orpheus Hymn “to Apollo»:

In ancient Greek:

μίξας χειμώνος θέρεος τ' ίσον αμφοτέροισιν (35)

In English:


“mixed in equal parts advance winter and summer in alternate”


This part refers to the knowledge by ancient peoples the astronomical event of season equinox of winter and summer.

This is a unique event, which occurred, in particular date every time.

Would someone calculate the dates that this event occurred in ancient times (let say before 1000 BC)?

[STAL]

It seems that nobody can contribute in this calculation ...

I had put this querry in other fora too, so when I got a contribution I will come back to present it.

Anyway, I think that one must be more familiar with astronomy ( or the relevant software in the internet) to contribute to such a querry. I am afraid I am not too -- for that reason I put such question in this forum.

Certainly, such a specific question moves beyont an opinion, chat based on articles or books etc, etc.

Hope to come back soon with some result...

[Fram]

I just don't understand the question. Do you want the dates of the winter and summer equinox in ancient Greece? For every year or what? Or do you have some special kind of equinox in mind? I just don't get it...

[STAL]

I just don't understand the question. Do you want the dates of the winter and summer equinox in ancient Greece? For every year or what? Or do you have some special kind of equinox in mind? I just don't get it...

Fram hi!

All winter-summer equinox are special astronomical events.
They happens several times during millenia.
There were only few winter-summer equinox BEFORE 1000 BC.

So since this ancient text refers to such a winter-summer equinox, an astronomer would easily identify when such a case happened during ancient age.

The arhaeoastronomic reasoning is quite simple in this particular case: there must be obesrvers at that particular time to record this knowlege, which reach us through this specific Hymn.

Certainly, this winter-summer equinox must observed at least twice by people in order to record as a special event (and it pre-supposed some knowlege of maths, astronomy, etc).

I say search the period before 1000BC since the date of the text is around 750 BC.

So, when such an event happened in ancient times?

[Eroica]

What do you mean by a "winter-summer equinox"?

Equinoxes occur, by definition, about midway between the summer and winter solstices. So how can an equinox ever take place in summer or winter?

Are you referring to the calendar? A 365-day calendar would fall out of step with the tropical year (which governs the seasons), but the solstices would still mark midsummer and midwinter, even though they might occur in March or September.

What type of calendar did the ancient Greeks use? Lunar? Solar?

Finally, you are asking us to take it on faith that "mixed in equal parts advance winter and summer in alternate" is referring to a special and specific astronomical event. To me it sounds like a poetic way of saying, "the seasons follow one another in equal measure".

But, of course, the seasons are of unequal duration! Could the hymn be referring to a period of time when the seasons were of equal duration? Or does it simply date from a time when people hadn't yet noticed that the seasons are of unequal duration?

In about 4102 BC the autumnal equinox would have occurred when the Earth was at perihelion. I think that would make the two halves of the year ("summer" and "winter") of equal duration. :-k

Determination of the Earth's Orbital Parameters (http://aom.giss.nasa.gov/srorbpar.html)

[STAL]

Eroica,
Thank you for your reply and especially for the very helpful url.

Certainly, the Hymn is referring to a period of time when the winter and summer were of equal duration.
In this respect, it is referring to a special and specific astronomical event, which occurs at particular dates. (I will come back to this reference later).

The winter and summer are of equal duration under specific circumstances of earth's orbital parameters. You offer 4102 BC as such particular case - or I understand wrongly?
I got also another date from other forum: 11.809 BC. At this particular date the winter and summer were of equal duration. The prior date of such an event was 3.973 BC (which is close to yours 4102 BC).

If this astronomical calculation for the winter and summer equal duration before 1000 BC is correct, then the entire job that an astronomer from his standpoint has to do is done.

What an astronomer asks is that the ancient text must provide the necessary terms of reference to do his search. He can accept or not these terms of reference as sufficient or not.

The real meaning of the Hymn is not astronomer's problem. This is a problem for an expert in ancient Greek text and he must provide the answer to the astronomer.
Besides, a relevant expert in ancient Greek texts should identify the "when" and "who" wrote the ancient text.

For that reason archaeoastronomy as a scientific field is “collaboration” among several sciences.

You raised some justified questions about the “meaning” of the Hymn.
Again, from astronomical standpoint are not critical if they provide the necessary terms of reference to do the search.
But from archaeological and ancient linguistic standpoints is crucial.
I totally rest on expert knowledge to this respect, as I totally rest on astronomical calculation that an expert or experienced person provide as far as concerned the particular search (e.g. the dates: 4102 BC or 3.973 BC and 11.809 BC).

So, to my knowledge, there is a general agreement among experts in ancient Greek texts that the Hymn makes such a reference to the equal duration of summer and winter.
Now, why the ancient people decide that is worth to record that particular event, we can only speculate but they must think that it is worth to record it, as the very existence of the text (which is an Hymn to Apollo – the God of Sun) reveals.
What we know about the “when” & “who” wrote the Hymn. Experts acknowledge that the writer (the poet Orpheus) lived several generations before the Trojan War (1450 BC) so the astronomical search for the winter and summer equal duration should be earlier of this date.

Finally, if we all agree about the dates of this astronomical event (recorded in ancient Greek text), then a strong indication exist that at this particular time (let’s say: 11.809 BC) an ancient people observed the astronomical event (even they observed it several times in the past), it was worth for them to record it and they, certainly, has the necessary level of civilization to clarify the event.

I think it is a simple case, which proves that we can date past event if we got in ancient texts enough information to do astronomical search.

[STAL]

This a chart of the winter-summer equal calculation I found.

[Fram]

So, to my knowledge, there is a general agreement among experts in ancient Greek texts that the Hymn makes such a reference to the equal duration of summer and winter.
Now, why the ancient people decide that is worth to record that particular event, we can only speculate but they must think that it is worth to record it, as the very existence of the text (which is an Hymn to Apollo – the God of Sun) reveals.
What we know about the “when” & “who” wrote the Hymn. Experts acknowledge that the writer (the poet Orpheus) lived several generations before the Trojan War (1450 BC) so the astronomical search for the winter and summer equal duration should be earlier of this date.



Hold it! What 'expert' claims that this is truly a Hymn written by Orpheus? All hymns and peotry attributed in ancient times to Orpheus is supposed to be (by experts) to be (much) later work. You are not only assuming that Orpheus is a real person, but that his work has survived as well.
If these are the same 'experts' that have given you the interpretation of the poem, then I wouldn't give any value to it.

Basically, when a poem says that winter and summer have the same length, you interpret it as an absolute, and you interpret that absolute as necessary depicting a real event. Two big assumptions, and I'm not willing to make them.

[STAL]

Fram Hi! – nice to hear again from you, your comments are always stimulate our discussion.

Perhaps I was not so clear in my comment above. Let me say it again:

"What an astronomer asks is that the ancient text must provide the necessary terms of reference to do his search. He can accept or not these terms of reference as sufficient or not.

The real meaning of the Hymn is not astronomer's problem. This is a problem for an expert in ancient Greek text and he must provide the answer to the astronomer."

That's all as far as what the astronomer needs to do the search.

Well again it’s about interpretation -- that means that the discussion is about archaeology not astronomy. Big assumptions. – Ok. Fair enough. I share your opinion too... So, for the sake of discussion let me clarify some points.

As you recall I pointed out:

“again, from astronomical standpoint are not critical if they provide the necessary terms of reference to do the search. But from archaeological and ancient linguistic standpoints is crucial. I totally rest on expert knowledge to this respect”

So I am initially skeptical and, further on, I am very willing to change my opinion based on new evidence on interpretation.

Who may call “experts”? As with the field of astronomy, we call experts basically all persons that have academic credentials in ancient Greek Linguistics or Archaeology– namely university professors etc. By this choice I don’t want to underestimate the research work of other individuals, but to rest upon the so-called "widely recognized" academics of the field.

Hold it! What 'expert' claims that this is truly a Hymn written by Orpheus? All hymns and poetry attributed in ancient times to Orpheus is supposed to be (by experts) to be (much) later work. You are not only assuming that Orpheus is a real person, but that his work has survived as well.

You are skeptical about the existence of Orpheus and, moreover, if the hymns and poetry attributed in ancient times to Orpheus would be a much later work. So, I am skeptical too – but my opinion does NOT matter about this particular issue. Let the experts find out what really is the case. I was just taking a prevailing opinion in academia (which, to my knowledge, is not seriously opposed by some experts) concerning the date of text and the meaning of the text. If both are solid, then I am willing to accept the significance of any chronology made by astronomical calculation based on that. That’s all.

For me its just the same if a date points 500 AC or 1000 BC or to 11.000 BC or to 20.000 BC and make whatever impact to accepted pre-historical or historical data. The only case that matter for me is that all finding must be solid and proved.
My interest in the field of archeoastronomy totally rest on the premise the “above us” is an “endurable clock” which, given some necessary data, the astronomical tools can produce some results and open up research prospects.

So, bottom line, if the experts are correct (verified data) about the ancient Greek text, are we willing to accept the astronomical findings about the dates or not just because they seem “usual for our belief system”? The question is certainly rhetoric – no need for a reply in this.

[Fram]

So you haven't replied to either point I made.

What experts think Orpheus really existed and this text is really by him? Any names, books, sources, weblinks, whatever?

And what experts think that you have to take this poem literally (or at least these two lines, and not the other ones), and that it depicts a true event? Again, Any names, books, sources, weblinks, whatever?

After you have established those, perhaps we can make the efoort to see what it can refer to. Now all we are doing is jumping to conclusions based on extremely flimsy material.

[STAL]

So Fram,
You want to turn this discussion from astronomy to archaeological sources...
No problem at all -- I would present an endless list of sources about the subject so you verify, reading all these, the real translation of ancient Greek text and the date that this text appear, so you can be sure if this hymn describe an observation or some how the knowledge of such an event.
Again you missed the point:
Providing that he got the necessary terms of reference for his search is the work of an astronomer to verify archeological data?
We are willing to accept the astronomical findings – or divert the issue under astronomical examination on the validity of archaeological sources?

[Fram]

So Fram,
You want to turn this discussion from astronomy to archaeological sources...
No problem at all -- I would present an endless list of sources about the subject so you verify, reading all these, the real translation of ancient Greek text and the date that this text appear, so you can be sure if this hymn describe an observation or some how the knowledge of such an event.
Again you missed the point:
Providing that he got the necessary terms of reference for his search is the work of an astronomer to verify archeological data?
We are willing to accept the astronomical findings – or divert the issue under astronomical examination on the validity of archaeological sources?

Yes, I wan tto turn this discussion, for a couple of reasons.
First of all, you have shown that you don't know the difference between archaeology, history, and literatury studies. The example you give (and the whole thread) has almost nothing to do with archaeology (texts can be found and perhaps dated by archaeology, but there it ends).
Second, I don't trust you on this. Indeed, when the historians and literature scientists have done their job, the astronomers can check if their is some astronomical relevance to the text and the interpretation. But what you claim as the background, dating and interpretation of this text, is far removed from what I have learned about Greek mythology and Greek poetry, and even farther removed from the usual interpretation of such hymns.
It looks to me as if your source is some woowoo site or author, comparable to Sitchin.

So please do give a substantial part of your 'endless' list of sources. If those convince me (or someone else here), we can go a step further. Until then, you have no case, only a vivid imagination.

From your own link Perseus (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/), a quote
Considering the slight acquaintance which the ancients evidently possessed with these works, it is somewhat surprising that certain extant poeins, which bear the name of Orpheus, should have been generally regarded by scholars, until a very recent period, as genuine, that is, as works more ancient than the Homeric poems, if not the productions of Orpheus himself. It is not worth while to repeat here the history of the controversy, which will be found in Bernhard and the other historians of Greek literature. The result is that it is now fully established that the bulkof these poems are the forgeries of Christian grammarians and philosophers of the Alexandrian school; but that along the fragments, which form apart of the collection,are some genuine remains of that Orphic poetry which was known to Plato, and which must be assigned to the period of Onomacritus, orperhaps a little earlier.
Could it be that your knowledge of ancient Greek literature, or your sources, are a bit outdated?

[POLARIS09876]

It seems that Fram is that kind of forum's guys who spend time to hassle just to bypass the question and blow up any attempt for discussion.

It seems that he is that kind of people who "when someone points the finger to the Moon, they comment ... on the finger"!!

Anyway, let me now contribute for the real interested fellows this interview I have just found at:
http://archaeology.about.com/cs/archaeoastronomy/a/dearborn.htm

[Fram]

Which of my comments in this thread was impertinent and/or wrong?

Oh, and welcome! Do you have the right or the permission to reprint this interview here, or is this a breach of copyright? (Yep, I'm pointing at the finger here, and not at the moon).
Regarding the interview: I guess you'll notice that his definition of Archeoastronomy does not cover the study of texts of Greek poets.

[STAL]

Hello!!
After some time being professionally quite busy doing academic research, I am back.
It seems nothing really happened here in meantime. The core issue (recorded astronomical events in ancient Greek texts) seems too poor to attract any further attention especially of some people relevant with astronomical observations or with archeo-astronomy.

So, the matter is still focus on the question: can we base an astronomical search on ancient texts because of what they say. Let me clarify some issues:

About “the difference between archaeology, history, and literatury studies” what would I say? You make this issue out of your initial opinion about terminology: “The study of ancient texts has little to do with archaeology. I mean, you can find them by archaeology, or by rummaging through abbey archives, or any other means, but the study of them is the realm of history and paleography. Wouldn't this better be called histoastronomy? Archeoastronomy would in my view be essentially non-text based (as primary object of study)”. I just repeat my comment on this: ancient texts (as recorded events & places) provide the primary motive for archaeological search. This how much clear I could put it. As far as I am concerned I have no intention to come back on the so called issue of "distinction of academic fields".

Turning to the issue of archaeological sources: I am still considering this question out of focus in this topic and certainly it is not worth to spent time for replying on this just to convince someone who, nevertheless, has the right of holding his own opinion. Especially, when I found the opinion: “when the historians and literature scientists have done their job, the astronomers can check if there is some astronomical relevance to the text and the interpretation” totally misleading in the context of this topic. Anyway, of course, I will come back giving my final reply in details on the issue "what experts think that you have to take this poem literally (or at least these two lines, and not the other ones), and that it depicts a true event".

In a more general issue you raised (= “texts can be found and perhaps dated by archaeology, but there it ends”) let me now just point out that “some” academics (James Diggle, University of Cambridge and John Underhill, University of Edinburgh) … do not agree on the view that “there it ends”. So, there is some news, as an example case, on this very issue :

The location of Greek hero Odysseus’ homeland - the island of Ithaca described in the poet Homer’s Odyssey - is a mystery that has baffled scholars for nearly 3,000 years particularly because Homer's descriptions bear little resemblance to the modern island called Ithaki. Now this ancient enigma has been solved with the help of World Wind, NASA’s 3D planetary visualisation tool. This radical solution to the mystery of ancient Ithaca ’s location was discovered by sifting through the Odyssey and following a similar detective trail of literary, scientific and archaeological clues. The remarkable conclusion is that researchers over the centuries have been looking for ancient Ithaca in the wrong place. The site of Homer's Ithaca has been identified by Robert Bittlestone, Chairman of the UK management consultancy Metapraxis, whose quest was motivated by combining his company's experience in the visualisation of complex data with a lifelong interest in Greece and the classics. He has solved the problem with the help of James Diggle, Professor of Greek and Latin at Cambridge University, and John Underhill, Professor of Geology at Edinburgh University. As Robert Bittlestone comments: "I and my co-authors have had to analyse a mass of data including literary, geological and archaeological clues, combined with advanced satellite imagery, and it would have been impossible to identify and master the hidden meanings in this data without these computer-based capabilities".

So, the ancient texts … seems to be “worth” for some discoveries and, at least, some academics … “dare” to work with those without the pretext of … having translation and other kind of problems.

Of course, anyone would still asks that was Homer a historical person, are the event existed, was Odysseus existed, and so on... But whatever question asks, the search for Homer's Ithaca - not some other text's Ithaca - seems to be enough motivation for some academics to do the interdisciplinary research.

Commenting on the book “Odysseus Unbound: The Search for Homer's Ithaca”, Professor Tjeerd van Andel, Honorary Professor in Earth History, Quaternary Science and Geo-archaeology, University of Cambridge says: ‘This curious, spellbinding book is a masterpiece of writing for the general public. The geological argument in particular is first-class and leaves me in no doubt about the possibility of the theory being proposed.’ But also Professor Gregory Nagy, Francis Jones Professor of Classical Greek Literature, Harvard University and Director of the Center for Hellenic Studies, Washington DC acknowledges: ‘This book is a gem. Its reconstruction of prehistoric Ithaca has a convincingly Homeric ‘look and feel’ to it. Reading the Odyssey is unlikely ever to be the same again.’

To any reasonable people, the ancient texts would (and I say just “would”) provide the base for interdisciplinary research to clarify particular archaeological issues. I suppose that Homer's Ithaca example is not questionable as a matter for interdisciplinary research.

[Fram]

A few things: the fact that nothing much has happened in the meantime may be because some questions were asked to you, and you have not responded to them. You can look them up in my last post to you, but mainly they are about your sources.

Second: you can use historical texts as a tool in archaeology, and you can use them as a tool in astronomy. You cannot use them as the primary source for archaeastronomy though (they can be secondary sources of course, just like many other things), as that is astronomy based on archaeological finds, not based on literary finds.

The rest of your post is not really relevant with regards to astronomy. You seem to use this example to make a point, but I don't think anyone has disputed that the study of ancient texts can be useful in a number of disciplines, be it vulcanology, geography, or botany.
I am still very interested in the discussion of serious examples of historical texts (or archaeological finds) that describe astronomical events, but I am not willing to accept any example that you or anyone gives without serious scrutiny of its origin, context and meaning.