Blurb:

From the New World, Aveni suggested that progress (albeit slow) has been made in archaeoastronomy with the development of interpretative archaeoastronomy and cultural astronomy, concluding that it will succeed better when it is fully integrated into the culture-based disciplines. Pauketat said that while parts of the Kintigh/Aveni debate still resonate today, archaeological theory has opened up to the necessity of exploring the way in which people relate to the heavens, offering new possibilities for archaeoastronomers to work with archaeologists. Back in the Old World, Belmonte told his own publishing story to show that in his opinion there is still a degree of separation between archaeoastronomers and archaeologists, yet that this is diminishing in some areas such as Mayan and landscape archaeology as well as in Egyptology, one of his specific fields of interest. Darvill concluded the forum and reminded us that the nature of the material evidence very much dictates the type of research methodology that can be applied. Drawing parallels between landscape and skyscape archaeology he called for greater integration between the two. From their very different backgrounds, these four distinguished scholars not only acknowledged the importance of skyscape but offered suggestions as to how it could be better integrated into archaeological investigations.