[Aztlan] could be a silly question

[martha noyes]

I'm not even sure it is a question, actually, but - here goes -

I think I've noticed a disinterest on the list in posts relating to  
celestial interpretations of mythological material.  I'm thinking of,  
among others, Bob Hall's recent post which, apart from some  
discussion of dog and suckle words, was pretty much left alone.

Yet Mesoamerican mythology is known to be celestially oriented and  
ethnoastronomical and archaeoastronomical studies of, for instance,  
Maya myth and archaeology are heavily associated with planets and  
stars.  That would seem to make inquiry and scholarship regarding  
celestial interpretations rather mainstream.

So I'm curious.  There doesn't seem to be a question of scholarly  
legitimacy, yet there does seem to be a lack of interest.  Can you  
tell me why?

Mahalo