The prehistory of astronomy seems to exercise a powerful attraction on many of us, as it seems to have on past generations of astronomers through the ages. The indirect questons this interest raises are at least as inetresting as the direct questions. What's prehistory? When does astonomy start? Why are there different astronomies,and what are the differences, and why? What do we include as our prehistory, and what do we exclude? Whose stories can we tell, and which do we require leave to tell, and how can we create the space for others to tell their stories? Are all "sky stories" commensurable?

The terms, and practices on "archaeoastronomy", ethnoastronomy", and "cultural astronomy" are in flux, and perhaps that is a good thing. The modes of research into the astronomies of the past, and their presentation, are not what they were in previous generations, and are certain not to remain static in the future.

Unlike the notional cat of the last podcast (11), Ratatoskr the red squirrel of this episode doesn't, as far as we know, have a place among the constellations. He does, however, have a role in Norse cosmology; see The Elder Edda: A Book of Viking Lore, tr. and ed. Andy Orchard, Penguin Classics (London: Penguin Books, 2011), p. 55 (Grímnismál 32). Ratatoskr's relative, Sciurus volans (the flying squirrel), though, did enjoy a brief spell in the heavenly meangerie; William Croswell, A Mercator Map of the Starry Heavens, Comprehending the Whole Equinoctial, and Terminated by the Polar Circles (Boston: T. Wightman, 1810). Also see John C. Barentine, Uncharted Constellations Asterisms, Single-Source and Rebrands (Cham–Heidelberg–New York–Dordrecht–London–Chichester: Springer, in associaiton with Praxis Publishing, 2016), pp. 137-139.

Some idea of what can be embraced under the term "cultrual astronomy" can be gathered from looking at the CAPjournal (=Communicating Astronomy with the Public Journal) 9 (October 2010). It is to the credit of the editors of this issue that they understand "cultural astronomy" to embrace the traditions and practices  of any culture with a relation to astronomical phenomena, including the history of modern astrophysics (the anthroplogy of this is that there is no hierarchical ranking in the treatment of these cultures).

A broad (and somewhat uncritical) list of cultrual astronomy resources can be found here.

The most recent authroitative overview of aracheoastronomy and ethnoastronomy is the Handbook of Archaeoastronomy and Ethnoastronomy, ed. Clive L.N. Ruggles (Cham–Heidelberg–New York–Dordrecht–London: Springer, 2015). Unfotunately, it lives behind a paywall.

Both Charles Piazzi Smyth, and Norman Lockyer, were very good scientists, responsible for solid contributions to astronomy. They were also pioneers in what was later called archaeoastronomy; their contributions to that field were at times criticized in their day, and have not worn well in their entirety since. Lockyer's work has fared beter than Smyth's in the retrospective origin stories of the disicpline of archaeoastronomy***

Charles Piazzi Smyth's Life and Work at the Great Pyramid, During the Months of January, February, March, and April, A.D. 1865; with a DIscussion of the Facts Ascertained, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: Edmonston and Douglas, 1867) is consultable on various platforms: vols. I, II, & III, as is Sir Norman Lockyer's Stonehenge and Other British Stone Monuments Astronomically Considered (London: Macmillan and Co., 1906).