Provide some examples of pseudoarchaeology. What is pseudoarchaeology and what are the reasons for its appearance and popularity? Pseudoarchaeology likely arose from nationalistic archaeology that was developed in Europe during the late nineteenth century, and shares many of its traits. Similarly, pseudoarchaeology omits facts, can be used to claim identity (Dzino 2012 p.180) or can be used to perpetuate a worldview (Derricourt, 2012). However, unlike nationalistic archaeology, pseudoarchaeology does not have a scientific method (Fagan and Feder 2006 p.727, Flemming 2006 p.50). Due to this, it has the ability to appeal to a wider audience than archaeology by making definitive and sweeping statements about the past, with a satisfying beginning, …show more content…
As aforementioned, the appearance of pseudoarchaeology may have arisen out of the nationalist dogma of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when archaeology was used to construct national identities and give various groups legitimacy (Dzino 2012 p.180). This can be identified throughout Europe, including the construction of Bosnian identity. At the museum complex at Sarajevo, which opened in 1913, there is no evidence of the 400 years of Ottoman rule over the area. This history was omitted to distance the newly established Austro-Hungarian rule from the Turks (Dzino 2012 p.182). Furthermore, Nazi Germany also adopted archaeology for political gain as well as for ideological gain. In 1941, archaeologist Hans Reinerth and his colleagues went on an expedition to Greece, and claimed to have found new evidence to show that there was Indogermanic migration to Greece during the Neolithic period (Arnold 1990 p.467). This was used to serve as proof of German superiority, as ‘advanced’ civilisation radiated out of the Mediterranean - not Northern Europe (Ibid). These examples aren’t necessarily true of pseudoarchaeology, as they are carried out by experts and contain some semblance of truth. However, the omission and distortion of facts (to pursue a articular purpose) is shared by …show more content…
He was immediately met with the rejection of experts, from both archaeology and geology. However, despite his wild claims, the pyramids were adopted by the Bosniak community (Ibid p.184). According to Dzino (2012) this gave the community the chance to make financial gain, and also provided a ‘symbolic’ site to rally around after the destructive Bosnian War. However, no support came from the Serbs or the Croats (Dzino p.184). This modern case (despite its failings) is a prime example of the transformation of nationalistic archaeology to pseudoarchaeology, and illustrates its appeal to bring together groups of
The Iliad alone would never have been a reliable source without archaeological evidence to verify the actuality of a Trojan war. Therefore archaeologists have been working on the site known as hissarlik since the 1800’s to uncover truths about the myth. Frank Calv...
Heinrich Schliemann’s archaeological break throughs on the “Tell of Hissarlik” provided a substantial awareness of the civilizations of the Bronze ages1 and hence our understanding of its relationship to Homeric Troy. Many aspects of the Historicity of Homeric Troy include the existence of the Trojan War, the accuracy of Homers Iliad and contributions of Schliemann and other Archaeologist.
The Minoan archaeology is one which was surrounded by numerous controversies and this can be considered to be incomplete without the overall understanding of Sir Arthur Evans. The Minoan archaeology on its own has been present for several years however a true understanding of the culture and the culture was brought to life due to the efforts by Sir Arthur Evans. Heinrich Schliemann on the other hand was focused on the Mycenaean culture. Both these scholars were known to make a number of alterations to the artifacts, however for very different reasons and rationale. The main aim of this paper is to discuss their position in each culture and to discuss the possible rationale that these individuals had for making the alterations.
Hayley Ryan Anthropology 215 Archaeological Book Analysis February 7th, 2017 Bridge of Birds There is a great art that can be found in being able to describe the world of an ancient civilization. Especially in one where large man made walls form because of the creases of a sleeping dragon’s back, or that the layout of the fields and streams of a small village create the image of a galloping unicorn when looked from up above. Yet, this is Imperial China, or as Barry Hughhart writes in his Novel Bridge of Birds, “an Ancient China that Never Was” (Hughhart 1984). This novel explores the history and the world of Ancient China, and the tales of the people who have walked across the land.
Through examining these texts, it is evident that the advantages historians have when drawing on evidence such as this is that they can easily reveal certain social and cultural values of the society from which the authors came from, just as easily as it shows social and cultural values of the society of which it was written about. The limitations for historians when collecting written evidence is that some key features of the complex civilizations written about were often left out or could be easily misinterpreted or
In order to legitimise a regime or cause, traditions may be constructed around historical or mythological events, people or symbols that reinforce the image required to focus people’s conception of the past. People can be encouraged to invent a cohesive view of their shared ‘traditions’ by what could be called cherry picking bits of history.
Evolution can be seen throughout all aspects of life, but for each aspect evolution does not occur in the same process. In his article entitled “Natural Selection, Scale, and Cultural Evolution,” Dunnell emphasizes and explains why evolution has made such a small impact on archaeology. Cultural evolution and biological evolution are not the same. Biological evolution uses theoretical propositions that explain the mechanisms of biological adaptation and evolution. The laws of cultural evolution “are not theoretical propositions but rather empirical generalizations” (Dunnell, 1996: 25). Cultural evolution does not explain the differences among the occurrences cultural phenomena. Dunnell’s main goal is to effectively formulate ways to integrate evolutionary characteristics and anthropological theory (Dunnell, 1996).
John Lewis Gaddis, in his book, The Landscape of History, generates a strong argument for the historical method by bringing together the multiple standpoints in viewing history and the sciences. The issue of objective truth in history is addressed throughout Gaddis’s work. In general, historians learn to select the various events that they believe to be valid. Historians must face the fact that there is an “accurate” interpretation of the past ceases to exist because interpretation itself is based on the experience of the historian, in which people cannot observe directly (Gaddis 10). Historians can only view the past in a limited perspective, which generates subjectivity and bias, and claiming a piece of history to be “objective” is simplistic. Seeing the world in a multidimensiona...
In modern days, scientific discourse between ‘normal’ and ‘revolutionary’ scientists has raised questions about what they should or shouldn 't give proper attention and further study. One example of this, is the orthodox narrative of modern human history shared by geologists and archaeologists around the world, which tells us that the first technologically advanced human civilizations started in Mesopotamia around 3,000-5,000 BC. However, a series of evidence brought forth by two science skeptics and scientists suggest that the current narrative of our history could be inaccurate. They argue that it’s possible that a lost, technologically advanced ancient civilization mapped and explored the globe with great accuracy millennia before orthodox human history tells. From this debate arises a question: Should scientists focus exclusively on driving the current paradigm to its limits and not bother challenging it, even if other theories and scientific evidence defy the paradigm?
The Truth Behind: Atlantis Documentary focuses on both supporting and debunking the existence of Atlantis at either the Bahamas, Crete, Knossos, or Thera/Santorini. Throughout this paper I will be deliberating how archeology works at these stated sites, how archeology impacts society as a whole in the context of Atlantis in regards to the modern day fascination and obsession with this seeming mystery, and how archaeological knowledge is acquired and conveyed at the site in order to substantiate certain theories about the past location or Atlantis. Analyzing all of these facets will allow me to think critically about archeology and evidently the archaeological concepts we’ve discussed throughout the course. Atlantis, within this movie, demonstrates
The patterns of living that the world witnesses today are greatly influenced by history. This is because of the fact that history plays an immense role in forming one’s future; the abundant interactions socially, economically, politically, result in repercussions that can hardly be unraveled. However, this does not in anyway mean that one cannot trace today’s state of affairs back to its roots. Tracing today’s occurrences back to their origin is possible due to the fact that the agents’ (nations) origins are known.
of ‘Biblical Archaeology’ and saw it as a means of establishing the credibility of the
Whilst there have been major criticisms of the Systems Theory, it is still occasionally applied to modern day archaeology to describe the components of culture-systems.
A discourse analysis is a qualitative research method which attempts to "explain the meaning of social phenomena" (Phillips and Hardy 2002, p. 3) through the examination of a subject and all of its related facets. A discourse analysis is systematic as well as both reflexive and interpretive (Phillips and Hardy 2002, p. 5). As Phillips and Hardy (2002, p. 6) explain, "Discourse analysis...tries to explore how the socially produced ideas and objects that populate the world were created in the first place and how they are maintained and held in place over time." That is the overall goal of this thesis in simple terms, to understand how the concept of deviant burial has been attached to specific types of burial within the field of archaeology, and to determine if the concept still holds any benefit to the
According to The Society for American Archaeology, the definition of Archaeology is, “to obtain a chronology of the past, a sequence of events and dates that, in a sense, is a backward extension of history.” The study of ancient civilizations and archaeology is rather ambiguous due to the primitive nature of the time period. With little imagery and even less textual evidence, professionals in the field must work diligently when studying their subjects. Naturally, archaeologists cannot see or communicate with those whom they are studying, so they must be extraordinarily meticulous when analyzing past cultures. This relates to all aspects of the ancient world including; foods, raw materials, artifacts, agriculture, art work and pottery. All of these elements can collectively provide new and innovative information to curious archaeologists who may wish to gain a better understanding of those who came before us. This information is equally beneficial for both historians and archaeologists who plan to compare the histories of societies from all around the world. In the world of archaeology, archaeologists strive to better explain human behavior by analyzing our past. Therefore, the study of archaeology is a key element in understanding a time before our own.