Tag Archives: Archaeology

Archaeology and Social Studies Education: My Final Project

Posted on by
Reply

This course focused in part on presentation of archaeology to the public, both how and why. I believe that one of the strongest benefits that the discipline of archaeology can provide to the public is through education. Archaeology makes history tangible and local, so students who learn history through archaeology are learning in a way that makes history personally relevant to them.

I chose to create a classroom unit based on this belief. My project consists of five lessons created with fourth graders from my hometown of Weston, CT in mind. The lessons teach the history of Native Americans in the Connecticut area from the first inhabitants of the area 10,000 years ago to the colonial period alongside lessons in archaeological methods. Though students would by no means gain a complete knowledge of either archaeology or American Indian history and culture from this unit, the unit was created with the goal of having each topic reinforce the other, with the result that students are interested in retaining the information they learn and continuing to learn on their own.

One of the highlights of the unit I have created is the final lesson, a mock excavation in which students form groups to carefully excavate artificial plots of land, then record data about artifacts, ecofacts, and environmental conditions, and finally build a mini-museum. As a hands-on experience, the excavation should capture students’ attention and motivate them to carefully consider what they have learned. The mock excavation, with its focus on data recording and collaboration with teammates and stakeholders, also works to eliminate stereotypes and misconceptions the general public may have about archaeology.

 

All contributors to this blog are authorized to view the unit guide and the accompanying PowerPoint presentation, both stored on Vspace. Anyone else interested in seeing the project can contact me at caclevenger@vassar.edu for permission.

The Hero’s Excavation: The Mythopoetic Archaeologist in Popular Culture

Posted on by
Reply

After reading my colleagues’ discussions of Indiana Jones and the Titanic, I thought it might be appropriate to write about the romance of archaeology in popular culture, particularly in regard to notions of heroism:

Howard Carter inspecting King Tut with an unnamed colleague (Source: Teresa Wilde's Demon of the Week)

Like Indiana Jones, many of the most famous archaeological sites are characterized by a monolithic researcher, converting the archaeologist as a singular researcher into an archetype, a singularity. Tutankhamun’s tomb had Howard Carter; Olduvai Gorge had the Leakys; and Egyptology (until the Mubarak debacle, at least) had Zahi Hawass. The archaeologist as archetype is considered the supreme authority in their area of expertise, which permits them the authorship to unveil treasures and past events (another equally valuable of capital, one might argue) as yet another flourish to their legacy. We have already discussed the rhetoric of “discovery”, “seeking out”, “treasure-hunting”, and “revealing”, and I think it is telling that a single figure is often set at the head of these efforts. Recalling classical anthropology’s embedded militancy metaphors, the archaeologist becomes analogous to a war hero, or even a crusader, preserving and protecting and elevating a sacred property so that it does not fall victim to the ravages (or “savages”) of time.

We have discussed the difficulty of simply supplanting these dominant metaphors with our own “more appropriate” tropes; what sort of altered hero narrative do you think would be more befitting community archaeology (a priest, spreading a doctrine for the benefit of their parish to inspire them to good works?), or public archaeology (a wandering bard, like Homer or Johnny Appleseed?), or any other archaeological variants we have studied?  Do we need a hero narrative at all– or rather, why do you think it is there in the first place?

Alternatively, if you search "archaeologist" in Google Images, the results are-- more often than not-- a far cry from "heroic". (Source: How Stuff Works)

 

Image sources:

Howard Carter and an unnamed colleague. Teresa Wilde’s Demon of the Week Blog.

Alternatively, if you search… How Stuff Works.

 

Indiana Jones and the Archaeological Dig

Posted on by
Reply

While we’re on the topic of the use of archaeology in films, the ever-popular Indiana Jones series of movies deserves a mention.

I grew up on these movies, and for years we had a whip in our costume box so my brother could dress up as Indiana, who was the ultimate action hero with a mild-mannered professor for an alter-ego. When archaeologists want to discuss popular misconceptions of what archaeologists do, they tend to point towards Indiana Jones, who we first meet in The Raiders of the Lost Ark as he steals a gold treasure from a perfectly preserved ancient temple, dodging booby traps and the incensed natives. His catchphrase, “That belongs in a museum!” does little to counteract the fact that Indiana Jones is more looter than archaeologist.

How much does Indiana’s character affect what people think of archaeologists? When I watched the movies as a child, I already had such a strong association between archaeology and digging that the only scene in the movie in which I felt archaeology was being performed was the Nazi-funded excavation in Cairo. My impression of archaology was no more correct, then- (had you asked me for an example of an archaeological dig in a movie I night have pointed you to Jurassic Park) but it was not quite so shaped by the movies as concerned archaeologists might fear.

However, Indiana Jones is a powerful icon, and public archaeology tends to evoke him whenever possible in order to generate interest.

These two exhibits, one by the National Science Foundation and the other by National Geographic, both compare modern archaeologists to the famous hero, emphasizing discovery and unlocking secrets in particular. Visit them, and you’ll notice that one adopts a more critical stance than the other, but both focus on similarities over differences. Is this comparison harmful to public archaeology?

More on the Titanic: Is James Cameron an Archaeologist?

Posted on by
Reply

I’m so glad that Anne posted about the Titanic because I’ve been meaning to write a little something about it ever since I saw Titanic 3D a couple weekends ago.

Now, I don’t mean to claim that James Cameron is an archaeologist HOWEVER I am really interested in some archaeological ideas Cameron presents in his film Titanic.

I first saw the film when I was in elementary school and all I really remember is thinking how sad it was that Jack died in the end and how crazy the old woman was for throwing the necklace back into the sea.  Watching it now, especially after having learned a bit more about archaeology this semester, I have a slightly different mindset.

Both in Avatar and in Titanic Cameron does a phenomenal job of portraying the treasure-hunting greedy American as insensitive and as one who dehumanizes the artifacts and land that are in his way (the RDA corporation and Brock Lovett respectively).  In class, we’ve talked a lot about this perception of archaeologists.  This view, commonly shared among some Native American groups, who have traditionally viewed archaeologists as grave-robbing treasure-hunters, has hindered archaeological projects and has led to a mistrust of archaeologists by some Native Americans.  When the treasure-hunters in the film explain how the ship sunk to the modern day elderly Rose, they are pretty insensitive:

Lewis Bodine: [narrating an animated sequence of the Titanic’s sinking on a TV monitor] Okay here we go. She hits the berg on the starboard side, right? She kind of bumps along punching holes like Morse code, dit dit dit, along the side, below the water line. Then the forward compartments start to flood. Now as the water level rises, it spills over the watertight bulkheads, which unfortunately don’t go any higher than E deck. So now as the bow goes down, the stern rises up. Slow at first, then faster and faster until finally she’s got her whole ass sticking up in the air – And that’s a big ass, we’re talking 20-30,000 tons. Okay? And the hull’s not designed to deal with that pressure, so what happens? “KRRRRRRKKK!” She splits. Right down to the keel. And the stern falls back level. Then as the bow sinks it pulls the stern vertical and then finally detaches. Now the stern section just kind of bobs there like a cork for a couple of minutes, floods and finally goes under about 2:20am two hours and forty minutes after the collision. The bow section planes away, landing about half a mile away going about 20-30 knots when it hits the ocean floor. “BOOM, PLCCCCCGGG!”… Pretty cool, huh?

Old Rose: Thank you for that fine forensic analysis, Mr. Bodine. Of course, the experience of it was… somewhat different. (reference here)

Rose then proceeds to explain her personal experience on the Titanic.  This oral history serves to humanize the search bringing life back to the artifacts the treasure hunters have collected including a hand mirror and a butterfly hair accessory.  This is important in archaeology.  The objects on their own and out of context (in the film they were presented on a table) seem to just be old objects from a sunken ship.  However when brought to life by a personal experience or story and put into context of use and purpose, a viewer can have a totally different and emotional response to seeing and interacting with that object.

After Rose shared her story about surviving the shipwreck, the main treasure hunter, Lovett, says to Rose’s granddaughter, “Three years, I’ve thought of nothing except Titanic; but I never got it… I never let it in.” (ref)

I think what he meant here is during these past few years he has been meticulously researching the event and searching for treasure on site only really viewing the Titanic in an objective scientific sense.  He viewed it, in a way, as intangible event instead of viewing the ship itself as an artifact marking a serious tragedy.  The ship had its own life, significance, and culture and was much more complex than he may have completely realized.  The site itself is essentially a mass grave for over 1,000 people.  To someone removed from the event, that number may just seem like a statistic.  However when presented with the stories of the people it personally affected, the number may illicit a much more emotional response and deeper understanding of what the sinking of the Titanic really meant.

And now I think I understand why Rose threw the necklace into the ocean: because it belonged with the ship and the rest of the artifacts from the site.  It belonged in the earth under the ocean, not with treasure-hunters, not in a museum, not even with her.

 

This is a concept that I had been struggling to completely grasp.  I guess growing up the way I did, attending public school in northeastern USA up until Vassar, I kind of felt like it was the archaeologist’s right to dig up essentially anything for the sake of knowledge and preservation.  And I’m not trying to say that I didn’t have a good public school education because I really did, it’s just that archaeology wasn’t really the main topic of discussion in any of my classes.  It wasn’t until I took this course that I realized that archaeology and archaeological excavations are not as simple as finding treasure and unearthing mysteries in our history, as I had always assumed.  In the case of some Native American communities, it is natural and right for humans and objects to return to the earth when the time has come for them to do so.  So it’s hard, I think, to really determine if archaeologists have the right to dig up sites for the greater good of knowledge or if they should leave the site be.  Collaboration between archaeologists and the community that the archaeologists’ research affects is, I think, a step in the right direction.  Constantly reminding the archaeologist of the human aspect of their research and how that affects that modern-day community can enrich the research project and ultimately potentially have a greater and more significant impact.

Pictures: ref 1, ref 2, ref 3

Archaeology Games

Posted on by
Reply

Try your hand at this archaeology game made by the BBC.

The game puts you in the shoes of an archaeologist searching for an ancient burial site with a limited budget and under time pressure from developers. You need to do research at the local records office, take aerial photos of the land, and choose what methods to use in your excavation.

The game is quite unusual, in that it puts CRM archaeology in context and allows the player to see the “big picture” in an archaeology project- that which takes place outside of the actual excavation. I lost the game (and the quarry company destroyed my site) on my first try because I was too slow and careful with digging and went over budget.

In a basic search of online archaeology games out there, you’ll probably find that most aren’t really games at all, but “clickable” animations or quizzes. However, the best educational games (and Hunt the Ancestor only begins to scratch the surface of possibilities here) are immersive and immediate- you learn not by being asked to read facts, but by living a virtual life and having virtual “hands-on” experience. Actually making decisions and dealing with results makes programs like this one much more compelling and therefore better instruments of public archaeology.

Burarra Gathering: Sharing Indigenous Knowledge

Posted on by
Reply

Burarra Gathering is an online project authored by Questacon, Australia’s National Science and Technology Centre. At its physical location in Canberra, Questacon provides public exhibitions that promote greater awareness of science and technology within the community, emphasizing fun and hands-on experience. One of their outreach projects is Burarra Gathering, an interactive online exhibition (based on a physical one by the same name) that brings users on a virtual trip to the land of the Burarra people. The creators wanted to explore the significance of Indigenous technologies, and were intend upon making the exhibit ‘collaborative’ with the Burarra people of northern Arnhem Land.

The exhibit does an interesting job of presenting the intersection of Indigenous and ‘mainstream’ cultures. Our virtual host, a teenage boy named Danaja, is depicted wearing a brightly colored jersey and shorts, next to his grandfather in muted colors and a scruffy beard. Both guiding characters introduce the viewer to choice vocabulary of the Burarra language, and demonstrate usage of ‘traditional’ technologies like trapping fish, navigating a boat, understanding seasons, making fire with sticks, and tracking animals. Everything is animated, which perhaps appeals to their younger target audience, but also prevents any sense of real ‘intimacy’ with artifacts.

Perhaps the most interesting part of the online exhibit is the ‘permit application.’ Aboriginal land in Australia is privately owned, and you must be an invited guest to be issued a permit to visit. Danaja presents a postcard inviting us to visit the Burarra people, then asks that the user inputs their name into a simplified version of a permit application. The permit explains the importance of protecting the privacy, culture, and environment of Aboriginal communities.

The interface is not the smoothest by today’s standards, but the site could definitely be interesting and informative in classroom settings. Questacon says that Burarra Gathering has been successful because it shows that indigenous knowledge can be presented in engaging ways, and it helped cultivate a close relationship between Questacon and a remote Burarra community. They also say that it has inspired future creation of more projects that allow Indigenous communities to tell their stories online.

Review: The British Sloop Industry Online Exhibition

Posted on by
Reply

I looked at the the British Sloop Industry Exhibit from the Underwater Archaeology Museum. The authors, Chuck Meide (Director, Lighthouse Archaeological Maritime Program) and Sam Turner (Director of Archaeology, LAMP) identify themselves in the introduction and provide a list of acknowledgments on the credits page (which is, perhaps significantly, a separate page.) The webmaster, T. Kurt Knoerl, is listed at the bottom of the page. In the pictures that follow, none of the people are identified by name (attention is paid to the artifact or process being depicted), nor are the photographers identified. Self-erasure from the record is not the most reflexive method, even if a crew list is provided in the credits.

The introduction provides a historical context concerning Industry’s activities before it embedded itself in a sandbar in St. Augustine’s Harbor in 1764 (St. Augustine being, unfortunately, the sloop’s final destination), and the ship’s subsequent discovery by Southern Oceans Archaeological Research, Inc. in 1997.  The historical background gives a strong narrative of “discovering” and “colonization”, and mention of indigenous settlements is peripheral. This surprised me, as one panicky primary source reported that the beached ship (heavy with artillery and weapons) had been ransacked by Timucuan Indians, such that locals were now fearing all-out warfare. Certainly this is significant! “Today there are no known Native Americans who call themselves Timucuan”, but there must be ways to delve back into the record (archaeological or historical) to integrate that part of the story.

The methodology section provides an interesting account of how looting changes the archaeological process (but in an oddly disaffected way) and includes original surveys, but the jargon is not always explained. The findings section does not contain a full catalogue (a link to a dissertation on Industry provides a larger report), but each item is accompanied by a description, pictures, and historical context, making it the easiest to understand. However, this setup exactly mirrors what one might encounter in a museum, so I am not entirely sure what the online experience “adds” (other than helpful links to said dissertation and LAMP’s website, which are indeed helpful to have as immediate resources.)

SOAR worked to engage the general public through articles, high school internships (providing students with generalized training in nautical studies, museum practice, and public interpretation as well), television segments, and public talks. A section titled “Conservation” shows schoolchildren around a cannon submerged in a tank of water, speaking to the conservation of artifacts as well as public interest.

Highway to the Past: The Archaeology of the Central Artery Project–A Review.

Posted on by
Reply

The online archaeology exhibit, “Highway to the Past: The Archaeology of the Central Artery Project,” was created by “an intern from Northeastern University.” Though it would be preferable to know the name of this intern, the website was part of an archaeological project conducted by the Massachusetts Historical Commission, which lends it some legitimacy. That is, assuming the intern was actually working for the Commission. Knowing the author of a site can give the viewer an idea of the perspective the author is presenting a topic from, and may suggest possible biases. It can also help the reader decide whether or not the author can be trusted as an expert on their subject.  Here, it is a bit ambiguous.

This exhibit does a good job clearly and concisely explaining the context of the archaeological finds and what the objects are. There are also many pictures of the sites, the excavation process, and the artifacts. Only one of the sites in the archaeological project (which was done over a large area before the construction of a major highway in Boston) was described as a Native American site. Interestingly, unlike the other sites, which were fairly precisely dated (from the 1600s to 1900s), this site was given no date—not even an estimate. Perhaps we are expected to assume the site is from pre-Colombian times? Not including even a general date sort of puts the Native American site in a timeless space, which is both weird and inaccurate. Also, there is no mention of any Native Americans in any of the other sites, as if they did not and do not exist in more recent times, alongside the colonizers and their descendants. The website also does not provide much analysis for the reader as to the meanings of the artifacts. On the Native American site page, they merely provide a list of artifacts and encourage the reader to guess “what kind of activities” the Native Americans carried out there. There is no mention of which specific tribe or group might have used the site, which, along with not giving a time period, doesn’t help contest the image many people have of all Native American groups being basically the same. There is no use of any line of evidence besides the artifacts presented for people to guess what went on at the site.

Overall, the site is a pretty intuitive experience, and a good, if simple, use of the Internet as a medium for presenting archaeology. It uses a map of the general area of the sites as the basis for navigation, so that each page takes you to a new archaeological site. The overall purpose of the site seemed to be to educate the general public about how archaeology can uncover interesting windows into the past, even while progress is being made in the present (with the construction of the new highway). As might be expected with a large, urban governmental construction project, there is no evidence that any local people or descendants of the sites excavated were involved in any of the process.

Archaeology and Technology at Vassar

Posted on by
Reply

The above video is an excerpt from a short film made by Vassar students about the use of HP Tablet PCs in field-based classes. The full film can be found here.

Professor Johnson talks about using the tablets to prevent the degradation of data- critical and post-processual archaeology place much emphasis on how the archaeologist influences conclusions and interpretations of field data, but Johnson makes a good point in reminding us that the archaeologists’ first influence on the creation of knowledge happens in the field, during the copying out of data. Field methods have as much room for improvement as methods of thought and methods of collaboration or consultation.

Archaeology Blogs

Posted on by
Reply

http://digitaldirtvirtualpasts.wordpress.com/

Digital Dirt/ Virtual Pasts is written by a Ph.D. candidate at the Glasgow School of Art, aimed at other digital artists and archaeologists from the UK. The posts are accounts of the author’s projects as they progress, complete with pictures. Most recently, the author has been working on a 3D model of the St. Kilda Blackhouse. Technical terms about 3D modeling can make the blog difficult to approach and to comprehend fully, but the author uses her experiences to critically examine the process of archaeological illustration and reconstruction and how the creative process can affect interpretation. Though the reader may have to dig through narratives about unfamiliar people and places using unfamiliar terms, but the author’s commitment to reflexivity makes for a fresh perspective on how archaeology and media interact with each other, both for the archaeologist acting as a creator and for others acting as consumers.

http://badarchaeology.wordpress.com

Bad Archaeology is written by a group of British archaeologists and aimed at the general public. It has a large and varied readership with vigorous debate in the comments section. The blog takes an empirical stance on archaeology and attempts to dispel popular misconceptions about archaeology as well as theories he deems to be psuedoscience or unsupported by hard science. The blog emphasizes the importance of the archaeologist as a supreme authority on archaeological matters. Content includes explanations of why the authors believe dowsing, ley lines, biblical archaeology and “conspiracy theories” have no place in archaeology. The blog is an excellent example of public outreach from conservative academic archaeology; it uses those themes in archaeology to which the general public is most attracted (adventure, mystery, and treasure) in order to present archaeology as a hard science. The language is accessible to non-archaeologists and the posts are filled with pictures, making the posts entertaining as well as provocative, though the reader should remember that as an academic, the author has a motive, and the viewpoints he dismisses (particularly religious and indigenous viewpoints), can also be considered true representations of multiple pasts.