Usually, the history of the colonization of the North America is dominated by authorities such as Spain, England and France. However, excavations in the past few decades in Alaska have brought light to the previously unknown period of Russian colonialism in America. This epoch consisted of a mixing of two thoroughly different cultures that is still apparent in the southwestern Alaskan landscape today. By studying archaeological findings that were confirmed to be from this Russian Colonial period, we can form a more in depth understanding of our own nation’s history as a whole.

Russian America began in the mid-18^th century when groups of fur traders from Siberia traversed the Bering Strait and established camps in the Aleutian islands of southwestern Alaska. Sponsored by wealthy moguls, these trappers were well equipped and had practically an unlimited bounty of resources. Quickly, they began establishing their own infrastructure that consisted of houses, huts, docks and an array of forts that were scattered along the Alaskan coastline. In order to monopolize the seal population of the Alaskan coast, the Russian trappers moved in with brute force, often murdering entire villages and totally undermining the Aleutian way of life. In addition, the Russians exploited Aleutian natives and forced the indigenous people to work for them, often kidnapping the children of village leaders to ensure that hunters met their quota. As the Russians slowly moved eastward into the Alaskan mainland, native resistance steadily grew. Finally, in 1784, Grigorii Shelikhov led a group of infantry man to build an outpost on Refuge Rock, Kodiak Island. The trappers were met with a stiff Aleutian resistance, but Russian weaponry was simply too much for the native confrontation. The battle at Refuge Rock marked the beginning of a short stint of Russian occupancy in Alaska.

Battle of Sitka

Refuge Rock, Alaska (Kodiak Islands)

Today, there are few superficial indications of past Russian settlement. However, there is a treasure trove of artifacts and relics that lie just below the cold Alaskan soil. Brian Hoffman, an archaeologist at Hamline University, excavated a dwelling on Unimak Island and uncovered evidence of a massacre initiated by Russian trappers that included skeletal remains and broken weapons. Aron Crowell, the Director of the Smithsonian Institution’s Arctic Studies center, and a team of archaeologists have found a bounty of Russian artifacts including coins, samovars, religious items and pottery (American Archaeology, pp. 18). Because the trappers brought over an abundance of Russian supplies, archaeologists also found artifacts that were Russian in origin but were modified and reused by the native population. In addition to finding Russian artifacts that were used by natives, archaeologists found a trend of Russian architecture that had been adopted by the Aleutian people.

Archaeologists working to uncover Russian-America era artifacts

Relics buried under hundreds of years of soil are a perfect way to study the composition and evolution of a society. Stratigraphic evidence shows a distinct development of the Aleutian society that is clearly changed by Russian involvement. By understanding how different cultures affect one another’s growth, it is easier to study and make judgments about a nation’s social identity as a whole.

Picture 1:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sitka#mediaviewer/File:Battle_of_Sitka_by_Louis_S_Glanzman.jpg

Picture 2:    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Maritime_National_Wildlife_Refuge#mediaviewer/File:Alaska_Maritime_National_Wildlife_Refuge,_Aleutian_Island_Unit.jpg

Picture 3:    http://www.sha.org/index.php/view/page/alaska

References:

http://archive.archaeology.org/online/features/kadyak/rusala.html

American Archaeology Vol. 13 No. 2

http://www.akhistorycourse.org/articles/article.php?artID=202

http://www.nps.gov/akso/akarc/

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Russian_colonization_of_the_Americas.html

Whenever I visualize what a typical archaeologist looks like, what comes to mind is a nerdy, white male, shovel in hand, wearing a sunhat and those pants that zip off at the knee. Although this image may be specific to me, I’m sure that many people’s visual representations of an archaeologist would share one aspect in common with mine: the male gender. Women have only fairly recently been admitted into the field of archaeology, yet, this imbalance in the field isn’t the only way in which women have been overlooked- ancient women themselves have been unfairly overlooked in archaeology, therefore being left behind in the archaeological record.

In the 1960s emerged feminist archaeology, which seeks the gendered experiences of the past through three objectives: first, to expose and correct the male bias in archaeology; second, to balance the imbalance of women’s professional participation in archaeology; and third, to spotlight the roles of women in the past. An archaeological site in Israel serves as a perfect example that incorporates these three objectives into its excavation.

Excavation at Tel Abel Beth Maacah began because it was referenced in the Bible and holds the potential to inform us about northern Israel during the Bronze and Iron Ages. In 2014, Dr. Naama Yahalom-Mack, Dr. Nava Panitz-Cohen, and Prof. Lauren Monroe (all female archaeologists) implemented the “Gender Agenda” program at the site. The “Gender Agenda” served to excavate with the sole purpose of identifying engendered activities such as locating cooking and grinding areas, ovens, pottery, etc. Students a part of the “Gender Agenda” program learned how to collect samples for micro-archaeological analysis that can be used for understanding diet, modes of economic production and how activities were carried out within the home sphere, and other aspects of daily life. Students also conducted an ethnographic study by visiting and interacting with local Arab women at the Center for Women’s Traditional Crafts in a nearby village. By explicitly searching for the physical remains of women’s day-to-day lives, the archaeologists behind the “Gender Agenda” validate the often-marginalized history of women in antiquity. Women’s history was often overlooked because their activities weren’t believed to have contributed anything important to the society since they served as rulers of the private, home sphere. The archaeologists at Tel Beth Abel Maacah recognize the contributions that women add to society through their search for engendered activities.

Students at Center for Women’s Traditional Crafts in Arab village.

“Gender Agenda” co-director Lauren Monroe with husband and son on site.

Why is a focus on gender so important? Some argue that since gender assignments are untestable to a certain extent, then therefore gender is irrelevant in the archaeological record. This is not true. By analyzing and interpreting the gender roles established by a society we can get an overview of the social organization and structure of the society. Most importantly, we are acknowledging every person, rather than overlooking a group of people, and looking to understand their individual function within the society.

Additional Links:

http://anthrojournal.com/issue/october-2011/article/gender-in-mesoamerica-interpreting-gender-roles-in-classic-maya-society

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/digs-2014/gender-in-archaeology-at-abel-beth-maacah/

Sources Used:

http://www.abel-beth-maacah.org/index.php/12-seasons/2013-season/78-gender-agenda

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul G. Bahn. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. New York, NY: Thames & Hudson, 2010. Print.

Photos:

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/digs-2014/gender-in-archaeology-at-abel-beth-maacah/

http://www.abel-beth-maacah.org

Much like any other social science, archaeological theories are constantly changing. Recently, our chronological understanding of Neanderthals has been drastically altered.

Neanderthals are the predating cousin to modern day humans, formerly found in regions ranging from Spain to Siberia. They made their first appearance in the fossil record 230,000 years ago, suffered a large population decrease 50,000 years ago, and until now were thought to have disappeared 30,000 years ago. However, new studies have concluded that the disappearance of Neanderthals was actually 10,000 years previous to what had been assumed: 40,000 years ago.

This new evidence was found through analysis of tools and bones, stratigraphy, and radiocarbon dating. 196 new pieces of animal bone were found conclusive with Neanderthal tool markings based on the apparent cut marks. The problem with samples previously found was that they didn’t follow the law of superposition, such that the deeper layers were actually dated to be more recent than higher layers. This meant that the source of information wasn’t exactly reliable for purposes of relative dating. However, the stratification of the matrix where the new samples were found are accurate in that they follow the law of superposition. This was determined by radiocarbon dating of volcanic ash layers. The process of radiocarbon dating was developed by Willard Libby in 1949. This technique gives absolute date information by comparing the amount of carbon-14 present in a substance. The isotope’s half life is 5730 years, which is used in determining age. With this information and calibration to avoid pitfalls in deviation, the age of a substance can be given in calendar years based on today’s date.

Through methods of radiocarbon dating and the new fossil finds, we now have that much more information about the human experience and how we are connected to other walks of life. Based on this information, more is now known about the overlap between the first homo sapiens and Neanderthals based on the amount of time they coexisted. Genetic evidence has already been shown that there was some mating between Neanderthals and early humans during the brief period of interaction before the Neanderthal extinction. In fact there are still genetic traces in humans today among one to two percent of people of non-African origin. The theory that this interbreeding occurred 60,000 years ago is now affirmed by shortening the time period of Neanderthals’ extinction.

To learn more about the time in which overlap occurred between humans and Neanderthals, check out these articles:

http://news.discovery.com/human/evolution/how-neanderthal-dna-changed-humans-140129.htm

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/ancient-dna-and-neanderthals/interbreeding

Image Sources:

http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/naturelibrary/images/ic/credit/640×395/n/ne/neanderthal/neanderthal_1.jpg

http://www.zafarrayaneanderthal.com/neanderthalrange.gif

Information Resources:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/08/140820-neanderthal-dating-bones-archaeology-science/

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul G. Bahn. Archaeology Essentials: Theories, Methods, and Practice. New York, NY: Thames & Hudson, 2010. Print.

The battle at Culloden was a struggle for power between Prince “Charlie” Stuart and the Duke of Cumberland, the grandson of King James II (of England and VII of Scotland) and the son of King George II, respectively. It was the last set-piece battle on English soil.

Culloden Memorial Cairn

Afterwards, relatives placed stones showing where entire families fought as units within the greater Jacobite army (Prince Charlie’s). Additionally, stones meant to commemorate specific individuals were erected: these being the Well of the Dead, and the Cumberland stone. The graves of the 50-60 government soldiers who died fighting have not been found. They are honored with the English Stone.

Because this site has been marked out as culturally significant in Scottish history, it is of the utmost importance to preserve it, and by extension, the memory associated with the land. This is where archaeologists come in.

“Dog tags” were not invented until the mid-1800’s, so the identities of the people left behind must be determined by their belongings, commonly metal buttons and weaponry. The Jacobite army was constantly moving, so it restocked in towns on its way to Culloden. This resulted in an uneven array of weaponry and other surviving equipment.

The artifacts left on this site have been protected by the natural terrain, which merges into marshy land, and thick plant life, both of which work to prevent visitors from disturbing the grounds. This is important because when an artifact is moved, it loses its original context for the time in which it was first dropped/buried. Like many sites that have seen battle, or other traumatic experiences, it has gone into a period of abandonment. In this case, the restoration of the moor as a designated historical battlefield prevents other use, which will be apparent in the stratigraphic record (the study of how soil forms layers, and what time periods those layers are from).

A single object may tell us about itself, but its location (vertically and laterally) tells us about it in relation to other objects in the area (in a way that might form a pattern!). Together, they help us create a better picture of the past.

Archaeologists have used various methods (most common are surface survey, ground-probing radar, and metal detectors) to find the general layout of the battlefield. In addition to these surveying methods, primary source documents (old maps and journal entries!) are used to direct focus onto a specific area for fieldwork (historical archaeology).

This type of search, targeting a specific region within the battlefield is considered a biased survey. Excavations are performed when a site is in danger, in this case when the visitor center was built in 2007. Excavations may confirm the presence of certain features (such as buildings that are no longer present) that may help clarify previous research. In Culloden, buildings were burned to discourage further uprisings. This battle, like many others, can be explored through archaeological methods.

References/additional reading:

http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/14201/details/culloden+moor+battlefield/

http://www.wargravesheritage.org.uk/news.html

http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index.php/archives/05/2008/the-archaeology-of-the-battle-of-culloden

http://data.historic-scotland.gov.uk/pls/htmldb/f?p=2500:15:0::::BATTLEFIELD:culloden

http://www.explore-inverness.com/what-to-do/attractions/culloden-battlefield/

Photo by Hanna Mitamura

Under Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal program resources were given to create jobs preserving the nation’s monuments to protect them for posterity. Thousands of people were called upon to conduct large scale excavations across the lower 48 states. Archaeological projects were first funded through FERA or the Federal Emergency Relief Agency and then the WPA or Works Progress Administration. Archaeological programs worked closely with the Federal Writers Project to create state guides that provided a historical, cultural, and archaeological view of each state, while employing more people and encouraging tourism.

Figure 1: A CCC excavation in Nevada’s “Lost City”

The archeology practiced by these teams was not always the best form but it ultimately resulted in an increased understanding of archaeology in the public sphere and exposed people to the archaeological process. The crews would enter a site and often end up destroying much of the critical context around the finds and removing them from their associated objects. This was partly because modern sampling strategies using parallel and intersecting lines and squares had not yet been developed and also because most of the workers had no professional training in archeological field work or theory. So significant amounts of data have been lost about many of the Native American sites and colonial ruins that were excavated under the New Deal.

The archaeology done under the new deal was a form of Processual Archaeology and part of the period known as the “classificatory historical period”. The goals were to create a chronological narrative of a region as was common in the time. The narrative element also lent itself well to the creation of the State Guides.

The Cover of the FWP State Guide for Illinois

And through these state guides the history and archaeology of the country was opened up to the rest of the population instead of the elite intellectuals of the country. Among the programs of the New Deal the archaeological projects created more public awareness of the historical context of the United States and brought us more new information. Many other programs like the CCC and WPA just improved on existing things in the United States by restoring buildings, National Park maintenance, and building projects, but archeological programs took the bleakness of the Great Depression and used it to create opportunities for research and collecting knowledge from resources right outside our doors. And even if the processes were not perfect in the grander history of archaeology they widened the foundation of American Archaeology and made room for organizations like the Society of American Archaeology and other groups that serve to protect and preserve America’s archaeological resources.

References

http://onlinedigeditions.com/publication/?i=70732#{“page”:39,”issue_id”:70732}

http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=692

http://onlinedigeditions.com/display_article.php?id=738654&id_issue=70732

http://newdealarchaeology.com/2012/08/05/florida-wpa-archaeology-hillsborough-county/

http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/states/illinois/memory.html

http://newdealarchaeology.com/

Renfrew, Colin, and Paul G. Bahn.Archaeology essentials: theories, methods, and practice. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Thames & Hudson, 20102

Heather Gill-Robinson began her career as an archeologist just like we are, by taking an introductory anthropology class. She learned, as did we, that in wetland sites, “organic materials are effectively sealed in a wet and airless environment which favors preservation.” (Renfrew 54) Gill-Robinson’s first connection to the bog bodies, which she so heavily studies now, was via a picture of the head of the Tollund Man, Figure 1.

Figure 1: A close-up view of the Tollund Man’s head, an image similar to that which Gill-Robinson saw.

The Tolland Man is the best-preserved bog body. Found in a bog near Bjældskovdal, Denmark on May 6^th, 1950, the Tolland Man has been dated back to the Early Iron Age, or around 500 B.C. Gill-Robinson was amazed at the condition of the Tolland Man and wanted to learn how his body had been preserved for thousands of years. When her professor told her that researchers were still unsure how the preservation worked, Gill-Robinson decided that she wanted to perform research in order to find the answer; and research she did (in the form of experimental archeology).

In 1999, the New York Times picked up on Gill-Robinson’s bog research and wrote an article on her findings. Gill-Robinson, then a forensic support technician for the Belleville Police Department in Ontario, Canada, wanted to look into causes of decay in order to more accurately predict the time of death of discovered bodies. She chose to use piglets in her research for multiple reasons, the first of course being that human cadavers aren’t readily available, and the second being that piglets have many biochemical and physiological similarities to humans.

Gill-Robinson buried 14 piglets in three bog areas in England and Scotland, leaving each piglet in anywhere from 6 months to 28 months. After taking each of the piglets out, Gill-Robinson began to notice patterns. First, she noted that pH did not play a significant role in bog preservation, due to the fact that independent of their bog placements, in which the pHs differed greatly, the three piglets uncovered at the same time (regularly within the first few weeks) had undergone similar stages of decomposition. Also, the key find in her experiment was that the best-preserved piglets were buried in the peat bogs with the highest water levels. Gill-Robinson called this “Wetter is better.” (New York Times) Today, Gill-Robinson is focusing on the use of CT scans as a non-destructive analytical tool for bog bodies. She used a CT scan on the Damendorf Man, a bog body that everyone assumed had no bones left, because it was so flat, Figure 2.

Figure 2: The flat Damendorf Man.

By using the CT scan, Gill-Robinson was able to find 5 vertebrae, the pelvis, and both thigh bones in the Damendorf Man. Not only did she find his bones, Gill-Robinson also found his brain, which had shrunk to a few inches long and half an inch thick. Using the CT scan’s imaging software, she was able to print a perfect replica of the well-preserved brain. Gill-Robinson started just like us, and look how far she’s come!

Sources:

http://archive.archaeology.org/online/interviews/heather_gill_robinson/

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/08/17/science/piglets-buried-in-bogs-a-clue-to-mystery.html

http://www.tollundman.dk/default.asp

Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn (2010) Archaeology Essentials. 2nd edition. Thames & Hudson, New York. Chapter 2.

Figure 1: http://www.tollundman.dk/gifs/tollundmanden_2-350.jpg

Figure 2: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0c/Damendorf_Man.jpg

Further Reading:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/09/bog-bodies/bog-bodies-text

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/09/070908095852.htm

Flying over the Nazca Desert in Southern Peru, lines, geometric patterns, and plants and animals can be seen engraved into the landscape. These lines were created by the Nazca people who were native to the area and thrived from 1-700 CE, predating the Incas by about 500 years.  There have been theories over the past century regarding the line’s purpose and function, the most popular being that the lines were used by ancient aliens as landing strips for their spacecraft. A lot of the attention drawn to the Nazca lines stems from tales of intergalactic travel and the perpetuation of the enchantment and mystery attached to these figures. The allure of uncertainty sparks curiosity, but in the search for answers, unguided curiosity can lead to farfetched and sometimes damaging assumptions. Archaeology seeks to answer how and why people lived the way they did, proper study of artifacts, features, and sites such as the Nazca Lines can help us tell a more accurate story.

Nazca lines in the shape of a spider

In attempts to understand the how the Nazca Lines were used and what they meant for the Nazca culture several archaeological techniques can and were used on the site. For some of the more recent investigations, maps of the surrounding hills and valleys were created from the air. Doing so probably required methods of air reconnaissance such as aerial photography which later would be used with GIS to interpret the landscape. One of the early theories of the lines was studied using similar methods. Paul Kosok, a Geologist, had suggested that the geoglyphs hold astronomical significance aligning with celestial bodies, he even referred to them as “the largest astronomy book in the world.” However, Gerald Hawkins in 1968, using maps and astronomical data had disproved this idea; the figures and lines had appeared to be randomly placed with respect to sky.

Simple investigation such as surveying the landscape and understanding Nazca culture sheds light on common misconceptions. Popular media has lead most of us to believe that the geoglyphs could only be created through complex methods and that completing these works of art would not be possible without a vantage point well above the ground or alien intervention. However, it has been determined that the lines were created just by removing the top layer of soil, the soil in the Nazca desert has been oxidized and appears red, removing the top layer reveals a lighter color. Also, creation of the lines is not complex as some think, archaeologists have determined that with surveying equipment, they are easily replicable. As for the the vantage point issue, many of the images can be seen in their entirety from surrounding foothills. Just as with the burial mounds in the United States, the assumption that the people who inhabited the land were not capable of such creations or that Alien intervention was needed has roots in racism and stunts our ability to think critically about the site and culture. True archaeology helps discard these ideas and find the true story.

View of the lines up close.

References:

http://archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/nazca-lines

http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/archaeology/nasca-lines/

http://www.skepdic.com/nazca.html

Photo1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines#mediaviewer/File:Nazca-lineas-arana-c01.jpg

Photo2:http://archaeologyonline.net/artifacts/nazca-lines

For more about the site and Nazca culture:

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/700

http://www.peru-explorer.com/nasca/nazca_culture.htm

Deep-sea exploration illuminates the ruins of the Titanic

On the night of April 15, 1912, the Titanic sank, killing over 1,500 people, pulling the massive ship with everything inside under the dark waters of the North Atlantic Ocean. Inside the Titanic was a bursting microcosm of life filled with a diversity of people, the remains of which still exist 2.5 miles under the surface. Being able to examine the artifacts left behind could provide an insight into life during that time as well as answer critical questions. Although the Titanic remained an important archaeological site to survey, underwater archaeology could not penetrate the depths of the ocean, – until recently.

It was coincidentally the sinking of the Titanic that allowed for its rediscovery and exploration. The use of sonar was developed partially to create safer methods of avoiding future hazards under the water. As technology developed the reach of underwater archaeology expanded. In 1985, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) towed an unmanned deep-sea vehicle carrying video and sonar on miles of cable behind their boat and was able, for the first time since its ruin, to bring images of the Titanic to the public. In the following years, small manned submarines were able to circle the ruins of the Titanic while archaeologists peered out through thick Plexiglas portholes. But these small glimpses of such a massive structure were not enough to provide enough detail and recording in such short trips, and even the unmanned vehicles only viewed select areas of the ship.

Experts believe that the Titanic will not remain intact for much longer due to rust and bacteria, making it a priority. But there were many other complications besides the difficulty of being able to create a full survey. The Titanic lay in international waters making it difficult to access legally, and other companies had collected artifacts from the Titanic and were putting these up for display or auction. Archaeologists argued that they may have not been properly recorded, and that the artifacts taken were selectively – seemingly only the first class items have been picked up, creating an impression that was not wholly representative. Furthermore, the removal of items caused concern that other items may have been moved from their original locations without any record of where and how they were found. The site also contains modern trash, including many of the weights the manned submarines need to drop in order to return to the surface, and the Titanic had already taken damage from submarines that had latched onto its rails in order to get closer.

A view of the Titanic and surrounding area from the 3-D rendered map created in the 2010 expedition.

In a multiagency* expedition in 2010 the obstacles were finally jumped. With the work of two autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) and a remotely operated vehicle (ROV), archaeologists were able to take video and make a 3-D rendering of the entire ship as well as the area around the ship in full detail, every artifact included. The complete rendering was a revolutionary step for underwater archaeology, and allowed archaeologists to finally ask and answer important questions about the Titanic.

*WHOI, the Waitt Institute, Phoenix International, NOAA, and the National Park Service

Refrences:
http://archive.archaeology.org/1205/features/titanic_shipwreck_jean_charcot_site_map.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/08/100818-titanic-3-d-expedition-shipwreck-science-collapsing/

photos obtained from:
http://s.ngm.com/2012/04/titanic/img/titanic-bow-615.jpg
http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2012/03/09/1226294/528391-titanic-map.jpg

for a photo of an archaeological map made of the Titanic site:
http://www.whoi.edu/cms/images/oceanus/map_220433.jpeg

For more information:
http://eandt.theiet.org/magazine/2012/03/all-aboard-the-titanic.cfm
http://www.history.com/news/first-map-of-entire-titanic-wreck-site-sheds-new-light-on-disaster
http://waittfoundation.org/titanic
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/maritime/titanic/welcome.html
http://archive.archaeology.org/0101/etc/titanic1.html

If I told you to get a bunch of your friends, bring them to an old building, eat bones, drink blood, and kneel at the feet of a dead nail ridden body you would be taken aback.

What if I told you that your children were encouraged to hide their identities, visit strangers, and threaten those strangers to give them cavities?

These traditions sound unreasonable, when in actuality they are going to a Catholic mass and trick-or-treating. Their true meaning is lost when taken out of context and the same applies to archaeology. Although the field has improved from a time of speculation to one of evidentiary support, the discussion of some archaeological topics is still distorted. The Mayan civilization is an intriguing area of archaeological study, but how much truth is there in this civilization’s portrayal by popular media?

It is believed, by the general public, that the Mayans spread as far as Roatán, Honduras. This Mayanization began when early archaeologists used document sources by Christopher Columbus’s son, Ferdinand, to identify private collections of Roatán artifacts as Mayan. As Ferdinand depicted these Honduras natives as possessing Mayan watercrafts, the archaeologists misinterpreted their origins. This misinterpretation is substantiated due to the tourist attraction, Maya Keys. At this site there are replicas of Copán (Mayan) artifacts, and so the visiting public assumes that Honduras was Mayan as the island representatives have taken these artifacts out of context to increase tourism.

Figure 1: Mayan city Copán’s hieroglyphic stairway replicated in non-Mayan Maya Key, Roatán, Honduras

However, archaeologist Christopher Wells has been able to use modern tools to correct this geographic misconception. Through geographic information systems (GIS) he created maps and gathered environmental data to interpret the material culture found on the island and reveal that its artifacts fit the typology, or style, of the Pech and Miskitu Indians. These populations are indigenous to mainland Honduras, dating 600 to 1,000 years ago, and are not of Mayan descent.

Mayan civilization is also associated with the end of the world and black magic to maximize public interest. Yet when compared to present cultures and analyzed with modern techniques, these practices had a more mundane purpose. Due to volcanic activity, a natural formation process, archaeologists have uncovered well preserved art illustrating the Mayan’s use of rituals to prepare for war. This art shows tzompantli, or racks of skulls, were used not for dark voodoo, but to instill fear in their enemies much like current day burglar alarms do, and teotlacualli, or a paste made of poisonous insects for spirit communication, was used in order to be able to learn from the past when developing war strategies. Additionally, through examining the trash of the Mayan elite or artifact scatters of ceramic shards, which before the use of regional survey techniques could have been overlooked or lost to excavation, archaeologists have been able to determine that Mayan sorcery was simply a way of advancing political agenda demystifying the civilization further.

Figure 2:Mayan monument of royal woman conjuring deceased warrior spirit for aid with dispute between royal houses

Ultimately, to understanding the real Mayan civilization of the past the sampling techniques and context of the present must be applied.

Read More: http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/archaeologists-discover-two-long-lost-ancient-maya-cities-jungle-mexico
http://www.academia.edu/3113895/Mayanizing_Tourism_in_
Roatan_Honduras_Archaeological_Perspectives_on_Heritage_Development_and_Indigeneity

Sources: 
Figure 1: http://www.mayakeyroatan.com/content/en/activities/images/DSC_0086.jpg
Figure 2: http://www.learner.org/courses/globalart/assets/non_flash_386/work_237.jpg

Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn (2010) Archaeology Essentials. 2nd edition. Thames & Hudson, New York.
American Archaeology Magazine Vol. 16 No. 3 “That Old Black Magic” and “Revealing the Real Roatán”
http://www.archaeologicalconservancy.org/american-archaeology-magazine/

The Great Pyramids of Egypt as well as the marble columns of Rome and Greece have never been questioned to be anything other than immaculate structures created by the people of that time period. The same credit however was not originally transferred to the works of Natives around the globe. Prior to the evolvement of archaeology and the use of scientific calculations such as carrying capacity, the assumptions made during the speculative phase were the be-all end-all. People were only categorized as savages, barbarians or civilized, whereas savages and barbarians were deemed “incapable” of any mode of civilized behavior. It was originally thought that when sophisticated features and artifacts where discovered, Europeans or other “civilized” groups already inhabited the area and left. In reality, the Native Americans were responsible for the evidence of civilization and most likely deserted the area to avoid being enslaved.

Figure 1: Archaeologists recovered many artifacts from the site of the Fort of St. Joseph, including an ornate crucifix of a Native woman. This crucifix exemplifies melding as Native women were clearly baptized.

Even long after the impractical assumptions of the speculative phase, everyday people as well as some archaeologists are still neglecting evidence of civilized behavior demonstrated by Native Americans. In an article discussing the rapid rise and fall of a French Fort, Native Americans were wrongly accused for the slaughter of the French inhabitants due to the ignorant assumption that Native Americans were not educated and/or sophisticated enough to have a civil and peaceful interaction. It was not until recently, after thorough analysis of artifacts and ecofacts at the site, that the relationship between the Native Americans and French was determined as a melding of civilized cultures rather than a collision. Examples of civilized melding include that the French had been hunting with Native weapons and that the two groups were married with bi-culturally raised children. As anthropologist T.R. Kidder correctly put it, “Our findings go against what has been considered the consensus on hunter-gatherer societies — that they lack the political organization necessary to complete a labor-intensive project in such a short period.”

Figure 2 American Museum of Natural History where dinosaur fossils, exotic hissing cockroaches, and wondrous planetariums–right next to priceless human designed art and artifacts created by Native peoples of the Americas

Museums worldwide, such as the Museum of Natural History, wrongly place Native American art and sculptures in similar categories with dinosaur remains and tribal arts. In my opinion, this lends to the idea that Native American art is considered uncivilized and simplistic. Fortunately, other archaeologists who are still working vigorously to solve the problem, have supported my own opinion. A new exhibit called “Stereotyping Native America” features turn of the 20th Century stereotypes of Native Americans such as the mainstream American typologies that they lived in teepees, and wore feathers and animal skins. The need for these kinds of museums and exhibits indicate what little progress mainstream America has made in understanding the multifaceted history of Native Americans.

Further Reading:

Am. Archaeology. (n.d.). Retrieved September 13, 2014, from http://daphne.palomar.edu/ais130/Lectures/AmArchaeo.htm

Fort St. Joseph Archaeological Project. (n.d.). Retrieved September 13, 2014, from http://fortstjosepharchaeology.blogspot.com

References:

Stereotyping Native America. (n.d.). Retrieved September 13, 2014, from http://138.23.124.165/exhibitions/stereotyping/default.lasso

http://www.amnh.org/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/amnh/images/permanent-exhibitions/human-origins-and-culture-halls/hall-of-plains-indians/146538-1-eng-US/hall-of-plains-indians_dynamic_lead_hero_image.jpg

http://www.archaeologicalconservancy.org/6-u-s-forts-didnt-learn-history-class/