Heinrich Schliemann.  Few have given and simultaneously taken so much away from a field of study.  Today Schliemann is best known for being the man who found the likely site of the previously assumed mythical city of Troy, the very same city that was supposedly besieged for ten years by Aegean warriors led by Agamemnon, the city that saw the death of Hector and Achilles and was burnt to the ground after accepting a inconspicuous wooden horse into its walls.  The very mention of its name conjures up images of a time when gods spoke to men and a species of heroes fought to the death for glory.  And this man, Schliemann, is the one who found the city Homer sang about, and what a magnificent find it is.  If only Heinrich Schliemann weren’t also the man who destroyed it.

Sophia Schliemann wearing “The Jewels of Helen”

To modern archaeologists, Schliemann serves as more of a cautionary tale than anything else.  His overly ambitious attitude in the Troy and other digs exemplify a disposition that seeks to confirm preconceived notions about the past rather than discover what the evidence actually suggests, one that desires treasure, fame, and a compelling narrative more than anything else.  Having set out with the intent to find the city of Priam in all the glory Homer lends it, Schliemann became unable to see anything as he dug into the hill known as Hisarlik but gold.  Indeed, he dug and dug, destroying the stratified ruins of many past Troys until he came upon a layer he deemed acceptable of the name.  The Troy he took to be the one of legend (today referred to as Troy II) shows evidence of a fire and contained “Priam’s Treasure” including the “Jewels of Helen.”  As would later be discovered, Troy II also happened to flourish about 1000 years before the Trojan War supposedly happened, meaning the remains of Homer’s Troy were likely largely destroyed by the spades of Schliemann.  (Fields 10)

The many Troys at Hisarlik

Broadly, the story of Schliemann can be used to highlight particular challenges faced by archaeologists if impartiality is to be preserved.  Schliemann was a product of a culture that revered classical Greece perhaps excessively.  Without any reverence for the history of the site beyond his narrow interpretation of its importance, he not only failed to find the information he sought, but also disregarded and disrespected the millennia of civilizations that existed on that hill in Turkey.  Regardless towards whether or not Hisarlik is the location of Troy in actuality, the sheer volume of material evidence found in it is large enough to be invaluable to a study of past cultures of the region.  But as far as Schliemann was concerned, there was nothing of importance there that wasn’t related to one ancient Greek myth, ironically causing him to ignore the only layer of the site that possibly could be related to it.  His story should serve as a lesson to all archaeologists: Don’t allow biased expectations get in the way of what the evidence suggests.

Further Reading

• Fields, Nic.  Troy c. 1700-1250.  Osprey Publishing.  Oxford, UK.  2004.
• Wood, Micheal.  In Search of the Trojan War.  University of California Press.  Berkley and Los Angeles, California.  1998.

Images

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priam’s_Treasure#The_treasure
• http://www.livius.org/a/1/maps/troy_section.gif

When you think of archaeology, what comes to mind—treasure, gold, ancient mummies, lost civilizations? While this is not what modern archaeology is (despite the many stereotypes surrounding the field), it is how archaeology began. Evolving from both curiosity and greed, archaeology has blossomed, though only recently in the 19^th century, into a widespread discipline of discovering and preserving the past. Thus, compared to most scientific fields, archaeology is still relatively young and developing.

Before the Renaissances of the 14^th-17^th centuries, there was little interest in learning about the past. People, like the Romans, were only interested in collecting artifacts or finding treasure. During the time of the Roman Empire, regions in the Mediterranean were looted and destroyed in search of artifacts to beautify palaces. However, as more discoveries were made, some wanted to look past monetary values and learn about the past cultures. For example, in the 15^th century B.C., King Thutmose IV of Egypt ordered the excavation and restoration of the Great Sphinx. Once completed, he left a stone tablet, known as the Dream Stele, so that others could understand and learn from his discovery. This as well as other excavations set the groundwork for what would eventually become archaeological research.

However, as the number of archaeological finds grew, so did the number of interpretations of past. Evidence began to disprove the long-held view of the Old Testament creation story. However, disliking this, most simply ignored evidence that was brought to light. It was not until Charles Lyell’s work (about TWO centuries later) that the theological view of creation was successfully rejected. Lyell proposed the theory of uniformitarianism, stating that the processes in place today are the same ones from the past. Along with Lyell’s theory, human tools, dating back from far longer than 6,000 years (the estimated age of earth according to the Old Testament), were discovered with extinct animals. With that, the search for link between the past and present civilization of Europe began.

By the 19^th century, archaeology was becoming a professional discipline. People became full-time archaeologists, using facts rather than speculation to understand the past. Archaeologists began using models to put together puzzle pieces of the past. The first well-known model was the three-age system—the belief that civilizations developed gradually through the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age. However, this model could not be applied to the Americas (which lacked historical record). Thus, archaeologists began using the unilinear cultural evolution model—which stated that civilizations were barbaric before transforming into a civilization. Yet, with this model came a great deal of ethnocentrism—the belief that your way of life is the best way of life. Simply stated, this model was bias. Because archaeology developed in a Western culture, it centered around the idea that Western culture was superior in evolutionary development. However, modern archaeologists now recognize the dangers of their own bias and try to eliminate it from their work.

What began treasure hunting has developed into a complex field that works to fight ethnocentrism, preserve past culture, and learn ways to better the future. That is archaeology.

Links:

Ashmore, Wendy, and Robert J. Sharer. Discovering Our Past: A Brief Introduction to Archaeology. New York: McGraw- Hill, 2012. Print.

Image 1: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sphinx/stel-05.html

Image 2: http://catalystruser.tumblr.com/post/12286376592/charles-lyell-uniformitarianism-and-evolutionary

Further Reading: http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/archaeology/history_of_archaeology.html

When did archaeology become the respected profession it is today? What gives archaeologists the authority to excavate in a land that is not their own? Archaeology has transformed significantly throughout the years into a respected science that teaches us about the past and how we have progressed into today’s society.

Civilizations, modern and old, have always been fascinated with the people who sewed and toiled on the land before them. Even thousands of years ago, people wanted to understand the past. For example, during 15^th century B.C, an Egyptian pharaoh by the name of Thutmose IV led the first excavation of the Great Sphinx at Giza. With archaeological fascination growing and new artifacts being excavated at every turn, archaeology has progressed from antiquarianism (basically treasure hunting) to using the scientific method to investigate and understand more about the people of the past (Ashmore 26-27).

Indigenous archaeology is a branch of archaeology that collaborates with the people of the area being researched. Although this method of archaeology considers the heritage of the people living in the area of study, many indigenous people do not want their ancestors’ “things” being excavated or disturbed. Because of this, indigenous people have fought for change in the way archaeologist conduct their research. Every year more and more indigenous people are making their voices heard, some even becoming archaeologists.

Considering all the modifications archaeologists have made to their science, the debate of to whom the cultural artifacts belong, remains an ongoing issue. Those who sympathize with the native peoples have worked diligently to return ownership of graves and artifacts uncovered, back to them. Although there seems to be a large effort in assisting the indigenous people, there are still some who believe archaeological research is causing them harm.

This historical debate will most likely continue on as long as archaeology exists. Indigenous archaeology is one solution that tries to level this debate, but this type of archaeology is not yet fully established. It continues to change and develop with the collaboration of both indigenous people and archaeologists.

Archaeological practices have come a long way since Thutmose got curious about the Sphinx at Giza, and it will continue to transform in an effort to return the culture to as many groups of people as it can.  Challenges still remain, but archaeology has become a source of great understanding and respect for the past. From the lowliest cracked peace of pottery to the great Sphinx at Giza, archaeology has opened a world of understanding about the past. Every little piece of history holds a story, and possibly even the key to understanding an entire civilization. There is never old news in archaeology; it will always continue to unearth new mysteries and it will always attempt to solve them.

-Ava Sadeghi

Links:

Image 1: http://sacredsites.com/africa/egypt/images/sphinx-1900.jpg.

Image 2: http://news.mongabay.com/bioenergy/2007/09/researchers-explore-why-conservation.html

Ashmore, Wendy, and Robert J. Sharer. Discovering Our Past: A Brief Introduction to Archaeology. New York: McGraw- Hill, 2012. Print.

Atalay, Sonya. “Indigenous Archaeology as Decolonizing Practice.” The American Indian Quarterly 30.3 (2006): 280-310. Print.