Archaeology 101: What is Pseudoarchaeology?
Stonehenge is often the target of Pseudoarchaeological ideas and theories, particularly those aligned with Ancient Aliens.
It’s a big term, hard to pronounce, and just like the subject matter it can be a bit vague and complex when it’s stumbled across in everyday life. Given that I have already mentioned it a couple times in blog posts and that it’s a big part of my upcoming Lovecraft project, I’m going to break it down a bit further for anyone who has no idea what that means.
One big name within the field who has done a lot of research and even put together a book for us is an Archaeologist by the name of Garret Fagan, who wrote a book called, Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public (2006). Fagan spends the book outlining, identifying, and critiquing Pseudoarchaeology and many of the issues related to it. The biggest issue is defining it.
While I gave the Oxford Reference definition of the topic in my last article, The Currency of the Past, it is hard to put an exact definition on it due to the many ways people have misrepresented and misused archaeology in the past (& present). Fagan gives us parameters as opposed to a strict definition, and signs to look for to determine when it is real archaeology and when it is not.
Archaeology is a scientific process where a collection of data is analyzed AND interpreted by trained archaeologists using a variety of tools and methods that have been laid out by decades of archaeological research. While these tools and methods shift over time and with new research and technology, many of the basic ideas about archaeological interpretation remain the same (Fagan 24-26).
Pseudoarchaeology is often the opposite of that. A key sign that it’s Pseudoarchaeology involves the lack of data altogether and little-to-no excavation. Many of you likely had to do a science project in middle or high school following the Scientific Method, where the conclusions always come, as they should, in the end. In Pseudoarchaeology, conclusions are usually drawn before they do the research, the evidence they present is all carefully chosen to fit that conclusion, and any evidence that contradicts it is ignored.
Fagan also presents two main characteristics that MIGHT define various Pseudoarchaeological ideas. There is no one characteristic that defines all of Pseudoarchaeology, and every situation is different and should be examined critically before making assumptions.
Attitude: the use of old/disproven theories, being combative/disparaging of academics, seeking approval of authorities in academia despite combating them.
This is a general “I’m right, you’re wrong” attitude that uses whatever it can to prove itself, including old theories that aren’t used by trained archaeologists anymore, stating that academics are just “being secretive” or attempting to misuse academic writing to prove itself. The biggest example of this today is the Ancient Aliens show on the History Channel. Often the show uses an old theory to prove that aliens exist, that academics are part of the conspiracy, but at the same time taking a lot of academics out of context in their writing to prove that the Alien theorists are correct.
2. Procedure: vague definitions to often-used terms, superficial connections, obsessed with finding messages from the past, logical fallacies, expecting rewards, larger than life claims, incomplete evidence, and so on.
This is fairly common in any field with falsified data, in that when directly asked what they mean by X term, they can’t define it with certainty. They group things together loosely with no meaningful connection and they often make huge leaps. Again, we can look at Ancient Aliens for this, as they often can’t define what archaeologists actually are saying when they look at say, Ancient Egypt, and a hieroglyph that looks like a modern helicopter must mean they had technology of flight. Many times these things have been disproven by real Historians, Classicists, and Archaeologists, but they continue to make their wide-sweeping historical claims.
Now, where does this come into play with the pop culture? As I mentioned in previous articles, the collision of the supernatural and archaeological ideas is astronomically present in pop culture and in ideas about archaeology in general. From the “Curse of the Pharaohs” to Ancient Aliens to Nazi Archaeology both in historic accounts and in fiction. This trope can largely be attributed to Lovecraft’s influence (see Hiscock 2012), and is quite easily accepted by broad audiences.
Part of this is that it makes a fun story. Indiana Jones might or might not be half as exciting if the supernatural elements didn’t exist. The Tomb Raider franchise might not be quite as exciting to play either, and even Assassin’s Creed relies on an Ancient Alien narrative in its universe. There are good and bad elements to each of the pop cultural references I just made, as far as archaeology goes, but at their core they still depend on this supernatural trope.
“I don’t believe in magic, a lot of superstitious hocus pocus.”
Hiscock makes an argument that archaeologists should be responding to these narratives that are not true of real life, and in my own thesis, I broke down the Pseudoarchaeological notions in each medium I analyzed within Star Wars. However, I believe that fiction is fiction for a reason, and perhaps we shouldn’t take everything quite as seriously as Hiscock believes. And I stated in my research that in Star Wars, the Force (& magic) does exist in-universe and so pointing it out as illogical is a moot point to an extent.
However, because this is such a powerful trope in real life - the History Channel is just one example and has a wide following of viewers - who do actually believe a lot of these tropes, and even trained archaeologists have fallen prey to it (see the Nazi Archaeologists mentioned above) it does present some real danger for the field and for the history of humans. It impacts real people, and it also changes the way our collective history as the human race is viewed.
A photoshopped image of Alien ships above Stonehenge.
A lot of these supernatural tropes are an excuse to not give credit to past humans who were far from the “savages” we like to present them as, and this idea itself has a very real root in racism to discredit minority descendant groups during colonialism. Or, in other words, it was much easier for the European Colonial Powers to discredit groups of people, like the Mayans, and displace or rule over them if they didn’t build the Mayan Pyramids.
Not every fun archaeological adventure with some spooky supernatural event is embedded with these ideas, but many of them are. This again can likely be credited back to entering the collective cultural knowledge to Lovecraft (as he himself was notoriously xenophobic), but take a look at the first Indiana Jones movie again, where the “local natives” are very clearly stereotyped and are guarding the object he is seeking to steal (and it is stealing) with a cult-like zeal.
The opening 10 minutes of Indiana Jones: Raiders of the Lost Ark
Regardless, it is an important concept to understand and at least know the terms, as I will be mentioning it in blog posts again. As someone who quite enjoys many of the franchises I just mentioned, I am NOT seeking to put a ban on any movies or games that feature Pseudoarchaeological ideas. But I want it to be clear that it is fiction. Fiction is a wonderful, eucatastrophic (a Tolkien-ism for you) thing, as long as we know that it is, in fact, fiction.
A bit heavier of a topic but I wanted to have that information available since it has already come up a couple times and will likely continue to come up as I talk about a lot of media with supernatural elements. I will try to keep this post updated for anything new so that it continue to be a reference point for this specific discussion! I will be back with the usual pop culture programming on Thursday.
