A third common stereotype of archaeology is that it is a source of sensational revelations, although they occur also in association with other sciences, especially the life sciences. Curiously, this theme has previously attracted little attention although it occurs frequently and is, as in the case of the other themes, easily recognizable. Not unusual, for example, are archaeological newspaper stories with headlines like ”Dresden Stonehenge discovered: Stone Age observatory is 7000 years old!” (Bildzeitung Dresden, 7 August 2002; Fig. 3.4), ”Norrbotten was multi-cultural already 10,000 years ago” (Norrländska Socialdemokraten, 19 September 2003) or ”Göteborgs inhabitants are really Germans” (Aftonbladet, 19 October 2002; all my translations). Examples for these kinds of revelations cannot always be blamed on ”floppy” journalism but they are, at least in parts, the doing of archaeologists and scientists of other disciplines themselves:

As science relies more and more upon legitimisation by the public, via the media, … science itself takes up the media's … habits, portraying the world as a place caught between salvation and catastrophe, breakthrough and flop: a sphere in which heroic scientists struggle to offer us, the public, longer life and greater well-being... (Hargreaves and Ferguson 2000: chapter 2)

It has become normal to expect from archaeologists new revelations whenever they present their work (directly or via mediators) to large audiences. The stronger and more sensational the claim the more ”interesting” and ”worthwhile” a specific project can be perceived to be. Parodies have made that principle particular obvious. For example, in 1999 the American satirical paper The Onion run a story entitled ”Archaeological Dig Uncovers Ancient Race of Skeleton People”. After finding ancient skeletons, the excavator is cited as stating that "the implications are staggering”: ”We now know that the skeletons we see in horror films and on Halloween are not mere products of the imagination, but actually lived on Earth. … These skeletons may, in fact, be ancestors to us all. Any of us could be part skeleton." By the same token, on 1 April 2004, the campaign for awarding the German town of Bremen the title of ”European Cultural Capital 2010” published a short film and press statement announcing the ”archaeological sensation” that the ”mystery of the Sphinx of Gizeh” has been ”revealed”: it is said to have been part of a sculpture of the town musicians of Bremen, a well known German fairy tale.

Generally, the R theme is compatible with both the A theme and the D theme, and usually occurs in conjunction with either one or both of them. The basic notion is that at the end of an adventure or a detective story a sensational discovery is made that often contains a truth significant and important to everybody. In this vein, the British Time Team TV series promises that each programme ”unlocks the secrets of the past in just three days” (after Cleere 2000: 91). How significant such ”secrets” can be, is illustrated in Hammond Innes’ adventure novel Levkas Man (1973). Here, a series of excavations and finds gradually reveal to a desperate palaeoanthropologist that ”Man is a killer” who ”carries the seed of his own destruction in him”, thus questioning whether there is ”any hope for our species” (p. 260). Similarly large issues have been addressed in popular non-fiction literature about archaeology.

The German TV author Gisela Graichen (1995: 14, 22) suggested in one of the books accompanying her programmes that archaeologists could find the mechanisms that govern the rise and fall of civilizations and reveal the reasons why some societies flourish and others collapse. Based on their understanding of the past, archaeologists may thus be able to develop strategies of survival for our future as human beings. Likewise, the Swedish archaeologist Göran Burenhult (e.g. 1986: 10) made much of the possibility to learn from primitive societies in order to cope better with future challenges to humanity’s ambitions to survive.

In an illuminating study of archaeological non-fiction literature, including both ”fringe” and ”orthodox” books, the Canadian anthropologist Kathryn Denning (1999) showed that in quite a few of them the study of ancient civilisations led to warnings of some kind of apocalypse threatening our own society. Fortunately, the same studies also revealed ”ancient wisdoms” which can help humanity to avoid the cataclysm. It did not seem to make a principal difference in this respect whether the authors were ’good’ academics like Paul Bahn and John Flenley or ’alternative’ researchers like Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock. It is only a small step from here to the heroic Lara Croft whose archaeological expertise helps her directly to save the world from its imminent destruction by evil enemies. The archaeologist thus often comes across as a potential saviour, sometimes resembling a seer or messiah, whose revelations enlighten our ordinary lives and may even be able to save us from imminent doom. Although professional archaeologists may indeed occasionally entertain high hopes for the significance of their research, it is uncertain whether they will really be able to help human survival on planet Earth.

”We’ve got to track it, go to it, investigate it. This is the ultimate artifact, Leonore. Think. 
A device that challenges the basic parameters of the universe itself. What race designed 
it? Why?” (p. 383)
Inter-galactic archaeologist Michael Ralston realised to his horror that he was discovering 
the future, no longer just unearthing the past. He had to track down the devastating 
chaos field and stop it wreaking total havoc throughout the universe. The trail of catastrophe
 stretched back into deep space – and was moving forward into our own galaxy. 
(Back cover blurb)
From Robert Vardeman’s sci-fi novel Weapons of Chaos 
(omnibus edition, 1989)

The reason why archaeologists should have special access to such great truths goes beyond their ability to solve mysteries and recover treasures. The American archaeologist John Fritz (1973: 76) emphasized that the archaeologist is ”an intermediary between the worldly and the other worldly and between the quick and the dead.” In as much as it is possible to bring lost civilizations and the dead back to life and make ancient artifacts speak, terms often used to describe archaeology, it involves supernatural powers and achieves true miracles. As Fritz (1973: 77-8) went on to explain, ”to watch archeological techniques is to watch the archeologist use his (or her) power to deal with the power of the past” and ”to learn about the past from archeologists is to be enlightened about the nature of another world”.

Nowhere is the notion of the archaeologist having access to eternal truths better exemplified than in the Indiana Jones film scripts. Whereas in Raiders of the Lost Ark, Indiana Jones seeks to recover the Ark of the Covenant, which is believed still to hold the ten commandments, in the Last Crusade he hunts, together with has father, for nothing less than the Holy Grail. Archaeology thus harbours natural links to the supernatural. In other contexts, similar links emerge between archaeology and the world of ancient wisdoms and primitive ways of life that can show us ways to salvation (Steuben 1977: 13-4). Here is the link between archaeology and esoteric knowledge that also explains why the astrologer Jonathan Cainer’s shop in York sells books about ancient civilzations and their monuments (see chapter 2).

Erich von Däniken-style archaeology

When a certain threshold of revealing secrets is overstepped there is, however, the risk that the past takes revenge. As The Mummy films and numerous novels and adventure games vividly illustrate, the unscrupulous archaeologist who disturbs the peace of the dead and compulsively seeks to recover secrets of ancient civilisations may have to face the mighty forces guarding them. That holds in Egypt as much as in the southwestern United States (e.g. Preston and Child 1999). Archaeologists run the risk of:

tampering with forces that they do not understand. They are the people who raid the tomb, irrespective of the wishes and warnings of the local or indigenous population, awaken the dead, activate the curse, and bring down some immense supernatural nasty upon the world. (Russell 2002b: 46)

It is not surprising that this metaphysical dimension of archaeology enjoys considerable public interest. On the one hand, archaeology commands some of the same appeal as horror movies or the X Files. For all of them holds that when you are dealing with unknown mysteries, you can expect some (nasty) surprises. Steuben (1977: 14) was probably correct in assuming that the interest in archaeology is often of the same kind as the interest in flying saucers.

On the other hand, the archaeologist addresses several of the same large, existential questions which also account for peoples’ great interest in matters surrounding death, human nature, and predictions for the future. For an archaeologist, it is relatively easy to provide historical perspectives on life after death, to speculate about what is and is not unchangeable in the way humans behave, or to suggest social, cultural or environmental developments that might happen in the future. Even though satisfying the public demand in addressing these issues is arguably an important social function of both archaeology and cultural heritage (Burström 2004), archaeologists are often reluctant to get into any kind of speculations that cannot withstand scientific scrutiny. ”Alternative” archaeologists like Erich von Däniken or Graham Hancock have been able to claim the vacated territory with considerable success, enjoying much attention. An additional, regular selling point they have championed is the claim that academics are conspiring to hold back inevitable conclusions of research, since the revelations would threaten established paradigms.

A recent survey in the UK (English Heritage 2000) concluded that people will increasingly be looking to the heritage sector ”to help provide continuity, relevance, and meaning in their everyday lives”. Professional archaeologists should keep this in mind. But the most important aspect of the R theme is not that archaeologists might really have access to otherworldly truths which others do not. As the regular appearance of the R theme in popular archaeology shows, people are interested and attentive as soon as archaeologists are trying to answer some of the Big Questions of the Universe. Moreover, they are even willing to suspend disbelief when archaeologists occasionally come up with some really Big Answers. Significantly, a common characterization of the claims by Erich von Däniken is that ”it’s just a theory, like all the others.” For many, his spectacular suggestions evidently do not appear to be different in kind to any other archaeological theory. Unlike many religious missionaries, archaeologists (and others investigating archaeological sites) command trust and will be listened to. That ”revelatory might of archaeology” (Denning 1999: 101) gives the archaeologist a particular responsibility to consider carefully what is being ’revealed’. At the same time, it is an enormous possibility since we can be confident that when archaeologists seek to break out of the straightjacket of scientific caution they are likely to find some very attentive audiences.

Forward to The C theme: the archaeologist taking care of ancient sites and finds

Return to Table of Contents

Return to Home

References