Pseudoarchaeology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2009)

Pseudoarchaeology (also called fantastic archaeology, cult archaeology, and cryptoarchaeology)^[1] is pseudoscientific archaeology, the unscientific interpretation of material remains and sites (whether genuine or not). Archaeological theories, site excavations and publications which do not conform to standard accepted archaeological methodology are generally considered to fall under the category of pseudoarchaeology.

Contents 1 Description 2 History 3 Examples 3.1 Nationalistic/chauvinistic pseudoarchaeology 3.2 Religiously-motivated pseudoarchaeology 3.3 Unconventional/Scientifically suspect methodology 3.4 Legitimate archaeological sites often subject to pseudoarchaeological speculation 4 See also 5 Footnotes 6 References 7 External links

[edit] Description

Pseudoarchaeology can be practised intentionally or unintentionally. Archaeological frauds and hoaxes are considered intentional pseudoarchaeology. Genuine archaeological finds may be unintentionally converted to pseudoarchaeology through unscientific interpretation. (cf. Confirmation bias)

Pseudoarchaelogy is frequently motivated by nationalism or a desire to prove a particular religious theory (cf. Intelligent design), pseudohistorical, political, or anthropological. In many cases, an a priori conclusion is established, and fieldwork is undertaken explicitly to corroborate the theory in detail.

Practitioners of pseudoarchaeology often rail against academic archaeologists and established scientific methods, claiming that conventional science has overlooked critical evidence. Conspiracy theories may be invoked, in which "the Establishment" colludes in suppressing evidence.

Archaeologists distinguish their research from pseudoarchaeology by pointing to differences in research methodology, including recursive methods, falsifiable theories, peer review, and a generally systematic approach to collecting data. Few see themselves as unwitting cogs in a wider conspiracy, and many strive to make their work relevant to contemporary society. Though there is overwhelming evidence of cultural connections informing folk traditions about the past,^[2] objective analyses of folk archaeology, in anthropological terms of the cultural contexts from which they emerge and the cultural needs to which they respond, have been comparatively few. R. Silverberg located the Mormon's use of Mound Builder culture within a larger cultural nexus^[3] and the voyage of Madoc and "Welsh Indians" was set in its changing and evolving sociohistorical contexts by G. Williams.^[4]

[edit] History

Though the archaeological report given by the fifth-century Socrates of Constantinople in his Ecclesiastical History, of St Helena's discovery of the True Cross may make her the patron saint of pseudoarchaeology to sceptics, it is clear that the manipulation of archaeological sites and "finds" to assist propaganda and pseudohistory is not a phenomenon simply of modern historicist culture. In the mid-2nd century, those exposed by Lucian's sarcastic essay Alexander the false prophet prepared an archaeological "find" in Chalcedon to prepare a public for the supposed oracle they planned to establish at Abonoteichus in Paphlagonia:

"in the temple of Apollo, which is the most ancient in Chalcedon, they buried bronze tablets which said that very soon Asclepius, with his father Apollo, would move to Pontus and take up his residence at Abonoteichus. The opportune discovery of these tablets caused this story to spread quickly to all Bithynia and Pontus, and to Abonoteichus sooner than anywhere else."

At Glastonbury Abbey in 1291, at a time when King Edward I desired to emphasize his "Englishness" a fortunate discovery was made: the coffin of King Arthur, unmistakably identified with an inscribed plaque. Arthur was reinterred at Glastonbury in a magnificent ceremonial attended by the king and queen.

[edit] Examples

[edit] Nationalistic/chauvinistic pseudoarchaeology

• The theory, commonly held by European settlers, that the mound builders were a long vanished non-Native American people.
• Expeditions sent by the Ahnenerbe to research the existence of a mythical Aryan race.
• The Bosnian Pyramids project, which has projected that natural geological hills in Visoko are ancient man-made pyramids
• Hill of Tara in Ireland, excavated by British Israelists who thought that the Irish were part of the Lost Tribes of Israel and that the hill contained the Ark of the Covenant.

[edit] Religiously-motivated pseudoarchaeology

• Repeated claims of the discovery of Noah's Ark on Mount Ararat or neighboring mountain ranges.
• Insistence that questionable artifacts such as the Los Lunas Decalogue Stone represent proof of the presence of a pre-Columbian Semitic culture in America.
• Numerous spurious claims regarding archaeological evidence to support statements in the Book of Mormon that three lost tribes of Israel settled in the Americas during pre-historic times.

[edit] Unconventional/Scientifically suspect methodology

• The published work of Barry Fell.
• Virginia Steen-McIntyre's circular dating of Hueyatlaco spearheads.
• Lost continents such as Atlantis, Mu, or Lemuria, which are all contested by mainstream archaeologists and historians as lacking critical physical evidence and general historical credibility.
• The ancient astronaut theory regarding Mayan ruler Pacal II.
• Speculation regarding pre-Columbian contact between Egypt and the Maya.

[edit] Legitimate archaeological sites often subject to pseudoarchaeological speculation

• Stonehenge
• The Great Pyramid
• The Sphinx
• Etruscan inscriptions
• Easter Island
• Teotihuacan
• Palenque
• Chichen Itza
• The Nazca lines
• The stone spheres of Costa Rica

[edit] See also

• Ancient astronauts
• Antikythera mechanism
• Archaeology and the Book of Mormon
• Baghdad Battery
• Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology
• The Hall of Ma'at.
• Nationalism and archaeology
• Nazi archaeology
• Out-of-place artifact
• Phaistos Disc
• Troy
• Pathological science
• Phantom islands
• Pyramid inch
• Protoscience

[edit] Footnotes

[edit] References

• Gregory, Timothy E., "Pseudoarchaeology".
• Carroll, Robert Todd, "Pseudohistory". The Skeptic's Dictionary.
• "The Territory of Pseudoarchaeology" SFU museum of Archaeology and Ethnology.
• Feder, Kenneth L., "Archaeological Institute hosts workshop session on Combating Pseudoarchaeology". Skeptical Inquirer, May, 2002.
• "Hueyatlaco Site -"Extreme Dating Controversy"": Dr. Virginia Steen-McIntyre and dating of Hueyatlaco spearheads.
• West, John Anthony, "An Open Letter to the Editors of Archaeology". Archaeology, May/June 2003. [Special Section]
• Zimmerman, Larry J., and Richard A. Fox, Jr., "Fantastic Archaeology".
• "Hall of Maat": Weighing evidence for Alternative History, pseudohistory, and pseudoarchaeology. Ma'at is the ancient Egyptian principle of justice and balance.
• "Archaeological Fantasies: How pseudoarchaeology misrepresents the past and misleads the public"
• "Bad Archaeology" Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews and James Doeser provide resources for debunking the claims of pseudoarchaeology.

[edit] External links

• Alternative archeology at the Open Directory Project
• Archaeological/Skeptical Criticisms of popular archeology
• Criticisms of alternative geology such as pole shifts
• The Hall of Ma'at
• Bad Archaeology, common examples of pseudoarcheology