Pseudoarchaeology: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing (Part 1)

Kia ora,

In light of the heightened profile of pseudoarchaeology in the popular media recently, I thought I would write a bit on this blog about what pseudoarchaeology actually is and why it's a bad thing.   

What is pseudoarchaeology?

Archaeology (as I have previously discussed in this blog), is the study of past human societies through the material remains that those societies left behind. I have previously alluded to some of the careful data gathering practices and analytical methods that have become widely established in the discipline for very good reasons.

Pseudo is a combining form meaning "false", "pretended", or "unreal", used in the formation of compound words such as pseudoarchaeology. 

Pseudoarchaeological interpretations of the past are not based on these widely accepted data gathering practices and analytical methods, yet give the false impression of being so.   

As noted by archaeologist David S. Anderson in a great twitter thread, accepted archaeological interpretations, like scientific interpretations, are the result of inductive reasoning (i.e. conclusions are built from the 'bottom-up', based on (all) the available data). On the other hand, pseudoarchaeological interpretations rely on 'cherry-picked' (i.e. selectively sampled) data that supports certain claims and ignores the typically larger set of data that doesn't. Conclusions based on this sort of approach in archaeology are eventually 'weeded-out'.

A prominent example of pseudoarchaeology is the belief that ancient civilizations around the world were visited by extraterrestrial beings who then proceeded to play a guiding role in the development of ancient culture and technology. This idea, often referred to as the 'Ancient Astronaut Theory' (spoiler: the word theory is definitely not used here in the scientific sense!) has gained a high profile in recent years thanks to the TV show 'Ancient Aliens'. Perhaps you are familiar with memes of this nature?:

Image sourced here.

Some readers may be familiar with an earlier platform for this idea - Erich von Däniken's book, Chariots of the Gods? Unsolved Mysteries of the Past:

Image sourced here. 
Interestingly, later editions of the book dropped the question mark.

          

Ancient Aliens presents its content in a consistent way (no doubt the aim here is false equivalence):

  

"A talking head of traditional academic (i.e. a PhD holder currently employed by a university) will provide a historical backdrop for a ruined temple complex, or the folkloristic explanation of a myth. Then, often with little difference in presentation, an Ancient Astronaut theorist will present their side of the issue. A subtitle will often display their qualifications to speak on the matter: most frequently publications by non-academic presses and the occasional unspecified graduate degree." (Quote source here)

   

Yet these ideas are not equal in terms of their likelihood of representing the truth!

To give a specific example - The Great Pyramid at Giza (built ca. 2560 BC) - the tomb of the Egyptian Pharaoh Khufu and one of the 'Seven Wonders of the Ancient World' - was unquestionably an incredible feat of engineering, and as a result it has often been argued by Ancient Astronaut proponents that its construction would have required extraterrestrial assistance.

The Great Pyramid of Giza (built ca. 2560 BC) - the tomb of the Pharaoh Khufu and one of the 'Seven Wonders of the Ancient World'. Image sourced here.

However, data that is often conveniently ignored or brushed over is the surviving architectural record in the century or so prior to the construction of this monument. Clearly there was a learning process involved, which begins to call the involvement of vastly technologically superior beings into question. Furthermore, these are only examples of attempts at pyramid construction that haven't fallen down!:

The Step Pyramid at Saqqara, built almost a century before the Great Pyramid of Khufu at Giza, was the tomb of the 3rd Dynasty Pharaoh Djoser. Image sourced here.

Constructions under Sneferu, founder of the 4th Dynasty and father of Khufu, such as the Bent Pyramid at Dahshur (built ca. 2600 BC), illustrate a clear transitional stage in architectural design between the step pyramid and 'true' pyramid forms. Image sourced here.

The Ancient Egyptians also appear to have left us some clues about how they managed to move those massive stones. 

Recently it has been announced that actress Megan Fox would be fronting a new TV show on the American Travel Channel,  Mysteries and Myths with Megan Fox.

  

From the linked article:

 

"Though Fox is neither an archaeologist nor historian, she will take it upon herself to portray their work as some sort of conspiracy, wherein archaeologists are gatekeepers of information, actively trying to hide “the truth,” whatever that may be."

And later in the same article: 

"History only gives us a one-sided view of the truth," Fox tells Deadline. "I haven’t spent my entire life building a career in academia so I don’t have to worry about my reputation or being rebuked by my colleagues, which allows me to push back on the status quo. So much of our history needs to be re-examined."

Portraying archaeologists and scientists as exclusive, too narrow-minded to see the truth, or worse, part of a deliberate conspiracy to suppress the truth, is actually quite a common strategy of proponents of pseudoarchaeology, pseudoscience, etc., whose ideas actually fall short of the evidential standards required by mainstream archaeology or science.

While this is a misrepresentation of archaeology, it is a fair accusation to say that historically the discipline has not had the best track record of inclusivity or of ethical behaviour for that matter, which certainly accounts for some misunderstanding and even mistrust from those outside of the field - especially from some indigenous communities in countries with a colonial history. I have previously mentioned a specific example of this from New Zealand. As a whole, however, archaeology has gotten better at inclusivity and communication, but must continue to improve if such misconceptions are to be overcome and the pseudoarchaeology and pseudohistory being presented in various forms of popular media are to be effectively countered.

To be continued ...

(If you are on Twitter, you can follow the likes of David S. Anderson, Jens Notroff, Steph Halmhofer, and ArchyFantasies for more pseudoarchaeology debunking!)