Archaeological Institute hosts workshop session on Combating Pseudoarchaeology

Archaeological Institute hosts workshop session on Combating Pseudoarchaeology

Skeptical Inquirer

Author: Kenneth L. Feder

Issue: May, 2002

The annual meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) was held at the Philadelphia Marriott Hotel on January 3-6, 2002. Tucked in among the fascinating symposia on Greek architecture, ancient iconography, Bronze Age ideology, and Roman sculpture was a workshop titled "Combating Pseudoarchaeology." Organized by Garrett Fagan, assistant professor of classics and ancient Mediterranean studies and history at Penn State University, the session was devoted to the issue of so-called "alternative" prehistory and history. Along with defining, enumerating, and discussing the many guises of pseudoarchaeology, one of the workshop's aims was to begin a conversation within the archaeological community concerning strategies that might be developed in response to popular but unsubstantiated claims made about the human past.

As Fagan pointed out in his introductory remarks, pseudoarchaeology is predicated on the assertion that, in essence, everything we archaeologists think we know about the human past is wrong. Having deconstructed traditional archaeological interpretations as entirely comprised of conjecture, the pseudoarchaeologists provide alternative versions of the human past. For example, traditional archaeologists view human antiquity as explicable by reference to a complex interplay of culture and the physical and social environments in which human beings live.

Pseudoarchaeology, on the other hand, ignores that complexity, proposing simpler--though certainly quite remarkable--scenarios of the human past that present the inconvenient additional problem of having absolutely no evidence in their support. So, instead of the development and evolution of ancient societies being the result of complex cultural evolutionary processes, it is proposed by the "alternative" archaeologists that the human past can be understood only if one accepts:

1) The crucial role in human history of catastrophically colliding planets--in the workshop, Egyptologist Donald Redford of Penn State University discussed the claims of Immanuel Velikovsky as these relate to the history of ancient Egypt;

2) The visitation of Earth in the mists of antiquity by peripatetic extraterrestrial aliens--archaeologist Ken Feder of Central Connecticut State University discussed, among a number of issues, acceptance by university students of the claims of Erich von Daniken that the development of ancient civilizations resulted from the visits of such aliens; or,

3) The existence of an extraordinarily precocious and now lost ancient civilization which single-handedly inspired the development of all of the "derivative" ancient civilizations with which we are familiar--television science documentary producer Chris Hale related his experiences producing a documentary that addressed claims like these offered by popular writer Graham Hancock

Oceanographer Nicholas Flemming, of the European Global Ocean Observing System at Southampton Oceanographic Observatory, provided a broad context for the claims of the pseudoarchaeologists and addressed the vexing question: Should professional archaeologists respond to the claims of pseudoarchaeologists or does such a response provide an air of legitimacy to the claimants? Flemming maintained that it is an abrogation of professional responsibility to let invalid claims about the human past stand without response by the scientists who study that past.

Each of the invited workshop participants provided short presentations about a number of elements of pseudoarchaeology. These presentations served as catalysts for discussion among the presenters as well as with members of the audience. The sizeable number of workshop attendees, and the robust discussions that characterized the entire session, is a reflection of the seriousness with which the archaeological community views the issue of pseudoarchaeology. Though there were varying perspectives expressed concerning the best strategies for response, it is fair to state that most of those in attendance were in agreement that pseudoarchaeology aimed at a mass audience poses a genuine danger to a field of study that depends on public interest and support for its work. It is hoped that this workshop will lead to additional discussions and a coordinated response to the nonsense that dogs our discipline.

Kenneth L. Feder is an archaeologist at Central Connecticut State University and author of Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology. He is a CSICOP Fellow.