Psuedo-archaeology refers to the nonscientific misapplication, misinterpretation, and/or misrepresentation of the archaeological record. Brian Fagan, in his book Archaeology: A Brief Introduction, writes:
“Our complex world is full of ‘unexplained’ mysteries and hidden surprises, phenomena that sometimes defy obvious explanation.”
Writers, movie producers, and television producers often utilize these mysteries to take their audiences into a fantasy world loosely based on archaeology. According to Brian Fagan:
“From the comfort of our armchairs, via television, we can search for lost continents, reconstruct Noah’s Ark, and trace the landing patterns of extraterrestrials’ spaceships.”
Pseudo-archaeology includes deliberate frauds, such as the infamous Piltdown Man, as well as manufactured mysteries. With regard to archaeological frauds, Mark Sutton and Robert Yohe, in their textbook Archaeology: The Science of the Human Past, write:
“Such frauds have been perpetrated to embarrass, amuse, and bewilder both scientists and laypersons over the centuries.”
These frauds include faked artifacts which are deliberately planted in sites to fool archaeologists.
Under the category of manufactured mysteries would be the idea that a mysterious, vanished race was responsible for the construction of the earthworks in the American Midwest and Southeast; the stories of lost continents of advanced civilizations (such as Atlantis) which were responsible for building pyramids in Mesoamerica and Egypt; and the allegation that the archaeological record shows visitations by aliens from other planets. These manufactured mysteries are often based on the mistaken assumption that ancient people were not creative, intelligent, clever, or capable.
With regard to Egypt, the eminent Egyptologist Barbara Mertz, in her book Temples, Tombs, & Hieroglyphs, writes:
“The people who do not know better are the pyramid mystics, who believe that the Great Pyramid is a gigantic prophecy in stone, built by a group of ancient adepts in magic. Egyptologists sometimes uncharitably refer to this group as ‘pyramidiots,’ but the school continues to flourish.”
Archaeologists working in Egypt have often noted that these pyramid mystics usually ignore the facts. Sir William Flinders Petrie once wrote:
“It is useless to state the real truth of the matter, as it has no effect on those who are subject to this type of hallucination.”
Archaeological interpretation intended to foster either nationalism or racism is a form of propaganda that falls within the realm of pseudo-archaeology. Julie Ruiz-Sierra, in an entry in The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, writes:
“Archaeology can serve a nationalistic purpose when it is used to promote patriotic sentiment and a people’s pride in their national history.”
Examples of this would include the efforts of German Nazis during the 1930s and 1940s to use supposed archaeological findings in support of their notions of Aryan superiority. In their textbook Archaeology: The Science of the Human Past, Mark Sutton and Robert Yohe report:
“Unfortunately, political agendas can and do cloud scientific objectivity, as in the case of the Nazis’ use of the archaeological record to support their expansionist efforts during World War II. Long ignored before the rise of the Third Reich, German archaeology was reinvented by linguist and historian Gustav Kossina, who claimed to be able to recognize ‘Germanic’ artifact types throughout many parts of Europe.”
The German “fatherland,” according to Kossina, included most of Europe. This claim was based on spurious data. Mark Sutton and Robert Yohe report:
“The Nazis used this false prehistory as propaganda to support the reclamation of their ancient homeland through military expansion.”
Similarly, Italy’s Mussolini had the Forum of Trajan excavated in order to celebrate Italy’s rediscovered glory. Use of archaeological findings to bolster nationalistic propaganda is not limited to Europe. In an entry in The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, Roderick McIntosh reports:
“In China, archaeology was an instrument of political education. Theoreticians, such as Xia Nai, devoted their efforts to reconciling Marxist laws to a special, proudly Chinese case of social development and to a chauvinistic search for innovation centers (e.g. Honan and East Shensi for Neolithic and Bronze Age origins).”
We might view the Piltdown Man forgery as created as pseudo-archaeology done out of nationalistic or ethnocentric interests. The forgery was created using a human skull and an ape jaw in 1912 and planted in a British gravel pit. Richard Leakey, in his book The Making of Mankind, writes:
“It also delighted British prehistorians, as the discovery swung the scientific spotlight away from the continent of Europe and on to the centre of the British Empire; the first man was clearly intelligent…and an Englishman!”
While biblical archaeologists—that is, archaeologists who are working in the broad geographic area of Syria, Israel, and Jordan—are concerned with finding out more about ancient life in these biblical lands, there are many pseudo-archaeologists—often called charlatans and con artists by actual archaeologists—whose primary purpose seems to be making money by advancing claims of supposed finds verifying the historical accuracy of the Bible, or at least their interpretation of it. Many lay people, particularly Christians whose foundational beliefs require the inerrancy of the Bible, feel that biblical archaeologists should be seeking answers to questions that would verify the accuracy and truth of the Bible. In his book Biblical Archaeology: A Very Short Introduction, Eric Cline writes:
“In fact, solutions and answers to such questions are more frequently proposed by pseudo-archaeologists or archaeological charlatans, who take the public’s money to support ventures that offer little chance of furthering the cause of knowledge. Every year, ‘scientific’ expeditions embark to look for the Garden of Eden, Noah’s Ark, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Ark of the Covenant, and the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. These expeditions are often supported by prodigious sums of money donated by gullible believers who eagerly accept tales spun by sincere but misguided amateurs or by rapacious confidence men.”
Eric Cline writes:
“By practicing pseudo-archaeology rather than by using established archaeological principles and real science, the archaeological charlatans bring discredit to the field of biblical archaeology.”
Another example of pseudo-archaeology and the Bible can be seen in what appears to be the deliberate misrepresentation of archaeological findings. The so-called Lost Tomb of Jesus (the Talpiot Tomb) spurred headlines, a documentary film, and a book. With regard to the actual archaeology of the tomb, Eric Cline writes:
“There was no mention in the report of any possible connection of the tomb to Jesus or any members of his family, nor was there any reason that there should have been, for there was no link to be made.”
The claim had no scientific basis or support. It was sensationalistic and involved manipulation of data and leaps of faith. The professional archaeologists who were involved in the actual excavation feel that the film was intellectually and scientifically dishonest. Eric Cline writes:
“As far as professional archaeologists are concerned, the tomb of Jesus and his family remains undiscovered and, in fact, is more likely to have been located in their home town of Nazareth than in Jerusalem.”
In his entry on pseudo-archaeology in The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, Kenneth Feder writes:
“Another aspect of pseudo-archaeology includes the attempt to force the archaeological record to conform to and provide support for a literal interpretation of the Bible, especially the Old Testament.”
The archaeological evidence does not support the idea that the world was created only 10,000 years ago, nor does it support the idea of a universal flood that destroyed all but a handful of people.
Another example of pseudo-archaeology being used to verify the Bible comes from the search for Noah’s ark on Mount Ararat. One amateur explorer, Fernand Navarra, brought back a piece of hand-hewn beam which was examined by pseudo-scientific methods and declared to be dated at about 3000 BCE. However, radiocarbon dating done by several different laboratories showed dates which clustered about the eighth century CE. The scientific dates were ignored by Navarra while others attempted to explain the more recent dates by claiming that the wood was from later repairs to the ark.
Another supposed discovery of Noah’s Ark was claimed by Bob Cornuke, the founder of the Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration (BASE) Institute in Colorado. In his book Biblical Archaeology: A Very Short Introduction, Eric Cline reports:
“Cornuke is a self-described former police investigator and SWAT team member turned biblical investigator, international explorer, and best-selling author.”
In 2006, Cornuke reported that he had found boat-shaped rocks on Mount Suleiman and that the rock looked like wood. Eric Cline reports:
“But peer review by professional geologists quickly debunked these findings.”
In general, when science disagrees with the beliefs of the true believers, they tend to dismiss the science. The Turin Shroud, for example, is claimed to be the burial shroud of Jesus Christ, but the scientific evidence shows that it is of more recent origin.
Accounts of places being destroyed by catastrophic events—earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, tsunamis, and so on—can be found in oral traditions throughout the world. The concept of Atlantis, a great kingdom on an island, originates with the Greek philosopher Plato. While Aristotle said that Atlantis was an invented concept, other writers have used their imaginations to expand Atlantis from an island to a continent. In The Oxford Companion to Archaeology, Bruce Williams writes:
“Expanding knowledge has progressively driven the Atlantis story away from possible reality. Advocates have had to change its date, location, and description, and would have to alter the name, depriving Atlantis of any existence but that of a composite of experiences and theories.”
Ancient aliens is a theme that frequently appears on popular television programs which purport to be historical but are actually works of fantasy. The idea that ancient aliens created or inspired the great civilizations of Egypt, Mesoamerica, and South America is based on two assumptions: (1) that humans (homo sapiens sapiens) lacked the intelligence to create civilizations, and (2) that these civilizations “suddenly” appeared and thus must have come from outer space. The archaeological record does not support these assumptions. Egypt’s pyramids, for example, were developed over a long period of time and do not actually require a sophisticated knowledge of either mathematics or engineering to construct.
One artifact which has been used as evidence of either ancient advanced civilizations or alien visits was found in 1961 in the Coso Range of California. Dubbed the Coso Artifact, it was alleged to be a geode which held a small porcelain cylinder with a central metallic shaft. Featured on television programs and offered as evidence of a pre-flood civilization in support of Creation Science, the artifact is, in fact, a 1920s Champion spark plug. However, proponents of ancient aliens continue to cite the Coso Artifact as evidence supporting their claims of ancient civilizations and ancient aliens.
Another pseudo-archaeological theme is contact between the Americas and Europe, Africa, and Asia. Speculation about the origins of American Indians began shortly after the Spanish discovery of the Americas. In his book The Origins of Native Americans: Evidence from Anthropological Genetics, Michael Crawford writes:
“Since the Bible ‘explained’ the creation and origin of all humanity, many of the scholars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries went scurrying to the Bible for an answer.”
Many felt that Indians had to be descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel, or perhaps descendants of migrations from Egypt to the Americas.
Some of these claims were originally created as frauds, revealed as such, but continue to emerge in the popular media. One example is the story of Prince Madoc of Wales who supposedly led an expedition to Florida in 1170. The story first emerges in the English court in 1580, a time when the English were attempting to expand their claims to North America via the Discovery Doctrine. While the story was clearly fraudulent, it continued to emerge during the nineteenth and twentieth century with claims of Welsh-speaking Indians as well as claims of Welsh influence in the creation of the Mayan, Aztec, and Inkan civilizations.
There are many claims that the Egyptians colonized Mexico based on the fact that there are pyramids in both areas. These claims pay little attention to the differences in the construction of the pyramids, the differences in the use of the pyramids, and the fact that the Egyptians never sailed on open water. They were, in fact, notoriously poor sailors.
In 1558 Nicolo Zeno published a collection of travel accounts allegedly undertaken by his ancestors in the 14th and 15th centuries. According to Zeno, his ancestors reached North America from Europe in 1380 and he provided a map to prove it. The Zeno map, however, was quickly shown to be a cartographic amalgam derived from contemporary maps. While it is clear that this was a hoax intended to add to his family’s prestige, it is still recounted as truth on some popular television programs.
Saint Brendan, according to stories written down between 700 and 900, set sail from Ireland in a curragh (a 36 foot skin-covered boat) about 512-530 and returned after seven years with many fascinating stories about his adventures. While Saint Brendan may have been a real person, the claims that he reached North America are less certain. Experimental archaeology has shown that such a voyage is possible, but there is no other archaeological evidence that Saint Brendan sailed from Ireland to North America.
The speculations about contacts between Asia, more specifically China, and the Americas are often based on histories and maps. In his books 1421: The Year China Discovered the World and 1434: The Year a Magnificent Chinese Fleet Sailed to Italy and Ignited the Renaissance, Gavin Menzies presents some interesting speculation about the Chinese fleets in the 15th century, but there is little archaeological data from North America to substantiate claims of contact. On the other hand, architect Paul Chiasson, in his book The Island of Seven Cities: Where The Chinese Settled When They Discovered America, claims to have discovered an ancient Chinese settlement on Cape Breton Island in Canada, but no-one trained in archaeology has examined the site.
Similarly, there are speculations about contacts between Africa and the Americas which are also based on written records. Both Leo Wiener (Africa and the Discovery of America) and Ivan van Sertima (They Came Before Columbus) have presented what they feel is evidence of this contact, but none of it is substantial enough for most archaeologists to accept.
Pseudo-archaeology is a form of pseudoscience. In his book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, Carl Sagan writes:
“Pseudoscience speaks to powerful emotional needs that science often leaves unfulfilled. It caters to fantasies about personal powers we lack and long for (like those attributed to comic book superheroes today, and earlier, to the gods.)”
More Human Origins
Human Origins: Domesticating Fire
Human Origins: The Large Brain
Human Origins: Leaving Africa, Ancient Humans
Human Origins: Menopause
Human Origins: The Great Chain of Being
Human Origins: The Mind
Human Origins: Bipedalism
Human Origins: Symbolism