Who are we?
We are a couple of real archaeologists (Keith and James) fed up with the distorted view of the past that passes for knowledge in popular culture. We are unhappy that journalists with no knowledge of the methods, aims, techniques and theories of real archaeology can sell hundreds of times more books than real archaeologists. We do not appreciate news programmes that talk about ley lines as if they are real. In short, we are Angry Archaeologists.
One of us is Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews, who began work on a version of this site as part of his personal home pages as long ago as 1999. Keith is a local authority archaeologist in North Hertfordshire with a long-standing interest in Bad Archaeology and who has grown increasingly concerned at the profession’s evident unwillingness to deal with it. He is also worried at the growth of anti-Enlightenment attitudes during his lifetime, which he worries may return us to a Dark Age of superstition-based belief.
The other of us is James Doeser, who is currently trying to finish his PhD in government and archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London. James is interested in the way efforts to increase public understanding of archaeology (museums, media, tourism etc.) collide with a the belief that everybody has a right to understand the past in whichever way they want. We can’t all be right, can we?
What gives us the right to criticise the work of others?
Bad Archaeologists have rarely – if ever – gone through the years of training that we have, which has given us a broad knowledge of what archaeological evidence can and cannot tell us about the past. We are not members of an Establishment frightened by new ideas that will push us from our positions of authority, as we do not have positions of authority! Rather, we are ordinary archaeologists who are passionate about the past and hate to see it misrepresented by those who are out to make money from it or to gain control over the gullible and poorly informed.
How come you are experts on every aspect of archaeology?
We don’t claim to be! Archaeology is a set of methods and theories as well as a great, ever-expanding encyclopaedia of knowledge. Our critique of Bad Archaeology is founded more on knowledge of method and theory than actual expertise in specific periods and places. Should they be required, we know where to look for the experts and their knowledge!
Do you want to put people off archaeology?
We don’t! We want to encourage all people to enjoy archaeology and (where possible) take active part in it. An archaeological perspective is one which values a critical approach to claims made of meagre evidence. This website should not deter people from discovering more about the past. The archaeological process can sometimes throw up controversial or problematic results: this is part of the joy of science.
The Council for British Archaeology is probably the best place to start. It has details of local groups, lectures and excavations as well as publishing the monthly magazine British Archaeology. Another good source is Current Archaeology, which publishes a Handbook of all digs available to volunteers and other participants. If you want to work as a professional archaeologist then the British Archaeological Jobs Resource has lots of advice about training and education (as well as plenty of warnings about what it’s really like to be an archaeologist!).
Good stuff guys! Thanks! You had just what I needed with the New Archaeology page and more!
I have a question, please. Does Salima Ikram really believe the ancient Egyptians and pharoahs were black (as in negroid) as has been asserted by Bauval, author of Black Genesis? If so, what are the motivations that would inspire her to go against Hawass’ assertion that the pharoahs and ancient egyptians for the most part were egyptian–a race that is different from the negroid people’s of other parts of Africa? I don’t care about race at all, myself, but I passionately care about the truth–in all things and in archeology. I view the paintings and all the artifacts from ancient egypt and I see an Arabic looking people mostly–in the hair, the facial structure, etc. I also see variances in color–with Nefertari almost fair skinned. There are some negroid appearing people, but they are not the pharoahs–they are combatants to the pharoahs–and such. To believe Mr. Bauval, must I disbelieve my own eyes and the research of respected archeologists?
:) That sounds like a test question, but it’s interesting nonetheless. I hope the authors of this blog respond! Personally I find the concept of classifying cultural/ethnic groups as distinct “races” very problematic. There are rarely clean lines in groups of the homo sapien sapien subspecies, especially in a geo-political location like Egypt. Beyond that one of the scenarios that I would use to analyze the question is as follows. If a future digital-archaeologist found my 2012 Twitter profile (https://twitter.com/#!/Bruce_N_Smith) would they be expected to believe that my image of myself has a direct correlation to physical reality, or would they need to consider that my self-representation was a creative act which needs to be interpreted using other related data from the same time period?
Bruce, by evading the question in this way you seem to be siding with the “black Egyptians” claim, and I don’t think that’s what you intended. You needn’t classify human beings into “races” to dismiss claims that the Egyptians in general looked either like typical sub-Saharan Africans (i. e., not only very dark-skinned but with a specific and characteristic facial structure and build), or like typical Northern Europeans (i. e., not only very light-skinned but with a specific and characteristic facial structure and build). Even if you pay no regard to “races” in principle, you can and probably should dismiss such race-based claims based on that principle. But in fact you could even state a conjecture that the ancient Egyptians in general didn’t look much different from the modern Egyptians (which I’d agree with completely), based not only on images and other representations or descriptions (I see no reason to discount them all as fanciful or extremely idealised – even to the point of changing basic features – they deserve to be taken seriously even if they may not be 100% accurate or reliable), but also on general considerations (while modern ethnic groups can never be considered direct continuations of ancient ethnic groups, given that there is essentially always considerable admixture, we have no reasons to assume any radical changes in ethnic composition in Egypt, either, and the Copts are probably the closest we can get to a relatively undisturbed continuation of the indigenous population), without compromising your “race-sceptical” stance.
Thanks for your thoughts Bruce. Hmmm. Interesting concept. However, the social and cultural constructs of the times influence how people prefer to paint/portray themselves–and usually there is some archetype or reality upon which ideas are based. THerefore, even if using artistic license in one’s rendering, the desire to appear a certain way–however idealized– usually reflects the values of one’s peer group/society, don’t you think? I do appreciate your reply and it’s always great to share ideas with people who enjoy archeology–and more important–people who just like to think!
Thanks,
Kate
Hi ,
Our hisory has been hidden and manipulated by a Cabal that control our lives to suit their agenda this is not conspiracy as you would have your readers believe,because this cabal have admitted to doing what they are being accused of.
An example, the use of Cannabis or Hemp as a spiritual, medicinal,and cormercial product for the past 10,000 years and its been our most important crop of the last 5000 years until earlier in the last century where it was vilified and made illegal by J edgar hoover and USA and the rest of the world bullied by by the Economic weight of USA followed suit and the discovery of Isareli scientists in the 90s of the Endocannabinoid system in humans,2 cannabinoid receptors 1 n the brain and 1 in the stomach to recieve the active prperties of cannabis which is only produced by Cannabis, we are hardwired for Cannabis as the scientists put it. Cannabis is the most medicinal plant known to man and thats why the US Government and Pharmaceutical companies are filing patents for its medicinal properties and keeping this hidden while sending people to prison for using cannabis this is a crime against humanity. If you would like i can provide links to patents filed as far back as 1940 and to peer reviewed scientific research, My point is because of the important role of cannabis,hemp in our history why is it not mentioned in western education when teaching kids history and also that the biggest percentage of black african slaves were used to harvest hemp and not cotton as we are taught.
This is brainwashing, our history is being manipulated and the truth hidden from us, which you deny is happening and Cannabis or Hemp is just 1 example and all the above can easily be verified by yourselfs.
I think you are wrong to suggest that there is a cabal that suppresses the role of hemp cultivation in the past. I’d agree that it is probably underestimated (and there is increasing evidence for its use in the British Neolithic, for instance), but that’s far from being evidence for deliberate suppression.
By the way, your assertion that “the biggest percentage of black african slaves were used to harvest hemp and not cotton as we are taught” is just plain wrong: the majority were transported across the Atlantic to work on sugar plantations, not cotton or hemp. You’ve also underestimated the importance of coffee…