#archaeological ethics

[ijustwannanappppp]

Talking to people about archaeology on tiktok is..... something as someone who has written counless assignments about the etchics of archaeology, and wan to inform people about why archaeology is fun.

Because tell me why people will argue that archaeology is graverobbing, and double down on it even when you try to talk about how its not, and that it used to be, but certainly is not anymore, and that anyone who is a graverobber is not an archaeologist, so i'm sorry that you have to do x,y,z to keep people away from your familys graves but that is not archaeologists, that a graverobber.

A lot of people seem to think archaeology has not changed since the 20th centry (and before)......... why the fuck would it not?????

Also saw a few comments saying only white museums (idk what they mean specifically by white museums, people of colour work in museums too, could be museums in countries with a majortly white population, idk) displayed human remains, and siting the only souce as they have only been to The Smithsonian and The British Museum. Crazy thing to say when you have only been to the "i see nice thing i take, and you're not getting it back" museum (i have no opinions on The Smithsomian and do not know their practise of theft past or present)

And, correct me if i'm wrong, that is factually incorrect, yes a lot of countries do not display human remains because its wrong/dissrespectful etc. but a lot do, and museums that display human remains from cultures where it is dissrespectful to do so should not happen, but it is not only "white museums" that do it (and i know displaying human remains is a whole topic with a lot of diffrent opinions, but that is another discussion)

Another thing i saw people saying is it's only white people who "dig up bones and put them in museums", that is incorrect, there are archaeologists around the world, they're also people of colour (not saying they're also bad for digging up bones, just saying archaeologists should not be, and are not only white people, and again the dission about digging up human remains is very complex)

And finally the people saying "we're already repeating our past so why is it important to still lean and try not to repeat it" im in your walls.

And all the people not understanding why archaeology is an important field of study, why the science we can do with archaeology is important to continue to do, you are the cause of my migraines.

also, the person who said archaeologists (presumably, they didnt specify) dig up graves and put new bones in, i really want to fucking know where you got that from because that is insane.

[weblogarchaeologicalethics-blog]

The Future of Archaeology and this Blog

At the beginning of this semester I was assigned to write blog posts that related to the topics of the course. And so this blog was created with the sole purpose of trying to get through as many posts as I could about the course while maintaining my sanity balancing my other school work, family life, social life and the unexpected twists and turns that life generally hands us. Not to toot my own horn, I think I did a pretty good job. 

I talked about hollywood’s favourite archaeologist Indiana Jones twice, managed to stay civil when discussing ISIS and war issues, real life debates like the Nefertiti Bust, and the ideas on censorship, the ideas of using the past to your advantage and most notably brought in amazingly related if only by force ideas like Doctor Who, The Little Mermaid, USBs, giant nickels and even a waterfall and did this all while keeping archaeological ethics in mind. Ok so there was that one reblog I did about the egyptians but come on that was funny! 

The funny thing is that some could look at my blog and say that I learned nothing since I rarely used real life situations. Those people may be right but as I see it archaeology, especially the ethics surrounding it, is an ever evolving thing that needs new interpretations to help explain it.

I was asked to make this blog about what I think the future of archaeology will be. In all honesty I feel like more archaeological discoveries and findings will be less for academic purposes and more accessible to the public. As for ethics, they will still be taught, but more abstract examples can be used to teach them. A perfect example is that the first post I made about Indiana Jones. The only reason I had this idea is because it was based off of an assignment that I had done in class. The idea of taking things that are generally outside of the realm of archaeology and implementing the ideas into it is not uniquely mine and I hope that the trend continues into the future.  

As for this blog specifically, if I find something I feel relates to ethics and needs to be discussed in a different way then be assured that I will post it. However it will no longer be as frequent as I have been posting up to this point. 

So this isn’t really goodbye but the end of a chapter, a new page opening up in a book. The cool things about books are, no matter how many times you finish them and set them aside, you can always rediscover them and start all over again. 

Like always, I wanna know what the readers, if I have any, think so feel free to comment below and until then...

[archaeologicalethics-blog]

Future of Archaeology

There has been much done in recent years to pull archaeology ‘from’ the past and into the future. One of the inventions I am the most excited about is the one innovation that has been made in an effort to restore monuments, In order to satiate the inevitable lust for returning  ancient & historical monuments and structures back to their original state of grandeur that i think some archaeologists face . It has been in years past, considered ethically taboo to  physically rebuild any sort of temple space or statue or even domestic space with normal modern materials , yet this new innovation of projecting holographic  images onto objects which were destroyed either historically or recently offers a new alternative ! Instead of actually having to take care and rebuild , we can now simply project an image, leaving the actual historical monument or building to retain it’s present sate of preservation  which reveals all aspects of it’s long history for archaeologists and historians, and enticing casual tourists to enjoy  both the history and the majesty of these “recreated” historical wonders.

[weblogarchaeologicalethics-blog]

Darling its Better Down Where It’s Wetter....

Alright now for those of you who don’t know, the title is a reference to song called Under the Sea, from Disney’s the Little Mermaid. Now if you are confused as to why I used that as the title then let me enlighten you. 

See when it comes to Archaeology, Underwater has a lot less regulation which makes “better down where it is wetter” for antiquities to be found and brought to the surface. A great example of this is actually the Prince Eric statue from the movie. 

Such wonderful things around her, what more is she looking for? 

See Ariel (Red Haired Mermaid pictured with statue) finds this statue and decides to put it with her other collection of human artifacts. Now legally under the UN Law of the Sea and the UNESCO 2001 convention our fined finned friend would be in a fair bit of trouble seeing as she and her friends illegally obtained that statue from the shipwreck of Eric’s ship. Her father quickly takes care of this though after he finds his daughter’s grotto.  Leaving her quite upset and us with any of those artifacts that she had collected.

Tears indeed Ariel. Tears indeed. 

As we can see, having less strict laws under the sea can lead to catastrophic events that could cause us to lose the past forever. Should more strict laws be placed on the sea? Or should it always be better down where its wetter under the sea? 

I’ll leave that for you to decide! 

[weblogarchaeologicalethics-blog]

Censorship of the Past (Collectors POV)

Before you read this know that this was part of my speech for a debate I conducted into class. 

Hello everyone, my name is Annie Nonymous and I am the head of the Nonymous Family of collectors. I have a collection of tablets and coins that I feel deserve to be published. What is stopping me from getting my fabulous collection published? Well unfortunately, due to some policies in the archaeological world, it is impossible for me to publish my collection. According to The American School of Oriental Research, or ASOR for short, since the tablets my father had spent his life collecting do not have archaeological provenience and because he started collecting them after 1972 the tablets can’t be published. As for the coins since my coins are rusted or dented and it is not possible to see where they are from, regulations state I can’t publish those either. This is blatant censorship of the past and I will not stand for it. Now before anyone says it, I know that I could only publish part of the collection, the parts that would fall under the rules that are in place. However I feel it would take away from the hard work of my father and I, along with value of this family collection.  To publish only part of the collection would be agreeing with these regulations and with the idea that censoring parts of the past is an acceptable practice. By taking objects out of their historical and cultural context, some believe that this also takes away their value. This notion forgets that for many years before the rules and regulations for cuneiform tablets and coins came into effect, that many articles were not only able to be published that contained items that did not have provenience, but because of those articles the items were able to be researched and led to discoveries in the archaeological world.  This is a serious suppression of knowledge, as these regulations are in place in many places throughout the world causing the next generation not to be able to learn about all the beauty and knowledge the past has to offer. Do we really want to deny the advancement of knowledge due to not being able to precisely place where something belongs? Keeping the objects without provenience out of publications is an irrational and unintelligent practice that is detrimental to the intelligence of the world. Who has the right to deny the spread of information just because it doesn’t fall into specific guidelines? All I want is to share the knowledge that these artifacts in my family’s collection could give to the world. What is so wrong with that?

Like always discuss below what you think! 

[archaeologicalethics-blog]

To publish or not to publish

Another opinion piece here, surprise surprise ! :)

But really people of my audience,  today’s topic is quite serious. To today I wanted to ponder through whether or not archaeologists should publish articles or papers on private collections or rather on archaeological artifacts without provenience( i.e. without a location to pin it to). 

Obviously most archaeologists , or those who particularly idealize our profession, would say that we absolutely should not partake in such works or behaviors. Those people would urge us to resist the call to shed more light upon these artifacts despite the allure of these virgin relics, no matter what they might be able to tell us about the ancient world. Those people would say that to indulge in this behavior is to essentially validate or glorify the work and ill gotten gains of private collectors , looters and salvaging companies; something I also agree we must actively work to root out.

However, my heart breaks when i think about all the information which could be garnered from such artifacts, all the information we stand to lose and for what? To protect our pride as archaeologists? Our jobs?The sites themselves? Because lets face it, regardless of who is digging up these sites be it trained and objective archaeologists or looters or salvage people  etc. the excavation is always bound to destroy at least some of the site. The only difference with us as archaeologist is that we document some of the other layers...  most of the time.

Also can we ever peel ourselves away from the existence of looters and salvage people by ignoring these artifacts? probably not.

In any case I have no answers , just more questions than I know what to do with.

[archaeologicalethics-blog]

Under Water Archaeology

Q:  Is the archaeology done by large salvaging companies like “Marine Odyssey” good ?

A: what a complex question. It could be considered “good” in many ways, because it’s not like companies like “Marine Odyssey”  don’t put their finds out for public display and education. In fact my professor , a nautical archaeologist herself, conceded that the museum the aforementioned big budget salvage company runs in Seattle was actually quite good. They also employ lots of archaeologists , so you know that they’re methods can’t be all bad. At least there are people who know what they’re doing actually excavating. Going even further, they do get a lot of material remains off of the tumultuous sea bed and the multitude of things we as human people do to our oceans and seas.

However,I cannot get my mind over the idea that these people are TREASURE HUNTERS! over glorified treasure hunters!  They make money off of this, lots and lots of money and yet most archaeologist with morals seem to not make as much. I do desperately want to not approve of these people and their methods -  for instance, not EVERYTHING has to be or even SHOULD be excavated often in situ preservation is most of the time better-  but it is so hard when everything about them seems to be so similar to regular archaeological practices. Obviously except the budget.

what do YOU think

[archaeologicalethics-blog]

Is a statue worth a human life?

 In the view of the military, this is not even a question! I cannot , however, be in total agreement with this sentiment. In the case of statues or the monuments of a living( or even a long dried up) culture I would say this question poses a more complex problem than it would first appear. While its true someone needs to be alive to appreciate art and the intricate symbolism that seems to follow these amazing works of human ingenuity, I think it is wrong to assume that we can let these amazing works go so easily. Let us not forget that a lot of statuary finds itself cemented in the very fabric of our inherently social cultures. One need look no further than the damage being done to the ancient city of Palmyra and Mosul Museum by ISIS to really get a sense of what I’m talking about. 

ISIS , fear mongers that they are, have come up with the ingenious idea of not only destroying Syria and Iraq's rich cultural history, but have taken it a step further by executing people in front of these destroyed sculptures and monuments. In this way, they are showing the world not only that they hold power over human life but also over history. They can control what the world sees , control Syria, by ripping away its historic foundation.Through their massacre of sculpture, ISIS have made it apparent that they will kill non- believers presently and retroactively.

That is what scares me about the army, and society in general, putting history last. We think little of these waves of historical destruction now while these lovely works are still fresh in our minds, while we are still fighting this petulant enemy and understandably have bigger things to worry about. Yet, there will come a day when those sculptures and the history they represent will be missed. When  ISIS is defeated and the Syrians wish to reclaim their home , to retake their place in the global sphere, they will find they’re homeland plundered and destroyed. And the world in general will find our own perspective on the roots of humanity and modern society much for the worse.

The world is slowly letting them win.