Pseudoscience in archaeology, or pseudoarchaeology, are ideas formed by distrust, with minimal observable evidence that explain the human past. In a world of widespread, accessible misinformation, researchers often dismiss the ideas presented within pseudoscientific theory as laughable or irrelevant. On the contrary, many of these thoughts are supported by and for colonialist or racist agendas. With popular media throughout North America now supporting pseudoarchaeology, misinformation is beginning to take a hold on public perception of the field of archaeology. To explore this influence further, this paper summarizes the origins and thoughts presented within popular pseudoarchaeology, current public understanding of archaeology, and why this matters to archaeologists. This paper primarily considers how archaeology is portrayed in Canada and the United States, although I use additional international examples to underscore the importance of global public engagement and media influences within the field of archaeology. Stressing the lack of accurate representation of archaeology, especially regarding the representation of Indigenous peoples, provides an invitation to strive for public engagement and honest discourse about the field.
Anderson, David. 2019. “Crafting a Mysterious Ancient World: The Effects of Theosophy and Esotericism on Public Perceptions of Archaeology.” Nova Religio Vol. 22 (4): 13–26.
Anderson, David S. 2019. “‘I Don’t Believe, I Know’: The Faith of Modern
Pseudoarchaeology.” SAA Archaeological Record Vol. 19 (5): 31–34.
Atalay, Sonya. 2012. Community-Based Archaeology: Research with, by, and for Indigenous and Local Communities. University of California Press, Berkely.
California State University. 2019. The Year in Hate and Extremism. California State University, San Bernardino. United States. Retrieved from the Library of Congress,
https://www.loc.gov/item/lcwaN0017309/. Accessed July 11, 2022
Deer, Ka’nhehsí:io. 2021. “Why it's difficult to put a number on how many children died at residential schools.” CBC News. https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/residential-school-children-deaths-numbers-1.6182456. Accessed July 11, 2022
Derricourt, Robin. 2012. “Pseudoarchaeology: the concept and its limitations.” Antiquity
Vol. 86 (332): 524. Gotshalk-Stine. Amy. 2011. “Understanding Archaeological Misconceptions Among College Students: A Project Report.” Master’s thesis, Department of Science Education, California State University, Long Beach, California.
Hiscock, Peter. 2012. “Cinema, Supernatural Archaeology, and the Hidden Human
Past.” Numen. Vol. 59. 156–177. Holtorf, C. 2005. “Beyond Crusades: How (Not) to Engage with Alternative Archaeologies.” World Archaeology Vol. 37 (4): 544–551.
Kaplan, Jeffrey. 1997. Radical Religion in America: Millenarian Movements from the Far Right to the Children of Noah. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press.
Kajda, Kornelia. Amala Marx. Wright, Holly Wright. Richards, Julian Richards.
Arkadiusz Marciniak. Kai Salas Rossenbach. Michal Pawleta. Monique Van Den Dries. Krijn Boom.Maria Guermandi. Felipe Criado-Boado. David Barreiro. Anita Synnestvedt. Konstantinos Kotsakis. Kostantinos, Kasvikis. Eleftheria Theidoroudi. Friedrich Luth. Mayssoun Issa. Isabelle Frase. 2018. “Archaeology, Heritage, and Social Value: Public Perspectives on European Archaeology.” European Journal of Archaeology 21 (1): 96–117.
King, Amanda. Lepofsky, Dana. Pokotylo, David. 2011. “Archaeology and Local Governments: The Perspectives of First Nations and Municipal Councillors in the
Fraser Valley, B.C.” Canadian Journal of Archaeology / Journal Canadien d’Archéologie Vol. 35 (2): 258–29.
Kuhn, Robert. 2002. “Archaeology under a Microscope: CRM and the Press.” American Antiquity Vol. 67 (2): 195–212. Laycock, J. 2019. “Religious Aspects of Pseudoarchaeology: The How and the Why.” Nova Religio 22(4): 89–95.
Matić, Uroš, and Sonja Žakula. 2021. “Alien and Storytelling in the Anthropocene: Evolutionism, Creationism and Pseudoarchaeology in Science Fiction”.
Etnoantropološki Problemi/ Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 16 (3):677– 698.
National Center for Truth and Reconciliation. 2015. A Knock on the Door: The Essential
History of Residential Schools. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press. Newman, Nic.
Richard, Fletcher. Anne Schulz.Simge Andi, Rasmus Nielsen. 2020. Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
Pokotylo, David. 2002. “Public Opinion and Canadian Archaeological Heritage: A National Perspective.” Canadian Journal of Archaeology / Journal Canadien d'Archéologie Vol. 26 (2): 88–129.
Pokotylo, David. 2018. “Online Public Opinion and Archaeological Heritage Conservation: A Case Study from Western Canada.” In Relevance and Application of
Heritage in Contemporary Society, edited by Pei-Lin Yu, Chen Shen, and George S. Smith, pp 22–34. Routledge, London.
Raff, Jennifer. 2018. “Rejecting the Solutrean hypothesis: The first peoples in the
Americas were not from Europe.” The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/21/rejecting-the-solutrean-hypothesis-the-first-peoples-in-the-americas-were-not-from-europe. Accessed May 1, 2022.
Richardson, Lorna-Jane. 2019. “Using Social Media as a Source for Understanding
Public Perceptions of Archaeology: Research Challenges and Methodological Pitfalls.” Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology Vol. 2 (1): 151–162.
Society for American Archaeology and Ipsos. 2018. American Perceptions in Archaeology. Electronic Document, https://documents.saa.org/container/docs/ defaultsource/docpublicoutreach/ipsos_poll2018.pdf?sfvrsn=a1f0921e_4. Accessed March 23, 2022.
Stanford, Dennis J and Bradley, Bruce. 2012. Across Atlantic Ice: The Origin of
America's Clovis Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Tkemlúps te Secwépemc Office of the Chief. 2021. Statement from Tk’emlúps te
Secwépemc Chief and Council. Press Release. https://tkemlups.ca/wp-
content/uploads/TteS_-Cowessess_Statement_June24_2021.pdf. Accessed July 11, 2022.
Watkins, Joe. 2005. “Through Wary Eyes: Indigenous Perspectives on Archaeology.” Annual Review of Anthropology Vol. 34: 429–449.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Christie Fender