Public Archeology Nationalism and Public

Public Archeology

Nationalism And Public Archeology

Although there are numerous positive and negative motivations that inspire archeologists to search for ancient ruins and civilizations in various countries, the spread of modernization as a result of the ever-changing cultural face of the world related to technology and population growth has now created what is known as public archeology, being excavations "which have been principally financed from public funds" and which have therefore "been thought as valid and useful to society" (Morrison, 1991, p. 24) by those who support and finance archeological digs and explorations within the boundaries of world societies, more usual than not directly within an urban setting, such as a large populated city like London or Dublin. Certainly, respectable and questionable motivations for archeological works are closely related to the history of a particular nation and to the current political and religious beliefs of its citizens and leaders, something that is very closely bound up to nationalism.

In today's modern Ireland, a good number of archeological excavations and programs are directly supported by the Irish government and major Irish universities, both of which tend to be highly nationalistic. For instance, archeology at the University College of Dublin is taught in a department suitably named Celtic Archeology, a reference to the Celtic history of Ireland and Scotland which dates back many thousands of years, and more often than not, the Irish Republic has encouraged "the pursuit of Irish archeology by which they mean pre-Viking" (Morrison, 1991, p. 24), an example being important excavations in Dublin of the rich Viking urban levels, much of which has been bulldozed and carted away as refuse. The director of the excavations openly appealed for more funding from his employer, the National Museum; unfortunately, the reply from the museum was quite discouraging -- "Ah! Now only if it were Early Christian" (Jameson, 1997, p. 167), an indication of the museum's dedication to Irish nationalism rather than to the discoveries which might have been made at the Viking site which were obviously pre-Christian.

These types of nationalistic biases are also responsible for the concentration in Irish archeology on what the late Michael O'Kelly, the one-time professor of archeology at the University of Cork, used to refer to as "Squiggle archeology" which concerned Irish Christian art like crosses and other religious remains of Ireland's so-called "Golden Age." Once again, the National Museum, upon learning that a valuable early Christian treasure had been illegally unearthed at the monastic site of Derrynaflan, hailed the find as "a great and highly-important discovery for the nation of Ireland" (Morrison, 1991, p. 26). Therefore, in order to demonstrate the influence of nationalism upon important archeological excavations in the British Isles and elsewhere, we will examine three particular case studies -- first, the controversies surrounding Sutton Hoo in England, an Anglo-Saxon burial site "of the kings of the dynasty which ruled East Anglia in the 6th and 7th centuries a.D." (Bruce-Mitford, 2004, p. 45); second, Conor Newman's Misinformation, Disinformation and Downright Distortion: The Battle to Save Tara, 1999-2005, and third, "Digging for Trouble" by Yigal Bronner and Neve Gordon which examines the on-going debate regarding the Israeli government and its archeological excavations which have often forced many Palestinian families to leave their ancestral lands.

Located on a terrace at the edge of cultivated land which overlooks the estuary of the River Deben in Suffolk, England, Sutton Hoo is believed to be the principle burial site of Anglo-Saxon kings dating back to the 7th century a.D. In 1939, a remarkable discovery was made at this site, then owned by Mrs. E.M. Pretty who "entrusted the archeological work to the Ipswich Museum and to famed archeologist Basil Brown" (Rahtz, 1998, p. 175), the man responsible for uncovering the remains of a Viking ship of which only corroded clench nails, soil discoloration and textural differences in the surrounding sand remained. But Brown then realized that this was no ordinary ship, for he concluded that it was a burial-ship which somehow had managed not to be robbed of its treasures in antiquity. This burial site turned out to be immensely important, for the remains of the ship held gold, silver and other Viking treasure; amazingly, Mrs. Pretty decided to bequest to Great Britain all that had been found at the site, one of the largest gifts of its kind ever given to a sovereign nation. Eventually, everything found at the site ended up in the British Museum where it remained without being studied for many years.

Since 1991, many other excavations have been made at Sutton Hoo and not surprisingly, a number of debates have arisen concerning exactly how much work at the site should be allowed in the future and what the British government should do about protecting not only the site but also the Viking treasures discovered within it. These debates can be summarized by listing several of the arguments put forward by those opposing any future excavations at Sutton Hoo. For instance, one argument maintains that the Sutton Hoo site, although not "subject to the hazards of the motorway, quarrying or other rural development," deserves to be "rescued" from further excavations. As one opponent puts it, "It is the duty of this generation to preserve monuments and the archeology contained within them, not to destroy them. The longer Sutton Hoo is left alone, the better" (Rahtz, 1998, p. 186). Another argument maintains that since the Sutton Hoo site is "exotic and unique... It is not really in the mainstream of British archeology which should be concerned with the broader patterns of human development," rather than on the burial places of Anglo-Saxon kings. Also, the financial resources which have already been utilized at Sutton Hoo "could more profitably be deployed in a dozen other equally worthwhile but less exotic" Anglo-Saxon projects (Rahtz, 1998, p. 187).

Obviously, this last argument is based solely upon the ideals of nationalism, due to regarding Sutton Hoo as being too "exotic" and not as "worthwhile" a project as other sites within Great Britain which usually date after the Viking invasions and have more connections with true British heritage. After all, "It is to the advantage of archeology as a whole that public interest in the past is stimulated, and how better than by excavating a site such as Sutton Hoo which is well-known to the general public?" (McGimsey, 2002, p. 184). It is interesting to note that as of 1991, the Sutton Hoo site has experienced continuous excavations which have yielded new information on Anglo-Saxon history in Great Britain, not to mention the discovery of the remains of a house, circa 2000 B.C.E., buried beneath a huge mound of earth not far from the original Sutton Hoo excavation site (Bruce-Mitford, 2004, p. 214).

Over the last several years, another archeological site, this time located in Ireland, has stirred up much controversy and debate. As Conor Newman relates, "The last three years have witnessed a major international campaign against routing a new motorway, the M3, along the valley between the hills of Tara and Skreen," an ancient pre-Christian site long believed to be the capital of pagan Ireland, dating back more than four thousand years. "The case against running a motorway through this landscape," adds Newman, "is quite simple and has remained unchanged from the start" (2005, Internet). However, the Irish government failed to yield to this viewpoint, for the toll motorway known as M3 currently runs along and very adjacent to the area of Tara/Skreen. In 2005, Newman and a host of other individuals opposed to building M3 smack up against the remains of Tara noted that "if this motorway goes ahead as planned, the monuments will have been unceremoniously slighted and the landscape surrounding them cleaved in two" (2005, Internet). Certainly, Newman and his fellow opponents, most of whom are professional archeologists and historians, see the ancient site of Tara as a national treasure which deserves to be protected at all costs; in fact, some view the Tara site as an Irish "royal landscape" of great historical importance and as an example "of how generations of people have contributed to the promotion, development and preservation" of Irish heritage over the last four thousand years (2005, Internet).

As to the viewpoint of the Irish government, the construction of M3 almost directly on top of the Tara archeological site was necessary as a way of lowering "Dublin-bound commuter" congestion on the "log-jammed M50" and as a way of promoting future business in nearby towns and cities like Meath whose councillors, along with others, argued that M3 "was vital to the future of northwest" Ireland (Newman, 2005, Internet). Without a doubt, the Irish government was more concerned about the future of Ireland as a viable European entity than it was concerning protecting what some government officials saw as "a collection of what appears to be defunct and irrelevant earthworks on the summit of a hill" (Newman, 2005, Internet), a rather surprising statement considering the long, bitter and violent struggle for an Ireland free of the influence of the English Crown and the efforts of the Irish people over the last fifty years or so to reclaim Irish nationalism.

One other area of the world which is currently experiencing some major problems related to archeological excavations in public places is the Middle East, particularly Israel and within its capital city of Jerusalem. In this case study by Yigal Bronner and Neve Gordon, the main area of dispute lies with "the way archeology is being used in Silwan, a Palestinian neighborhood in the oldest part" of Jerusalem, where excavations, under the guidance and support of the Israeli government, are currently being carried out. However, as Yonathan Mizrachi, an Israeli archeologist, sees it, these excavations are part of "a concerted campaign to expel Palestinians from their ancestral home" by using archeology as a leveraging tool. Mizrachi's evidence for this alleged campaign has deep connections to Elad, an Israeli settlement organization which through a variety of legal means has managed to "evict East Jerusalem Palestinians from their homes and replace them with Jewish settlers," something which apparently is quite accurate, due to the fact that Jewish homes have been built at several archeological sites which earlier were fenced in and protected by armed guards (2008, Internet).