Introduction: What is Archaeology’s Value?
Description: Survey of topics to be covered in the course.
The nature of ethics; professional ethics; archaeology as a profession;
the legal organization of archaeology. Why is archaeology important?
What is the value of archaeology? We explore
these issues by examining our own interests, backgrounds, and involvement
in archaeology.
Learning Objectives:
Appraise one's attitudes about archaeology and what it does.
Assess the multiple values of cultural resources.
Readings:
William D. Lipe, "Value and Meaning in Cultural Resources," in Approaches to the Archaeological Heritage, ed. H. Cleere (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 1-11.
C. McGimsey, "The Value of Archaeology," in Ethics and Values in Archaeology, ed. E. L. Green (New York: Free Press, 1984), 171-174.
1. Preliminaries
a. Hand out syllabus.
b. Instructor and students identify themselves. The students briefly describe their backgrounds in terms of class standing (e.g., senior, junior , etc.), major, and current interests in archaeology (e.g., Maya, Classical, historical).
[Note for Instructors: I find it helpful for each student to fill out an index card listing name, e-mail address, class, major, list of archaeology classes completed or currently being taken, and any archaeological experience (e.g., CRM work or field school). I teach the class as an upper-level undergraduate course, so most of the students are seniors with considerable academic experience. A few are juniors and, rarely, sophomores; I usually interview sophomores and others (e.g., archaeology minors) to make sure they have had enough exposure to archaeology.]
c. Using the syllabus, go over the requirements of the course in detail, including required books and readings; oral presentations; student papers; the final exam; and expectations, especially the need for students to participate in class discussions. Describe the grading criteria.
d. Briefly go over the weekly topics in the syllabus and give the students an idea of what to expect.
[Note for Instructors: The list of weekly topics in the syllabus follows a deliberate pattern. The first seven weeks of the course focus on ethical considerations—what it means to be an archaeologist; the public interest in archaeology; relationships with other groups, such as Native Americans, dealers, and museum curators; professional ethics—and culminates in a discussion session, "On Being an Archaeologist." Having established the ethical and professional groundwork, in the remaining eight weeks of the course we turn to a series of important topics that are conveniently considered under the rubric of archaeological law. These include looting and the antiquities market, international and national approaches to archaeological heritage management; cultural resource management in the United States, contract archaeology in the United States, and maritime law/underwater archaeology. By putting the ethical component of the course first, students are able to approach the legal topics based on a solid grounding in archaeological values. The last class allows a final opportunity for discussion.]
2. Discussion of Student Attitudes Toward Archaeology
To begin our exploration of the value of archaeology, we start with a survey of student attitudes. Hand out the worksheet and do each item one at a time. Read the question, give the students a few minutes to write an answer, then have some of the students read their answers as a way of stimulating discussion.
[Note for Instructors: To ensure candid, unstressed responses, assure the students in advance that the worksheets will not be collected or graded. After a few responses are solicited, rather than hearing each student’s response you might ask "Did anyone say something different?" The questions and answers will frequently lead into various fruitful avenues of discussion.]
"What made you decide to major in archaeology and/or wish to become a professional archaeologist?"
[The variety of answers is charming, ranging from basic interest in history and civilization (often "ancient Egypt" or the like) to a childhood visit to a museum or dig. Some students admit to fascination with collecting old things.]
"What do your parents think of this choice?"
[An opportunity to face the practical limitations of choosing a profession in archaeology. Some parents express absolute support, many wonder "What are you going to do with it?"]
What do your friends, or people you meet, say when you tell them you are specializing in archaeology?
[Always a fun question. One of the most common responses from students is that people say, "I always wanted to be an archaeologist. If I had to do it all over again, that’s what I would do." Others ask questions about jobs. Still others assume you know everything about world archaeology, and ask your opinion of pseudoarchaeological topics like crop circles, astronauts building pyramids, etc.]
"Name up to five kinds of jobs that exist for professional archaeologists."
[Most students have trouble coming up with more than one or two. "Professors" and "museum archaeologists" top the list. Few students know that there are jobs in federal, state, and local government, in organizations like the National Park Service, and very few seem aware of the field of cultural resource management (CRM) as a private-sector activity.]
"Number the jobs listed above 1 to 5 in order of your career priorities. Number 1 should be your ideal job, number 2 next, etc."
[Another eye-opening question, given the burgeoning of CRM employment and the apparent drop in academic archaeology jobs. Almost invariably, students choose an academic job—"being a professor"—as the ideal position. Very few list CRM. The answers indicate that most students, despite the realities of archaeological employment in the 21st century, cling to the traditional academic model of professional employment.]
"In order of priority, name the top five cultural sites that are important to you as a citizen of the United States (or other nationality if not a U.S. citizen)."
"In order of priority, name two or three cultural sites of a local or regional nature that are important to you."
[I've been asking students these questions for years and remain amazed by the responses. Most students who are American citizens are befuddled by the question. If you ask a Greek national, he or she will immediately list "the Acropolis," "the Parthenon," "Delphi," "Mount Athos," or any number of sites. American students are as likely to say "Yankee Stadium" or "New York City" as they are "Plymouth Rock" or "the Liberty Bell." Ask 10 American students the question and you are likely to get 10 different responses. Among most Americans, it seems, cultural sites are only weakly linked to personal or national identity. This point is useful to keep in mind as the class considers cases where the link between site and identity is often very strong.
For an even more surprising result, substitute the word "archaeological" for "cultural" in the two questions above. Most of the students simply did not have strong feelings about archaeology in terms of their personal or national heritage. Several students—and these were archaeology majors!—could not think of a single American archaeological site of importance to them or their country.]
"In a single sentence, describe the value of archaeology."
[This question is sure to elicit groans from the students, yet its answer is at the core of the class. If archaeology majors cannot articulate a clear and simple value of the field they are studying, how can we expect the general public to do so? Answers tend to be on the order of "To learn about the past" or "If we understand the mistakes of the past, we won’t repeat them in the future." Few articulate a value for archaeology that relates to the public interest.]
"Archaeologists often use terms like "artifacts" and "sites" to describe the things they study. List as many other names and terms that you can think of that archaeologists and non-archaeologists use to describe the stuff of the past."
[Apart from "artifacts," the most commonly cited terms include antiquities, material culture, art, relics, and treasure. Students rarely offer any of the following: cultural/archaeological resources; cultural/archaeological heritage; cultural property; cultural patrimony; sacred objects.]
"Define archaeology."
[Even more groans. Most students who offer a definition try to parrot the one from their introductory archaeology texts, such as Brian Fagan’s People of the Earth. I like to tell students that they need to be able to explain to a first-grade student what archaeology is, in language that the student will understand. Even at this stage in their academic careers, many upper-level undergraduate majors are so steeped in detail, theory, and facts that being asked to give a bare-bones, non-jargon definition of archaeology is enough to render them speechless. This is always a salutary question to ask.]
"Why should we do archaeology?"
[At this point students often resort to platitudes about advancing knowledge. It is useful to push a bit on this question: Why should people spend money on archaeology? Why should there be laws to protect sites? Why should governments incorporate archaeology into their land-use policies?]
3. Four Values for Cultural Resources
To provide some structure and a convenient heuristic approach to contemplating the value of archaeology, present the four values identified by William D. Lipe (1984). After presenting each of Lipe’s four values, elicit discussion from the class by encouraging students to think of examples of sites for each value.
a. Associative/Symbolic Value. Cultural resources that are regarded as tangible links to the past. They are often valued as symbols or even mnemonics of past experience or heritage. The associative value comprises sites and artifacts that are perceived as important for group, national, or personal identity. Examples for Americans might include the Declaration of Independence, Plymouth Rock, Gettysburg, or Mount Rushmore. A Catholic might say the Vatican; an Egyptian the pyramids at Giza; a Native American a prehistoric skeleton.
b. Informational Value. This value is regarded as providing information, knowledge, or data, and emerges from formal research in a wide variety of disciplines (archaeology, art history, architectural history, geography, etc.). For many archaeologists this value is considered paramount, as it is the knowledge gleaned from archaeological sites that archaeologists pursue. Sites providing such informational potential are often nondescript and a far cry from the famous tourist sites that appeal to many peoples’ sense of heritage.
c. Aesthetic Value. This value derives primarily from an appreciation of style, beauty, and art. It is the value most appreciated by dealers, collectors, and many museum curators and perhaps by many in the general public as well. It is usually gleaned from the physical object itself and generally does not require contextual information.
[Note for Instructors: Much of the conflict between archaeologists and the art market, which is responsible for the plundering of archaeological sites, may be understood as a fundamental competition between two of the above value systems. Collectors of ancient art give primacy to the aesthetic value over all others; it is the beauty of the piece, not its archaeological context, that is paramount. Archaeologists, on the other hand, value the informational aspect of the piece over the aesthetics; they see little value in the object once it has been stripped of its archaeological context. Is one value better than the other? Consider: the archaeological (informational) value preserves not only the information that can be learned but also the aesthetic value; in fact it enhances the aesthetic value by preserving the object within its context. On the other hand, privileging the aesthetic value over the informational often results in the destruction of the informational value because it countenances the destruction of context.]
d. Economic Value. This value comprises a monetary benefit to the cultural resource or object. As examples one may include utilitarian uses, such as adaptive reuse of historical buildings; the use of artifacts as commodities, for example in the art market; and heritage or cultural tourism.