Ancient Apocalypse and shows like it are a gateway drug to other Science Denial and Conspiracy Theories.

 Ancient Apocalypse and shows like it are a gateway drug to other Science Denial and  Conspiracy Theories. 

‘Ancient Apocalypse” is causing quite the stir these days, at least in certain circles. It seems the Archaeologists I follow are all rather annoyed. The series is presented by a man named Graham Hancock, who has quite the History. He has been knocking around in the ether for years, publishing dozens of books in that time. He seems to focus most of his efforts on speculative archaeology  ideas that often connect cultures and ideas with no evidence to actually connect them. I’ll leave it to others to actually explain more of Hancock’s career, but suffice it to say I suppose he has made quite the living throwing ideas at the wall to see what, if anything, sticks. 

Pseudo archaeology is often disparaged by academic and mainstream archaeologists but I don’t think many people outside of the academic world and it’s immediate orbit really understand what it is, or what it’s dangers and pitfalls are. Archaeology as a discipline is poorly understood by most people, and the only exposure many of us have to archaeology can also serve as an indicator of age. For people older than me it’s usually Indiana Jones. For people my age it can be either Indiana Jones or Lara Croft, and for people the age of my students the first exposure they had to archaeology was probably Nathan Drake in the ‘Uncharted” series even though he isn’t actually an archaeologist I’m told. As a consequence, the only exposure the general public usually gets to archaeologists is of them being rugged and handsome (or beautiful) adventurers who engage in fantastic adventures filled with sex and violence. 

Now I am not an archaeologist but I know enough to know that that’s not at all what it’s like. If the general public knew that the average archaeologist spent most of  their days painstakingly digging perfectly square holes in the ground with perfect sides, meticulously documenting every single bead, pottery shard, nail and other mundane item they find with drawings, photos, measurements they would be bored to tears. It’s not that exciting, at least to outsiders. Like, at all. Once more, the public perceives the work or archaeologists as grand, temples, idols, treasure. What archaeology usually is is far less exciting, it’s garbage. Peoples garbage and the stuff they leave behind. At the end of the day that’s how we learn about people and their everyday lives, the things they leave behind. The other thing I think most people fail to realize is the number of archaeologists who are doing something the general public would consider exciting is few and far between. My favorite experience with an archaeologist was when I worked for the Castillo de San Marcos as a Park Ranger in St. Augustine. One day the maintenance crew was working in the flooring in one of casemates and they found BONES (just…..look at the bones!). All work stopped and maintenance called my department (interp) and our boss called Carl Halbirt, the grizzled, bearded, City Archaeologist for St. Augustine(the NPS did not have its own Archaeologist, but everyone liked Carl.) There was a buzz among some people present, but most of the Interp staff and the older men in the maintenance crew already knew what was up, but nonetheless, we waited for Carl. Carl showed up, he knelt down. Looked at the bones, examined them and the surrounding floor and said “yup, chicken bones. Probably left behind by the maintenance crew that did this floor last time in the 1950s. Go ahead and keep working.” And work resumed. My point is, most archaeology is considered pretty mundane, and the average lay person has no idea what archaeologists ACTUALLY DO. Hell, I’m pretty sure I know more than the average person and I only have a vague idea of the work involved. And that’s my point, most people don’t know what archaeologists do, so it’s easy take advantage of that and use that ignorance to fleece people and make a profit. 

So, what is pseudo archaeology? Well, Wikipedia (obviously not the best source but it will work for our purposes) defines it pretty clearly as “Pseudo archaeology—also known as alternative archaeology, fringe archaeology, fantastic archaeology, cult archaeology, and spooky archaeology—is the interpretation of the past from outside the archaeological science community, which rejects the accepted data gathering and analytical methods of the discipline.”  Adherents to this sort of theory are people like Erik Von Daniken (author of Chariots of the Gods wherein he espouses views that ancient astronauts gifted mankind with technology, culture, religion, etc) and of course, the subject of this article, Graham Hancock. Basically pseudo archaeology, from where I’m sitting, is someone playing at archaeology with none of the discipline education or hard work involved in real archaeology.  It seems like these characters, Hancock, and Von Daniken before him, always start with an innocent question. 

“What if…..”

Yes, ‘what if’, such an innocent question. ‘What if aliens are responsible for teaching mankind all bout everything” and “what if there was an ancient advanced civilization in the ice age that was wiped out by a cataclysm at the end of the ice age and the survivors taught ice age hunter gatherers civilization.” Naturally these are thought provoking ideas that grab ahold of Imagination. The problem is that oftentimes the answer to that question is ‘no, there is no evidence of that whatsoever’ which is not a fun answer at all. It makes the person answering look a stuffy no fun at parties wet blanket type. The strength of pseudo archaeology is the fact that archaeology has gaps and does not have all the answers, and it sometimes makes mistakes. Pseudo archaeology steps In and exploits the gaps in existing archaeology by interpreting the data slightly differently and bending and twisting existing facts, and sometimes even inserting all new facts. It’s amazing the kind of incredible narratives and theories that you can come up with when you ignore inconvenient facts and insert the ones you need. 

The Appeal 

From where I am sitting the appeal of pseudo archaeology is simple. It’s all the fun and romance of what we imagine archaeology to be like with none of the work or discipline of the real thing. Adherents get to say what they want and when admonished or challenged by mainstream archaeologists the pseudo archaeology crowd responds that they are close minded old stuffy academics. This of course plays well to the masses who are not involved in academia and allows the viewers and fans of pseudo archaeology to feel special. It is they who are open minded, it is they who are the true free thinkers and are willing to entertain and embrace new and controversial ideas, while the academics are stuck in the mire and unwilling to bend or change.  It’s an argument that embraces the common saying and wisdom that one should  have an open mind, but as I have stated before in other blog posts, an open mind is important, but we run the risk of having our mind so open that it simply falls out of your head.

I was the target audience for this sort of program for years. We had cable, I absorbed things like a sponge and I had curiosity to spare. I’m not sure if you can tell, but writing is not my strong suit, and while I like reading, I have always learned much better by listening, whether it’s documentaries or podcasts. I ate this sort of stuff up. In my early years at college I still sort of clung to that mentality, but the more I learned, and since my instructors were paitient, I gradually sort of broke out of that mentality. It was a sort of gradual change and as I got older and progressed in my education documentaries about pseudo archaeology started to have less and less appeal and I started to hear these outrageous claims and say things like “hey…..wait a second…..” and somewhere along the line I started being more skeptical. 

So what’s the big deal?

So who cares? It’s not like bad documentaries and pseudo archaeology are dangerous, it’s just entertainment and fun.Right? RIGHT?!?! Sure, for most people that’s true.  But these sorts of  lines of questioning that aren’t in good faith  and disregard for the work of experts and generally agreed upon consensus set the stage for other types of denial down the road. Specials like Ancient Apocalypse, shows like Ancient aliens, the myriad of specials about lost civilizations and the like, they all act a sort of gateway drug to other science and social denial in the future. You can draw a fairly straight line from viewers of things like Ancient Apocalypse or Ancient Aliens to people who are flat earthers, moon landing deniers, to the more nefarious holocaust denial, vaccine denial, and election denial. Asking ‘what if’ questions and imagining alternative history is harmless, most people who view these programs go on to remain harmless, but for the few that take these ideas of denial and mistrust of expertise further, there can be real world implications that are damaging. How many people have died because they refused to get vaccines that are widely known to work and be safe? Let’s not even get into the damage caused to our Republic by election denial, leading even to an insurrection that killed multiple people and wounded many others, not to mention the long term effects. Long story short, shows like Ancient Apocalypse are probably harmless, but the can lead to things that are harmful to society at large. 

But Jake, you didn’t talk about Ancient Apocalypse hardly at all?

Yup. That’s true, but there are literally dozens of archaeologists out there who know better than I do and can provide more insight than I can, and I’ll try to include some links to articles and twitter threads at the bottom this article to point you in the direction of some. I’ll say this, characters like Graham Hancock often deride archaeologists as hiding the truth for their own benefit or enrichment. Graham Hancock is worth about $2 million dollars. Now,I may catch heat for this, but  for a man of 72 years old who has been working his whole adult life, has had multiple books sell fairly well in addition to regular work over the years, coupled with an assumption he has made wise investments and money management, that is not necessarily an excessive sum. BUT I’d venture to say he’s worth a bit more than your average archaeologist of any age,and that’s something to keep in mind. Who makes more money from the claims? Your local archaeology professor working his or her  butt off for maybe 50-70k/yr if they are LUCKY or the guy signing deals with Netflix and raking in plenty of money? That’s up to you, but I know who I’m with on this question, firmly in the camp of expertise and listening people who have done the work and put the time in. 

If you want to see some takes on Ancient Apocalypse from Archaeologists and other academically minded people who are qualified to give opinions on the veracity of the claims made in the show, check out the following podcasts and archaeologists. 

Check out these people for some good discussions on Archaeology and debunking of pseudo archaeology. 

“The Plastic Plesiosaur Podcast: The Graham Hancock Question”- available at most podcast apps.

Archeologist Ken Feder- @fiftysitesbook on twitter

Archaeologist Bill Farley-@archaeologygame on twitter (also on YouTube)

Monstertalk Podcast- they have not tackled this topic, yet. 

In Research Of Podcast - related to monstertalk, but always great discussions concerning archaeology and pseudo archaeology.