Blog Post

Archaeology: Fact or Fiction?

Introduction

The Crisis in Archaeology: Why a Once-Respected Discipline is Losing Its Way

Archaeology, the study of human history and prehistory through excavation and analysis, is facing a credibility crisis. Once a vital link to the past, the discipline is increasingly met with scepticism, with its findings often dismissed as speculative or even fictional. This erosion of trust and academic relevance arises from flawed methodologies, resistance to new technologies, and a culture prioritising sensationalism over rigorous scientific inquiry. This article examines the core issues contributing to archaeology’s challenges and explores potential solutions to restore its integrity. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Subjectivity vs. Scientific Rigour

Why Archaeology is a dying discipline? Archaeology: Fact or Fiction?
(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

One major criticism of archaeology is its inherent subjectivity. Unlike pure sciences that rely on quantitative data and mathematical models, archaeology often interprets incomplete and degraded evidence, such as artefacts and structures. This reliance on fragmentary data makes definitive conclusions difficult and opens the discipline to claims of speculation. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Interpretative Bias

Archaeological findings are frequently influenced by the archaeologist’s perspective, leading to multiple, sometimes conflicting narratives. These narratives can vary based on cultural background, theoretical framework, or even personal bias. The result is that possibilities are often presented as certainties, creating a misleading view of the past. (Archaeology: Fact or Fiction? )

Lack of Reproducibility

In scientific disciplines, reproducibility is a cornerstone of credibility. However, archaeological findings are often unique to specific sites and cannot be replicated. For example, interpreting an artefact’s purpose or an ancient structure’s use often relies on context that cannot be recreated, making it difficult to validate conclusions through independent studies. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Emphasis on Probability

Archaeology operates in probabilities, where conclusions are based on the most likely scenarios rather than certainties. While this approach is a pragmatic necessity given the fragmentary nature of evidence, it contrasts sharply with the definitive proof or disproof found in pure sciences. This can make archaeology appear less rigorous and more speculative. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Resistance to New Technologies

(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )
(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

The reluctance of some archaeologists to adopt new technologies is a significant factor in the discipline’s struggles. While methods like GIS, LiDAR, stable isotope analysis, and Optically Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dating have revolutionised the field, resistance to integrating these into traditional studies persists. This often stems from an overreliance on older methodologies or scepticism about newer techniques. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

LiDAR Technology

LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) provides unparalleled accuracy in studying landscapes by using laser technology to create detailed topographical maps. For instance, a comprehensive LiDAR survey of Offa’s Dyke revealed new insights into its construction and purpose. Despite these advancements, some archaeologists continue to rely on outdated observational methods, ignoring the transformative potential of LiDAR. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

OSL Dating

OSL dating offers critical information about the last exposure of sediments to sunlight, providing insights into site usage and artefact burial timelines. Despite its potential to reshape our understanding of archaeological sites, there are instances where OSL findings are dismissed or underutilised. This is often due to a preference for traditional carbon dating methods or a reluctance to challenge established narratives.(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Integration Challenges

Part of the resistance to new technologies lies in integrating them into existing curricula and research frameworks. Many archaeologists are trained in traditional methodologies and lack exposure to advanced techniques during their education. Bridging this gap requires significant investment in training and resources, which some institutions are hesitant to provide.(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Funding, Egos, and Sensationalism

(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )
(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

The competitive nature of academia exacerbates the challenges facing archaeology. With limited funding opportunities, researchers often prioritise sensationalism to attract grants and media attention. This focus on bold claims over meticulous research undermines the discipline’s credibility.(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Ego-Driven Research

The egos of prominent archaeologists can create a toxic environment where rivalry replaces collaboration. In some cases, this leads to premature announcements of discoveries that have not been thoroughly investigated. The rush to claim credit for significant findings can result in flawed interpretations and missed opportunities for peer review. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Sensationalised Interpretations

Archaeologists sometimes present sensationalised interpretations of findings to secure funding or public interest. For example, media coverage of Cheddar Man’s DNA analysis led to exaggerated and often inaccurate reconstructions of his appearance. These narratives, while engaging, usually lack the scientific rigour necessary for credibility. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Ignoring Contradictory Evidence

In some instances, evidence that challenges established theories is disregarded to preserve favoured interpretations. For example, carbon dates from Stonehenge’s quarries suggest activity as early as 8500 BCE, far earlier than traditional timelines. Rather than re-evaluating these findings, they are often dismissed or overlooked. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )


Misinterpretations of Key Sites

Woodhenge 2
(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

The reluctance to embrace new methods and the tendency to prioritise established narratives have led to significant misinterpretations of key archaeological sites. These errors hinder our understanding of history and contribute to the discipline’s credibility crisis. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Stonehenge

Stonehenge is traditionally dated to the Neolithic period, approximately 3000-2000 BCE. However, earlier carbon dating evidence suggests the site’s construction may have begun as far back as 8500 BCE. Additionally, the widely accepted theory that the stones were dragged over land ignores the challenges posed by the landscape’s steep drops and river valleys. Alternative explanations, such as the use of waterways, remain underexplored. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Iron Age Hill Forts

Over 3,300 sites in Britain are classified as “Iron Age hill forts,” despite limited evidence to support this designation. Many of these sites lack indications of fortification, such as mass graves or signs of warfare. This misclassification stifles further research into their true purpose and period. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Linear Earthworks

Features like dykes are often attributed to the Saxon period based on their names. However, LiDAR studies suggest these structures are much older and likely served as transport routes rather than defensive boundaries. Discoveries such as a Roman barge at Car Dyke support the theory that these earthworks were prehistoric canals rather than fortifications. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Woodhenge

The traditional interpretation of Woodhenge as a single-story house or an arrangement of tree stumps fails to account for the size of the postholes. Recent excavations indicate that the original posts were far larger, suggesting a more imposing structure. Furthermore, the dating of Woodhenge is based on unrelated antler and bone fragments, with many posthole samples untested or lost. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

The Impact of Post-Glacial Flooding

BGS Flood Map (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )
BGS Flood Map – (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Post-glacial flooding, which submerged large parts of Britain after the last Ice Age, has been overlooked in many archaeological analyses. These waterways were essential for transportation and construction, yet their significance is often underestimated. For instance, linear earthworks like Wansdyke may have functioned as prehistoric canals rather than defensive structures. A better understanding of hydrology is needed to interpret these features accurately. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

The Peer-Review Process

While essential for maintaining scientific rigour, the peer-review process can also hinder progress in archaeology. Slow review times and resistance to new ideas often delay the dissemination of groundbreaking research. Critics argue that the discipline’s adherence to outdated methodologies and theories creates an environment hostile to innovation. This resistance to change has been likened to ideological dogmatism, where new evidence is met with outright denial rather than critical evaluation. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Accessibility and Public Engagement

The language used in academic journals is often dense and inaccessible to the general public. This disconnect limits public understanding and engagement with archaeology. Efforts to bridge this gap through public education initiatives and accessible publications are crucial for fostering a broader appreciation of the discipline. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Specific Examples of Flawed Practices

archaeological pulp fiction (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )
(Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Craig Rhos-y-Felin

Reports on this site have been criticised for inconsistencies and selective use of data. For example, carbon dates suggesting activity as far back as 5620 BCE were largely ignored, and tool marks indistinguishable between Mesolithic and Neolithic periods were overlooked. These omissions undermine the credibility of interpretations. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Waun Mawn

A BBC documentary linking Waun Mawn to Stonehenge relied on flawed methods, such as photogrammetry requiring impractical vertical stone movements. Additionally, OSL samples were collected without ensuring uncontaminated conditions, further compromising the findings. (Archaeology: fact or fiction? )

Professor Ray’s Journey

Attempts to recreate the transport of Stonehenge’s bluestones by foot failed to account for the region’s geographical challenges. The reliance on modern roads and disregard for natural obstacles rendered the experiment unrealistic and uninformative.

The Path Forward

The issues facing archaeology are complex but not insurmountable. By adopting an evidence-based, interdisciplinary approach, the discipline can restore its credibility and continue to illuminate humanity’s shared history.

Embrace New Technologies

Integrating advanced techniques like LiDAR, OSL, and GIS into research and education is essential for improving accuracy and efficiency.

Promote Interdisciplinary Collaboration

Collaboration with hydrology, geology, and climate science fields can provide a more comprehensive understanding of ancient environments and landscapes.

Strengthen Scientific Rigour

Archaeology must prioritise empirical data and mathematical models over subjective interpretation. This includes using statistical analysis to validate hypotheses and revisiting established theories in light of new evidence.

Encourage Critical Analysis

The peer-review process should welcome new ideas and foster critical debate rather than suppress dissenting views. Openness to challenging established narratives is vital for progress.

Enhance Public Engagement

Making research more accessible through public education, open discussions, and simplified publications can bridge the gap between archaeologists and the wider community.

Reduce Sensationalism

Resisting the temptation to prioritise media appeal over scientific validation is crucial for rebuilding trust in the discipline. Findings should be thoroughly vetted before being presented to the public.

Conclusion

Archaeology stands at a crossroads. Its credibility has been undermined by resistance to new methods, subjective interpretation, sensationalism, and external pressures. However, by addressing these challenges, the discipline can regain trust and respect, ensuring its continued relevance in uncovering and understanding our shared human past.

Briefing Document: Re-evaluating Prehistoric Britain

Introduction

This document summarises key themes and arguments presented in a series of blog posts and a PDF document, all focusing on Prehistoric Britain. The sources challenge mainstream archaeological interpretations, proposing alternative explanations for various historical phenomena and highlighting the limitations of current research methodologies. A central figure throughout these documents is Robert John Langdon” who presents many of the alternative theories and claims to be challenging mainstream, accepted archaeology with these claims.

Key Themes and Ideas:

Prehistoric Canals and Linear Earthworks (Dykes):

    • Main Argument: Linear earthworks, traditionally considered defensive boundaries or political markers (like Offa’s Dyke and Wansdyke), were primarily prehistoric canals used for transportation and trade.
    • Evidence:LiDAR analysis revealing the scale and engineering of these earthworks, suggesting their suitability for water conveyance.
    • The discovery of a canal ditch in the Wansdyke earthwork that is “twice as big as the Victorian canal,” suggesting sophisticated hydrological knowledge and engineering.
    • The existence of Roman barges at Car Dyke indicates that many of the dykes are pre-Saxon.
    • The East Wansdyke being far more substantial, with deeper ditches and wider banks, further supports its use as a waterway, as West Wansdyke appears to be a later, possibly Roman, road extension. As the source material states, “Excavations conclusively show that the Ditches on the East side of Wansdyke are much more profound and twice as broad. In contrast, the Banks on the East Side are much wider.
    • The connection between these ‘canal’ earthworks and barrows and flint pits, which is seen in the East but not the West, further supports the theory that the East portion is older.
    • Challenged Ideas: Refutes the traditional narrative that these dykes were defensive structures. “Many people have dismissed my theory, but I have not let that stop me.

    Mesolithic Seafaring and Early Boats:

      • Main Argument: Evidence suggests boats were in use much earlier than conventionally believed, possibly as far back as 10,000 years ago.
      • Evidence:Discovery of 10,000-year-old boats on British hillsides challenges traditional dating of boat construction.
      • Discussion of coracles and their capacity for sea travel, posing the question of early sea exploration. “Furthermore, radiocarbon dating evidence suggests that sea travel may have been invented much earlier than previously thought.

      The Problem of “Iron Age Forts”:

        • Main Argument: Many structures labeled “Iron Age hill forts” are misclassified. These sites lack clear evidence of defense, such as mass graves, implying they served other purposes. As the source material notes, “All sites that sit on top of hills and have ditches are called Iron Age Forts – sadly I have yet to find a single location that is either ‘Iron Age’ or a ‘Fortification’ as not a single dead body from slaying has ever been found and all the so called defensive ditches EVER!!
        • Evidence:The lack of defensive remains at these sites.
        • The classification stifles further research into the true purpose of these structures.
        • Challenged Ideas: The widely accepted idea that many hilltop sites in Britain were military defenses in the Iron Age.

        Roman Ports and Shifting Coastlines:

          • Main Argument: Roman ports located far inland indicate significant sea-level changes or different hydrological conditions, possibly fed by freshwater rivers rather than the sea.
          • Evidence:Examples of Roman ports like Brading and Lewes, now inland, due to what is assumed to be rising sea levels.
          • The silting of harbours like Ephesus.
          • Questions whether the Lewes harbour was once fed by freshwater rather than seawater.

          Raised Beaches and Post-Glacial Activity:

            • Main Argument: Raised beaches are better explained by falling sea levels or past tsunami events, rather than solely by isostatic rebound.
            • Evidence:Alternative explanations for raised beach formation, including tsunami theory and falling sea levels. “Geologists have come up with a complex explanation for raised beaches, but a more straightforward reason is that they form when sea levels fall, leaving beaches exposed and stranded above the new sea level.
            • Discussion of the Storegga slide and its potential impact.
            • Rejection of the idea that deposits are due to post-glacial flooding.

            Giant Skeletons and Early Human Populations:

              • Main Argument: Claims that giant skeletons were dismissed by modern science. This suggests that prior human species existed that were larger than humans as they exist now.
              • Evidence:The dismissing of giant skeleton findings found by French Archaeologists

              Ancient Knowledge and Weather Patterns:

                • Main Argument: Prehistoric people in Britain had knowledge of severe weather patterns (including tornadoes) and constructed underground shelters in response.
                • Evidence:The existence of “souterrains” and fogous.
                • Historical records of severe storms such as the “Grote Mandrenke” in 1362 and a tornado in 1091.

                Mythological Dragons as Reality:

                  • Main Argument: The global presence of dragon mythology across diverse cultures suggests a possible shared experience with a real, now-extinct animal or some other ‘real’ experience.
                  • Evidence:The presence of dragon mythologies across different cultures.

                  Doggerland/Atlantis and a Lost Civilization:

                    • Main Argument: The sunken land of Doggerland in the North Sea may be linked to Plato’s account of Atlantis. This suggests a potential “world’s oldest and greatest civilisation” existed in the area.
                    • Evidence:Plato’s account of Atlantis is debated due to its potential connection to the flooded land of Doggerland

                    Alexander the Great and Ancient Waterways:

                      • Main Argument: Alexander’s campaign into India was facilitated by waterways that no longer exist, rather than solely over land.
                      • Evidence:The proposal that Alexander used waterways that were larger in the past, leading to India. “Traditionally, Alexander’s route was seen as a march over barren land, but a photojournalist suggests he used waterways that were larger in the past.

                      Challenging Mainstream Archaeology:

                        • Main Argument: Mainstream archaeology is flawed, often biased by preconceived notions and hampered by a resistance to alternative interpretations, often referred to as “bad science.”
                        • Evidence:The classification of many sites as “Iron Age hill forts” despite a lack of evidence.
                        • The misinterpretations and censorship of archaeological findings.
                        • The slow adoption of new technology, such as LiDAR, and new perspectives.
                        • The continued misinterpretations of ancient measurements.
                        • Specific criticism of academics who use peer review to validate and propogate errors. As the source material notes “Previous peer-reviewed works have perpetuated the same mistakes, making them socially acceptable in archaeology.

                        Stonehenge Transportation:

                          • Main Argument: The stones used in Stonehenge were likely transported primarily via waterways, rather than overland, as mainstream archaeology suggests.
                          • Evidence: The difficulty in transporting the stones overland, given the landscape.
                          • Logistical assessments of stone transportation, indicating that overland movement is unlikely, and that using water is far more feasible. As the source material states, “The number of Rivers are immense and would have been larger than today!
                          • Calculations of workforce, materials and time needed for moving bluestones with boats as opposed to overland transportation.
                          • Challenged Ideas: The prevailing idea that stones were hauled by sledges over land, ignoring the difficulties posed by terrain.
                          • The Use of LiDAR TechnologyMain Argument: LiDAR technology has revolutionised and will continue to transform our understanding of Prehistoric Britain.
                          • Evidence: The consistent referral to the use of LiDAR technology in various claims throughout the source material.

                          Contradictions and Questions:

                          • The sources present a clear bias against mainstream archaeology, often framing it as deliberately flawed or resistant to new evidence.
                          • Some of the arguments are speculative and may rely on interpretations of the evidence and logic more than concrete proof.
                          • The sources often conflate multiple lines of evidence to support a singular conclusion, which might make it difficult to verify.

                          Concluding Thoughts:

                          These sources provide an interesting challenge to conventional historical accounts of Prehistoric Britain. They raise valid concerns about the limitations of current archaeological practices and push for re-evaluation using new technologies and interdisciplinary approaches. However, it’s important to approach these alternative interpretations with a critical eye and note that they are often based on a revisionist point of view. Further research and scrutiny will be needed to validate the claims made. The use of LiDAR and other advanced technologies to gather new evidence should also be given further scrutiny.

                          Exploring Prehistoric Britain: A Journey Through Time

                          My blog delves into the fascinating mysteries of prehistoric Britain, challenging conventional narratives and offering fresh perspectives based on cutting-edge research, particularly using LiDAR technology. I invite you to explore some key areas of my research. For example, the Wansdyke, often cited as a defensive structure, is re-examined in light of new evidence. I’ve presented my findings in my blog post Wansdyke: A British Frontier Wall – ‘Debunked’, and a Wansdyke LiDAR Flyover video further visualizes my conclusions. (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          My work also often challenges established archaeological dogma. I argue that many sites, such as Hambledon Hill, commonly identified as Iron Age hillforts are not what they seem. My posts Lidar Investigation Hambledon Hill – NOT an ‘Iron Age Fort’ and Unmasking the “Iron Age Hillfort” Myth explore these ideas in detail and offer an alternative view. Similarly, sites like Cissbury Ring and White Sheet Camp, also receive a re-evaluation based on LiDAR analysis in my posts Lidar Investigation Cissbury Ring through time and Lidar Investigation White Sheet Camp, revealing fascinating insights into their true purpose. I have also examined South Cadbury Castle, often linked to the mythical Camelot. (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          My research also extends to the topic of ancient water management, including the role of canals and other linear earthworks. I have discussed the true origins of Car Dyke in multiple posts including Car Dyke – ABC News PodCast and Lidar Investigation Car Dyke – North Section, suggesting a Mesolithic origin2357. I also explore the misidentification of Roman aqueducts, as seen in my posts on the Great Chesters (Roman) Aqueduct. My research has also been greatly informed by my post-glacial flooding hypothesis which has helped to inform the landscape transformations over time. I have discussed this hypothesis in several posts including AI now supports my Post-Glacial Flooding Hypothesis and Exploring Britain’s Flooded Past: A Personal Journey. (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          Finally, my blog also investigates prehistoric burial practices, as seen in Prehistoric Burial Practices of Britain and explores the mystery of Pillow Mounds, often mistaken for medieval rabbit warrens, but with a potential link to Bronze Age cremation in my posts: Pillow Mounds: A Bronze Age Legacy of Cremation? and The Mystery of Pillow Mounds: Are They Really Medieval Rabbit Warrens?. My research also includes the astronomical insights of ancient sites, for example, in Rediscovering the Winter Solstice: The Original Winter Festival. I also review new information about the construction of Stonehenge in The Stonehenge Enigma. (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          Further Reading

                          For those interested in British Prehistory, visit www.prehistoric-britain.co.uk, a comprehensive resource featuring an extensive collection of archaeology articles, modern LiDAR investigations, and groundbreaking research. The site also includes insights and extracts from the acclaimed Robert John Langdon Trilogy, a series of books exploring Britain during the Prehistoric period. Titles in the trilogy include The Stonehenge Enigma, Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and The Post Glacial Flooding Hypothesis, offering compelling evidence about ancient landscapes shaped by post-glacial flooding.

                          To further explore these topics, Robert John Langdon has developed a dedicated YouTube channel featuring over 100 video documentaries and investigations that complement the trilogy. Notable discoveries and studies showcased on the channel include 13 Things that Don’t Make Sense in History and the revelation of Silbury Avenue – The Lost Stone Avenue, a rediscovered prehistoric feature at Avebury, Wiltshire. (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          In addition to his main works, Langdon has released a series of shorter, accessible publications, ideal for readers delving into specific topics. These include:

                          For active discussions and updates on the trilogy’s findings and recent LiDAR investigations, join our vibrant community on Facebook. Engage with like-minded enthusiasts by leaving a message or contributing to debates in our Facebook Group.

                          Whether through the books, the website, or interactive videos, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of Britain’s fascinating prehistoric past. We encourage you to explore these resources and uncover the mysteries of ancient landscapes through the lens of modern archaeology.

                          For more information, including chapter extracts and related publications, visit the Robert John Langdon Author Page. Dive into works such as The Stonehenge Enigma or Dawn of the Lost Civilisation, and explore cutting-edge theories that challenge traditional historical narratives. (The Great Antler Pick Hoax).

                          Other Blogs

                          t