Whip Cracking, Gun Toting, Torch Waving Treasure Hunters

Whip Cracking, Gun Toting, Torch Waving Treasure Hunters?

The Stereotype Vs The Archaeologist

"Stereotypes die hard and, for most of us, archaeologists still wear pith helmets, exhume mummies, do their work far from home, discover lost Greek of Roman statues, decipher Mayan glyphs, or brandish bullwhips like Indiana Jones. Most of today’s real archaeological careers shatter such facile stereotypes" (Day 1997: 5)

What exactly do we think of when we think of archaeologists? Indiana Jones? Lara Croft? Puzzles and pitfalls set by some ancient race to protect their most prized possessions? All of the above? Stiebing (1993) has said:

"Many people picture a romantic figure like the fictional Indiana Jones exploring exotic places in search of treasure and adventure. Novels, movies, and many popular accounts of archaeological discoveries have made this concept of archaeology and archaeologists quite widespread." (Stiebing 1993: 21)

The idea of treasure hunters is more common in films in general with a lesser focus on 'real' archaeological work such as painstaking excavation techniques and documentation. This is understandable, however, as one must ask themselves, how much would we pay to watch a two hour motion picture on how to properly document an archaeological excavation? In all movies there has to be a 'crowd pulling' attraction. How far, therefore, can it be said that these depictions of archaeologists in motion pictures are true to life and how much of it is pure fiction?

As I have mentioned, treasure hunting is one such way of depicting archaeology as a profession. However, the fact is that any money made in the profession is often made by lecturing or by writing some form of literature. It is interesting to note that Indiana Jones is a university lecturer even though he must take frequent and long sabbaticals! Also, in Stargate, one of the main characters, an Egyptologist named Daniel Jackson, is seen to be taking a lecture, however unpopular, at the beginning of the movie.

In the more recent film, Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, the main character harks back to the gun-toting stereotype of the likes of Indiana Jones, first seen on the big screen twenty years before. She is not a lecturer and there is some mention of her being a photographer early in the film. However, there is no need to dwell on this point as she is clearly a very wealthy woman and is able to finance her "adventures" with ease. It would seem, therefore, that in some of these films there is some attempt to ground the story in reality.

Paul Bahn has said of archaeology:

"don't expect to get rich" (Bahn 1996: 4)

The way in which the history of archaeology is seen can also be related to the depiction of archaeologists as treasure hunters. In essence, archaeology is generally seen as a series of great discoveries:

"the tomb of Tutankhamun in Egypt, the lost Maya cities of Mexico, the painted caves of the Old Stone Age…or the remains of our human ancestors buried deep in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania" (Renfrew and Bahn 1996)

This can be seen to fit in with the idea of the treasure hunting archaeologists, hungry to make their one great discovery.

So, is there any real truth to this notion of treasure hunting in archaeology? As mentioned, there is more of a focus of gaining knowledge in the field today but is it possible that these ideas were based on archaeologists of the past? Well, in short, yes. In past archaeology and, in particular the nineteenth century, there were a number of archaeologists who, one could say, rivalled the captivating adventures of Indiana Jones and Lara Croft. (See "The Real Indy" section of the site) Nowadays, however:

"the fabulous treasures and exciting adventures that so captivate the public interest are no longer the primary reason for archaeological research" (Stiebing 1993: 22)

It seems that archaeologists pursue knowledge rather that actual personal gain. In fact, Fagain( 1978) states that:

"Archaeological research has become meticulous, laborious, and complicated, with many startling achievements to its credit" (Fagan 1978: 4)

So, archaeologists have moved away from these more adventurous attitudes depicted in motion pictures, although this is a statement with which many may argue. The study has turned towards a more research based discipline. This is not necessarily a bad thing as Fagain describes the "startling achievements" that have been accomplished.

This does not mean that the search for material remains and actual artefacts is obsolete. There is still a drive towards finding these remains but now there is more need to find out what these remains can tell us about past societies rather that filling up some kind of archaeological trophy cabinet.

Of course, the aim of finding out about past societies cannot be seen as merely one which belongs to archaeology. Anthropology and History also have these aims and as Fagan describes:

"Archaeology straddles many well-established areas of academic inquiry, including anthropology, history, philosophy, and the natural sciences" (Fagan 1978: 8)

Archaeology can sometimes be viewed as a mere subset of these disciplines. However, the fact that archaeology involves the physicality of going out and digging up the past in comparison with sitting and reading about it is what sets it apart from these other disciplines. Perhaps, therefore, this physicality is why archaeology attracts the movie producers and executives.

The gun toting, whip cracking hero or heroine is not always the typical portrayal of archaeologists in these films. In older movies they are characterised by their cowardliness and sometimes serve as comic relief or are used as a medium through which to describe events or artefacts. In Stargate, for example, the archaeologist Jackson is not the typical archaeologist hero and uses his brains rather than braun to achieve his goals in the film. This is likewise with the archaeologist heroine in The Mummy(1999). This, at least, shows that not all archaeologists are alike and this is certainly true.