Search This Blog

Monday, September 17, 2018

Elon Musk is building a spaceship that's so ambitious that some experts are calling it 'science fiction.' Here's what SpaceX and its engineers are up against.




elon musk big falcon rocket bfr spaceship bfs mars mission 2x1
Elon Musk and SpaceX's Big Falcon Rocket is designed to carry up to 100 people and deliver 150 tons of cargo to Mars.
SpaceX; NASA; Mark Brake/Getty Images; Samantha Lee/Business Insider

  • Elon Musk plans to blast a tourist around the moon in a ship made by his rocket company, SpaceX.
  • The private lunar mission is meant to demonstrate a new two-part launch system called Big Falcon Rocket, which is designed to eventually bring humans to Mars.
  • Engineers are said to be building a prototype of the BFR's spaceship primarily out of carbon-fiber composites.
  • Exactly how SpaceX is building that spaceship isn't publicly known, but industry experts have some guesses.
  • Aerospace engineers, astronauts, and Musk himself have said the first missions to Mars are likely to be perilous.
In December, a giant white tent appeared at the Port of Los Angeles. A routine permit suggested that SpaceX, the rocket company founded by Elon Musk, was using the roughly 20,000-square-foot $500,000 facility as a "storage tent."

But Musk revealed the tent's true purpose a few months later. Inside, his engineers are building a colossal interplanetary spacecraft called BFR, the Big Falcon Rocket (or, as Musk has said, Big F---ing Rocket).

On Thursday, SpaceX announced it had selected the first private passenger to be launched in the BFR. That person, whose identity is set to be revealed on Monday, will fly around the moon, the company said.

The BFR project and its immediate lunar goalposts mark the incredible and plainly unorthodox beginning of an effort by SpaceX to colonize Mars. Though Musk may announce a moon-mission launch date on Monday, his larger goal, which he has described as "aspirational," is to launch an uncrewed cargo mission to the red planet in 2022, followed by human missions in 2024.

"He wants to have two planets for humans to live on. Some people call it crazy, but it kind of makes some sense," Marco Cáceres, a senior space analyst at the Teal Group, told Business Insider. "If something were to happen to our planet, we have an option."

Based on Musk's statements and peeks of hardware inside the tent, experts say it's clear that SpaceX workers are now building a full-scale prototype there.




spacex white tent satellite image photo december 2017 port of los angeles google earth pro LABELED
SpaceX is said to be building a prototype Mars spaceship inside a 20,000-square-foot tent at the Port of Los Angeles.
Google Earth Pro; Samantha Lee/Business Insider

The two-part BFR, as described by Musk before his private-lunar-voyage announcement, will consist of a 157-foot-tall spaceship sitting atop a 191-foot-tall rocket booster. Together, such a system would be 35 stories — taller than the Statue of Liberty.

When fully fueled, it'll weigh nearly 9 million pounds, lift up to 150 tons of cargo, and ferry those supplies to Mars with as many as 100 passengers.

On top of all that, the entire system will be 100% reusable.

That's something "we haven't seen, ever," Cáceres said. "This would be the first entirely reusable launch vehicle."




elon musk mars bfr rocket spaceship launch earth launch transportation system youtube
An illustration of a Big Falcon Rocket launching toward space.
SpaceX/YouTube

Musk's vision for the BFR places it among the most difficult engineering projects ever attempted by humans.

"We've gone to the moon. But this is an order of magnitude at least more ambitious than that — probably a couple," Steve Nutt, a materials scientist and professor of chemical, aerospace, and mechanical engineering at the University of Southern California, told Business Insider of Musk's Martian ambitions. "It just sounds like science fiction."

So far, SpaceX has mostly kept secret whatever is going on under that white tent. People who work there will not reveal details of the project, nor will the few lucky outsiders who've been given a tour. The company declined multiple requests to provide interviews or on-the-record comments for this story.

Aerospace experts and the public are left asking how SpaceX could possibly build the enormous spaceship Musk has envisioned on the timelines he's put forth.

To get as close as possible to an answer, we spoke with a handful of aerospace industry experts who have ideas about how SpaceX will construct the BFR — including potential building materials, cutting-edge assembly processes, safety checks, and projected costs.

But they also have big questions, perhaps the most important of which is: Is society prepared to accept the high probability that some of SpaceX's missions to Mars will end in tragedy?

Will 2019 be the year of the first Mars spaceship?






elon musk mars colonization big falcon rocket spaceship bfr bs illustration iac 2017 GettyImages 855369196
Musk at the International Astronautical Congress last September in Adelaide, Australia.
Mark Brake/Getty Images

Musk said the BFR system would eventually replace every rocket and spaceship that SpaceX uses today, since it should be inexpensive to launch — that is, relative to the single-use rockets that dominate the industry.

To that end, the company recently raised hundreds of millions of dollars, much of which may go toward the BFR project. The newly announced moon voyage will also go toward the spacecraft's development, and more and more of SpaceX's 6,000 employees are also getting pulled into the effort.

Engineers started with "by far the hardest" part of the system to get right, as Musk has described it: the 16-story spaceship. The first prototype should be completed in 2019, according to Musk.

Assuming construction began with the tent's completion around December — tools for making pieces of the fuselage, or body of the spaceship, rolled through the tent's flaps months ago — this would mean a build time of about 18 to 24 months. By comparison, NASA's space shuttle orbiters, which are smaller than a BFR spaceship, each took about five years to make.

"It's typical SpaceX and Elon Musk stuff," Nutt said. "You don't sit around. There's a lot of pressure to do things quickly."

Once built, the spaceship prototype would most likely ride on a barge through the Panama Canal, get dropped off in Texas, and be transported inland by truck to the company's rocket facility in southern Texas. There it would start a series of short "hop" tests by late 2019, Gwynne Shotwell, the company's president and COO, indicated during a conference earlier in September.

Around the same time, workers may finish constructing SpaceX's permanent BFR factory in the Port of Los Angeles. That facility will be about 200,000 square feet, 10 times as large as the white tent.

According to SpaceX's plans, when all the parts are ready, the booster will heave the spaceship dozens of miles above Earth, detach, then land itself for inspection and refueling. Meanwhile, the spaceship will fire its engines to accelerate into orbit around Earth. (Shotwell said this might happen as soon as 2020.)




spacex big falcon rocket bfr mars landing mission sequence refueling colonization scheme figure14 new space journal liebert
A diagram showing how SpaceX plans to establish a base and methane-fueling depot on Mars.
Elon Musk/SpaceX; New Space/Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Publishers

The ship will be nearly out of fuel by that point, though, so SpaceX plans to launch nearly identical tanker spaceships to meet up with the first one in orbit. A series of rendezvous at about 17,500 mph would refill the spaceship's tanks with liquid methane fuel and the liquid oxygen required to burn it, but this might take about a dozen tanker flights.

"That allows us to effectively reset the rocket equation," Paul Wooster, SpaceX's principal Mars-development engineer, said during a presentation to the Mars Society in August. "We go from getting 100 tons or more into low-Earth orbit, then refill, and we can take that payload pretty much anywhere — including the surface of Mars."




city mars rocket bfr elon musk spacex iac 2017 talk
Musk's vision of a city on Mars.
SpaceX/YouTube

The BFR's spaceship is also designed to be refilled with fuel on Mars to power its return to Earth. SpaceX plans to manufacture oxygen and methane fuel using water from Martian soil, carbon dioxide in the planet's thin air, and electricity from solar panels.

A carbon-fiber emissary from Earth





big falcon rocket bfr spaceship bfs landing mars spacex
An illustration of SpaceX's BFR spaceship landing on Mars.
SpaceX

To be able to launch, refuel in orbit, endure months of flying through space, land on Mars, leave that planet, and safely return to Earth — then do all that over again — the BFR can't be an ordinary spacecraft.

That's why Musk is planning to build the entire spaceship "primarily of an advanced carbon fiber," he said in 2016.

Carbon-fiber composites are made out of many borderline-microscopic yet superstrong threads of carbon. The filaments, which are often woven together into a fabric, are then set in sticky, glue-like epoxy. When cured by heat, the epoxy hardens into an ultratough resin around the fibers.




carbon fiber filament thread knot tour group rice university 0715_KNOTS 5 web
A carbon-fiber strand tied in a knot.
Tour Group/Rice University

In this case, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Many carbon-fiber composites can match or exceed the properties of steel using one-fifth of the material. Some variants can also meet the properties of aluminum — the aerospace industry's go-to lightweight building material — at half that metal's mass.

But it's not easy to build huge structures from carbon fiber, and what SpaceX is constructing is unprecedented in the history of aviation and spaceflight.

The largest comparable vehicle ever made would be Boeing's 787 Dreamliner commercial jet airplane, which is about 50% composites by weight.

Of the spaceship, Cáceres said, "It will be massive — much bigger than anything we've ever seen."

Musk revealed the first clues about how SpaceX would manufacture a carbon-fiber vessel when he shared a photo on Instagram in April of a 40-foot-long metal cylinder with a seemingly tiny Tesla car next to it for scale.

"SpaceX main body tool for the BFR interplanetary spaceship," Musk said on Instagram. (He has since deleted his account.)




spacex bfr spaceship carbon fiber mandrel elon musk instagram
A tool roughly 30 feet in diameter that SpaceX will use to build its Big Falcon Rocket spaceship.
Elon Musk/SpaceX; Instagram

Nutt and others suspect that the tool is a rotating machine called a lathe or mandrel, which is used to apply carbon-fiber materials.

"It's a really, really big one," Nutt said of the mandrel. "I've never seen one close to that big."

Mandrels work something like a thread spooler. A robot moves along the length of a rotating mandrel, precisely unwinding rolls of carbon-fiber tape and wrapping them around the cylinder.

"You lay layer upon layer of the material. If you're going to make a spacecraft part, you'd probably have dozens of layers of material on top of each other," Greg Autry, the director of the Southern
California Spaceflight Initiative who's a leading expert on the space industry, told Business Insider. (Autry has a nondisclosure agreement with SpaceX but offered to speak about the aerospace industry in general.)

Only Boeing has ever used a mandrel close to the size of the tool in Musk's photo.

'The complexity is daunting'

Though the exact materials and methods SpaceX is using aren't publicly known, Nutt said several big challenges loom if you're making carbon-fiber structures the size of apartment buildings.

One is that epoxy slowly cures on its own at room temperature. Each epoxy has a different cure rate, but the kind used to manufacture airplanes becomes unusable after about four weeks, according to Federal Aviation Administration regulations. That means SpaceX would get only about a month to build each major section of the spaceship.

Another challenge is that carbon-fiber composites don't really like to touch super-cooled, or cryogenic, liquids. But to remain a liquid, methane must be kept below -259 degrees Fahrenheit and oxygen below -297 degrees.

The stakes of that challenge became clear in 2016, when one of SpaceX's Falcon 9 rockets exploded on a launchpad while carrying a $200 million satellite. The most likely cause: the bursting of a carbon-fiber-wrapped tank filled with cryogenic liquid.

"It's subject to cracking and leaking," Musk said during a presentation after the explosion.




carbon fiber fuel tank spacex mars elon musk
Inside SpaceX's giant carbon-fiber tank.
SpaceX/Elon Musk

But Musk said last year that SpaceX had "developed a new carbon-fiber matrix that's much stronger and more capable at [cryogenic temperatures] than anything before."

To demonstrate that technological breakthrough, SpaceX built the biggest-ever carbon-fiber-composite fuel tank, which Musk's staff then tied to a barge, dragged to sea, filled with cryogenic liquid, pressurized beyond its limits, and made violently burst.




spacex interplanetary transport system its carbon fiber fuel tank size
A carbon-fiber tank 40 feet in diameter that SpaceX made in 2016.
Elon Musk/SpaceX

And there's yet another major challenge in building most of a spaceship out of carbon-fiber composites: If the material isn't cured correctly, hard-to-detect and potentially mission-ending flaws might get cooked into the spaceship's body.

To avoid such disastrous defects, carbon-fiber composites must get squeezed under as much pressure as possible to push out bubbles, collapse voids, and ensure strong bonds.

"That's typically done with a giant pressurized oven, like a pressure cooker, that's called an autoclave," Autry said. "But these things are very expensive."

Cáceres said an autoclave the size SpaceX might require would be a similar size to the one used for 787 airplane fabrication, and that custom-built device cost Boeing up to $300 million. So Nutt thinks SpaceX is likely to go about it a different way.

"I think they're going to cure it in an oven," Nutt said. "You can make an oven for one-half to one-tenth the cost of an autoclave."




beoing 787 dreamliner airplane carbon fiber composite body barrel section fuselage kawasaki reuters tim kelly 2015 03 13T120000Z_1994645183_GM1EB3D1CB101_RTRMADP_3_KAWASAKI HEAVY BOEING
A forward fuselage of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
Tim Kelly/Reuters

If he's right, that means SpaceX would put each finished section into a giant heat-resistant plastic bag, suck out enough air to smoosh the carbon-fiber layers together, and heat everything.

Workers might then disassemble the mandrel to free the cured and hardened section. When all the big pieces are done — perhaps two or three "barrel sections," as Wooster calls them, plus one pointy nosecone — SpaceX would somehow combine them all into a single fuselage.

To join the sections of Boeing's Dreamliner together, the company uses about 50,000 metal fasteners. But initially this led to major headaches, since thousands of fasteners had to be replaced on about a dozen of the earliest planes after problems appeared during pressurization tests.

Such a problem would only be worse for a spaceship. Temperature differences in space can be hundreds of degrees, and various aerospace materials expand and contract at different rates.

"There are so many different parts of this thing, the complexity is daunting," Nutt said. "There will have to be a variety of materials and joining methods to accomplish everything this has to accomplish."

Nutt said this would be all the more reason for critics to laud any triumphs by SpaceX.

"I think if he succeeds, then people should appreciate what he had to overcome — what the company had to overcome," Nutt said, adding, "I wouldn't recommend betting against Elon Musk."

How to avoid death by defect or damage

Whatever is going on under that big white tent, one thing is certain, Nutt said: SpaceX needs to very carefully check its work.

That's because carbon-fiber composite materials don't easily signal cracks, voids, or other defects.

"When a metal part gets damaged, there's usually a dent or a scratch or something like that," Nutt said. "With composite parts, there can be damage and no manifestations at the surface. It's all subsurface."




787 dreamliner airplane factory carbon fiber composites boeing twitter
Workers look over carbon-fiber composite materials for Boeing's 787 Dreamliner.
Boeing

To inspect carbon-fiber sections, SpaceX may need to painstakingly cover every square inch with ultrasound scanners.

"You may have some structural problems on an aircraft, but the aircraft won't explode," Cáceres said. "But on a rocket, leaks, cracks, and instability — those things can be catastrophic. It explodes and people die."

Nutt thinks that to reduce that risk, SpaceX is likely to follow an industry standard practice of making demonstration parts, cutting out foot-long sample pieces, torturing those in stress tests, then inspecting them. Engineers could feed that test data into computer models and simulators to estimate how a full-size spaceship might fare.

"It's a fairly tedious process, and that's one reason materials in aerospace are introduced extremely slowly," Nutt said.

Eventually, SpaceX will build and test a full-scale spaceship. And there's a good chance the first one will fail spectacularly.

"When you're building something this big, the only real way to test it is once you've completed it, and you launch it," Cáceres said. "You better have a lot of money, because you're probably going to go through a lot of big, big structures before you get the one that works."




rocket landing explosion video spacex
A SpaceX Grasshopper rocket explodes in midair in August 2014 after an engine sensor failure.
SpaceX/YouTube

SpaceX is not under any delusions about avoiding snags. Many of its experimental launches and landings have ended in fiery explosions. The company has also weathered failures with operational rockets that resulted in the loss of expensive payloads. And earlier this year, Musk warned that SpaceX's largest-ever rocket, Falcon Heavy, could blow up during its maiden launch. (It did not.)
"Knowing Elon, I think you can expect him to experiment and do iterative testing — he always has — and it may work, or it may not," Autry said.

Once the spaceship is on a mission, however, in-flight inspections and repairs would still be essential.
"It's such a long mission," Nutt said. "I think the chances of some kind of damage or failure en route are much greater than a mission of days or weeks that we've seen in our lifetime."

Tiny pieces of rock or comet dust are extremely dangerous in space, since they can impact a spacecraft at thousands of miles per hour. One strike by a millimeter-long object could cripple a deep-space mission if it doesn't have repair capabilities.

"Those things can go right through any kind of structure and do a lot of damage," Nutt said. (The video below shows a 0.1-inch aluminum sphere striking a carbon-composite material at 15,800 mph.)

Yet carbon-fiber composites are extraordinarily tricky to fix, even on Earth. For example, Nutt said, when the Department of Defense needs to repair carbon-fiber-composite jet fighters, workers sand and sheen a damaged area, slather on layers of epoxy using "fancy trowels," put the damaged area under vacuum, and heat it. And that's what he calls the "crude" method.

"Things that you might be able to repair with some difficulty on Earth are orders of magnitude more difficult to execute and accomplish in space," Nutt said. "It's a big structure with a lot of components. The chances of failure are not zero. So you have to worry about those things and have contingency plans for all of them."

Spaceships don't grow on trees





spacex bfr mars ship earth space station resupply
An illustration of a BFR spaceship docked at the International Space Station.
SpaceX/YouTube

Cáceres said each BFR launch might cost about $10 million, give or take, with most of that going toward fuel (since the system is designed to be reused many times). By comparison, the Falcon Heavy rocket costs close to $100 million per launch but can carry about half the payload of a BFR spaceship.

However, Cáceres' estimate doesn't include the capital needed to build and test the BFR in the first place.

"If I had to venture to guess, I would say it would be somewhere in the $4 billion to $5 billion range," Cáceres said of those development costs, adding that if Musk "is really unlucky and there continue to be setbacks, it could be more than that."

Delays can add enormously to the final bill, Cáceres said.

"That's why so many government space programs tend to be so expensive — because they just go on and on, forever and ever, for technical reasons as well as budgetary and political reasons," he said.





spacex moon mission big falcon rocket spaceship bfr bfs illustration
SpaceX's rendering of a Big Falcon Rocket spaceship carrying a passenger around the moon.
SpaceX/Twitter

But Cáceres expects that if SpaceX shows enough progress, NASA could become interested and invest in the system's further development, helping to offset the company's costs.

"Ultimately, BFR could become a joint US government-SpaceX program," Cáceres said. "That would be my guess, eventually, because as much as I admire the success of SpaceX, this just seems like something too massive and too complicated for one company alone to handle."

If SpaceX successfully flies a tourist around the moon, it could serve as an audacious advertisement to NASA and lawmakers who control the government's purse strings: "Buy me," it would tacitly say.

'Rockets are going to explode, and people are going to die'





spacex crew dragon spaceship nasa commercial crew program illustration 42878298755_a9670c6596_o
An illustration of SpaceX's Crew Dragon spaceship, also known as Dragon 2 or Dragon V2, orbiting Earth.
Kennedy Space Center/SpaceX via Flickr

Before BFR is built and a passenger is launched toward the moon, SpaceX must ace a more immediate task.

For the first time in its 16-year existence, the company is about to launch NASA astronauts to the International Space Station.

"If BFR is going to work, then using Falcon 9 or Falcon Heavy rockets to launch a crewed capsule has to be successful," Cáceres said. "SpaceX has got to get into a rhythm where launching people to the space station becomes a matter of habit."

But even if those crewed flights go smoothly, the world must be prepared for an uncomfortable and inevitable moment: death on, or en route to, Mars.

When Musk presented his plan to reach the red planet to the International Astronautical Congress in 2016, an audience member asked who the first people to go on SpaceX's Mars mission should be.

"The first journey to Mars is going to be really very dangerous. The risk of fatality will be high; there's just no way around it," Musk said, adding, "It would be basically: Are you prepared to die? And if that's OK, then you're a candidate for going."

Cáceres, who was watching the presentation, said he was struck by Musk's honesty.

"I immediately thought: That's not something that any representative, any CEO from a company, or any NASA administrator would say," Cáceres said. "That's about as blunt as you can be, and I think he was being very truthful."

Is Earth ready for a trail of death leading to the red planet?





mars isro issdc emily lakdawalla ccbyndsa3
Mars is about 140 million miles from Earth.
ISRO/ISSDC/Emily Lakdawalla (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)

A significant chunk of the US population now considers sending people to the space station to be somewhat routine and fairly safe, minus two deadly space shuttle accidents, Cáceres said. But the early days of the commercial railroad, automobile, and aviation industries were very deadly.
Cáceres said we should expect a similar outcome if SpaceX is to achieve its goal of making interplanetary travel similarly commonplace.

"SpaceX is going to fail in the future — rockets are going to explode, and people are going to die," he said. "That is what everyone has to totally understand."

Chris Hadfield, a retired astronaut, has compared the dangers of using current technologies to reach Mars to an even earlier period of human history, when explorers circumnavigated Earth on perilous, yearslong ocean voyages.

"The majority of the astronauts that we send on those missions wouldn't make it," Hadfield told Business Insider of attempts to reach Mars. "They'd die."

Seasoned astronauts would be likely to attempt the trip regardless — and already the first private lunar voyager has signed up.

But Cáceres wonders how deep our enthusiasm for reaching toward the stars runs.

"If we want to actually open space to average people rather than government astronauts, then we've got to accept that there's going to be a lot of fatalities," he said. "We can either decide that that's acceptable or it's not, in which case we don't explore space any more than we have already."

Are you a SpaceX or other aerospace industry insider with information to share? Contact this reporter at dmosher+tips@businessinsider.com. More secure communications options are also available here.

Archaeology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archaeology, or archeology, is the study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture. The archaeological record consists of artifacts, architecture, biofacts or ecofacts and cultural landscapes. Archaeology can be considered both a social science and a branch of the humanities. In North America archaeology is a sub-field of anthropology, while in Europe it is often viewed as either a discipline in its own right or a sub-field of other disciplines.

Archaeologists study human prehistory and history, from the development of the first stone tools at Lomekwi in East Africa 3.3 million years ago up until recent decades. Archaeology is distinct from palaeontology, the study of fossil remains. It is particularly important for learning about prehistoric societies, for whom there may be no written records to study. Prehistory includes over 99% of the human past, from the Paleolithic until the advent of literacy in societies across the world.
Archaeology has various goals, which range from understanding culture history to reconstructing past lifeways to documenting and explaining changes in human societies through time.

The discipline involves surveying, excavation and eventually analysis of data collected to learn more about the past. In broad scope, archaeology relies on cross-disciplinary research. It draws upon anthropology, history, art history, classics, ethnology, geography, geology, literary history, linguistics, semiology, textual criticism, physics, information sciences, chemistry, statistics, paleoecology, paleography, paleontology, paleozoology, and paleobotany.

Archaeology developed out of antiquarianism in Europe during the 19th century, and has since become a discipline practiced across the world. Archaeology has been used by nation-states to create particular visions of the past. Since its early development, various specific sub-disciplines of archaeology have developed, including maritime archaeology, feminist archaeology and archaeoastronomy, and numerous different scientific techniques have been developed to aid archaeological investigation. Nonetheless, today, archaeologists face many problems, such as dealing with pseudoarchaeology, the looting of artifacts, a lack of public interest, and opposition to the excavation of human remains.

History

Antiquarians

The science of archaeology (from Greek ἀρχαιολογία, archaiologia from ἀρχαῖος, arkhaios, "ancient" and -λογία, -logia, "-logy") grew out of the older multi-disciplinary study known as antiquarianism. Antiquarians studied history with particular attention to ancient artifacts and manuscripts, as well as historical sites. Antiquarianism focused on the empirical evidence that existed for the understanding of the past, encapsulated in the motto of the 18th-century antiquary, Sir Richard Colt Hoare, "We speak from facts not theory". Tentative steps towards the systematization of archaeology as a science took place during the Enlightenment era in Europe in the 17th and 18th centuries.

In Europe, philosophical interest in the remains of Greco-Roman civilization and the rediscovery of classical culture began in the late Middle Age. Flavio Biondo, an Italian Renaissance humanist historian, created a systematic guide to the ruins and topography of ancient Rome in the early 15th century, for which he has been called an early founder of archaeology. Antiquarians of the 16th century, including John Leland and William Camden, conducted surveys of the English countryside, drawing, describing and interpreting the monuments that they encountered.

First excavations

old photograph of stonehenge with toppled stones
An early photograph of Stonehenge taken July 1877

One of the first sites to undergo archaeological excavation was Stonehenge and other megalithic monuments in England. John Aubrey (1626–1697) was a pioneer archaeologist who recorded numerous megalithic and other field monuments in southern England. He was also ahead of his time in the analysis of his findings. He attempted to chart the chronological stylistic evolution of handwriting, medieval architecture, costume, and shield-shapes.

Excavations were also carried out in the ancient towns of Pompeii and Herculaneum, both of which had been covered by ash during the Eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79. These excavations began in 1748 in Pompeii, while in Herculaneum they began in 1738. The discovery of entire towns, complete with utensils and even human shapes, as well the unearthing of frescos, had a big impact throughout Europe.

However, prior to the development of modern techniques, excavations tended to be haphazard; the importance of concepts such as stratification and context were overlooked.

Development of archaeological method

Artifacts discovered at the 1808 Bush Barrow excavation by Sir Richard Colt Hoare and William Cunnington.

The father of archaeological excavation was William Cunnington (1754–1810). He undertook excavations in Wiltshire from around 1798, funded by Sir Richard Colt Hoare. Cunnington made meticulous recordings of Neolithic and Bronze Age barrows, and the terms he used to categorize and describe them are still used by archaeologists today.

One of the major achievements of 19th-century archaeology was the development of stratigraphy. The idea of overlapping strata tracing back to successive periods was borrowed from the new geological and paleontological work of scholars like William Smith, James Hutton and Charles Lyell. The application of stratigraphy to archaeology first took place with the excavations of prehistorical and Bronze Age sites. In the third and fourth decades of the 19th-century, archaeologists like Jacques Boucher de Perthes and Christian Jürgensen Thomsen began to put the artifacts they had found in chronological order.

A major figure in the development of archaeology into a rigorous science was the army officer and ethnologist, Augustus Pitt Rivers, who began excavations on his land in England in the 1880s. His approach was highly methodical by the standards of the time, and he is widely regarded as the first scientific archaeologist. He arranged his artifacts by type or "typologically, and within types by date or "chronologically". This style of arrangement, designed to highlight the evolutionary trends in human artifacts, was of enormous significance for the accurate dating of the objects. His most important methodological innovation was his insistence that all artifacts, not just beautiful or unique ones, be collected and catalogued.

William Flinders Petrie is another man who may legitimately be called the Father of Archaeology. His painstaking recording and study of artifacts, both in Egypt and later in Palestine, laid down many of the ideas behind modern archaeological recording; he remarked that "I believe the true line of research lies in the noting and comparison of the smallest details." Petrie developed the system of dating layers based on pottery and ceramic findings, which revolutionized the chronological basis of Egyptology. Petrie was the first to scientifically investigate the Great Pyramid in Egypt during the 1880s. He was also responsible for mentoring and training a whole generation of Egyptologists, including Howard Carter who went on to achieve fame with the discovery of the tomb of 14th-century BC pharaoh Tutankhamun.

earthern fort with many walls
Mortimer Wheeler pioneered systematic excavation in the early 20th century. Pictured, are his excavations at Maiden Castle, Dorset, in October 1937.

The first stratigraphic excavation to reach wide popularity with public was that of Hissarlik, on the site of ancient Troy, carried out by Heinrich Schliemann, Frank Calvert and Wilhelm Dörpfeld in the 1870s. These scholars individuated nine different cities that had overlapped with one another, from prehistory to the Hellenistic period. Meanwhile, the work of Sir Arthur Evans at Knossos in Crete revealed the ancient existence of an equally advanced Minoan civilization.

The next major figure in the development of archaeology was Sir Mortimer Wheeler, whose highly disciplined approach to excavation and systematic coverage in the 1920s and 1930s brought the science on swiftly. Wheeler developed the grid system of excavation, which was further improved by his student Kathleen Kenyon.

Archaeology became a professional activity in the first half of the 20th century, and it became possible to study archaeology as a subject in universities and even schools. By the end of the 20th century nearly all professional archaeologists, at least in developed countries, were graduates. Further adaptation and innovation in archaeology continued in this period, when maritime archaeology and urban archaeology became more prevalent and rescue archaeology was developed as a result of increasing commercial development.

Purpose

Cast of the skull of the Taung child, uncovered in South Africa. The Child was an infant of the Australopithecus africanus species, an early form of hominin

The purpose of archaeology is to learn more about past societies and the development of the human race. Over 99% of the development of humanity has occurred within prehistoric cultures, who did not make use of writing, thereby no written records exist for study purposes. Without such written sources, the only way to understand prehistoric societies is through archaeology. Because archaeology is the study of past human activity, it stretches back to about 2.5 million years ago when we find the first stone tools – The Oldowan Industry. Many important developments in human history occurred during prehistory, such as the evolution of humanity during the Paleolithic period, when the hominins developed from the australopithecines in Africa and eventually into modern Homo sapiens. Archaeology also sheds light on many of humanity's technological advances, for instance the ability to use fire, the development of stone tools, the discovery of metallurgy, the beginnings of religion and the creation of agriculture. Without archaeology, we would know little or nothing about the use of material culture by humanity that pre-dates writing.

However, it is not only prehistoric, pre-literate cultures that can be studied using archaeology but historic, literate cultures as well, through the sub-discipline of historical archaeology. For many literate cultures, such as Ancient Greece and Mesopotamia, their surviving records are often incomplete and biased to some extent. In many societies, literacy was restricted to the elite classes, such as the clergy or the bureaucracy of court or temple. The literacy even of aristocrats has sometimes been restricted to deeds and contracts. The interests and world-view of elites are often quite different from the lives and interests of the populace. Writings that were produced by people more representative of the general population were unlikely to find their way into libraries and be preserved there for posterity. Thus, written records tend to reflect the biases, assumptions, cultural values and possibly deceptions of a limited range of individuals, usually a small fraction of the larger population. Hence, written records cannot be trusted as a sole source. The material record may be closer to a fair representation of society, though it is subject to its own biases, such as sampling bias and differential preservation.

Often, archaeology provides the only means to learn of the existence and behaviors of people of the past. Across the millennia many thousands of cultures and societies and billions of people have come and gone of which there is little or no written record or existing records are misrepresentative or incomplete. Writing as it is known today did not exist in human civilization until the 4th millennium BC, in a relatively small number of technologically advanced civilizations. In contrast, Homo sapiens has existed for at least 200,000 years, and other species of Homo for millions of years. These civilizations are, not coincidentally, the best-known; they are open to the inquiry of historians for centuries, while the study of pre-historic cultures has arisen only recently. Even within a literate civilization many events and important human practices are not officially recorded. Any knowledge of the early years of human civilization – the development of agriculture, cult practices of folk religion, the rise of the first cities – must come from archaeology.

In addition to their scientific importance, archaeological remains sometimes have political or cultural significance to descendants of the people who produced them, monetary value to collectors, or simply strong aesthetic appeal. Many people identify archaeology with the recovery of such aesthetic, religious, political, or economic treasures rather than with the reconstruction of past societies.
This view is often espoused in works of popular fiction, such as Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Mummy, and King Solomon's Mines. When such unrealistic subjects are treated more seriously, accusations of pseudoscience are invariably levelled at their proponents (see Pseudoarchaeology). However, these endeavours, real and fictional, are not representative of modern archaeology.

Theory

Archaeologists dig in the dirt very carefully so they won't miss anything important.

There is no one approach to archaeological theory that has been adhered to by all archaeologists. When archaeology developed in the late 19th century, the first approach to archaeological theory to be practiced was that of cultural-history archaeology, which held the goal of explaining why cultures changed and adapted rather than just highlighting the fact that they did, therefore emphasizing historical particularism. In the early 20th century, many archaeologists who studied past societies with direct continuing links to existing ones (such as those of Native Americans, Siberians, Mesoamericans etc.) followed the direct historical approach, compared the continuity between the past and contemporary ethnic and cultural groups. In the 1960s, an archaeological movement largely led by American archaeologists like Lewis Binford and Kent Flannery arose that rebelled against the established cultural-history archaeology. They proposed a "New Archaeology", which would be more "scientific" and "anthropological", with hypothesis testing and the scientific method very important parts of what became known as processual archaeology.

In the 1980s, a new postmodern movement arose led by the British archaeologists Michael Shanks, Christopher Tilley, Daniel Miller, and Ian Hodder, which has become known as post-processual archaeology. It questioned processualism's appeals to scientific positivism and impartiality, and emphasized the importance of a more self-critical theoretical reflexivity. However, this approach has been criticized by processualists as lacking scientific rigor, and the validity of both processualism and post-processualism is still under debate. Meanwhile, another theory, known as historical processualism has emerged seeking to incorporate a focus on process and post-processual archaeology's emphasis of reflexivity and history.

Archaeological theory now borrows from a wide range of influences, including neo-evolutionary thought, phenomenology, postmodernism, agency theory, cognitive science, structural functionalism, gender-based and feminist archaeology, and systems theory.

Methods

Video showing the different works in an archaeological recovery and analysis

An archaeological investigation usually involves several distinct phases, each of which employs its own variety of methods. Before any practical work can begin, however, a clear objective as to what the archaeologists are looking to achieve must be agreed upon. This done, a site is surveyed to find out as much as possible about it and the surrounding area. Second, an excavation may take place to uncover any archaeological features buried under the ground. And, third, the data collected from the excavation is studied and evaluated in an attempt to achieve the original research objectives of the archaeologists. It is then considered good practice for the information to be published so that it is available to other archaeologists and historians, although this is sometimes neglected.

Remote sensing

Before actually starting to dig in a location, remote sensing can be used to look where sites are located within a large area or provide more information about sites or regions. There are two types of remote sensing instruments—passive and active. Passive instruments detect natural energy that is reflected or emitted from the observed scene. Passive instruments sense only radiation emitted by the object being viewed or reflected by the object from a source other than the instrument. Active instruments emit energy and record what is reflected. Satellite imagery is an example of passive remote sensing. Here are two active remote sensing instruments:

Lidar (Light Detection and Ranging) A lidar uses a laser (light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) to transmit a light pulse and a receiver with sensitive detectors to measure the backscattered or reflected light. Distance to the object is determined by recording the time between the transmitted and backscattered pulses and using the speed of light to calculate the distance travelled. Lidars can determine atmospheric profiles of aerosols, clouds, and other constituents of the atmosphere.

Laser altimeter A laser altimeter uses a lidar (see above) to measure the height of the instrument platform above the surface. By independently knowing the height of the platform with respect to the mean Earth's surface, the topography of the underlying surface can be determined. 

Field survey

Monte Alban archaeological site

The archaeological project then continues (or alternatively, begins) with a field survey. Regional survey is the attempt to systematically locate previously unknown sites in a region. Site survey is the attempt to systematically locate features of interest, such as houses and middens, within a site. Each of these two goals may be accomplished with largely the same methods.

Survey was not widely practiced in the early days of archaeology. Cultural historians and prior researchers were usually content with discovering the locations of monumental sites from the local populace, and excavating only the plainly visible features there. Gordon Willey pioneered the technique of regional settlement pattern survey in 1949 in the Viru Valley of coastal Peru, and survey of all levels became prominent with the rise of processual archaeology some years later.

Survey work has many benefits if performed as a preliminary exercise to, or even in place of, excavation. It requires relatively little time and expense, because it does not require processing large volumes of soil to search out artifacts. (Nevertheless, surveying a large region or site can be expensive, so archaeologists often employ sampling methods.) As with other forms of non-destructive archaeology, survey avoids ethical issues (of particular concern to descendant peoples) associated with destroying a site through excavation. It is the only way to gather some forms of information, such as settlement patterns and settlement structure. Survey data are commonly assembled into maps, which may show surface features and/or artifact distribution.

Inverted kite aerial photo of an excavation of a Roman building at Nesley near Tetbury in Gloucestershire.

The simplest survey technique is surface survey. It involves combing an area, usually on foot but sometimes with the use of mechanized transport, to search for features or artifacts visible on the surface. Surface survey cannot detect sites or features that are completely buried under earth, or overgrown with vegetation. Surface survey may also include mini-excavation techniques such as augers, corers, and shovel test pits. If no materials are found, the area surveyed is deemed sterile.

Aerial survey is conducted using cameras attached to airplanes, balloons, UAVs, or even Kites. A bird's-eye view is useful for quick mapping of large or complex sites. Aerial photographs are used to document the status of the archaeological dig. Aerial imaging can also detect many things not visible from the surface. Plants growing above a buried man made structure, such as a stone wall, will develop more slowly, while those above other types of features (such as middens) may develop more rapidly. Photographs of ripening grain, which changes colour rapidly at maturation, have revealed buried structures with great precision. Aerial photographs taken at different times of day will help show the outlines of structures by changes in shadows. Aerial survey also employs ultraviolet, infrared, ground-penetrating radar wavelengths, LiDAR and thermography.

Geophysical survey can be the most effective way to see beneath the ground. Magnetometers detect minute deviations in the Earth's magnetic field caused by iron artifacts, kilns, some types of stone structures, and even ditches and middens. Devices that measure the electrical resistivity of the soil are also widely used. Archaeological features whose electrical resistivity contrasts with that of surrounding soils can be detected and mapped. Some archaeological features (such as those composed of stone or brick) have higher resistivity than typical soils, while others (such as organic deposits or unfired clay) tend to have lower resistivity.

Although some archaeologists consider the use of metal detectors to be tantamount to treasure hunting, others deem them an effective tool in archaeological surveying. Examples of formal archaeological use of metal detectors include musketball distribution analysis on English Civil War battlefields, metal distribution analysis prior to excavation of a 19th-century ship wreck, and service cable location during evaluation. Metal detectorists have also contributed to archaeology where they have made detailed records of their results and refrained from raising artifacts from their archaeological context. In the UK, metal detectorists have been solicited for involvement in the Portable Antiquities Scheme.

Regional survey in underwater archaeology uses geophysical or remote sensing devices such as marine magnetometer, side-scan sonar, or sub-bottom sonar.

Excavation

Excavations at the 3800-year-old Edgewater Park Site, Iowa
 
Archaeological excavation that discovered prehistoric caves in Vill (Innsbruck), Austria
 
An archaeologist sifting for POW remains on Wake Island.

Archaeological excavation existed even when the field was still the domain of amateurs, and it remains the source of the majority of data recovered in most field projects. It can reveal several types of information usually not accessible to survey, such as stratigraphy, three-dimensional structure, and verifiably primary context.

Modern excavation techniques require that the precise locations of objects and features, known as their provenance or provenience, be recorded. This always involves determining their horizontal locations, and sometimes vertical position as well. Likewise, their association, or relationship with nearby objects and features, needs to be recorded for later analysis. This allows the archaeologist to deduce which artifacts and features were likely used together and which may be from different phases of activity. For example, excavation of a site reveals its stratigraphy; if a site was occupied by a succession of distinct cultures, artifacts from more recent cultures will lie above those from more ancient cultures.

Excavation is the most expensive phase of archaeological research, in relative terms. Also, as a destructive process, it carries ethical concerns. As a result, very few sites are excavated in their entirety. Again the percentage of a site excavated depends greatly on the country and "method statement" issued. Sampling is even more important in excavation than in survey.Sometimes large mechanical equipment, such as backhoes (JCBs), is used in excavation, especially to remove the topsoil (overburden), though this method is increasingly used with great caution. Following this rather dramatic step, the exposed area is usually hand-cleaned with trowels or hoes to ensure that all features are apparent.

The next task is to form a site plan and then use it to help decide the method of excavation. Features dug into the natural subsoil are normally excavated in portions to produce a visible archaeological section for recording. A feature, for example a pit or a ditch, consists of two parts: the cut and the fill. The cut describes the edge of the feature, where the feature meets the natural soil. It is the feature's boundary. The fill is what the feature is filled with, and will often appear quite distinct from the natural soil. The cut and fill are given consecutive numbers for recording purposes. Scaled plans and sections of individual features are all drawn on site, black and white and colour photographs of them are taken, and recording sheets are filled in describing the context of each. All this information serves as a permanent record of the now-destroyed archaeology and is used in describing and interpreting the site.

Analysis

Once artifacts and structures have been excavated, or collected from surface surveys, it is necessary to properly study them. This process is known as post-excavation analysis, and is usually the most time-consuming part of an archaeological investigation. It is not uncommon for final excavation reports for major sites to take years to be published.

At a basic level of analysis, artifacts found are cleaned, catalogued and compared to published collections. This comparison process often involves classifying them typologically and identifying other sites with similar artifact assemblages. However, a much more comprehensive range of analytical techniques are available through archaeological science, meaning that artifacts can be dated and their compositions examined. Bones, plants, and pollen collected from a site can all be analyzed using the methods of zooarchaeology, paleoethnobotany, and palynology, while any texts can usually be deciphered.

These techniques frequently provide information that would not otherwise be known, and therefore they contribute greatly to the understanding of a site.

Computational and virtual archaeology

Computer graphics are now used to build virtual 3D models of sites, such as the throne room of an Assyrian palace or ancient Rome. Photogrammetry is also used as an analytical tool, and digital topographical models have been combined with astronomical calculations to verify whether or not certain structures (such as pillars) were aligned with astronomical events such as the sun's position at a solstice. Agent-based modeling and simulation can be used to better understand past social dynamics and outcomes. Data mining can be applied to large bodies of archaeological 'grey literature'.

Drones

Archaeologists around the world use drones to speed up survey work and protect sites from squatters, builders and miners. In Peru, small drones helped researchers produce three-dimensional models of Peruvian sites instead of the usual flat maps – and in days and weeks instead of months and years.

Drones costing as little as £650 have proven useful. In 2013, drones have flown over at least six Peruvian archaeological sites, including the colonial Andean town Machu Llacta 4,000 metres (13,000 ft) above sea level. The drones continue to have altitude problems in the Andes, leading to plans to make a drone blimp, employing open source software.

Jeffrey Quilter, an archaeologist with Harvard University said, "You can go up three metres and photograph a room, 300 metres and photograph a site, or you can go up 3,000 metres and photograph the entire valley."

In September 2014 drones weighing about 5 kg (11 lb) were used for 3D mapping of the above-ground ruins of the Greek city of Aphrodisias. The data is being analysed by the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Vienna.

Academic sub-disciplines

As with most academic disciplines, there are a very large number of archaeological sub-disciplines characterized by a specific method or type of material (e.g., lithic analysis, music, archaeobotany), geographical or chronological focus (e.g. Near Eastern archaeology, Islamic archaeology, Medieval archaeology), other thematic concern (e.g. maritime archaeology, landscape archaeology, battlefield archaeology), or a specific archaeological culture or civilization (e.g. Egyptology, Indology, Sinology).

Historical archaeology

Historical archaeology is the study of cultures with some form of writing.

In England, archaeologists have uncovered layouts of 14th century medieval villages, abandoned after crises such as the Black Death. In downtown New York City, archaeologists have exhumed the 18th century remains of the African Burial Ground.

Ethnoarchaeology

Ethnoarchaeology is the ethnographic study of living people, designed to aid in our interpretation of the archaeological record. The approach first gained prominence during the processual movement of the 1960s, and continues to be a vibrant component of post-processual and other current archaeological approaches. Early ethnoarchaeological research focused on hunter-gatherer or foraging societies; today ethnoarchaeological research encompasses a much wider range of human behaviour.

Experimental archaeology

Experimental archaeology represents the application of the experimental method to develop more highly controlled observations of processes that create and impact the archaeological record. In the context of the logical positivism of processualism with its goals of improving the scientific rigor of archaeological epistemologies the experimental method gained importance. Experimental techniques remain a crucial component to improving the inferential frameworks for interpreting the archaeological record.

Archaeometry

Archaeometry aims to systematize archaeological measurement. It emphasizes the application of analytical techniques from physics, chemistry, and engineering. It is a field of research that frequently focuses on the definition of the chemical composition of archaeological remains for source analysis. Archaeometry also investigates different spatial characteristics of features, employing methods such as space syntax techniques and geodesy as well as computer-based tools such as geographic information system technology. Rare earth elements patterns may also be used. A relatively nascent subfield is that of archaeological materials, designed to enhance understanding of prehistoric and non-industrial culture through scientific analysis of the structure and properties of materials associated with human activity.

Cultural resources management

Archaeology can be a subsidiary activity within Cultural resources management (CRM), also called heritage management in the United Kingdom. CRM archaeologists frequently examine archaeological sites that are threatened by development. Today, CRM accounts for most of the archaeological research done in the United States and much of that in western Europe as well. In the US, CRM archaeology has been a growing concern since the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, and most taxpayers, scholars, and politicians believe that CRM has helped preserve much of that nation's history and prehistory that would have otherwise been lost in the expansion of cities, dams, and highways. Along with other statutes, the NHPA mandates that projects on federal land or involving federal funds or permits consider the effects of the project on each archaeological site.

The application of CRM in the United Kingdom is not limited to government-funded projects. Since 1990, PPG 16 has required planners to consider archaeology as a material consideration in determining applications for new development. As a result, numerous archaeological organizations undertake mitigation work in advance of (or during) construction work in archaeologically sensitive areas, at the developer's expense.

In England, ultimate responsibility of care for the historic environment rests with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in association with English Heritage. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the same responsibilities lie with Historic Scotland, Cadw, and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency respectively.

In France, the Institut national du patrimoine (The National Institute of Cultural Heritage) trains curators specialized in archaeology. Their mission is to enhance the objects discovered. The curator is the link between scientific knowledge, administrative regulations, heritage objects and the public.

Among the goals of CRM are the identification, preservation, and maintenance of cultural sites on public and private lands, and the removal of culturally valuable materials from areas where they would otherwise be destroyed by human activity, such as proposed construction. This study involves at least a cursory examination to determine whether or not any significant archaeological sites are present in the area affected by the proposed construction. If these do exist, time and money must be allotted for their excavation. If initial survey and/or test excavations indicate the presence of an extraordinarily valuable site, the construction may be prohibited entirely.

Cultural resources management has, however, been criticized. CRM is conducted by private companies that bid for projects by submitting proposals outlining the work to be done and an expected budget. It is not unheard-of for the agency responsible for the construction to simply choose the proposal that asks for the least funding. CRM archaeologists face considerable time pressure, often being forced to complete their work in a fraction of the time that might be allotted for a purely scholarly endeavour. Compounding the time pressure is the vetting process of site reports that are required (in the US) to be submitted by CRM firms to the appropriate State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). From the SHPO's perspective there is to be no difference between a report submitted by a CRM firm operating under a deadline, and a multi-year academic project. The end result is that for a Cultural Resource Management archaeologist to be successful, they must be able to produce academic quality documents at a corporate world pace.

The annual ratio of open academic archaeology positions (inclusive of post-doc, temporary, and non- tenure track appointments) to the annual number of archaeology MA/MSc and PhD students is disproportionate. Cultural Resource Management, once considered an intellectual backwater for individuals with "strong backs and weak minds," has attracted these graduates, and CRM offices are thus increasingly staffed by advance degreed individuals with a track record of producing scholarly articles but who also have extensive CRM field experience.

Popular views of archaeology

Extensive excavations at Beit She'an, Israel
 
Permanent exhibition in a German multi-storey car park, explaining the archaeological discoveries made during the construction of this building

Early archaeology was largely an attempt to uncover spectacular artifacts and features, or to explore vast and mysterious abandoned cities. Early archaeology was mostly done by upper class, scholarly men. This generalization laid the foundation for the modern popular view of archaeology and archaeologists. This generalization has been with western culture for a long time. Another popular thought that dates back to this era is that archaeology is monetarily lucrative. A large majority of the general public is under the impression that excavations are undertaken for money and not historical data. It is easy for the general public to hold this notion for that is what is presented to them through general media, and has been for many decades.

The majority of the public view archaeology as being something only available to a narrow demographic. The job of archaeologist is depicted as a "romantic adventurist occupation". To generalize, the public views archaeology as a fantasized hobby more than a job in the scientific community. The audience may not take away scientific methods from popular cinema but they do form a notion of "who archaeologists are, why they do what they do, and how relationships to the past are constituted". The modern depiction of archaeology is sensationalized so much that it has incorrectly formed the public's perception of what archaeology is. The public is often under the impression that all archaeology takes place in a distant and foreign land, only to collect monetarily or spiritually priceless artifacts.

Much thorough and productive research has indeed been conducted in dramatic locales such as Copán and the Valley of the Kings, but the bulk of activities and finds of modern archaeology are not so sensational. Archaeological adventure stories tend to ignore the painstaking work involved in carrying out modern surveys, excavations, and data processing. Some archaeologists refer to such off-the-mark portrayals as "pseudoarchaeology". Archaeologists are also very much reliant on public support; the question of exactly who they are doing their work for is often discussed.

Current issues and controversy

Public archaeology

Excavations at the site of Gran Dolina, in the Atapuerca Mountains, Spain, 2008

Motivated by a desire to halt looting, curb pseudoarchaeology, and to help preserve archaeological sites through education and fostering public appreciation for the importance of archaeological heritage, archaeologists are mounting public-outreach campaigns. They seek to stop looting by combatting people who illegally take artifacts from protected sites, and by alerting people who live near archaeological sites of the threat of looting. Common methods of public outreach include press releases, and the encouragement of school field trips to sites under excavation by professional archaeologists. Public appreciation of the significance of archaeology and archaeological sites often leads to improved protection from encroaching development or other threats.

One audience for archaeologists' work is the public. They increasingly realize that their work can benefit non-academic and non-archaeological audiences, and that they have a responsibility to educate and inform the public about archaeology. Local heritage awareness is aimed at increasing civic and individual pride through projects such as community excavation projects, and better public presentations of archaeological sites and knowledge. The U.S.Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service (USFS) operates a volunteer archaeology and historic preservation program called the Passport in Time (PIT). Volunteers work with professional USFS archaeologists and historians on national forests throughout the U.S. Volunteers are involved in all aspects of professional archaeology under expert supervision.

Television programs, web videos and social media can also bring an understanding of underwater archaeology to a broad audience. The Mardi Gras Shipwreck Project integrated a one-hour HD documentary, short videos for public viewing and video updates during the expedition as part of the educational outreach. Webcasting is also another tool for educational outreach. For one week in 2000 and 2001, live underwater video of the Queen Anne's Revenge Shipwreck Project was webcast to the Internet as a part of the QAR DiveLive educational program that reached thousands of children around the world. Created and co-produced by Nautilus Productions and Marine Grafics, this project enabled students to talk to scientists and learn about methods and technologies utilized by the underwater archaeology team.

In the UK, popular archaeology programs such as Time Team and Meet the Ancestors have resulted in a huge upsurge in public interest. Where possible, archaeologists now make more provisions for public involvement and outreach in larger projects than they once did, and many local archaeological organizations operate within the Community archaeology framework to expand public involvement in smaller-scale, more local projects. Archaeological excavation, however, is best undertaken by well-trained staff that can work quickly and accurately. Often this requires observing the necessary health and safety and indemnity insurance issues involved in working on a modern building site with tight deadlines. Certain charities and local government bodies sometimes offer places on research projects either as part of academic work or as a defined community project. There is also a flourishing industry selling places on commercial training excavations and archaeological holiday tours.

Archaeologists prize local knowledge and often liaise with local historical and archaeological societies, which is one reason why Community archaeology projects are starting to become more common. Often archaeologists are assisted by the public in the locating of archaeological sites, which professional archaeologists have neither the funding, nor the time to do.

Archaeological Legacy Institute (ALI), is a registered 501[c][3] non-profit, media and education corporation registered in Oregon in 1999. ALI founded a website, The Archaeology Channel to support the organization's mission "to nurturing and bringing attention to the human cultural heritage, by using media in the most efficient and effective ways possible."

Pseudoarchaeology

Pseudoarchaeology is an umbrella term for all activities that falsely claim to be archaeological but in fact violate commonly accepted and scientific archaeological practices. It includes much fictional archaeological work (discussed above), as well as some actual activity. Many non-fiction authors have ignored the scientific methods of processual archaeology, or the specific critiques of it contained in post-processualism.

An example of this type is the writing of Erich von Däniken. His 1968 book, Chariots of the Gods?, together with many subsequent lesser-known works, expounds a theory of ancient contacts between human civilization on Earth and more technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilizations. This theory, known as palaeocontact theory, or Ancient astronaut theory, is not exclusively Däniken's, nor did the idea originate with him. Works of this nature are usually marked by the renunciation of well-established theories on the basis of limited evidence, and the interpretation of evidence with a preconceived theory in mind.

Looting

A looter's pit on the morning following its excavation, taken at Rontoy, Huaura Valley, Peru in June 2007. Several small holes left by looters' prospecting probes can be seen, as well as their footprints.
 
Stela of a king named Adad-Nirari. Object stolen from the Iraq National Museum in the looting in connection with the Iraq War of 2003.

Looting of archaeological sites is an ancient problem. For instance, many of the tombs of the Egyptian pharaohs were looted during antiquity. Archaeology stimulates interest in ancient objects, and people in search of artifacts or treasure cause damage to archaeological sites. The commercial and academic demand for artifacts unfortunately contributes directly to the illicit antiquities trade. Smuggling of antiquities abroad to private collectors has caused great cultural and economic damage in many countries whose governments lack the resources and or the will to deter it. Looters damage and destroy archaeological sites, denying future generations information about their ethnic and cultural heritage. Indigenous peoples especially lose access to and control over their 'cultural resources', ultimately denying them the opportunity to know their past.

In 1937, W. F. Hodge the Director of the Southwest Museum released a statement that the museum would no longer purchase or accept collections from looted contexts. The first conviction of the transport of artifacts illegally removed from private property under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA; Public Law 96-95; 93 Statute 721; 16 U.S.C. § 470aamm) was in 1992 in the State of Indiana.

Archaeologists trying to protect artifacts may be placed in danger by looters or locals trying to protect the artifacts from archaeologists who are viewed as looters by the locals.

Descendant peoples

In the United States, examples such as the case of Kennewick Man have illustrated the tensions between Native Americans and archaeologists, which can be summarized as a conflict between a need to remain respectful toward sacred burial sites and the academic benefit from studying them. For years, American archaeologists dug on Indian burial grounds and other places considered sacred, removing artifacts and human remains to storage facilities for further study. In some cases human remains were not even thoroughly studied but instead archived rather than reburied. Furthermore, Western archaeologists' views of the past often differ from those of tribal peoples. The West views time as linear; for many natives, it is cyclic. From a Western perspective, the past is long-gone; from a native perspective, disturbing the past can have dire consequences in the present.

As a consequence of this, American Indians attempted to prevent archaeological excavation of sites inhabited by their ancestors, while American archaeologists believed that the advancement of scientific knowledge was a valid reason to continue their studies. This contradictory situation was addressed by the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA, 1990), which sought to reach a compromise by limiting the right of research institutions to possess human remains. Due in part to the spirit of postprocessualism, some archaeologists have begun to actively enlist the assistance of indigenous peoples likely to be descended from those under study.

Archaeologists have also been obliged to re-examine what constitutes an archaeological site in view of what native peoples believe to constitute sacred space. To many native peoples, natural features such as lakes, mountains or even individual trees have cultural significance. Australian archaeologists especially have explored this issue and attempted to survey these sites to give them some protection from being developed. Such work requires close links and trust between archaeologists and the people they are trying to help and at the same time study.

While this cooperation presents a new set of challenges and hurdles to fieldwork, it has benefits for all parties involved. Tribal elders cooperating with archaeologists can prevent the excavation of areas of sites that they consider sacred, while the archaeologists gain the elders' aid in interpreting their finds. There have also been active efforts to recruit aboriginal peoples directly into the archaeological profession.

Repatriation

A new trend in the heated controversy between First Nations groups and scientists is the repatriation of native artifacts to the original descendants. An example of this occurred on 21 June 2005, when community members and elders from a number of the 10 Algonquian nations in the Ottawa area convened on the Kitigan Zibi reservation near Maniwaki, Quebec, to inter ancestral human remains and burial goods—some dating back 6,000 years. It was not determined, however, if the remains were directly related to the Algonquin people who now inhabit the region. The remains may be of Iroquoian ancestry, since Iroquoian people inhabited the area before the Algonquin. Moreover, the oldest of these remains might have no relation at all to the Algonquin or Iroquois, and belong to an earlier culture who previously inhabited the area.

The remains and artifacts, including jewelry, tools and weapons, were originally excavated from various sites in the Ottawa Valley, including Morrison and the Allumette Islands. They had been part of the Canadian Museum of Civilization's research collection for decades, some since the late 19th century. Elders from various Algonquin communities conferred on an appropriate reburial, eventually deciding on traditional redcedar and birchbark boxes lined with redcedar chips, muskrat and beaver pelts.

An inconspicuous rock mound marks the reburial site where close to 80 boxes of various sizes are buried. Because of this reburial, no further scientific study is possible. Although negotiations were at times tense between the Kitigan Zibi community and museum, they were able to reach agreement.
Kennewick Man is another repatriation candidate that has been the source of heated debate.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedi...