The summer is the time for archaeological excavations. Every year, thousands of excavations are taking place all over Europe and beyond. A very large proportion of them is rescue archaeology, i.e. projects that aim at rescuing information from ancient sites before they get destroyed through development. In most Western countries, developers are required by law to pay for the costs of these excavations. Professional archaeology has until recently been a field that defined itself nearly exclusively in relatively narrow academic terms. But now that both states and many businesses are in difficult economic situations, professional archaeologists feel an increasing need to justify what they are doing for society. Is it still right that tax-payers and consumers should be paying for research concerning the distant past? Do archaeologists have social responsibilities and duties beyond contributing to academic enlightenment?
fig1_1_1
“it’s our money sonny
and we want some answers..…
- where are the receipts?
- where are the budget plans?
- where are the goods?”
The ensuing process of “opening up” archaeology to take into account broader social contexts has, however, not only been forced upon the subject from the outside. A quickly expanding interest in a wide range of issues and phenomena that have come to be known as “public archaeology” is fundamentally transforming even the academic discipline itself (Merriman 2002). For example, a few years ago, a new academic journal called Public Archaeology was founded with the express purpose “to analyse and report on archaeological and heritage issues which relate to the wider world of politics, ethics, government, social questions, education, management, economics and philosophy”.1 All these elements taken together describe the field within which professional archaeology is operating today.
The meaning of archaeology in popular culture is a topic born out of that same opening process of the discipline of archaeology, manifesting the trend towards a truly public archaeology. It is not surprising that others too have found the contemporary image of the archaeologist an interesting field of study. For example, a group of archaeology students at Humboldt University in Berlin conducted extensive research about “Indy, Lara and Hercule – how the media determine the image of the archaeologist” (Felder et al 2003). Their results were presented in an exhibition shown in their university (13 March – 3 April 2003). A wide range of topical examples from fictional literature, movies and computer games, was thoroughly analysed and categorised. Among other topics, the group considered the discrepancy between the depiction of archaeology and its reality and asked whether actual archaeological practice influenced the existing clichés and to which extent those determine the public expectations of professional archaeology.
Elsewhere, another group of students prepared an exhibition entitled “From Heinrich Schliemann to Lara Croft. The Fascination of the Past” which was shown in Freiburg’s University Library (20 May –18 June 2003):
“‘The past? That exists only in history books anyway!’ – ‘False!’, say those responsible for this exhibition. In fact, we encounter the past in many realms of our lives in which we may not suspect it. Whether in TV, in advertisements or while shopping: we come across the relics of ancient peoples everywhere […] This is similar in relation to the discipline of Archaeology. It does not only supply us with these witnesses of the past but in recent years, it has also attracted increasing interest among the media. This exhibition is intended to demonstrate that archaeologists are not dealing with periods that are long past and far removed from us – in other words, periods that do not need to mean anything to us. Quite the opposite: the relics of various different, lost civilizations are more present and have a larger impact today than ever before. […]”2
My own two-year long investigations about the meaning and portrayal of archaeology in contemporary popular culture were conducted as part of a larger research focus on “Archaeology in Society” which the Swedish National Heritage Board devoted particular attention to over recent years. One of its main aims has been to adapt the practice of Swedish cultural heritage management to changing social conditions, by re-evaluating its practices and seeking out new opportunities.
A path-breaking initiative carried out across the entire Swedish heritage sector over three years fits into this context, too. Entitled Agenda Kulturarv (best translated as Operation Heritage), this grand project was about putting the social significance of the cultural heritage on the agenda of a broad discussion between many stake-holders within the Swedish heritage sector. Its aim was to refine professional practice in order to make the most of people’s interest in the past and the cultural heritage and to make the work of the professionals accessible and relevant to them.3 The manifesto that resulted from the project (Agenda Kulturarv 2004) resolved that all people in society should be enabled and encouraged to draw on the power of archaeological sites, as a part of the cultural heritage more generally. That power was said to be twofold. Stories about the past told in relation to the heritage could (a) broaden peoples’ perspectives on the present and (b) create familiar surroundings that make people at home. As far as historical perspectives on the present are concerned, I imagine that they could be based either on actual hard knowledge about the laws, patterns or trends of history, or on softer insights about the variety of different human realities. The question is, however, how much archaeological research, focussing on inconclusive evidence about limited aspects of societies that existed a long time ago, can really contribute to any such results.
The fact that many people state, when asked, that they are interested in the past, find archaeology exciting and enjoy visiting excavations (see chapter 4) is not really helpful in deciding the question about the social benefits gained from archaeology. After all, Erich von Däniken’s new theme park in Switzerland, called Mystery Park4 and his numerous books about archaeological topics have been popular too (see chapter 5). I am inclined to concur with Gavin Lucas (2004: 119) who argued that insofar as archaeology enhances people’s lives and society in general, its major impact might be said to lie in popular culture rather than in any noble vision of improving self-awareness through “historical perspectives”. What this actually means, is the topic of the present book.

Archaeology: a trendy subject

In order to get a better grip on people’s fascination with archaeology in popular culture, it is useful to consult studies that describe larger, underlying trends in Western culture and society. Over a decade ago, the German sociologist Gerhard Schulze (1993) published a study describing Die Erlebnisgesellschaft (The Experience Society). In this book, which has been very influential in the German social sciences, Schulze argued that Erlebniswert (experience value) is quickly replacing use and monetary values in significance. As people in affluent Western societies have become economically secure and possess all the tools they require, they are orientating their lives more and more towards experiences: to live and to experience have nearly come to mean the same thing. Whereas in the past you may have received a book or a mobile phone as birthday presents, now you are almost more likely to get a bungee jump or a day on an excavation (see chapter 2)! As a consequence, the market for experiences is expanding fast. The Swedish geographer Orvar Löfgren (1999: 16) cautioned that this is not an entirely new trend but has roots that go at least two centuries back: tourism has always been largely about experiences. Yet today, from travel agencies to shopping centres, from TV stations to universities and from swimming pools to theme parks, all are offering experiences to their customers (see also Köck 1990: 77–82; Pine and Gilmore 1999; Schmitt 1999; O’Dell 2002).
The difficult choices people are facing when having to choose between competing experiences are often, albeit unconsciously, informed by larger social patterns. Whereas some sections of the population prefer experiences such as listening to classical music and contemplating art in museums, others enjoy schlager music and watching sentimental films on TV and others again like rock’n roll, pub visits and generally “action” (Schulze 1993: 142–57). Companies trying to reach certain groups of consumers have long understood the significance of framing their products within existing patterns of differently favoured experiences. Similarly, customers prefer to buy products that relate to the preferred experiences of those people as which they see themselves (Schulze 1993: chapter 9). This might explain, at least in parts, why the “product” archaeology enjoys the amount of popularity it does. It offers and is perceived to offer, valued experiences for many. Visiting an archaeological museum or excavation site can be about ancient art and education about the past, about usually idyllic reconstructions of past daily life and re-assurance about one’s home village, or about modern computer technology and quests for treasure in the spirit of Indiana Jones who is probably the best known archaeologist in the world today (Bahn 1989: 59). In each case, it is a particular experience in the present that accounts for peoples’ interest in the past.
At about the same time when Schulze wrote his book, the American marketing “guru” Faith Popcorn published The Popcorn Report (1992) in which she predicted certain trends for the future. She recommended to companies to “bend” their products around such trends. One of the ten most important trends she noticed was a trend towards “fantasy adventure” which she described as “a momentary, wild-and-crazy retreat from the world into an exotic flavour” (Popcorn 1992: 34). Popcorn’s prediction was that product appeal will increasingly resul...