Archaeology Magazine Archive

A publication of the Archaeological Institute of America

Special Introductory Offer!


Beyond Stone & Bone

Druids, New Agers and Archaeologists
by Heather Pringle
August 7, 2009

StonehengeSunrise1980sI’ve just landed back in the office after nearly four weeks of travelling through the highlands of Peru and in Ecuador.  It was a glorious trip, full of superb archaeology, heart-pounding hikes to remote sites in the Andes, a misadventure in a small boat as a storm brewed up on Lake Titicaca, and a bizarre overnight stay in an all but deserted 16th century hacienda in Ecuador.   I returned home dusty and bone-weary, but mentally recharged.

For a good part of the trip, I made Cuzco my base, and as I wandered its steep, narrow streets, I was struck by the many signs I saw for a rather specialized form of tourism in the Andes—shamanic travels.  Interested parties were invited to take a mystical journey to ancient Andean sites, one that involved coca leaf readings, encounters with self-proclaimed shamans, baths in medicinal hot springs, and participation in what purported to be spiritual ceremonies.  It reminded me once again of how much New Agers love to flock to the world’s great archaeological sites:  so great are the numbers in the Andes that Cuzco entrepreneurs have cleverly devised a whole new tourism industry for them.

I must confess that I have little patience with New Age thinking.  In my admittedly jaundiced view, most New Agers have little real interest in the ancient past or in the long vanished cultures that once flourished in the Andes and elsewhere.  Instead, they seem to see places like Machu Picchu or Ollantaytambo as some kind of portal for their own journeys of self-discovery.  In other words, it’s all about them.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with a little self-revelation and discovery.  But I often think that New Agers would like nothing better than to rid the world’s most famous ancient sites of archaeologists and archaeological research entirely, clearing the way for their wild fantasies. Let me give you a case in point.  This week a New Ager and self-titled Druid named King Arthur Pendragon called for the cessation of scientific studies on human remains excavated from Stonehenge and immediate reburial of the skeletons.

What the Druid doesn’t mention is that the studies in question, led by University of Sheffield archaeologist Michael Parker Pearson, are revolutionizing our understanding of Stonehenge.  Examination of the site’s 240 or so human remains has revealed, for example, that Stonehenge served until the mid-third millennium as the burial ground of one royal family.  Thanks to Pearson and his colleagues, we now know that mourners interred 30 to 40 generations of one kingly line at Stonehenge.

King Arthur Pendragon, whose real name is John Timothy Rothwell, wants to shut down this amazingly productive line of research.  And he has even gone so far as to collect thousands of signatures for a petition calling for the reburial of the remains.  “There is no dignity left if they can just take them away and not care that they were living, talking human beings at one stage,” Rothwell told a Salisbury Journal reporter.

The real issue here has nothing at all to do, in my opinion, with respect for human remains or dignity.  It is about whether we want scientists or media-savvy New Agers like Rothwell to make key decisions on what happens at the world’s most famous  sites.  It doesn’t seem like much of a choice to me.  But the thousands of people who signed Rothwell’s petition are clearly of a different mind.

(Many thanks to Mark Rose,  who filled in for me here while I was travelling!)

Comments posted here do not represent the views or policies of the Archaeological Institute of America.

18 comments for "Druids, New Agers and Archaeologists"

  • Reply posted by Johan Normark (August 7, 2009, 8:52 pm):

    New Agers (and here I also include pseudoscientists and creationists) are notable in their strive to ignore science. Another case is the approaching December 21, 2012 date, the supposed “end” of the Maya Long Count calendar. All sorts of ill-founded claims about non-existent ancient Maya, Chinese, Egyptian, etc. prophecies are mixed with non-existent Planet X/Nibiru that will cause destruction, or our galactic consciousness will transform, etc.

    I have showed them the flaws in their ideas on several occasions and their main counter argument is that archaeologists hide the truth (orchestrated by the illuminati probabably) or that archaeology is not a real science or that science as such is wrong. Whatever the result of the Stonehenge research will be, they will continue to ignore it and search unbelievable connections to whatever they feel like. Science is just plain wrong to them. No evidence will ever change their minds. Good post btw.

         

  • Reply posted by malcolm sender (August 7, 2009, 9:28 pm):

    When I was backpacking around Peru in 1979, the highland shamen(sp.?) were performing curing ceremonies involving the use of San Pedro cactus, an hallucinogen, and a dip in the cold waters of mountain lakes. It seems they have successfully adapted ceremonies developed to target ex-hippies into coca based, hot water ceremonies for New-Agers!

         

  • Reply posted by JeM (August 8, 2009, 1:01 am):

    I totally agree. The New Agers seems to work as an anti-science movement. Did the thousands who signed the petition run by Rothwell really understand what they were signing? I doubt it. People like Rothwell are seeking power through the use of superstition.

         

  • Reply posted by Daniel Molitor (August 9, 2009, 8:48 am):

    Hear, hear.

    As someone who loves ancient Egypt and Greece, and has written a couple of novels incorporating real archaeological science, I can’t tell you how much it bugs me when I go to one of my favorite sites, or even just see a video or TV program, and have to deal with these self-absorbed naval gazers projecting their own modern “spirituality” on monuments that have as much in common with new age religion as the garden gnome in my back garden.

    There’s one clown who is always hounding me on facebook, promoting his package tours to the world’s “sacred spaces,” designated as such by him, of course. One trip promises a trip to the tholos tombs at Mycenae, wherein the lucky traveller will get to experience the guide “toning” inside the great beehive vault. “Toning,” for those not in the know, is the latest new-agey take on meditation in which one hums a very loud sound and waits for one’s surroundings to echo it back to you, fortified with the energy of your surroundings, of course. Supposedly that is what the beehive vault was designed for, dontcha know.

         

  • Reply posted by Michelle W. (August 9, 2009, 2:22 pm):

    I myself get annoyed with people who cannot respect the findings of archaeological science and insist that the antiquated (I use this term here to mean unenlightened in regards to scientific findings), victorian, romanticized view of ancient cultures and religious practices is correct and true, when all the scientific evidence points to the contrary.

    One thing that I would like to point out here is that not all who follow a Neo-Pagan path are against science and archaeology in particular. Nor should anyone think that this particular person (King Arthur Pendragon) speaks for all those who follow a Druidic path. I have had many stimulating conversations with Neo-Pagans who appreciate and value the scientific findings that come to light every day, myself included.

    Having said that, I have a real issue with generalized statements regarding those who don’t follow a mainstream religious path, as well as monikers such as “self-proclaimed” and “self-titled”. I would never even entertain the idea of calling someone a “self-proclaimed” Christian, or “self-titled” Muslim. This is at least disrespectful of a person’s chosen path, in my mind. It dismays me when I see these statements in article after article. It cannot be that hard to find normal Neo-Pagan folks from which to get an opinion on the subject. I know plenty of them.

    I am not saying that a majority of the situations discussed in the article and in the previous comments are necessarily valid. In every box of cereal, you will always find the bad cornflake. As a person who follows a Neo-Pagan Druidic path, I can honestly say that I do not agree with King Arther Pendragon’s position (Not sure what he is king of actually, he’s certainly not mine!). I personally think he is full of it, and is an attention-starved media whore.

    My 2 cents.

         

  • Reply posted by Steph (August 10, 2009, 4:36 am):

    I too would question how much those who signed the petition really understood what they were signing, or for that matter how much thought they’d really put into it. In my experience, the gut-level reaction of most people to the idea of the study of human remains is a blend of curiosity and revulsion. I have been harangued on more than one occasion along the lines of ‘how could you?’ and/or ‘how dare you dig up these people?’. Very often the individuals concerned are perfectly pleasant, well-meaning, ordinary people. They don’t seem to realise that in the UK at least, the vast majority of archaeology these days is carried out under the auspices of PPG16 and thus any cemeteries being dug are rarely dug for research purposes, let alone on the whim of some mad antiquarian scholar of previous generations. They’re dug because there’s a road going through or a housing estate being built. Oddly enough, these same people don’t want to live in a house with bodies in the foundations and seem quite relieved at the idea of someone excavating them then. In the case of many who signed Rothwell’s petition, I suspect it’s a case of lack of knowledge rather than New Age spiritualism that made them sign. But I agree that the New Age agenda is what drove the petition to be written in the first place.

         

  • Reply posted by John Gruntke (August 10, 2009, 6:28 am):

    I recall meeting a group of Christian missionaries on the train from Agua Calente to Cusco. When I indicated the majority of Peruvians are Catholics and asked who they are attempting to convert I was told Catholics were not Christians and their purpose was to bring these lost souls to Christ. New Agers are for the most part a harmless lunatic fringe. It is these so called missionaries that are the most disruptive to what remains of Andean culture.

         

  • Reply posted by Brent (August 13, 2009, 4:22 am):

    Interesting that some have chose to include Christendom in their scientific views of those that are anti-science. As a Christian and creationist (though not “YEC”), I to find it appalling that there are those religious and non-religious, that cannot see the need for this kind of research.

    Sacred space is at issue, perhaps, but that sacred space is out of context of its sacred time. Further, their beliefs that the scientists are “Doing whatever” with the remains is an inaccurate view of the handling of the remains.

    Thanks for your blog/views; I appreciate reading the honest views of others in these fields.

         

  • Reply posted by DianaGainer (August 13, 2009, 12:40 pm):

    As an interested person on the sidelines, I’d like to point out that most people are well meaning but ignorant of the issues. Rather than cursing the darkness they’re in, I suggest that those of us who have an axe to grind ought to spend more time lighting candles. People can’t know what they’ve never been taught, you know. Nobody teaches archeology in the U.S. in elementary school. Certainly don’t hear about it in junior high. Wouldn’t touch it with a 10-foot pole in high school. Probably not 10% of U.S. college grads take it as a General Ed course either and only 2% of them pay attention in class — only to pass the test at the end of the semester. So, at best, probably 1% of the population knows two cents about the field. And only 1% of THEM cares.

    That’s why people sign petitions like King Arthur’s. Or whatever his name was. They do know about dead bodies being dug up because their Uncle Fred was once buried and they wouldn’t want HIM being dug up. That’s about as much thought as goes into THAT.

    I’ve written historical novels based on archeological evidence too, but nobody reads them — not even kinfolks. Their eyes glaze over when I talk about such things. King Arthur’s one up on me there. It has virtually nothing to do with being Druid or Christian or a shaman. Now go out and light a candle!

         

  • Reply posted by Donna (August 13, 2009, 5:28 pm):

    I too am fed up with new agers (or whoever they are and whatever they call themselves these days) who try to usurp a traditional culture and try to make it fit their own ideas and values. In the 21st century I would have thought people would value science more, not less. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem to be the case.

         

  • Reply posted by Bob S (August 14, 2009, 7:51 am):

    I’ve been interested in archaeology since a very early age though I’ve never taken a course in all my 60+ years. (I will be taking one as soon as I can find one in my area). 🙂

    I think a lot of the modern offshoots of ancient religions really don’t know much about how and why their particular adopted religion functioned, nor about particular rites and beliefs. It seems to me that they would be anxious for archaeologists to shed some light on their own history. There’s a lot of room for cooperation here.

         

  • Reply posted by Steve M (August 14, 2009, 10:53 am):

    While you are on the subject of “NEW AGERS”, check out andrewcollins.com and read his story of the caves beneath Giza. You might also enjoy his other publications listed on his newsletter. It’s no wonder that Dr. Hawass had nothing to say on the subject. The Edgar Cayce Foundation funded Mark Lehner, when he went to Giza to find the “Hall of Records”. One of these days someone will find the “Hall of Records” or maybe even stumble upon Dr. Hawass’s secret tunnel to the pyramids.
    We take ourselves too seriously except for those rare moments when the focus is shifted to Harrison Ford as Lego Indiana Jones versus Bigfoot!
    Diana, you are spot-on; we need to reach more than 1% of 1%.

    Steve M.

         

  • Reply posted by William (August 18, 2009, 5:51 pm):

    Obviously, there are no shortages of interesting folks out there…

    But what intrigues me far more is why it is that all around me here in New England there is compelling evidence that Eurpoeans were here hundreds- even many hundreds- of years before Columbus’ voyage.

    Yet the so called “established” archaeological community continues to act as if anyone who so much as seeks that this evidence be investigated is somehow a quack.

    It is very similar to what we see in political discourse these days: Do not confront the substance of what the opposition says. instead, just label them as the radical fringe.

    The scientific community might well be reminded of the similar radical fringe in history, like Darwin, Capernecus and, oh yes…the folks who uncovered the L’Anse Au Meadows site in Newfoundland.

    You know: the actual earliest proven European settlement in North America- the same one archaeology said for years could never have existed and that for years archaeology continues to barely mention…

         

  • Reply posted by Daniel Molitor (August 21, 2009, 6:02 am):

    @ William:

    I disagree with you about archaeologists not recognizing Viking and other northern European visits to the eastern N. American continent. Seems to me Archaeology Magazine itself (admittedly a populist publication) has run numerous articles in which a revised view of Vikings and their travels were presented. L’Anse aux Meadows appears in several. Use the search feature up in the corner to find them.

    I also seem to recall seeing a blurb about the recent rediscovery of a Chinese literary reference to voyages to the west coast (of South America, I seem to remember…brain is fuzzy.) long before even the Vikings were galavanting around the North Atlantic.

    Actually, the history book I used in, I believe it was the third grade — which was some time ago, trust me — mentioned Viking explorers predating Columbus.

    But let’s face it, Columbus took center stage for centuries and his discoveries carried a lot of social baggage with them into the future. It’s hardly the archaeologists’ fault if his voyages are still overplayed in the typically simplistic media.

         

  • Reply posted by Heather Pringle (August 21, 2009, 7:44 am):

    Yes, I agree with Daniel that the Viking settlement at L’Anse aux Meadows is well accepted by the archaeological community. And today prominent reseasrchers are continuing the quest for Viking sites in northern Canada. Patricia Sutherland, an archaeologist at the Canadian Museum of Civilization, has been tracing the presence of Viking traders and merchants on Baffin Island and northern Labrador. In April this year, I published an article about Sutherland’s research in Canadian Geographic. Interested readers can find the article at:

    http://magazine.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/apr09/arctic_vikings.asp

         

  • Reply posted by Maria Eliferova, PhD (September 4, 2009, 4:52 am):

    “I would never even entertain the idea of calling someone a “self-proclaimed” Christian, or “self-titled” Muslim. This is at least disrespectful of a person’s chosen path…@
    Surely if you have not been baptized by a Christian priest but call yourself Christian just because you like it, you ARE a self-proclaimed Christian, and it is absurd to be politically correct about it!
    The problem with the Druids is that no one knows how you could become an authentic Druid. All the data on the actual Druids was lost well before Anglo-Saxon invasion. So, if you want to found a religious community of your own, you are free to do it. But why call it ‘Druids’? Just because the actual Druids have been long dead and will not bring you to trial for using their name?

         

  • Reply posted by Maria Eliferova, PhD (September 4, 2009, 4:55 am):

    P. S. I had been a self-proclaimed Christian for 12 years, and I was aware of it :-))) now perfectly agnostic

         

  • Reply posted by pov (September 18, 2010, 7:28 am):

    “It is about whether we want scientists or media-savvy New Agers like Rothwell ”
    That shows a closed-mind and ingrained propaganda. A person labeled scientist is no more or less wise and capable of discovery than a person labeled “media-savvy New Ager.” The almost reverential assumptions that are often bestowed on anyone labeled scientist are both amusing and disconcerting to see. In fact many of these scientists operate from viewpoints that are an affront to the scientific method.

    I’d rather see people with more wisdom and open-mindedness than you’re show making the key decisions at sites like Stonehenge

         


About Our Blogger:

Heather Pringle is a freelance science journalist who has been writing about archaeology for more than 20 years. She is the author of Master Plan: Himmler's Scholars and the Holocaust and The Mummy Congress: Science, Obsession, and the Everlasting Dead. For more about Heather, see our interview or visit www.lastwordonnothing.com.

Thanks for writing! While we may not be able to respond to every message, we appreciate your comments and suggestions. (Comments are now closed.)


RSS feed
Trowel Tales: The AIA Blog


Advertisement


Advertisement