Vè Seminari Arqueologia i Ensenyament Barcelona, 25-27 de novembre, 2004 Treballs d’Arqueologia 10, 2004

Archaeology as a media experience

Julian Richards

This paper is written by an the 1930’s, that if archaeology archaeologist who has been was to survive and thrive then it closely involved with broadcast needed to communicate with an media (both television and audience far beyond the radio) over the last eight years. confines of the academic world. It is not a conventional He used his flamboyance, the academic paper but a reflection scale of the sites that he on the relationship between investigated, and his archaeology and broadcast understanding of the media in media, examining in the process its broadest sense to bring some of the ways in which the archaeology to the public. He past is presented to a viewing also realised that the appeal of and listening public. The role of archaeology lay in its ability to broadcast media in education generate ‘stories’. will also be examined. It was Wheeler that helped to Archaeology is the study of the develop the relationship human past through its material between archaeology and the remains, the coins, stone tools, media as a panellist on the bones and fragments of pottery successful show, ‘Animal, that once excavated, studied Vegetable, Mineral?’ broadcast and reported, form the basis for between 1952 and 1960 by the the majority of museum BBC, then the sole television displays. Archaeology is an channel. In this series, hosted academic subject, increasingly by archaeologist Glyn Daniel, scientific and professional and the panellists attempted to with an awareness of the need identify a range of objects drawn for public sympathy, if not actual from British Museums. This was engagement. a novel format, an object based quiz show, and one that has not In Britain, the celebrated subsequently been attempted. archaeologist Sir Mortimer The success of ‘Animal, Wheeler realised, as long ago as Vegetable, Mineral?’ resulted in

47 Vè SEMINARI D’ARQUEOLOGIA I ENSENYAMENT

a series of archaeological It was not replaced by any long documentaries under the title of running series that took ‘Buried Treasure’ that ran archaeology as its subject between 1954 and 1959. matter, although significant new ‘Treasure’ was here taken in its discoveries were still considered broadest sense and programmes worthy subjects for documenta- examined sites such as Scara ry films. What is apparent in Brae in Orkney, the stone rows looking back over the early of Carnac in Brittany and the 1990’s is that archaeology was Etruscan towns and tombs of still regarded as a subject for Italy. In 1966 the BBC created straightforward documentaries an Archaeological and Historical and that there was considered Unit, under the direction of little scope for repackaging what producer Paul Johnstone and was a essentially a scientific between 1965 and 1989 this discipline into new formats. unit made over 250 However, with the addition of programmes under the title more channels, both terrestrial ‘Chronicle’. These were extraor- and satellite, and increasing dinarily popular documentaries, expectation for ‘entertainment’ with regular audiences of over 3 from viewing audiences, it was million, rising to over 5 million inevitable that the relationship when the subject was Egypt. between archaeology and This was archaeology and broadcast media would change. television at its best due largely It is worth examining just what to Paul Johnstone who became each one of the ‘partners’ in this eventually an archaeologist in relationship can offer the other. his own right, making valuable contributions to experimental There is undoubtedly a huge and archaeology. Sir Mortimer apparently growing interest in Wheeler said of Johnstone ‘Paul all aspects of the human past. would have made a good History and archaeology can professional archaeologist with both offer insights into much of his intense attention to detail this past, with archaeology and his visual appreciation of offering the only means of everything’. understanding the more remote past, devoid of written records. Chronicle was taken off the air Where archaeology may be seen not due to any apparent as more appealing to the media dwindling of popularity, but than historical research is in its possibly simply because it had sense of immediate discovery. been running for so many years. An excavation can provide

48 Archaeology as a media experience

objects, sometimes ‘treasure’, archaeological challenge such as as well as excitement, drama the investigation of a site or and a sense of mystery and landscape but with a time limit; genuine revelation. It can also just three days to solve the provide ‘characters’ from a mystery/find the answer. This discipline that has traditionally, three-day structure is designed perhaps falsely, been seen as to fit with that of an hour-long being populated by eccentrics. programme made for commercial television, punctua- But what does archaeology ted by three commercial breaks. wants from the media? In broad The ‘team’ is of carefully chosen terms archaeology wants ‘characters’, kept in order by exposure to a wider audience, presenter, and genuine beyond that provided by more archaeology enthusiast, Tony traditional methods of Robinson. The production team ‘outreach’. Museum exhibitions, for shoots is huge, ‘popular’ publications, lectures, with multiple camera crews, a and even the exposure offered large production team, many by the internet, cannot deliver ‘cast’ members and specialists the instant exposure offered by including geophysical survey television. Even the most team. The scale of the operation obscure programmes, shown at is necessary in order to have some unfortunate time can enough filmed in three days to generate nearly 1 million make a one hour programme. viewers. Compare this to the sales of books intended for a ‘Time Team’, part high-speed wider audience where 20,000 is archaeological evaluation, part considered highly successful, or ‘challenge’ programme and part the 250-500 print run of the soap opera with a cast of average academic publication. loveable eccentrics, has undoubtedly raised the profile of Given these mutual expectations archaeology in Britain. It it is now important to examine showcases scientific techniques the range of programmes that such as geophysical survey, have developed, largely during ensuring that the idea of the last decade. ‘geophys’ is firmly embedded in the public’s consciousness. The best known is ‘Time Team’, However, due to the self- a simple but successful format imposed three-day time limit, it that is now in its 12th series. cannot demonstrate the The format is simple, an potential for analysis and

49 Vè SEMINARI D’ARQUEOLOGIA I ENSENYAMENT

greater understanding of main contrast with the ‘Time excavated finds and other Team’ approach was that with evidence. Essentially Time Team no time limit, ‘Meet the is archaeology packaged, Ancestors’ dealt not just with scripted and acted out for the excavation and the television, complete with immediate results, but with the ‘discoveries’ that sometimes subsequent scientific analysis of appear to be re-staged for the the entire range of material camera and conclusions that at recovered. Facial reconstruc- times cannot be fully justified by tions of the individuals who were the archaeological findings. It’s the subjects of the programmes impact has been and continues enabled ‘Ancestors’ to be ‘met’ to be huge and in 2004 it still and scientific analysis of a wide delivers consistently high range of artefacts and audiences and much loyalty environmental samples allowed from its viewers. for their lives to be reconstructed in some detail. In 1998 BBC2 first broadcast what was assumed by many to The first three series were be a rival to Time Team. Devised produced by a very small crew and presented by the author of using DV cameras, this this paper, ‘Meet the Ancestors’ arrangement guaranteeing the ran for seven series, ending in flexibility to be able to respond 2004, and had an equally simple rapidly to unexpected discove- format, based on the premise ries. In later series programmes that the best way to understand were lengthened from 30 minute the past is through its to 50 and the concept of inhabitants, the ‘ancestors’ of ‘Ancestors’ was widened beyond the series title. The starting just human burials to include point for each programme was many wider aspects of the the excavation of a human human past. ‘Meet the burial, not organised by TV Ancestors’, certainly in its production but being carried out original 30 minute format, was by professional archaeologists archaeology as it happened, the as part of research or pre- programmes attempting to show construction works. As the TV the entire process from production depended upon excavation, through analysis to being invited to film excavations conclusion. then the relationship between the two parties was conse- It is a well known cliché that quently very different. The other imitation is the sincerest form of

50 Archaeology as a media experience

flattery and whereas ‘Time ‘Time Flyers’ (BBC 2) took as its Team’, perhaps due to the subject aerial archaeology. strength and distinctiveness of Presented by a team consisting the original format, has not had of Mark Horton, Jo Caruth and its imitators, Ancestors spawned Dave MacLeod, its starting point a range of imitations. ‘Secrets of was a view from the air, the Dead’ and ‘Tales from the provided by the main ‘prop’, a Grave’ (both Channel 4) and helicopter. Initially somewhat ‘Ancient Murder Mysteries’ on like a shorter (half hour) version Channel 5, were all based on the of ‘Time Team’ it developed into familiar concept of taking a a series that took more of a human burial as the starting landscape approach, examining point for the programme less fashionable types of sites narrative and in some cases and periods such as post involved ‘Meet the Ancestors’ medieval highland clearance and trademark of facial the WW II decoys designed to reconstruction. lure enemy aircraft away from Hull docks. Two series were Beyond these two long running broadcast. series, over the past four years both the BBC and Channel 4 ‘Hidden Treasure’ presented by have experimented with other Miranda Krestovnikoff (not an archaeological formats. archaeologist), took as its theme the objects (‘treasure’) ‘Two Men in a Trench’ (BBC2) that are found on a regular basis dealt with the subject of by the users of metal detectors battlefield archaeology, ran for and the process of reporting, two series and was aimed firmly investigating and ultimately of at a younger audience. rewarding the finders. What was Presented by two young male being documented was archaeologists, Tony Pollard and effectively the work of the Neil Oliver, it was a mixture of Portable Antiquities Scheme, investigation, including metal designed to encourage the detecting and excavation, and reporting and recording of reconstruction, sometimes light- archaeological finds. This series hearted. The series is reported was made by the same team to have been commissioned on that produced ‘Meet the the basis that each battlefield Ancestors’ but was heavily site would produce mass graves. criticised by archaeologists for Such graves were inevitably and placing too much emphasis on conspicuously absent. the monetary, rather than the

51 Vè SEMINARI D’ARQUEOLOGIA I ENSENYAMENT

historical, value of the objects drama and the ‘extremity’ of the discovered. Only one series was locations were at times over broadcast, in 2003, and, on the emphasised and the series basis of the resulting attracted much adverse antagonism, it must be comment from the wider questioned whether a second archaeological community who could have been made. felt that there was to much ‘extreme and not enough In the same way that the word ‘archaeology’. ‘mystery’ is often a component of archaeological programme So what of the future? ‘Extreme titles, the word ‘extreme’ is Archaeology’ may have often used to promote films attempted to provide many of about weather, animals or the key requirements of sports. The final format to be commissioning editors. Its described, broadcast on Channel format sought to package 4 in 2004, introduced this archaeology in a way that was concept to the world of upbeat, dramatic (even if some archaeology. of the drama had to be constructed) and above all ‘Extreme Archaeology’ (or ‘ExA’ would appeal to a younger as it liked to be known) was audience. This is a laudable aim, made by the same production but can it be delivered without company that makes ‘Time compromising the subject that is Team’ and involved the being portrayed? examination of sites in locations too ‘extreme’ for the regular What is clear is that major personnel. In this series, aimed archaeological discoveries, the again at a younger audience, a ‘biggest’ the ‘oldest’ the most team of three young women, ‘macabre/bizarre/inexplicable’, Katie Hurst, Meg Watters and will continue to be regarded as Alice Roberts, under the suitable subjects for leadership of Mark Davies, a documentaries. But beyond male Welsh volcanologist and these, what formats will be helped into place by an ‘access devised to repackage team’, caved, climbed, abseiled archaeology for a more and waded through mud to demanding viewing public and reach their objectives. At this how will archaeology respond to point a range of conventional the growing demand for archaeological techniques were involvement that has been fuelled brought to bear. The sense of by this intense media interest?

52 Archaeology as a media experience

This brings me on to the final time volunteer work. In part of this discourse. The consequence the tradition of question of what happens locally based fieldwork is in beyond the broadcast? Media decline in many areas, not exposure of archaeology has helped by the increasingly aged created a wider interest in the membership profile of many subject than ever before and local or regional archaeological broadcast media can have an societies. educational role while providing entertaining programmes. Channel 4 attempted to address Numbers of students enrolled in this problem with a bold both full time and part time experiment in 2003. Time Teams archaeology courses have grown ‘Big Dig’, a live event broadcast considerably over the last over a week during the summer decade and interest is catered was intended to provide a for by a wide range of popular vehicle for anyone to become an publications and on-line instant archaeologist. All over material. What is not provided, the country people could apply however, is what is ultimately to dig a test pit. The proposed desired by many of those who location was then checked to develop this interest, the ensure that it did not encroach opportunity to be involved in on an already known fieldwork, and more specifically, archaeological site and guidance excavation. on the excavation and recording was given. This project, Archaeology in Britain has although supported by English grown enormously in recent Heritage, did not meet with decades and has, in the process, universal approval from become more professional professional archaeologists and –there is more archaeology the broadcasts proved that on being done by more archaeolo- the whole 1m by 1m test pits do gists. But just as public interest not make enthralling television. and desire to be involved has It will be interesting to see if this grown, this professionalism and experiment will ever be the increasingly scientific nature repeated and to see whether it of excavation and analysis have has generated any more lasting made involvement more means of involving the public in difficult. In a world of excavation. archaeology that is increasingly driven by commercial pressures As a media ‘experience’ there is little opportunity for part archaeology is being asked to

53 Vè SEMINARI D’ARQUEOLOGIA I ENSENYAMENT

change, and archaeologists may side of investigating the past. be asked to become things that The media therefore has a they are not necessarily responsibility to help provide the comfortable with; more means for this interest to be dramatic, more extreme, more fulfilled, but will it and can it take ‘eccentric’. If these characteris- on this responsibility in a world tics cannot be provided by the that is highly competitive and archaeologists themselves then increasingly tightly budgeted? the subject may be take away from them and the subject given The media and archaeology to those who can, professional have, on the whole, had a good but non-specialist presenters, relationship in recent years. As television ‘personalities’ or the needs of both partners comedians. This is when change, that of television for archaeology on television will more entertaining and dramatic cease to become educational, formats, that of archaeology to except in a peripheral way, and get the message across without will become entertainment. resorting to hyperbole, the relationship will undoubtedly be The media have responsibilities, tested, and may not survive to allow whenever possible, the intact. archaeologists themselves to explain their world and their As an archaeologist I would like understanding of the past. The to continue to see archaeology media should also acknowledge on television, but real that they have to a large degree archaeology, presented by real created this upsurge of interest archaeologists, with real in archaeology and the practical passion.

54