Fighting Ancient Aliens in the Classroom: Restoring Credit to Peoples of the Past in Introduction to Archaeology Courses Cerisa R. Reynolds, Aims Community College Over the past ten years, I have heard I ultimately realized that my student after student suggest that so-called determination to restore recognition of the “primitive man” could not have built the abilities of past peoples was all about pyramids: aliens must have built them, or at highlighting inequality. Though inequality the very least provided people with the was always an important part of my knowledge and technologies necessary to Introduction to Archaeology course, it now build them. Initially, I only briefly addressed became the central theme of the course. As a these beliefs, hoping that by the end of the class, we now examine a) the blatant racism semester, the truth—the abilities of peoples that shaped early approaches to interpreting of the past—would have become obvious. the past, b) the thinly masked racism that However, as the years went by, and with the shapes current popular approaches to growing popularity of shows like Ancient interpreting the past (most notably, those Aliens, an increasing number of students having to do with Ancient Aliens), and c) were in my class specifically because of their the inequality that existed in the many interest in (and oftentimes belief in) Ancient complex societies represented in the Alien theories. I realized that I needed to archaeological record. For example, any address—repeatedly and head-on—this discussion of the history of archaeology in assumption that past peoples were incapable the Americas should include reference to the of designing and building the incredible racism with which early explorers and structures, like pyramids, that we see in the “archaeologists” approached the past. The archaeological records of both the New and “Moundbuilder Myth,” for instance, was a Old Worlds. What’s more, I needed to popular method by which people in somehow address this (directly and professional and public spheres stripped a indirectly) while teaching students about complex past from Native Americans, every facet of archaeology, including the insisting instead that various other peoples, history of archaeology, archaeological such as Spanish explorers, Vikings, or a laboratory and field methods, and the number of other white groups, had built the peoples of the past. Sometimes I needed to mounds that stretch across the eastern U.S. develop new lectures or activities, but (Stiebing 1993, 170-180). This theory oftentimes I needed to only tweak older ones remained popular for more than 150 years to reach my goals. in large part because Euroamericans did not want to believe that Native Americans were capable of such constructions and because 2 Teaching Anthropology: Proceedings of the 2015 AAA Meeting Vol. 21, No. 1 admitting as much would interfere with Euroamerican expansion onto supposedly One method by which we can explore “unclaimed” and “undeveloped” lands. social inequality and the abilities past Exploring the racism of historic peoples had to design and build monuments interpretations of the past is important is by focusing on the everyday people, not because these approaches are not so the kings, queens, and pharaohs. We can different from current popular Ancient accomplish this by spending time looking Aliens postulations, where individuals over the Mesopotamian Standard ignore the archaeological record, deny the Professions List and by reading Ancient abilities of past peoples, minimize ancient Egyptian Literature. Egyptian poems and power structures, and insult previous belief letters (especially those found in Lichtheim systems. Both scenarios (Ancient Alien 1973, 184-192 and 1976, 168-175) regularly theories and the Moundbuilder Myth) reveal include reference to the daily struggles and an ethnocentrism so strong that it denies the toils of peasants, teachers, barbers, weavers, abilities of our fellow humans. In my class, I carpenters, jewel-makers, potters, masons, spend time talking about these assumptions gardeners, farmers, cobblers, washermen, early on, and then return to many of the and fishermen. Learning about occupations very sites targeted in Ancient Alien theories reminds students that these were real people throughout the semester. When I return to with real jobs, and that these jobs were an these specific cultures, we do not need to essential part of maintaining and supporting explicitly discuss Ancient Alien theories. a stratified society that was thus capable of Instead, we simply talk about the almost anything. organization of the societies and the Students also look over maps and construction methods used to build or create reconstructions of ancient cities and discuss the various structures and features so often the various occupations necessary to design, linked to aliens. We explore how and why construct, and maintain the cities and their those features and structures were important infrastructure. It usually works well to have to the people who designed, built, and students look at maps and photos of ancient visited them. And in order to do this, we and modern cities throughout the semester, need to talk about inequality. We need to as they then realize that ancient societies spend a lot of time talking about what it would have required many of the same would have been like to live in the many specialists as modern ones, even if they were complex societies of the past. Below, I briefly employing different technologies or world describe some of the lecture topics, films, views in the process. discussion topics, assignments, and class activities I have used to teach my Introduction to Archaeology students about inequality, thereby “fighting” against Ancient Alien theories in my classroom. Focus on Everyday People and Discuss Infrastructure Reynolds Fighting Ancient Aliens in the Classroom 3 Explore How We Identify Social Status in status based on burial goods and grave the Past and Present architecture. Station A includes 32 skeletons buried close to each other (see Figure 1). To help my students think about how Most of the individuals are buried without archaeologists identify social stratification preserved burial goods, though some are and status, we spend some time talking found with rabbit, dog, or fish skeletons, about the ways in which socioeconomic spears, and/or fish hooks. Since there is no status today and in the past impacts one’s evidence of stone tombs or hardware for access to goods and is thus visible in wooden coffins, students usually suggest that architecture, clothing and accessories, these individuals were buried in cloth, hide, occupations, diet, agency, and so much or other perishable and “cheap” or more. Students read Kedmey (2015), an utilitarian materials. Stations B and C article exploring what toothbrushes reveal contain increasingly wealthy individuals, about one’s status, as this helps them see that who have more space to themselves, large almost every part of our lives—including the coffins or tombs, and a growing number of quality and quantity of our family’s luxurious grave goods (see Figures 2 and 3). toothbrushes—is impacted by social status. Finally, Station D includes three very large To apply this knowledge and work through tombs complete with monumental it on their own, students each create a photo architecture, immense amounts of gold and essay wherein they compare different items silver, dozens of sacrificed animals, and and structures that tell us something about several sacrificed humans to accompany wealth. (This assignment is adapted from these powerful individuals into the afterlife one employed by Dr. Matthew E. Hill, Jr. of (see Figures 4 through 6). the University of Iowa). Some students focus on architecture—comparing building materials, size of buildings, or the practical and impractical features of mansions and run-down apartment buildings, for example—while others focus on vehicles, neighborhood infrastructure, shoes, or electronics. After reflecting on material culture and status and submitting their photo essays, students make their way through a miniature cemetery that I have created. I Figure 1: A portion of “Station A” in the mock cemetery exercise. Station A is used to reveal provide a general description of the “lower class” individuals. Students are informed imaginary society, and they move through that needles represent spears and that plastic four stations, each representing a different animals (shown here, from left to right, a rabbit, a part of the cemetery. Students are asked to fish, and a dog) represent animals buried with assess characteristics like gender, these individuals. (Image courtesy of author) occupation, religious beliefs, and social 4 Teaching Anthropology: Proceedings of the 2015 AAA Meeting Vol. 21, No. 1 Figure 4: The three tombs of “Station D” in the mock cemetery exercise. Students are instructed to recognize the images show on the lids of these boxes as representative of monumental architecture built above the tombs. In addition to monumental architecture, a large number of exotic sacrificed animals (represented by plastic animals) as well as large treasure chests filled with “gold” are visible both outside and inside of the large tombs. Individuals buried in the tombs Figure 2: An individual burial from “Station B” on the left and right are buried with dozens of in the mock cemetery exercise. Station B sacrificed animals (some of which are shown individuals are certainly better off economically here), immense amounts of gold, and royal than those seen in Station A. These individuals insignia (see Figure 5). In contrast, the individual are buried in large “stone” coffins with dozens of in the center tomb is buried with hundreds of sea semi-precious and precious stones, shown here as shells and several sacrificed humans (see Figure plastic beads. (Image courtesy of author) 6). Students often suggest that perhaps the difference in monumental architecture and burial goods reflects a distinction between royal/governmental elite individuals (on the left and right) and religious officials (in the center).