Unit 9 – Uncovering the Past

Lesson A – An Interview with an Archaeologist

Exercise B – page 164

Conversation A

Todd: Hi, Jim.

Jim: Oh, hi, Todd. Say, how was your trip to Cambodia?

Todd: It was amazing. My original plan was just to relax on the beaches, but it rained virtually
every day, so my friend proposed that we visit Angkor Wat, and I’m so glad we did.

Jim: Yeah? What was it like? I’m curious.

Todd: It was definitely the highlight of my trip. I met this really interesting guide who knew all
about the history of the Khmer Empire. I learned so much.

Jim: Like what?

Todd: Well, I thought there was just the one temple at the site—Angkor Wat—but apparently
every major Khmer king between 900 and about 1700 AD built a temple at Angkor.

Jim: So there are lots of temples there?

Todd: Right. Tourists can visit some of the temples, but not others because they’re still being
excavated. In fact, I got to chatting with one of the archaeologists. Turns out she’s from my
hometown, and she invited me to come back next year and participate in one of the digs.

Jim: So you’d be collaborating with her? Wow! Are you going to do it?

Todd: I’ve already started saving!

Conversation B

Ann: What are you doing, Paola?

Paola: Hi, Ann. I’m just watching a documentary online.

Ann: Oh, yeah? What’s it about?

Paola: Ancient Egypt.

Ann: Seriously? Huh.

Paola: It doesn’t sound that exciting, I guess, but actually it’s fascinating.
Ann: Yeah?

Paola: Yeah. It’s all about mummies.

Ann: Mummies? You mean like the bodies or other remains of famous leaders?

Paola: Actually, the Egyptians also made mummies of birds and other animals. I just saw some
great images of archaeologists uncovering the mummy of a cat. The director interviewed a
couple of specialists including one named Salima Ikram who had some fascinating things to say.
She explained how much we can learn about Egyptian civilization from mummies.

Ann: Uh, that actually does sound pretty interesting. Say, do you mind if I watch the rest of it
with you?

Paola: Of course not. Have a seat.

An Interview with an Archaeologist

Interviewer: I’m joined today by Matthew Piscitelli, who has worked as an archaeologist, a
university professor, and an explorer for the National Geographic Society. Welcome, Matthew,
and thank you for being here. Now my first question for you is this: why should people care
about archaeology?

Piscitelli: Why should we care about some stones and bones? I think it’s important to study
objects from the past, from ancient civilizations because of the old cliché that we learn about the
future by studying the past. The past is who we are. We learn more about where we come from,
and it helps us learn more about our identity today. We need to study those ancient civilizations
so we can help prepare for the future.

And archaeology is also important because it inspires curiosity. People feel a connection to the
past when I say, “You know, you’re walking in the footsteps of ancient people.” Or, “This is
what it was like to live 5,000 years ago.” I think there’s something very interesting about that.

So it’s important that we, as archaeologists, not simply do our excavations, write a report, and
then file that away where nobody will read about it. We need to communicate what we do and
the importance of what we do.

We need to ask ourselves, why does what you propose to do really matter? Who’s going to care
beyond a few specialists in your field? Are you asking questions that can inform us about
humanity? About culture?

Interviewer: Those are all great questions. Now, I think it’s fair to say that when most people
think about archaeology, they think about uncovering objects from cultures like ancient Greece,
Rome, and Egypt. Why do you think that is? What is it about societies like these that inspires us
so much?
Piscitelli: So there are a lot of famous sites in the world like Stonehenge and the Pyramids of
Giza that people are always excited to learn about. And there’s something charismatic about
them. They have been around for thousands of years. People—not just us today as consumers of
media or tourists—but there have been tourists for hundreds of years, so people have constantly
been interested in these sites. And I think it’s from the charisma, the wonder, the awe of these
sites. It’s something about archaeology that makes us wonder: What was it like to live in the
past? What was it like to build the pyramids or to build Stonehenge? What did they mean? Those
voices aren’t here to talk to us today.

Interviewer: Are there any archaeological sites or ancient cultures you think people should
know more about?

Piscitelli: When we look at all the work that our National Geographic explorers are doing all
over the world, we come to realize that the world is a very ancient place and there are a lot of
civilizations out there to be discovered. Now in some of those places, like in Egypt, there’s a
long history of study. Some other places are more like the Wild West in that we don’t know as
much. For example, in Peru, we know Machu Picchu. We know some sites along the north coast
of Peru which are very famous, but there are some other sites along the north central coast of
Peru where there are the earliest pyramids in the New World. They are 5,000 years old. They’re
almost as large as the Pyramids of Giza, but there’s been very little study of them whatsoever. So
the important thing to think about is that there is so much history out there just waiting to be
discovered, and that’s why we have to continue to explore.

Interviewer: You’ve talked about what we can learn from archaeology in general terms. Now
I’d like you to think of specific examples from your work in the field and your collaborations
with local people. How can archaeology bring the past to life? How can it help us hear the voices
of the past, as you suggested earlier?

Piscitelli: One of the communities where I work is called Huaricanga, which is in Peru. I work
with individuals who have been living at the archaeological site for 30 years and some of them
had no idea that the mounds and hills around their houses were actually the remains of ancient
civilizations that have been there for 5,000 years. And through their participation, the
collaborative efforts of myself and those community members, they start to realize that there is
history around them and that it’s their history. We had this one instance where an individual had
this table in his house, this nice stone table. And he had actually taken the stone from one of the
nearby pyramids. He had no idea what it was used for in the past, but as we did our excavations
and he worked on our team, he learned the importance of the past and realized the connection
that he had was much deeper than he had originally thought.

Interviewer: Matthew Piscitelli, thank you so much.

Exercise C – page 167

Piscitelli: The past is who we are. We learn more about where we come from, and it helps us
learn more about our identity today.

2.

Piscitelli: So it’s important that we, as archaeologists, not simply do our excavations, write a
report, and then file that away where nobody will read about it.

3.

Interviewer: I think it’s fair to say that when most people think about archaeology, they think
about uncovering objects from cultures like ancient Greece, Rome, and Egypt. Why do you think
that is? What is about societies like these that inspires us so much?

4.

Piscitelli: There are some other sites along the north central coast of Peru where there are the
earliest pyramids in the New World. They are 5,000 years old. They’re almost as large as the
Pyramids of Giza, but there’s been very little study of them whatsoever.

5.

Piscitelli: I work with individuals who have been living at the archaeological site for 30 years
and some of them had no idea that the mounds and hills around their houses were actually the
remains of ancient civilizations that have been there for 5,000 years.

Lesson B – A Discussion about Archaeology

Professor: OK, so that wraps up today’s lecture, but before you all leave, I’ve got a quick
announcement about next class. We’ll be discussing some technologies that are changing the
way people do archaeology in the twenty-first century. To prepare, I’d like you all to pick a
technology that matches that description and research it. You can do that alone or collaborate
with others. OK? Everyone got that? Alright then, see you all next time.

Jess: Hey, uh, Serena, Omar, and Phil wait up a second. Do you want to work on the research
assignment as a group?

Omar: Yeah, good idea.

Serena: Sure.

Phil: Me, too.

Omar: Facebook would be OK, but as we’re all here and we’ve already started discussing it,
why don’t we just get on with it now?

Jess: Doing it now works for me.

Serena: And me.

Phil: I’ll have to leave soon, but I can stay for five minutes or so.

Jess: OK, so does anybody have any ideas for a technology we could discuss?

Serena: When Professor Levin mentioned the assignment, my first thought was ground-
penetrating radar. I spent the summer helping out at an excavation in Peru, and we used GPR
there. It was incredible to see where an artifact or other remains might be underground without
actually doing any digging, and I think …

Omar: Sorry to interrupt, Serena, but Professor Levin said we should discuss things that are
changing archaeology in the twenty-first century. But as I understand it, GPR dates from the
1980s, so I’m not sure it qualifies.

Serenaz: Oh, good point.

Phil: Still, I think GPR is definitely an important technology, so let’s add it to our list of options,
OK? Perhaps another option would be to research lidar. I recently came across an article about it,
and from what I read, it’s really changing how archaeologists work.

Jess: Lidar? Uh, could you refresh my memory?

Phil: It’s a way of using lasers to scan the surface of something, and then …

Jess: Oh, is it also called laser scanning?

Phil: Yeah, that’s right. Now, as I was saying, after scanning, archaeologists can use the data to
make a really high-definition map of an archaeological site. It shows what the ground surface
looks like even if there are trees or something that makes it hard to see surface features. You
know, some archaeologists recently used lidar to discover a lost settlement in the jungles of
Central America. There was an article in…

Omar: Oh, right. That was a really interesting article. Lidar’s a good idea, Phil, although I think
it’s another twentieth century technology. Still, let’s add it to our list. Ok, now one more
technology that we could …

Serena: Oh, what about drones? They’d be … Oh, sorry. I interrupted you, Omar.
Omar: That’s OK. Go ahead.

Serena: You sure? OK, well, as I said, I think drones would be a great technology to research.

Jess: You mean drones like the ones that people are talking about as a way to deliver pizza or
online purchases? Can drones be used for archaeology?

Serena: Sure. They’re used to fly over sites and take photos to make maps. The maps might not
be as detailed as the ones made with lidar, but they’d be a lot cheaper. And some drones are big
enough to carry a ground-penetrating radar device, so they can be used to do GPR scans, too.
And I’ve even read that archaeologists can use them to provide security for important sites. So
the drones fly over an excavation to stop non-archaeologists from looking for valuable artifacts
and causing damage by accident.

Omar: I didn’t know drones could be so useful. I think Serena’s right: they’re definitely a good
technology to add to our list. Anyway, I was going to suggest robots as another technology we
could consider. I’ve heard about these tiny rescue robots that are used if there’s a natural disaster
like an earthquake. The robots can go into the remains of a damaged building and search for
people who are alive. Because they’re so small, they can go anywhere and there’s no danger
they’ll cause further damage. I’ve read that archaeologists could use these tiny robots to go into
underground tombs or sites and take photos.

Phil: Cool! I’m really into robots, so for what it’s worth I’d love to research that topic. Anyway,
I’m going to have to head off soon, but does anyone have any other ideas before I go?

Jess: I don’t know much about this topic, but what about satellite archaeology? I’ve heard that
this archaeologist named Sarah Parcak is using data and photos from satellites to find
archaeological sites. And the really cool part is that she’s developing a website that anybody can
use to look at the data and suggest places that might be good sites for excavation. In other words,
she’s crowdsourcing archaeological discoveries.

Serena: Wow, that’s a neat idea, Jess. Let me add that to our list. So that’s ground-penetrating
radar, LiDAR, drones, micro robots, and now satellite archaeology. I’d say that’s a pretty good
list. So, should we vote on which of those technologies to research?

Phil: Actually, if I don’t leave now, I’ll be late. Could we all think about it and then post our top
choices on Facebook?

Jess: Yeah, let’s do that. Come on, Phil. I need to be somewhere soon, too, so I’ll walk out with
you.

Exercise E – page 177

1.
Jess: Hey, uh, Serena, Omar, and Phil wait up a second. Do you want to work on the research
assignment as a group?

Omar: Yeah, good idea.

Serena: Sure.

Phil: Me, too.

Jess: Great. We’ll need to decide what technology to look into. Do you want to set a date to
figure that out or should we just do it on Facebook?

Omar: Facebook would be OK, but as we’re all here and we’ve already started discussing it,
why don’t we just get on with it now?

Jess: Doing it now works for me.

Serena: And me.

Phil: I’ll have to leave soon, but I can stay for five minutes or so.

2.

Serena: When Professor Levin mentioned the assignment, my first thought was ground-
penetrating radar. I spent the summer helping out at an excavation in Peru, and we used GPR
there. It was incredible to see where an artifact or other remains might be underground without
actually doing any digging, and I think …

Omar: Sorry to interrupt, Serena, but Professor Levin said we should discuss things that are
changing archaeology in the twenty-first century. But as I understand it, GPR dates from the
1980s, so I’m not sure it qualifies.

Serena: Oh, good point.

3.

Phil: Still, I think GPR is definitely an important technology, so let’s add it to our list of options,
OK? Perhaps another option would be to research lidar. I recently came across an article about it,
and from what I read, it’s really changing how archaeologists work.

Jess: Lidar? Uh, could you refresh my memory?

Phil: It’s a way of using lasers to scan the surface of something, and then …

Jess: Oh, is it also called laser scanning?

Phil: Yeah, that’s right.

Omar: I didn’t know drones could be so useful. I think Serena’s right: they’re definitely a good
technology to add to our list. Anyway, I was going to suggest robots as another technology we
could consider. I’ve heard about these tiny rescue robots that are used if there’s a natural disaster
like an earthquake. The robots can go into the remains of a damaged building and search for
people who are alive. Because they’re so small, they can go anywhere and there’s no danger
they’ll cause further damage. I’ve read that archaeologists could use these tiny robots to go into
underground tombs or sites and take photos.

Phil: Cool! I’m really into robots, so for what it’s worth I’d love to research that topic. Anyway,
I’m going to have to head off soon, but does anyone have any other ideas before I go?