Moral Justifications for Archaeological Excavation Sites

Moral Justifications for Archaeological Excavation Sites Can archaeological excavation of sites not under immediate threat of development or erosion be justified morally? Explore the pros and cons of research (as opposed to rescue and salvage) excavation and non-destructive archaeological research methods using specific examples. Many people believe that archaeology and archaeologists are mainly concerned with excavation – with digging sites.   This may be the common public image of archaeology, as often portrayed on television, although Rahtz (1991, 65-86) has made clear that archaeologists in fact do many things besides excavate. Drewett (1999, 76) goes further, commenting that ‘it must never be assumed that excavation is an essential part of any archaeological fieldwork’.   Excavation itself is a costly and destructive research tool, destroying the object of its research forever (Renfrew and Bahn 1996, 100).   Of the present day it has been noted that rather than desiring to dig every site they know about, the majority of archaeologists work within a conservation ethic that has grown up in the past few decades (Carmichael et al. 2003, 41).   Given the shift to excavation taking place mostly in a rescue or salvage context where the archaeology would otherwise face destruction and the inherently destructive nature of excavation, it has become appropriate to ask whether research excavation can be morally justified.   This essay will seek to answer that question in the affirmative and also explore the pros and cons of research excavation and non-destructive archaeological research methods. If the moral justification of research excavation is questionable in comparison to the excavation of threatened sites, it would seem that what makes rescue excavation morally acceptable is the fact that the site would be lost to human knowledge if it was not investigated.   It seems clear from this, and seems widely accepted that excavation itself is a useful investigative technique.   Renfrew and Bahn (1996, 97) suggest that excavation ‘retains its central role in fieldwork because it yields the most reliable evidence archaeologists are interested in’.   Carmichael et al. (2003, 32) note that ‘excavation is the means by which we access the past’ and that it is the most basic, defining aspect of archaeology.   As mentioned above, excavation is a costly and destructive process that destroys the object of its study.   Bearing this in mind, it seems that it is perhaps the context in which excavation is used that has a bearing on whether or not it is m orally justifiable.   If the archaeology is bound to be destroyed through erosion or development then its destruction through excavation is vindicated since much data that would otherwise be lost will be created (Drewett 1999, 76).   If rescue excavation is justifiable on the grounds that it prevents total loss in terms of the potential data, does this mean that research excavation is not morally justifiable because it is not simply ‘making the best use of archaeological sites that must be consumed’ (Carmichael et al. 2003, 34)?   Many would disagree.   Critics of research excavation may point out that the archaeology itself is a finite resource that must be preserved wherever possible for the future.   The destruction of archaeological evidence through unnecessary (ie non-emergency) excavation denies the opportunity of research or enjoyment to future generations to whom we may owe a custodial duty of care (Rahtz 1991, 139).   Even during the most responsible excavations where detailed records are made, 100% recording of a site is not possible, making any non-essential excavation almost a wilful destruction of evidence.   These criticisms are not wholly valid though, and certainly the latte r holds true during any excavation, not only research excavations, and surely during a research project there is likely to be more time available for a full recording effort than during the statutory access period of a rescue project.   It is also debateable whether archaeology is a finite resource, since ‘new’ archaeology is created all the time.   It seems inescapable though, that individual sites are unique and can suffer destruction but although it is more difficult and perhaps undesirable to deny that we have some responsibility to preserve this archaeology for future generations, is it not also the case that the present generations are entitled to make responsible use of it, if not to destroy it?   Research excavation, best directed at answering potentially important research questions, can be done on a partial or selective basis, without disturbing or destroying a whole site, thus leaving areas for later researchers to investigate (Carmichael et al. 2003, 4 1). Furthermore, this can and should be done in conjunction with non-invasive techniques such as aerial photography, ground, geophysical and chemical survey (Drewett 1999, 76).   Continued research excavation also allows the practice and development of new techniques, without which such skills would be lost, preventing future excavation technique from being improved. An excellent example of the benefits of a combination of research excavation and non-destructive archaeological techniques is the work that has been done, despite objections, at the Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Sutton Hoo, in eastern England (Rahtz 1991 136-47; Renfrew and Bahn 1996, 98-99).   Excavation originally took place on the site in 1938-39 revealing many treasures and the impression in sand of a wooden ship used for a burial, though the body was not found.   The focus of these campaigns and those of the 1960s were traditional in their approach, being concerned with the opening of burial mounds, their contents, dating and identifying historical connections such as the identity of the occupants.   In the 1980s a new campaign with different aims was undertaken, directed by Martin Carver.   Rather than beginning and ending with excavation, a regional survey was carried out over an area of some 14ha, helping to set the site in its local context. Electronic distance measuring w as used to create a topographical contour map prior to other work.   A grass expert examined the variety of grass species on-site and identified the positions of some 200 holes dug into the site.   Other environmental studies examined beetles, pollen and snails.   In addition, a phosphate survey, indicative of likely areas of human occupation, corresponded with results of the surface survey.   Other non-destructive tools were used such as metal detectors, used to map modern rubbish.   A proton magnetometer, fluxgate gradiometer and soil resistivity were all used on a small part of the site to the east, which was later excavated.   Of those techniques, resistivity proved the most informative, revealing a modern ditch and a double palisade, as well as some other features (see comparative illustrations in Renfrew and Bahn 1996, 99).   Excavation later revealed features that had not been remotely detected.   Resistivity has since been used on the area of the mounds while soil-sounding radar, which penetrates deeper than resistivity, is being used on the mounds themselves.   At Sutton Hoo, the techniques of geophysical survey are seen to operate as a complement to excavation, not merely a preliminary nor yet a replacement.   By trialling such techniques in conjunction with excavation, their effectiveness can be gauged and new and more effective techniques developed.   The results at Sutton Hoo suggest that research excavation and non-destructive methods of archaeological research remain morally justifiable. However, simply because such techniques can be applied efficiently does not mean that excavation should be the priority nor that all sites should be excavated, but such a scenario has never been a likely one due to the usual constraints such as funding.   Besides, it has been noted above that there is already a trend towards conservation.   Continued research excavation at famous sites such as Sutton Hoo, as Rahtz notes (1991, 140-41), is justified since it serves avowedly to develop archaeological practice itself; the physical remains, or shapes in the landscape can be and are restored to their former appearance with the bonus of being better understood, more educational and interesting; such exotic and special sites capture the imagination of the public and the media and raise the profile of archaeology as a whole.   There are other sites that could prove equally good examples of morally justifiable long term research archaeology, such as Wharram Percy (for which see Rahtz 19 91, 148-57).   Progressing from a straightforward excavation in 1950, with the aim of showing that the earthworks represented medieval buildings, the site grew to represent much more in time, space and complexity.   Techniques used expanded from excavation to include survey techniques and aerial photography to set the village into a local context. In conclusion, it can be seen that while excavation is destructive, there is a morally justifiable place for research archaeology and non-destructive archaeological techniques: excavation should not be reduced only to rescue circumstances.   Research excavation projects, such as Sutton Hoo, have provided many positive aspects to the development of archaeology and knowledge of the past.   While excavation should not be undertaken lightly, and non-destructive techniques should be employed in the first place, it is clear that as yet they cannot replace excavation in terms of the amount and types of data provided.   Non-destructive techniques such as environmental sampling and resistivity survey have, provided significant complementary data to that which excavation provides and both should be employed. Bibliography Carmichael, D.L., Lafferty III, R.H. and Molyneaux, B.L. 2003. Excavation. Walnut Creek and Oxford: Altamira Press. Drewett, P.L. 1999. Field Archaeology: An Introduction. London: UCL Press. Rahtz, P. 1991. Invitation to Archaeology. 2nd edition.   Oxford: Blackwell.Renfrew, C. and Bahn, P.1996. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. 2nd edition. London: Thames Hudson.

Do the Right Thing: Independent Cinema Essay

â€Å"Do the Right Thing† (1989) is a drama-comedy film crafted by writer-director producer star Spike Lee which delved into issues dealing with Brooklyn existence, racism and bigotry which exist in areas found in metropolitan New York. Tolerance is normally maintained but feelings are always threatening to spill out the key point of Lee’s film. Most of the actions take place in Sal’s Pizzeria, a 25 year-old Italian-American establishment in the African-American community (Do the Right Thing; 1989). Sal has two sons, Pino and Vito who were all working with delivery person Mookie. In one of the scenes, Mookie was talking to one of his African-American friend in the pizzeria when the issue of â€Å"blackness† was again brought up. His friend asked Mookie who is his favorite basketball player, actor and musician. Mookie replied: â€Å"Magic Johnson, Eddie Murphy and Prince† who apparently are all African-Americans by descent (Do the Right Thing; 1989). His friend had humorously assumed that Mookie might have preferred to be â€Å"black† in a sense. Mookie responded that the three are not just â€Å"blacks†; they are the â€Å"higher blacks†. His friend, who is an African American, was shocked with how Mookie regarded his favorite personalities; they do not belong to the â€Å"ordinary blacks† to whom the issue of racism is often addressed; however, Mookie’s â€Å"categorization† of blacks can still be considered as being racist and still not a way to move out from the issue of racism (although Mookie had attempted to ease the degree of â€Å"insult† by bringing up the status of â€Å"some† blacks into a higher level). The stimulating theory of â€Å"double consciousness† explores the possibility of how black political culture may change as it moved out of the early phases which attempted to escape from the notion of slavery towards the acquisition of meaningful citizenship in post-emancipated societies (Gilroy, Paul; 1993). The categorization of Magic Johnson, Eddie Murphy and Prince as â€Å"higher blacks† is an evident response that the public (regardless of descent) is attempting to put a higher regard of what have been considered by history as â€Å"bearers of the lower status†.

Modern World: Things Fall Apart

â€Å" We cannot leave the matter in his hands because he doesn’t not understand our customs, just as we do not understand his. We say he is foolish because he does not know our ways, and perhaps he says we are foolish because we do not know his. Let him go away† (*1). This quote shows the major theme of the book which is change vs tradition. The quote shows the theme perfectly; basically it shows the ignorance of most of the Umuofia clan and their fear of the white peoples culture taking over theirs. They are dealing with the question of whether change should be privileged over tradition.The people of Umuofia want a little change but at the same time they have fear of completely losing their way of life, the people are divided on the subject at hand at what the right and wrong thing to do is, and how much is to much change. When the first white men was seen there was controversy already. The man was seen in Abame, the elders immediately went to see their oracle out of fear. The oracle told the elders that â€Å" the strange man would break their clan and spread destruction among them† (*2). So the people killed the white men immediately out of fear.Then a few weeks later out of revenge three white men went to the Abame market and shot everyone except the people that weren't there. The Abame people were foolish they should have known â€Å" Never kill a man who says nothing† ( * 3). But regardless of why the shooting happened at the Abame market the gossip had started and the fear had set in for the white men. After the Abame incident, other white people began to show. The white missionaries went to Umuofia and had begun building churches there and began getting converts.Not everyone was fond of the new religion though, but the leaders of the clan were not scarred because they believed that the weird faith would not last. Missionaries also arrived in the village of Mbanta. The missionaries begun telling the people of the villages abo ut the new religion â€Å" We have been sent by this great God to ask you to leave your wicked ways and false gods and turn to Him so that you may be saved when you die† (*4). The missionaries started to have the people of the villages question their religion and culture, and to make them think am I just worshiping false gods of wood and stone?Is all the rituals and killing and destroying innocent children actually right? Many questions began to stir. One person in particular who was captivated by the new religion was Nwoye, Okonkwo’s son. Nwoye became one of the first converts, but because of this change with his life that meant that he was no longer part of Okonkwo’s life or ever be considered his son. Even though this hurt Nwoye, he felt a relief in his life, so he thought that he could find other people within his new religion that would love him more then his father ever had.As the missionaries kept on spreading the word of their new religion and changing p eoples life’s, they decided to ask for some land to build their church. So the clan decided to give them as much land somewhere as they wanted. The missionaries were very happy that they were getting the land, but what they didn’t know was the land they were getting was called the â€Å"evil forest† because it was alive with sinister forces and was evil. The â€Å" evil forest† was where the clan had buried everyone that died from evil diseases.There was a so called curse that was set on the forest, so the people of Mbanta expected the missionaries to all be dead within four days. Not knowing of the curse the missionaries begun immediately clearing out the forest and building their church, and as each day went by and no one was dying the people of Mbanta were questioned about why the curse wasn't working on the white men. The church in Mbanta kept getting stronger and stronger as each day passed and was getting more converts. Okonkwo remained angered at t he new changes in Mbanto, â€Å" until the abominable gang was chased out of the village with whips there would be no peace† (*5).Although some did not mind the changes â€Å" It is not our custom to fight for our gods, let us not presume to do so now† (*6). Although everyone had their own opinions of the matter at hand, the assembly out of fear decided to exclude the christians from the privileges and life of the clan. Even though the new faith had only a few converts at first, the christians quickly grew and had became a small community and they were not going to be easily shut down. After the seven years of Okonkwo living in Mbanta, he was finally able to go back to Umuofia after being exiled.Although things had been changing in Mbanta, Okonkwo was unaware that Umuofia had also been changing. He still expected to just go back and have everything still be the same, even though that was the total opposite. The new church was not the only thing that had changed since h e was gone in Umuofia; the white men also brought a new government to the village. The men of power were no longer the high titled men, chief priests, and the elders, the men of power were now the District of Commissioner, and the court messengers.The District Commissioner had become the head of the government in Umuofia who judged cases ignorantly, then there were the court messengers who guarded the new prison, which was filled with citizens who would not listen to the white man’s laws. Okonkwo was very confused about what has happened to the village he once had some power over. â€Å" What is it that has happened to our people? Why have they lost the power to fight (*7)? † Okonkwo was so flabbergasted about how his once perfectly traditional south african village had changed into a government controlled christian village.So many things were changing, not only did the white men bring a new religion, and a new government, but they also brought trading to the village, which helped the village have more of a money flow and schools were beginning to be built. The clan had become barely recognizable to Okonkwo anymore, it was falling apart in his eyes. The village had not only begun to fall apart in Okonkwo’s eyes but in others soon to follow too. On the annual worship of the earth goddess day, one of the egwugwu’s masks were accidentally torn off by Enoch, which was one of the greatest crimes a man could commit.Enoch showed everyone that that the egwugwu’s were merely men impersonating spirits, therefore Enoch had basically killed an ancestral spirit. From Enoch doing that he helped the missionaries falsify the Umuofia's religion and show that it was all superstition, but he also re-sparked the conflict between the christian church and the clan. That was the last straw for the clan with dealing with the christians, â€Å" Tell him to go back to his house and leave us alone†¦ But this shrine which he built must be destroye d. We shall no longer allow it in our midst† (*8).The clan came in agreement to burns down the church; which makes Okonkwo very happy for once. The men in Umuofia finally begun to take back the village that was once theirs, so the next few days the men were armed and stayed aware. As the men were on cloud nine thinking things might end up going back to the traditional ways, they forgot to remember that their was still a government. The district commissioner was at a tour when the clan decided to burn down the church and not follow the laws. But when the District Commissioner did come back from his tour, Mr.Smith, who was the head missionary ,immediately caught the Commissioner up on what had happened while he was away. After finding out what had happened the Commissioner got his messenger to round up the leaders of Umuofia for a meeting. When all six leaders, including Okonkwo, met up at the commissioners headquarters they were asked what had happened, before they even had a c hance to explain what had happened then they were immediately arrested. â€Å" I have brought you here because you joined together to molest others, to burn people’s houses and their place of worship† (*8).The six leaders were fined with two hundred bags of cowries and were sentenced to prison and would not be released until they paid the fine, and if they choose not to they would be taken to Umuru to be hung. Thankfully each one of the leaders paid the fine, and were set free. Okonkwo was so incredible angered when he was let out of the prison. Later that night when he went back to his hut he could barley even sleep. All he could think about was revenge, and how no matter what he was not going to back out of his plan.The next morning he went to the meeting place, which was the marketplace where he was going to meet Obierika. â€Å" All our gods are weeping. Idemili is weeping, Ogwugwu is weeping, Agbala is weeping, and all the others. Our dead fathers are weeping bec ause of the shameful sacrilege they are suffering and the abomination we have all seen with our eyes† (*9). Okonkwo decided that enough was enough he was not going to stand by and watch his clan fall apart any longer. â€Å" We must root out this evil. And if our brothers take the side of evil we must root them out too.And we must do it now. We must bale this water now that it is only ankle deep†¦ † (*10). And that is exactly what Okonkwo did. He stood by his word, and he did what he felt was right. He shot and killed a messenger at the market place, where every person witnessed with their own eyes. Shortly after this the District Commissioner arrived at Okonkwo’s compound to retrieve him to be killed because of the sin he had just committed, but the commissioner along with a few other people had realized he was to late the deed had been already done.Okonkwo was found hanging dead on a tree behind his compound; he committed suicide. When Okonkwo was found de ad Obierika turned to the District Commissioner and said, â€Å" That man was one of the greatest men in Umuofia. You drove him to kill himself; and now he will be buried like a dog† (*11). So rather then wait to be killed and humiliated, Okonkwo took matters into his own hands and killed himself. In the book Things fall apart the main character Okonkwo ended up both losing and winning at the end.He lost in the sense of the new religion, and government, and basically just the overall change ended up winning over tradition. Which was what he feared all along. But in a sense he won because the last thing he did before he died was something he completely believed was the right thing to do, so he never gave up or stopped trying, even though he knows that he did all that he could and tried. But In the end it was just unbearable for him to live any longer with all that had changed in his village, so he did what he wanted to do, which was killing the messenger, then he killed himsel f.He killed himself because he understood that since he killed the messenger he was then going to be killed for the sin he had committed. But he he didn't want to be killed by someone else and be made as an example, and he didn’t want to give the satisfaction to the District Of Commissioner by letting himself get killed by him. So in the end he just gave up and realized their was nothing else he could do about the situation at hand. â€Å"The world has no end, and what is good among one people is an abomination with others† (* 11).That shows that no matter that people will always see things differently, what is good or bad or what is right or what is wrong. No matter what, the world will never be agreeing on the matter at hand, there will always be fighting and arguing as long as their is something to be argued about. So in the end through all the fighting and heartache Okonkwo’s death symbolized the tradition dyeing out and change taking over.

My Father And Brother Choose The Monastery Of Gadong

During the 20th century, Tashi Tsering, Palden Gyatso, and Phutsok are Tibetans males who acquired a different education with differing ambitions. Palden Gyatso, Tashi Tsering, and Phutsok all had different levels of ambition that was influenced and challenged by parental authority figures. Palden Gyatso’s strive for education could be described as moderate because while he wanted to become a monk, he did not bother to figure out how one becomes a monk. Gyatso claims that he was â€Å"reluctant to raise the subject with my father in case he thought I was just unhappy at home†. While he would like an education, he would not strive for it if it disrupted the Tibetan family dynamics. When Gyatso’s father does bring up the topic of getting a†¦show more content†¦Tashi had already discussed the possibility of getting a secular education with his parents, but they did not allow him to leave. This is unusual considering that Tashi’s father was one of three literate men in their town. Tashi’s father may have been influenced by the other Tibetan’s idea of education. Tibetans did not be lieve in the importance of education because they were not convinced that education was a means of raising one’s social or economic position. Tibetan society determined a person’s rank in life and Tibetans were not willing to leave their places in their traditional way of life. While Tashi’s mother and father were not willing to give Tashi an education, his aunt does teach him the alphabet. On the other hand, Phutsok’s ambition for education was not hindered by his parental figures at all. Phutsok’s parents encouraged him to obtain an education by sending him to the monk with his uncle. However, the level of importance Phutsok placed in terms of education is questionable when considering that the death of his uncle meant that he left the monastery. If Phutsok truly wanted to further his education, he would have tried different means in order to be allowed to stay at the monastery. Overall, both Phutsok and Palden Gyatso strive for religious educati ons, while Tashi Tsering is only offered a secular education. The fact that Phutsok and Palden