“Purity†of Archaeological Sites? Re-creations +Re-constructions:
Sir Arthur Evans (1851-1941), the curator ofthe Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, was a controversial figure inarchaeology. Following in the footsteps of Heinrich Schliemann(1822-1890), he studied Greek myths as literature based on fact. Bydoing so, he discovered the Minoan palace of King Minos, which hadpreviously been thought to be only a fable. Excavations took placeover many years in the early 1900s. Not only did he use textsthought to be fictional accounts as scientific sources, but he alsore-created the site as he believed it to look. Thisinvolved incorporating foreign materials (reinforced cement, modernpaint, etc) into the archaeological site, and destroyed some of theoriginal site in order to do so. This means no one else couldre-excavate here, and everyone would see and be influenced byhis interpretation of the site, not allowing for theflexibility of multiple interpretations due to advances ordevelopments in knowledge, techniques, equipment, etc over time.For many scientists, Knossos is now a travesty of archaeology. Forthe average person, it is a way of understanding how an ancientarchaeological site may have looked. What do you think? Isre-creating a site based on one person’s understanding orinterpretation worth the destruction of some of that site? If oneis to re-create a site, should one be limited to materialsthat would have been used originally? Can you think of anyadditional issues, whether positive or negative, about this type ofactivity?
