Forensic Archaeology In Pop Culture: Myths Vs. Reality

Forensic archaeology on screen

Television programs, films and literature have undoubtedly popularized Forensic Archaeology. Some of these depictions represent the realities of complicated work; others seriously derailed or raised such expectations. Television programs like “Bones”, “CSI” and “Silent Witness” have brought forensic archaeology into many people’s lives. Most of these programs outline the science behind the disciplines, but always simplify the process and exaggerate the pace at which results can be produced. In addition, forensic archaeologists are usually portrayed as glamorous, action-oriented characters, which is an unrealistic representation. From “Indiana Jones” to “The Mummy”, films depicting adventurous archaeologists who discover treasures and fight off dangers have made the box office. These movies entertain audiences but often distort reality, portraying archaeological fieldwork as very tiresome and meticulous. Popular novels involving forensic archaeologists, for instance, those penned by Kathy Reichs, must have contributed to portraying an increased element of reality within the discipline. In most cases, these works present complexities regarding a discipline that deals with collecting, analyzing and interpreting Evidence.

Common misconceptions of forensic archaeology

Misinterpretations of forensic archaeology have added to a variety of common fallacies. Most of the fiction portrays forensic archaeologists as coming up with quick results, sometimes within a few hours. Actually, excavation, analysis and interpretation take months or even years. It is posited that forensic archaeologists are glamorous and jet-set across the globe to exotic places. While fieldwork may be exciting, it is actually physically demanding and entails long hours of work under harsh conditions. This is usually what the public has been made to understand with regard to forensic archaeology. The reality, however, is that it also involves the analysis of artefacts, eco-facts and the surrounding environment. It is often depicted that forensic archaeologists work in isolation. However, to obtain precise results, they have to work as a team consisting of an anthropologist, a geologist and a chemist.

Misconception 1: Forensic archaeologists work on scenes of crime only

One of the common fallacies about forensic archaeology is that it deals exclusively with crime scenes. Although this forms a very significant area of work, forensic archaeologists are involved in a broad spectrum of other projects, including mass fatality incidents and disasters, recovery and archaeological sites of forensic interest. For example, ancient battlefields or the identification of historical disasters require the same meticulous approach and specialized skills as a modern crime scene.

Misconception 2: Forensic archaeology is all about digging

Though undoubtedly this forms an integral part of forensic archaeology, it is not defined by excavation alone. Instead, it incorporates extensive research, analysis and interpretation of evidence recovered from it. This shall comprise examination of skeletal remains, artifacts, and environmental data to reconstruct a full record of the past. Moreover, the large-scale excavation required in many instances is now diminished by non-intrusive techniques such as ground-penetrating radar and LiDAR.

Misconception 3: Forensic archaeologists can identify any remains

Such is the power of popular media in implying that forensic archaeologists can identify remains, no matter their condition or age. In fact, such identification is possible only under a range of optimal conditions that include good preservation of the bones, availability of comparative data, and advancement of techniques in forensic work. Many advances have been made in DNA analysis and other means of identification, but there are still limitations as to what can be done.

Misconception 4: Forensic Archaeology is Fast-Paced, Action-Filled

Television shows and movies portray the forensic archaeologist under extreme pressure in their efforts to ‘crack the case’ within an unrealistically short time frame. Although there is undoubtedly pressure to deliver in some cases, forensic archaeology is meticulous and highly time-consuming. Evidence collection, analysis, and interpretation all require painstaking attention to fine detail, often involving long hours in the laboratory.

Misconception 5: Forensic archaeology deals only with the dead

This discipline in science, therefore, encompasses not only the recovery and analysis of human remains but also the context of the site as a whole. It refers to the study of the environment and artifacts, among other pieces of evidence, in order to reconstruct events that led up to and caused the death or deaths. For example, forensic archaeologists might examine environmental factors that caused or triggered the catastrophe in cases of mass fatalities, such as flooding or landslides.

Real-life cases inspiring fiction

So many fictional narratives are pegged on real-life cases. For example, the unearthing of Pompeii and Herculaneum, which revealed just how tragic the eruption of Mount Vesuvius really had been, has been the subject of many books, movies and television shows. The discovery of King Tutankhamun’s tomb, with all the riches and mummies in it, has captured the imagination of people everywhere. More recently, the cases include the identification of victims from mass disasters or remains recovered from war zones, which have provided materials upon which fictional narratives are based; indeed, many of these stories emphasize the challenges encountered by forensic archaeologists and the nature of their work in bringing closure to families.   

Conclusion

There is little doubt that popular culture, through television series, movies and books, has influenced forensic archaeology. While such exposure brings the discipline to a large audience, it also creates several fallacies in the process. These fallacies, such as perceived glamour for the forensic archaeologists and expectations about the speed at which results are obtained, often result from demands in storytelling. But the real world of forensic archaeology is decidedly more complicated. It included painstaking research, a study with care and far-reaching interpretation of evidence. Excavation may be an integral part of the process, but it is not the sole defining attribute. Forensic archaeologists examine crimes, mass fatality and archaeological sites of forensic interest. This type of work is very time-consuming; it requires an excellent knowledge base in various areas such as anthropology, geology and chemistry.

While popular culture continues to shape our view of what forensic archaeology is all about, it is essential to note that in reality, practitioners are facing complexities and challenges. It is necessary to demystify such myths about the actual nature of this discipline, if only to better appreciate all the valuable contributions that the discipline brings to our understanding of both the past and present.

Refferences

• Byrd, B. F., & Sutton, M. (2012). Forensic archaeology. In D. R. Brothwell & A. M. Pollard (Eds.), Advances in world archaeology (Vol. 30, pp. 1-26). Routledge.
• Galloway, A. (2005). Forensic archaeology: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press.

Authored By