Where real archaeology gets buried and myths dig their way out fighting and a hollering!

By David Connolly

Welcome, to the shiny, grift ridden, bewildering, and often comical world of pseudoarchaeology—a realm where pyramids are power plants, Atlanteans hand us blueprints to agriculture, and lost continents surface more often than an annoying poo that refuses to flush. Strap in, keep your bullwhip handy, and don’t forget your critical thinking cap as we embark on a journey deep into the wildest theories ever to leave the safety of an internet forum, group or tinfoil coated backroom conspiracy. And finally, if you get that far, I promise a case study that is dear to my heart, the origins of civilisation in the near and middle east.

If you are amongst the millions of people taken in by any of these ‘pseudoscientific’ claims, don’t feel bad. Firstly, you are not alone, and many of them are quite fun, secondly such ideas are often propagated by unscrupulous and opportunistic individuals, who are cleverly making you to believe, with one aim only: to make money or for fame or both… The internet is a great facilitator/enabler but difficult to police!

What in the Hollow Earth is Pseudoarchaeology?

First things first: pseudoarchaeology is to real archaeology what fan fiction is to classic literature. There’s imagination, there’s enthusiasm, but the evidence stands up to scrutiny like a paper house in a hurricane. In essence, pseudoarchaeology refers to interpretations of the past that sound super-exciting, even believable on a superficial level, yet have little or no grounding in credible scientific research. These are the “stunning discoveries” that often make headlines for their audacity, not their accuracy. Think about the recent overblown and increasingly speculative ancient complex of tunnels and tubes beneath the pyramids, or the pyramids that lie at a depth of 600m deep off  the coast of Cuba, and let’s not forget the 20,000 + year old pyramid in Indonesia, perhaps you prefer Bosnian Pyramids or a chilled Antarctic one?   Why, oh why is it always pyramids?   It can of course come garbed in a veneer of respectability – like the comet air burst over Gomorrah– however, a little scratching of the surface finds connections and shenanigans that would make for a great conspiracy theory in itself. 

Let’s be clear: professional archaeologists do the actual hard work, the remote sensing, the ground surveys, the site evaluation, and the digging both literal and metaphorical. Pseudoarchaeologists, on the other hand, may not need to dig at all—they’ve already struck gold in their own minds, deciding what secret they, and only they have uncovered, cherry picking the bits they like, ignoring inconsistent facts and crying foul with ever increasing fury, if they are challenged.  It seems that we (archaeologists) don’t want you (the public) to know the truth, when in reality it is out there, albeit perhaps not in a such a well packaged book or YouTube video.  This is changing as well, as archaeologists really want the public to know what we are up to, but just don’t like adding sprinkles of pixie dust and highly advanced stargates to the report on every new discovery. Archaeologists produce thousands of articles in reputable journals or by respectable publishers every year, many of these are accessible to the general public.  Recommended ( i.e. those I use regularly )

• Antiquity: Published six times a year, and a personal favourite;
• Archaeopress: Publishes 70-100 archaeology titles annually;  
• European Journal of Archaeology: Published four times a year. 
• Oxford Journal of Archaeology: Publishes four issues per year.  
• Cambridge Archaeological Journal: Published four times a year, became fully open access in 2024. 
• Open Archaeology: Published once a year and fully open access.
• The Seminar for Arabian Studies E-Bulletin: Published yearly and a great way to keep up with what’s going on ( I love my cover image on Issue 31 )

Of course, there are scores of other open access publications and articles you can read, depending on what takes your fancy.   Archaeologists don’t hide; we love it when people read about our discoveries.

Pyramids, Ancients and the Power of Wishful Thinking

If you’ve ever watched late-night television or strolled down the speculative aisles of your local bookstore, you’ve probably encountered the greatest hits of pseudoarchaeology. The Pyramids of Giza as space-age batteries, clearly built by ‘the Ancients’, whoever they are!  Stonehenge? Maybe it’s a landing pad, maybe it’s the world’s first calendar (though now they say it is Gobekli Tepe Pillar 43), maybe it’s both – cos of course, no matter how advanced the advanced ‘Ancients’ ™ were, they had yet to invent watches and relied on flamin’ great big stones to work out when the next apocalypse was coming!  Don’t be led astray by the authors’ scientific or academic credentials either (e.g. 2021 Giza Pyramids as a Power Plant (Geologist  Gregory Charles Herman PhD) ; Or the Connections made between Gobekli Tepe and Greek Constellations (Chemical Engineer Martin Sweatman PhD), many of these authors do not have archaeology degree or a professional experience in archaeology.  Now, don’t get me wrong, new and challenging views from outside the profession are often useful, though it’s best to check to see if the specialism they have is used in the opinion piece – if the answer is no, then whip out that red flag, and look a bit deeper into what they’re saying.   Yes indeed, yes, you can write a paper without the crisp university credentials, but how we write, how we present evidence in supporting theories, is not negotiable and often overlooked. Part of the reason I am more likely to read more about the hypothesis of Robert M. Schoch et al and enjoy the challenge he presented, whether I agree or disagree, is that he is a geologist, and is using geology to examine the surface erosion of the limestone in the Sphinx Enclosure.  

It’s almost as if, for some individuals, Occam’s Razor is less of a practical tool and more of a blunt decorative wall hanging. As William of Ockham (Franciscan friar, philosopher and theologist, and all-round clever chap) suggested: “The simplest solution is usually the best, especially when backed by evidence”. Or as Mr Pseudoarchaeologist would have it: “the most wildly convoluted, and dubious solution, that relies on a tiny detail that no one else has noticed, aha-ahahahaah”… responds the pseudoarchaeologist, unperturbed.

Pyramids, it seems, are the perennial all-stars of pseudoarchaeology— a geometric shape with untold meanings, a blank canvas onto which every wild speculation, cosmic fantasy, or secret history can be projected. Why are these angular edifices so irresistible? Perhaps it’s their imposing silhouette on the horizon, or the mathematical precision that hints at lost sciences and cosmic alignments. To the pseudoarchaeological mind, no ancient human society could possibly have piled up that much stone without help from, anti-gravity beams, laser cutting tools, geopolymers, or at least a stray Atlantean lurking in the shadows suggesting that the best way to make a big building is to put stones in a pile one on top of the other.

The pyramid is the mascot of the ‘alt historian’: every few years, another “discovery” ripples across social media—a pyramid under the Antarctic ice, a submerged structure off the coast of Cuba, or a newly “found” pyramid (-ish) structure in Indonesia. These are always thousands of years older than the monolithic ‘mainstream’ archaeology allows for and, naturally, predates all known human civilizations. The more outlandish the location or date, the quicker it can spread, like a virus. Forget boring archaeological context recording or dating methodologies; these stories thrive on the thrill of overturning ‘everything we thought we knew’.  

Just to be clear, the Antarctic Pyramid is a mountain, the Cuba Pyramid is a by-product of a sonar image interpretation of a possible rock formation, some 750m underwater, and the Indonesian pyramid is dated based on C14 from organic material in natural soils; not related to human activity.  In this case, there is a published paper in a reputable journal that later had to be retracted (foul I hear them cry; but only because they were caught out).  Incidentally, as I type this piece, this new article on the Cuban Pyramid resurfaces again like a horror movie where the baddy suddenly lurches to life yet again; so many other stories are still alive and kicking and going strong, even when way past their sell by date. The end result is that the rambling opinions of Mr B. Angry of Whacko Illinois, and the knowledgeable measured tones of trained archaeologists and specialists are seen to have equal value.   Like all the kids getting First prize in an egg and spoon race when sadly little Jimmy fell at the start line.

To pseudoarchaeologist, pyramids become reimagined as power stations channelling mysterious energies and pulsing plasma bubbles, and as beacons for vanished races (often a bit whitish), concealing encoded messages in every measurement. For example: the pyramid’s position (29.9792458°N) × 19,060,970 = 571,366,223 (the speed of light in ancient cubits). Its total vertical measurement (1,107 cubits) × 69,066 = 99.997% of Earth’s equatorial circumference.  The base-to-height ratio (1.57197) matches π/2 with 0.07% precision. In the first case, this works only with decimal latitude and an arbitrary number or that 29.9792458°N is sort of the same as 299,792,458 m/s. The other two examples are a ‘precision’ which is really just a natural consequence of the relationship between large numbers and small numbers.

This reminds me of a great Discworld quote:

“He read that the Great Pyramid of Tsort, now long vanished, was made of one million, three thousand and ten limestone blocks. […] He read that its height plus its length divided by half its width equalled exactly 1.67563, or precisely 1,237.98712567 times the difference between the distance to the sun and the weight of a small orange. He learned that sixty years had been devoted entirely to its construction.  It all seemed, he thought, to be rather a lot of trouble to go to just to sharpen a razor blade.”
Pyramids, Terry Pratchett, 1989

The sheer endurance of these ideas is almost admirable—no amount of scientific debunking can slow or perturb them. After all, in the pseudoarchaeological universe, every pyramid is the tip of an iceberg, beneath which lies a conspiracy, a secret technology, a tunnel to the Hall of Records or the long-lost proof that we are not alone. Look no further than the latest craze about Synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) and its use to locate voids and lost cities far beneath the Giza Plateau.  You can of course be an independent researcher and not be a pseudo, and though producing no papers but rather well crafted YouTube videos, the presentation to the public can be of great use ,

Why does Pseudoarchaeology grip our imaginations so tightly?

Let’s admit it: the past can feel a little too, mundane (though, to be honest, I find it all exciting, even the boring bits, but that’s just me). Ancient pre-agrarian societies harvesting wild cereals or the initial steps into pastoralism, including domestication of goats etc., are incredibly important steps in human history, but they lack pizzazz and fireworks we crave. Now, throw in a lost race of hyper-intelligent Atlanteans or time-travelling lizard people, who show the stumbling and bumbling idiots of the past how to do things properly and suddenly your Netflix queue is full, your book deal assured.

We love a good mystery don’t we, I think that is why we loved the X-files or the host of shows and films like Stargate.  The unknown is compelling—especially when it comes with a side order of forbidden knowledge and a sprinkle of ‘They don’t want you to know!’ Yummy! Pseudoarchaeology delivers all of that, often wrapped in glossy packaging, complete with CGI reconstructions and even an ominous narrator, seeding enough doubt into the unsubstantiated claims to make you think: “Hey, what if this is real?” Just asking questions, while looking puppy eyed into the camera, is actually a code for: ‘don’t look too closely at what I said, as it is internally inconsistent, and I have another book/series/YouTube podcast to present’.

The Danger Lurking Beneath the Surface

It can be tempting to dismiss pseudoarchaeology as harmless fun—a little myth, a little mystery and a lot of entertainment; not to mention the even a large helping of the ‘Underdog vs Big Archaeology™’. However, the otherwise thick and obvious line between fantasy and fact can be blurred to the point where the fiction overshadows genuine research, distorts cultural histories, perpetuates stereotypes or misinformation and even plays into the hands of supremacists of all hues.  Look for instance at Graham Hancock, who had to  publicly distance himself from the big R’s group, the ‘Real Racists’, they were using his work to act as a primer for new recruits.  Now, I certainly don’t believe for one minute that Hancock himself is a racist and don’t know a single archaeologist who holds that view, but we have to understand why his writings come across a certain way, and are picked up by certain less savoury groups to validate their viewpoints, while, at the same time, diminishing the ingenuity of the past (and present) indigenous populations.  An example of this is Hancock’s book Fingerprints of the Gods (1995), on page 162 he writes: ‘Why did the semi-civilized Maya need this kind of high-tech precision? Or did they inherit, in good working order, a calendar engineered to fit the needs of a much earlier and far more advanced civilization?”    [Can I recommend Is Atlantis hunting racist? No, but… – YouTube – veritas et caritas ]

However, Hancock is obviously aware of the problematic terminologies he used to describe physical  features of these ‘advanced civilizations’ , as  in his later writings, he exchanges terms like white,  Anglo-Saxon, Caucasian male and looks like uncle sam to having ‘non-indigenous features’ –  while still continuing to play upon aspects of white god mythology when convenient and often muddled narrative – Starting with a rather dodgy unverified quote from Francisco Lopez de Gomara (1553) quoted by Garcilaso de la Vega (1609) and passed into a translation from 1961, which then ends up in his books – for a more detailed examination of this one issue – head on over to Jason Colavito.  

When pseudoarchaeological claims go viral, they need nothing more than ‘what ifs’ or massive leaps of faith that would terrify even Indiana Jones, to produce a compelling tale. In contrast, the genuine archaeologists invest years in careful excavation, analysis, and peer reviewed research, examining and re-examining interpretations as new data and evidence come to light or as new investigative technologies become available. Often this leads to a complete or partial overhaul of older theories. That’s science folks – or at least what we try to achieve as much as possible!  Findings by professional archaeologist help us understand who we are as humans, where we came from, and sometimes, just sometimes, hinting at the why we are the way we are today. While the process of archaeological discovery can be thrilling, it is also very time-consuming, measured and highly complex, with no clear lines and no hard edges, and often no absolute answers!  There dear reader is where the gaps allow pseudoarchaeology to seep in, skip the boring stuff—like evidence or primary data collection—and jump straight to the blockbuster conclusions!  IS IT POSSIBLE?   Usually not. 

Take, for example, the persistent claims that ancient Egyptians couldn’t possibly have built the pyramids themselves. Not only does this ignore the ingenuity and organisation of ancient societies (the non-European/white ones certainly), it also undermines their achievements—sometimes with a dash of modern prejudice. This is despite the multiple evidence that we have for the very human and very ancient builders of these very pyramids: from the Diary of Merer to the worker gangs names, written inside the pyramid on blocks of stones. We also have evidence of graves of the workers, and their houses, even the size and how the workforce was organised.   Although archaeologists continue to investigate the methods employed in the construction of the pyramids, it is a fundamental mistake to think or to claim that these were built by anyone else but ancient human societies. The pyramids were built by ancient Egyptians, and the reply of “yeah but” is not a rational rebuttal to the very real and numerous facts that litter the ground at every quarry site, funerary temple and tomb.    Recently the question was asked, “why do we not have any records of how to build an Egyptian Pyramid?”  not so surprising, as it may shock you to know, there are no plans for the Colosseum in Rome either, but you don’t see us questioning the origin of that monument.  (Unless you believe in Mudfloods and Tartaria of course)

Why We Want To Believe

Why do so many embrace pseudoarchaeological ideas? Partly, it’s the eternal hope that there’s more to the world than meets the trowel. Maybe we just crave a little magic in our daily lives or perhaps we find it comforting to believe that history is full of secrets waiting to be uncovered by the chosen few, ready to reveal a humanity changing expose that only they have found, by comparing things that look a bit the same —especially if those happy few happen to have a YouTube channel or a Twitter following.

Also, hands up, who doesn’t like to feel a little smarter than the experts? “They laughed at Galileo!” the pseudoarchaeologist might say. And, sure—they did. But Galileo also had evidence on his side. “Look at Schliemann, he followed a myth and found Troy!”, and that is kind of true, but far more interesting, as ever, is the real convoluted truth.  Ahem, prepare yourselves for some ‘boring’ facts:

Troy was abandoned around 1000 BCE after it first became a small, fortified city around 3000 BCE (Troy 1) and after it was reoccupied in the eighth century BCE (around the time of Homer).   The Greek settlers called it Illion but it was previously called Wiluša by the Hittites. The Persian king Xerxes even stopped to pay homage to Troy on his way to attack Greece around 480 BCE and so did Alexander the Great. Troy’s inhabitants took advantage of the city’s mythological status with both Homer’s stories and Alexander’s visit, and it became a popular destination for early ‘tourists’.  However, during the Middle Ages, Troy fell into decline once more, and by the 13th century, the former city had been reduced to a modest farming community.  

In the 16th and 17th centuries, Pierre Belon and Pietro Della Valle, had mistakenly identified Troy with another site, some 20km to the south, while In the late 18th century, Jean Baptiste LeChevalier suggested another location, a mound near the village of Pınarbaşı, Ezine, as Troy. It wasn’t until 1822 that Scottish journalist Charles Maclaren first to identify the correct location, known as Hisarlik, and the site was excavated in 1855 by British civil engineer John Brunton.  Next excavation was conducted in 1865 by Frank Calvert and three years later (in 1868) Heinrich Schliemann secured permission to excavate the site. While his excavations made him and the site famous, his methods were distinctly unorthodox as well as destructive (from today’s point of view also criminal). They involved use of dynamite and a side order of looting, leaving modern archaeologists with the job of unpicking the destruction he created.  Now tell me, isn’t the truth/fact more exciting than the myth/legend. Sure, it does not follow the well worn narrative of a man (it is mostly a man after all) fighting against ridicule to discover a secret, based on an ancient text but everything else is there.
(You can read more on Troy discovery here: Lessons Worth Sharing | TED-Ed). And if you want to nerd out completely – here is the book by Charles Maclaren that pins down the location.  A Dissertation on the Topography of the Plain of Troy – Google Books

How to Spot Pseudoarchaeology (Without Special Glasses)

Staying on the sunny sandy beach of scepticism doesn’t require a degree, but it does require a modicum of critical thinking, a questioning mind, and the ability to pull back from the hyper-focused point being made, and look at the bigger, more colourful picture. Here are some handy indications that you’re wading into dark pseudoarchaeological waters:

• Sensational Claims: The more incredible the claim, the more likely it is to feature on a YouTube Channel first; it also either lacks any great detail or perhaps includes too much detail (such as the city under Giza that is currently bobbing through the murky water).
• Lack of Peer Review: Real archaeology is a group project and we talk and write and discuss and do conferences and argue (sometimes fiercely) to achieve consensus; it is not a solo mission in a basement, or a podcast studio, with a map of Antarctica and some pushpins connected with red wool.
• Mysterious Sources or half remembered ones: “A friend of a friend once said…” isn’t quite as reliable as carbon (C14) or Thermoluminescence (TLS) dating, neither is the reference to a site or an article, that when pressed for more information, becomes the often heard cry, “do your own research”, which can be loosely translated as “ I made it up”.
• Disregard for Context: Artefacts are cool, but it is where they’re found and in association with what other material that really matters. Pointing to a study of a high precision stone vases made by ancient Egyptians and bought in an auction and saying, this is the smoking gun, misses out several key questions, such as, where were the ones that are super precise found? What is the range of material used? So, if most are softer alabaster, and a few are granite, but the granite ones have dubious provenance, well I will let you work that one out. 
• Lost Civilisation: If the answer to any new astonishing discovery or ancient technology is always a ‘lost civilisation’, you might want to ask the simple question of where did they disappear to? How did they so completely vanish, falling between the gaps of the known archaeological cultures, such as Mesolithic hunter gatherers and the Neolithic (agricultural) societies. Why do we find hazelnut shells and charred seeds but cannot find a single trace, not even a whisper, of this globe spanning, sea faring, stone melting, pyramid building, enlightened civilisation? I could continue…
• Information overload: or, as they say, over the pond, Gish Gallop, bombarding you with a rapid-fire series of arguments and claims. You answer one, and like trying to play whack-a-mole with a dozen moles popping up simultaneously you are overwhelmed by the sheer volume of convoluted and baffling material!  
• Internally inconsistent: Sounds plausible, that first bit, how they teach agriculture to the savages, and they get all excited, but then there is no genetic trace of domesticated crops, so the story goes that they were so enlightened that they did not need agriculture, and so somehow they both knew about agriculture and simultaneously didn’t.  Or they simultaneously were a maritime people, who were however wiped out by a slowly rising sea level. If your brain itches, then prepare to scratch it.
• Undermine other opinions: Undermine the opposition (usually archaeologists) as ‘them’ and part of a wider conspiracy.   Watch out for derogatory comments about archaeologists, accusing them of being “mainstream” or liars or worse. If they want to take your eyes off the paper-thin gauze that drapes their unsubstantiated opinion, there is nothing better than attempting to undermine the public confidence in the experts. Just ask Flint Dibble or Jason Colavito (others exist, we are not alone!)  and the rising star of remarkable facts and awesome archaeology  Hugh Thomas with his soon to be YouTube Channel
• Changing the subject:   When the going gets tough, don’t worry, as the pseudoarchaeologist can be relied on to drag you down so many alleys, and cul-de-sacs that you will forget what you were talking about. Beware the deviation and the distraction. Stay on target!
   

The Joy of Real Archaeology and the rise of civilisation

While pseudoarchaeology might be the clickbait salad of conspiracy, real archaeology is where true wonders lie. There’s something quietly thrilling about uncovering a fragment of pottery, analysing pollen, or piecing together the story of an everyday person or culture from thousands of years ago down to the last century. The real magic is in the sense that we’re connecting with lives long vanished. The process of discovery is a long-drawn process, often requiring patience and an eye for a detail. Showing willingness to change one’s mind in light of new evidence is essential to the practice of archaeology.  Archaeologists attempt to discover facts, often from  meagre evidence, from which we can construct interpretations, while pseudoarchaeologists don’t have to worry about the tedious collection of data, but can take you on a tour (often for a charge – 14 days in Egypt for example with Graham Hancock..  only $14,985) or try to sell you books that connect dots or rely on images covered in measurements or decoded symbols and the now essential self-congratulatory Conference circuit. (book early to ensure disappointment)

So next time you hear of an ancient death ray hidden beneath the Sphinx in the hall of records or a blueprint for Atlantis that’s carved on a red granite box in Peru, in the form of a coded geometrical measurement as the square root of the sides in millimetres divided by a large random number, ask yourself this: “is this real, or just a ripping yarn dressed up as archaeology?” “Is it too good to be true, and what research should you do to verify fact from fiction?” Sometimes, trusting experts is a good thing to do. 

Now remember I did promise a bit of background on my favourite bit of ‘Ancients’. Well, here we go and yes you are allowed to skip to the end, but you will get the drift, and see that fun as pseudoarchaeology may seem, it misses out the entire point of archaeology– the complexity of the past.  

Civilisation ( now there is a term that needs an overhaul) is still (give or take a bit), as old as we (archaeologists) long-suspected (give or take a bit of fuzzy edges, hoorah for the Sumerians (sort of), though I must confess I still hold a flame for the Cucuteni-Trypillia culture in what is now Moldova, Romania and Ukraine (around 5050BCE). How did we get there and why is it that the ‘alternative historian crew’ so focussed on Gobekli Tepe as if it is an anomaly that archaeologists are only just finding out about, while simultaneously missing all the encoded secrets and lost knowledge that can only be revealed by YouTubers and is staring us in the face – allegedly.  As they would have us believe, somehow, one day, primitive hunter gatherers in furry pants were wandering about, possibly banging into each other, until a group of geezers with beards and wet sandals, came along and explained that there had been a bit of a catastrophe and this is how you build T pillars and grow your own  food.  Hmmmmm….

Well, turns out Katheleen Kenyon had contemplated these things way back in the 1950s, when she excavated at Jericho (Pre-Pottery Neolithic A period site, around ca 8300 BCE-7800 BCE). Crucially, she did it with less of ‘just asking the questions’ and more asking ‘the right questions’. She asked: “If by 10,000 years ago, we are able to create proto cities..  THEN it is reasonable to expect an older tradition that leads to this more advanced activity.”

This older tradition, known as the Geometric Kebaran, and then Natufian is dated to the transitional Epipalaeolithic phase (c. 21,000 – 9,600 BCE). They are characterised by the emergence of stone-built architecture, increasing social complexity, and a more sedentary lifestyle. Both are examples of the incredible and highly complex process of transition from purely hunter-gatherer lifestyle into something different, something new and exciting, as we, as humans, experiment with a new complex way of living. No magic or ancient civilisation was involved, but the simple agent of human curiosity, a degree of accidental discovery and an more contact for sharing ideas. At the site of Quermez Dere in Iraq, I had the good fortune to work on the final season of the site in 1990, can be used as an example of this transitional stage. The site included evidence of non-domesticated cereals as an important food source, processed using massive basalt quernstones from what is now Türkiye, suggesting long-distance contacts, together with presence of short ‘pillars’ within the ‘room’ sharing similarities with the famous T Pillars of Gobekli on a far more domestic scale.

Starting around 20,000 years ago, we see the change happening in the archaeological record, as the settlement, architecture and societies become more complex. This is not, as some would have us believe, a sudden event, but a result of long-drawn, continuous process, with steps forward and set-backs in equal measure, which take place at different times and locations across the world.  In this wider region, Gobekli Tepe is but a single example of much wider tradition, drawing on previous generations. Sure, it is amazing and yes we are still learning so much from this site about this incredible period of human history, but Gobekli did not exist in isolation, there are many more sites, some older some later.  We need more sites, not more Gobekli. 

Stepping back from Gobekli Tepe, this near contemporary site that I am still awestruck by, and that you may or may not have heard of, is the  Dja’de el‐Mughara (ca 9000 BC) in the Euphrates valley of Syria, excavated by the French archaeologists, led by Eric Coqueugniot.  The team not only uncovered a remarkable sunken chamber with painted plaster walls but the first signs of the transmission of animal disease to humans, including tuberculosis, as a result of the close proximity that they now lived. It does make you wonder why we, as humans, decided that the additional disease, child mortality and societal inequalities, were worth it! But change we did and if you want to know more, another paper, also based on work at Dja’de el‐Mughara site looks at the what it entailed. You can also read another fascinating article about the process of Neolithization and steps to Civilisation.    This was never a sudden and binary change from Hunter Gathering lifestyle, which had served us well for 10s of thousands of years, to civilised society, tending fields and sipping tea, it was gradual, it was complicated, it happened in many places at various times, and it became inevitable.  It is the details that matter, and while the Sumerians are credited as the first civilisation, with advanced water management technology, it was the Samarra culture (6200-5700 BC) in central Mesopotamia who show the earliest evidence of irrigation, predating the Ubaid period and thus the Sumerians and the ‘first city’ of Eridu.  Irrigation also changes society over vast areas, as you are no longer alone, but part of a massive network of co-dependents – a failure of any part of the irrigation system has impacts on many other communities – another layer of complexity is added to our lives.  

There is so much more interesting stuff, which I can’t fit here but I hope that this at least provides a little snapshot of this incredibly fascinating point in time of human history!   One person who, although not an archaeologist, does a good job at translating this period into well researched videos, is Ancient Architects. 

A past full of mysteries

There is perhaps one thing that archaeologists and pseudoarchaeologists have in common; the belief that the past is full of mysteries waiting to be unravelled. However, our mysteries do not involve invisible tesla coils or secret societies locking secrets and giant bones in a basement or even a lost civilisation of ‘The ancients’, who will one day appear again, and teach us how to cut stones into blocks and pile them high. The most astonishing stories are the ones that are built on solid ground, hard work and carefully collated data, not wishful thinking, and are revealed during the process rather than sought with an ancient map in one hand.    

If you must indulge your inner pseudoarchaeologist, enjoy it, just remember to keep your tongue firmly in your cheek …and the ‘trowel of truth’ handy. Enjoying the search for our shared humanity, no matter where in the world, requires a real open mind, not distracted by those who claim to open minds, but feed you only half-truths and unsubstantiated statements and get rather upset if you contradict them.  So come on in, to enjoy the wonderful world of archaeology – it is waiting for you with an open mind.  

If you want to find out more:

You can start with these channels and articles in no particular order, to begin a quest into the fascinating and ever changing understanding of who we are, why we are, and how on earth we are going to go from here!   

• What Archaeologists Really Think About Ancient Aliens, Lost Colonies, And Fingerprints Of The Gods
• Welcome to the Ancient Architects Channel ( Videos on the Pre-Pottery Neolithic )
• Hugh Thomas – YouTube (Amazing stories about the ancient world.)
• Archaeology with Flint Dibble Channel  
• MegalithHunter – YouTube ( Entertaining and well researched snapshots of the neolithic and Bronze Age – with added fun!)
• veritas et caritas – You Tube ( Correcting inaccurate popular history, deliberately misrepresented history, and outright pseudo-history )
• Miniminuteman – You Tube (Archaeology educator, environmental scientist, author, Googledebunker.)
• History for Granite – You Tube (Independent and fact based exploration of the pyramids of Ancient Egypt. If you like Pyramids, you will like this.)

---

You are free to republish the text of this article both online and in print under Creative Commons Licence. We ask that you follow some simple guidelines. Please note that images are not included in this licence other than those created by the author.

Please do not edit the piece, ensure that you attribute the author, and mention that the article was originally published on the British Archaeological Jobs Resource (BAJR). Please let us know if you do use this article ( david@bajr.org ).

Cite:
Connolly D. (2025) Raiders of my lost mind: A deep dive into the Whacky World of Pseudoarchaeology – British Archaeology Jobs and Resources, BAJR.
Available at: https://www.bajr.org/raiders-of-my-lost-mind-a-deep-dive-into-the-whacky-world-of-pseudoarchaeology/ (Accessed: 02 September 2025).

MAIN IMAGE: Great Pyramids – by Mozmoz31 WikiMedia under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.

thanks to Dr Hugh Thomas and Hana Kdolska for comments, edits and reviews.