Throughout this paper, the author will discuss the ethics and methodologies of
Archaeology and the people that practice the profession. Throughout the world, several sites
considered holy or sacred by a populous are bringing up conflict with the excavations that are
performed by Archaeologists. Several people in dozens of communities have often wondered,
what is the price of discovery? What should people go through in order to gain more tangible
knowledge of the past and of the natural world around us? Thus the author of this paper has
taken these questions upon himself in order to bring more clarity to the people of the world.
Using the questions mentioned earlier and several more questions often asked on the
methodologies of Archaeologists, the author created his own question which will resolve the
inquiries on a broad scale. The author resolved to first compare three considerably important or
“holy” sites to different populations around the world and then analyze the methods taken by the
scientists who restored them. Using the results from the comparisons of the methods, the author
will then devise a way to answer his question, “Which would be the best or most successful
methodology to use in a universal situation including sacred sites in stable or unstable countries
around the globe?” The author of the paper will be using several if not dozens of credible
resources for this paper, including an interview with an archaeology major and one experienced
in excavations, to prove his theory that the best methodology to use in a universal situation
including sacred sites in stable or unstable countries around the globe would be the stratification
method created by Sir Flinders Petrie because the method allows for the most thorough
investigation of the topography and geography of a site and allows for minimal if not nonexistent
damage to any ruins while being excavated. The stratification method also proves best in
Archaeology methodology in the author’s opinion because it also takes any minor shards of
pottery or art often considered mundane and uses the debris to mark out and determine the
timeline in which a ruin had been inhabited.
Clarifying the subject brought up by the author, the aforementioned Gavrinis site
describes the structures found on an island situated in the Gulf of Morbihan in the Brittany
Region of France. Since the mid-1830s, several excavations have taken place in the area and
numerous operations involving the structures of this site have occurred. The author however, will
focus on the early excavations of this particular area starting from 1835 and concluding with the
works of Zacharie Le Rouzic in 1930 and those of Charles-Tanguy Leroux in 1980.
Beginning with the discovery of the site and the internal chamber in the year of 1835,
excavations took place that cleared out the chamber and set the site apart from the landscape.
(Hunger) While the discovery of the Gavrinis site boosted the knowledge concerning the
Megalithic Era of Archaeologist and Historian alike, major excavations did not take place until
the early 1930s. (Scarre and Paul) Spearheaded by Archaeologist Zacharie Le Rouzic, serious
excavations took place at the Gavrinis site which took into major account the details and artwork
found amongst the ruins. (Scarre and Paul) Using the information discovered by previous
excavators and that of his own works, Le Rouzic began restoring the ancient cairn, wishing to
learn more from the Megalithic art inscribed on the cairn’s stone slabs. (Hunger)
When completely restored, the Gavrinis mound began to resemble the various other
mounds found throughout the Brittany region of France. (Whittle) The efforts of Le Rouzic
uncovered the entirety of the Cairn, finding the mound to add up to fifty meters in diameter and
discovering that the stone slabs making up the walls of the structure are supported by an internal
series of walls, subdividing the mound itself into “ranks”. (Whittle) Le Rouzic discovered a
burial chamber located in the center of the mound, coming to about two and a half meters in
diameter when measured. (Hunger) After further investigation, Le Rouzic discovered that the
central burial chamber comprised of stone slabs similar to those that made up the external
structure of the mound. (Hunger) Le Rouzic’s restoring of the chamber allowed for the discovery
of a sacrificial chamber in the burial chamber, which gave a more in-depth view of the culture of
the indigenous population during the Megalithic Era. (Scarre and Paul) Through Le Rouzic’s
discoveries in the mound, the Gavrinis site proved to present itself as the find of the century for
research and excavation of the Megalithic burial mounds of the region. (Whittle)
Starting in the year of 1980, former Director of Antiquity Charles-Tanguy Leroux began
picking up where Zacharie Le Rouzic left off. (Hunger) The excavations spearheaded Le Rouzic
and his efforts in restoring the Gavrinis burial mound allowed for further interpretation of the
symbols and signs inscribed upon the stone slabs that comprised structure and walls of the
mound itself. (Scarre and Paul) Leroux began intent studies concerning the Gavrinis site and
almost at once, began several operations to look deeper behind the meanings of the symbols of
the mound. (Whittle) Leroux took a hand-picked team of Archaeologists and Anthropologists
and immediately began his venture into the site, establishing camp outside the mound. (Hunger)
Upon close investigation, Leroux found the symbols of the mound to have varying
meanings. (Whittle) The symbols he found included those of axes, men, horses, rituals, armor,
and battles; all of which described the lifestyles of the indigenous population that had once
inhabited the region. (Hunger) The new discoveries surrounding the symbols allowed for Leroux
and his team of researchers to learn more about the cultures that influenced the building of the
mound and how it was used. (Whittle) Through careful investigation, Leroux discovered that the
burial chamber located in the center of the mound in fact held a sacrificial chamber that the
previous inhabitants had used for certain religious rituals. (Whittle) Inside the sacrificial
chamber, Leroux’s team found staff and axes amongst the stonework, suggesting that the
inhabitants used the tools to perform rituals and enact animal or human sacrifice as tribute to
their gods. The significant discoveries made by Leroux and his team gave historians a newfound
knowledge of the cultures of the indigenous population present during the Megalithic Era,
specifically the ritualistic and religious cultures exhibited by the population’s actions. (Scarre
and Paul)
The methods used during the excavations of the Gavrinis site, located within the Brittany
region of France, by Leroux and Le Rouzic have found to have had their roots originate from the
methods established by Sir Flinders Petrie; The Father of Palestinian Archaeology. Sir Flinders
Petrie created two methods that used the underground geography and shards of artifacts found at
a dig, called Stratification and Sequence Dating.
Clarifying the author’s earlier remarks mentioning Israel, the excavations that he
mentions take place in the city of Jerusalem, specifically the site known as the Temple Mount.
The few excavations centered on this location and the surrounding areas have taken place over
an extensive length of time, operations being conducted over many different centuries. The
author of this essay will center his writing surrounding the methodologies established by Sir
Flinders Petrie and how Archaeologists incorporated Petrie’s methods in excavating the Temple
Mount of Jerusalem, the timeline spanning from the early 19th century to the later 20th century.
Starting during the early 1890s, Sir Flinders Petrie started making his first ventures into
Palestine. (Peach) Petrie’s earlier experiences in excavation and archaeology in the country of
Egypt and the Sahel allowed him to withstand the hot, arid climate of the country and the dessert
in which it was situated in. Petrie began the first official scientific excavation in the country
around the site of the ancient city of Tell el-Hesi. (Peach) The Archaeologist and his team
involved themselves in a six-week excavation of this site, where Petrie first showed signs of his
use of the methods of Stratification and Sequence Dating. (Peach)
Finishing with his operation in Tell el-Hesi, Petrie moved onto Palestine, where he began
digging around the tombs located within the older part of the city. (Peach) It was within
Jerusalem that Petrie officially established his methods of layering out his dig sites in order to
produce chronology of the site and of those that once inhabited the area. The methods
aforementioned are called Stratification and Sequence Dating, two important methods used by
Archaeologists in excavations since their creation by Petrie in Jerusalem. (Hammer) Petrie
discovered that by establishing the underground geography of an area in which an excavation
was occurring into layers, an archaeologist was able to identify the time periods that each layer
represented and by looking further into that specific layer, which population inhabited the area at
that time. Sequence Dating, or Seriation in the scientific terminology, became the system by
which Archaeologists take the various shards of pottery and tools found at a site during an
excavation and establish groups for the examples found. (Peach) Once creating these groups, an
Archaeologist is able to analyze which groups belong to each other and which time period each
of the groups belongs to. The system upon which these groups are created and organized by is
based on shape, decoration, form, and etc. (Bar-Yosef) Petrie explained the relevance behind the
newly established Sequence Dating system by stating, “Once settle the pottery of a country and
the key is in our hands for all future explorations.” (Hammer) Petrie proved himself to be correct
in his theory as the methods he created soon became the most popularly used amongst the
Archaeological community, revolutionizing the process of which excavations were held on
significant sites.
Using the two now established methodologies of his creation, Petrie made several
significant Archaeological discoveries within various regions of Israel, most importantly the
Jerusalem region. (Peach) Petrie managed to uncover the tombs of several Roman officials
within the boundaries of the city, adding to historical record of the Roman occupation. Sir
Flinders Petrie laid the grounds for further investigation handled by later Archaeologists in the
region. (Peach)
Moving onto the more tentative subject of the Temple Mount ruins located in the center
of the older districts of the city of Jerusalem, the site has remained a topic of significant issue
and conflict in the eyes of Archaeologists in the region. Very few operations have been allowed
to take place on the Temple Mount due to the Islamic-control of the site and the religion’s
general taboo for Archaeology, seeing any attempt to delve into the ruins as desecration. The few
operations concerning the Temple Mount that have been allowed took place in the late 19th
century and early 20th century, performed relatively without the knowledge of the officials in
control of the location.
The first and most extensive of the operations on the Temple Mount took place under the
supervision of Charles Warren, an officer of the British Royal Engineers, in the late 19th century.
Recruited through the Palestine Exploration Fund organization, Warren led a team through Syria
and into Palestine, looking to explore the Holy Land and to survey the several Religious-Related
sites located within the region. (Farmbrough) Due to the British Mandate, Charles Warren had to
mark down several details on each site in his journals, journals which would be inputted into the
records of the British Government. (Farmbrough) Most importantly, Warren’s assignment
required that he took a survey of the Temple Mount and of the tunnels located within the caves
under the site. (Farmbrough) Leading his team to Jerusalem, Warren became the first person to
perform excavations on the Temple Mount ruins, taking extensive surveys of the location’s
passages. (Farmbrough) While surveying the tunnels and the geography of the Temple Mount,
Warren and his expedition uncovered Warren’s Shaft, a tunnel which he thusly named after
himself that he discovered had been used as one of the city’s main water shafts in the past.
(Hammer)
Upon further investigation of the water shaft, Warren found the tunnel to run throughout
the entire city and out to the Gihon water spring on the city’s outskirts. (Farmbrough) Warren
and his expedition began several operations on the shaft, during which the Archaeologist mapped
out the geography and span of the tunnel. (Farmbrough) Through his survey of the area, Warren
discovered that the shaft had actually been the centerpiece of ancient Jerusalem’s early water
supply system, passing the water from the Gihon spring throughout the entire city’s expanse.
(Bar-Yosef) Warren’s shaft, named after Warren as mentioned before, had been used by the
inhabitants of the city as a main source of water, which would have otherwise not been available
to the inhabitants anywhere else within the city. (Bar-Yosef) When the city came under siege
numerous times in ancient history, the shaft proved to keep the city alive through its easy access
to water, allowing the inhabitants to survive long periods of isolation. (Laughlin) Charles Warren
found that the bible spoke of a shaft almost exactly alike to the water shaft he had discovered
when David spoke of how he had conquered Jerusalem by sending Joab to sneak up a similar
water shaft, launching a surprise attack from within the city confines; prompting Warren to
believe that the shaft he had discovered was in fact, Joab’s water shaft. (Farmbrough) Warren’s
expedition to and survey of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem became the first known excavation
of the area and symbolized the beginning of a flourish in Biblical Archaeology. (Farmbrough)
Warren wrote down his experience into his letter or journals and later on, the journals were made
available to later Archaeologists going into the area, providing a source of background
information for future operations. (Farmbrough)
During the same timeline as Warren’s expedition in the year of 1864, another operation
took place in the area surrounding the Temple Mount, instead focusing on the ruins bordering the
site of the Temple Mount. (Farmbrough) This expedition was led by Charles Wilson, who also
represented the Palestine Exploration Fund organization as a member of the British Royal
Engineers. Wilson came to Palestine with the same group as Charles Warren, instead being given
a different assignment with a different team. (Farmbrough) Wilson’s assignment became a
simple survey of the area surrounding the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, also given the task to
record the significance of any important religious sites. (Farmbrough) More importantly to the
expedition though, Wilson was given the assignment of surveying the Western Wall site located
by the Temple Mount, required by the British Mandate. (Laughlin)
While surveying the Western Wall site in the year of 1864, Wilson discovered a
significant arch in the architecture of the wall. (Farmbrough) Investigating the architecture of the
structure, Wilson deducted that what he had found was in the past, actually an archway in the
structure of the wall that overlooked a road that led to the Temple Mount. (Farmbrough) While
Wilson only found the top part of the archway, further digging around the find and remnants of a
gate proved Wilson’s theories to be correct. (Farmbrough) The archway he had found had been
part of a structure that had contained an entrance through which a road to the Temple Mount ran
through. Originally, the archway spanned forty two feet and been built of limestone, supporting a
road to the Temple that went on for seventy five feet. (Farmbrough) While the discovery of
Wilson’s Arch, thusly named after Wilson himself, was not as dramatic as the discoveries made
by Charles Warren and his expedition on the Temple Mount itself; Charles Wilson’s discoveries
at the Western Wall added to knowledge of how the Temple Mount was structured and gave
Archaeologists the ability to map out the build of the temple itself. (Farmbrough)
The next excavation of the Temple Mount of Jerusalem did not take place until several
years later, when the Al-Aqsa Mosque located on the Temple Mount became damaged during
earthquakes in both 1927 and 1937. (Bar-Yosef) The damage from both of the earthquakes
prompted the Supreme Muslim Council to begin renovations of the entire structure in order to
prevent any further damage of the Mount. In 1930, whilst renovations of the Mosque took place,
Director of the British Mandate Antiquities Department R.W. Hamilton began the first official
excavation of the Temple Mount’s Al-Aqsa Mosque made by the British Mandate. (Farmbrough)
Hamilton used Sir Flinders Petrie’s method of Stratification to layer out the ground beneath the
Mosque structure itself and in doing so, managed to find evidence of the Byzantine occupation of
the city before the Muslims.
Whilst excavating the Mosque in 1930, Hamilton came across a Byzantine Floor Mosaic
under the structure. Hamilton used this find to theorize that the Al-Aqsa Mosque had been built
atop the remains of a monastery or cathedral that had originally been built there by the
Byzantines before the Muslims. (Hammer) Hamilton also theorized that the Mosaic could have
also made up the floor of a make-shift church that the Crusaders had made out of the Al-Aqsa
Mosque when they had taken the city in the early 12th century. (Laughlin) From how Hamilton
had found the Byzantine Mosaic shallowly buried underneath the current Mosque’s foundations,
he assumed that once the Muslims had taken back Jerusalem from the Crusaders in the late 12th
century, the Muslims had proceeded to basically build over and otherwise destroy the changes
that the crusaders had instilled into the Mosque. (Laughlin) Hamilton’s finds provided significant
knowledge for historians toward how the Temple Mount had been treated during the Byzantine
and Crusader occupation of the city. Hamilton had provided enough evidence to prove the claim
that instead of utterly destroying the Mosque, the crusaders instead outfitted the Mosque to
become their center of operations in the Holy Land. (Bar-Yosef) Unfortunately though, due to
tensions held by the local Arabs towards the Jews that would transfer to Israel later on,
Hamilton’s excavation would prove to be the last of operations involving the Temple Mount for
at least thirty years.
Towards the end of Israel’s Six Day War in the year of 1967, a war in which the country
fought several Arab countries that had held control over the old quarter of Jerusalem, Israel
gained ownership of the Temple Mount and proceeded to conduct several unlicensed
excavations. (Hammer) Starting from the Western Wall plaza and moving towards the Southern
part of the Muslim Quarter of the city, Israeli Archaeologists began excavations at the foot of the
Temple Mount. (Hammer) Using notes that had been taken by Charles Warren earlier, the
Archaeologists managed to map the geography of the area into earlier marked layers and conduct
several accurate digs. (Hammer) Using the aforementioned layers in the digs, Israeli
Archaeologists managed to uncover remains of buildings and pottery dating back to the Second
Temple of the Temple Mount, to the Roman occupation, to the Umayyad occupation, and to the
Crusader occupation of the city. (Laughlin) Using the notes left by Charles Wilson on Wilson’s
Arch, Israeli authorities managed to excavate the arch and clear out the tunnel, which led the
Archaeologists to find Warren’s Gate. (Bar-Yosef) Surveyed earlier by British Archaeologist
Charles Warren, Warren’s gate proved to connect to the tunnel system under the Temple Mount
that Warren had outlined in his Journals, except that Warren’s Gate’s tunnel proved to lead into
the inner sanctum of the caverns located under the Temple Mount. (Bar-Yosef) This find caused
significant excitement among Archaeologists since this discovery exhibited the first major
breakthrough into the ruins located under the Temple Mount, giving Archaeologists access to the
long-sought after secrets that the Temple Mount ruins held. (Laughlin) Sadly however, the
mechanical excavators the Archaeologists used to clear the rubble caused severe structural
damage to several buildings in the Muslim Quarter, alerting the native population to the
excavation taking place under the Mosque. (Bar-Yosef) This discovery caused the native
population of Muslims in the city to go into an uproar, starting several riots throughout the city
that prompted the Israeli government to cease any and all excavations of the ruins and to block
up Warren’s Gate with cement despite the significant find that the entrance held. (Bar-Yosef) To
the anger of Archaeologists around the world, the gate remains blocked to the present day and
the secrets of the ruin remain hidden. (Farmbrough)
Excavations of the Temple Mount and Gavrinis have revealed an important and also
effective attention to detail amongst Archaeologists when methodology is brought into question.
Archaeologists in the Yucatan Peninsula use similar methods when digging in Olmec ruins,
however Archaeologists in the region are forced to go deeper into the detail of the landscape;
using similar methods to Flinders.
Thinking of the Yucatan Peninsula, several Archaeological sites come into mind. The
author, however, will devote his writing on the site designated as San Lorenzo, specifically the
site named San Lorenzo amongst the three ruins that exist in the region. The timeline used by the
author will start and end in the year of 1938 with this site’s discovery by Matthew Stirling and
his accompanying team. (Evans and David)
Starting with background information of the site, San Lorenzo Tenochtitlan is the
designated area where the three Archaeological ruins San Lorenzo, Tenochtitlan, and Potrero
Nuevo reside. (Evans and David) San Lorenzo specifically, is located on the Rio Chiquito, on the
coastal Gulf plain of Southern Veracruz, Mexico. (Wendt) San Lorenzo was the first capital of
the ancient Olmec civilization and the most powerful center in Mesoamerica from the years of
1200 B.C. to 900 B.C. Between the years of 1500 B.C. to 1200 B.C. the site known by San
Lorenzo started in the form of a simple farming community but later grew into a much larger
civic-ceremonial center which eventually spread out to cover the Gulf Region and transfer its
economic prosperity throughout Mesoamerica. (Evans and David) Unfortunately though, the first
capital of the ancient Olmecs experienced a dramatic cultural decline in 900 B.C. and by 400
B.C., the city was left abandoned by former inhabitants. (Evans and David)
Upon visiting the Yucatan Peninsula in the year of 1945, Archaeologist Matthew Stirling
rediscovered the city of San Lorenzo and the other two sites that make up San Lorenzo
Tenochtitlan. (Henderson) Using similar stratification techniques to those used by Petrie, Stirling
mapped out the layers of the jungles of the Yucatan and plotted out the region where most Olmec
artifacts that appeared in the region originated; following up on his calculations and assumptions,
Stirling came across the city to find that the buildings had been taken back into the river it had
once settled next to. Taking the expedition that he had formed, Stirling and his group forded the
river and managed to drain the water from the ruin. (Henderson)
Stirling was forced to deal with an environment that caused extensive damage to the site
and provided numerous obstacles in the ruin’s restoration. (Bach) Apart from the water from the
river and the flora from the jungle, Stirling and the excavation team came upon a ruin that had
sunken back into the earth from which it had been created. Due to innumerable amount of years
that had passed since the ruin’s use, the abandoned village had gone into ruin and proceeded to
then literally sink and be absorbed by the geography with numerous tectonic movement that took
place in the region. (Bach) After fording the water from the particular section of the river that the
ruin resided in, Stirling proceeded to delve into the terrain of the site, determined to uncover the
rest of the village. By using Petrie’s famous Stratification method and by using careful
investigation of the jungle around and beneath the site, Stirling created a grid that he used to lay
out the site and the residing foliage of the jungle nearby. (Henderson) Using this grid, Matthew
Stirling also managed to determine how old each layer was and when each part of the village was
abandoned, simply by determining the age of each layer of foliage in the topography.
(Henderson) Once finished with his investigation and documenting of the site in his grid, Stirling
set upon restoring the village of San Lorenzo as mentioned earlier. In little less than a few
months, he managed to unearth most of the village’s buildings and ford the river that had
originally flooded the site.(Henderson) While the ruins exited in somewhat degraded and ruined
condition, Stirling managed to restore the site to such a condition that if kept under watch, the
ruin would continue to exist. (Evans and David)
Taking into account the methods used by the archaeologists in Europe, South America,
and the Middle-East, the author managed to arrange an interview with an Archaeology major
who took part in several excavations on the Eastern Coast of the United States. Using the
information gathered from her experiences, the author can prove that stratification is a popular
and effective method used by every single Archaeologist around the world.
Joanne Murray is a social studies teacher who works at Tallwood High School in Virginia
Beach, Virginia; more specifically for the Global Studies and World Languages Academy
program of the school. While free on a Friday afternoon of January 6, 2012, the author managed
to get an interview in with her and ask her several questions concerning her experiences with
Archaeology and the methods she used throughout her excavations. After going to college and
majoring in Anthropology/Archaeology, specifically for the Native American history of the
United States, Mrs. Murray relocated to the state of Mississippi. After arriving in the state, she
immediately began working on several excavations which involved the remains of different
Native American tribes. She described the work as, “slow and agonizing” at points and also
“exciting when you finally discovered something”. Mrs. Murray described her work on the
Native American sites as lengthy and time consuming, yet worthwhile in the end when all of
your work amounts up to the one thing you were looking for, as is true with all aspects of
Archaeology.
Throughout the excavations Mrs. Murray participated in, she remembers working with
methods similar to Petrie’s stratification theory while digging up the remains. She is quoted
saying, “We would take a long, sharp trowel and scrape the dirt of the site slowly to the side. We
would continue to do this carefully in order to shirk any danger of harming possible artifacts.”
(Murray) She also said that while digging, she and several archaeologists with her would
definitely observe and catch glimpse of the stratification of the dirt of the site, showing the times
when the nomadic tribes of the Native American people would inhabit it throughout different
lengths of time. (Murray)
When asked questions concerning the treatment of sacred sites she excavated, she
answered in saying that, “This side of archaeology is where the Archaeologists are separated
from the fortune hunters.” (Murray) She acknowledged the fact that several archaeologists will
often take scared artifacts from a site and its people in order to put the relics on displays in
museums, angering the people of that culture. She explained to the author that in the end, it really
depends on whether the person excavating is really after knowledge and education or fortune and
glory. Bringing into account one experience she had with sacred relics and excavation, Mrs.
Murray described to the author how she and her team had uncovered an ancient Native American
skeleton. (Murray) After the discovery, Murray and her team slowly took off layers of the dirt
entombing the skeleton until the remains were uncovered halfway, at which point they proceeded
to apply a mixture of Elmer’s glue to the skeleton to keep it intact. At that point, they took out
the skeleton after taking it and the remaining dirt chunk out gingerly. She explained that after
digging out the remains, the thoroughly cleaned it and then logged it, proceeding to keep it
logged in a careful storage bay making sure to not damage it. (Murray)
Taking into account the information gleamed from accounts in Gavrinis, Jerusalem, and
San Lorenzo along with the interview of Mrs. Murray, the author is able to prove his thesis stated
earlier in the paper. According to innumerable sources, Petrie’s method of Stratification is the
most popularly and effectively used method in the excavation of sites; sacred or not. The author
believes that with this paper and the evidence that it brings forward, Universities and
Archaeology institutions around the world should acknowledge Petrie’s method of stratification
as the default method to teach and use in Archaeology. The author hopes that if this is done,
Archaeologists around the world will enable themselves to carefully and respectfully excavate a
site without fear of angering any denizens of the region while also restoring a ruin thoroughly
and effectively. The author plans on using the methods he wrote on in this paper while
participating in an actual dig in Williamsburg, Virginia in order to further ground his claims.
Bibliography
Bar-Yosef, Omer, and Amihai Mazar. "Israeli Archaeology." World Archaeology. 13.3 (1982):
n. page. Web. 31 Oct. 2011.
Bach, Caleb. "Michael Coe: a question for every answer." Americas [English Edition] Jan.-Feb.
1996: 15+. General OneFile. Web. 21 Dec. 2011.
Dever, William. Recent Archaeological Discoveries and Biblical Research. University of
Washington Press, 1990.
Evans, Susan, and David Webster. Archaeology of Ancient Mexico and Central America: An
Encyclopedia. 1st ed. New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 2001. Print.
Farmbrough, Rich. "Excavations at the Temple Mount."Wikipedia. N.p., 06/10/2011. Web. 8 Jan
2012.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Excavations_at_the_Temple_Mount&action=history
>.
Hammer, Joshua. "Sifting sacred ground: as Israeli archaeologists recover artifacts from the
Temple Mount--a site revered by three religious faiths--ancient history inflames modern-day
political tensions." Smithsonian Apr. 2011: 34+. General OneFile. Web. 7 Dec. 2011.
Henderson, John S. "San Lorenzo." Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia. Grolier Online, 2011.
Web. 21 Dec. 2011.
Hunger, Alex. "Gavrinis Cairn - Cairn in France in Bretagne:Morbihan." The Megalithic Portal.
N.p., 08/24/2011. Web. 8 Jan 2012. <http://www.megalithic.co.uk/article.php?sid=9254>.
Laughlin, John. Archaeology and the Bible. 1st ed. New York: Taylor and Francis Group, 2000.
Print.
MacNiesh, Richard. "Mesoamerican Archaeology." Biennial Review of Anthropology. 5. (1967):
26. Web. 31 Oct. 2011.
Patton, Mark. "On Entoptic Images in Context: Art, Monuments, and Society in Neolithic
Brittany." Current Anthropology. 31.5 (1990): 5. Web. 31 Oct. 2011.
Peach, A. Kate. "Petrie, William Matthew Flinders (1853–1942)." Encyclopedia Americana.
Grolier Online, 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2011.
Rosen, Steven. "Nomads in Archaeology: A Response to Finkelstein and Perevolotsky." Bulletin
of the American Schools of Oriental Research. 287 (1992): n. page. Web. 31 Oct. 2011.
Scarre, Chris, and Paul Raux. "A new decorated menhir." Antiquity. 74.286 (2000): n. page.
Print.
Wendt, Carl. "Excavations at E1 Remolino: Household Archaeology in the San Lorenzo Olmec
Region ." Journal of Field Archaeology. 30.2 (2005): n. page. Web. 31 Oct. 2011.
Whittle, Alasdair. Europe in the Neolithic. 1st ed. New York: Caimbridge University Press,
1990. eBook.
TALLWOOD HIGH GSWLA
Archaeology and
Associated Global Methods
GSWLA Research Paper
Timmis Alexander Maddox
01/08/2012