AA Sum 05 pg C1-11
5/17/05
9:41 PM
Page 3
Letters Don’t Dismiss All Myths I read Ken Feder’s article “The Peculiar Phenomenon Of Pseudoarchaeology” and your Editor’s Corner in the Spring 2005 issue of American Archaeology with interest. I fully agree with Feder’s premise. I do, however, disagree with your assertion that all myths are fiction and that people who believe them are somehow misguided. I believe it is wrong for scientists to discard all ideas just because they don’t find acceptable evidence to support them. Do we really know the truth sufficiently to state all myths are false? Theories are what make archaeology and science interesting. Louis Deeter Orlando, Florida
on the outer edges of the incisions that indicate greater age than historic, post–Civil War occupation of the region. This data suggest authenticity. The runestone’s linguistic questions were discussed by Cornell professor Robert A. Hall, Jr. Hall argued that the supposed “errors” in rune form and words represent vernacular variations, which more recently have been judged to be medieval Bohuslän (Swedish) dialect. Add the unique historical circumstances in Scandinavia in the early 1360s, and the attested presence of Norse throughout the eastern high Arctic and the weight of probability is that the Kensington Runestone is authentic. Alice Beck Kehoe Adjunct Professor of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee
Runestone Probably Authentic
Learning Our History
As Kenneth Feder’s article states, it is true that “most archaeologists doubt the Kensington Runestone’s authenticity because no evidence of a Norse encampment was found with it.” However, the inscription does not say there was a camp where the stone was placed, and even if there were a camp, there is little likelihood that its scant imperishable residue would be found. Not finding evidence means that no evidence was discovered, but it doesn’t absolutely disprove occupation. The most important data come from geological examination of the rune incisions: do they show weathering? Both the first geologist to work on the question, Newton Winchell, in 1909, and contemporary forensic petrographer Scott Wolter see weathering
When I am in Europe, I hear various stories of kings and conquerors. There is so much history there. Unfortunately, America doesn’t have that much written history from the original natives of the land, but thankfully the archaeologists are starting to piece the history together. The News article in the Spring issue, “New Dating Technique Applied to Prehistoric Hawaiian Temple System,” told the fascinating story of temple research on Kahikinui. Like detectives, the archaeologists determined that the temple dates back to A.D. 1580 and that two Maui chieftains came together under one conquering divine king. Sharon Diane Roberts Port Orange, Florida
american archaeology
Editor’s Corner When I first read about the construction project in Washington’s Olympic Peninsula that inadvertently uncovered a large Native American graveyard, I wondered how it could have happened. There was reason to believe that a prehistoric village, Tse-whit-zen, once existed in the general area of the construction site. But Tse-whit-zen’s exact location was unknown. An archaeological assessment of the construction site done prior to the start of the project found no significant archaeological deposits. Shortly after construction began, human remains were uncovered. The project stopped and another archaeological assessment followed. This assessment also found no significant evidence of a graveyard. So the construction project—the Washington Department of Transportation was building a dry dock that would be used to repair a floating bridge—began again. As numerous burials were uncovered, the project stopped and has not since resumed. Hundreds of burials were desecrated, millions of dollars were apparently wasted. Our feature “Graving yard, Graveyard” (see page 12) tells this tragic, complicated tale.
Sending Letters to American Archaeology American Archaeology welcomes your letters. Write to us at 5301 Central Avenue NE, Suite 902, Albuquerque, NM 87108-1517, or send us e-mail at tacmag@nm.net. We reserve the right to edit and publish letters in the magazine’s Letters department as space permits. Please include your name, address and telephone number with all correspondence, including e-mail messages.
3
