Archaeology Theories Methods and

Practice Seventh Edition Colin Renfrew

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/archaeology-theories-methods-and-practice-seventh-
edition-colin-renfrew/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Theories and Practice in Interaction Design 1st Edition

Sebastiano Bagnara

https://textbookfull.com/product/theories-and-practice-in-
interaction-design-1st-edition-sebastiano-bagnara/

Business Ethics; Methods, Theories, and Application 2nd

Edition Christian U. Becker

https://textbookfull.com/product/business-ethics-methods-
theories-and-application-2nd-edition-christian-u-becker/

Engaging Archaeology 25 Case Studies in Research

Practice First Edition Silliman

https://textbookfull.com/product/engaging-archaeology-25-case-
studies-in-research-practice-first-edition-silliman/

Interfacial Mechanics-Theories and Methods for Contact

and Lubrication 1st Edition Jane Wang (Author)

https://textbookfull.com/product/interfacial-mechanics-theories-
and-methods-for-contact-and-lubrication-1st-edition-jane-wang-
author/
Fashion Knowledge : Theories, Methods, Practices and
Politics 1st Edition ■■Elke■ ■Gaugele■■ And ■■Monica■
■Titton■■

https://textbookfull.com/product/fashion-knowledge-theories-
methods-practices-and-politics-1st-edition-elke-gaugele-and-
monica-titton/

The Practice of Research in Criminology and Criminal

Justice (Seventh Edition) Ronet D. Bachman

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-practice-of-research-in-
criminology-and-criminal-justice-seventh-edition-ronet-d-bachman/

Theories to Inform Superior Health Informatics Research

and Practice Nilmini Wickramasinghe

https://textbookfull.com/product/theories-to-inform-superior-
health-informatics-research-and-practice-nilmini-wickramasinghe/

China s National Balance Sheet Theories Methods and

Risk Assessment 1st Edition Yang Li

https://textbookfull.com/product/china-s-national-balance-sheet-
theories-methods-and-risk-assessment-1st-edition-yang-li/

Nursing Leadership, Management, and Professional

Practice for the LPN/LVN Seventh Edition Dahlkemper Msn
Rn

https://textbookfull.com/product/nursing-leadership-management-
and-professional-practice-for-the-lpn-lvn-seventh-edition-
dahlkemper-msn-rn/
Archaeology
Theories, Methods, and Practice
ology COLIN RENFREW
PAUL BAHN
Theories, Methods, and Practice

COLLEGE
Archaeo
EDITION

SEVE NTH
E D I T I O N

REVISED &
U P DAT E D
Archaeology © 1991, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016
Thames & Hudson Ltd, London

Text (unless otherwise indicated) Copyright © 1991 and 2016

Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn

For other textual credits see acknowledgments

All Rights Reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced

or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopy, recording or any other information storage and
retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.

First published in 1991 in the United States of America by

Thames & Hudson Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10110

thamesandhudsonusa.com

Seventh edition 2016

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 2015943655

ISBN 978-0-500-29210-5

Manufactured in China by Imago

 CONTENTS

Preface to the College Edition 9 BOX FEATURES

Experimental Archaeology 53
Introduction
Wet Preservation: The Ozette Site 60
The Nature and Aims of Archaeology 12 Dry Preservation: The Tomb of Tutankhamun 64
Cold Preservation 1: Mountain “Mummies” 67
Cold Preservation 2: Snow Patch Archaeology 68
PART I Cold Preservation 3: The Iceman 70

The Framework of Archaeology 19

3 Where?
1 The Searchers Survey and Excavation of Sites and Features 73

The History of Archaeology 21 Discovering Archaeological Sites

The Speculative Phase 22 and Features 74

The Beginnings of Modern Archaeology 26 Assessing the Layout of Sites and Features 98

Classification and Consolidation 32 Excavation 110

A Turning Point in Archaeology 40 Summary 130

World Archaeology 41 Further Reading 130

Summary 48 BOX FEATURES

Further Reading 48 The Sydney Cyprus Survey Project 76
Sampling Strategies 79
BOX FEATURES Identifying Archaeological Features from Above 82
Digging Pompeii: Past and Present 24 Interpretation and Mapping From Aerial Images 86
Evolution: Darwin’s Great Idea 27 Lasers in the Jungle 89
North American Archaeological Pioneers 30 GIS and the Giza Plateau 96
The Development of Field Techniques 33 Tell Halula: Multi-period Surface Investigations 100
Pioneering Women in Archaeology 38 Geophysical Survey at Roman Wroxeter 106
Processual Archaeology 41 Measuring Magnetism 108
Interpretive or Postprocessual Archaeologies 44 Underwater Archaeology 113
Çatalhöyük: Interpretive Archaeologies in Action 46 Excavating the Red Bay Wreck 114
Jamestown Rediscovery: The Excavation Process 117
2 What is Left? Excavating the Amesbury Archer 120
The Variety of the Evidence 49 Excavating an Urban Site 126

Basic Categories of Archaeological Evidence 49 4 When?

Formation Processes 52
Dating Methods and Chronology 131
Cultural Formation Processes – How People
Have Affected What Survives in the Relative Dating 132
Archaeological Record 54 Stratigraphy 132
Natural Formation Processes – Typological Sequences 133
How Nature Affects What Survives Linguistic Dating 136
in the Archaeological Record 55
Climate and Chronology 136
Summary 72
Absolute Dating 138
Further Reading 72
Calendars and Historical Chronologies 140
 Annual Cycles: Varves, Speleothems, Investigating Maya Territories 210
and Tree-Rings 142 Conspicuous Ranking at Mississippian Spiro 218
Radioactive Clocks 146 Conflict Archaeology 220
Early Intermediate Period Peru: Gender Relations 226
Other Absolute Dating Methods 160
Genetic Dating 162
6 What Was the Environment?
Calibrated Relative Methods 163
Environmental Archaeology 233
Chronological Correlations 164
World Chronology 167 Investigating Environments on a Global Scale 233
Summary 176 Studying the Landscape: Geoarchaeology 240
Further Reading 176 Reconstructing the Plant Environment 249

BOX FEATURES Reconstructing the Animal Environment 256

The Maya Calendar 140 Reconstructing the Human Environment 264
The Principles of Radioactive Decay 147 Summary 272
How to Calibrate Radiocarbon Dates 150 Further Reading 272
Bayesian Analysis: Improving the Precision of
Radiocarbon Chronologies 152 BOX FEATURES
Dating the Earliest West Europeans 158 Sea and Ice Cores and Global Warming 235
Dating the Thera Eruption 164 El Niño and Global Warming 236
Cave Sediments 242
Doggerland 246
Pollen Analysis 250
PART II Elands Bay Cave
Mapping the Ancient Environment: Cahokia
262

Discovering the Variety of and GIS 266

Ancient Gardens at Kuk Swamp 268
Human Experience 177

5 How Were Societies Organized? 7 What Did They Eat?

Social Archaeology 179
Subsistence and Diet 273

Establishing the Nature and Scale of the Society 180

What Can Plant Foods Tell Us About Diet? 274

Further Sources of Information Information from Animal Resources 278

for Social Organization 186 Investigating Diet, Seasonality, and
Techniques of Study for Mobile Domestication from Animal Remains 288
Hunter-Gatherer Societies 195 How Were Animal Resources Exploited? 306
Techniques of Study for Segmentary Societies 198 Assessing Diet from Human Remains 310
Techniques of Study for Chiefdoms and States 209 Summary 316
The Archaeology of the Individual Further Reading 316
and of Identity 222
BOX FEATURES
The Emergence of Identity and Society 225 Paleoethnobotany: A Case Study 276
Investigating Gender and Childhood 225 Butser Experimental Iron Age Farm 278
The Molecular Genetics of Investigating the Rise of Farming in Western Asia 284
Social Groups and Lineages 230 Seasonality at Star Carr 290
Summary 232 Taphonomy 292
Quantifying Animal Bones 294
Further Reading 232
Bison Drive Sites 296
BOX FEATURES The Study of Animal Teeth 298
Network Analysis 185 Farming Origins: A Case Study 300
Ancient Ethnicity and Language 194 Shell Midden Analysis 304
Monuments, Polities, and Territories in Early Wessex 204
Interpreting Stonehenge 206
8 How Did They Make and Use Tools? From Written Source to Cognitive Map 401

Technology 317 Establishing Place: The Location of Memory 403

Measuring the World 405
Unaltered Materials: Stone 319
Planning: Maps for the Future 409
Other Unaltered Materials 334
Symbols of Organization and Power 411
Synthetic Materials 342
Symbols for the Other World:
Archaeometallurgy 347 The Archaeology of Religion 413
Summary 356 Depiction: Art and Representation 422
Further Reading 356 Music and Cognition 428
BOX FEATURES Mind and Material Engagement 430
Artifacts or “Geofacts” at Pedra Furada? 320 Summary 432
How Were Large Stones Raised? 324 Further Reading 432
Refitting and Microwear Studies at Rekem 330
Woodworking in the Somerset Levels 336 BOX FEATURES
Metallographic Examination 348 Clues to Early Thought 396
Copper Production in Ancient Peru 350 Paleolithic Art 398
Early Steelmaking: An Ethnoarchaeological The Ness of Brodgar:
Experiment 355 At the Heart of Ceremonial Orkney 406
Maya Symbols of Power 414
9 What Contact Did They Have? The World’s Oldest Sanctuary 418
Recognizing Cult Activity at Chavín 420
Trade and Exchange 357 Identifying Individual Artists in Ancient Greece 424
Sacrifice and Symbol in Mesoamerica 426
The Study of Interaction 357
Early Musical Behavior 428
Finding the Sources of Traded Goods: Cognition and Neuroscience 431
Characterization 365
The Study of Distribution 374
11 Who Were They? What Were They Like?
The Study of Production 372
The Study of Consumption 382 The Bioarchaeology of People 433

Exchange and Interaction:

Identifying Physical Attributes 435
The Complete System 384
Assessing Human Abilities 445
Summary 390
Disease, Deformity, and Death 453
Further Reading 390
Assessing Nutrition 466
BOX FEATURES
Population Studies 467
Modes of Exchange 361
Diversity and Evolution 469
Materials of Prestige Value 362
Analyzing Artifact Composition 368 Identity and Personhood 475
Glassware from the Roman Mediterranean in Japan 372 Summary 475
Amber From the Baltic in the Levant 373 Further Reading 476
Fall-off Analysis 377
Distribution: The Uluburun Wreck 380 BOX FEATURES
Production: Greenstone Artifacts in Australia 383 Spitalfields: Determining Biological Age at Death 438
Interaction Spheres: Hopewell 389 Facial Reconstructions 442
Finding a Neolithic Family 444
10 What Did They Think? Ancient Cannibals? 450
Examining Bodies 454
Cognitive Archaeology, Art, and Religion 391 Grauballe Man: The Body in the Bog 456
Life and Death Among the Inuit 460
Investigating How Human Symbolizing
Richard III 462
Faculties Evolved 393
Genetics and Language Histories 471
Working with Symbols 400 Studying the Origins of New World
and Australian Populations 473
12 Why Did Things Change? Archaeological Ethics 551

Explanation in Archaeology 477 Popular Archaeology Versus

Pseudoarchaeology 551
Migrationist and Diffusionist Explanations 477
Who Owns the Past? 556
The Processual Approach 481
The Responsibility of Collectors and Museums 560
Applications 483
Summary 564
The Form of Explanation: General or Particular 489
Further Reading 564
Attempts at Explanation: One Cause or Several? 491
BOX FEATURES
Postprocessual or Interpretive Explanation 498
The Politics of Destruction 552
Cognitive Archaeology 501 Destruction and Response: Mimbres 561
Agency and Material Engagement 503
Summary 506 15 The Future of the Past
Further Reading 506 How to Manage the Heritage? 565
BOX FEATURES
The Destruction of the Past 565
Diffusionist Explanation Rejected: Great Zimbabwe 480
Molecular Genetics, Population Dynamics
The Response: Survey, Conservation,
and Climate Change: Europe 482 and Mitigation 568
The Origins of Farming: A Processual Explanation 484 Heritage Management, Display, and Tourism 580
Marxist Archaeology: Key Features 486 Who Interprets and Presents the Past? 581
Language Families and Language Change 488
The Past for All People and All Peoples 583
Origins of the State: Peru 492
The Classic Maya Collapse 496 What Use is the Past? 583
Explaining the European Megaliths 500 Summary 584
The Individual as an Agent of Change 504 Further Reading 584

BOX FEATURES
Conservation in Mexico City: The Great Temple

PART III of the Aztecs

CRM in Practice: The Metro Rail Project
570
574
The World of Archaeology 507 Portable Antiquities and the UK “Portable
Antiquities Scheme” 576
13 Archaeology in Action
16 The New Searchers
Five Case Studies 509
Building a Career in Archaeology 585
Oaxaca: The Origins and Rise of the
Zapotec State 510 Lisa J. Lucero: University Professor, USA 586
The Calusa of Florida: Gill Hey: Contract Archaeologist, UK 587
A Complex Hunter-Gatherer Society 519 Rasmi Shoocongdej: University Professor,
Research Among Hunter-Gatherers: Thailand 589
Upper Mangrove Creek, Australia 525 Douglas C. Comer: CRM Archaeologist, USA 591
Khok Phanom Di: Shadreck Chirikure: Archaeometallurgist,
Rice Farming in Southeast Asia 531
South Africa 593
York and the Public Presentation
of Archaeology 538
Jonathan N. Tubb: Museum Curator, UK 594

Further Reading 548

14 Whose Past? Glossary 596

Archaeology and the Public 549 Notes and Bibliography 605

The Meaning of the Past: Acknowledgments 651

The Archaeology of Identity 549 Index 654
 P R E FA C E T O T H E
COLLEGE EDITION
Since we first published this book twenty-five years ago we
have revised it six times. This new edition of Archaeology:
Theories, Methods, and Practice is the most comprehensive
introduction to archaeological method and theory avail-
able. It is used by instructors and students for introductory
courses on methods and theory, but also for classes on
field methods, archaeological science, and a number of
other courses.
The book presents an up-to-date and accurate overview of
the world of archaeology in the 21st century. We are acutely
aware of the complex relationships between theory and
method, and of both of these upon the current practice of
archaeology – in excavations, in museums, in heritage work,
in the literature, and in the media. Throughout, the box fea-
tures illustrate specific examples of excavation projects, and
explain particular techniques or theoretical approaches.
The references and bibliography ensure that the work can
be used as a gateway to the full range of current scholarship
– in that way it is also a work of reference for graduate stu-
dents as well as professional archaeologists. We hope too
that the book is written with sufficient clarity and purpose
that it is of real value for the general reader, whether as an
overview of the subject today or to be used selectively to
follow up particular topics of interest.
We have tried not to duck any of the controversial issues
of contemporary archaeology – whether in the field of
theory or of politics. And we have tried to include origi-
nal ideas of our own. We would claim for instance that
our chapter on The Bioarchaeology of People (Chapter
11) offers an overview not readily found elsewhere,
and that the chapters (10 and 12) on Cognitive Archae-
ology and on Explanation in Archaeology offer syntheses
that present a number of original perspectives. The dis-
cipline of archaeology is perpetually in a state of change,
and we have tried to capture and to represent where it is
at now.
Resources
With this edition students will have access to free online
study materials at http://goo.gl/WTwvu6. Its quizzes,
chapter summaries, flash cards, and web projects will
enable students to test their comprehension of the book
and to explore new areas of research. For instructors there
is an online instructor’s manual, a test bank and images
and diagrams (as JPEGs and as PowerPoint presentations)
for use in class.
Archaeology in the 21st Century
We set out to convey a sense of the excitement of a rapidly
moving discipline that is seeking answers to some of the
fundamental questions about the history of humankind.
The archaeological record is the only resource we have
which can answer such questions about our origins – both
in terms of the evolution of our species and of the develop-
ments in culture and society which led to the emergence
of the first civilizations and to the more recent societies
founded upon them. The research is thus an enquiry into
ourselves and our beginnings, into how we have become
what we are now, and how our world view has come about.
That is why it is a discipline of central relevance to the
present time: only in this way can we seek to achieve a
long-term perspective upon the human condition. And it is
worth emphasizing that archaeology is about the study of
humans, not just artifacts and buildings for their own sake.
The dynamic pace of change in archaeology is reflected
in the continuing evolution of this book, particularly in this
seventh edition. Each chapter and every element is reviewed
and updated, incorporating new methods, changing theo-
ries, and fresh discoveries. This dynamism is driven in part
by the range of research constantly underway in every part
of the world, which in turn means that the data accessible
to the archaeologist are increasing all the time.
But new interpretations are not simply the product
of new excavations turning up new information. They
depend also upon the development of new techniques
of enquiry: the field of archaeological science is a rapidly
expanding one. We believe also that progress and deeper
understanding come from the continuing developments
in archaeological theory, and from the changing nature of
the questions we pose when we approach these increas-
9
ing amounts of data. The questions we ask, moreover,
arise not only from academic research but from the
 P RE FAC E TO T HE CO L L E G E ED I TI O N
changing needs and perspectives of contemporary society,
and from the different ways in which it comes to view
its own past.
The archaeology of the 21st century is now well under-
way. This point can be illustrated in a rather shocking
way by the fortunes of war and civil unrest. All conflicts
carry with them the risk of damage to the archaeological
heritage. In Chapter 15 we describe the destruction of the
16th-century bridge at Mostar after shelling by Croatian
guns. We also explore the politics of destruction through
the case of the mosque at Ayodhya in northern India,
this time by Hindu fundamentalists (Chapter 14). Great
Britain is only now, in the wake of devastating attacks on
archaeological sites by the “Islamic State” (see Chapter
15), planning to ratify the 1954 Hague Convention and its
two Protocols on the Protection of Cultural Property in the
Event of Armed Conflict, as the United States did in 2009.
It is sad to note that the religious intolerance underly-
ing the events at Ayodhya was matched or even surpassed
by the deliberate destruction by the Taliban of the great
Buddhas at Bamiyan in Afghanistan (Chapter 14). Again
we see a key part of the heritage of one sect or ethnic group
deliberately destroyed by another. More recently, during
the “Arab spring” in Egypt of 2011, civil unrest allowed
thieves to loot items from the famous Cairo Museum and
Egyptian archaeological sites. The world was shocked by
the destruction of, among other ancient monuments,
the iconic man-faced winged bull at the Nergal Gate of
Nineveh, Iraq, announced by “Islamic State” militants
through a video released in February 2015. In the digital
age, the opportunity to publicize such attacks on cultural
heritage serves as a tool for both publicity and propa-
ganda. All these tensions and losses underline the need
for archaeologists, heritage managers, and museum cura-
tors to be vigilant and to proclaim at every opportunity the
value of the ancient heritage for all humanity.
How the Book is Organized
In archaeology as in any scientific discipline, progress is
achieved through asking the right questions. This book is
founded upon that principle, and nearly every chapter is
directed at how we can seek to answer the central questions
of archaeology. Part I, “The Framework of Archaeology,”
begins with a chapter on the history of archaeology, an
overview of how the discipline has grown and developed.
In a sense it answers the question “How did we get to be
where we are?” Past discoveries and ideas shape how we
think about archaeology today.
Then we come to the first major question, “What?”
This addresses the subject matter of archaeology, namely
10
the things that are left, and how the archaeological
record is formed and how we can begin to recover it. The
“Where?” question of Chapter 3 is answered in terms
of archae­ological prospection, survey, and excavation.
The “When?” question that follows is perhaps the most
important so far, since archaeology is about the past, and
about seeing things in the perspective of time, so that the
procedures of absolute dating are central to the archaeo-
logical enterprise.
Following this outline of the framework of what archae-
ology is about, we then move on to its subject matter. Some
commentators and reviewers have expressed surprise that
we begin Part II with the question “How were societies
organized?” For it sometimes seems easier to speak, for
instance, about early subsistence or trade than about
social organization. But in reality the scale and nature of
the society determines not only those issues, but more
particularly governs how we as archaeologists can attempt
to investigate them. In general, the rather scanty camp-
sites of hunter-gatherers require a different approach
from the formidable and deeply stratified cities of the first
civilizations. There are exceptions, of course, and the case
study on the Calusa of Florida (in Chapter 13) discusses
the approach to one of these, a sedentary and centralized,
politically powerful society that was based almost entirely
upon hunting, fishing, and gathering.
We go on to ask in successive chapters how to inves-
tigate the environment of these early communities, their
diet, their technology, and their trade. And when we come
to ask in Chapter 10 “What did they think?” we are enter-
ing the field of cognitive archaeology, confronting new
theoretical approaches such as agency, materiality, and
engagement theory, which surface again when we ask
“Why did things change?”, encompassing the controver-
sial areas of archaeological explanation.
The structure, then, is in terms of questions, of what
we want to know. Among the most fascinating questions
are “Who were they? What were they like?” (Chapter 11).
Increasingly it is realized that the “Who?” question is a
theoretically difficult one, involving matters of ethnic-
ity and what ethnicity really means: here we refer to new
work in the fields of archaeogenetics and archaeo-linguis-
tics. The “What were they like?” question can be answered
in a number of new ways, including again the increasing
use of archaeogenetics and DNA studies.
Part III of the book, “The World of Archaeology,” shows
in Chapter 13 how the questions of Parts I and II have been
addressed in five exemplary field projects from around
the world, from societies ranging from hunter-gatherers
to complex civilizations and cities. The remaining three
chapters (see below) look more widely at the question of
who owns the past and management of the heritage, as
well as careers in archaeology.
We understand more clearly now that there are many
archaeologies, depending upon the interests and the
 P RE FA CE T O TH E CO LLE GE E DIT ION

perspectives of the communities in different parts of the our understanding of a site and the ancient society that
world that undertake the work, or of those who commis- created it, and how theory has grown with the discipline
sion and pay for it, or of the wider public who are, in effect, to inspire new interpretations of archaeological evidence.
the “consumers” of what the archaeologist produces. We In Chapter 11, two new boxes introduce notable indi-
are also coming to realize more clearly how the world of viduals from the past and investigate what their physical
archaeology is governed by prevailing political beliefs. remains can reveal to us about diet, physique, health,
That is why “archaeological ethics” figures with ever- clothing, and status, as well as examining the methods
increasing prominence throughout the book. archaeologists employ to learn about these aspects of
ancient life and death. The first, Denmark’s Grauballe
Man, is one of Europe’s Iron Age bog bodies, unfortunate
New to This Edition individuals possibly sacrificed by their community, but
In the sixth edition of this book, we added a new final astonishingly well preserved due to the conditions of the
chapter: “The New Searchers – Building a Career in bogs in which they were interred. The second, England’s
Archaeology.” We chose five professional archaeologists, King Richard III, was found beneath a Leicester car park
in mid-career, from different countries with different in 2013. His discovery captured the imagination of the
histories, and working in different branches of the archae- world’s media, but both individuals – the anonymous
ological field – in research, in heritage management, in and the famous – provide us with opportunities to learn
the museum. Gill Hey, a contract archaeologist based in directly about the people of the past.
the United Kingdom, now joins their ranks, as archaeo-
logical survey and excavation is increasingly guided by Once more, numerous specialists and course tutors have
the need to respond to development projects. The aim is assisted with the preparation of this edition, providing
to glimpse the reality of archaeological practice today, or detailed comments, information, or illustrations. We
rather the different realities that the practicing archaeolo- thank them by name in the Acknowledgments at the
gist will encounter in actually doing archaeology – good back of the book, together with those many scholars who
archaeology – in different parts of the world. helped with earlier editions.
We have continued to update Chapter 3 to reflect the
immense improvements and new techniques in aerial Colin Renfrew
survey – including the use of drones to identify archae- Paul Bahn
ological sites and features – and the use of digital data
capture and recording systems, both on-site and in post-
excavation analysis. A new box feature, “Excavating an
Urban Site,” illustrates how archaeologists confront the
challenges of excavation in continuously occupied towns
and cities, using the example of the Museum of London
Archaeology’s Bloomberg project.
In Chapter 4, we emphasize new and improved methods
of dating archaeological remains, covering the emerging
field of archaeogenetic dating and its implications for our
reconstruction of human evolution, and the impact of the
increased use of the uranium-thorium method on our
understanding of the chronology of world cave art, even
suggesting the possibility that particular artworks may be
credited to the Neanderthals.
Social archaeology, introduced in Chapter 5, continues
to provoke lively debate, none more so than the meaning
and interpretation of Stonehenge and its surroundings;
two new boxes, “Monuments, Polities and Territories in
Early Wessex” and “Interpreting Stonehenge,” chart the
progress of exciting research in this region, past and
present, and discuss some of the latest theories about this
iconic monument and its surrounding landscape. Another
11

new box feature, “Conspicuous Ranking at Mississippian

Spiro,” demonstrates how archaeological theory informs
 Introduction
The Nature and Aims of Archaeology
Archaeology is partly the discovery of the treasures of the
past, partly the meticulous work of the scientific analyst,
partly the exercise of the creative imagination. It is toiling
in the sun on an excavation in the deserts of Central Asia,
it is working with living Inuit in the snows of Alaska. It
is diving down to Spanish wrecks off the coast of Florida,
and it is investigating the sewers of Roman York. But it is
also the painstaking task of interpretation so that we come
to understand what these things mean for the human
story. And it is the conservation of the world’s cultural
heritage – against looting and against careless destruction.
Archaeology, then, is both a physical activity out in the
field, and an intellectual pursuit in the study or labora-
tory. That is part of its great attraction. The rich mixture
of danger and detective work has also made it the perfect
vehicle for fiction writers and film-makers, from Agatha
Christie with Murder in Mesopotamia to Steven Spielberg
with Indiana Jones. However far from reality such por-
trayals may be, they capture the essential truth that
archaeology is an exciting quest – the quest for knowledge
about ourselves and our past.
But how does archaeology relate to disciplines such as
anthropology and history that are also concerned with the
human story? Is archaeology itself a science? And what
are the responsibilities of the archaeologist in today’s
world, where the past is manipulated for political ends
and “ethnic cleansing” is accompanied by the deliberate
destruction of the cultural heritage?
Archaeology as Anthropology
Anthropology at its broadest is the study of humanity – our
physical characteristics as animals, and our unique non-
biological characteristics that we call culture. Culture in
this sense includes what the anthropologist Edward Tylor
usefully summarized in 1871 as “knowledge, belief, art,
morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits
acquired by man as a member of society.” Anthropologists
also use the term culture in a more restricted sense when
they refer to the culture of a particular society, meaning the
12
non-biological characteristics unique to that society which
distinguish it from other societies. (An “archaeological
culture” has a specific and somewhat different meaning,
as explained in Chapter 3.) Anthropology is thus a broad
discipline – so broad that it is generally broken down into
three smaller disciplines: biological anthropology, cultural
anthropology, and archaeology.
Biological anthropology, or physical anthropology as it
used to be called, concerns the study of human biological
or physical characteristics and how they evolved.
Cultural anthropology – or social anthropology – ana-
lyzes human culture and society. Two of its branches are
ethnography (the study at first hand of individual living cul-
tures) and ethnology (which sets out to compare cultures
using ethnographic evidence to derive general principles
about human society).
Archaeology is the “past tense of cultural anthropology.”
Whereas cultural anthropologists will often base their
conclusions on the experience of actually living within
contemporary communities, archaeologists study past
humans and societies primarily through their material
remains – the buildings, tools, and other artifacts that
constitute what is known as the material culture left over
from former societies.
Nevertheless, one of the most challenging tasks for the
archaeologist today is to know how to interpret material
culture in human terms. How were those pots used? Why
are some dwellings round and others square? Here the
methods of archaeology and ethnography overlap. Archae­
ologists in recent decades have developed ethnoarchae­ology,
where like ethnographers they live among contemporary
communities, but with the specific purpose of under-
standing how such societies use material culture – how
they make their tools and weapons, why they build their
settlements where they do, and so on.
Moreover, archaeology has an active role to play in the
field of conservation. Heritage studies constitute a devel-
oping field, where it is realized that the world’s cultural
heritage is a diminishing resource, and one which holds
different meanings for different people. The presentation
of the findings of archaeology to the public cannot avoid
difficult political issues, and the museum curator and the
popularizer today have responsibilities which some can be
seen to have failed.
 i n t ro d uct i o n: t h e n atu re and aim s of arc h aeology

Archaeology as History writing, the distinction between history and prehistory

If, then, archaeology deals with the past, in what way does it
differ from history? In the broadest sense, just as archaeol-
ogy is an aspect of anthropology, so too is it a part of history
– where we mean the whole history of humankind from
its beginnings over 3 million years ago. Indeed for more
than 99 percent of that huge span of time archaeology –
the study of past material culture – is the only significant
source of information, if one sets aside physical anthropol-
ogy, which focuses on our biological rather than cultural
progress. Conventional historical sources begin only with
the introduction of written records around 3000 bc in
western Asia, and much later in most other parts of the
world (not until ad 1788 in Australia, for example). A com-
monly drawn distinction is between prehistory – the period
before written records – and history in the narrow sense,
meaning the study of the past using written evidence. In
some countries, “prehistory” is now considered a patron-
izing and derogatory term which implies that written texts
are more valuable than oral histories, and which classifies
their cultures as inferior until the arrival of Western ways
of recording information. To archaeology, however, which
studies all cultures and periods, whether with or without
0.1 The vast timespan of prehistory compared with the relatively
short period for which we have written records (“history”).
Before c. 3000 bc, material remains are our only evidence.
on
is a convenient dividing line that simply recognizes the
importance of the written word in the modern world, but
in no way denigrates the useful information contained in
oral histories.
As will become abundantly clear in this book, archae­
ology can also contribute a great deal to the understanding
even of those periods and places where documents, inscrip-
tions, and other literary evidence do exist. Quite often, it
is the archaeologist who unearths such evidence in the
first place.
Archaeology as a Science
Since the aim of archaeology is the understanding of
humankind, it is a humanistic discipline, a humane study.
And since it deals with the human past it is a historical
discipline. But it differs from the study of written history
– although it uses written history – in a fundamental
way. The material the archaeologist finds does not tell us
directly what to think. Historical records make statements,
offer opinions, pass judgments (even if those statements
and judgments themselves need to be interpreted). The
objects that archaeologists discover, on the other hand, tell
us nothing directly in themselves. It is we today who have
to make sense of these things. In this respect the prac-
tice of archaeology is rather like that of the scientist. The
scientist collects data (evidence), conducts ex­peri­ments,
formulates a hypothesis (a proposition to account for the

on
o

on

on

on

data), tests the hypothesis against more data, and then

ag

0
ill

ill

00
i

i
ill

ill

ill
m

m
s
ar

0,
m

m
5

in conclusion devises a model (a description that seems

50
Ye

2.

1.
3

best to summarize the pattern observed in the data). The

Human
PREHISTORY
archaeologist has to develop a picture of the past, just as
origins
the scientist has to develop a coherent view of the natural
world. It is not found ready made.
Archaeology, in short, is a science as well as a human-
ity. That is one of its fascinations as a discipline: it reflects
the ingenuity of the modern scientist as well as the
modern historian. The technical methods of archaeologi-
cal science are the most obvious, from radiocarbon dating
to studies of food residues in pots. Equally important are
scientific methods of analysis, of inference. Some writers
have spoken of the need to define a separate “Middle
Range Theory,” referring to a distinct body of ideas to
bridge the gap between raw archaeological evidence and
d
/a
bc

bc

bc

bc

00

00

the general observations and conclusions to be derived

s

10

20
00

00

00
ar

1
Ye

30

20

10

ad

ad

ad

from it. That is one way of looking at the matter. But we

see no need to make a sharp distinction between theory
PREHISTORY and method. Our aim is to describe clearly the methods
Australia
(1788) and techniques used by archaeologists in investigating
Origins
HISTORY the past. The analytical concepts of the archaeologist are
13

of writing
(W. Asia) as much a part of that battery of approaches as are the
instruments in the laboratory.
 i n tr odu c tio n : th e n at u r e a n d a im s of a rc h a eol og y

The diversity of modern archaeology

This page: 0.2 (right) Urban archaeology:

excavation of a Roman site in the heart of
London. 0.3 (below left) Working in the on-
site archaeobotanical laboratory on finds
from Çatalhöyük in Turkey (see pp. 46–47).
0.4 (below right) An ethnoarchaeologist in
the field in Siberia, sharing and studying
the lives of modern Orochen people, here
making blood sausages from the intestines
of a recently butchered reindeer.

Opposite: 0.5 (above) Underwater

archaeology: a huge Egyptian statue
found in the now-submerged ruins of an
ancient city near Alexandria. 0.6 (below
left) An Inca “mummy,” now known as the
“Ice Maiden,” is lifted from her resting
place high up on the Ampato volcano in
Peru (see p. 67). 0.7 (center right) Piecing
together fragments of an elaborate mural
from the early Maya site of San Bartolo in
Guatemala (see p. 426). 0.8 (below right)
Salvaged in advance of development:
a 2000-year-old Western Han dynasty
tomb is excavated at a construction site
in Guangzhou, China.
14
i n t ro d uct i o n: t h e n atu re and aim s of arc h aeology

15
 i n tr odu c tio n : th e n at u r e a n d a im s of a rc h a eol og y

The Variety and Scope of Archaeology has now become a focus of study in its own right. The
archaeology of the 21st century already ranges from the
Today archaeology is a broad church, encompassing a design of Coca-Cola bottles and beer cans to the forensic
number of different “archaeologies” which are never­ pathology increasingly used in the investigation of war
theless united by the methods and approaches outlined crimes and atrocities, whether in Bosnia, West Africa, or
in this book. We have already highlighted the distinction Iraq. Actualistic studies in archaeology were pioneered
between the archaeology of the long prehistoric period in the Garbage Project set up by William L. Rathje,
and that of historic times. This chronological division is who studied the refuse of different sectors of the city of
accentuated by further sub­divisions so that archae­ologists Tucson, Arizona, to give insights into the patterns of con­
specialize in, say, the earliest periods (the Old Stone Age or sumption of the modern urban population. Sites such as
Paleolithic, before 10,000 years ago) or the later ones (the airfields and gun emplacements dating from World War
great civilizations of the Americas and China; Egyptology;
the Classical archaeology of Greece and Rome). A major 0.9 Today the conventions, idioms, and findings of archaeology
development in the last two or three decades has been the are increasingly referenced in contemporary society, including
realization that archaeology has much to contribute also contemporary art. Antony Gormley’s Field for the British Isles
to the more recent historic periods. In North America is made up of thousands of terracotta figures resembling
and Australia historical archaeology – the archaeologi­ prehistoric figurines from excavations in Mesoamerica or
cal study of colonial and postcolonial settlement – has southeast Europe. For the viewer in front of them the effect
is overpowering.
expanded greatly, as has medieval and post-medieval
archaeology in Europe. So whether we are speaking of
colonial Jamestown in the United States, or medieval
London, Paris, and Hamburg in Europe, archaeology is a
prime source of evidence.
Cutting across these chronological subdivisions are
specializations that can contribute to many different
archaeological periods. Environmental archaeology is
one such field, where archaeologists and specialists
from other sciences study the human use of plants and
animals, and how past societies adapted to the ever-
changing environ­ment. Underwater archaeology is
another such field, demanding great courage as well as
skill. In the last 40 years it has become a highly scientific
exercise, yielding time capsules from the past in the form
of shipwrecks that shed new light on ancient life on land
as well as at sea.
Ethnoarchaeology, too, as we discussed briefly above,
is a major specialization in modern archaeology. We now
realize that we can only understand the archaeological
record – that is to say, what we find – if we understand
in much greater detail how it came about, how it was
formed. Formation processes are now a focus of inten­
sive study. It is here that ethnoarchaeology has come into
its own: the study of living peoples and of their material
culture undertaken with the aim of improving our under­
standing of the archaeological record. For instance, the
study of butchery practices among living hunter‑gather­
ers undertaken by Lewis Binford among the Nunamiut
Eskimo of Alaska gave him many new ideas about the
way the archaeological record may have been formed,
allowing him to re‑evaluate the bone remains of animals
eaten by very early humans elsewhere in the world.
16

Nor are these studies confined to simpler communi­

ties or small groups. Contemporary material culture
 i n t ro d uct i o n: t h e n atu re and aim s of arc h aeology
II (1939–45) are now preserved as ancient monuments,
as are telecommunication facilities from the era of the
Cold War, and surviving fragments of the Berlin Wall
which once divided East from West Germany but which
was opened and torn down in 1989. The Nevada Test Site,
established in 1950 as a continental location for United
States weapons testing, is similarly now the subject of
archaeological research and conservation.
The archaeology of the 20th century even had its
looters: artifacts raised from the wreck of the Titanic have
been sold for large sums to private collectors. And the
archaeology of the 21st century had a grim start with the
recovery work following the catastrophic destruction of
the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York on
11 September 2001. Ground Zero, the conserved and pro-
tected site where the twin towers once stood, has taken its
place as one of the most notable of the commemorative
monuments of New York.
Archaeology today continues to develop new special­
isms and sub-disciplines. Out of the environmental
approach widely emphasized at the end of the 20th
century bio­archaeology has emerged: the study of plants
and animals (and other living things) in the human envi-
ronment and diet. So too geoarchaeology: the application
to archae­ology of the geological sciences, for the recon-
struction of early environments and the study of lithic
materials. Archaeo­genetics, the study of the human past
using the techniques of molecular genetics, is a rapidly
expanding field. These, and other emerging areas, such
as forensic anthro­pology, are the product both of develop­
ments in the sciences and of increasing awareness
among archaeologists as to how such developments can
be exploited in the study of the past.
The Ethics of Archaeology
Increasingly it is realized that the practice of archaeol-
ogy raises many ethical problems, and that the uses of
archaeology, politically and commercially, nearly always
raise questions with a moral or ethical dimension (see
Chapters 14 and 15). It is easy to see that the deliber-
ate de­struction of archaeological remains, such as the
demolition of the Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan or
the leveling of Nineveh and other sites by the so-called
“Islamic State,” are essentially evil acts, judged by most
moral standards. Comparable in its damaging conse-
quences was the deplorable failure of the coalition forces
that invaded Iraq to safeguard the archaeological trea-
sures and sites of that country. But other issues are less
obvious. In what circumstances should the existence of
archae­ological sites be allowed to impede the progress
of important construction projects, such as new roads
or new dams? During the Chinese Cultural Revolution,
Chairman Mao coined the slogan “Let the past serve the
present,” but that was sometimes used as an excuse for
the deliberate destruction of ancient things.
The commercial exploitation of the past also raises
many problems. Many archaeological sites are today
over-visited, and the large numbers of well-meaning
tourists pose real problems for their conservation. This
has been a long-standing problem at Stonehenge, the
major prehistoric monument in south Britain, and the
failure of the UK government to do anything effective
about the situation over many decades brought general
condemnation. Most serious of all, perhaps, is the con-
nivance of major museums in the looting of the world’s
archae­ological heritage through the purchase of illicit and
unprovenienced antiquities. The settlement of the res-
titution claims made by the Italian government against
the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, the Getty
Museum in Malibu, and the Cleveland Museum of Art
and the return to Italy of looted antiquities raise ques-
tions about the integrity of some museum directors and
trustees – well-informed people whom one would expect
to be the guardians and defenders of the past, not par-
ticipants in the commercial processes which lead to
its destruction.
Aims and Questions
If our aim is to learn about the human past, there remains
the major issue of what we hope to learn. Traditional
approaches tended to regard the objective of archaeol-
ogy mainly as reconstruction: piecing together the jigsaw.
But today it is not enough simply to recreate the material
culture of remote periods, or to complete the picture for
more recent ones.
A further objective has been termed “the reconstruc-
tion of the lifeways of the people responsible for the
archaeological remains.” We are certainly interested in
having a clear picture of how people lived, and how they
exploited their environment. But we also seek to under-
stand why they lived that way: why they had those patterns
of behavior, and how their lifeways and material culture
came to take the form they did. We are interested, in
short, in explaining change. This interest in the processes
of cultural change came to define what is known as proces-
sual archaeology. Processual archaeology moves forward
by asking a series of questions, just as any scientific study
proceeds by defining aims of study – formulating ques-
tions – and then proceeding to answer them.
The symbolic and cognitive aspects of societies are
also important areas emphasized by recent approaches,
often grouped together under the term postprocessual
17
or interpretive archaeology, although the apparent unity
of this perspective has now diversified into a variety of
 i n tr odu c t i on : th e n at u r e a n d a im s of a rc h a eol og y
concerns. It is persuasively argued that in the “postmod-
ern” world different communities and social groups have
their own interests and preoccupations, that each may
have its voice and its own distinctive construction of the
past, and that in this sense there are many archaeologies.
This becomes particularly clear when one looks at the
newly formed nations of the Third World where different
and sometimes competing ethnic groups have their own
traditions and interests, and in some senses their own
archaeologies.
There are many big questions that preoccupy us today.
We want to understand the circumstances in which our
human ancestors first emerged. Was this in Africa and
only in Africa, as currently seems the case? Were these
early humans proper hunters or merely scavengers?
What were the circumstances in which our own species
Homo sapiens evolved? How do we explain the emergence
of Paleolithic art? How did the shift from hunting and
gathering to farming come about in western Asia, in
Mesoamerica, and in other parts of the world? Why did
this happen in the course of just a few millennia? How
do we explain the rise of cities, apparently quite indepen-
dently in different parts of the world? How are identities
formed, both of individuals and of groups? How do we
decide which aspects of the cultural heritage of a region
or nation are worth conserving?
The list of questions goes on, and after these general
questions there are more specific ones. We wish to
know why a particular culture took the form it did: how
its particularities emerged, and how they influenced
developments. This book does not set out to review the
provisional answers to all these questions – although
many of the impressive results of archaeology will emerge
in the following pages. In this book we examine rather the
methods by which such questions can be answered.
FURTHER RE A D I NG
The following books give an indication of the rich variety of
archaeology today. Most of them have good illustrations:
Bahn, P.G. (ed.). 2000. The World Atlas of Archaeology. Facts on
File: New York.
Bahn, P.G. (ed.). 2001. The Penguin Archaeology Guide. Penguin:
London.
Cunliffe, B., Davies, W., & Renfrew, C. (eds.). 2002. Archaeology,
the Widening Debate. British Academy: London.
Fagan, B.M. (ed.). 2007. Discovery! Unearthing the New Treasures
of Archaeology. Thames & Hudson: London & New York.
Forte, M. & Siliotti, A. (eds.). 1997. Virtual Archaeology. Thames
18
& Hudson: London; Abrams: New York.
Plan of the Book
The methods of archaeology could be surveyed in many
different ways. As mentioned in the Preface, we have
chosen to think in terms of the many kinds of questions
to which we wish to have answers and we list them briefly
again here. It could be argued that the whole philosophy
of archaeology is implied in the questions we ask and the
form in which we frame them.
Part I reviews the whole field of archaeology, looking
first at the history of the subject, and then asking three
specific questions: how are materials preserved, how are
they found, and how are they dated?
Part II sets out further and more searching questions –
about social organization, about environment, and about
subsistence; about technology and trade, and about the
way people thought and communicated. We then ask what
they were like physically. And finally the interesting ques-
tion is posed: why things changed.
Part III is a review of archaeology in practice, showing
how the different ideas and techniques can be brought
together in field projects. Five such projects are chosen as
case studies: from southern Mexico, Florida in the south
of the United States, southeastern Australia, Thailand,
and urban York in England.
In conclusion there are two chapters on the subject
of public archaeology, discussing the uses and abuses
of archaeology in the modern world, and the obligations
these things have placed on the archaeologist and on all
those who exploit the past for gain or for political pur-
poses. Finally, our last chapter gives the personal stories
of six archaeologists working in different areas of the
world and in various fields. In this way we plan that the
book should give a good overview of the whole range of
methods and ideas of archaeological investigation.
Renfrew C., & Bahn P. (eds.). 2014. The Cambridge World
Prehistory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 3 vols.
Scarre, C. (ed.). 1999. The Seventy Wonders of the Ancient World.
The Great Monuments and How they were Built. Thames
& Hudson: London & New York.
Scarre, C. (ed.). 2013. The Human Past. World Prehistory and the
Development of Human Societies. (3rd ed.) Thames & Hudson:
London & New York.
Schofield, J. (ed.). 1998. Monuments of War: The Evaluation,
Recording and Management of Twentieth-Century Military Sites.
English Heritage: London.
 PART I
the framework of archaeology

Archaeology is concerned with the full range of past human expe­

rience – how people organized themselves into social groups and
exploited their surroundings; what they ate, made, and believed;
how they communicated and why their societies changed. These
are the engrossing questions we address later in the book. First,
however, we need a framework in space and time. It is little use
beginning our pursuit of ideas and methods concerning the past
without knowing what materials archaeologists study, or where
these might be found and how they are dated. Indeed, we also
want to know how far previous generations of archaeologists have
traveled and along which roads before setting off on our own jour­
ney of discovery.
Part I therefore focuses on the fundamental framework of archae­
ology. The first chapter looks at the history of the discipline,
showing in particular how successive workers have redefined and
enlarged the questions we ask about the past. Then we pose the
first question: “What?” – what is preserved, and what is the range of
archaeological materials that have come down to us? The second
question, “Where?,” addresses methods for finding and surveying
sites, and principles of excavation and preliminary analysis. Our
third question, “When?,” considers the human experience of time
and its measurement, and assesses the huge battery of techniques
now available to help the archaeologist date the past. On this
basis we are able to set out a chronology summarizing the human
story, as a conclusion to Part I and a prelude to Part II.
 The Searchers
The History of Archaeology
The history of archaeology is commonly seen as the history
of great discoveries: the tomb of Tutankhamun in Egypt,
the lost Maya cities of Mexico, the painted caves of the Old
Stone Age, such as Lascaux in France, or the remains of
our human ancestors buried deep in the Olduvai Gorge in
Tanzania. But even more than that it is the story of how we
have come to look with fresh eyes at the material evidence
for the human past, and with new methods to aid us in
our task.
It is important to remember that just a century and a
half ago, most well-read people in the Western world –
where archaeology as we know it today was first developed
– believed that the world had been created only a few thou-
sand years earlier (in the year 4004 bc according to the
then-standard interpretation of the Bible), and that all that
could be known of the remote past had to be gleaned from
the surviving pages of the earliest historians, notably those
of the ancient Near East, Egypt, and Greece. There was no
awareness that any kind of coherent history of the periods
before the development of writing was possible at all. In the
words of the Danish scholar Rasmus Nyerup (1759–1829):
Everything which has come down to us from heathen-
dom is wrapped in a thick fog; it belongs to a space
of time which we cannot measure. We know that it is
older than Christendom, but whether by a couple of
years or a couple of centuries, or even by more than a
millennium, we can do no more than guess.
Today we can indeed penetrate that “thick fog” of the
remote past. This is not simply because new discoveries
are being made all the time. It is because we have learnt to
ask some of the right questions, and have developed some
1.1 The Roman city of Pompeii lies in the shadow of Mount
Vesuvius in Italy. When the volcano erupted in ad 79, the entire
city was buried, all but forgotten until excavations began in the
mid-18th century. Spectacular discoveries generated huge interest
in the past, and greatly influenced the arts (see box, pp. 24–25).
1
of the right methods for answering them. The material evi-
dence of the archaeological record has been lying around
for a long time. What is new is our awareness that the
methods of archaeology can give us information about
the past, even the prehistoric past (before the invention of
writing). The history of archaeology is therefore in the first
instance a history of ideas, of theory, of ways of looking at
the past. Next it is a history of developing research methods,
employing those ideas and investigating those questions.
And only thirdly is it a history of actual discoveries.
We can illustrate the relationship between these aspects
of our knowledge of the past with a simple diagram:
1.2
Questions/
Ideas/
Theory
Research Discoveries
Methods in the Field
In this chapter and in this book it is the development of
the questions and ideas that we shall emphasize, and the
application of new research methods. The main thing to
remember is that every view of the past is a product of
its own time: ideas and theories are constantly evolving,
and so are methods. When we describe the archaeological
research methods of today we are simply speaking of one
point on a trajectory of evolution. In a few decades or even
a few years’ time these methods will certainly look old-
21
fashioned and out of date. That is the dynamic nature of
archaeology as a discipline.
 PART I : the f ra m e wor k o f a rc h a eol og y
T HE SP EC UL ATIVE PHASE
Humans have always speculated about their past, and most
cultures have their own foundation myths to explain why
society is how it is. The Greek writer Hesiod, for instance,
who lived around 800 bc, in his epic poem Works and Days
envisaged the human past as falling into five stages: the
Age of Gold and the Immortals, who “dwelt in ease and
peace upon their lands with many good things”; the Age of
Silver, when humans were less noble; the Age of Bronze;
the Age of Epic Heroes; and lastly his own time, the Age of
Iron and Dread Sorrow, when “men never rest from labor
and sorrow by day and from perishing by night.”
Most cultures, too, have been fascinated by the societ-
ies that preceded them. The Aztecs exaggerated their
Toltec ancestry, and were so interested in Teotihuacan, the
huge Mexican city abandoned hundreds of years earlier
which they mistakenly linked with the Toltecs, that they
incorporated ceremonial stone masks from that site in
the foundation deposits of their own Great Temple (see
box, pp. 570–71). A rather more detached curiosity about
the relics of bygone ages developed in several early civi-
lizations, where scholars and even rulers collected and
studied objects from the past. Nabonidus, last native
king of Babylon (reigned 555–539 bc), took a keen inter-
est in antiquities. In one important temple he dug down
1.3 A page from the commonplace book of William Stukeley, with a sketch plan of standing stones at Avebury, southern England.
22
and discovered the foundation stone which had been laid
some 2200 years before. He housed many of his finds in
a kind of museum at Babylon.
During the revival of learning in Europe known as the
Renaissance (14th to 17th centuries), princes and people
of refinement began to form “cabinets of curiosities” in
which curios and ancient artifacts were displayed with
exotic minerals and all manner of specimens illustrative of
what was called “natural history.” During the Renaissance
also scholars began to study and collect the relics of
Classical antiquity. And they began too in more northern
lands, far from the civilized centers of ancient Greece and
Rome, to study the local relics of their own remote past. At
this time these were mainly the field monuments – those
conspicuous sites, often made of stone, which immediately
attracted attention, such as the great stone tombs of north-
western Europe, and such impressive sites as Stonehenge,
or Carnac in Brittany. Careful scholars, such as the English­
man William Stukeley (1687–1765), made systematic
studies of some of these monuments, with accurate plans
which are still useful today. Stukeley and his colleagues
successfully demonstrated that these monuments had
not been constructed by giants or devils, as suggested by
local names such as the Devil’s Arrows, but by people in
 T he Se ar che r s: Th e H i s t ory of Arc h aeology
antiquity. He was also successful in phasing field monu-
ments, showing that, since Roman roads cut barrows, the
former must be later than the latter. In the same period,
around 1675, the first archaeological excavation of the New
World – a tunnel dug into Teotihuacan’s Pyramid of the
Moon – was carried out by Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora.
The First Excavations
In the 18th century more adventurous researchers initi-
ated excavation of some of the most prominent sites.
Pompeii in Italy was one of the first of these, with its strik-
ing Roman finds, although proper excavation did not begin
there until the 19th century (see box overleaf). And in 1765,
at the Huaca de Tantalluc on the coast of Peru, a mound
was excavated and an offering discovered in a hollow; the
mound’s stratigraphy was well described. Nevertheless,
the credit for conducting what has been called “the first
scientific excavation in the history of archaeology” tradi-
tionally goes to Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), later in his
career third President of the United States, who in 1784
dug a trench or section across a burial mound on his prop-
erty in Virginia. Jefferson’s work marks the beginning of
the end of the Speculative Phase.
In Jefferson’s time people were speculating that the
hundreds of unexplained mounds known east of the
Mississippi river had been built not by the indigenous
1.4 Early excavations: Richard Colt Hoare and William Cunnington direct a dig north of Stonehenge in 1805.
1
Native Americans, but by a mythical and vanished race of
Moundbuilders. Jefferson adopted what today we should
call a scientific approach, that is, he tested ideas about the
mounds against hard evidence – by excavating one of them.
His methods were careful enough to allow him to recog-
nize different layers in his trench, and to see that the many
human bones present were less well preserved in the lower
layers. From this he deduced that the mound had been
reused as a place of burial on many separate occasions.
Although Jefferson admitted, rightly, that more evidence
was needed to resolve the Moundbuilder question, he
saw no reason why ancestors of the present-day Native
Americans themselves could not have raised the mounds.
Jefferson was ahead of his time. His sound approach
– logical deduction from carefully excavated evidence, in
many ways the basis of modern archaeology – was not taken
up by any of his immediate successors in North America.
In Europe, meanwhile, extensive excavations were being
conducted, for instance by the Englishman Richard Colt
Hoare (1758–1838), who dug into hundreds of burial
mounds in southern Britain during the first decade of the
19th century. He successfully divided field monu­ments
into different categories, such as bell barrow, which are still
in use today. None of these excavations, however, did much
to advance the cause of knowledge about the distant past,
since their interpretation was still within the biblical frame-
work, which insisted on a short span for human existence.
23
 IT
AL
Y
Pompeii l

di ggi n g p o m p e ii : pa s t a nd p r e se nt

The first catalogue of the royal

N Dates of Excavation: 1748–1798
Herculaneum Gate Gate
collection was published in 1757.
1806–1815 Five years later the German scholar
0 600ft
1815–1860 Johann Joachim Winckelmann, often
0 200m
UNEXCAVATED 1860–1870 regarded as the father of Classical
1879–1923 archaeology, published his first Letter
Gate
1924–1961 on the discoveries at Herculaneum.
From that time onward the finds
1961–2011
T. of Augustan Fortune from both cities attracted enormous
Central Baths
international attention, influencing
Provision Market
UNEXCAVATED styles of furniture and interior
Forum Baths
Gate decoration, and inspiring several
T. of Jupiter
T of La es pieces of romantic fiction.
Amphitheater
T. o Vespasian Not until 1860, however, when
Forum

Stab an Baths
T. of Apollo
Eumach a T. of Jupiter Meilichios
T of Isis
Bu lding
House of Menander
Marine Small Theater
Basilica
Gate
T. of Venus Triangular Forum Large Theater
Gladiatorial Barracks Gate
1.5 Sketch plan of Pompeii, showing the excavated areas.
In the history of archaeology, the sites
of Pompeii and Herculaneum, lying at
the foot of Mount Vesuvius in the Bay
of Naples, Italy, hold a very special
place. Even today, when so many
major sites have been systematically
excavated, it is a moving experience
to visit these wonderfully preserved
Roman cities.
Pompeii’s fate was sealed on the
momentous day in August ad 79
when Vesuvius erupted, a cataclysmic
event described by Pliny the Younger,
a Roman writer. The city was buried
under several meters of volcanic
ash, many of the inhabitants being
asphyxiated as they tried to flee.
Herculaneum was buried to an even
greater depth. There the complete
cities lay, known only from occasional
chance discoveries, until antiquarian
curiosity grew in the early 18th century.
In 1709 the Prince of Elboeuf,
learning of the discovery of worked
24
Large
Palaestra
Gate
Tombs
what we now know to be the site of
Herculaneum. He had the good luck
to discover the ancient theater – the
first complete Roman example ever
found – but he was mainly interested
in works of art for his collection.
These he removed without any kind
of record of their location.
Following Elboeuf, clearance
resumed in a slightly more systematic
way in 1738 at Herculaneum, and in
1748 Pompeii was discovered. Work
proceeded under the patronage
of the King and Queen of Naples,
but they did little more than quarry
ancient masterpieces to embellish
their royal palace. Shortly afterwards,
on the outskirts of Herculaneum,
the remains of a splendid villa were
revealed, with statues and an entire
library of carbonized papyri that have
given the complex its name: the Villa
of the Papyri. The villa’s dimensions
were closely followed by J. Paul Getty
Giuseppe Fiorelli was put in charge
of the work at Pompeii, did well-
recorded excavations begin. In 1864
Fiorelli devised a brilliant way of
dealing with the cavities in the ash
within which skeletons were found:
he simply filled them with plaster
of Paris. The ash around the cavity
acted as a mold, and the plaster took
the accurate shape of the decayed
body. (In a more recent technique, the
excavators pour in transparent glass
fiber. This allows bones and artifacts
to be visible.)
1.6 How a body shape is retrieved.
1 Pumice and
ash bury a victim
in ad 79.
2 The body
gradually
decays, leaving
a hollow.
3 Archae­ologists
find the hollow, and
pour in wet plaster.
4 The plaster
hardens, allowing
the pumice and ash

marble in the vicinity, proceeded in the construction of his museum at to be chipped away.
to investigate by shafts and tunnels Malibu, California.
 During the 20th century, Amedeo
Maiuri excavated at Pompeii between
1924 and 1961, and for the first time
systematic excavations were carried
out beneath the ad 79 ground level,
revealing remains of earlier phases
of the town. In recent years his work
has been supplemented by targeted
excavations by many international
teams of archaeologists. This work
has uncovered a complex history of
changing property boundaries and
land use, revealing how Pompeii
grew from a small rural settlement
into a sophisticated Roman town and
throwing much new light on its social
and economic development.
Pompeii remains the most complete
urban excavation ever undertaken.
The town plan is clear in its essentials;
most of the public buildings have
been investigated, along with
innumerable shops and private
houses. Yet the potential for further
study and interpretation is enormous.
Today it is not difficult for the visitor
to Pompeii to echo the words of
Shelley in his Ode to Naples, written
more than a century and a half ago:
“I stood within the City disinterred;/
And heard the autumnal leaves like
light footfalls/Of spirits passing
through the streets; and heard/
The Mountain’s slumberous voice at
intervals/Thrill through those roofless
halls.”

1.7–10 (Top) Early 20th-

century excavations
of the Via dell’
Abbondanza, Pompeii’s
main thoroughfare.
(Above) Wall painting
from the House of the
Chaste Lovers; a slave-
girl watches two couples
enjoying a banquet.
(Left) Plaster, poured
into the cavity left by
the body, recreates the
shape of a Pompeian
struck down in flight.
(Right) Preservation
conditions at Pompeii
are remarkable:
25

carbonized eggs are

among the survivors.
 PART I : the f ra m e wor k o f a rc h a eol og y
T HE B EGIN NIN GS OF MO D ER N ARCHAE OLO GY
It was not until the mid-19th century that the discipline
of archaeology became truly established. Already in the
background were significant achievements in the newly
developed science of geology. The Scottish geologist James
Hutton (1726–1797), in his Theory of the Earth (1785), had
studied the stratification of rocks (their arrangement in
superimposed layers or strata), establishing principles
which were to be the basis of archaeological excavation, as
foreshadowed by Jefferson. Hutton showed that the strati-
fication of rocks was due to processes still ongoing in seas,
rivers, and lakes. This was the principle of “uniformitarian-
ism.” Charles Lyell (1797–1875) also argued, in his Principles
of Geology (1833), that geologically ancient conditions were
in essence similar to, or “uniform with,” those of our own
time. This idea could be applied to the human past also, and
marks one of the fundamental notions of modern archaeol-
ogy: that in many ways the past was much like the present.
The Antiquity of Humankind
These ideas did much to lay the groundwork for what was
one of the significant events in the intellectual history
of the 19th century (and an indispensable one for the
discipline of archaeology): the establishment of the antiq-
uity of human­kind. It was a French customs inspector,
Jacques Boucher de Perthes (1788–1868), working in
the gravel quarries of the Somme river, who in 1841 pub-
lished convincing evidence for the association there of
human artifacts (of chipped stone, what we would today
call “hand-axes” or “bifaces”) and the bones of extinct
animals. Boucher de Perthes argued that this indicated
human existence for a long time before the biblical Flood.
His view did not at first win wide acceptance, but in 1859
two leading British scholars, John Evans (1823–1908) and
Joseph Prestwich (1812–1896), visited him in France and
were persuaded of the validity of his findings.
It was now widely agreed that human origins extended
far back into a remote past, so that the biblical notion of
the creation of the world just a few thousand years before
our own time could no longer be accepted. The possibility
of a prehistory of humankind, indeed the need for one, was
established; the term itself came into general use after the
publication of John Lubbock’s (1834–1913) book Prehistoric
Times in 1865, which went on to become a bestseller.
The Concept of Evolution
These ideas harmonized well with the findings of another
26
great scholar of the 19th century, Charles Darwin (1809–
1882), whose fundamental work, On the Origin of Species,
1.11 The title page
of Darwin’s book;
his ideas about
evolution proved
highly influential,
not least in
archaeology.
published in 1859, established the concept of evolution as
the best explanation for the origin and development of all
plants and animals. The idea of evolution itself was not
new – earlier scholars had suggested that living things
must have changed or evolved through the ages. What
Darwin demonstrated was how this change occurred.
The key mechanism was, in Darwin’s words, “natural
selection,” or the survival of the fittest. In the struggle
for existence, environmentally better-adapted individu-
als of a particular species would survive (or be “naturally
selected”) whereas less well-adapted ones would die. The
surviving individuals would pass on their advan­tageous
traits by heredity to their offspring and gradually the char-
acteristics of a species would change to such an extent that
a new species emerged. This was the process of evolution.
Darwin’s other great work, The Descent of Man, was not
published until 1871, but already the implications were
clear: that the human species had emerged as part of this
same process. The search for human origins in the mate-
rial record, by the techniques of archaeology, could begin.
The Three Age System
As we have seen, some of these techniques, notably in the
field of excavation, were already being developed. So too
was another conceptual device which proved very useful
for the progress of European prehistory: the Three Age
System. As early as 1808, Colt Hoare had recognized
ev o l u t i o n : da r w in ’s g re at i de a
The idea of evolution has been
of central significance in the
development of archaeological
thinking. In the first place it is
associated with the name of Charles
Darwin, whose On the Origin of
Species (1859) effectively explained
the problem of the origin and
development of the plant and animal
species, including humankind. It did
so by insisting that within a species
there is variation (one individual differs
from another), that the transmission
of physical traits is by heredity
alone, and that natural selection
determines survival. Darwin certainly
had precursors, among whom Thomas
Malthus (1766–1834) was influential
with his notion of competition
through population pressure, and
the geologist Charles Lyell with his
insistence upon gradual change.
The Impact on Archaeology
Darwin’s work had an immediate
effect on archaeologists such as
Pitt-Rivers, John Evans, and Oscar
Montelius, laying the foundations for
the study of the typology of artifacts.
His influence on social thinkers and
anthropologists was even more
significant: among them was Karl
Marx (Marx was also influenced by the
American anthropologist, Lewis Henry
Morgan – see p. 29).
The application of the principles
of evolution to social organization
does not always follow the
detailed mechanisms of hereditary
transmission which apply to the
biologically defined species. For
culture can be learned, and passed
on between generations more
widely than between parents and
their children. Often, indeed, the
term “evolutionary” applied to an
argument or an explanation simply
means “generalizing.” Here it is
important to be aware of the great
swing in anthropology at the end
of the 19th century away from the
1.12 Charles Darwin caricatured as an
ape, published in 1874. The drawing
was captioned with a line from William
Shakespeare’s Love’s Labour’s Lost:
“This is the ape of form.”
broad generalizations of Lewis Henry
Morgan and Edward Tylor in favor of
a much more detailed, descriptive
approach, often termed “historical
particularism,” and associated with
the anthropologist Franz Boas. In
the years before and after World
War II American anthropologists like
Leslie White and Julian Steward were
therefore innovators in rejecting Boas
and seeking to generalize, to find
explanations for long-term change.
White was for many years the only
protagonist of what may be termed
cultural evolutionism, with books
such as The Evolution of Culture
(1959). White and Steward strongly
influenced the New Archaeologists
of the 1960s and 1970s, in particular
Lewis Binford, Kent Flannery, and
D.L. Clarke.
Recent Approaches
Evolutionary thinking has naturally
continued to play a major role in the
consideration of human origins. Drift,
and all it implies, was an important
factor in biological evolution in
addition to natural selection. It has
been appreciated that the process
of evolution does not need to be
gradual; the concept of “punctuated
equilibrium” has come into play. Nor
need it be simple: the role of self-
organizing systems and catastrophe
theory are discussed in Chapter 12.
Nor does the debate, dominant in the
United States, on “intelligent design”
seem helpful: it is no more than an
update of traditional arguments for
the existence of God, modified to
avoid the identity of the designer – it
is not science. But increasingly it is
realized that Darwinian evolutionary
thought has not yet produced
mechanisms which adequately
describe the processes involved
in human cultural development.
Richard Dawkins’ notion of the
“meme,” supposedly a specific and
transmissable agent for change based
on the concept of the “gene,” has not
proved useful in practice. Nor has the
application of evolutionary psychology
yet solved many problems. There
is no suggestion here that the
application of Darwinian evolutionary
theory is incorrect or inappropriate;
in fact there are indications now that
computer-aided simulation studies
and approaches to diversification
(phylogenetic studies) applied to
linguistics and material culture as well
27
as to molecular genetics are opening
new avenues to its application.
 PART I : the f r a mew o rk of a r cha e o log y
1.13 C.J. Thomsen shows visitors around the Danish National
Museum, arranged according to his Three Age System.
a sequence of stone, brass, and iron artifacts within the
barrows he excavated, but this was first systematically
studied when, in 1836, the Danish scholar C.J. Thomsen
(1788–1865) published his guidebook to the National
Museum of Copenhagen. This appeared in English in
1848 as the Guide to Northern Archaeology. Thomsen
proposed that the collections could be divided into those
coming from a Stone Age, a Bronze Age, and an Iron Age.
This system was soon found useful by scholars throughout
Europe. A division in the Stone Age was later established
between the Paleolithic (“Old Stone Age”) and the Neo­
lithic (“New Stone Age”). These terms were less applicable
to Africa, where bronze was not used south of the Sahara,
or to the Americas, where bronze was less important and
iron was not used before the European conquest. But it
was conceptually significant. The Three Age System
established the principle that by studying and classifying
prehistoric artifacts one could produce a chronological
ordering, and say something of the periods in question.
Archaeology was moving beyond mere speculation about
the past, becoming instead a discipline involving careful
excavation and systematic study of the artifacts unearthed.
Although superseded by chronometric dating methods
28
(see Chapter 4), the Three Age System remains one of the
fundamental divisions of archaeological materials today.
1.14 The influence of Darwin is evident in these early typologies.
(Left) John Evans sought to derive the Celtic British coinage,
bottom, from the gold stater of Philip of Macedon, top.
(Right) Montelius’ arrangement of Iron Age f bulae (cloak pins),
showing their evolution.
These three great conceptual advances – the antiquity of
humankind, Darwin’s principle of evolution, and the Three
Age System – at last offered a framework for studying the
past, and for asking intelligent questions about it. Darwin’s
ideas were influential also in another way. They suggested
that human cultures might have evolved in a manner anal-
ogous to plant and animal species. Soon after 1859, British
scholars such as General Pitt-Rivers (whom we shall meet
again) and John Evans were devising schemes for the evo-
lution of artifact forms which gave rise to the method of
“typology” – the arrangement of artifacts in chronological
or developmental sequence – later greatly elaborated by
the Swedish scholar Oscar Montelius (1843–1921).
Ethnography and Archaeology
Another important strand in the thought of the time was
the realization that the study by ethnographers of living
communities in different parts of the world could be a
useful starting point for archaeologists seeking to under-
stand something of the lifestyles of their own early native
inhabitants who clearly had comparably simple tools and
crafts. For example, contact with indigenous communities
in North America provided antiquarians and historians
with models for tattooed images of Celts and Britons, and
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
the others after a distressing wait of ten minutes at the inward lock.
“Begob, I thought we was all lost. ’Twas a close shave. But I’ll go no
more below. I’ve had enough.” He was thinking of a small bank
account—six hundred dollars in all—which he had saved, and of a
girl in Brooklyn who was about to marry him. “No more!”

But, at that, as it stood, there was no immediate danger of work

being offered. The cave-in had cost the contractors thousands and in
addition had taught them that mere air pressure and bracing as
heretofore followed were not sufficient for successful tunneling.
Some new system would have to be devised. Work on both halves of
the tunnel was suspended for over a year and a half, during which
time McGlathery married, a baby was born to him, and his six
hundred had long since diminished to nothing. The difference
between two and five dollars a day is considerable. Incidentally, he
had not gone near his old foreman in all this time, being somehow
ashamed of himself, and in consequence he had not fared so well.
Previously Cavanaugh had kept him almost constantly employed,
finding him faithful and hard-working, but now owing to stranger
associates there were weeks when he had no work at all and others
when he had to work for as little as one-fifty a day. It was not so
pleasant. Besides, he had a sneaking feeling that if he had behaved
a little more courageously at that time, gone and talked to his old
foreman afterward or at the time, he might now be working for good
pay. Alas, he had not done so, and if he went now Cavanaugh would
be sure to want to know why he had disappeared so utterly. Then, in
spite of his marital happiness, poverty began to press him so. A
second and a third child were born—only they were twins.
In the meantime, Henderson, the engineer whom Cavanaugh had
wanted to consult with at the time, had devised a new system of
tunneling, namely, what subsequently came to be known as the pilot
tunnel. This was an iron tube ten feet in length and fifteen feet in
diameter—the width of the tunnel, which was carried forward on a
line with the axis of the tunnel into the ground ahead. When it was
driven in far enough to be completely concealed by the earth about,
then the earth within was removed. The space so cleared was then
used exactly as a hub is used on a wagon wheel. Beams like spokes
were radiated from its sides to its centre, and the surrounding earth
sustained by heavy iron plates. On this plan the old company had
decided to undertake the work again.
One evening, sitting in his doorway thumbing his way through an
evening paper which he could barely read, McGlathery had made all
this out. Mr. Henderson was to be in charge as before. Incidentally it
was stated that Thomas Cavanaugh was going to return as one of
the two chief foremen. Work was to be started at once. In spite of
himself, McGlathery was impressed. If Cavanaugh would only take
him back! To be sure, he had come very near losing his life, as he
thought, but then he had not. No one had, not a soul. Why should he
be so fearful if Cavanaugh could take such chances as he had?
Where else could he make five dollars a day? Still, there was this
haunting sensation that the sea and all of its arms and branches,
wherever situated, were inimical to him and that one day one of them
would surely do him a great injury—kill him, perhaps. He had a
recurring sensation of being drawn up into water or down, he could
not tell which, and of being submerged in ooze and choking slowly. It
was horrible.
But five dollars a day as against one-fifty or two or none at all
(seven, once he became very proficient) and an assured future as a
tunnel worker, a “sand-hog,” as he had now learned such men as
himself were called, was a luring as well as a disturbing thought.
After all, he had no trade other than this he had begun to learn under
Cavanaugh. Worse he was not a union man, and the money he had
once saved was gone, and he had a wife and three children. With
the former he had various and sundry talks. To be sure, tunneling
was dangerous, but still! She agreed with him that he had better not,
but—after all, the difference that five, maybe seven, instead of two a
day would make in their living expenses was in both their minds.
McGlathery saw it. He decided after a long period of hesitation that
perhaps he had best return. After all, nothing had happened to him
that other time, and might it ever again, really? He meditated.
 As has been indicated, a prominent element in McGlathery’s
nature was superstition. While he believed in the inimical nature of
water to him, he also believed in the power of various saints, male
and female, to help or hinder. In the Catholic Church of St. Columba
of South Brooklyn, at which McGlathery and his young wife were
faithful attendants, there was a plaster statue of a saint of this same
name, a co-worker with St. Patrick in Ireland, it appears, who in
McGlathery’s native town of Kilrush, County of Clare, on the water’s
edge of Shannon, had been worshipped for centuries past, or at
least highly esteemed, as having some merit in protecting people at
sea, or in adventures connected with water. This was due, perhaps,
to the fact that Kilrush was directly on the water and had to have a
saint of that kind. At any rate, among other things, he had
occasionally been implored for protection in that realm when
McGlathery was a boy. On his setting out for America, for instance,
some few years before at the suggestion of his mother, he had made
a novena before this very saint, craving of him a safe conduct in
crossing the sea, as well as prosperity once he had arrived in
America. Well, he had crossed in safety, and prospered well enough,
he thought. At least he had not been killed in any tunnel. In
consequence, on bended knees, two blessed candles burning before
him in the rack, a half dollar deposited in the box labeled “St.
Columba’s Orphans,” he finally asked of this saint whether, in case
he returned to this underground tunnel work, seeing that necessity
was driving him, would he be so kind as to protect him? He felt sure
that Cavanaugh, once he applied to him, and seeing that he had
been a favorite worker, would not begrudge him a place if he had
one. In fact he knew that Cavanaugh had always favored him as a
good useful helper.
After seven “Our Fathers” and seven “Hail Marys,” said on his
knees, and a litany of the Blessed Virgin for good measure, he
crossed himself and arose greatly refreshed. There was a pleasant
conviction in his mind now, newly come there before this image, that
he would never come to real harm by any power of water. It was a
revelation—a direct communication, perhaps. At any rate, something
told him to go and see Cavanaugh at once, before the work was well
under way, and not be afraid, as no harm would come to him, and
besides, he might not get anything even though he desired it so
much if he delayed. He bustled out of the church and over to the
waterfront where the deserted shaft was still standing, and sure
enough, there was Cavanaugh, conversing with Mr. Henderson.
“Yis—an’ what arr ye here fer?” he now demanded to know of
McGlathery rather amusedly, for he had sensed the cause of his
desertion.
“I was readin’ that ye was about to start work on the tunnel again.”
“An’ so we arr. What av it?”
“I was thinkin’ maybe ye’d have a place fer me. I’m married now
an’ have three children.”
“An’ ye’re thinkin’ that’s a reason fer givin’ ye something, is it?”
demanded the big foreman rather cynically, with a trace of
amusement. “I thought ye said ye was shut av the sea—that ye was
through now, once an’ fer all?”
“So I did, but I’ve changed me mind. It’s needin’ the work I am.”
“Very well, then,” said Cavanaugh. “We’re beginnin’ in the mornin’.
See that ye’re here at seven sharp. An’ mind ye, no worryin’ or
lookin’ around. We’ve a safe way now. It’s different. There’s no
danger.”
McGlathery gratefully eyed his old superior, then departed, only to
return the next morning a little dubious but willing. St. Columba had
certainly indicated that all would be well with him—but still— A man
is entitled to a few doubts even when under the protection of the best
of saints. He went down with the rest of the men and began cleaning
out that nearest section of the tunnel where first water and then earth
had finally oozed and caked. That done he helped install the new
pilot tunnel which was obviously a great improvement over the old
system. It seemed decidedly safe. McGlathery attempted to explain
its merits to his wife, who was greatly concerned for him, and
incidentally each morning and evening on his way to and from his
task he dropped in at St. Columba’s to offer up a short silent prayer.
In spite of his novena and understanding with the saint he was still
suspicious of this dread river above him, and of what might happen
to him in spite of St. Columba. The good saint, due to some error on
the part of McGlathery, might change his mind.
Nothing happened, of course, for days and weeks and months.
Under Cavanaugh’s direction the work progressed swiftly, and
McGlathery and he, in due time, became once more good friends,
and the former an expert bracer or timberer, one of the best, and
worth seven a day really, which he did not get. Incidentally, they were
all shifted from day to night work, which somehow was considered
more important. There were long conversations now and again
between Cavanaugh and Henderson, and Cavanaugh and other
officials of the company who came down to see, which enlightened
McGlathery considerably as to the nature and danger of the work.
Just the same, overhead was still the heavy river—he could feel it
pushing at him at times, pushing at the thick layer of mud and silt
above him and below which with the aid of this new pilot shield they
were burrowing.
Yet nothing happened for months and months. They cleared a
thousand feet without a hitch. McGlathery began to feel rather
comfortable about it all. It certainly seemed reasonably safe under
the new system. Every night he went down and every morning came
up, as hale and healthy as ever, and every second week, on a
Tuesday, a pay envelope containing the handsome sum of seventy-
two dollars was handed him. Think of it! Seventy-two dollars!
Naturally, as a token of gratitude to St. Columba, he contributed
liberally to his Orphans’ Home, a dollar a month, say, lit a fresh
candle before his shrine every Sunday morning after high mass, and
bought two lots out on the Goose Creek waterfront—on time—on
which some day, God willing, he proposed to build a model summer
and winter cottage. And then—! Well, perhaps, as he thought
afterward, it might have been due to the fact that his prosperity had
made him a little more lax than he should have been, or proud, or
not quite as thoughtful of the saint as was his due. At any rate, one
night, in spite of St. Columba—or could it have been with his aid and
consent in order to show McGlathery his power?—the wretched
sneaky river did him another bad turn, a terrible turn, really.
 It was this way. While they were working at midnight under the
new form of bracing, based on the pilot tunnel, and with an air
pressure of two thousand pounds to the square inch which had so
far sufficed to support the iron roof plates which were being put in
place behind the pilot tunnel day after day, as fast as space
permitted, and with the concrete men following to put in a form of
arch which no river weight could break, the very worst happened.
For it was just at this point where the iron roof and the mud of the
river bottom came in contact behind the pilot tunnel that there was a
danger spot ever since the new work began. Cavanaugh had always
been hovering about that, watching it, urging others to be careful
—“taking no chances with it,” as he said.
“Don’t be long, men!” was his constant urge. “Up with it now! Up
with it! In with the bolts! Quick, now, with yer riveter—quick! quick!”
And the men! How they worked there under the river whenever
there was sufficient space to allow a new steel band to be
segmentally set! For at that point it was, of course, that the river
might break through. How they tugged, sweated, grunted, cursed, in
this dark muddy hole, lit by a few glittering electric arcs—the latest
thing in tunnel work! Stripped to the waist, in mud-soaked trousers
and boots, their arms and backs and breasts mud-smeared and wet,
their hair tousled, their eyes bleary—an artist’s dream of bedlam, a
heavenly inferno of toil—so they labored. And overhead was the
great river, Atlantic liners resting upon it, thirty or fifteen or ten feet of
soil only, sometimes, between them and this thin strip of mud
sustained, supposedly, by two thousand pounds of air pressure to
the square inch—all they had to keep the river from bleeding water
down on them and drowning them like rats!
“Up with it! Up with it! Up with it! Now the bolts! Now the riveter!
That’s it! In with it, Johnny! Once more now!”
Cavanaugh’s voice urging them so was like music to them, their
gift of energy, their labor song, their power to do, their Ei Uchnam.
But there were times also, hours really, when the slow forward
movement of the pilot tunnel, encountering difficult earth before it,
left this small danger section unduly exposed to the rotary action of
the water overhead which was constantly operating in the bed of the
river. Leaks had been discovered from time to time, small tricklings
and droppings of earth, which brought Cavanaugh and Henderson to
the spot and caused the greatest tension until they had been done
away with. The air had a tendency to bore holes upward through the
mud. But these were invariably stanched with clay, or, if growing
serious, bags of shavings or waste, the air pressure blowing outward
from below being sufficient to hold these in place, provided the
breach was not too wide. Even when “all hands” were working
directly under a segment wide enough for a ring of plates, one man
was told off to “kape an eye on it.”
On the evening in question, however, after twenty-eight men,
including Cavanaugh and McGlathery, had entered at six and
worked until midnight, pushing the work as vigorously as usual,
seven of the men (they were told off in lots of seven to do this) were
allowed to go up to the mouth of the tunnel to a nearby all-night
saloon for a drink and a bite of food. A half hour to each lot was
allowed, when another group would depart. There was always a
disturbing transition period every half hour between twelve and two,
during which one group was going and another coming, which
resulted at times in a dangerous indifference which Cavanaugh had
come to expect at just about this time and in consequence he was
usually watching for it.
On the other hand, John Dowd, ditcher, told off to keep an eye on
the breach at this time, was replaced on this particular night by
Patrick Murtha, fresh from the corner saloon, a glass of beer and the
free lunch counter still in his mind. He was supposed to watch
closely, but having had four glasses in rapid succession and
meditating on their excellence as well as that of the hot frankfurters,
the while he was jesting with the men who were making ready to
leave, he forgot about it. What now—was a man always to keep his
eye on the blanked thing! What was going to happen anyway? What
could happen? Nothing, of course. What had ever happened in the
last eight months?
“Sssst!”
 What was that? A sound like the blowing off of steam. All at once
Cavanaugh, who was just outside the pilot tunnel indicating to
McGlathery and another just where certain braces were to be put, in
order that the pilot tunnel might be pushed forward a few inches for
the purpose of inserting a new ring of plates, heard it. At a bound he
was back through the pilot hub, his face aflame with fear and rage.
Who had neglected the narrow breach?
“Come now! What the hell is this?” he was about to exclaim, but
seeing a wide breach suddenly open and water pour down in a swift
volume, his spirit sank and fear overcame him.
“Back, men! Stop the leak!”
It was the cry of a frightened and yet courageous man at bay.
There was not only fear, but disappointment, in it. He had certainly
hoped to obviate anything like this this time. But where a moment
before had been a hole that might have been stopped with a bag of
sawdust (and Patrick Murtha was there attempting to do it) was now
a rapidly widening gap through which was pouring a small niagara of
foul river water, ooze and slime. As Cavanaugh reached it and
seized a bag to stay it, another mass of muddy earth fell, striking
both him and Murtha, and half blinding them both. Murtha scrambled
away for his life. McGlathery, who had been out in the front of the
fatal tunnel with others, now came staggering back horribly
frightened, scarcely knowing what to do.
“Quick, Dennis! Into the lock!” Cavanaugh called to him, while he
himself held his ground. “Hurry!” and realizing the hopelessness of it
and his own danger, Dennis thought to run past, but was stopped by
the downpour of water and mud.
“Quick! Quick! Into the lock! For Christ’s sake, can’t ye see what’s
happenin’? Through with ye!”
McGlathery, hesitating by his chief’s side, fearful to move lest he
be killed, uncertain this time whether to leave his chief or not, was
seized by Cavanaugh and literally thrown through, as were others
after him, the blinding ooze and water choking them, but placing
them within range of safety. When the last man was through
Cavanaugh himself plunged after, wading knee-deep in mud and
water.
“Quick! Quick! Into the lock!” he called, and then seeing
McGlathery, who was now near it but waiting for him, added, “In, in!”
There was a mad scramble about the door, floating timbers and bags
interfering with many, and then, just as it seemed as if all would
reach safety, an iron roof plate overhead, loosened by the breaking
of plates beyond, gave way, felling one man in the half-open
doorway of the lock and blocking and pinning it in such a way that it
could be neither opened nor closed. Cavanaugh and others who
came up after were shut out. McGlathery, who had just entered and
saw it, could do nothing. But in this emergency, and unlike his
previous attitude, he and several others on the inside seized upon
the dead man and tried to draw him in, at the same time calling to
Cavanaugh to know what to do. The latter, dumbfounded, was
helpless. He saw very clearly and sadly that very little if anything
could be done. The plate across the dead man was too heavy, and
besides, the ooze was already pouring over him into the lock. At the
same time the men in the lock, conscious that although they were
partially on the road to safety they were still in danger of losing their
lives, were frantic with fear.
Actually there were animal roars of terror. At the same time
McGlathery, once more realizing that his Nemesis, water, had
overtaken him and was likely to slay him at last, was completely
paralyzed with fear. St. Columba had promised him, to be sure, but
was not this that same vision that he had had in his dreams, that
awful sense of encroaching ooze and mud? Was he not now to die
this way, after all? Was not his patron saint truly deserting him? It
certainly appeared so.
“Holy Mary! Holy St. Columba!” he began to pray, “what shall I do
now? Mother of God! Our Father, who art in Heaven! Bejasus, it’s a
tight place I’m in now! I’ll never get out of this! Tower of Ivory! House
of Gold! Can’t we git him in, boys? Ark of the Covenant! Gate of
Heaven!”
 As he gibbered and chattered, the others screaming about him,
some pulling at the dead man, others pulling at the other door, the
still eye of Cavanaugh outside the lock waist-deep in mud and water
was surveying it all.
“Listen to me, men!” came his voice in rich, heavy, guttural tones.
“You, McGlathery! Dennis!! Arr ye all crazy! Take aaf yer clothes and
stop up the doorway! It’s yer only chance! Aaf with yer clothes, quick!
And those planks there—stand them up! Never mind us. Save
yerselves first. Maybe ye can do something for us afterwards.”
As he argued, if only the gap in the door could be closed and the
compressed air pushing from the tunnel outward toward the river
allowed to fill the chamber, it would be possible to open the other
door which gave into the next section shoreward, and so they could
all run to safety.
His voice, commanding, never quavering, even in the face of
death, subsided. About and behind him were a dozen men huddled
like sheep, waist-deep in mud and water, praying and crying. They
had got as close to him as might be, still trying to draw upon the
sustaining force of his courage, but moaning and praying just the
same and looking at the lock.
“Yis! Yis!” exclaimed McGlathery of a sudden, awakening at last to
a sense of duty and that something better in conduct and thought
which he had repeatedly promised himself and his saint that he
would achieve. He had been forgetting. But now it seemed to him
once more that he had been guilty of that same great wrong to his
foreman which had marked his attitude on the previous occasion—
that is, he had not helped him or any one but himself. He was a
horrible coward. But what could he do? he asked himself. What
could he do? Tearing off his coat and vest and shirt as commanded,
he began pushing them into the opening, calling to the others to do
the same. In a twinkling, bundles were made of all as well as of the
sticks and beams afloat in the lock, and with these the gap in the
door was stuffed, sufficiently to prevent the air from escaping, but
shutting out the foreman and his men completely.
 “It’s awful. I don’t like to do it,” McGlathery kept crying to his
foreman but the latter was not so easily shaken.
“It’s all right, boys,” he kept saying. “Have ye no courage at aal?”
And then to the others outside with him, “Can’t ye stand still and
wait? They may be comin’ back in time. Kape still. Say yer prayers if
ye know any, and don’t be afraid.”
But, although the air pressing outward toward Cavanaugh held the
bundles in place, still this was not sufficient to keep all the air in or all
the water out. It poured about the dead man and between the chinks,
rising inside to their waists also. Once more it threatened their lives
and now their one hope was to pull open the shoreward door and so
release themselves into the chamber beyond, but this was not to be
done unless the escaping air was completely blocked or some other
method devised.
Cavanaugh, on the outside, his whole mind still riveted on the men
whom he was thus aiding to escape, was the only one who realized
what was to be done. In the panel of the door which confronted him,
and the other, which they were trying to break open, were thick glass
plates, or what were known as bull’s eyes, through which one could
see, and it was through the one at his end that Cavanaugh was
peering. When it became apparent to him that the men were not
going to be able to open the farthest door, a new thought occurred to
him. Then it was that his voice was heard above the tumult,
shouting:
“Break open the outside bull’s eye! Listen to me, Dennis! Listen to
me! Break open the outside bull’s eye!”
Why did he call to Dennis, the latter often asked himself
afterwards. And why did Dennis hear him so clearly? Through a
bedlam of cries within, he heard, but also realized that if he or they
knocked out the bull’s eye in the other door, and the air escaped
through it inward, the chances of their opening it would be improved,
but the life of Cavanaugh and his helpless companions would
certainly be destroyed. The water would rush inward from the river,
filling up this chamber and the space in which stood Cavanaugh.
Should he? So he hesitated.
 “Knock it out!” came the muffled voice of his foreman from within
where he was eyeing him calmly. “Knock it out, Dennis! It’s yer only
chance! Knock it out!” And then, for the first time in all the years he
had been working for him, McGlathery heard the voice of his
superior waver slightly: “If ye’re saved,” it said, “try and do what ye
can fer the rest av us.”
In that moment McGlathery was reborn spiritually. Although he
could have wept, something broke in him—fear. He was not afraid
now for himself. He ceased to tremble, almost to hurry and awoke to
a new idea, one of undying, unfaltering courage. What! There was
Cavanaugh outside there, unafraid, and here was he, Dennis
McGlathery, scrambling about like a hare for his life! He wanted to go
back, to do something, but what could he? It was useless. Instead,
he assumed partial command in here. The spirit of Cavanaugh
seemed to come over to him and possess him. He looked about,
saw a great stave, and seized it.
“Here, men!” he called with an air of command. “Help knock it out!”
and with a will born of terror and death a dozen brawny hands were
laid on it. With a mighty burst of energy they assaulted the thick plate
and burst it through. Air rushed in, and at the same time the door
gave way before them, causing them to be swept outward by the
accumulated water like straws. Then, scrambling to their feet, they
tumbled into the next lock, closing the door behind them. Once in,
they heaved a tremendous sigh of relief, for here they were safe
enough—for the time being anyhow. McGlathery, the new spirit of
Cavanaugh in him, even turned and looked back through the bull’s
eye into the chamber they had just left. Even as they waited for the
pressure here to lower sufficiently to permit them to open the inner
door he saw this last chamber they had left his foreman and a dozen
fellow workers buried beyond. But what could he do? Only God, only
St. Columba, could tell him, perhaps, and St. Columba had saved
him—or had he?—him and fifteen other men, the while he had
chosen to allow Cavanaugh and twelve men to perish! Had St.
Columba done that—or God—or who?
“’Tis the will av God,” he murmured humbly—but why had God
done that?
 But somehow, the river was not done with him yet, and that,
seemingly, in spite of himself. Although he prayed constantly for the
repose of the soul of Thomas Cavanaugh and his men, and avoided
the water, until five years later, still there was a sequel. By now
McGlathery was the father of eight children and as poor as any
average laborer. With the death of Cavanaugh and this accident, as
has been said, he had forsworn the sea—or water—and all its works.
Ordinary house shoring and timbering were good enough for him,
only—only—it was so hard to get enough of this at good pay. He was
never faring as well as he should. And then one day when he was
about as hard up as ever and as earnest, from somewhere was
wafted a new scheme in connection with this same old tunnel.
A celebrated engineer of another country—England, no less—had
appeared on the scene with a new device, according to the papers.
Greathead was his name, and he had invented what was known as
“The Greathead Shield,” which finally, with a few changes and
adaptations, was to rid tunnel work of all its dangers. McGlathery,
sitting outside the door of his cottage overlooking Bergen Bay, read it
all in the Evening Clarion, and wondered whether it could be true. He
did not understand very much about this new shield idea even now,
but even so, and in spite of himself, some of the old zest for
tunneling came back to him. What times he had had, to be sure!
What a life it had been, if a dog’s one—and Cavanaugh—what a
foreman! And his body was still down there entombed—erect, no
doubt, as he was left. He wondered. It would be only fair to dig him
out and honor his memory with a decent grave if it could be done.
His wife and children were still living in Flatbush. It stirred up all the
memories, old fears, old enthusiasms, but no particular desire to
return. Still, here he was now, a man with a wife and eight children,
earning three a day, or less—mostly less—whereas tunneling paid
seven and eight to such as himself, and he kept thinking that if this
should start up again and men were advertised for, why shouldn’t he
go? His life had been almost miraculously saved these two times—
but would it be again?—that was the great question. Almost
unceasingly he referred the matter to his saint on Sundays in his
church, but receiving no definite advice as yet and there being no
work doing on the tunnel, he did nothing.
But then one day the following spring the papers were full of the
fact that work would soon actually be resumed, and shortly
thereafter, to his utter amazement, McGlathery received a note from
that same Mr. Henderson under whom Cavanaugh had worked,
asking him to call and see him. Feeling sure that it was the river that
was calling him, he went over to St. Columba’s and prayed before
his saint, putting a dollar in his Orphans’ box and a candle on his
shrine, and then arising greatly refreshed and reassured, and after
consulting with his wife, journeyed over to the river, where he found
the old supervisor as before in a shed outside, considering one
important matter and another.
What he wanted to know was this—did McGlathery want to take
an assistant-foremanship under a new foreman who was going to be
in charge of the day work here, one Michael Laverty by name, an
excellent man, at seven dollars a day, seeing that he had worked
here before and understood the difficulties, etc.? McGlathery stared
in amazement. He an assistant-foreman in charge of timbering! And
at seven dollars a day! He!
Mr. Henderson neglected to say that because there had been so
much trouble with the tunnel and the difficulties so widely advertised,
it was rather difficult to get just the right sort of men at first, although
McGlathery was good enough any time. But the new shield made
everything safe, he said. There could be no calamity this time. The
work would be pushed right through. Mr. Henderson even went so
far as to explain the new shield to him, its excellent points.
But McGlathery, listening, was dubious, and yet he was not
thinking of the shield exactly now, nor of the extra pay he would
receive, although that played a big enough part in his calculations,
but of one Thomas Cavanaugh, mason foreman, and his twelve
men, buried down below there in the ooze, and how he had left him,
and how it would only be fair to take his bones out, his and the
others’, if they could be found, and give them a decent Christian
burial. For by now he was a better Catholic than ever, and he owed
that much to Cavanaugh, for certainly Cavanaugh had been very
good to him—and anyhow, had not St. Columba protected him so
far? And might he not in the future, seeing the position he was in?
Wasn’t this a call, really? He felt that it was.
Just the same, he was nervous and troubled, and went home and
consulted with his wife again, and thought of the river and went over
and prayed in front of the shrine of St. Columba. Then, once more
spiritualized and strengthened, he returned and told Mr. Henderson
that he would come back. Yes, he would come.
He felt actually free of fear, as though he had a mission, and the
next day began by assisting Michael Laverty to get out the solid
mass of earth which filled the tunnel from the second lock outward. It
was slow work, well into the middle of the summer before the old or
completed portion was cleared and the bones of Cavanaugh and his
men reached. That was a great if solemn occasion—the finding of
Cavanaugh and his men. They could recognize him by his big boots,
his revolver, his watch, and a bunch of keys, all in position near his
bones. These same bones and boots were then reverently lifted and
transferred to a cemetery in Brooklyn, McGlathery and a dozen
workers accompanying them, after which everything went smoothly.
The new shield worked like a charm. It made eight feet a day in soft
mud, and although McGlathery, despite his revived courage, was
intensely suspicious of the river, he was really no longer afraid of it in
the old way. Something kept telling him that from now on he would
be all right—not to fear. The river could never hurt him any more,
really.
But just the same, a few months later—eight, to be exact—the
river did take one last slap at him, but not so fatally as might have
appeared on the surface, although in a very peculiar way, and
whether with or without St. Columba’s aid or consent, he never could
make out. The circumstances were so very odd. This new cutting
shield, as it turned out, was a cylinder thirteen feet long, twenty feet
in diameter, and with a hardened steel cutting edge out on front, an
apron, fifteen inches in length and three inches thick at the cutting
edge. Behind this came what was known as an “outside diaphragm,”
which had several openings to let in the mud displaced by the
shield’s advance.
Back of these openings were chambers four feet in length, one
chamber for each opening, through which the mud was passed.
These chambers in turn had hinged doors, which regulated the
quantity of mud admitted, and were water tight and easily closed. It
was all very shipshape.
Behind these little chambers, again, were many steel jacks, fifteen
to thirty, according to the size of the shield, driven by an air pressure
of five thousand pounds to the square inch, which were used to push
the shield forward. Back of them came what was known as the tail
end of the shield, which reached back into the completed tunnel and
was designed to protect the men who were at work putting in the
new plates (at that danger point which had killed Cavanaugh)
whenever the shield had been driven sufficiently forward to permit of
a new ring of them.
The only danger involved in this part of the work lay in the fact that
between this lining and the tail end of the shield was always a space
of an inch to an inch and a half which was left unprotected. This
small opening would, under ordinary circumstances, be insignificant,
but in some instances where the mud covering at the top was very
soft and not very thick, there was danger of the compressed air from
within, pushing at the rate of several thousand pounds to the square
inch, blowing it away and leaving the aperture open to the direct
action of the water above. This was not anticipated, of course, not
even thought of. The shield was going rapidly forward and it was
predicted by Henderson and Laverty at intervals that the tunnel
would surely go through within the year.
Some time the following winter, however, when the shield was
doing such excellent work, it encountered a rock which turned its
cutting edge and, in addition, necessitated the drilling out of the rock
in front. A bulkhead had to be built, once sufficient stone had been
cut away, to permit the repairing of the edge. This took exactly fifteen
days. In the meantime, at the back of the shield, at the little crevice
described, compressed air, two thousand pounds to the square inch,
was pushing away at the mud outside, gradually hollowing out a cup-
like depression eighty-five feet long (Mr. Henderson had soundings
taken afterwards), which extended backward along the top of the
completed tunnel toward the shore. There was then nothing but
water overhead.
It was at this time that the engineers, listening to the river, which,
raked by the outpouring of air from below, was rolling gravel and
stones above the tunnel top and pounding on it like a drum, learned
that such was the case. It was easy enough to fix it temporarily by
stuffing the crevice with bags, but one of these days when the shield
was repaired it would have to be moved forward to permit the
insertion of a new ring of plates, and then, what?
At once McGlathery scented trouble. It was the wretched river
again (water), up to its old tricks with him. He was seriously
disturbed, and went to pray before St. Columba, but incidentally,
when he was on duty, he hovered about this particular opening like a
wasp. He wanted to know what was doing there every three minutes
in the day, and he talked to the night foreman about it, as well as
Laverty and Mr. Henderson. Mr. Henderson, at Laverty’s and
McGlathery’s request, came down and surveyed it and meditated
upon it.
“When the time comes to move the shield,” he said, “you’ll just
have to keep plenty of bags stuffed around that opening,
everywhere, except where the men are putting in the plates. We’ll
have extra air pressure that day, all we can stand, and I think that’ll
fix everything all right. Have plenty of men here to keep those bags
in position, but don’t let ’em know there’s anything wrong, and we’ll
be all right. Let me know when you’re ready to start, and I’ll come
down.”
When the shield was eventually repaired and the order given to
drive it just twenty-five inches ahead in order to permit the insertion
of a new ring of plates, Mr. Henderson was there, as well as Laverty
and McGlathery. Indeed, McGlathery was in charge of the men who
were to stuff the bags and keep out the water. If you have ever seen
a medium-sized red-headed Irishman when he is excited and
determined, you have a good picture of McGlathery. He was
seemingly in fifteen places at once, commanding, exhorting,
persuading, rarely ever soothing—and worried. Yes, he was worried,
in spite of St. Columba.
The shield started. The extra air pressure was put on, the water
began to pour through the crevice, and then the bags were put in
place and stopped most of it, only where the ironworkers were
riveting on the plates it poured, poured so heavily at times that the
workers became frightened.
“Come now! What’s the matter wid ye! What arr ye standin’ there
fer? What arr ye afraid av? Give me that bag! Up with it! That’s the
idea! Do ye think ye’re goin’ to be runnin’ away now?”
It was McGlathery’s voice, if you please, commanding!—
McGlathery, after his two previous experiences! Yet in his vitals he
was really afraid of the river at this very moment.
What was it that happened? For weeks after, he himself, writhing
with “bends” in a hospital, was unable to get it straight. For four of
the bags of sawdust burst and blew through, he remembered that—it
was a mistake to have sawdust bags at all. And then (he
remembered that well enough), in stuffing others in, they found that
they were a bag short, and until something was secured to put in its
place, for the water was streaming in like a waterfall and causing a
flood about their ankles, he, McGlathery, defiant to the core, not to
be outdone by the river this time, commanded the great thing to be
done.
“Here!” he shouted, “the three av ye,” to three gaping men near at
hand, “up with me! Put me there! I’m as good as a bag of sawdust
any day. Up with me!”
Astonished, admiring, heartened, the three of them jumped
forward and lifted him. Against the small breach, through which the
water was pouring, they held him, while others ran off for more bags.
Henderson and Laverty and the ironworkers, amazed and amused
and made braver themselves because of this very thing—filled with
admiration, indeed, by the sheer resourcefulness of it, stood by to
help. But then, if you will believe it, while they were holding him
there, and because now there was nothing but water above it, one
end of the shield itself—yes, that great iron invention—was lifted by
the tremendous air pressure below—eleven or thirteen or fourteen
inches, whatever space you can imagine a medium sized man being
forced through—and out he went, McGlathery, and all the bags, up
into the river above, the while the water poured down, and the men
fled for their lives.
A terrific moment, as you can well imagine, not long in duration,
but just long enough to swallow up McGlathery, and then the shield,
having responded at first to too much air pressure, now responding
to too little (the air pressure having been lessened by the escape),
shut down like a safety valve, shutting off most of the water and
leaving the tunnel as it was before.
But McGlathery!
Yes, what of him?
Reader—a miracle!
A passing tug captain, steaming down the Hudson at three one
bright December afternoon was suddenly astonished to see a small
geyser of water lift its head some thirty feet from his boat, and at the
top of it, as it were lying on it, a black object which at first he took to
be a bag or a log. Later he made it out well enough, for it plunged
and bellowed.
“Fer the love av God! Will no one take me out av this? Git me out
av this! Oh! Oh! Oh!”
It was McGlathery right enough, alive and howling lustily and no
worse for his blow-out save that he was suffering from a fair case of
the “bends” and suffering mightily. He was able to scream, though,
and was trying to swim. That old haunting sensation!—he had had it
this time, sure enough. For some thirty or forty seconds or more he
had been eddied swiftly along the top of the tunnel at the bottom of
the river, and then coming to where the air richocheted upward had
been hustled upward like a cork and literally blown through the air at
the top of the great volume of water, out into space. The sudden shift
from two thousand pounds of air pressure to none at all, or nearly
none, had brought him down again, and in addition induced the
severe case of “bends” from which he was now suffering. But St.
Columba had not forgotten him entirely. Although he was suffering
horribly, and was convinced that he was a dead man, still the good
saint must have placed the tug conveniently near, and into this he
was now speedily lifted.
“Well, of all things!” exclaimed Captain Hiram Knox, seeing him
thoroughly alive, if not well, and eyeing him in astonishment. “Where
do you come from?”
“Oh! Oh! Oh!” bawled McGlathery. “Me arms! Me ribs! Oh! Oh! Oh!
The tunnel! The tunnel below, av course! Quick! Quick! It’s dyin’ av
the bends I am! Git me to a hospital, quick!”
The captain, truly moved and frightened by his groans, did as
requested. He made for the nearest dock. It took him but a few
moments to call an ambulance, and but a few more before
McGlathery was carried into the nearest hospital.
The house physician, having seen a case of this same disease
two years before, and having meditated on it, had decided that the
hair of the dog must be good for the bite. In consequence of this
McGlathery was once more speedily carted off to one of the locks of
this very tunnel, to the amazement of all who had known of him (his
disappearance having aroused general excitement), and he was
stared at as one who had risen from the grave. But, what was better
yet, under the pressure of two thousand pounds now applied he
recovered himself sufficiently to be host here and tell his story—
another trick of his guardian saint, no doubt—and one rather
flattering to his vanity, for he was now in no least danger of dying.
The whole city, if not the whole country, indeed, was astounded by
the accident, and he was a true nine days’ wonder, for the papers
were full of the strange adventure. And with large pictures of
McGlathery ascending heavenward, at the top of a geyser of water.
And long and intelligent explanations as to the way and the why of it
all.