And so we go...

It's a Tuesday - but not any Tuesday.  It is the last Tuesday of classes for the semester.  The sweet freedom of summer is but 20 days and 4 exams away. 

Looking deeper into the archaeology of death this semester has been facinating.  I learned about some stunning archaeological sites, and was faced with questions I'd never thought to ask before.  Needless to say, my interest for the subject has increased dramatically.  And, for once, I had an enjoyable group project experience.  So thank you to Erin and my classmates for an enjoyable and enlightening semester.

I will leave you with this - as promised - the final copy of the group project. Problematic Revenants of the Western World sheds some light on the archaeological origins of the belief in vampires.  Feel free to peruse the site, and perhaps discover some interesting facts you didn't know about the original vampire (sparkly vampires not included).

Thank you, and goodbye.

Finders Keepers?

Repatriate [ree-pey-tree-eyt] verb: To bring or send back to his/its country of origin.

This has been a term I’ve become familiarized with of the past week or so.  In archaeology, the issue of repatriation seems to be relentless and on-going, with different museums holding different views on the subject. 

Computer generated image of a toi moko

One case of repatriation examined  in class was the return of the Maori toi moko to their homeland of New Zealand.  Toi moko are preserved heads (through smoking) used to honour a deceased loved one, or a trophy of war to reduce the status of the defeated enemy.  When early Europeans arrived in New Zealand, they became fascinated with the toi moko and began trading with the Maori to get them.  Eventually trade of these heads became outlawed, but the toi moko were already in collections around the world.

Two centuries after the trading, New Zealand is still trying to repatriate the toi moko from across the world.  So far 70 toi moko have been returned from 15 countries, with at least 100 others remaining in collections overseas.  This website has a lot of information about the continued repatriation efforts and the history of the toi moko.

What struck me about this issue was that these toi moko were not your average identity-less ancestor.  Maori were commonly extensively tattooed to reflect their genealogy, rank, and character, therefore tattoos could be used for identification.  Tattoos were also preserved during the creation of a toi moko.  This means that they could still possibly be traced to living ancestors, or at least to a living group of people.  For this reason I think that the toi moko should definitely be repatriated.  These are not faceless artifacts, but show who they were through their intricate tattoos, showing that they undoubtedly belong to the Maori, and should be respected as such. 

Sketch of typical Maori tattooed face

We also looked at other cases of repatriation, and this is where my “hurray repatriation” attitude started to waver.  Human remains hold a lot of valuable information that may not be available through written records or other grave goods.  To simply send them back where they came from without analysis would cause the loss of a lot of clues to life in the past.  However, to deny repatriation would be to disrespect the wishes of the ancestors of the individual, and possibly disrespect the religion and final wishes of the deceased.  I still think skeletons should be repatriated to show respect for the deceased and living ancestors, but I also believe that some analysis should take place before repatriation so that valuable scientific information is not lost. 
 

The issue of the repatriation of grave goods gets a little fuzzier for me.  I feel that most grave goods should be fully analysed and used for display for educational purposes, as long as they are also treated respectfully.  Because they are not human remains, I feel that they hold less of an obligation to be reburied.  However, again, there could be exceptions that needed to be made, making this issue more than just black or white.

As I was flip-flopping on this issue myself, I stumbled onto Caitlin’s blog, who also seemed to be having a similar inner battle.  A solution she finds is 3-D displays of artifacts to be displayed instead of the actual artifacts. (Brilliant!)  You can read more on her thoughts here.

The issue may seem easy on the outside, but the issue goes much deeper than that, with limitless twists and turns.  Where do we draw the line? How far do we take the “finders keepers” mentality?  This is on on-going battle that won’t be ending any time soon.

 

 

 

Works Cited:

Toi moko information. 2013.Te Papa Museum of New Zealand. http://www.tepapa.govt.nz/AboutUs/Repatriation/toimoko/Pages/default.aspx

Repatriation. 2013. Dictionary.com. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/repatriation

Te Papa gets 20 more toi moko. 2011. The Dominion Post. http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/5735347/Te-Papa-to-get-20-more-toi-moko

Tattoos: Another Ancient Art

The other day my group held a meeting to discuss our awesome case study project.  While having our meeting we may have gotten slightly off topic, and started discussing different tattoos designs, etc.  Then I wondered, how long have people been fascinated with these permanent designs?  Obviously this is not a recent trend.  You still see pictures circulating of the sweet old dudes with a lot of tattoos.  We’ve also discussed Otzi the Iceman, who also had 50 tattoos forming lines and crosses.  But how far does this really go back?   

Some of Otzi's tattoos

I found this article that seems to have a lot of information on the history of tattoos in the archaeological record.  As you need the skin to see tattoos, it’s hard to find any evidence of their existence in very ancient graves on actual bodies.  Our friend Otzi has been the oldest discovery made that has tattoos (dated to over 5,200 years old).  There is, however, other evidence that tattooing did take place in ancient Egypt beginning in 4000-3500 B.C.  Female figurines found in tomb scenes had tattoos on their thighs, and some bronze implements were identified as tattooing tools from 1450 B.C.  There are also three women mummies that have been found from 2000 B.C. with tattoos.  Evidence has also been found in many other ancient cultures, such as the Inuit, ancient Greeks, Romans, and the ancient Chinese.



Egyptian tattooing instruments dated to c.1450 B.C.



The tattoos found on these Egyptian mummies were mostly dotted patterns of lines and diamonds, and used a black or other dark pigment.  Brighter colours and more intricate design were popular among other different ancient cultures.  These tattoos have been interpreted to show status or nobility, belonging to a specific group, personalization, and other protective symbolism.  The placement of tattoos seemed to vary between the cultures.

Tattooed hand of Charibaya mummy c.900-1350 A.D.

Again, I find this topic interesting because this is something from ancient cultures that still exists today, which relates back to my post about fear of the dead (For those who have not read it: Vampires, Zombies, and Revenants, Oh My!).  Tattoos are a trend that still exists to demonstrate personality, belonging to a group, or another personal reason.  Designs and colour vary wildly, as they did in ancient cultures, but the underlying idea is still the same.  I think that, although we seem to try to separate ourselves from these individuals from ancient cultures, we share more – psychologically speaking – than is always recognized.  The thought process evident in archaeological sites is something that really interests me, and I find it fascinating the parallels that can be made between the past and present.  It would be interesting to find what other evidence there is for overlap between trends today and those of the past.  If you know of any intriguing ones, let me know!    

Works Cited:

Lineberry, C. 2007. Tattoos: The Ancient and Mysterious History. Smithsonian.com. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/tattoo.html?c=y&page=1#

Otzi. 2013. South Tyrol Museum of Archaeology. http://www.iceman.it/en

   

But who will speak for the dead?

Tollund Man - bog body

Throughout my archaeology of death class we have been viewing pictures of different burial sites, which can include pictures of the remains of individuals.  The pictures I find most graphic are those of mummies or bog bodies, which still have their skin mostly intact and can be visualized as a living person.  This visualization is harder to achieve with just a skeleton, making it easier for me to emotionally separate.  But, in the end, these were still living, breathing people.  You can’t help but wonder how they would have felt about their bodies being exhumed and put on display.

Nowadays, you can consent to donate your body to science after death.  An extreme example of this is the Body Worlds exhibition that travels to different museums.  For this, the body has undergone plastination to preserve parts of the body to demonstrate different aspects of human physiology.

One of many bodies at the Body Worlds exhibition

 However, the display of other bodies – mummies for example – is completely different.  These individuals can give no consent.  Exhumation may be greatly against their final wishes.  For this reason, I think it is important to treat these bodies with respect, and to return the remains to the original homeland after analysis so that they may be properly interred once again.  I will not deny that the remains we find have a lot of value to piecing together the puzzle of the past, and the finds themselves are utterly fascinating, but this must not overshadow their importance as people.

Frozen Inca mummy

The dead cannot speak for themselves, so it is us that need to remember to show respect. 

 

Picture sources:

Body Worlds exhibition: http://www.bodyworlds.com/en.html
Frozen Inca mummy: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/photogalleries/mummy-pictures/
Tollund Man: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tollund_Man

The (Not So) Gay (Not So) Caveman

Have you ever heard of the gay caveman?  If you happen to Google this particular search term you’ll find headings such as “5,000-year-old male skeleton ‘outed’ by the way he was buried”, etc.  There is even a twitter account for the “Gay Caveman”, but whether this is related to the archaeological find or not is a little fuzzy.

The archaeological find itself was made outside Prague, where the male skeleton was buried as a female – head facing west, lying on the left, and buried with household jugs.  We can assume that this was not a mistake, as funerary rites at this point in time were very important.  However, I think that many Western assumptions played a large role in the labelling of this skeleton as the ‘gay caveman’.

Grave of the 'gay caveman'

The distinction between gender and sex is that the sex of a person is biological, whereas gender is societal or cultural.  In the Western world, we have two sexes that are normally aligned with two genders: male or female.  However, we tend not to acknowledge that individuals may not fall into these discrete categories, whereas other cultures show evidence of the acceptance of more than two genders.
 

I think the grave goods found with the skeleton could be indicative of a third gender, or the presence of a different societal role than the average man of the period.  The skeleton may not have been buried with weapons, as was the norm for males; however, it was also not buried with any jewellery, as was expected in female graves.  This grave is distinct from expected burials of both genders, in a way.  To immediately jump to the conclusion of homosexuality is a result of our bias towards the two gender norm.  Other possibilities are just as plausible with such a small amount of evidence to rely on.  I also question the number graves that they have to compare this sample to.  Perhaps this is not a deviant grave, and perhaps there are more individuals with this style of grave that have not been uncovered!  

Identifying a skeleton to be either male or female is also objective, as there can be manly women, or feminine men.  Perhaps this skeleton was a woman after all, but this was just less evident in the remains.  There are many other ideas to be considered when investigating the archaeological evidence when you remove Western biases.  However, it could very well be that this man was gay.  This may be another archaeological question that we can never fully answer.

And to briefly address the ‘caveman’ label - well, that’s just silly.  This skeleton is from the time of pre-Bronze Age Corded Wear culture.  This is far from the image that comes to mind when you say ‘caveman’.  Archaeology lingo 101.    

Works Cited:

McDowell, A. 2011. Gay caveman probably not gay or a caveman. National Post. http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/04/17/gay-caveman-probably-not-gay-or-a-caveman/

The oldest gay in the village: 5,000-year-old- male skeleton ‘outed’ by the way he was buried.  2011. Daily Mail. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1374060/Gay-caveman-5-000-year-old-male-skeleton-outed-way-buried.html

Caveman image: http://blog.timesunion.com/opinion/ignorant-people-get-to-vote-too/18646/cartoon-caveman-with-a-club/

The Prehistoric Hug

One of my favourite methods of procrastination lately has been Pinterest.  If you haven’t heard of this site, you may have been living under a rock.  Now usually, you find things like recipes, crafts, and pictures of Ryan Gosling on this site, but today I found something a little different...



Google map of Italy
A is Mantua, B is Verona



A picture of the ‘Lovers of Valdaro’ immediately caught my attention, and I needed to learn more.  These skeletons were uncovered in 2007, and have been dated to the Neolithic period, about 6,000 years ago.  The pair was found in a necropolis at Valdaro near Mantua, Italy – ironically close to Verona, the city of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.  The intertwined skeletons are male and female, and aged to 20 and 18 years old respectively.  There is no evidence of a violent death, so this may just be yet another tragic love story. 



This picture interested me because it is very different from the other burials we have been discussing in class.  Many of the burials we have talked about have been interesting because of the grave goods, or way in which they were buried (e.g. the Viking boat burials), but none quite like this.  This is also a rare find because most of the internments found from the Neolithic period are single internments, and if there are multiple individuals, they are not touching.   



The Lovers of Valdaro



So many questions can be raised just by looking this pair of skeletons.  Did they die in this position, holding each other for warmth on a freezing night?  Were they placed like this after death? Was the woman sacrificed at the man’s death? So many questions that can really never be answered.  I think this is the part of archaeology that frustrates me the most.  You become so engaged in learning about the lives of the people that get uncovered, but there is only so much you can infer from the burial.  There are so many stories that we will know fully know, however, finding these little insights is enough to peak my interest and keep me searching for more clues.    

Works cited:

Stampa, L.  2011.  6,000 Years Later, the 'Lovers of Valdaro' Need a Home.  Time: World.  http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2092970,00.html             

Vampires, Zombies, and Revenants, Oh My!

It’s interesting the stories that the human mind will fabricate to interpret life and death.  These types of ideas have been around for some time, and I found an interesting one evident at an archaeological site.  The news story I encountered while conducting research for my case study was one of “zombie” skeletons found at the Kilteasheen site in Ireland. 



"Zombie" from Kilteasheen site

These two 8^th-century skeletons were found side by side with large stones stuck into their mouths.  This has been interpreted as a method by those burying the deceased to prevent the return of the walking dead.  Interestingly, the two individuals were found to have been buried at different times.  Perhaps this was a specific plot for those the living feared to be revenants?  (Revenants: an animated corpse like your zombies, vampires, etc.)  

The stones in the mouth are explained through the belief that the mouth was the main way through which the soul exited the body, which also allowed opportunity for a different soul to enter it.  The theory of a belief in vampires was ruled out because this folktale did not emerge in Europe until the 1500’s.  These skeletons were therefore interpreted to demonstrate a fear of zombies.

These ideas of the undead have been around for many centuries, and still exist today.  The fascination with zombies and vampires seems to be rising in popularity, even.  Example A: The Walking Dead.  I find it fascinating that these same ideas that can be seen in the archaeological record are still present today in a form more of curiosity than fear.  If you do a little more searching you can find other sites that have found similar methods used to ensure the dead will stay dead.  I will stop myself from going any further though, as this topic is similar to my case study, and I wouldn’t want to spoil the surprise.



Works cited:
Lorenzi, R.  2011.  Did Zombies Roam Medieval Ireland? Discovery News.
http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/zombie-skeletons-ireland-grave-110916.htm