The study of Prehistoric Mortuary
Practices has enriched our knowledge of past societies in varied ways. It gives
us a vivid description of the physical and biological aspects of people
studied, belonging to the prehistoric times, and also an idea about the social
and ideological dimensions of them. Mortuary symbolism has been interpreted
variously in Anthropology. Understanding about shared ancestry, place and
history are the symbolic raw material from which a sense of mutual interest and
community is built. One can visualize an important emotional relationship
between the people concerned and their dead ancestors. Archaeologists can
benefit from looking at mortuary practices by observing the manner in which the
dead were disposed, as well as spatial and architectural associations with the
burials. While looking at mortuary practices, archaeologists can compare the
material culture shown in the burial along with age and sex to answer questions
about social status and gender. Archaeologists see mortuary practices as a
communication that expresses the social role at death of an individual.
Archaeologists in different parts of the world have studied the socio-economic
and ideological roles of individuals through mortuary evidence.
Archaeologists have devoted much
energy to the study of cemeteries and skeletal remains. A body of theory and
corresponding methods has therefore developed to determine the level of
information archaeologists can gain from cemetery data. This article does not
attempt to conduct a comprehensive review of the copious literature devoted to
the archaeology of death. Here I would examine some theoretical approaches and
methods used in burial analysis. Before delving into this discussion it is
necessary to define mortuary practices.
I should describe here what the
mortuary practices are. Simply stated, mortuary practices are made up of
actions that are carried out by the living when an individual dies. Such
practices consist of ceremonies performed for the dead and may leave no traces
in the archaeological record. Archaeologists use the physical remnants of
mortuary practices left in the archaeological record, to make statements about
the ceremonies and practices that patterned their creation. Why should
archaeologists concern themselves with studying mortuary practices? According
to Metcalf and Huntington(1991), the study of death ritual is a positive
endeavour because ,regardless of whether custom calls for festive or restrained
behaviour, the issue of death throws into relief the most important cultural
values by which people live their lives and evaluate their experiences. Life
becomes transparent against the background of death, and the fundamental social
and cultural issues are revealed.
It would follow that social and
cultural issues are reflected in both the mortuary behaviours accorded to an
individual upon death and its physical manifestations. As a result, an
archaeologist may examine social and cultural issues by studying the physical
manifestations of mortuary behaviour.
Saxe states that "How people dispose of their dead is a reflection
of the socio-cultural system in which they participate" (1977:74).
A method for determining the
status of archaeological skeletal remains is suggested by Saxe (1970), Brown
(1971), and Tainter (1978). They use Binford’s theory to develop a methodology,
formal analysis, to quantify the amount of energy invested in the mortuary
treatment of skeletal remains. Peebles (1971) developed a method based on
Binford's theory, evaluating the status of grave goods by classifying them
according to technomic, socio-technic, and idiotechnic categories. Once the
status of the deceased is determined, Peebles pose that archaeologists can
ascertain the level of social organization characterizing the group the
individual lived within.
2 comments:
Sketchy. Need elaboration.
I forgot to add to be continued..Continue reading...http://kumardigvijay.blogspot.in/2012/08/perspective-on-burial-analysiscontinued.html
Post a Comment