Figured I should do a little post on Ethics, since it's a fairly big subject in archaeology, and I need a couple more posts to finish off the semester with.
     Archaeology can be a very controversial subject in a variety of ways, especially when it comes to actually handling the dead. This matter can get political extremely fast, especially in regards to the subject of first nations repatriation. I understand the need for a regulated system of rights and ancestral repatriation, as is represented by the NAGPRA practices in the states. However, I really believe, however much more time consuming it may be, a "case-by-case" system is far more valuable, particularly if the case is an important one. An example that comes to mind where significant and crucial information may have been lost if the basic guidelines of NAGPRA had been followed: Kennewick Man.
 In case you haven't heard of it, my best friend Wikipedia does a great job of introducing you to the subject.


I understand how spirituality is an essential part to the lives of first nations, and that it should be treated with the utmost respect by others, especially scientists studying said first nations. However, in a case such as this, where the origins of the individual are completely unknown, and the remains ancient, with little chance that it has a clear relation to any living relative, studies MUST be conducted to learn more. If the indigenous group fighting for the ownership of Kennewick man had won in court, what would have happened? Much of the critical prehistory of North America may still remain unknown. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be in some cases to study a ground breaking find, and then have it taken away, losing that information (possibly forever) due to legal technicalities.

With that being said, it is still important to respect the rights of those occupying the lands before us, which is why a case-by-case approach is the best way to go. These things are so circumstantial, it really depends on the context of each individual case on which the right path to take is.

Here's a photo of our kennewick man, looking nothing like any contemporary first nations individual from North America. If the facial reconstructions are accurate, I'd say that the enterprise accidentally flew into a black hole.

Burial customs, mon

I just got back from my latest travel yesterday at about 1:30 am after a rather trying day of travelling with Air Canada (Definitely not an airline I recommend going with). Oh yeah, before I get into my point, I watched a little documentary on archaeology on the flight over about stone henge. Guess who was the lead excavator? None other than our friend Mr. Parker Pearson! (He's a wee bit short and chubby).

     Anyways, this blog entry is inspired by a fellow class-mate and friend, ms. Carmen Fletcher who told me about a blog entry she did earlier in the semester about checking out a graveyard while travelling. It's mostly because of that and this class that really made me pay attention to the burial practices of the local population in Jamaica where I was visiting.

 view from the road leading into the mountains, away from the coast 

    The majority of event's i'll talk about occurred on the same day, while we took the tongue biting journey through less than drive-able roads in a difficult and mountainous terrain to visit the Mausoleum of Bob Marley. The majority of the time travelling from the coast into the center of the island was spent feeling like we were lost, particularly when we wound up in the middle of a funeral in a very small, secluded mountainous town. Judging from the sour looks of most of the surprisingly well-dressed mourners, we weren't welcome outsiders. The only exchange between the five of us in the car and the crowded road was a nod and the shout from a middle aged man exclaiming "It's a funeral mon, drive through!" (seriously, they do say mon... A LOT).

     The other run-ins with death we had (other than examining graves themselves) were with animals. In one circumstance, we drove by a small settlement where we heard the screaming of a dog. At the side of the road we saw a man prodding a large stick repeatedly into a dumpster-like bin, where the noise was coming from. With traffic tailing behind us on the small and winding road, we had no choice but to keep on driving, leaving the helpless screams of dispair from the dog behind. On our way back down to the coast, a similar experience ensued. This time, as we turned a hair-pin corner, we found a young puppy in the middle of the road, standing by what appeared to be its sibling. The body of the second dog was half squished into the road, with its tail still wagging rapidly. Again on a dangerously small road where accidents are frequent, we had little time to react. I remember looking up at the nearest house on the hill with its residents watching carelessly as the mother and brother/sister of the dying dog paced distraughtly  back and fourth along the road, risking death by staying to close. Once again we were forced to leave without taking action.

     I've encountered death before in a number of circumstances. Growing up in a rural area, animal death has been nothing out of the ordinary. However, there was something chilling about this time. Maybe it was the graphic sight and sound, maybe it was the mood I was in. It made me wonder how the locals could care so little, but one must recognize that this was just another difference of culture. Coming from an area where the rate of death from auto-accidents is one of (if not the) highest in the world, I suppose there is no surprise from the lack of remorse of those people watching one of their animals slowly die infront of their eyes (two of which were children no older than 7 or 8).


    Anyways, I should speak about the graves of human beings that I viewed. Unfortunately, I was unable to actually walk through any graveyards or even near any graves. What seemed to be the most common occurrence that was visible from the roadside was burial within the yards of loved ones; a little eerie, if you ask me. Everywhere we went were one or more tombs right next to the houses where the deceased's  family members lived. Bob Marleys tomb was also located right next to the house where he grew up.

Here's a quick snap shot of the only collective gravesite I saw on the whole trip

      Most likely due to British Colonial influence, much of the burials seemed similar to what you would expect here ( in terms of the tombs themselves, at least). Large concrete foundations with slabs of marble or concrete were the most common. At the funeral we saw, everyone was dressed in western drab: suits, gowns, dresses. It would have been really cool to see a Rasta style burial, but it seems christianity is the leading religion there.

Just thought I'd throw in this shot of the Jamaican country-side for fun

I just realized I completely forgot to include a really cool story about a wake I went to while we were in Jamaica. 

 On St. Patty's day we decided to go out to downtown Montego Bay (which is pretty busy on a regular night). On saturday, it was absolutely crazy -you could hardly drive down the road at any time, it was just so packed with people moving about. After walking down to a park where they had some sort of music festival, we started heading back, brushing off the constant stream of pushy locals hoping that we would buy whatever they were selling at the 'tourist' rate as we went. Towards the city center, there was this small, secluded beach, just packed with people. Looking down from the road we could see some sort of party or gathering going on, and a big section of lit candles spread out on the sand. Curiosity took over, and even though it appeared to be more of a local event, we decided to go down and check it out. 

 I've always wanted any closure process after my death to be more of a party ('celebration of life' sounds too phony) than a funeral. That's pretty much exactly what this was. At first we confused it as a straight up beach party, as they had a full out bar and enough bass to cause ear haemorrhaging -especially with the extremely vocal semi-rasta DJ. It was upon closer inspection (and realizing that although people were drinking, no one was really dancing or getting wild) of the candles that we realized this was a wake/memorial for someone who had recently passed. How cool is that?? Being remembered through and awesome beach party. 

Shackled Thoughts; Blood and Gore

Bit of a Melodramatic title, I know.
 The whole Shackled thoughts thing comes from my inability to think of worth-while creative things to say when I HAVE to (kinda like this blog entry). Maybe it's some sort of deep-seated, subconscious problem I have with authority (haha). Anyways...
   
     Since my group is focusing on a rather morbid subject (human sacrifice, specifically children), I found an article pertaining to said subject that may one-up the gruesomeness of our entire project. However, I stumbled upon it after my failed attempts of trying to find a legit website. I was searching for a museum website or such, something that would contain many of the "victims" we have been researching through our project. However, most government-run websites in South America tend to be in Spanish, and are difficult enough to find in the first place despite the language barrier. I used to know a bit of Spanish. USED to. So yeah, I resorted to this neat tid-bit on what is basically child-slaughter by National geographic.

 Probably the biggest thing I've learned from this required blog prompt is how lacking our Rubric is. While it covers the content fairly well, maybe a bit of organization and grammar/spelling, I think it needs to be more specific to our project, and also requires more focus on referencing and citations.
 While national geographic can't really be critiqued on its referencing (since they are basically just interviews/primary accounts from journalists), it still made me realize what else needs to be included.
     As far as I can see, the content is legit, the layout is fine (like any national geographic online article you would find), there aren't any spelling/grammar issues, there can't be a critique on group work, since its a one-author article and, to my knowledge (although I haven't researched this topic elsewhere at all) the content accuracy also seems fine.

 I just wanted to mention some of the comments I read on the article itself. Hopefully I don't offend anyone, and if I do, well.... too bad.
     Somehow the judgements of the modern population being passed to a past culture accused of child massacre/torture quickly became a highly political discussion based around the current controversies of abortion. I'm sorry people, but there's a time and a place for everything, and while everyone needs to keep a clear head, comparing abortion to a brutal act of sacrifice that occurred en mass is outright idiocy. There were some good points brought up with people explaining that we need to view this ancient cultures actions through their eyes, not from our own westernised view point. As far as I'm concerned, the ridiculous right-wing, overbearing religious zealots commenting about abortion can take their arguments back to their bible-study class, or whatever other fictitious religious literature they gawk over.
     K, venting complete

***PS: I'm not saying every religious person shares this view point; believe whatever you wish, I can respect that, just don't push ridiculous and biased beliefs on others, especially when that belief can adversely effect another's life.

On the subject of cross-cultural comparisons and grave goods, Erin's discussion of the burial practices of ancient cultures in terms of material goods got me thinking. While it is interesting to wonder why some people may choose to bury really elaborate and seemingly important personal or other objects with their dead, I think Erin's point of perspective is key. We are looking at this from a western point of view, where (typically) traditional calls for us to pass on our belongings down the lineage (or at least the important sentimental belongings.. ie wedding rings, other jewellery etc.). This may not be the case all the time, but it seems that we choose to have material culture as symbols to remember people by. This may not be the case in other cultures, especially ancient ones. Perhaps this is due to grieving processes; may it's not that these ancient peoples didn't have a use for such objects, but because they belonged distinctly to the deceased individual, it was part of the grieving process to let go of said individual, including all of their belongings. It's doubtful that they would wish to forget, but maybe it's just part of the process of moving on. 

Gayveman

Back to the Caveman subject. I'm kinda glad we touched on this again, since I think when Erin brought it up on one of the first days, I wasn't really paying attention 100%. I remember seeing the title "Gay Caveman" under one of the pictures just as she was changing a slide, and thinking "wtf?".

Anyways, after researching it on google and discussing gender in class, it's clear that it is certainly quite an interesting idea. However, what I want to focus on more so in this entry are the reactions I read to the various articles posting about this groundbreaking "Gay Caveman"

 Since this individual was in fact a member of a bronze-age farming community, why must the media label him as a "caveman" in the first place? I think this is a perfect example of how skewed media perspectives can be, particularly in archaeology, and just goes to show that you can't believe everything you read -scary thought considering how many news papers/articles actually took him to be a caveman.


Judging from the comments on the national post article, it's bizzarre how many people were angered by the interpretation of the team excavating the "gayveman" -yeah, made that up myself. Sure, I understand that sexual orientation is still very much a touchy subject, but people seemed more annoyed by the fact that these archaeologists came up with (what they believed) was such a far fetched hypothesis based on the evidence at hand. Although we've all been guilty of ignorance at one time or another, it seems many of these folks commenting don't understand what archaeology is about. Sure, skepticism and questioning is definitely a healthy aspect to any field of research, but what it seems many people don't understand, is that theoretical approaches are a huge aspect of archaeology. Without theory and interpretation, what could we discover from the past? There are so few situations where the evidence completely speaks for itself, due to preservation issues or what have you, and so you gotta start somewhere, right? As crazy interpretation as the gayveman may be, I still think it's a valid one. Questions and additional revised ideas  are necessary on any subject, but complete refutation in such a case is simply ignorance.


   I don't really want to pick out individual comments, but the replies to the article I'm talking about can be found at
 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/has-the-first-gay-caveman-been-unearthed/article1976257/comments/

TGIF

Death is a mysterious thing, I think we can all agree on that. It only makes sense then, that graveyards also hold their share of mysteries. As a group, we decided to explore the vast Ross Bay Cemetery, with a specific interest in the War memorials and graves. Therefore, it is only natural that we should have questions about such graves. Who were these individuals? how did they die? What was it like to live, fight and die for your country- or is that how they viewed it? Unfortunately, questions such as these are not easily answered, if answerable in today's day and age at all. However, there are other questions which may be more appropriate to examine; this is what we chose:
 The first we chose to look into was the positioning of the war graves within the cemetery. The majority of graves were found in two separate sections, one in the lower eastern corner of the cemetery, and one in the lower west. It appeared to us that the graves in the east must have been the earlier ones; this area seemed more dedicated to those who had specifically perished in either of the world wars. Found within this section was also a large memorial commemorating fallen seamen from both wars (this was also one of our mapping points). It seemed possible that this area was originally designated for those who died fighting in the first world war, since nearly all the tomb stones were dated around 1916.
     Our next question involved the western area of the graveyard. Here, we found the majority of graves were dated to the mid 1920's. To make things even more puzzling, we found a fair number of them were multiple-burial graves, with a soldier being buried with his wife or even entire family at a single plot. Why was it that these soldiers should be commemorated with their comrades who died in the war, while their deaths took place after the first world war had ended? Why were these soldiers being buried with their families? Perhaps the answer involves something around the real estate of burial. Perhaps these individuals had already purchased burial plots in the grave yard, and that's the reason they were buried with their families. However, the date of their deaths still confuses me, and I honestly have no idea where to find the information to answer it. Here's the link to the map we created: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&oe=UTF8&msa=0&msid=204947318620268261385.0004b84028b3297997c63

Bizzarre Burials

Just figured I should throw up a new post here since I haven't really touched this thing since I made it. In response to Erin's question: I couldn't really find any peculiar burial practices within Canada, although I didn't really dig as deeply as I probably should have. I mostly just wanted to comment on the "Mushroom burial suit" Ted Talk. As wacked out as it is, what a cool idea! The Green movement has definitely been building and gaining support as humanity pushes itself closer and closer to the brink; western funeral practices are a big impact that contribute to environmental damage that most people probably don't even give a second thought to (I know I didn't until now). If this catches on it could really do a lot of good...which brings me to my next thought.
  Why is it that people are so caught up with what happens to their bodies after death? (Before you hit the reply button, take that comment with a grain of salt). I know how ignorant that sounds, and how many people have religion as their reasoning, but c'mmon... it's the 21st century. I think by now many people realize the route to "heaven"isn't as strict as it once was, and choosing a practice other than burial won't hinder your chances to cross through the pearly gates all that much. I respect the fact that most people don't want others poking and prodding at their corpse for science or other reasons, but what's wrong with choosing a simple "green" burial, or even a cremation?  As long as your body is respected, kept away from any unwanted public displays, is it really so bad to choose to be eaten by mushrooms rather than plague the ground with more toxic chemicals and a big ol', super non-biodegradable coffin?