Kool and the Gang and a Viking Dance. 'Nuff Said.

That's it! Thank you UVic, it's been a great six (SIX?!) years. Good day. Thank you to Erin for teaching a great class! I am going to go do a dance of ethereal happiness:

The Viking bison disco inferno (Taken from http://www.georgianicolson.com/extras.html)

For this dance you need some bison horns. If you can’t find any bison shops nearby, make your own horns from an old hairband and a couple of twigs or something. Oh, I don’t know, stop hassling me, I’m tired.

Instructions:
Stamp, stamp to the left,
Left leg kick, kick,
Arm up,
Stab, stab to the left (that’s the pillaging bit),
Stamp, stamp to the right,
Right leg kick, kick,
Arm up,
Stab, stab to the right,
Quick twirl round with both hands raised to Thor (whatever)
Raise your (pretend) drinking horn to the left,
Drinking horn to the right,
Horn to the sky,
All over body shake
Huddly duddly,
Aand fall to knees with a triumphant shout of “HORRRRNNNNN!!!!”

I'd like to think that Ibn Fadlan would have seen dance performed at the Funeral of the Rus. 

 

Picky Eaters Need Not Apply.

Source: http://s-ak.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/web04/20
11/3/27/0/lecter-pug-22811-1301200171-82.jpg

I posed a question to the Cannibalism Crew in class today, "is eating the placenta considered cannibalism?". We all agreed it was because it is the consumption of human flesh. It was also noted that licking one's own blood is too a form of cannibalism. Move over, Hannibal Lecter!
The placenta is a great source of nutrients for mothers who have just given birth and celebrities, such as Vancouver Island's own Pamela Anderson has admitted to cooking it. Lasagna anyone?

If archaeologists were lucky enough to find a sample of ancient hair, tests could reveal the diet of the individual for the last year or so of the individual's life. Could we use this to determine if the person or culture was a cannibal? One would think an act of cannibalism is a rare occasion, perhaps in times of mourning like the mortuary ritual of the Wari' as described by A.C.G.M. Robben who wrote Death, mourning and burial: a cross-cultural reader.
Butchery marks on skeletal remains would indicate a dismemberment or dissection of a human, as would discolouration from heat or scrape marks from tools (to de-flesh or to access marrow). These all point towards cannibalism, but are not fully indicative. 
Isotope analysis of hair or teeth would give the consumption levels of meat versus vegetable and marine foods. Although, is it possible to resolve the level of Nitrogen-15 that would solely indicate a period of human flesh consumption? Could we use the cannibalistic trends of chimpanzees in Tanzania to test this question? Did I just find a masters thesis? Surely more Googling needs to be done on my end.

While writing this post, I began to wonder what other strange habits and cultural norms archaeologists will not experience when excavating and analyzing a site. There is so much we want to know and I fear we may never find out. We can only analyze and re-analyze until the weaker argument folds. Dang.


Extra Reading:
Nishida T, and Kenji Kawanaka.
     1985. Within-Group Cannibalism By Adult Male Chimpanzees. Primates, 26(3):274-284.

Ethics and use of the dead.

When is it okay to use a body for research or to remove it from its resting place?
Time, religious beliefs, property rights and consent from descendants are all factors that influence in the decision. This is tricky business!
With a quick Google search of "ethics exhuming" I came across some strange finds:
1. A woman who is preventing her ex husband from exhuming their infant's remains for a legal case.
Fair enough, re-experience the burial of your child is heartbreaking. I hope the woman tells her ex-husband that after 20 years her child will be skeletonized and no soft tissues will remain for evidence. Because this is a recent event and the family remains to protest. It is likely the child will not be exhumed. But, who is to speak on behalf of her mother once her mother too passes on?

2. Seeking a paternity test from the dead. 
A woman wants to stop someone from digging up her dad for a DNA test. In this case, she is seeking legal council to prevent the action.

3. Testing a dead president for poisoning.
"'I think it's time we do something about this diggin' up mentality that's pervading this country,' said Louisiana state Representative Ralph Miller."

I wanted to explore the concerns people have with the recently dead. This is because many seem to loose the concern for excavating graves with greater antiquity. For example, Egyptian Mummies. Chasing Mummies is a reality show on the History Channel that showcases Dr. Zahi, and Egyptologist whose passion is to find dig up the dead. Recent studies on King Tut is another good example. A recent program on the National Geographic Channel (oh good, you're all going to think I gain my knowledge from sensationalized tv shows) showed the CT scans of Tut's mummified corpse. That's pretty personal!

I am all for research and exploration. But I am grappling with the issue of "when is it okay to dig 'em up?". I don't want to anger any descendants who may protest the exhuming of a relative or friend. Because of my own beliefs, I think the soul is the important component in internment and afterlife--not everyone will agree. If someone was to ask me permission to dig up my deceased Grandpa Lee for the sake of research, I would be a-okay. Pretty sure I would be the only one okay with it, but every family needs a black sheep, right? I think if the researchers describe their intent to the extant family and adhere to any demands the family may have, exhuming individuals who have died within the last 100 years is okay.

In case an individual does not have someone to speak on their behalf, should we put disclaimers on tombstones? "Rest In Peace" and in fine print "until discovered and removed, poked and prodded by Indiana Jones or the like". I think I just might.

Pirates and Skulls

Word on the street is a Pirate's earring was to pay for his funeral. How thoughtful is that? These days we pay into life insurance through work and on our own; scrimp and save, and hope to have enough to pay for a decent casket or urn and a plot. I guess plundering is similar to scrimping and saving, but the earring is much more simpler form of accessing the income.
What I am getting at is that even swashbucklers like Pirates who seem to not have a care in the world were concerned about their funeral. Yes, the whole "earring as a payment for a funeral" factoid may be fictional, but it made me think how centered we are around death.
As it was mentioned in class today, Western populations are moving away from traditional remembrance of the dead, yet we still plan and save for the big event. We feel socially obligated to leave our family a sum to pay for our internment, yet we are fully aware how little we will be visited. Will Canadians stop having formal plots and opt for more intimate and unique modes of memorial? Will we do both? We already have the option to be cremated and pressed into a diamond which is kind of awesome. There are online memorials, donations to charity and even a simple picture on a mantle. I have a stuffed bunny taken from my friend's collection at his memorial. I will never forget who and what the bunny is to represent.

These modern forms of memorial  remind me of the buried heads under the floors of Jericho. There is an intimate relationship between the dead and those who are to remember. After skeletonization, the skulls would be removed from the remaining body. Clay would be applied onto the Viscerocranium and it is thought the clay is molded to look like the face of the deceased. In addition, alabaster or lapis lazuli was inlaid on the eyes for "that certain glow" (Collon 1995).
Modernly, we may be shifting towards other forms of remembrance because we're "too busy" or quite frankly, too lazy, but we still hold the desire to connect with our kin. A photo or urn on the mantle of a loved one is a daily reminder. Some may talk to the image or turn down the frame when they are doing something the deceased would disapprove. These interactions are hard to quantify and also hard to fathom when looking at past cultures. However, through observations of the present, we can apply our knowledge to the past to make educated interpretations.

Wow, what a random transition from pirates to skulls in Jericho--it must be the end of term. In sum, due to finances and laziness, I think we all are going to become much more unique and intimate in our remembrance of the dead-- good luck solving that one, archaeologists 1000 years from now!


Collon, Dominique. (1995). Ancient Near Eastern Art.  Berkeley: University of California Press

Archaeology and the Internet

I've been beginning to wonder how the internet and masses of media publications will alter the practice of archaeology in the future. We now have a multitude of newspapers, journal articles and websites dedicated to world events, such as the Genocide in Rwanda. Archaeologists are going to be so privileged to have such information at their fingertips---granted no one kills the internet.
We have put so much in the hands of "the internet". What happens if we are no longer able to access it? Say, some freak magnetic field wipes our computer memory's clean. What will happen to the information? Paper records too are destructible and  many of us have had the tragedy of losing a hard copy of an assignment and scrambled to re-write it. If we lose access to the plethora of information stored in the world wide web, will we scramble to re-write it? If so, how will it be written? What influence will this have on the archaeological record?
If someone encounters the Rwanda Genocide grave sites with no available documentation dictating the horrific events of those 100 days in 1994, how will it be interpreted? 800,000-1 500 000 bodies buried within one small country, all dated to the same year. On top of the large quantity of deceased, they all died of a brutal, violent death. Forensic Archaeologists would see that many skeletons have blunt force, ballistic and sharp trauma. Even if there are is little skeletal evidence of trauma on some remains, the manner and commingling of remains would give rise to the idea that a major event occurred. Perhaps a genocide, perhaps an epic sacrifice, perhaps a war. 
These interpretations will be subjective to the 'hot topics' of research as well as the availability of funds to research the graves.
In sum, the internet can be a really handy tool in applications of archaeology--just as long as it is still functioning hundreds of years from now.

Location, location, location!

Thanks to this course, I am more aware of the placement of the dead.
Last week I was at my folks house in Chilliwack for reading break. They live in a newly-developed area and there are a lot of changes to the landscape. At the bottom of the 'mountain' they live on, there is another suburban development, a landscaping supply (straight up dirt and rocks), a few commercial centres, and elementary school and a cemetery.
Judging by the style and weathering of the grave stones, I'm guessing the cemetery has been there the longest.
I would like to know the reasoning as to why that cemetery is where it is. Was this place a tranquil forested area? Was there once a church nearby? Before the massive development, the cemetery was likely a place of solitude and now it is by-passed by dump trucks and daily commuters who curse the 30km speed zone (thanks to the elementary school).
This makes me wonder how our interpretations change as the landscape around a cemetery changes. My initial reaction to the cemetery, due to the billowing dust from the business across the street, was, "wow, crappy spot for the dead". Will this spot be like Mr. Fredericson's house in Up? Will everything change around it, forcing the cemetery to disappear? I am curious.
Another thought I had relates back to the billowing dust. With the landscape materials and constant traffic, who wants to visit the dead in such a congested place? Instead of a fresh, country setting, descendants pay their respects in an asthmatics worst nightmare. There still may be space within the cemetery and families may decide not to bury their dead in this spot because of the surroundings. How can archaeologists interpret this? Discontinued use of a cemetery can be for a multitude of reasons, but do we ever suspect a change in surrounding landscape has made the cemetery undesirable?