The Archaeology of Death and Burial

Last updated
The Archaeology of Death and Burial
Archaeology of Death and Burial.jpg
The first edition cover of the book, depicting a skull found at the Neolithic archaeological site of Jericho.
Author Mike Parker Pearson
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
Subject Archaeology
Funeral
PublisherSutton Publishing Ltd
Publication date
1999
Media typePrint (hardback & paperback)
Pages250
ISBN 978-0750917773

The Archaeology of Death and Burial is an archaeological study by the English archaeologist Mike Parker Pearson, then a professor at the University of Sheffield. It was first published in 1999 by Sutton Publishing Limited, and later republished by The History Press.

Contents

Parker Pearson's book adopts a post-processual approach to funerary archaeology. It explores earlier approaches to the subject that have been advocated by social anthropologists and processual archaeologists.

The Archaeology of Death and Burial was reviewed in various academic, peer-reviewed journals, to widespread praise, with a number of reviewers noting that the book would work well as a textbook on the subject of funerary archaeology for students. Some however criticised what they saw as Parker Pearson's dismissive and negative attitude towards processual approaches to funerary archaeology.

Background

Mike Parker Pearson attained his BA in archaeology at the University of Southampton in 1979, where he had been supervised by the prominent post-processual archaeologist Ian Hodder, and socialised with several of Hodder's other students, including Sheena Crawford, Daniel Miller, Henrietta Moore, Christopher Tilley and Alice Welbourn. Like them, he had come under the influence of Hodder's post-processual ideas, in particular his use of structuralism as an interpretative tool. Parker Pearson went on to write a number of academic papers that were published in early post-processual anthologies such as Symbolic and Structural Archaeology (1982), Marxist Perspectives in Archaeology (1984) and Ideology, Power and Prehistory (1984). In 1985, he was awarded his PhD in archaeology from the University of Cambridge for a thesis entitled "Death, society and societal change: the Iron Age of southern Jutland 200 BC – 600 AD."

Gaining work as an Inspector of Ancient Monuments for English Heritage, in 1989 he became a member of the Institute of Field Archaeologists. In 1990, he took up an academic teaching position at the University of Sheffield, becoming a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries the following year.

Synopsis

Chapter one, "Learning from the Dead", opens with an account of a 10th-century Volga Viking funeral from the Arab traveller Ibn Fadlan. Parker Pearson then highlights that funerals and the rites of the dead tell us more about the living in a society rather than the dead themselves. The book then proceeds to offer an overview of such issues as inhumation, cremation, grave goods, the organisation of cemeteries and human sacrifice. [1]

In the second chapter, "From Now to Then: Ethnoarchaeology and Analogy", Parker Pearson explores earlier anthropological and archaeological theoretical approaches to death and burial. Beginning with a discussion of social anthropological approaches, he discusses the role of death as a rite of passage, thereby introducing the reader to the work of the anthropologist Arnold van Gennep. From there, he moves on to a discussion of functionalist approaches to death among social anthropologists, highlighting that funerals often serve as political events among communities. This is followed by a discussion of the dead as polluting entities, an idea advocated by Mary Douglas, and then themes of fertility and regeneration. He finally refers to the rites of reversal and ancestor veneration that play a role in funerals in many societies. From social anthropology, he moves on to look at the processual archaeological approaches to funerary archaeology, which have been advocated since the 1960s. In doing so, he discusses Arthur Saxe's arguments regarding the social dimensions of mortuary practices as well as Joseph Tainter's theories regarding the relationship between the energy expenditure used for a funeral and the social status of the corpse. He rounds this section off by highlighting a number of criticisms of processual approaches. Proceeding with a discussion of post-processual archaeological approaches, Parker Pearson looks at the influence of social practice and human agency on mortuary practices. [2]

Reception

Academic reviews

Jane Buikstra of the University of New Mexico reviewed Parker Pearson's tome for the Journal of Anthropological Research . Considering it to be a "curious and intriguing" work, she thought it noteworthy that there was no introductory chapter exploring the author's goals. Remarking that Parker Pearson was clearly well versed in the subject, she also praised the use of illustrations throughout the book. Ultimately, she felt that The Archaeology of Death and Burial read like a series of essays, with the epilogue and the appendix being poorly integrated with the rest of the text, but nevertheless considered it to be "very good" overall. [3]

"Apart from the boldness of its vision, the clarity of its argument, and the breadth of its learning the bibliography is 26 pages in small type this book's most impressive feature is the rich diversity of its exempla. The author vividly illustrates the customs of many different historic and geographic realms, from the frozen barrows at Pazyryk in central Asia to Sutton Hoo, the Berewan of Borneo, African Americans in colonial Manhattan, and Chilean and Peruvian druglords. His selection is biased toward prehistoric northern Europe, but only because Britain and Scandinavia have long been in the vanguard of this growing field."

Joseph L. Rife, 2001. [4]

The American Journal of Archaeology published a book review by the classical archaeologist Joseph L. Rife of Cornell University in New York. In it, Rife described Parker Pearson's work as a "cogent, learned and entertaining" study that he believed would become both the primary textbook in the field of funerary archaeology and the prime example of a post-processual approach to the subject, arguing that the influence of Ian Hodder was "profound". Feeling that the work struck the correct balance between theoretical discussions and case studies, Rife notes that Parker Pearson had not used any examples from the classical Mediterranean, but nevertheless feels that classical archaeologists could learn much from reading the book. [4]

Edward M. Luby of the Berkeley Natural History Museums reviewed the book for American Antiquity , asserting that it was written in a "clear and lively" manner and praising the detailed nature of the endnotes and bibliography, ultimately feeling that it would be of great use to undergraduate students, who would be particularly interested in its discussion of topics like mummification, bog bodies and cannibalism. Recognising its post-processual approach to the subject of funerary archaeology, he felt however that its critique of processual approaches had been unnecessarily severe, describing it as "one-sided, disappointing, and ultimately distracting." Luby felt that the book would have been greatly enhanced had Parker Pearson sought to unite processual and post-processual approaches rather than pitting the latter against the former in an "either/or" situation. [5]

Wider reception

While referencing Parker Pearson's work in their 2005 book, The Quest for the Shaman, archaeologists Miranda and Stephen Aldhouse-Green commented that he had produced "a major contribution" to the study of "ancient death rituals". [6]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Processual archaeology</span> Theoretical paradigm in archaeology

Processual archaeology is a form of archaeological theory that had its beginnings in 1958 with the work of Gordon Willey and Philip Phillips, Method and Theory in American Archaeology, in which the pair stated that "American archaeology is anthropology, or it is nothing", a rephrasing of Frederic William Maitland's comment: "My own belief is that by and by, anthropology will have the choice between being history, and being nothing." The idea implied that the goals of archaeology were, in fact, the goals of anthropology, which were to answer questions about humans and human culture. That was a critique of the former period in archaeology, the cultural-history phase in which archaeologists thought that any information that artifacts contained about past people and past ways of life would be lost once the items became included in the archaeological record. All they felt could be done was to catalogue, describe, and create timelines based on the artifacts.

Post-processual archaeology, which is sometimes alternately referred to as the interpretative archaeologies by its adherents, is a movement in archaeological theory that emphasizes the subjectivity of archaeological interpretations. Despite having a vague series of similarities, post-processualism consists of "very diverse strands of thought coalesced into a loose cluster of traditions". Within the post-processualist movement, a wide variety of theoretical viewpoints have been embraced, including structuralism and Neo-Marxism, as have a variety of different archaeological techniques, such as phenomenology.

Lewis Roberts Binford was an American archaeologist known for his influential work in archaeological theory, ethnoarchaeology and the Paleolithic period. He is widely considered among the most influential archaeologists of the later 20th century, and is credited with fundamentally changing the field with the introduction of processual archaeology in the 1960s. Binford's influence was controversial, however, and most theoretical work in archaeology in the late 1980s and 1990s was explicitly construed as either a reaction to or in support of the processual paradigm. Recent appraisals have judged that his approach owed more to prior work in the 1940s and 50s than suggested by Binford's strong criticism of his predecessors.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Culture-historical archaeology</span> Theoretical paradigm in archaeology

Culture-historical archaeology is an archaeological theory that emphasises defining historical societies into distinct ethnic and cultural groupings according to their material culture.

Cognitive archaeology is a theoretical perspective in archaeology that focuses on the ancient mind. It is divided into two main groups: evolutionary cognitive archaeology (ECA), which seeks to understand human cognitive evolution from the material record, and ideational cognitive archaeology (ICA), which focuses on the symbolic structures discernable in or inferable from past material culture.

Archaeological theory refers to the various intellectual frameworks through which archaeologists interpret archaeological data. Archaeological theory functions as the application of philosophy of science to archaeology, and is occasionally referred to as philosophy of archaeology. There is no one singular theory of archaeology, but many, with different archaeologists believing that information should be interpreted in different ways. Throughout the history of the discipline, various trends of support for certain archaeological theories have emerged, peaked, and in some cases died out. Different archaeological theories differ on what the goals of the discipline are and how they can be achieved.

The term bioarchaeology has been attributed to British archaeologist Grahame Clark who, in 1972, defined it as the study of animal and human bones from archaeological sites. Redefined in 1977 by Jane Buikstra, bioarchaeology in the United States now refers to the scientific study of human remains from archaeological sites, a discipline known in other countries as osteoarchaeology, osteology or palaeo-osteology. Compared to bioarchaeology, osteoarchaeology is the scientific study that solely focus on the human skeleton. The human skeleton is used to tell us about health, lifestyle, diet, mortality and physique of the past. Furthermore, palaeo-osteology is simple the study of ancient bones.

Michael Parker Pearson, is an English archaeologist specialising in the study of the Neolithic British Isles, Madagascar and the archaeology of death and burial. A professor at the UCL Institute of Archaeology, he previously worked for 25 years as a professor at the University of Sheffield in England, and was the director of the Stonehenge Riverside Project. A prolific author, he has also written a variety of books on the subject.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paleopathology</span> Archaeological sub-discipline

Paleopathology, also spelled palaeopathology, is the study of ancient diseases and injuries in organisms through the examination of fossils, mummified tissue, skeletal remains, and analysis of coprolites. Specific sources in the study of ancient human diseases may include early documents, illustrations from early books, painting and sculpture from the past. Looking at the individual roots of the word "Paleopathology" can give a basic definition of what it encompasses. "Paleo-" refers to "ancient, early, prehistoric, primitive, fossil." The suffix "-pathology" comes from the Latin pathologia meaning "study of disease." Through the analysis of the aforementioned things, information on the evolution of diseases as well as how past civilizations treated conditions are both valuable byproducts. Studies have historically focused on humans, but there is no evidence that humans are more prone to pathologies than any other animal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jane E. Buikstra</span> American anthropologist

Jane Ellen Buikstra is an American anthropologist and bioarchaeologist. Her 1977 article on the biological dimensions of archaeology coined and defined the field of bioarchaeology in the US as the application of biological anthropological methods to the study of archaeological problems. Throughout her career, she has authored over 20 books and 150 articles. Buikstra's current research focuses on an analysis of the Phaleron cemetery near Athens, Greece.

Conjunctive archaeology is a method of studying of the past developed by Walter Taylor in the 1940s that combined elements of both traditional archaeology and the allied field of anthropology. It is exemplified by Taylor's A Study of Archeology (1948).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Archaeology</span> Study of human activity via material culture

Archaeology or archeology is the study of human activity through the recovery and analysis of material culture. The archaeological record consists of artifacts, architecture, biofacts or ecofacts, sites, and cultural landscapes. Archaeology can be considered both a social science and a branch of the humanities. It is usually considered an independent academic discipline, but may also be classified as part of anthropology, history or geography.

In archaeology, phenomenology is the application of sensory experiences to view and interpret an archaeological site or cultural landscape in the past. It views space as socially produced and is concerned with the ways people experience and understand spaces, places and Landscapes. Phenomenology became a part of the Post-processual archaeology movement in the early 1990s and was a reaction to Processual archaeology's proposed 'scientific' treatment of space as an abstract and empty locus for action. In contrast, phenomenology proposes a 'humanized' space which is embedded with meaning and is created through praxis. Phenomenology therefore treats the landscape as a network of places, each of which bears meaning and is connected through movements and narratives.

Marxist archaeology is an archaeological theory that interprets archaeological information within the framework of Marxism. Although neither Karl Marx nor Friedrich Engels described how archaeology could be understood in a Marxist conception of history, the archaeological theory was developed by Soviet archaeologists in the Soviet Union during the early twentieth century. Marxist archaeology quickly became the dominant archaeological theory within the Soviet Union, and subsequently spread and was adopted by archaeologists in other countries. In particular, in the United Kingdom, where the theory was propagated by an influential archaeologist V. Gordon Childe. With the rise of post-processual archaeology in the 1980s and 1990s, forms of Marxist archaeology were once more popularised amongst the archaeological community.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Neolithic British Isles</span> British, Irish and Manx history c. 4100–2500 BCE

The Neolithic period in the British Isles lasted from c. 4000 to c. 2,500 BCE. Constituting the final stage of the Stone Age in the region, it was preceded by the Mesolithic and followed by the Bronze Age.

<i>Signals of Belief in Early England</i> Book edited by Martin Carver, Alex Sanmark and Sarah Semple

Signals of Belief in Early England: Anglo-Saxon Paganism Revisited is an academic anthology edited by the British archaeologists Martin Carver, Alex Sanmark and Sarah Semple which was first published by Oxbow Books in 2010. Containing nine separate papers produced by various scholars working in the fields of Anglo-Saxon archaeology and Anglo-Saxon history, the book presents a number of new perspectives on Anglo-Saxon paganism and, to a lesser extent, early Anglo-Saxon Christianity. The collection – published in honour of the archaeologist Audrey Meaney – was put together on the basis of a conference on "Paganism and Popular Practice" held at the University of Oxford in 2005.

<i>The Viking Way</i> (book) 2002 book by Neil Price

The Viking Way: Religion and War in Late Iron Age Scandinavia is an archaeological study of old Norse religion in Late Iron Age-Scandinavia. It was written by the English archaeologist Neil Price, then a professor at the University of Aberdeen, and first published by the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History at Uppsala University in 2002. A revised second edition is due to be published in 2017 by Oxbow Books.

Albert Clanton Spaulding was an American anthropologist and processual archaeologist who encouraged the application of quantitative statistics in archaeological research and the legitimacy of anthropology as a science. His push for thorough statistical analysis in the field triggered a series of academic debates with archaeologist James Ford in which the nature of archaeological typologies was meticulously investigated—a dynamic discourse now known as the Ford-Spaulding Debate. He was also instrumental in increasing funding for archaeology through the National Science Foundation.

<i>Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory</i> Academic journal

The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is a peer-reviewed academic journal which focuses on methodology and theory in archaeology. It is published quarterly by Springer Science+Business Media.

Funerary archaeology is a branch of archaeology that studies the treatment and commemoration of the dead. It includes the study of human remains, their burial contexts, and from single grave goods through to monumental landscapes. Funerary archaeology might be considered a sub-set of the study of religion and belief. A wide range of expert areas contribute to funerary archaeology, including epigraphy, material culture studies, thanatology, human osteology, zooarchaeology and stable isotope analysis.

References

Footnotes

Bibliography