Mass Graves

Mass Graves and Genocide 

Warning: Due to the sensitive nature of this topic, some individuals may find the material discussed in this blog entry upsetting. Additionally, please be aware that graphic images will be used, including but not limited to: bodies of deceased children, bodies of individuals who were likely subject to torture before death and graves containing multiple bodies. 

For my last blog post of the semester, I want to take a look at mass graves with a focus on genocide; my interest in this area stems from the fact that it allows my interest in anthropology, psychology, human rights and forensics to intersect. This was originally a topic that I had intended to explore for the larger group project, but the ethical issues associated with finding/using images on this subject would have made the logistics very difficult. In turn, I decided to only use pictures from journal articles or very well recognized/respected websites for this Blogger entry, in hopes of minimizing any ethical problems. 

When I asked my friends and siblings to list all of the examples of genocide they could think of, the most common responses I received were the mass murders that took place in Rwanda (1994), and the crimes committed by the Nazis during WWII. Unfortunately, genocide is far more common than many people are aware of, with more than twenty separate instances being reported between 1951 and 2000 (“Genocides in history”, 2012). One of the more recent examples is the al-Anfal Campaign, also known as the Kurdish Genocide, which was spearheaded by Saddam Hussein’s cousin Ali Hassan al-Majid, and took place in Iraq between 1986 and 1988. Over 100,000 people were killed, including many women and children. In 2007 Al-Majid was convicted of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, and this was due (in part) to the evidence collected by archaeologists such as Michael S. (Sonny) Trimble, in 2007 (“Al-Anfal campaign”, 2012). 

Fantasy! (Dowdey, 2012)

  If you complete a Google image search for “archaeologist” you are generally met with images of Indiana Jones, or men in tilley hats examining very old skeletons and dinosaur bones. What most people don’t imagine are people like Trimble, who sacrificed his own safety by entering a country precipitously close to civil war because, as he recalled, “I was really interested in assisting the Iraqi people” (Pringle, 2009). His field directer, Susan Malin-Boyce, was another archaeologist that put herself in harms way in pursuit of justice for the victims of the Kurdish Genocide. 

(Pringle, 2008)

The physical excavation of the mass graves in Iraq was challenging for several reasons. The first was that even though the graves were incredibly shallow, approximately one and a half feet below the surface, each body and its associated belongings had to be removed individually and bagged to ensure identification could take place. This required rather painstaking cooperation between the archaeologists and physical anthropologists, as they were working on a 36 meter grave that contained 114 bodies using only trowels. One of the interesting, and frightening, things about this mass grave in particular was that only 30 of the bodies were adults (2 males, 28 females), and the remaining 84 were children, most of whom were under the age of thirteen. A second challenge was the 120 degree heat, which posed a challenge for both excavation, and analysis of the bodies due to the accelerated decomposition (Pringle, 2009).

(Pringle, 2009)

Over the course of Anthropology 392, two aspects of burial that we have talked about a great deal are the physical placement of a body in the grave, and grave goods. I feel like the Iraqi mass grave example is a valuable learning tool, because these two areas of analysis provided a great deal of insight into how/why the individuals were buried in the grave and they also helped to date the mass murder. For example, based on the orientation of the bodies in the grave, the anthropologists were able to determine that the adult males and adolescent boys were killed first, because they were positioned in the deepest part of the grave. The remaining children and women were then shot, and placed in the more shallow parts of the grave. The grave goods were particularly important because analysis of these artifacts revealed that 80% of the deceased were either dressed in an article of traditional Kurdish clothing, or possessed a stereotypical artifact such as Kurdish jewelry. This analysis helped the anthropologists prove, without a doubt, that the Kurdish people were specifically targeted in this attack. Furthermore, a child’s rubber boot was used to date the grave to 1988-1989, because it was imprinted with the cartoon character Hanna-Barbera, which was only popular during this time period. 

  I believe that this modern day example helps demonstrate that the techniques we learned in class are not only applicable to ancient graves, but also modern burials. It is worth noting, however, that individuals who work in this subfield of anthropology recognize that there is a lack of training and standardization in regards to mass grave excavation. As a result, the quality of investigation and reporting is often variable, and experts recommend that universities should start offering graduate programs focusing on mass grave excavation, and the United Nations needs to start examining more long term solutions and investing more financial resources into this growing field (Skinner, Alempijevic & Djuric-Srejic, 2003). 

 

References:

Al-Anfal campaign. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved March 31, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Anfal_campaign

Dowdey, Sarah. (n.d.). How archaeology works. How stuff works. Retrieved February 29, 2012, from http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/archaeology.htm

Genocides in history. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved March 31, 2012, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history 

Pringle, H. (2009). Witness to Genocide. Archaeology, 62, 28-65.  

Non-journal Link: http://www.archaeology.org/0901/etc/iraq.html 

Pringle, H. (2008, December 12). Massacre of the innocents. Retrieved from http://archaeology.org/blog/?p=155 

Skinner, M., Alempijevic, D., & Djuric-Srejic, M. (2003). Review: Guidelines for international  international forensic bio-archaeology monitors of mass grave exhumations. Forensic Science International, 134, 81-92.

Museum Displays

Museum Displays: 

  Today in class we discussed how we determine whether an artifact or remains are “appropriate” to be kept on display in a museum. My opinion deviated quite strongly from the other students’ iclicker responses, because I believed that it was acceptable to allow every item to be publicly viewed. My reasons for this aligned closely with what Devin said during class. Basically, we never know what we might be able to learn from an object in the future, and so to relinquish access to an artifact or remains may be robbing scientists of an amazing opportunity in the future. Additionally, and I should preface this by saying I am not a sentimental person, I can’t wrap my head around a person or group wanting remains or an object back from a museum. In my mind, allowing an object to be held, examined, and displayed in a museum is one of the greatest gifts an individual can give to society after death. To inspire scientific interest in children, provide researchers with insight into the past, and provide revenue for an institution that helps protect and educate the community about the past seems like a noble sacrifice. 

Paleolithic burials

Paleolithic Burials 

Photograph by Glacoma Giocobini 

Available at: http://www.modernhumanorigins.net/arenecandide.html

Sometimes all it takes is a dramatic image to spark a person’s interest in a topic. For me, the above image catalyzed my interest in Upper Paleolithic burials because I was instantly drawn to the “Young Prince” and his lavish grave goods. After doing a bit of research, I discovered that this fifteen year old male was was found in the Italian Arene Candide Cave (1942), and dated to 23,4400 +/- 190 years BP (Giacobini, 2007). His bones are extremely dramatic because they are covered with red ochre, and the artifacts around his head are actually very small shells which are the remains of a cap. If you look closely at the above image, you can also identify four elk antler batons that have been pierced, a flint blade, and four ivory pendants (Giacobini, 2007). 

(Formicola & Buzhilova, 2004)

A second grave with beautiful grave goods from the Upper Paleolithic period was found in Sunghir, near Moscow. This burial is quite different than the “Young Prince” interment, however, because it contained the remains of one juvenile girl and one juvenile boy who were positioned head to head (Formicola & Buzhilova, 2004). The bodies were covered in red ochre, and the grave contained a huge quantity of ivory grave goods in the form of beads, pins, pendants, figurines, disks and lances. In addition, a belt made of fox teeth and antler batons were found with the pair (Pearson, 1999, p. 150). 

Reflecting on this blog post so far, I am struck by how apparent it is that my value system has been shaped by Western culture. The mere fact that I chose to examine Upper Paleolithic burials because of their beautiful grave goods speaks to the fact that the individualistic and materialistic nature of our society has influenced what I value as ‘interesting’. Although I was not actively trying to be objective when constructing this entry, because it is personal and reflective in nature, this realization is still a bit unsettling. 

  On a relatively regular basis, Lindsay brings up the fact that she does not necessarily feel “right” drawing many of the conclusions from burials/grave goods that we discuss in class, because the interpretations could vary based on an individual’s perspective. I am not very fond of speaking up in class, but in the majority of cases I agree with Lindsay’s concerns. Although anthropologists try to acknowledge any biases that could influence their interpretation of the data, I often wonder how much bias goes unrecognized by the anthropologists themselves. Regardless of where we come from the social, cultural and political structure of our community plays a role in shaping our value systems from the day we are born. In turn, our community becomes a part of who we are in addition to simply a place where we live. This leads me to question how truly objective we can be when interpreting data from the distant past or different cultures, because if my value system could subconsciously influence my topic for a blog post, I am sure it influences my perspective in many other ways as well! 

References:

Formicola, V. & Buzhilova, A. P. (2004). Double child burial from Sunghir (Russia): Pathology and inferences for Upper Paleolithic funerary practices. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 124, 189-198. 

Giacobini, G. (2007). Richness and diversity of burial rituals in the Upper Paleolithic. Diogenes, 54, 19-39. 

Pearson, M. P. (1999). The archaeology of death and burial. College Station: Texas A & M University Press.  

Marking Rubric

      Applying the Marking Rubric

      Unfortunately, both the topic and format for our presentation is rather unique, so there are not very many sources to choose from! I was able to find one Prezi that addressed the topic of Hierakonpolis, however it appeared to be geared towards a less academic group of individuals than our project. Regardless, I will mark it using our seven part rubric in order to answer Dr. McGuire’s questions of “How does it measure up?” and “What would make it better?”

Screen shot of the Prezi marked using our rubric.

Analysis (8): The Prezi would receive an “Adequate” rating of 3/8 for this section, because it does not provide an analysis and critique of current interpretation(s), or includes one or more alternative interpretations based on different methodological or theoretical approaches” (McGuire, 2012), even though it does include a very brief introduction to Hierakonpolis. In order to improve the grade on this section, a far greater amount of analysis should be done, rather than simply citing facts. 

Visual Presentation (8): In this section, the fact that the creator of this project simply cited facts in relation to his images means that he technically meets the criteria for a very high grade on this section. However, because he did not address any of the author’s arguments, evidence or conclusions in any depth, I will only give him a “Good” rating of 6/8 on this section. In order to improve this grade, more images should be used and pictures should be tied into arguments and new conclusions rather than just simple facts. 

Outline/Introduction (4): The creator of the Prezi mentions very vaguely why he is interested in this topic, however the opening transitions do not address any research questions or a statement regarding the appropriate audience. Additionally, there is no indication regarding what type of evidence is going to follow. In turn, I would give this section a “Poor” rating of 1/4. Improvements would include providing a clear research question, a warning regarding the content of the Prezi, and a brief overview of the evidence that will be used in his analysis. Evidence (8): This project fails to cite any sources within the text or beside the images, and there is no bibliography! The only source chosen was accurate and of high quality, however this does not compensate for the other issues. As a result, this section would receive a “Poor” rating of 2/8. In order to improve this grade, more sources should be chosen and integrated throughout the presentation, and a bibliography must be included.  

Conclusion (4): The conclusion is completely absent, and so this section receives a “Poor” rating of 0/4. To improve, a conclusion should be included and aim to reframe and synthesizes the key points of the project, suggests new questions or perspectives, and bring closure.

Organization/Clarity (8): As this Prezi is extremely brief, it is also relatively easy to follow for the marker. There are some transitions that are not very clear, there is a complete lack of quotations and the majority of information is presented as single sentences or bullet points, rather than in paragraphs. As a result, I will award this section a “Poor” rating of 4/8. This grade would increase if paragraphs were used, quotations incorporated and cited throughout the text, and the font was easier to read. 

Mechanics (4): The short nature of this project means that there are not very many mechanical errors. As a result, this section receives a “Good” grade of 3/4. This would be improved if sentence structure was used consistently throughout the Prezi. 
Total: 19/44