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.