Inferring Status From Early Bronze Age Burial

Transcription

1 Inferring Status From Early Bronze Age Burial Figure 1: Mound of the Hostages (Photo by author) Introduction The numerous Early Bronze Age burials that were incorporated into the Neolithic Passage Tomb of the Mound of the Hostages at Tara, offer a tantalizing insight into the society of that time. The various methods of burial and the associated grave goods and pottery all indicate that, while there was some differentiation in burial practices, society treated some members differently in death. What the actual criteria for this variation in burial practice was, that provisioned cremation for some and inhumation for others, is hard to know. Do the objects placed with the dead offer any clues into their position in society or does it reflect their individual importance as a valued member of society? It is evident, through the subsequent reuse of the site, that there was a desire for some sort of continued association

2 with the mound itself, and perhaps reflection of this, as well as focusing on the burials, will provide some deeper insight into the Bronze Age burials there. Figure 2: Burial 30 Faience, amber and jet necklace, (Photo: National Museum of Ireland) Section 1: There has been much debate to date by archaeologists seeking to infer rank and status in society through the evidence found in burial practices. This began in the 1970s with a processualist approach to critically analyse the data of mortuary evidence in order to evaluate how society was organised. At a later date, a movement against Processualism began to question the approaches adopted by the New Archaeology, and an attempt was made by Post- Processualists to re- evaluate the evidence and infer a greater holistic understanding of pre- historic society through greater understanding of the symbolic aspect of material culture (Jones 2007). The methods used through different ideological approaches can be utilised in the study of the Early Bronze Age burials at the Mound of the Hostages. The alternate opinions and findings that these differing approaches offer in relation to status and rank, can be used as a tool to extract a reasonable understanding of these burials at Tara and the many complex questions that they raise. The first section of this paper will give a brief review of pertinent papers that chronologically map a history of thought and debate surrounding this 2

3 trope. It is hoped that this will inform our understanding and interpretation of the enigma surrounding the social organisation of the individuals buried in the Early Bronze Age at Tara. Beginning in the early days of processualism, Susan Shennan (1975) suggested that by looking at small regional examples of burials throughout Europe, a greater understanding could be obtained for Early Bronze Age society. The evidence that each individual site would offer could be pieced together to form an overarching picture of social organization of that which sought to move away from the earlier assumptions about beliefs and view differences in burials as processes of status and social complexities in response to environmental and personal attributes of individuals and their affects upon society. Parker- Pearson (1982) would argue from a post- processualist stance, that the treatment of the dead should be evaluated in relation to the wider social context which is represented by all forms of the material remains and burial evidence, not just within archaeological theories of social systems based solely on material culture in burial contexts. He advanced his theory through looking at modern and Victorian modes of burial, especially aspects of display. He maintained that the dead were manipulated by the living for social competition between groups and conspicuous wealth advertising operated within a political framework. Treatment of the dead would later be governed by wider social concerns for sanitation in the communal living area. time and this can distort the record which status can be recognised by social analysis. He suggests a new four- step interpretive approach to viewing mortuary variability which is based upon previous designs, namely Saxe and Binford ( ), but with a view to making better social inferences. Wason (1994) suggested a clear processualist method of linking mortuary data to his interpretations about status. He indicated that there are variances in burial practices among the different levels in society and this can be reflected in the practices of burial which could indicate status in life or their position in society. Brown (1995) gave a processualist overview to the Binford and Saxe theoretical program of mortuary analysis, and weighs the benefits and drawbacks that any generalizing theory has to offer in relation to status and social organisation. The two perspectives which form the premise of this paper are an argument for a balanced approach to viewing both the burials 3

4 as symbolic representations of social order and also for burials as objects symbolising political manipulation. He maintained that it is only by regarding mortuary variability on a regional scale that burials can contribute most effectively to the understanding of past society. Mount (1995, 1997a) concentrated his work on the burial record of Early Bronze Age cemeteries in the Leinster and south- east Ireland. Through editing unpublished reports for cemeteries in this region, he was able to compile a comprehensive report on the make- up of society in this region. His findings, through spatial analysis and the material culture of the burial record, concluded that Irish Early Bronze Age society was significantly differentiated (1997b) showed that this site had many comparisons with that of the Mound of the Hostages evidenced by the jet necklace which indicated wealth and status was represented in the burial rites and stratification of society. Similarly, the cemetery at Edmonstown (Mount, 1993) offered an insight into the use of cemeteries for the internment of important individuals in society and how they represent a stratified society. Parker- Status, Rank and Power (1999), offers a synopsis of processualist approaches and then offers a post- processualist critique of those approaches. Parker- Pearson questions the processualist approach of dividing status into two categories of achieved or ascribed, and argues for more dynamic approaches to mortuary practices that reflect the processes and agency of the living as well as the dead. The significance of meaning in interpreting mortuary practices should be paramount considerations over wealth and status indicators in grave goods. Chapman (2003) takes a middle- ground approach to weighing up the arguments presented by processualist archaeologists and gives a balanced synopsis of the relevance of such approaches over time. His review of an edited volume of papers which contained the influential paper by Binford (1971), discussed above, acknowledges the significance that earlier approaches to mortuary investigation has had on current thought and methods. Brück (2004) takes a post- processualist approach to mortuary analysis and attempts to deconstruct the traditional notion of individualism in Bronze Age society, arguing for a more relational interpretation of burial for the mourners, rather than for the deceased. She views burial in regard to the personal relationships that were built 4

5 not merely a statement of the status of the living individual. As such, they serve to show that our modern notions of personhood do not equate with past perceptions of the self, because in terms of ideology, different relationships had other meanings that cannot be thought of in these ways. Her paper on Women, Death and Social Change, (Brück, 1999) also challenges the notion that funerary practices Figure 3: Mound Duma na ngiall) indicate a differing roles and positions in society. Her feminist argument is based upon the theory that women were instrumental in the economic and social changes that occurred over the entire period of the Bronze Age. Section 2: Assessing the Data The Neolithic Passage Tomb at Tara is believed to date from the middle of the fourth to the middle of the third millennium BC. However, because of the large number of burials R 148). Prior to the published report on the Mound of the Hostages some authors estimated now estimates an approximate Early Bronze Age burials in the Mound of the Hostages chamber (for a full list of Early Bronze Age burials, see Appendix 1). This represents the earliest phase of Bronze Age activity in the mound. The remaining Neolithic burials all occur in the tomb area and disturbance caused by the later Early Bronze Age activity there, prior to the tombs closure, has confused the overall picture of the exact amount. 5

6 Excavations began on the Mound of the Hostages in the summer of 1955, led by Professor Sean P. Ó Ríordáin and continued through the summer of 1956, when Ó Ríordáin fell ill before passing away the following year. Another excavation occurred in 1959, led by Ó uaidhrí de Valera, who completed the excavations on the Mound of the Hostages. However, the final report was not released until the complete report was There are several periods of activity at the Mound of the Hostages, beginning in the Neolithic period with the construction of the passage tomb and the overlying cairn. Several features have been discovered beneath the cairn, including a palisade trench and some pit burials. However, the main focus of ritual occurred within the tombs chamber (Figure 3), where most of the primary burials were focused. There is estimated to be quite a substantial number of Neolithic burials here, although an indiscriminate estimation can only be guessed, it is thought to be a couple of hundred. This number cannot be verified due to the disturbance, discussed above, by the Bronze Age activity which cleared many of the Early Bronze Age burials can be verified within the tomb, it is certain that overcrowding A The assemblage of pottery between both the tomb and the mound is an indicator of this shift and infers a chronological sequence to the differing periods of use. The predominant vessel type are the Cinerary Urns, of which there are 10, a total of 8 are from the mound and 2 were from the tomb interior. These Urns were accompanied by Vase s, of which there are also 10. Vase s are exclusively found with cremations and are usually inverted, as evidenced in the context of the mound, but are not inverted in the earlier phase within the tomb. There appears to be no overlap of the Vase food s and Bowl s, apart from Burial 40, which is problematic in terms of context Figure 4: Burial 30 and 41 artefacts (Photo by author) represented at Tara, only 3 being found, however, of those 6

7 that are known from other cemeteries, usually conforms to the pattern of not appearing with other pottery types however they have been known to contain other non- ceramic artefacts. Interestingly, it is with the Collared Urns in the mound of the Hostages, particularly those of Burials 38 and 41, that the remains of Bronze Daggers were found within the vessel, having been through the crematory stage with the body. The other Collared Urn and accompanying Enlarged of Burial 42 contained a rich assemblage of artefacts that included a perforated bone shaft, awl and a chert flake among The artefacts that were discovered during excavation reveal much about the society who appropriated this mound for their burial rites, the finds display a rich assemblage of grave- goods. Numerous burials stand out in artefact assemblage, namely, Burials 18 and 19, both from the same burial pit within the tomb chamber. It is noteworthy that both of these deposits contained V- perforated buttons made from anthracite, however, the latter burial (19) also contained a group of 57 shale washer Figure 5: Burial 38 artefacts (Photo by author) beads, 4 shale disc- beads and a circular shale washer bead. Bronze daggers and razors are well represented with 5 in total found at the Mound of the Hostages, two of which were contained in Collared Urns as discussed previously. The daggers with Burials 30 and 45 had no pottery association, which is remarkable in itself, and the remaining dagger in Burial 39 was found in a Encrusted. Only two bronze awls were recovered, one from Burial 30 in the mound, and the other from Burial 18 in the tomb. The two stand out burials in the Early Bronze Age period use of the Mound of the Hostages are Burials 30 and 38, simply for their richness of exotic grave- goods. Burial 38 appears to have been placed near the extreme south- eastern quadrant of the mound and is unusually very close to the cairn edge. This is out of keeping with the stratigraphy of the other burials in the mound and its peripheral setting may set it apart from the other burials in some symbolic manner (Figure 8). Burial 38 contained a highly worked battleaxe which was fragmented after having been treated to intense heat during cremation with the body. 7

8 Likewise, a bronze dagger, which also had been treated in the same manner, was included with the cremation and Battle axes were occasionally included in graves especially during the period when collared urns and an inverted vase which was placed in a pit with a possible protective cist. Burial 30 is a complex crouched inhumation of an adolescent male, years old, whose body was placed within a simple pit in a south- west to north- east orientation. The position of the body was knees flexed, with arms straight by his side and orientated in a south- west to north- east direction. This inhumation was excavated on the north- west quadrant of the mound and the skeleton had been very badly preserved in the clay pit where it was Figure 6: Burial 30 necklace (Photo by author) found. This burial is unusual in many ways and poses many questions as to its inclusion among the other early Bronze Age burials upon the mound. It is the only burial there that has not been subjected to cremation, moreover, its peripheral and solitary position in that section of the mound alone sets it apart from the others. This burial was probably the last to be committed to the Mound of the Hostages and it is more intriguing given the exotic composite necklace discovered around the youths neck. The necklace comprised of four segmented faience beads, four amber beads, one jet bead, one bone bead and eight tubular bronze beads. This type of composite necklace is more in keeping with female burials in the rich Wessex Graves tradition (Sheridan 2003). The inhumation Figure 7: artefacts from Burial 19 (Photo by author) also had a bronze razor or dagger at his feet and a badly preserved bronze awl. Newman - 8

9 Figure 8: Plan showing burials on the mound (from O'Sullivan s Duma na ngiall) 9

10 Section 3: Discussion The overall pattern of burial and reuse of the Mound of the Hostages displays a varied use of burial ritual in the Early Bronze Age. There is an unquestionable desire in Bronze Age society to express a connection with the ancestors and continuity in the social importance of earlier sacred spaces suggests strong bonds with social and landscape Nevertheless, social organisation had altered greatly from the more egalitarian Neolithic period and Bronze Age society was beginning to differentiate between status and rank of certain members who possessed greater access to wealth and knowledge of new metallurgical and agricultural technologies. This differentiation was expressed through the burial rites granted to elite members of society, which is reflected by the associated grave- (Shennan 1975, 287). Nonetheless, the evidence that is produced through regional studies, - east Ireland (Mount 1993,1995,1997), enables us to perceive an overarching view of the customs and rituals current in society during that period. In regard to the specific burials at Tara, it has been demonstrated that, after a lapse of time and use of the passage tomb in the Mound of the Hostages, the tomb was re- appropriated for internment of privileged members of society. However, it is possible that due to the overcrowded nature of the inner chamber from activity during the Neolithic period, the mound was permanently closed for ritual and the clay mantle of the mound became the focus for burial rites. Binford offers an alternative suggestion for this change in interpreted by the conversion to cremation for burials in the mound as opposed to inhumation that was predominant in the tomb chambers, particularly those of Burials 18 and 19. The last Early Bronze Age burial to appear in the tomb was Burial 24, which 10

11 demonstrates this shift, as it was a cremation contained in an inverted Encrusted Urn, one of the only Encrusted Urns found within the tomb (Burial 25 being the other). The artefact assemblage of some of the burials in the Mound of the Hostages attests to the importance of those interred there, and offers the best method of inferring rank and status in society. The artefacts are indicative of a wealthy society that had extensive exchange networks, especially with mainland Britain, as evidenced by necklaces containing amber and jet. Whilst there is no doubt that pottery types had an important significance in the ritual and the manner in which burials occurred, they are more useful for indicating the chronology in relation to burial rites, although some may be interpreted as status indicators (Brindley 2007). The actual artefacts display wealth and status of persons predominantly through the exotic nature of their origins and may have some relevance to the ideological or artefacts p 1994, 93). Burial 38, containing the inverted Collared Urn with the battleaxe and bronze dagger, is an exceptional burial for its contents, but also for the marginality chosen for its insertion in the mound in the extreme south- east, which sets it apart in a section of the mound most favoured for burial (Figure 8). It is highly likely, given the evidence of the grave assembly, that this burial is of a warrior or chief, as both the battleaxe and dagger can be construed as weapons or symbols of power. Burial 30 also has a rich assembly and is also placed in a location that is peripheral but in a section of the mound that has no other burial and in a manner that is a break from the traditional manner of burial. Age has been known to be a deciding factor in the selection for certain burial rites, as demonstrated at Fourknocks, Co. Meath where infants and children were not cremated and were buried separately from adults (Waddell 2000, 67). This has specific consequences when regarding the treatment of Burial 30 and his significance in society. Some authors would deduce that a necklace containing magical properties, such as jet and amber, would assign such a personage as a shaman in society (Prufer & Dunham 2009, Handler 1997). However, given the young age of the boy it seems unlikely that he could have risen to such an important position in society. Another plausible possibility is that he was a member of an important family, perhaps the last in his line, and that the necklace was an heirloom that accompanied him in burial or perhaps placed on him 11

12 during the funeral rite by a grieving family member (Brück 2004). It is documented that most burials found with amber necklaces are in the context of female burials (Sheridan 2003), and it is interesting to note that the necklace of sixty- two shale beads and V- perforated buttons all come from a Burial 19 which contained the inhumed bodies an adult male, female and adolescent. Given the discussion above, it can be assumed that the youth found in Burial 30 had some form social privilege which demarcated his position in society. It is not generally presumed that he had attained any rank of his own, due to his young age, but it is likely that he came from a wealthy or powerful family with wide ranging connections abroad (Cooney not necessary to show an object, or class of artefacts is used to as a symbol an artefact found in just one burial may well represent a special unique status, it may The inclusion on the mound of this youth, and in a position peripheral to the others, indicates that he was probably accorded inclusion with the ancestors. However, being the last burial there, perhaps indicates that he was the last of a line that had connections to the territory around Tara and his peripheral placement marks the final act here upon the mound. 12

13 Appendix 1 Figure 9: Orthostat L3( From O'Sullivan's Duma na ngiall) 13

14 Bu rial No. Location Type Inhumations/B urials 18 Tomb Inhumatio n with Cremation 19 Tomb Crouched Inhumatio n and Two Cremation s One, Maybe More One Adult, One Adolescent, One Small Adult 20 Tomb Cremation One Child, One Infant, Three Cremated and Three Un- cremated Adults Grav e Goo ds Yes Yes No Pottery Artefacts Provenance Bowl Bowl X2 Bowl V- Perforate d Button, Bronze Awl V- Perforate d Button, Disc Beads, Animal Bone and a Core of Quartz Located in a pit within tomb beside the inner sill stone, lay on its side, south- west to north east. Beneath burial 25, against orthostat L3 and the Back stone 24 Tomb Cremation in Cist One Adult Yes Encrust ed Urn, Vase 25 Tomb Cremation Maybe One No Vase (with Encrust ed Urn of Burial 46) 26? No Large Urn 27 Mound Cremation Spread Flint and Chert flakes, Plano convex knife South side of the inner compartment, touching orthostat L1, 0.4m from the south portal, 5.7m east and m south of the central peg Beside orthostat L3 on the south side of inner compartment One No 3 m. west of central peg and 0.5m. north of west- east axis 28 Mound Cremation One No Vase, 3.5m. West of the central peg and 0.5m north of the 14

15 Pygmy Cup east- west axis in the southeast quadrant. 29 Mound Cremation One No Encrust ed Urn, Pygmy Cup 30 Mound Inhumatio n 31 Mound - Cist 32 Mound Bone scatter - Cremation + Inhumatio n One Adolescent Yes No Pottery Cremation One Yes No Pottery Maybe One Yes no Pottery 33 Mound Cremation N/A No Bowl/ Vase 34 Mound - Cist 35 Mound - Pit or Cist Cremation One Yes Encrust ed Urn Cremation One Yes Enlarge d vessel, Vase, Necklace, Bronze Razor, Bronze Awl Bone Needles, 2 Portions Blue Glass Bead, Pebble Quartz Pebble Bone Pin, Flint Knife or Scraper close to the summit of mound on the south quadrant, the pit disturbed burial 35 North- west, 4m west and 3.5m north of centre peg Remains of Cist, buried in the south east quadrant, at a depth of 0.57m from the surface, it was very close above burial m from the surface and1.9, north of the central peg, this burial is located in the centre of the mound, at the bottom of north west quadrant near the intersection 0.4m in depth on the the north - south axis of the east quadrant, overlying the south west stones of the inner tomb chamber South east quadrant of the mound, immediately below burial the adjacent burial 31, at 0.89m from surface 3m south and 1.7m east of central peg in south east quadrant 15

16 36 Mound Cremation One No No Pottery 37 Mound - Cist 38 Mound - Pit or Cist 39 Mound - Pit with Cover Slab cremation - With Unburnt arm One Yes No Pottery Cremation One Yes Collare d Urn, Vase Cremation One Yes Enlarge d 40 Mound Cremation Three Yes Bowl, vase vessel 41 Mound - Pit 42 Mound - Cist and Urn Cremation Two Yes Collare d Urn Cremation Four Yes Collare d Urn and Enlarge d Worked Pebble alongside Arm Bone Battleaxe, Bronze Dagger Bronze Dagger, Bone Pin. Perforate d Pumice Stone Flint Plano- Convex knife Bronze Dagger Perforate d Bone Shaft, Awl or Pendant, Chert flake 4.55 east and 0.77m south of central peg at depth of 0.86m from mound surface, overlying central inner tomb uprights on south side. 4.5m east and 2.44m south of central peg, in south- east quadrant 3m east and 5.2m of the central peg, inserted into the south east quadrant above the very edge of the cairn at 0.58m below mound, this is the furthest southern burial and appears to be late 1.7m south of the main east - west axis in the south east quadrant, close to burials 36 and m east and 3.8m north of the central peg, 0.5m from mound surface 2.2m east and6m north of central peg, at a depth of 0.3m from mound surface on three north- east quadrant close to north- south axis in the south west quadrant, the furthest south in such, 2m west and 4m south of the central peg, and 0.43m deep into mound 16

17 43 Mound - Two Urns 44 Mound - Pit 45 Mound - Cist 46 Tomb - Inner Compart ment Cremation Four No Encrust ed Urns X2, Vase s X2 Only Pottery No associated bone with this pot burial. No Bowl vessel Cremation One Adult Yes No Pottery Only Pottery One No Sheds of Encrust ed urn found with burial Mound Cremation One No Vase Bronze Fragment s, Possible Dagger, Flint Flake 2.5m west- south- west of the central peg, along the west - east axis, m under the mound. 1.5m east and 5.75m north of the central peg in the north east quadrant. 6m east and 3.3m north of the central peg, pit dug into the cairn through the mound Inner compartment, Disturbed 2.1m south of the central peg just west of the main north - south axis, just beneath the mound sod and 1.45m above the cairn 17

18 Bibliography Binford, Lewis R. (1971) Mortuary Practices: Their Study and Their Potential Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, No. 25, pp Brindley, A. (2007) The Dating of s and Urns in Ireland, Galway University Press. Brown, J. (1995) On Mortuary Analysis with special reference to the Saxe - Binford research program, in Beck, L.A. (ed) Regional Approaches to Mortuary Analysis, New York, London: Plenum Press. Brück, J. Early Bronze Age B Journal of Social Archaeology 4. Brück, J. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 42:1, pp Chapman, R. Mortality, Vol. 8, No. 3. Cooney, G. & Grogan, E. (1999), Irish Prehistory, A Social Perspective, Dublin: Wordwell. Eogan, J. (2004) The Construction of Funery Monuments in the Irish early Bronze Age: a review of the evidence in Roche, H. (ed) From Megaliths to Metal, Essays in Honour of George Eogan, Oxford: Oxbow Books. Approach to Mortuary Analysis: Social and S American Antiquity 66, pp Grogan, E. (2004) Middle Bronze Age Burial Traditions in Ireland in Roche, H. (ed) From Megaliths to Metal, Essays in Honour of George Eogan, Oxford: Oxbow Books. Type Healer/Diviner and His Grave Goods; A Burial From A International Journal of Historical Archaeology, Vol. 1, No.2, pp Jones, C. (2007)Temples of Stone, Exploring the Megalithic Tombs of Ireland, Cork: The Collins press. Mount, C Excavations of an Early Bronze Age Cemetery at Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Section C, Vol. 97C, No. 1, pp

19 New research on Irish Early Bronze Age Cemeteries, in Waddell, J. Shee Twohig, E.(Eds) Ireland in the Bronze Age, Proceedings of the Dublin Conference, April, 1995, Dublin: Office of Public Works. Mount, C. (1997) Early Bronze Age Burial in South- East Ireland in the Light of Recent Research Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section C, Vol. 97C, No. 3 pp Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Section C, Vol. 93C, No. 2 pp Newman, C. (ed) (1997)Tara: An Archaeological Survey, Discovery Programme Monograph 2, Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. J.M. (1984) Mortuary Variability, London: Academic Press Inc. Duma na ngiall, the Mound of the Hostages, Tara, Bray: Wordwell Press Ltd. Parker- Pearson, M. (1999) The Archaeology of Death and Burial, Sutton Publishing LTD., Republished (2009) Gloucestershire: The History Press. Parker- ethnoar in Hodder, I. (ed) Symbolic and Structural Archaeology, Cambridge: Cambridge Archaeology Press. World Archaeology 41:2, pp Antiquity, XLIX, pp Sheridan, A. British Archaeology, pp Waddell, J. (2000) The Prehistoric Archaeology of Ireland, (3 rd ed) Bray: Wordwell Press Ltd. Wason, P. (1994) The Archaeology of Rank, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 19