Posts tagged with “archaeology”
Posted on . Filed in . Tagged with , , , , , , , , .

“It makes no difference how long ago someone died. We are their living…

“It makes no difference how long ago someone died. We are their living relatives.” – Emma Restall Orr

I read a post by Anna the Imp, Sacred Ancestors. This is an issue I have thought about before. Mainly, is it ok (morally correct) to move, display or physically analyze historical dead bodies. At what point does respect for the dead come into scientific research?

Honouring the Ancient Dead a British initiative that advocates respect for what are commonly called ‘human remains’ and their related funereal artefacts.

This is what Ana wrote:

There was a story in the Telegraph and the Guardian yesterday concerning the display of ancient human remains in museums. They report the findings of a new book by Dr Tiffany Jones that museums are removing or partially covering mummies, skeletons and other human remains for fear of protests by neo-pagan organisations, the chief among which seems to be Honouring the Ancient Dead (HAD), an advocacy group founded by Emma Restall Orr, a neo-druid, poet and author.

There is certainly considerable sensitivity over this issue, particularly when some of the remains in question were removed from traditional burial grounds without consultation, something that might be defined as anthropological imperialism, a corollary of political imperialism. Many of these artefacts have subsequently been returned to the rightful communities

But is it right to be equally concerned over remains such as mummies and bog bodies, where no cultural or tribal continuity can be established? The examination of such things is, after all, an essential part of archaeological research, helping to establish a better understanding of the past, of past lives and past cultures.

Speaking personally I approach this question from two dimensions. As a scholar and as a historian I have to welcome anything that throws a greater light on the past, which I love. As a pagan, as an admirer of the ancient ways and ancient customs, I believe that we have to approach human remains, the remains of our ancestors, with a high degree of sensitivity. How could I possibly celebrate Samhain (Halloween) and not feel a link with the spirits of the dead, no matter how ancient?

Sensitivity, that’s the key word, to show things always in context, not to display the dead, many of whom were buried with reverence, simply to be gawped at as objects of idle curiosity. After all, how would you feel if your own ancestors were taken from consecrated ground and put on public display? Ah, but time, the removal of time, excuses such things, does it not? Perhaps, then again, perhaps not.

I've copied and posted Ana's thoughts because it's from an old blog which could disappear. I like what she wrote.

Myself, it makes me think about older photographs, movies or TV shows. Everyone is in black and white. So, we don't see them in colour, or think of them as being people who lived their lives in colour. They seem less real. Of course, logically, we know all those people lived in colour, just as we do now. But, it takes extra brain power to think of them as being people like ourselves, every day in colour, not someone from an old photograph or movie, lost in time.

Posted on . Filed in . Tagged with , , , .

Canadian Archaeological Association

"Canada's national organization for the promotion and ethical conduct of archaeology in Canada. Posts about Canadian archaeology, research and events, are welcomed".

Posted on . Filed in . Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , .

Mudlarking and Beachcombing?

I read a post about mudlarking. What to Know About Mudlarking. From Archaeology Now, London, England.

"Mudlarking is the romantic name for scavenging on the riverbank (also called the foreshore) when the tide is out."

Things I learned about mudlarking in England: you need a license (even just to poke around), there are places you are not allowed to go, and you must report your finds. The writer, Jill Brown, suggests a catch and release plan where you don't keep what you find, just put it back. Take photos, leave it where you found it. I can understand, those are the general rules for urban exploration too.

But, what if I want to keep it? I don't know if we have rules about beachcombing or mudlarking here in Canada, or Ontario. Maybe they do in Toronto, the city itself. I'm not sure if the same urban exploration rules apply for finding something washed up on a beach or forgotten under the dirt in a forest, etc.

I like the name mudlarking, but I would think of it as beachcombing. I wondered if they were two words meaning the same thing or is there a difference between the two. Reading the description from the post, they sound very similar. Unless you're some kind of elite purist and insist beachcombing can only be considered beachcombing if it takes place on an actual beach. I've never heard of forestcombing (as far as I can remember) and I know there is mud in a forest.

This is a history of mudlarking, quoted from the same post as above:

"Many 19th-century mudlarks were poor, desperate children. They made their miserable livings selling pieces of coal, bits of rope, and anything else they could find. Two hundred years on, the mud is still dirty, the water is still cold, and the extraordinary treasures are still few and unpredictable, but mudlarking has become amateur archaeology."

I don't think beachcombing started that way. It seems it has always been a hobby, finding little things to collect and ponder about.