1.30 – 2.4 What would archaeologists do today differently?- Pay more attention to commonerso In the 19th and early 20th centuries, there was bias in archaeology toward tombs of eliteso This is because there would be better objects for museum displayo General bias in historical study towards elites and high culture (kings, palaces, temples, “great men”)o Today, we know to study commoners: It provides a more complete view of society Royal tombs are fascinating but not representative of society as a whole Helps “democratize” the archaeological perspectiveo Ex. The commoner cemetery at Ur Commoners were buried in the same location as royal tombs The area was also used as a midden (trash disposal) Who’s in, who’s not? Woolley provided some info on 2000 graves, encountered another 4000 that he didn’t record information on- There were 10,000 people in Ur so there should have been more than 6,000 graves. So a lot of the dead di not end up in the cemetery- Inclusion was restricted (a privilege?)- Who’s missing? Children are not in the cemetery; inclusion depended on a status that only (some) adults could obtain- Age dependent treatment is a very strong feature of Sumerian deathways 300 burials date to Early Dynastic III- Ordered arrangement, lack of overlap; above ground markers? - Many graves are disturbed and show signs of re-entry, which Woolley thought was looting but that seems unlikely because these were commoners… the re-entry could have been part of Sumerian deathways Commoner burial patterns- Mostly single burials in pits- A few were in coffins or chambers with the body flexed to one side in a sort of fetal position – males had heads facing SW and females had heads facing NW Commoner grave goods- ½ of the graves that Woolley found lacked grave goods, which could have been do to lack of preservation- Most common grave good that was found was a small conical bowl- Commoners were not all treated equally; there were some rich commoners, like PG-755 Makscalemdug (spelling) - The most common commoner grave goodso Items of adornment (items on the body):  Pins, bracelets, necklaces, earrings, the brim (a fastener that held a headdress on); o Personal items:  Combs, brushes, cosmetic cases, tweezers; o Weapons: Knives, spears, axeso Vessels: Bowls- What are not grave goods?o No work related items, such as grinding stones and weaving materials; no ordinary toolso No furnitureo No art, statues, etc., not even religious items- What this tells us is that ordinary work (occupation) was not relevant at death- Strong gendering in most commoner grave goodso Females: More jewelry Hair ornaments No weaponso Males Had brims but generally no other hair items At least one axe or dagger Burial Treatment and social divisions- No sharp breaks among commoners in treatments = gradient ofstatus differences- Qualitative break between commoner and royal treatment = social divide between royals and everyone else- Much more rigorous investigation (sampling, multidisciplinary, more thorough documentation)o Study and keep all material; Woolley discarded a lot of stuff, including skeletons, which was very detrimentalo Skeletal material could determine age/sex structure of burial population, the general level of their health like disease and stresses, and biological relationships (DNA)o Pay more attention to soil filling the Death Pits (the “tomb fill”) The sequence of deposition reveals time and episodes in stage 3, showing how long it took to fill the Death Pit (could have showed how long the intermediary period was) Sample for botanical remains (pollen reveals season of burial)o Grave goods – history and use Made for the grave or actually used? For example, you can look at wearpatterns on pottery to see if and how much they were used Vessels = containers (empty now but probably weren’t when they were put in the grave; probably contained non-preservable goods like food); vessels not the offering itself but hold the offering How can we study what they contained?- Woolley report – food remains visible in 9 jars from commoner tombs- Probably remains of a stew- 1978 – microscopic analysis of soil samples from vessels from Puabi’s tomb and found microscopic fragments of bread, fish, dates, vegetables (chick peas), pig, sheep, goat, beer, etc. - Residue analysis – a way of studying residues that fall into microscopic cracks in pottery A lot of grave goods have to do with eating and consumption (food remains + cauldrons + cups, bowls and knives)- May also have to do with funerary feasting (feasts at the funeral) Other death feast clues- Drinking vessels in Death Pits in the hands of dead, or held near the mouth- Can compare to “banquet scenes” of Sumerian art grave vesselssame type shown at banquetso Queen Puabi seal: a royal banquet; the seal has food and drink Does the arrangement of bodies replicate a banquet?- “Tableau mort” – an image created with the dead; use of the dead to stage a scene- Deceased meant to be seen as participating in a royal banquet- Why is this considered a proper send-off of the dead ruler? Banquet scene cylinder on body in Dead Pitt 1237 – dancers and musicians; two children are depicted, one child found in the Death Pit Textual evidence for funeral feasts- Clay tablet (late Early Dynastic III Period): Uruk Agina’s ReformText- Standard burial fee: 7 jars of beer, 420 loaves of bread, 120 quarts of barley- Some was given to priest and gravediggers as payment, some placed in grave, and the remainder consumed at funeralo Pay more attention to how dead dressed Most non-container grave goods are clothing, jewelry, items of adornment (stuff worn on the person)- Women wore cuff bracelets Extreme range in how dead dressed; would have been a very visual aspect of the funeral Does elaboration of dress express social position?- How to study this?o Even in art, depictions of people in court or royalty are not particularly dressed upo However, in the Standard of Ur, captives are shown naked and captors are always dressedo Ruler identified by elaborate headwear and hairstyleso Powerful, elite wear more jewelry Queen Puabi’s jewelry would have weighed 14 poundso Written clues (cuneiform texts) Two concepts from textual sources:- Hi-lii (“looking good”; this is how the Sumerians