Chapter 3 - Archaeological Burial Sites with Tools
Archaeological records showing BURIALS WITH TOOLS
Burials have been rediscovered in multiple locations with various tools included, which this section will focus on. The examples include specific locations where the tools, or their smaller and unusable analogue versions, have been found. There, the meanings that archaeologists have attributed to the artifacts and their placement in the terms of the mythology are aligned with the hypothesis that the tools reflect the societies’ manipulation of nature to fit under human control.
Egypt – Theban Mapping Project
As mentioned in the previous section, one of the tombs mapped as part of the Theban project belonged to Horemheb, KV 57. Within the Valley of the Kings, on the opposite bank from ancient Thebes (or present-day Luxor) Horemheb was laid to rest around the year of c. 1292 BCE as the last pharaoh of the 18th dynasty. Like his two predecessors, Ay and Tutankhamun, his tomb’s artifacts and wall art reflect the return to the polytheistic religion that Egyptians followed for centuries before Akhenaten (Tut’s father) reformed the country’s religion. The walkway itself was carved with a similar steep decent as with earlier tombs, which included stairs, however the shape was unique because it demonstrated a transitional period from the bent- to straight-axis tombs [figure 37]. This change in tradition is also reflected in the art on the walls, because, although all completed, the murals depict Horemheb alongside deities and, for the first time, scenes pulled from the Book of Gates (Martin, 2008).
Unfortunately, Horemheb’s mummy had not been recovered from his tomb because there were incidents of grave robbing during which the red quartzite sarcophagus lid was smashed open and everything inside that was valuable was stolen (Martin, 2008). While this may seem to be the end of use of this burial for this thesis, the murals can also serve this purpose. The Book of Gates is the narration of a recently deceased person’s soul moving into the next world and it served as a manual for the rites and rituals continuing throughout the New Kingdom (Hornung, 1999). Part of these rites involves the wrapping of the mummy, adding amulets in between the linen layers, and the opening of the mouth ceremony. Because everything written or drawn on the walls becomes real in the afterlife, they had to follow all of the practices as closely as possible. The adze that was wielded by Anubis was drawn on many tombs, including Horemheb’s and Tutankhamun’s, alongside their physical forms which were included in either the mummy’s wrappings as an amulet, off to the side of the burial, or both. In whatever form, it is considered to be part of the same symbolic purpose, humans’ ability and right to speak truth to meaning, to give commanding orders, and to praise the gods for the protection of our world from chaos and destruction.
Scandinavia
In much of Western Europe and Scandinavia the Viking culture dominated, and the evidence of their burial rites is scattered across many of the countries in which they conquered. Two sites will be covered, one Neolithic, and one Iron Age, because they both demonstrate the evolution of a community while retaining the societies’ culture and practices.
One example is Kverrestad, a site from the Neolithic, located in southeastern Scania or the region of southernmost Sweden [figure 38]. According to Karsten, tools were commonly destroyed in sites dating from the Early to Late Neolithic (Karsten, 1994), but they were found less in burial contexts during the Early to Middle (Larsson, 2000: 607). In the Late Neolithic Battle Axe Culture, dating to c. 3860±75 BP, burnt tools were deposited at the entrances of megalithic tombs (Vandkilde, 1996: 166 in Larsson, 2000: 604). Larsson initially argues that because there are not unpolished axes entombed with the bodies these would not have been burial offerings, since they were deposited “just like axes in other kinds of offerings” (Larsson, 2000: 607). But sacrificial ritual objects do not have to be prestigious or elaborate to connect to the ideals of the community. More importantly, they must be tied to their usage and to the land; suggesting that their utilization widely represents the power the society holds. Ritual burning and the sacrificing of tools, especially the tools that were found: flint axes, thin axes, scrapers, and chisels would have been burned in effigy for the burials, and parts of the same traditions were lacking in the earlier Funnel Beaker Culture (Larsson, 2000: 603). Another aspect specific to the burnt clay is that it is an exotic material as there are no sources nearby. There is also a higher correlation to axes being fire broken than the other tools, as 90% of the axes found display the changes brought on by the process of firing (Larsson, 2000: 605) relating to the Battle Axe Culture in which this takes place. Larsson, through his experimentation, postulates that the cracking and the color change of the flint from black or grey to white could be connected to a rite of passage, as undergoing this process makes them look similar to the fragmented cremated human bones with the burials nearby (Larsson, 2000: 609).
Archaeologists think that the meaning is, “the destruction of material culture would have been very obvious, and the wealth represented by the number of tools and exotics included must have been considerable” (Larsson, 2000: 609). In these massive deposition sites such as Kverrestad and its earlier mirror, Svartskylle, there is a clear use of destruction by fire to sacrifice these tools, mostly axes, in conjunction to the tomb located directly next to the monumental pyres. Larsson continues in a paper, examining creation burial pits and large tombs in various Neolithic and Bronze age sites which all show that the purpose of participating in these mortuary activities is as a “reproduction of [the] social structure… to an extraordinary degree” (Larsson, 2003: 155). Showing what the culture should look like relates to the mythology and the mortuary rituals enacted, according to Larsson from Bloch and Parry (1982), as the creation of the society itself which gives the community the feeling of control in the “social arena” (Larsson, 2003: 163-164). In the Battle Axe Culture control would have been signified by the axe for power over the chaos and destruction of everything around the community on behalf of the ancestors of whom the deceased will be joining and will be given gift by the gods (Larsson, 2003).
Later, in the Iron Age (during the 9th to 11th centuries CE), the hammer-rings, also mentioned in the previous sections, were buried with the bodies to serve the same purpose as the flint cremation pyres of the Neolithic. In fact, in the spread of Scandinavian societies extra artifacts have been laid to rest after the cremation pyres were burnt out. The archaeologist Williams argues that these would not be the ‘objects of memory’ which would be connected to neither the true nor idealized versions of the lives’ of the deceased (Williams, 2013: 196). But they are instead ‘commemorative catalysts’, artifacts or materials that created memories, protected the deceased, and did “not simply ‘honour’ the dead; it re-made them” (Williams, 2013: 197). Therefore, looking specifically in the Lake Mälaren Region of Sweden, the cremated Thor’s Hammer-Rings, whether originally burned with or after the body were also seen as evidence for the worship of Thor by Andersson for the benefit of the deceased person and the entire community (Williams, 2013).
In this case the mythology is highly recognized as playing a part in the direct purpose of including hammer-rings in the burial. As in the Norse myths that were discussed earlier in the chapter, both the hammer Mjölnir and Perun’s axe were the connection to the power of the gods of lighting and thunder. Williams states that Andersson noticed that the hammers themselves could be attributed to Thor’s gift of the creation of fire and his protection over the forces of chaos (Williams, 2013: 199). The ring that the pendant lays upon, however, also speaks to the unending notion of cycles, regeneration, and order versus destruction and chaos (Andersson in Williams, 2013: 199). This led to speculating that all the artifacts included in the burials were part of the aforementioned commemorative catalysts, placed for memory and not of memory (Williams, 2013: 204). Williams also identifies the 8th century CE onward burial custom of including rock flakes in urns at Vittene in nearby Västergötland, Sweden. This is significant because Williams makes the argument that “seemingly ‘natural’ materials may…have held important roles” was a carry-over from the centuries older Greco-Roman period in which the stones were perceived “as belonging to the earth and ‘planted’ by burial” (Williams, 2013: 202).This connects to the idea of taking a piece of the Earth, the tools and plain stones that affect the human community with its own life force, use it, and then lay the material and its energy to rest just as a person would be, as a flesh and bone “commemorative act” (Williams, 2013: 202).
Cyprus
The same older traditions are evident within the burial sites Khirokitia and Erimi on the island of Cyprus [figure 39] in the westernmost region of Anatolia. The sites are classified prehistoric and were mainly occupied from the Neolithic well into the Bronze Age. The monumental burial structures here are called tholoi, or beehive burials, within which the amount of burials may only depend on the size of the structure (Dikaios, 1940). The architectural characteristics vary a bit between the tholoi of Khirokitia and Erimi in the locations of support posts and the amount of use in daily life; however, they are similar in terms of the individual goods present in burials underneath the floors (Dikaios, 1940: 77). Tools such as grinding stones, both single and double headed axes, and fishing gear are all present, with the axes and grinding stones most commonly made out of flint and chert throughout the various island locations. While not the only items included in many of the burials, the most extravagant of materials present was the obsidian, which was traded from Syria and Eastern Anatolia. The specific burial site, Vouncous A, which dates to around c. 2800 BCE (according to dating done on a ceramic vase) contained tools knives, awl, and axes made out of copper [figure 40] (Keswani, 2005: 365 & Dikaios, 1940: 82).
Similar to Egypt, archaeologists have stated that the meaning is to equip the deceased for the afterlife saying, “[they] clearly believed the dead wanted or needed many of the same goods, provisions, tools, and ceremonial regalia that were used” (Keswani, 2005: 360). And as Dikaios states, “the folk… appear to have been pastoral and to have practiced agriculture” (1940: 79). Therefore, the inclusion of these tools and other ceremonial artifacts of significance is because of the ritual importance it had within their mythology and what was the greater importance of shaping the chaos of nature. Looking specifically at the later tombs of Vounous, patterns of increasing occupancy is evident, seemingly due to the later generations being entombed with their ancestors and creating larger, multi-chambered tombs whenever possible (Keswani, 2005: 361). As time progressed the purposes of having individual burials with prestige goods waned and the social backing and shared inheritance of the wealth and social prestige in the family burial plot would have been markedly more important. And because there were already goods being pulled together between family members, all the newly deceased would have been able to show off their families’ symbolic control of the world around them to all the others of the community.
Mesoamerica
In the Maya Preclassic (c. 1000 BCE – 250 CE) and Classic (c. 250 – 900 CE) periods there are larger groupings of flaked celts within various burials around the populated region, with the highest amount located in the Maya Lowlands. These celts (siliceous stone ungrooved axes, adzes, and hoes) are also the tools depicted on the stelae in areas such as Tikal, Palenque, and Copan in Guatemala (Thompson, 1996). One example of tool use in burials can be found in Tikal within burial 48, which contained two sacrificed youths. The tools buried alongside were a set of a mano and metate, a set of grinding stones, for the production of food from maize. These offerings were symbolic of the Maya’s human cremation myth out of maize from the Popol Vu (Scherer, 2015: 157-158). Because these were found with two children, possibly a representation of the Hero Twins, who had not yet been able to specialize, the entirety of burial 48 would have been symbolic in nature and demonstrated its importance as part of mythology (Scherer, 2015: 158).
Examples of the axe as a grave good are difficult to find, as most descriptions of tomb sites don’t specify what the tools made of obsidian and basaltic included within the burials are. Unfortunately, past archaeologists have seen these offerings as general waste objects and general cache pits because most burials belonged to the commoners and were located in subfloor graves to retain the connection to individual families (Kunen et al., 2002:198-199). Thus, the main published writings on burials from this general area upon which we can learn can be found under the homes of Teotihuacan. Grave one, underneath the floor of Room VII, is thought to be from one of the earliest periods in Teotihuacan’s history because there is evidence of the floor being re-laid, but the remains were unconnected (Linné, 2003:54). The contents of this grave were the skeletal remains, common dishware, utilitarian clay tripod pottery with decorations, various obsidian objects, and a single stone axe (Linné, 2003: 56). It is rare to find axes in Teotihuacan and with the limited use of obsidian as axes and ornaments, the stone would have had to have been obtained through trade because the site is far from any other rock quarry (Linné, 2003: 58). The connection this has with the mythology is found from the combination of the painted ceramics and the exotic material of the axe. One vessel from grave one [figure 41] contains a border of the symbols of rain clouds and droplets which are thought to symbolize the power of the god Tlaloc, the Aztec equivalent to Chaak, whose face is also represented in the center (Linné, 2003: 58, Milbrath, 2017: 163).
Within the Dresden Codex, the god Chac wields his hafted copper celt, more specifically the baat, a single-handed hatchet. Linguistic evidence has shown the Mayan word ch’ak means to chop or decapitate, which Thompson has related to the Maya god Chac who came from Chac-Xib-Chac who has the iconography of Batab, the hatchet-weilder (Thompson, 1996: 127). The Batab glyph [figures 42a and b above] has a hatchet included and is part of the title of Batabob, who led warriors into battle (Morley et al., 1983: 215-216 in Thompson, 1996: 130). People holding them, therefore, “appear to be lords or warriors in similar stylized postures, which might be termed the ‘hatchet wielding’ motif. [S]imilar to that of the gods illustrated in the Late Postclassic codices, also depicted in murals and on painted ceramics” (Thompson, 1996: 122). If they are depicting the lord and warriors as the gods, the implication is that they will have the same duties and power [image b of figure 42 above]. Replicating the deity of farming, water, and kingship leads to the kings displaying their ability to provide for their subjects as the gods could [figures 43 and 44], such as when Chac would call in the rains.
CONCLUSIONS
A few patterns for tool use depictions emerged within stories from a number of distinct mythologies. The first shows that because tools are produced in every human society, they are not inherently special and so are given a mythological context and back-story. These stories from mythology depict the gods already wielding and using their signature tools and not creating them, potentially because their construction was already common knowledge, and thus did not need recording. Sometimes myths would involve gods being given a special tool, but it is an action that the tool played in the distant past and that particular goal had already been achieved. The second is that because stone tools are from nature, the gods that humans worship had to imbue the tools with an energy to keep the chaos of the wilderness at bay. And the third is that burials are events for the communities to honor those who died and the gods, so the tool which would have the closest link to the gods is gifted back to the natural world to complete its cycle.
This signals that for protection and stability society uses tools as a means to change the chaos of nature into a world for humans to survive in. This is reflected by the gods’ positions within the realm of the societies’ mythological beliefs. The mortuary service is not so much a direct reflection on the individual but is a framing of an entire family or community because they leave imprints on the minds of all who witness it. The various deities and traditions of these communities, of which are understood through the lenses of lore and narrative, are a means of justifying and paying homage to the world that we humans cannot readily control without assistance from those who are greater. Those who supposedly made the world the way it is for human use. With the tools and energy of ritual that the aforementioned deities gave to us humankind created the act of leaving tools in burials to be a sign of wealth and influence because of the environmental control that is implied through those same rituals to the mythos of the culture.
With the information that I have gathered in Chapters Two and Three I have built a model utilizing the aspects laid out within this chapter. These aspects can be summarized in terms of the four points as follows:
First, that there is a record of tools and their use within the mythology of a culture.
Second, that within the mythology, these tools are associated with the ability to control and manipulate the environment in which people live.
Third, that the manipulation stems from bringing a piece of nature into the realm of human culture.
Fourth, it is because of these mythological associations that these tool types have ideological significance to communities and are often found as grave goods.
We have found that this model applies in cultures around the world and with whatever tool is in the forefront of use in any particular society. Thus, it is appropriate to say that the adze or toki, as a backbone and necessary tool of the Māori toolkit, and because of the use of them by the Atua within their stories, should be granted the same status. This is because adzes were often used and were not only ritualistic based on the marks from rework, redressing, and chips along the edges. Highly polished examples have been found that would have been larger than an average worker would find easy to carry, implying either limited use or a purpose of ritual only. Many, however, that had been left with the bodies may not be finished, highly polished, nor larger than one’s palm. These latter examples imply that the use of a burial adze was important, without the mana being utilized in some way over its life there is less ritual significance to repatriate it to the earth as part of human ritual.
In the next chapter I will be applying the model built in this chapter to look specifically at the context in New Zealand. First, I will be focusing on the adzing-toki tool, by definition and production. Second, I will be examining the tool’s place within the mythology of the Māori and, to an extent, Hawai’ian peoples. Third, I will examine burial sites containing the toki as a grave good. Fourth, I will bring all of these together for an analysis of interpretations to reason the ideological purpose of using the toki as a grave good.
留言