Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira; Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

| Peer-Reviewed

Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira, Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva

Published in International Journal of Archaeology (Volume 9, Issue 2)

Received: 30 August 2021 Accepted: 28 September 2021 Published: 23 November 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

This article presents an aspect of the configuration of the studies of funerary practices in archaeology, first in terms of their plural perspectives and intersecting spaces, such as mortuary studies, funerary archaeology, social bioarchaeology and archaeology-anthropology of death; and in a second moment, with emphasis on the issue of cemeteries as historical archaeological heritage. It was based on an article initially published in Revista Clio Série Arqueológica, a periodical of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil, which dealt with the issue of the relationship between funerary sites, funerary practices and archaeological heritage. From a review of the random archaeological bibliography, the intersections between a general archaeological theory of material culture and as bioarchaeologies were verified, on the one hand in the international perspective and hermetic legislation and burial terminologies, on the other hand, in the perspective of the case from Brazil. In the first case, hypotheses were formulated to characterize funerary contexts and non-funerary contexts in relation to funerary cycles. In the second case, exemplified sites and funerary terminologies linked with the proper funerary contexts - the heritage-cemeteries in the case of Brazil. Heritage-cemeteries contain objects of material culture, closely related to human skeletal remains, comprising artifacts or primordial, symbolic, sensitive structures, representing an innovative intersectional area, with the body amalgamated with artifacts and funerary structures, within the studies of funeral practices, perhaps necessarily, in the underground and aboveground approaches.

Published in	International Journal of Archaeology (Volume 9, Issue 2)
DOI	10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
Page(s)	62-73
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Funerary Practices, Burial Terminology, Cemetery, Archaeological Heritage

References

[1]	Mignon, M. R. (1993). Dictionary of Concepts in Archaeology. London. Greenwood Press.
[2]	Gowland, R., & Knüsel, C. (2009). Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains. Oxford. Oxbow Books.
[3]	Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. (2011). Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell.
[4]	Chapman, R., Kinnes, I., Randsborg, K. (1981). The Archaeology of Death. London. Cambridge University Press.
[5]	Ribeiro, M. S. (2007). Arqueologia das Práticas Mortuárias: uma abordagem historiográfica. São Paulo. Alameda.
[6]	Silva, S. F. S. M. (2014). Arqueologia Funerária: corpo, cultura e sociedade. Recife. Editora da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.
[7]	Yarrow, H. C. (1891). A further contribution to the study of mortuary customs of the North American Indians. 1st Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington D. C., 89-206.
[8]	Bushnell, D. I. (1920). Native cemeteries and forms of burial east of the Mississipi. Bureau of American Ethnology. Washington D.C. (71).
[9]	Macleod, W. C. (1925). Certain mortuary aspects of Northwest Coast culture. American Anthropologist. 27: 122-148.
[10]	Kroeber, A. L. (1927). Disposal of the dead. American Anthropologist. 29: 308-315.
[11]	Childe, V. G.. (1942). The chambered Cairns of Rousay. Antiquaries Journal. 22: 138-142.
[12]	Childe, V. G. (1945). Directional changes in funerary practices during 50,000 years. Man. 4: 13-19.
[13]	Bartel, B. (1982). A historical review of ethnological and archaeological analyses of mortuary practice. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. 1: 32-58.
[14]	Lubbock, J. (1882). The origin of civilization and the primitive condition of man. London. Longman Green.
[15]	Lubbock, J. (1900). Prehistoric times. London. Williams and Norgate.
[16]	Brown, J. A. (1971). Approaches to the social dimensions of mortuary practices. SAA Memoirs. n. 25, Washington D.C.
[17]	Tainter, J. A. (1975). Social inferences and mortuary practices: an experiment in numerical classification. World Archaeology. 7: 1-15.
[18]	Tainter, J. A. (1978). Mortuary practices and the study of prehistoric social systems. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory. 1: 105-141.
[19]	Goldstein, L. (1981). One-dimensional archaeology and multi-dimensional people: spatial organization and mortuary analysis. In. Chapman, R., Kinnes, I., Randsborg, K. The Archaeology of death. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, p. 53-69.
[20]	Blakely, R., & Beck, L. A. (1981). Trace elements, nutritional status, and social stratification at Etowah, Georgia. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 376: 417-431.
[21]	Humphreys, S. C., & King, H. (1981). Mortality and Imortality: the anthropology and archaeology of death. London. Academic Press.
[22]	Parker-Pearson, M.. (1982) Mortuary practices, society, and ideology: an ethnoarchaeological study. In. Hodder, I. Symbolic and structural archaeology. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press, 99-113.
[23]	Saxe, A. A. (1970). Social dimensions of mortuary practices. Ph. D. dissertation. Michigan. University of Michigan.
[24]	Binford, L. R. (1971). Mortuary practices: their study and their potential. In. Brown, J. A. Approaches to the social dimensions of mortuary practices. SAA Memoirs. Washington D.C. (25): 6-29.
[25]	Duday, H. (2009). The Archaeology of the Dead. Lectures in Archaeothanatology. Oxford. Oxbow Books.
[26]	Weiss-Krejci, E. (2011). The formation of mortuary deposits: implications for understanding mortuary behavior of past populations. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 68-106.
[27]	White, L. A., & Dillingham, B. (2009). O conceito de cultura. Rio de Janeiro. Contraponto.
[28]	Pettitt, P. (2011). The Palaeolithic Origins of Human Burial. London. Routledge.
[29]	Schiffer, M. B. (1987). Formation processes of the archaeological record. Albuquerque. University of New Mexico Press.
[30]	Py-Daniel, A. R. (2015). Os contextos funerários na arqueologia da Calha do Rio Amazonas. Doctoral thesis. São Paulo. Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia da Universidade de São Paulo.
[31]	Strauss, A. M. (2010). As práticas mortuárias dos caçadores-coletores pré-históricos da região de Lagoa Santa (MG): um estudo de caso do sítio arqueológico "Lapa do Santo". Masters dissertation. São Paulo. Instituto de Biociências - USP.
[32]	Souza, C. D. (2011). As práticas mortuárias na região da Argólida entre os séculos XI e VIII a. C. Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia da Universidade de São Paulo. Suplemento. (13).
[33]	Jackes, M. (2011). Representativeness and bias in archaeological skeletal samples. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 107-146.
[34]	Knudson, K. J., & Stojanowski, C. M. (2008). New directions in Bioarchaeology: recent contributions to the study of human social identities. Journal of Archaeological Research. 16: 397-432.
[35]	Hollimon, S. E. (2011). Sex and Gender in Bioarchaeological Research: theory, method, and interpretation. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 149-182.
[36]	Dowson, T. (2000). Why Queer Archaeology? An Introduction. World Archaeology. 32: 161-165.
[37]	Geller, P. L. (2005). Skeletal analysis and theoretical complications. World Archaeology. 37: 597-609.
[38]	Zakrzewski, S. (2011). Population migration, variation, and identity. An islamic population in Iberia. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 183-211.
[39]	Barret, A. R., & Blakey, M. L. (2011). Life histories of enslaved africans in colonial New York. A Bioarchaeological study of the New York African Burial Ground. In. Agarwal, S. C.; & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 212-251.
[40]	Roberts, C. (2011). The bioarchaeology of leprosy and tuberculosis. A comparative study of perceptions, stigma, diagnosis, and treatment. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 252-281.
[41]	Sofaer, J. (2011). Towards a social bioarchaeology of age. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 285-311.
[42]	Halcrow, S. E., & Tayles, N. (2011). The bioarchaeological investigation of children and childhood. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, 333-360.
[43]	Glencross, B. A. (2011). Skeletal injury across the life course. Towards understanding social agency. In. Agarwal, S. C., & Glencross, B. A. Social Bioarchaeology. London. Wiley-Blackwell, p. 390-409.
[44]	Chapman, R., & Randsborg, K. (1981). Approaches to the archaeology of death. In. Chapman, R., Kinnes, I, Randsborg, K. The Archaeology of Death. London. Cambridge University Press, 1-24.
[45]	Huntington, R., & Metcalf, P. (1992). Celebrations of death: the anthropology of mortuary ritual. 2. ed. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
[46]	O´Shea, J. (1981). Social configurations and the archaeological study of mortuary practices: a case study. In. Chapman, R., Kinnes, I., Randsborg, K. The Archaeology of Death. London. Cambridge University Press, 39-52.
[47]	Bastos, R. L., Souza, M. C. (2010). Normas de gerenciamento do patrimônio arqueológico. IPHAN. São Paulo. Superintendência Regional do IPHAN.
[48]	Brasil. (2017). Código Penal. Decreto-Lei nº 2.848, de 7 de dezembro de 1940. Brasília: Senado Federal, Coordenação de Edições Técnicas.
[49]	Silva, S. F. S. M., Fontes, L. R. O., Fuzinato, D. V. (2008). Relatório preliminar do plano de arqueografia das deposições funerárias do Mosteiro da Luz, São Paulo (jan. - dez. 2008). São Paulo, MAE-USP/MAS-SP/IPHAN (not published).
[50]	Alacântara, T. M. (2015). Vida e morte em clausura: arqueologia do corpo de mulheres do Recolhimento da Luz, São Paulo, Sécs. XVIII e XIX. Departamento de Arqueologia, Centro de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas. Recife. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco.
[51]	Grave, J., & Netto, C. (s.d.). Lello Universal. Novo Diccionario Encyclopedico Luso-brasileiro. Porto. Lello & Irmão Editores, v. 1-4.
[52]	Bazin, G. (1961). Historia del Arte (de la prehistoria a nuestros dias). Barcelona. Ediciones Omega.
[53]	Lima, T. A. (1994) De morcegos e caveiras a cruzes e livros: a representação da morte nos cemitérios cariocas do século XIX (estudo de identidade e mobilidade sociais). Anais do Museu Paulista. História e Cultura Material. São Paulo. Museu Paulista da Universidade de São Paulo. 2: 87-150.
[54]	Silva, J. A. F. (2000). Tratado de Direito Funerário. São Paulo. Método, v. 1-2.
[55]	Ariès, P. (1981). O Homem diante da Morte. Rio de Janeiro. Francisco Alves, v. 1.
[56]	Sprague, R. (2005). Burial Terminology. A guide for researchers. New York. Altamira Press.
[57]	Silva, S. F. S. M. (2005-2006). Terminologias e classificações usadas para descrever sepultamentos humanos: exemplos e sugestões. Revista do Museu de Arqueologia e Etnologia, São Paulo. MAE-USP, (15-16): 113-138.
[58]	Oliveira, M. A. S. (2018). Práticas funerárias na Arqueologia: pluralidades e patrimônio. CLIO Série Arqueológica. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco. 33 (2): 1-43.
[59]	Silva, S. F. S. M. (2019) Forensic Anthropology and Archaeology in Brazil. Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology - Biological Anthropology of Latin America Historical Development and Recent Advances, v. 1, p. 31-39.
[60]	Lawer, D. ;F.(2016). Differential diagnosis in archaeology. International Journal of Paleopathology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpp.2016.05.001
[61]	Mays, S. (2018). How should we diagnose disease in paleopathology? Some epistemological considerations. International Journal of Paleopathology. 20 (2018) 12-19.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira, Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva. (2021). Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage. International Journal of Archaeology, 9(2), 62-73. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira; Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva. Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage. Int. J. Archaeol. 2021, 9(2), 62-73. doi: 10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira, Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva. Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage. Int J Archaeol. 2021;9(2):62-73. doi: 10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15,
  author = {Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira and Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva},
  title = {Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage},
  journal = {International Journal of Archaeology},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {62-73},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ija.20210902.15},
  abstract = {This article presents an aspect of the configuration of the studies of funerary practices in archaeology, first in terms of their plural perspectives and intersecting spaces, such as mortuary studies, funerary archaeology, social bioarchaeology and archaeology-anthropology of death; and in a second moment, with emphasis on the issue of cemeteries as historical archaeological heritage. It was based on an article initially published in Revista Clio Série Arqueológica, a periodical of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil, which dealt with the issue of the relationship between funerary sites, funerary practices and archaeological heritage. From a review of the random archaeological bibliography, the intersections between a general archaeological theory of material culture and as bioarchaeologies were verified, on the one hand in the international perspective and hermetic legislation and burial terminologies, on the other hand, in the perspective of the case from Brazil. In the first case, hypotheses were formulated to characterize funerary contexts and non-funerary contexts in relation to funerary cycles. In the second case, exemplified sites and funerary terminologies linked with the proper funerary contexts - the heritage-cemeteries in the case of Brazil. Heritage-cemeteries contain objects of material culture, closely related to human skeletal remains, comprising artifacts or primordial, symbolic, sensitive structures, representing an innovative intersectional area, with the body amalgamated with artifacts and funerary structures, within the studies of funeral practices, perhaps necessarily, in the underground and aboveground approaches.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage
AU  - Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira
AU  - Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva
Y1  - 2021/11/23
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
DO  - 10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
T2  - International Journal of Archaeology
JF  - International Journal of Archaeology
JO  - International Journal of Archaeology
SP  - 62
EP  - 73
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-7595
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
AB  - This article presents an aspect of the configuration of the studies of funerary practices in archaeology, first in terms of their plural perspectives and intersecting spaces, such as mortuary studies, funerary archaeology, social bioarchaeology and archaeology-anthropology of death; and in a second moment, with emphasis on the issue of cemeteries as historical archaeological heritage. It was based on an article initially published in Revista Clio Série Arqueológica, a periodical of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil, which dealt with the issue of the relationship between funerary sites, funerary practices and archaeological heritage. From a review of the random archaeological bibliography, the intersections between a general archaeological theory of material culture and as bioarchaeologies were verified, on the one hand in the international perspective and hermetic legislation and burial terminologies, on the other hand, in the perspective of the case from Brazil. In the first case, hypotheses were formulated to characterize funerary contexts and non-funerary contexts in relation to funerary cycles. In the second case, exemplified sites and funerary terminologies linked with the proper funerary contexts - the heritage-cemeteries in the case of Brazil. Heritage-cemeteries contain objects of material culture, closely related to human skeletal remains, comprising artifacts or primordial, symbolic, sensitive structures, representing an innovative intersectional area, with the body amalgamated with artifacts and funerary structures, within the studies of funeral practices, perhaps necessarily, in the underground and aboveground approaches.
VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira

Department of Archaeology, Federal University of Pernambuco, Pernambuco, Brazil
Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva

Department of Archaeology, Federal University of Pernambuco, Pernambuco, Brazil

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira, Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva. (2021). Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage. International Journal of Archaeology, 9(2), 62-73. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira; Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva. Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage. Int. J. Archaeol. 2021, 9(2), 62-73. doi: 10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira, Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva. Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage. Int J Archaeol. 2021;9(2):62-73. doi: 10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15,
  author = {Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira and Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva},
  title = {Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage},
  journal = {International Journal of Archaeology},
  volume = {9},
  number = {2},
  pages = {62-73},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ija.20210902.15},
  abstract = {This article presents an aspect of the configuration of the studies of funerary practices in archaeology, first in terms of their plural perspectives and intersecting spaces, such as mortuary studies, funerary archaeology, social bioarchaeology and archaeology-anthropology of death; and in a second moment, with emphasis on the issue of cemeteries as historical archaeological heritage. It was based on an article initially published in Revista Clio Série Arqueológica, a periodical of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil, which dealt with the issue of the relationship between funerary sites, funerary practices and archaeological heritage. From a review of the random archaeological bibliography, the intersections between a general archaeological theory of material culture and as bioarchaeologies were verified, on the one hand in the international perspective and hermetic legislation and burial terminologies, on the other hand, in the perspective of the case from Brazil. In the first case, hypotheses were formulated to characterize funerary contexts and non-funerary contexts in relation to funerary cycles. In the second case, exemplified sites and funerary terminologies linked with the proper funerary contexts - the heritage-cemeteries in the case of Brazil. Heritage-cemeteries contain objects of material culture, closely related to human skeletal remains, comprising artifacts or primordial, symbolic, sensitive structures, representing an innovative intersectional area, with the body amalgamated with artifacts and funerary structures, within the studies of funeral practices, perhaps necessarily, in the underground and aboveground approaches.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Funerary Practices in Archaeology: Pluralities & Heritage
AU  - Maria Aparecida Silva Oliveira
AU  - Sérgio Francisco Serafim Monteiro Silva
Y1  - 2021/11/23
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
DO  - 10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
T2  - International Journal of Archaeology
JF  - International Journal of Archaeology
JO  - International Journal of Archaeology
SP  - 62
EP  - 73
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2330-7595
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20210902.15
AB  - This article presents an aspect of the configuration of the studies of funerary practices in archaeology, first in terms of their plural perspectives and intersecting spaces, such as mortuary studies, funerary archaeology, social bioarchaeology and archaeology-anthropology of death; and in a second moment, with emphasis on the issue of cemeteries as historical archaeological heritage. It was based on an article initially published in Revista Clio Série Arqueológica, a periodical of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil, which dealt with the issue of the relationship between funerary sites, funerary practices and archaeological heritage. From a review of the random archaeological bibliography, the intersections between a general archaeological theory of material culture and as bioarchaeologies were verified, on the one hand in the international perspective and hermetic legislation and burial terminologies, on the other hand, in the perspective of the case from Brazil. In the first case, hypotheses were formulated to characterize funerary contexts and non-funerary contexts in relation to funerary cycles. In the second case, exemplified sites and funerary terminologies linked with the proper funerary contexts - the heritage-cemeteries in the case of Brazil. Heritage-cemeteries contain objects of material culture, closely related to human skeletal remains, comprising artifacts or primordial, symbolic, sensitive structures, representing an innovative intersectional area, with the body amalgamated with artifacts and funerary structures, within the studies of funeral practices, perhaps necessarily, in the underground and aboveground approaches.
VL  - 9
IS  - 2
ER  -

Copy | Download