UCL INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY

ARCLG281: FUNERARY ARCHAEOLOGY

2013-14

15 credits

Co-ordinator: MIKE PARKER PEARSON

m.parker-pearson@ucl.ac.uk
Room 310 02076794767

1
1 OVERVIEW

Short description
How we dispose of and commemorate our dead is fundamental to human culture. Human remains
are some of the most significant archaeological finds and archaeologists have to know something
about the diversity of attitudes and practices relating to the dead. This half-module begins with the
study of methods and techniques of analysis, followed by a survey of contemporary societies' funerary
practices and the variety of human responses to death. It then focuses on the interpretive theories and
models that have been used to reconstruct the social significance of funerary treatment in past
societies. Case studies will focus on the interpretation of rank and status, ritual and symbolism,
territory and legitimation, and the ethical and legal aspects of exhumation and reburial. These studies
will range across a wide variety of periods and places, from the Lower Palaeolithic to the present day.

Week-by-week summary

TERM 1

1.10.13 14:00 1. Introduction to funerary archaeology: course organization

8.10.13 14:00 2. Principles of analysis: ritual and remembrance

15.10.13 14:00 3. Ethnoarchaeology of death

22.10.13 14:00 4. Reading the body, treating the corpse

29.10.13 14:00 5. Status, power and identity: the powerful dead

5.11.13 14:00 6 Death in the landscape

12.11.13 14:00 7. Death and the origins of human consciousness

19.11.13 14:00 8. READING WEEK (NO TEACHING)

26.11.13 14:00 9. The human experience of death

3.12.13 14:00 10. The politics of the dead

10.12.13 14:00 11. Funerary powerpoint karaoke

Basic texts
Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Stroud: Sutton. ISSUE DESK IoA PAR 8,
INST ARCH AH PAR
Pettitt, P. 2010. The Palaeolithic Origins of Human Burial. London: Routledge. ISSUE DESK IoA PET 20, INST
ARCH BC 120 PET
Huntington, R. and Metcalf, P. 1979. Celebrations of Death: the anthropology of mortuary ritual. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. ANTHROPOLOGY D 155 HUN
Knsel, C. and Gowland, R. (eds) 2006. Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains. Oxford: Oxbow. INST ARCH
JF Qto GOW
Tarlow, S. and Nilsson Stutz, L. (eds) 2013. The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Death and Burial.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

2
Methods of assessment
This course is assessed by means of two pieces of coursework, each of 2,500 words,
which each contribute 50% to the final grade for the course.

Teaching methods
The course is taught through lectures/seminars. In addition, a gallery visit will be
arranged to give students greater familiarity with the materials covered in the course.

Workload
There will be 20 hours of seminars for this course. Students will be expected to
undertake around 90 hours of reading for the course, plus 40 hours preparing for and
producing the assessed work. This adds up to a total workload of some 150 hours
for the course.

2 AIMS, OBJECTIVES AND ASSESSMENT

Aims
This half-modules aims are:
to evaluate different types of archaeological and historical evidence
to integrate this variety of evidence in a theoretically informed manner
to explore a range of themes in funerary archaeology
to discuss patterns of human behaviour in funerary archaeology
to explore the relationship between material culture and funerary practices

Objectives
On successful completion of this course a student should:
be familiar with the archaeological and historical sources for past and present
funerary practices
have developed a critical awareness of the ritual, political, social and economic
factors influencing funerary practices
appreciate the problems and potentials of the data available, and be able to apply
this knowledge to a range of archaeological periods
have become familiar with the sources available for funerary archaeology
understand the strengths and weaknesses of the archaeological and
documentary sources for funerary archaeology
understand the need for a broad geographical and chronological approach to
funerary archaeology
Be able to make effective paper and discussion/lecture presentations on the
materials relevant to the course

Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of the course, students should be able to
demonstrate/have developed:
observation and critical reflection
application of acquired knowledge
oral presentation skills

3
Coursework

Assessment tasks
Essay 1a:
How have archaeologists and historians explained the lavishness and monumentality
of the Victorian way of death in Britain?

Curl, J.S. 1972. The Victorian Celebration of Death. Newton Abbott: David and Charles. HISTORY 82
u CUR

Jalland, P. 1999. Victorian death and its decline: 1850 to 1918. In P.C. Jupp and C. Gittings (eds)
Death in England: an illustrated history. Manchester: Manchester University Press. pp. 230-
55. INST ARCH DAA 100 JUP, HISTORY 82 du JUP, ANTHROPOLOGY JA 43 JUP, FLS D
45 JUP

Morley, J. 1971 Death, Heaven and the Victorians. London: Studio Vista.

Tarlow, S. 2011. Ritual, belief and the dead in early modern Britain and Ireland. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. INST ARCH DAA 200 TAR

Essay 1b: How far does the new fashion for green burial reflect a change or decline
in religious belief?

Clayden, A. 2011. Reclaiming and reinterpreting ritual in the woodland burial ground. In P. Post and J.
Kroesen (eds) Sacred Places in Modern Western Culture. Louvain: Peeters. 289-294.

Clayden, A. Hockey, J. and Powell, M. 2010. Natural burial: the de-materialising of death? In J.
Hockey, C. Komaromy, and K. Woodthorpe (eds) The Matter of Death: space, place and materiality.
London: Plagrave. 148-164.

Hockey, J. Green, T. Clayden, A. and Powell, M. 2012. Landscapes of the dead? Natural burial and
the materialisation of absence. Journal of Material Culture 17: 115-32. Electronic resource

Wienrich, S., Speyer, J. and Albery, N. (eds) 2003. The Natural Death Handbook. London: Random
House. Chapters 4, 6 and 9.

Essay 1c: How have methods of archaeological excavation and sampling of human
burials improved in the last 30 years?

Cox M., Flavel A., Hanson I., Laver J. and Wessling R. (eds) 2008. The Scientific Investigation of
Mass Graves: towards protocols and standard operating procedures. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. IoA ISSUE DESK CD COX, INST ARCH JF COX

Duday, H. 2009. The Archaeology of the Dead: lectures in archaeothanatology. Oxford: Oxbow. INST
ARCH JF DUD

Mays, S. 2002. Guidelines for producing assessments and reports on human remains from
archaeological sites. English Heritage/BABAO: London. http://www.babao.org.uk/index/cms-
filesystem-action/eh_human_remains_mays2002.pdf

Submission date: Monday 4 November 2013

Essay 2a:
To what extent to Upper Palaeolithic burials in Europe and western Asia provide
evidence for social structure and social status?

4
Pettitt, P. 2010. The Palaeolithic Origins of Human Burial. London: Routledge. ISSUE DESK IoA PET
20, INST ARCH BC 120 PET

Riel-Salvatore, J. and Gravel-Miguel, C. 2012. Upper Palaeolithic mortuary practices in Eurasia: a

critical look at the burial record. In S. Tarlow and L. Nilsson Stutz, (eds) The Oxford Handbook
of the Archaeology of Death and Burial. Oxford: Oxford University Press.pp. 303-346 (Chapter
17).
http://www.academia.edu/2626398/Upper_Paleolithic_mortuary_practices_in_Eurasia_A_critic
al_look_at_the_burial_record Electronic resource

Vanhaeren, M. and dErrico, F. 2005. Grave goods from the Saint-Germain-la-Rivire burial: evidence
for social inequality in the Upper Palaeolithic. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24: 117-
34. Electronic resource

Zilho, J. 2005. Burial evidence for the social differentiation of age classes in the early Upper
Palaeolithic. In D. Vialou, J. Renault-Miskovsky and M. Patou-Mathis (eds) Comportements
des Hommes du Palolithique Moyen et Suprieur en Europe: territoires et milieux. Actes du
Colloque du G.D.R. 1945 du CNRS, Paris, 8-10 janvier 2003. Lige: ERAUL 111. pp. 231-41.
http://www2.ulg.ac.be/prehist/PUBLICATIONS/PDF/E111%20Zilhao.pdf Electronic resource

Essay 2b:
How have discoveries from rivers and caves in Britain affected interpretations of
Neolithic mortuary practices?

Chamberlain, A.T. 2012. Caves and the funerary landscape of prehistoric Britain. In Moyes, H
(Ed.), Sacred Darkness: a global perspective on the ritual use of caves. Boulder, Colorado:
University Press of Colorado. pp. 81-86. eScholarID:196900 Electronic resource

Lamdin-Whymark, H. 2008. The Residue of Ritualised Action: Neolithic deposition practices in the
middle Thames valley. Oxford: BAR (British Series) 466. INST ARCH DAA Qto Series BRI
466

Schulting, R.J. 2007. Non-monumental burial in Britain: a (largely) cavernous view. In L. Larsson, F.
Lth and T. Terberger (eds) Non-Megalithic Mortuary Practices in the Baltic new methods
and research into the development of Stone Age society. Schwerin: BRGK 88. pp. 581-603.
http://www.academia.edu/543776/Non-
monumental_burial_in_Neolithic_Britain_a_largely_cavernous_view Electronic resource

Thomas, J. 1999. Understanding the Neolithic. London: Routledge. Chapter 6. INST ARCH DAA 140
THO

Essay 2c:
To what extent were cosmological beliefs about the transition to the afterlife in
Egypts New Kingdom embodied in the tomb and its contents?

Faulkner, R.O. 1972. The Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead. London: British Museum. Introduction
(pp.11-16). EGYPTOLOGY V 50 BOO

Reeves, C.N. 1990. The Complete Tutankhamun: the king, the tomb, the royal treasure. London:
Thames & Hudson. (pp. 70-74, 78-91, 100-114, 119-122, 128-149, 188-196, 208-211).
EGYPTOLOGY E 7 REE

Quirke, S. 2013. Going out in Daylight: prt m hrw - the ancient Egyptian book of the dead: translations,
sources, meanings. London: Golden House. EGYPTOLOGY QUARTOS V 30 BOO

5
Spellane, J. 2007. Image into reality: the vignette of Spell 151 of the Book of the Dead, and its
integration throughout the burial of Sennedjem. Archaeological Review from Cambridge
22(1): 58-74. Periodicals

Taylor, J.H. 2001. Death and the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt. London: British Museum. Chapter 3 (pp.
92-111). ISSUE DESK IOA TAY 7, EGYPTOLOGY R 5 TAY

Taylor, J.H. (ed.) 2010. Journey Through the Afterlife : ancient Egyptian book of the dead.
EGYPTOLOGY QUARTOS V 50 BOO

Submission date: Monday 13 January 2014

If students are unclear about the nature of an assignment, they should discuss this
with the Course Co-ordinator.

Students are not permitted to re-write and re-submit essays in order to try to improve
their marks.

The nature of the assignment and possible approaches to it will be discussed in

class, in advance of the submission deadline.

Word-length
Strict new regulations with regard to word-length were introduced UCL-wide with
effect from 2013:

3.1.7 Penalties for Over-length Coursework

For submitted coursework, where a maximum length has been specified, the following
procedure will apply:
i) The length of coursework will normally be specified in terms of a word count
ii) Assessed work should not exceed the prescribed length.
iii) For work that exceeds the specified maximum length by less than10% the mark will
be reduced by ten percentage marks; but the penalised mark will not be reduced below
the pass mark, assuming the work merited a pass.
iv) For work that exceeds the specified maximum length by 10% or more, a mark of zero
will be recorded.
vii) In the case of coursework that is submitted late and is also overlength, the lateness
penalty will have precedence.

The following should not be included in the word-count: title page, contents pages,
lists of figure and tables, abstract, preface, acknowledgements, bibliography,
captions and contents of tables and figures, appendices, and wording of citations.

Submission procedures (coversheets and Turnitin, including Class ID and password)

Students are required to submit hard copy of all coursework to the course co-
ordinators pigeon hole via the Red Essay Box at Reception by the appropriate
deadline. The coursework must be stapled to a completed coversheet (available
from the web, from outside Room 411A or from the library)

Students should put their Candidate Number on all coursework. This is a 5 digit
alphanumeric code and can be found on Portico: it is different from the Student

6
Number/ ID. Please also put the Candidate Number and course code on each page
of the work.

It is also essential that students put their Candidate Number at the start of the title
line on Turnitin, followed by the short title of the coursework.. eg YBPR6 Funerary
Archaeology

Please note the stringent UCL-wide penalties for late submission given below. Late
submission will be penalized in accordance with these regulations unless permission
has been granted and an Extension Request Form (ERF) completed.

Date-stamping will be via Turnitin (see below), so in addition to submitting hard

copy, students must also submit their work to Turnitin by the midnight on the day of
the deadline.

Students who encounter technical problems submitting their work to Turnitin should
email the nature of the problem to ioa-turnitin@ucl.ac.uk in advance of the deadline
in order that the Turnitin Advisers can notify the Course Co-ordinator that it may be
appropriate to waive the late submission penalty.

If there is any other unexpected crisis on the submission day, students should
telephone or (preferably) e-mail the Course Co-ordinator, and follow this up with a
completed ERF

Please see the Coursework Guidelines on the IoA website (or your Degree
Handbook) for further details of penalties.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook/submission
Hard copy will no longer be date-stamped.

The Turnitin 'Class ID' is XXXXX and the 'Class Enrolment Password' is
IoA1314 Further information is given on the IoA website.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook/turnitin
Turnitin advisers will be available to help you via email: ioa-turnitin@ucl.ac.uk if
needed.

UCL-WIDE PENALTIES FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF COURSEWORK

UCL regulation 3.1.6 Late Submission of Coursework

Where coursework is not submitted by a published deadline, the following penalties will
apply:
i) A penalty of 5 percentage marks should be applied to coursework
submitted the calendar day after the deadline (calendar day 1).
ii) A penalty of 15 percentage marks should be applied to coursework submitted on
calendar day 2 after the deadline through to calendar day 7.
iii) A mark of zero should be recorded for coursework submitted on calendar day 8 after
the deadline through to the end of the second week of third term. Nevertheless, the
assessment will be considered to be complete provided the coursework contains material
than can be assessed.
iv) Coursework submitted after the end of the second week of third term will not be
marked and the assessment will be incomplete.

7
vii) Where there are extenuating circumstances that have been recognised by the Board
of Examiners or its representative, these penalties will not apply until the agreed
extension period has been exceeded.
viii) In the case of coursework that is submitted late and is also over length, only the
lateness penalty will apply.

Timescale for return of marked coursework to students.

You can expect to receive your marked work within four calendar weeks of the official
submission deadline. If you do not receive your work within this period, or a written
explanation from the marker, you should notify the IoAs Academic Administrator,
Judy Medrington.

Keeping copies
Please note that it is an Institute requirement that you retain a copy (this can be
electronic) of all coursework submitted. When your marked essay is returned to you,
you should return it to the marker within two weeks.

Citing of sources
Coursework should be expressed in a students own words giving the exact source of
any ideas, information, diagrams etc. that are taken from the work of others. Any
direct quotations from the work of others must be indicated as such by being placed
between inverted commas. Plagiarism is regarded as a very serious irregularity
which can carry very heavy penalties. It is your responsibility to read and abide by
the requirements for presentation, referencing and avoidance of plagiarism to be
found in the IoA Coursework Guidelines on the IoA website
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook

There are strict penalties for plagiarism. Further details are available on the IoA
website.

AVOIDING PLAGIARISM
The term plagiarism means presenting material (words, figures etc.) in a way
that allows the reader to believe that it is the work of the author he or she is reading,
when it is in fact the creation of another person.
In academic and other circles, plagiarism is regarded as theft of intellectual
property. UCL regulations, all detected plagiarism is to be penalized and noted on
the students record, irrespective of whether the plagiarism is committed knowingly or
unintentionally. The whole process of an allegation of plagiarism and its investigation
is likely to cause considerable personal embarrassment and to leave a very
unpleasant memory in addition to the practical consequences of the penalty. The
penalties can be surprizingly severe and may include failing a course or a whole
degree. It is thus important to take deliberate steps to avoid any inadvertent
plagiarism.
Avoiding plagiarism should start at the stage of taking notes. In your notes, it
should be wholly clear what is taken directly from a source, what is a paraphrase of
the content of a source and what is your own synthesis or original thought. Make
sure you include sources and relevant page numbers in your notes.
When writing an essay any words and special meanings, any special phrases,
any clauses or sentences taken directly from a source must be enclosed in inverted
commas and followed by a reference to the source in brackets. It is not generally

8
necessary to use direct quotations except when comparing particular terms or
phrases used by different authors. Similarly, all figures and tables taken from sources
must have their origin acknowledged in the caption. Captions do not contribute to any
maximum word lengths.
Paraphrased information taken from a source must be followed by a reference
to the source. If a paragraph contains information from several sources, it must be
made clear what information comes from where: a list of sources at the end of the
paragraph is not sufficient. Please cite sources of information fully, including page
numbers where appropriate, in order to avoid any risk of plagiarism: citations in the
text do not contribute to any maximum word count.
To guard further against inadvertent plagiarism, you may find it helpful to write
a plan of your coursework answer or essay and to write the coursework primarily on
the basis of your plan, only referring to sources or notes when you need to check
something specific such as a page number for a citation.
COLLUSION, except where required, is also an examination offence. While
discussing topics and questions with fellow students is one of the benefits of learning
in a university environment, you should always plan and write your coursework
answers entirely independently.

3 SCHEDULE AND SYLLABUS

Teaching schedule
Seminars will be held 14:00-16:00 on Tuesdays, in room 612. One visit will be
scheduled to the British Museum. It is anticipated that this will be held in the fourth
week of the autumn term, subject to finalization of the arrangements and discussion
with the class. Further details will be announced closer to the date.
Lecturer: Mike Parker Pearson.

Syllabus
The following is an outline for the course as a whole, and identifies essential and
supplementary readings relevant to each session. Information is provided as to
where in the UCL library system individual readings are available; their location and
Teaching Collection (TC) number, and status (whether out on loan) can also be
accessed on the eUCLid computer catalogue system. Readings marked with an *
are considered essential to keep up with the topics covered in the course. Copies of
individual articles and chapters identified as essential reading are in the Teaching
Collection in the Institute Library (where permitted by copyright) or are available
online.

1. Introduction to funerary archaeology

This lecture introduces students to the main themes and directions of funerary
archaeology, from methods of excavation and analysis to concepts and principles for
investigating ritual and social dimensions of funerary practices in past societies. It is
an opportunity to discuss the theoretical and empirical influences on the development
of funerary archaeology.

Reading:
Bahn, P.G. (ed.) 1996 Tombs, Graves and Mummies. London: Weidenfeld &
Nicolson. 34-87, 92-133, 146-51, 180-99. INST ARCH AG BAH

9
Chapman, R. and Randsborg, K. 1981. Perspectives on the archaeology of death. In
R. Chapman, I.A. Kinnes and K. Randsborg (eds) The Archaeology of Death.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1-24. ISSUE DESK IOA CHA 7,
INST ARCH BC 100 Qto CHA
Duday, H. 2009. The Archaeology of the Dead: lectures in archaeothanatology.
Oxford: Oxbow. INST ARCH JF DUD
Mays, S. 2002. Guidelines for producing assessments and reports on human
remains from archaeological sites. English Heritage/BABAO: London.
http://www.babao.org.uk/index/cms-filesystem-
action/eh_human_remains_mays2002.pdf

2. Principles of analysis: ritual and remembrance

How do archaeologists identify and characterize ritual, with regard to the treatment of
human remains? What are the concepts of ritual, liminality, remembrance, and
materiality? How do concepts of reversal, separation, transition, decay, fertility and
sex have relevance for understanding mortuary rites and rituals? These are
questions that will be addressed in this seminar.

Reading:
Huntington, R. and Metcalf, P. 1979. Celebrations of Death: the anthropology of
mortuary ritual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chgapter 3. INST
ARCH FA INS, ANTHROPOLOGY D 155 HUN
Insoll, T. 2004. Archaeology, Ritual, Religion. London: Routledge. 10-12, 65-100.
ANTHROPOLOGY D 100 INS
Insoll, T. (ed.) 2011. The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Ritual and Religion.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. INST ARCH FA INS
Kyriakidis, E. 2007. Finding ritual: calibrating the evidence. In E. Kyriakidis (ed.) The
Archaeology of Ritual. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. 9-22. INST
ARCH AH KYR
Vanzetti, A., Vidale, M., Gallinaro, M., Frayer, D.W. and Bondioli, L. 2010. The
iceman as a burial. Antiquity 84: 681-92. Electronic resource

3. Ethnoarchaeology of death
Archaeologists have drawn on ethnographic and ethnoarchaeological studies to
develop a wide range of analogies for understanding the archaeology of mortuary
practices. This seminar examines different types of analogy and their relative uses
and limitations for understanding the past.

Reading:
Ucko, P.J. 1969. Ethnography and archaeological interpretation of funerary remains.
World Archaeology 1: 262-80. Electronic resource
Binford, L. 1971. Mortuary practices: their study and their potential. In J. Brown (ed.)
Approaches to the Social Dimensions of Mortuary Practices. Washington DC:
Memoir of the Society for American Archaeology 25. 6-29. ISSUE DESK IoA
BRO5, INST ARCH BD BRO
Danforth, L.M. 1982. The Death Rituals of Rural Greece. Princeton: Princeton
University Press. Gr.IV DAN, ANTHROPOLOGY LT 43 DAN
Parker Pearson, M. 1982. Mortuary practices, society and ideology: an
ethnoarchaeological case study. In I. Hodder (ed.) Symbolic and Structural

10
 Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 99-113. ISSUE DESK
IOA HOD 12 , INST ARCH AH HOD, ANTHROPOLOGY C 7 HOD
David, N. and Kramer, C. 2001. Ethnoarchaeology in Action. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. Chapter 13 (378-408). ISSUE DESK IoA DAV8, INST ARCH
AH DAV
Mack, J. 1986. Madagascar: island of the ancestors. London: British Museum Press.
62-92. INST ARCH MG 3 MAC
Bloch, M. 1971. Placing the Dead: tombs, ancestral villages and kinship organization
in Madagascar. London: Seminar Press. INST ARCH DCD BLO
Kus, S. 1992 Toward an archaeology of body and soul. In J.-C. Gardin and C.S.
Peebles (eds.) Representations in Archaeology. Bloomington: Indiana
University Press. 168-77. INST ARCH AH GAR
Parker Pearson, M. 2000. Eating money: a study in the ethnoarchaeology of food.
Archaeological Dialogues 7: 217-32. Electronic resource
Parker Pearson, M. 2010. Pastoralists, Warriors and Colonists: the archaeology of
southern Madagascar. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports (International
Series) S2139. 472-510. INST ARCH DCD Qto PAR

4. Reading the body, treating the corpse

Human remains may be exposed to lengthy post-mortem treatments: mummification,
cannibalism, trophy-taking, cremation, excarnation and skull decoration amongst
other activities. This seminar examines the material residues of different methods of
post-mortem treatment to understand their social implications and significance.

Reading:
Armit, I. 2012. Headhunting and the Body in Iron Age Europe. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 45-68.
Rebay-Salisbury, K. 2010. Cremations: fragmented bodies in the Bronze and
Iron Ages. In K. Rebay-Salisbury, M.-L. Stig Srensen and J. Hughes (eds)
2010. Body Parts and Bodies Whole: changing relations and meanings.
Oxford: Oxbow. 64-71. INST ARCH DA 100 REB
Turner, C.G. 1993. Cannibalism in Chaco Canyon: the charnel pit excavated in 1926
at Small House Ruin by Frank H.H. Roberts, Jr. American Journal of Physical
Anthropology 91: 412-39. Electronic resource
Boulestin, B., Zeeb-Lanz, A., Jeunesse, C., Haack, F., Arbogast, R.-M. and Denaire,
A. 2009. Mass cannibalism in the Linear Pottery Culture at Herxheim
(Palatinate, Germany). Antiquity 83: 968-82. Electronic resource
Tarlow, S. 2002. The aesthetic corpse in nineteenth-century Britain. In Y. Hamilakis,
M. Pluciennik and S. Tarlow (eds) 2002. Thinking through the body:
archaeologies of corporeality. London: Kluwer. 85-97. ISSUE DESK IOA HAM
4, INST ARCH BD HAM
Degusta, D. 2000. Fijian cannibalism and mortuary ritual: bioarchaeological evidence
from Vunda. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 10: 76-92. Electronic
resource
Chamberlain, A.T. and Parker Pearson, M. 2001 Earthly Remains: the history and
science of preserved human bodies. London: British Museum. 169-88. INST
ARCH JF CHA

5. Status, power and identity: the powerful dead

11
Archaeologists have long used burial rites to interpret social status of the deceased.
With the understanding that the dead do not bury themselves, more sophisticated
approaches to social ranking have emerged. This seminar examines the different
approaches to interpreting social status, including the political and ideological impact
on those holding funerals and those being commemorated.

Reading:
Peebles, C. and Kus, S. 1977. Some archaeological correlates of ranked societies.
American Antiquity 42: 421-48. Electronic resource.
Arnold, B. 2011. The illusion of power, the power of illusion: ideology and the
concretization of social difference in Early-Iron Age Europe. In Bernbeck, R. and
McGuire, R.H. (eds) Ideologies in Archaeology. Tucson: University of Arizona
Press. 151-72. INST ARCH AG BER
Morris, I. 1992. Death-ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 31-69. ANCIENT HISTORY M 55 MOR
Wason, P. 1994. The Archaeology of Rank. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. INST ARCH BD WAS
Williams, H. 2004. Death warmed up: the agency of bodies and bones in early Anglo-
Saxon cremation rites. Journal of Material Culture 9: 263-91. Electronic
resource

6. Death in the landscape

The dead are all around us, in monuments, mementos and memories as well as their
physical remains. This seminar explores spatial, topographical and
phenomenological approaches to placing the dead in the landscapes of past
societies in order to understand how relationships were constructed and maintained
between the living and the dead.

Reading:
Bradley, R. 2002. The Past in Prehistoric Societies. London: Routledge. 82-111.
INST ARCH DA 100 BRA
Tilley, C. 2004. The Materiality of Stone: explorations in landscape phenomenology.
London: Berg. 1-31. ANTHROPOLOGY C 7 TIL, INST ARCH DA 100 TIL
Cummings, V., Henley, C. and Sharples, N. 2005. The chambered cairns of South
Uist. In V. Cummings and A. Pannett (eds) Set in Stone: new approaches to
Neolithic monuments in Scotland. Oxford: Oxbow. 37-54. INST ARCH DAA 500
Qto CUM
Fleming, A. 2006. Post-processual landscape archaeology: a critique. Cambridge
Archaeological Journal 16: 267-80. Electronic resource

7. Death and the origins of human consciousness

In contrast with other primates, humans have an unusually developed sense of
mortality, treating the remains of their species with a dazzling variety of post-mortem
practices. How and why did this come about, and at what stages in our evolution?
How did it develop in relation to other indices of self-awareness, and what were its
long-term implications for human evolution and adaptation?

Reading:
Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Stroud: Sutton.
142-56. ISSUE DESK IoA PAR 8, INST ARCH AH PAR

12
Insoll, T. 2004. Archaeology, Ritual, Religion. London: Routledge. 23-32.
ANTHROPOLOGY D 100 INS
Pettitt, P. 2010. The Palaeolithic Origins of Human Burial. London: Routledge. 11-40,
261-70. ISSUE DESK IoA PET 20, INST ARCH BC 120 PET
Taylor, T. 2002. The Buried Soul: how humans invented death. London: Fourth
Estate. 56-85.

9. The human experience of death

Archaeology can provide insights into the human awareness of death as it evolved
over thousands of years from the earliest civilizations to the world religions and
secular humanism of today. In that time, humans have sought to transcend their
tragic limitation by seeking paths to immortality on both sides of the grave. This
seminar examines the archaeological evidence for these attempts to transcend
mortality over the last 10,000 years of social evolution from small-scale hunter-
gatherers to urban states.

Reading:
Chidester, D. 1990. Patterns of Transcendence: religion, death, and dying. Belmont
CA: Wadsworth. 169-216.
Kuijt, I. 1996. Negotiating equality through ritual: a consideration of Late Natufian and
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A period mortuary practices. Journal of Anthropological
Archaeology 15: 313-36. Electronic resource
Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Stroud: Sutton.
156-70. ISSUE DESK IoA PAR 8, INST ARCH AH PAR
Taylor, J.H. 2001. Death and the Afterlife in Ancient Egypt. London: British Museum
Press. 10-45. EGYPTOLOGY R 5 TAY

10. The politics of the dead

The dead have always been political, but today archaeologists and museums face
challenges from ethnic and religious minorities for reburial and repatriation of human
remains and associated materials. In addition, archaeologists are often involved in
forensic investigations of genocide and other recent atrocities, bringing them into
potential conflict with state authorities as well as local communities.

Reading:
Zimmerman, L.J. 1989. Made radical by my own: an archaeologist learns to accept
reburial. In R. Layton (ed.) Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions.
London : Unwin Hyman. 60-7. ISSUE DESK IoA LAY 5 , INST ARCH BD
LAY, ANTHROPOLOGY C 6 LAY
Cox M., Flavel A., Hanson I., Laver J. and Wessling R. (eds) 2008. The Scientific
Investigation of Mass Graves: towards protocols and standard operating
procedures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. IoA ISSUE DESK CD
COX, INST ARCH JF COX
Sayer, D. 2010. Ethics and Burial Archaeology. London: Duckworth. INST ARCH AG
20 SAY
Parker Pearson, M., Moshenska, G. and Schadla-Hall, T. 2012. Resolving the human
remains crisis in British archaeology. PIA: Papers from the Institute of
Archaeology 21: 6-34. Electronic resource

13
BABAO n.d. Code of Ethics. BABAO: London. http://www.babao.org.uk/index/cms-
filesystem-action/code of ethics.pdf

11. Funerary powerpoint karaoke

This is your opportunity to show what you have learned. Each person in the class
must give a 2-minute, stand-up presentation of a randomly chosen series of
powerpoint slides selected by the course co-ordinator. The audience can join in to
help explain the content of the slides if the presenter is struggling. This is meant to be
a light-hearted finale for the half-module.

4 ONLINE RESOURCES

The full UCL Institute of Archaeology coursework guidelines are given here:
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/students/handbook
The full text of this handbook is available here (includes clickable links to Moodle and
online reading lists if applicable)
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/archaeology/administration/staff/handbook

Online reading list

http://readinglists.ucl.ac.uk/lists/C7E22994-3847-1714-E079-80EFD041BFA0.html

Moodle
Access code ARCLG281

5 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Libraries and other resources

In addition to the Library of the Institute of Archaeology, other libraries in UCL with
holdings of particular relevance to this degree are: History, Science

Attendance
A register will be taken at each class. If you are unable to attend a class, please
notify the lecturer by email. Departments are required to report each students
attendance to UCL Registry at frequent intervals throughout each term. Students
are expected to attend at least 70% of classes.

Information for intercollegiate and interdepartmental students

Students enrolled in Departments outside the Institute should collect hard copy of the
Institutes coursework guidelines from Judy Medringtons office (411A).

Dyslexia
If you have dyslexia or any other disability, please make your lecturers aware of this.
Please discuss with your lecturers whether there is any way in which they can help
you. Students with dyslexia are reminded to indicate this on each piece of
coursework.

14
Feedback
In trying to make this course as effective as possible, we welcome feedback from
students during the course of the year. All students are asked to give their views on
the course in an anonymous questionnaire which will be circulated at one of the last
sessions of the course. These questionnaires are taken seriously and help the
Course Co-ordinator to develop the course. The summarised responses are
considered by the Institute's Staff-Student Consultative Committee, Teaching
Committee, and by the Faculty Teaching Committee.

If students are concerned about any aspect of this course we hope they will feel able
to talk to the Course Co-ordinator, but if they feel this is not appropriate, they should
consult their Personal Tutor, the Academic Administrator (Judy Medrington), or the
Chair of Teaching Committee (Dr. Karen Wright).

15
 HOW TO UPLOAD YOUR WORK TO TURNITIN
Note that Turnitin uses the term class for what we normally call a course.

1. Ensure that your essay or other item of coursework has been saved properly, and that you
have the Class ID for the course (available from the course handbook) and enrolment
password (this is IoA1314 for all courses this session - note that this is capital letter I, lower
case letter o, upper case A, followed by the current academic year)

2. Click on http://www.submit.ac.uk (NB not www.turnitin.com, which is the US site) or copy

this URL into your favourite web browser

3. Click on Create account

4. Select your category as Student

5. Create an account using your UCL email address. Note that you will be asked to specify a new
password for your account - do not use your UCL password or the enrolment password, but
invent one of your own (Turnitin will permanently associate this with your account, so you will
not have to change it every 3 months, unlike your UCL password). In addition, you will be
asked for a Class ID and a Class enrollment password (see point 1 above).

6. Once you have created an account you can just log in at http://www.submit.ac.uk and enrol
for your other classes without going through the new user process again. Simply click on
Enroll in a class. Make sure you have all the relevant class IDs at hand.

7. Click on the course to which you wish to submit your work.

8. Click on the correct assignment (e.g. Essay 1).

9. Double-check that you are in the correct course and assignment and then click Submit

10. Attach document as a Single file upload

11. Enter your name (the examiner will not be able to see this)

12. Fill in the Submission title field with the right details: It is essential that the first word in the
title is your examination candidate number (e.g. YGBR8 In what sense can culture be said to
evolve?), and not your name.

13. Click Upload. When the upload is finished, you will be able to see a text-only version of your
submission.

14 Click on Submit

If you have problems, please email the Turnitin Advisers on ioa-turnitin@ucl.ac.uk, explaining the
nature of the problem and the exact course and assignment involved.

One of the Turnitin Advisers will normally respond within 24 hours, Monday-Friday during term.
Please be sure to email the Turnitin Advisers if technical problems prevent you from uploading work
in time to meet a submission deadline - even if you do not obtain an immediate response from one
of the Advisers they will be able to notify the relevant Course Co-ordinator that you attempted to
submit the work before the deadline.

16
17