Ross Bay Monument Analysis

      In search of Angel grave markers, inspired by the existence of the Pooley Angel (Marker 2 on the map below), we began our exploration of the Ross Bay Cemetery. Unexpectedly, we were came across very few other angel monuments but were instead inspired by the sheer variation of originality of many grave markers. Our goal then shifted to an inspection of grand and visually inspiring markers. In this, we hoped we would be able to glean information as to the possible socio-economic standing in relation to the likelihood of elaborate (seemingly expensive) grave markers. Building upon this, we have decided to correlate this socio-economic standing and the possibility of family groupings of graves under the same markers.

  Our inspection of unique grave markers prompted us to outline 11 monuments, both new and old. We have mapped them in order to find links between placement in the cemetery, age of the graves and likely economic standing. By utilizing these diagnostic examples, while still being aware of other relevant  markers such as mausoleums, it became apparent that there was a greater concentration within the North East portion of the cemetery. The examples within this area generally seem to be elaborate and large. Judging by the dates on many markers, it is safe to assume that this is also one of the oldest sections of the yard. As we move South, and eventually east towards and along the ocean, though we see much variation and exemplary graves, they tend to be smaller in scale and slightly less ornate. However, the western edge and south-western perimeter show less diversity and more regulated patterning of basic markers. Through this layout inferences can be made as to the wealth and standing of individuals buried. The older, north-eastern corner can be interpreted as having a higher concentration of wealthy individuals. This can be somewhat misleading, as we do find many smaller markers, though in general we see higher concentrations of figures and other notable markers. Moving towards the south-east, situated between the Chinese and First Nations sections of Ross Bay (Adams, 1983) we again find small concentrations of unique grave markers. These seem to be more recent, and though smaller than the aforementioned examples, indicate that the individuals were wealthier than those surrounding them and desired uniqueness. Although we do see a spread of large markers, it does appear that certain areas of the cemetery contain greater concentrations of such graves.
 
Our second focus was to inspect the graves and see if we can determine any patterns in family graves. In this, we inspected grave transcriptions to see if it was possible to find whole families being represented by these large markers. In this, we were able to see a much greater distinction between the main north-eastern versus south-western concentrations. With the exception of the baby chair (though separate plaques for family members exist in close relation), all in the older corner of the yard contain transcriptions of whole families being kept together. For example, the Bossi grave (map item 1) includes Giacomo Bossi, in addition to his wife and children (Adams, 1983). Interestingly, Giacomo's daughter died roughly 30 years after any of the others and this has been clearly indicated. Similar trends are found throughout this conglomeration, as well as the Behnson grave, which is slightly more southern in orientation. The other grouping is quite different however. Graves such as the Eagle, sundial and tree trunk are either placed for an individual or a simply a couple. As these graves tend to be more recent, a change in burial techniques can be inferred. This can also serve to outline different cultural practices concerning death within a family or society (Binford, 1971). Less emphasis was placed on keeping whole families together underneath one massive stone monument and instead a greater focus was placed on the individual.

By examining grave differences we were able to determine basic pattern and grouping changes. Though we had not anticipated change over time, by looking at family relations we were able to see a divergence away from large family burials, and instead much and emphasis was put on the individual. By walking through the whole cemetery there were definite concentrations of simple and elaborate burials, which we can assume mark preferred burial plots. The later unique burials generally seemed to be smaller, though still differentiated and raised above other simple stones or plaques. This gives insight into divergent socio-economic standing and the ability to afford a family or personal monument. By only conducting an initial overview of the cemetery we are limited in making exact interpretations we can begin to make inferences. With a larger scale study, including all monuments found in the cemetery,  we would be able to conclusively prove all of these related aspects.

References Consulted:

1. Adams, J. 1983. Historic guide to Ross Bay Cemetery. Victoria, BC: Sono Nis Press.

2. Binford, L. 1971. Mortuary practices: Their study and their potential. Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, (25), 6-29.

View Ross Bay Cemetery in a larger map

Uncontacted Tribe

OK, so this isn't Death related. Or even archaeology. But it's a pretty cool video anthropologically and maybe someone will be interested.

SDP

A couple thoughts on Gender

Gender in archaeology has been coming up in most of my classes these past 2 weeks. This topic is definitely something I would expect to cover, but it is interesting to have all this overlap. Definitely makes it hard NOT to think about a topic when I am constantly reading or talking about it.

I personally find this to be quite a cantankerous subject as much of the time I find it is impossible to be certain of any factors, and even when the information we are presented with is said to be true there is always the possibility of gender biases. I certainly understand that often ethnographic data points us in the right direction in associating certain types of grave goods with a specific gender, but what about cases where you do not have direct knowledge of this sort. Are archaeologists therefore placing their predisposed notions of gender roles upon newly excavated graves of previously unknown cultures?

Osteological inferences can be used, but for older cultures there is always the possibility that remains will not be preserved. In these cases I find it EXTREMELY difficult to make gender assumptions. Perhaps the individual that you are exhuming was female, but a male counterpart was burying them and decided to place a personal item of his into the grave as protection or a method of mourning?

Though many cases can be accurately determined, I often think about the individuals that cannot be placed within a particular gender category. For me, this simply raises more questions and forces me to be more critical when trying to understand the roles of individuals in the past.

SDP

16,500 year old Cemeteries and Domesticated Animals

Excavations that have been in progress for the past 10 years in Jordan have revealed some interesting practices, in some very old cemeteries.

Specific finds indicate that there were early attempts at domestication of the small red fox, previous to the widespread domestication of dogs.

The fox remains that were found were in close association with human remains, and appear to have been moved when the human remains were moved. It is stated that this indicated a close relationship in life, and therefore an attempt was make to keep the remains together.

According to studies undertaken on the possibilities of Domesticating foxes, it is highly unlikely to be a successful undertaking. They are shy and skittish, in comparison to dogs.

However, it is difficult to be certain if this was the case this far in the past. Perhaps as more information is published more will become clear.

Check out the article here if you are interested.