Death and burial in iron age britain 1st edition harding 2024 scribd download

Page 1


Death and burial in Iron Age Britain 1st Edition Harding

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/death-and-burial-in-iron-age-britain-1st-edition-hardin g/

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...

A Small Stubborn Town Life Death and Defiance in Ukraine 1st Edition Andrew Harding

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-small-stubborn-town-lifedeath-and-defiance-in-ukraine-1st-edition-andrew-harding/

Preserved in the Peat an Extraordinary Bronze Age Burial on Whitehorse Hill Dartmoor and its Wider Context 1st Edition Andy M Jones Editor

https://textbookfull.com/product/preserved-in-the-peat-anextraordinary-bronze-age-burial-on-whitehorse-hill-dartmoor-andits-wider-context-1st-edition-andy-m-jones-editor/

Fall for Me Going Dutch 1 1st Edition Hazel Harding [Harding

https://textbookfull.com/product/fall-for-me-going-dutch-1-1stedition-hazel-harding-harding/

The Youth of Things: Life and Death in the Age of Kajii Motojiro Stephen Dodd

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-youth-of-things-life-anddeath-in-the-age-of-kajii-motojiro-stephen-dodd/

A Lord s Flaming Return A Historical Regency Romance Book 1st Edition Henrietta Harding [Harding

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-lord-s-flaming-return-ahistorical-regency-romance-book-1st-edition-henrietta-hardingharding/

Moral Dilemmas and Ethical Reasoning Harding

https://textbookfull.com/product/moral-dilemmas-and-ethicalreasoning-harding/

The Battle of Britain in the Modern Age, 1965–2020: The State’s Retreat and Popular Enchantment Garry Campion

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-battle-of-britain-in-themodern-age-1965-2020-the-states-retreat-and-popular-enchantmentgarry-campion/

Post-War Homelessness Policy in the UK: Making and Implementation Jamie Harding

https://textbookfull.com/product/post-war-homelessness-policy-inthe-uk-making-and-implementation-jamie-harding/

The Burial Record of Prehistoric Liangshan in Southwest China Graves as Composite Objects 1st Edition Anke Hein (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-burial-record-ofprehistoric-liangshan-in-southwest-china-graves-as-compositeobjects-1st-edition-anke-hein-auth/

DEATHANDBURIALINIRONAGEBRITAIN

DeathandBurial inIronAgeBritain

D.W.HARDING

GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom

OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©D.W.Harding2016

Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted

FirstEditionpublishedin2016

Impression:1

Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove

Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer

PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica

BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData

Dataavailable

LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2015931990

ISBN978–0–19–968756–5

Printedandboundby CPIGroup(UK)Ltd,Croydon,CR04YY

LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.

ToCarole forherpatienceandsupport

Preface

TheabsenceofaregularandrecurrentburialriteintheBritishIronAge,with somechronologicallylimitedregionalexceptions,haslongbeenacknowledgedbyarchaeologists,whohavelookedtoritessuchascremationand scatteringofremainstoexplaintheminimalimpactoffunerarypracticeson thearchaeologicalrecord.Pitburialsorthedepositofdisarticulatedbones insettlementshaveconventionallybeendismissedascasualdisposalorthe remainsofsocialoutcasts.Thisre-assessmentchallengestheassumptionthat thereshouldhavebeenanyregularformofburialintheIronAge,arguingthat thedeadweremorecommonlyintegratedintosettlementsofthelivingthan segregatedintodedicatedcemeteries.Evenwherecemeteriesareknown,other formsofdisposalmuststillhavebeenpractised.Itthereforefollowsthatwhat havebeenregardedasexceptionalpracticeswereinfactthenorm,andthe apparentnormwasinrealitytheexception,forwhichthereforealternative explanationsarerequired.

Aswellasdomesticandagriculturalsettlements,hillforts,too,evidently playedanimportantroleinfuneraryritual,assecurecommunitycentres whereexcarnationanddisplayofthedeadmayhavemadethemapotent symbolofidentity.Fromthelimitedinventoryofcemeteriesandsmaller burialgrounds ‘focal’ and ‘signal’ burialsmaytentativelybedistinguished, thoughnotnecessarilyasindicatorsofsocialstatus.Ageandgenderconsiderationsarealsoplainlyrelevant,thoughtherearefewindicationsofspecial treatmentonthegroundsofgender.Infantsandchildrenwerecertainly subjecttospecialtreatment,perhapsnotyethavinggraduatedtofullmembershipofthesocialorder.Animalburials,whetherincloseassociationwith human,orin ‘specialdeposits’,arealsorelevanttotheritualpracticesthat governeddisposalofthehumandead.Onekeyconsequenceofthisreviewis therealizationthatfragmentationanddispersalofthedeadisnotabnormalas conventionallysupposed,butastandardformofdisposalinthe firstmillennium BC inBritain,andperhapsmoregenerallyinprehistory,evenwhenthe archaeologicalrecordincludesothermoreobviouscategoriesofburial.The supposedvictimsanddisarticulatedremainsofbattlecasualtiesfromsome hillfortsmayinsomecasesbebetterexplainedasevidenceofdeliberate desecrationbyhostileagencies,nativeorRoman,inactsofpunitiveand symbolicsuppressionofasubjugatedcommunity.Notwithstandingmajor innovationsand ‘normalization’ ofcemeteriesinthelatepre-RomanIron Age,funerarypracticeandbeliefsmayreflectlong-standingtraditionsfrom theBronzeAgethatsurvivedbeyondtheRomanoccupation.

Thisbookisthe fifthinaseriesbythepresentwriterontheBritishIron Age,andtogetherwith TheIronAgeinNorthernBritain (Routledge2004), TheArchaeologyofCelticArt (Routledge2007), TheIronAgeRound-house; LaterPrehistoricBuildinginBritainandBeyond (OUP2009),and IronAge HillfortsinBritainandBeyond (OUP2012)representsreflectionsonsomekey issuesofIronAgearchaeology,whichhasbeenthewriter’sprofessional preoccupationinthestudyandinthe fieldforthepast fifty-fiveyears.Akey differencebetweenIronAgeburialsandhillfortsorsettlementsisthatthe latterareabundantlyrepresentedbyextantmonumentsinthelandscape, whereasfunerarysitesarelargelyinvisibletosurfaceinspection.Forsome periods,liketheNeolithicorBronzeAge,burials,ormoreaccuratelyritual andceremonialmonumentsthatcontainburials,aremarkedbyconspicuous barrowmounds,butIronAgecemeteriesgenerallyhaveminimalifany survivingtraces.ThecemeteriesofeasternYorkshireareexceptional,being visiblefromairphotographsifnotfromsurvivingmounds,butformuchof Britainthearchaeologistisdependentuponchance findsto fillthedepleted distribution.Thelong-standingbiasordeficiencyinthedata-baseofIronAge burialsformuchofBritainisthereforeaproductofvisiblesurvival,partially rectifiedonlyinrecentyearsbythegreatlyincreasedlevelofarchaeologically randomdeveloper-funded fieldwork.Nowgivenamorepositivespin, developer-funded fieldworkwasformerlycategorizedas ‘ rescue ’ or ‘salvage’ archaeology,becauseoftheimminentthreatofdestructionunderwhichthe evidencewasrecorded,whichstilloftenresultsindamagetothevitalcontextualdetailthatcurrentstudyofIronAgeburialsrequires.Theup-sideof commercialarchaeology,ofcourse,isthat findsarenotsubjecttotheinbuilt biasofarchaeologicallydeterminedresearchstrategies,whichcanprovea blessingindisguise.Atitsbestitcantransformourknowledgeandunderstandingofregionalarchaeology,asiswellexemplifiedintheworkofOxford ArchaeologyintheThamesvalley,whereexcavationswereonasufficientscale toassesstheroleofburialsofhumanremainsinsettlements.

Amorerecenttrendhasbeentheemphasisupon ‘communityarchaeology’ , inwhichthepublicatlargeareinvolvedin fieldworkwitheducationaland recreationalobjectives.Involvingschoolsorlocalvolunteersinarchaeological fieldworkisnotnovel,ofcourse,sincemuchofthe fieldworkconductedin previousgenerationswasdonethroughlocalsocietiesorwithvolunteer workers.Thepresentwriterinthe1950sand1960susedamixedworkforce includinglocalvolunteers,oftenfromWEA(Workers’ EducationAssociation)orUniversityExtra-Muralclasses(oftenretiredladiesandgentlemen familiarlyknownas ‘Extra-Muriels’),butalsoschoolchildrenand ‘volunteers’ frompenalinstitutionsandevenfromtheArmy.But,subjecttoavarietyof domesticandunexpecteddisruptions,theywerehardlyaconsistentworkforce,anduniversitystudentsfulfillingtheirvacation fieldworkrequirements provedmoredependableintheirattendance,owingtheirdegreelivestothe

companystore.Whatismoredisturbingisthefactthatarchaeologyisrapidly becominganadjuncttothetourism,recreation,andentertainmentindustries. Whenmud-larkingintheThamesorkey-holingfor findsonthebattlefieldat Bannockburnarepresentedasarchaeology,andwhengovernmentministers applaudtheactivitiesoftreasure-hunterswithmetaldetectors,wecanhardly expectthatarchaeologywillbetakenseriouslybyotheracademicdisciplines.

Themostemphaticchangeinthepast fiftyyears,ofcourse,hasbeenthe availabilityofspecialistexpertise,inthepresentcontextespeciallyenablinga moredetailedanalysisofskeletalremainsforevidenceoftraumaandpostmortemtreatmentaswellasdietanddisease.Itisnotclearthatstandardsof excavationandrecordinghaveimprovedtothesamedegree:thecommonuse ofspit-excavationwilljarwithanyonetrainedintheWheeler–Kenyonstratigraphicmethod.Andthevolumeofdatarecoverednowconsiderablyexceeds anyrealisticprospectoffullpublication.Despitetheuseofmicrofiche(now obsoletewithoutalibrary)itwasstillnotpossibletoreconstructkeyassemblagesfromDanebury,anymorethanitwasWheeler’sfromMaidenCastle, andmorerecentpublishedreports,lavishlyproducedwithmulti-colour illustration,andwithcopioustechnicalreports,oftenlacksimilarimportant basicdetails.Butitisinthesphereofinterpretationthatcurrentfashionmost fundamentallydepartsfromolderapproaches.Concernsquiterightlynow focusmuchmoreuponfunerarybeliefsandrituals,butweshouldguard againstallowingthe ‘empathic’ approachtoprehistorytotakeusbeyondthe limitsofarchaeologicalinference.Conceptssuchas ‘personhood’ and ‘dividuality’ mayinitiallyoffendasproductsofcontemporaryjargon,butequally, asChristopherHawkesoncefamouslypronounced, ‘weshouldnotmakethe mistakeofassumingthatthesepeoplewererationalasourselves!’ Thefocusof thisbookneverthelessremainsthearchaeologyoffunerarypracticeinIron AgeBritain,and,importantthoughtheymaybe,ethicalandotherissuesare notpartoftheremit.

Iwouldliketorecordmythankstocolleagues,fromdiscussionswithwhom andfromwhoseadviceIhavebenefited,andtothosewhohavepermitteduse ofillustrations.FinallyIshouldthankthestaffofNorthBerwickLibraryfor theirhelpinthereproductionofillustrations.

Autumn2014

Listofillustrations xiii

Abbreviations xv

1.Definingissues1

2.Mortuarypractices,problems,andanalysis25

3.Communitiesofthedead:formalcemeteries andburialgrounds55

4.Deadamongthelivinglandscape95

5.Focalandsignalburials127

6.Gravesandgrave-goods163

7.Socialandritualviolenceanddeath189

8.Genderissues219

9.Animalburialsandanimalsymbolism241

10.Conclusions:deathandburialintheIronAge267

Listofillustrations

2.1.SuttonCommon,Yorkshire,marsh-fortwithmortuaryenclosures.30

2.2.Westhampnett,Sussex,cemeteryplan.32

2.3.Westhampnett,Sussex,cemeterypyresites.33

2.4.Stanway,Colchester,Essex,siteplan.35

2.5.Stanway,Colchester,Essex,chamberBF6andpyresite.36

2.6.FisonWay,Thetford,Norfolk,siteplan.39

2.7.Ritual ‘bridges’,A,EtonRowingLake,Thames,B,LaTène,Switzerland.51

3.1.MaidenCastle,Dorset,eastentranceplan.56

3.2.Broxmouth,EastLothian,hillfortandcemeteryplan.58

3.3.SuddernFarm,MiddleWallop,Hampshire,enclosuresand cemeteryplan.59

3.4.WinnallDown,Hampshire,planofhouses,pits,andburials.61

3.5.Yarnton,Oxfordshire,planofmiddleIronAgesettlement andcemeteries.62

3.6.MillHill,Deal,Kent,planofcemeteries.63

3.7.AdanacPark,Southampton,cemeteryplan.65

3.8.TrethellanFarm,Newquay,Cornwall,cemeteryplan.67

3.9.Melton,Yorkshire,cemeteryplan.68

3.10.GartonSlack,Yorkshire,planofinfantcemetery.69

3.11.DryburnBridge,EastLothian,settlementplanwithburials.71

3.12.Mapofsquare-ditchedbarrowsineasternYorkshire.74

3.13.Scorborough,Yorkshire,cemeteryplan.75

3.14.Scorborough,Yorkshire,viewofextantbarrows.76

3.15.Mapofcemeteriesinsouth-westernEngland.79

3.16.HarlynBay,Cornwall,cemeteryplan.80

3.17.MapofDurotrigancemeteriesinsouthernDorset.83

3.18.KingHarryLane,Verulamium,cemeteryplan.90

3.19.Hinxton,Cambridgeshire,cemeteryplan.93

4.1.MaidenCastle,Dorset,SiteBplan.98

4.2.GravellyGuy,Oxfordshire,Block5settlementplanwithburials.100

4.3.Micklefield,Yorkshire,SiteMplan.102

4.4.MicheldeverWood,Hampshire,banjoenclosureplanwithburials.104

4.5.FairfieldPark,Bedfordshire,SiteAplan.106

4.6.GussageAllSaints,Dorset,phase2andphase3plans.109

4.7.LattonLands,Wiltshire,settlementplanwithburials.110

4.8.Watchfield,Oxfordshire,siteplanwithdoubleburial.113

4.9.Circularstructureswithburials,A,Frilford,Oxfordshire(Berkshire) andB,Abingdon-on-Thames.116

4.10.Melton,Yorkshire,planofstructure17andround-house27 withburials.117

5.1.Owslebury,Hampshire,planofcemeterieswithfocalburials.128

5.2.MapofchariotburialsandswordburialsineasternYorkshire.130

5.3.WetwangSlack,Yorkshire,plansofchariotburials.132

5.4.Warriorburials,A,Grimthorpe,Yorkshire,B,Kirkburn,Yorkshire, C,Whitcombe,Dorset,D,MillHill,Deal,Kent.139

5.5.BrisleyFarm,Ashford,Kent,enclosureplanwithwarriorburials.143

5.6.Stanway,Colchester,Essex,planof ‘doctor’ sgrave ’.147

5.7.Clemency,Luxembourg,planoffuneraryenclosureandburialchamber.150

5.8.Welwynseriesburials,A,WelwynGardenCity,Hertfordshire,B, Snailwell,Cambridgeshire.152

5.9.Aylesford,Kent,gravegroup.155

5.10.Baldock,Hertfordshire,theTene,gravegroup.157

5.11.Goeblange-Nospelt,Luxembourg,graveBplan.159

5.12.A2excavationssouthofGravesend,Kent,planofgrave6260.161

6.1.Bronzeritualspoons,A,Burnmouth,Berwickshire,B,MillHill, Deal,Kent.178

7.1.MaidenCastle,Dorset,warcemetery,A,generalview,B,burials P22andP23.190

7.2.SuttonWalls,Herefordshire,skeletonsinditchbywestentrance.193

7.3.Skulldepositsaroundsettlements,A,WasserburgBuchau, Baden-Württemberg,B,Glastonbury,Somerset.199

7.4.Doubleburials,A,Garton/WetwangSlack,Yorkshire,Area5,B, ViablesFarm,Basingstoke,Hampshire.200

7.5.Yorkshire ‘spearritual’:Rudstongrave174,GartonStationgrave 10andgrave7.204

7.6.Perforatedhumanskulls,A,Hunsbury,Northamptonshire,B, Hillhead,Caithness.209

7.7.CliffsEndFarm,PegwellBay,Kent,burialpit3666.214

9.1.BlewburtonHill,Oxfordshire(Berkshire), ‘closureepisode’ ofwestern entrance,A, finalphaseentranceplan,B,horseskeletons from1967excavations.247

9.2.PimperneDown,Dorset,southentrance,animalburialswith chalklamps,A,chalklampwithcattleremains,B,chalklampwith horseremains.250

9.3.Hallaton,Leicestershire,eastentranceplan.260

9.4.Sollas,NorthUist,wheelhouseplan.262

Abbreviations

AFEAF AssociationFrançaisepourl’Étudedel’ÂgeduFer

Ant.JAntiquariesJournal

Arch.JArchaeologicalJournal

BABritishArchaeology

BARBritishArchaeologicalReports

CACurrentArchaeology

CAJCambridgeArchaeologicalJournal

CBACouncilforBritishArchaeology

CNRSCentreNationaldelaRechercheScientifique CorACornishArchaeology

dBG Caesar,G.J. deBelloGallico

DESDiscoveryandExcavationinScotland

EdinArchEdinburghUniversityDepartmentofArchaeology

EJAEuropeanJournalofArchaeology

HFCProceedingsoftheHampshireFieldClubandArchaeologicalSociety

JASJournalofArchaeologicalScience

OJAOxfordJournalofArchaeology

OUCAOxfordUniversityCommitteeforArchaeology

PBUSSProceedingsoftheBristolUniversitySpeleologicalSociety

PCASProceedingsoftheCambridgeAntiquarianSociety

PDNHASProceedingsoftheDorsetNaturalHistoryandArchaeologicalSociety

PPSProceedingsofthePrehistoricSociety

PRIAProceedingsoftheRoyalIrishAcademy

PSASProceedingsoftheSocietyofAntiquariesofScotland

SAIRScottishArchaeologyInternetReports

SALSocietyofAntiquariesofLondon

SARScottishArchaeologicalReview

TBGASTransactionsoftheBristolandGloucestershireArchaeologicalSociety

WAMWiltshireArchaeologyandNaturalHistoryMagazine (now Wiltshire Studies)

Definingissues

ButatmybackIalwayshear Time’swingedchariothurryingnear AndrewMarvell(1621–78), ‘ToHisCoyMistress’

Theuniversalityofhumanmortalityisthecommonestoftruisms,butthe prospectofmortalityevidentlyhasweigheddifferentlyondifferentsocieties overthecourseofhumanhistory,fromtheoppressiveburdenofthelater MiddleAgestothemorerelaxedlive-for-the-present-ismofthecurrent generation.Thedisposalofthedeadisatbasisahygienicnecessitythat isrecognizedinallbutthemostsociallydisruptedcircumstances,but themannerofdisposalmayrevealattitudesofsocietytowardsdeathandthe conceptofafterlife,ortheroleofthedeadinthecontinuinglifeofthe community.Eveninourcontemporarysecularsociety,relativesofthevictims ofmurderorabductionorofdeathinforeignpartscravetherecoveryof bodiesfordueburial,withoutwhichtheyapparentlycannot ‘achieveclosure’ , aconditionofgracethatmighthavebeenconsideredessentialtothedead,but whichevidentlymattersequallytothebereaved.

Thedisciplineofarchaeologyismethodologicallydisposedtodistortthe realityofthepastinthatitseekstorecognizeorderedpatternswhereinreality diversityandapparentirrationalitymusthavebeeninherent.Thekeystoneof Childe’sapproach,theidentificationofarchaeologicalcultures,wasdependent upon recurrence ofdiagnostictypes inassociation,whichwouldpermit thecomparisonofoneculturalassemblagewithanotherintimeorspace. Eveninprocessualandpost-processualapproachestheessenceistoreducethe ever-burgeoningdata-basetosomesemblanceoforder,withoutwhichitis impossibleforinterpretationtoproceed,otherthanintuitively,empathically, orexperientially,thatis,baseduponimaginativereconstructionratherthan beinginferred,howeverinadequately,fromarchaeologicaldata.Theconsequenceofthisprocessofclassificationhasbeentoemphasizecertainoutstandingclassesofdata,likelongbarrows,stonecircles,orhillforts,astypical oftheirperiodorregion,attheexpenseofasubtleranalysisofthemany

possiblevariationsofsettlementorburialsitesthataredetectable,evenfrom thesurvivingarchaeologicalrecord.

Inrecentyearstherehasbeenasigni ficantshiftinarchaeologicalapproachestoburialdata.Foragenerationormoreconsiderationhasfocused uponidentity,socialstatusandhierarchies,andquestionsrelatingtodemography;nowlesstangibleaspectssuchasfuneraryritualsand ‘personhood’ , includinggenderissues,areincreasinglyattractingattention(Danielssonetal., 2009:9–11).Allarevalidsubjectsofstudy,providingthatwerecognizethe limitationsofinferenceofthedata,anddonottransgresstheboundariesof rigorousscholarshipintotheseductiverealmsofcreative fiction.Regrettably, theprimarydataforIronAgeburialinBritainistoooften flawed,ifnotasa resultofineptrecoveryandinadequaterecordinginthepast,thenasan inevitableconsequenceofthemechanicalstrippingofsitesintheprocessof morerecentdevelopment.

THEELUSIVEDEAD

Theapparentabsenceofaregularandrecurrentburialriteorclassoffunerary monumentfortheBritishIronAge,withtheprincipalexceptionsoftwo regionallyandchronologicallyrestrictedareas,namely,easternYorkshirein themiddlepre-RomanIronAgeandsouth-easternEnglandinthelater,has beenlongestablished(Whimster,1977a,1981),andwascitedbyHodson (1964:105)asa ‘negativetypefossil’ ofhisinsularWoodburyculture.Wilson (1981)extendedthecorpusbyincludingmiscellaneousburialsandfragmentaryremainsfromsettlements,butthesewereessentiallyseenasaminorityor aberrantpopulation(Wait,1985).

Infact,thedeclineofanarchaeologicallyvisiblemodeofburialbeginswith theendofcremationin flatcemeteriesattheoutsetoftheLateBronzeAge.As Brück(1995:245)putit,aftertheMiddleBronzeAgeinBritain, ‘alandscape structuredaroundhengesandbarrowswasreplacedbyonedominatedby settlementsand fieldsystems’.Perhapsevenmoresignificantistheriseto prominenceofhillforts,justasfunerarypracticesseemtofadefromthe archaeologicalradar.Thescaleofenclosureofhillfortsimpliesaneedfor protection,notjustinamilitarysensebutmoreprobablyascommunalcentres forsafestorageofproduceandresources,andasafocusforcommunal activities,includingmortuaryritualsthatneededtobesafefromintrusion orviolation.Andthereareothermajorchangesinthearchaeologicalrecord intheLateBronzeAge,withamuchbroaderrangeofbronzetypeswith techniquessuchascomplexcasting,sheet-bronzework,andwire-drawing, leadingtothedevelopmentofavarietyofweaponsanddefensivearmour, developmentsthathavejustifiablybeencharacterizedasanindustrial

revolution(Harding,1994).Thequestionofclimaticdeteriorationisonethat hasbeenraisedperiodicallyasapossiblecatalystformajorchange,increasing landpressuresandmakingcommunitiesmoreconsciousoftheneedto establishboundariesandtoasserttraditionalterritorialrights.Insuchchangingcircumstancesitisperhapshardlysurprisingthatfunerarycustomswere equallysubjecttochange,andthatburialswereusedtoreinforcetraditional territorialentitlement,ineffect,that ‘thedeadbecamestrongsymbolsofsuch conceptsasliminality,continuity,identity,andrenewal’ (Brück,1995:264).

TheapparentpaucityofevidenceforburialsintheBritishLateBronzeAge andIronAgeforsignificantareascertainlycannotbeexplainedongroundsof depopulation,sincethereisabundantevidenceofsettlementcoincidentspatiallyandchronologicallywiththeabsenceofburials.Thedeficiencytherefore mustlieinthearchaeologicalrecordorinourabilitytointerpretit.Evenifa ritewaspractisedthatleftnotangibleburialrecord,suchascremationand scattering,theremainsofpyresorancillarystructuresshouldstillberecognizable.Burialissimplythe finalactofdepositioninwhatcouldhavebeena complexsequenceoffuneraryritualsthatneverthelessmightleaveminimal archaeologicaltrace,sothatachangefromdepositiontoscatteringasthat final actneednotsignifynearlyasradicalashiftinpracticeasthearchaeological recordmightsuggest.Butwestillneedtoexplainwhysuchachangemight havebeenimplemented.Inapoliticallyvolatileenvironment,especiallyifthe populationinconsequencewastransientormobile,thenitispossiblethat burialpracticesmightreflectthelackofapermanenthomeland.Butthereis noevidenceforsuchinstabilityintheinsularIronAge,andsettlement evidenceinfactsuggestsquitethecontrary,withmanysitesdisplayinga structuralpalimpsestthattestifiestorenewalwithlittlefundamentalchange overseveralgenerations.

Otherexplanationsmightaccountinpartforthelackofsurvivingevidence. Someburialsmightsimplyhavebeenplacedonthegroundsurfaceinsteadof inagrave-pit,withjustalowmound,sufficienttodeterpredators,being scrapedupoverthem.Insuchcircumstances,ploughingwouldhaveremoved alltraceoftheburial,withanyassociatedartefactsbeingbrokenandscattered beyondrecognitionoftheirformersignificance.Thisexplanationhasbeen advancedtoexplaintheabsenceofsurvivingburialsorburialpitswithinsome ofthesquare-ditchbarrowsoftheYorkshireseries.Otherpossibilitiesinclude disposalintheseaorinrivers,thoughtheformerwillevidentlynotsatisfy land-lockedcommunities,andlimitedevidencefordepositsinriverslikethe Thames(AllenandHacking,2000)suggestsspecialcircumstancesratherthan regulardisposal.

ItishardtobelievethatfailuretolocateIronAgecemeterieshasresulted fromasignificantbiasinarchaeologicalresearchstrategies,sincethiswould surelyhavebeenrectifiedbythefactthatthegreatmajorityofevidencenowadaysderivesfromarchaeologicallyarbitrarydiscoveryduringdevelopment.

Theonlycircumstancesinwhichthismightnotapplywouldbeifburials werelocatedsomewherethatarchaeologicalresearchseldominvestigatedbut wheretheywerenotnormallyvulnerabletodevelopment.Thatverylimited combinationofcircumstancesmightapplytotheimmediatelyexternalenvironsofhillforts,closeenoughtoaprotectedmonumenttoevadediscovery throughdevelopmentbutoutsidethenormalrangeofhillfortexcavation strategies.TheknownexistenceofsmallcemeteriesatBroxmouth,East Lothian,BattlesburyCamp,Wiltshire,andofcourseadjacenttotheeast entranceatMaidenCastle,Dorset,underlinesthispossibility.

AsignificantfactorinourfailuretorecognizeIronAgeburials,especially onmulti-periodsettlements,maybetheabsenceofgrave-goods,sinceitis thesethatinitiallytriggerthearchaeologist’sattributiontoperiod.So,for example,theYarntoncemetery(Heyetal.,2011)waswronglyassigneduntil radiocarbondateswereobtained.Anotherpossibility,wheregrave-goodsare absent,isthatburialswereincorporatedintoearliercemeteriesandthereby confusedintermsofdatingwiththegeneralityofearliergraves.Howwidespreadthepracticewasofre-usingearliercemeteriesisunclear.Inthecaseof theHighKnowes,Alnham,Northumberland,burial(JobeyandTait,1966), locatedwithinwhatwasinterpretedasaBronzeAgecairnfield,theIronAge burialwasonlyrecognizedthroughitsapparentassociationwithadistinctive pinofIrishtype.

Allofthesepossibilitiesmightcontributetowardsanexplanationofthe phenomenonofthe ‘elusivedead’.Buttherealissueiswhetheritismisguided toexpectaregularandrecurrentburialriteinthe firstplace.Thefactthat therearesuchinthecemeteriesofeasternYorkshire,inthecremation cemeteriesofsouth-easternEngland,orinthe ‘Durotrigan’ cemeteriesof southDorsetdoesnotmeanthatotherriteswerenotprevalentatthesame time.Perhapstheproblemisnotsomuchthefailureofevidenceforburialsto registerinthearchaeologicalrecord,butourfailuretorecognizetheevidence forwhatitis.

‘ CASUAL ’ HUMANDEPOSITS

Humanremains,whetherwholeskeletons,articulatedfragments,orindividualbones,havebeenrecoveredfrompitsandenclosureditchesonboth hillfortsandsettlementsfromtheearliestexcavations,sothattheexistence ofthisdatasethasbeenwellknownformanyyears.Inthecaseofpitburials,a distinctionneedstobedrawnbetweengroupsofburialsinpitsandoccasional burialsingroupsofpits.Theformer,thoughsometimesrelativelyfewin number,couldberegardedassmallcemeteries;thelatterhardlyqualifyas such,sincetheyoccurseeminglyatrandomamongacomplexityofdomestic

features.Thelatterhavebeenregardedasanomalousfortworeasons.First, becauseonlyasmallproportionofpitsactuallycontainhumanremains,it followsthatthepitgroupasawholewasnotdedicatedexclusivelyorprimarily tothedisposalofthedead.Second,thefactthatasignificantnumberofpit depositsarenotofwholeskeletons,butpartialremainsorjustsinglebones, violatesmodernperceptionsof ‘normal’ burial.Theconclusionthereforeis thatthesepitswerenotcustom-builtfortheintermentofhumanremains,but werere-usedoncetheyhadceasedtoservetheirprimarypurpose,which, followingBersu’s(1940)interpretationofpitsatLittleWoodburyinWiltshire asundergroundgrainsilos,hasbeengenerallyacceptedasstorageofagriculturalproduce.Notthusdefinedbytheirarbitrarycontext,theseburialsof humanremainscouldberelatedtosimilardepositsfoundinenclosureditches, inscoopsorhollowsaroundsettlements,orinstructuralpostholes.

Becausetheydonotconformtotheexpectationsofaregularburialrite, earlyinvestigatorsoftenregardedsuchburialsas ‘casual’,anextraordinary inference,evenallowingforthefactthattheymightappeartodepartfrom expectednorms.ThatviewwasexemplifiedinanoverviewofIronAge Wiltshire:

Burialpracticesappeartoremainoflittleinteresttothepopulation bodieswere simply flungintoconvenientpitsorditchesalongwithotherhouseholdrubbish, althoughitcouldalwaysbearguedthatburialsplacedinpitshadsomereligious significance.

(Cunliffe,1973:423–4, myitalics)

Whereindifferencewasnotimplied,theninterpretationsfavouredsocial outcastsorcriminalswhohadnotbeenaccordedthe ‘normal’ rites.If, however,wesuspendtheexpectationthatthedeadshouldinvariablyhave beenaccordedasingle,designatedplaceormannerofdisposal,andthattheir remainsshouldbepreservedasanentity,thenthepossibilityopensupthatthe apparentlyveryirregulartestimonyofthearchaeologicalrecordmayreflect practicesthataccordedwithregularsocialnorms.

DEFININGBURIAL

Amajorissueplainlyisourdefinitionofaburial.Atoneendofthespectrum ofarchaeologicaldepositsarecompleteskeletonsingraves,whethersinglyor aspartofacemetery,thatwouldwithoutquestionbeacceptedasaburial.At theotherendareindividualhumanbones,orfragmentsofhumanbones, foundinpits,ditches,ormiscellaneousoccupationalstratathatmayhaveno contextualevidenceorartefactualassociationtoindicatethattheyconstituted adeliberatedepositinanymeaningfulsenseofburial.Betweenthesepolar

extremeshumanremainsinvaryingdegreesofarticulationarefoundina varietyofcontexts.Evenwheremostofthebodyisintact,itisnotuncommon to findcertainpartsmissing.Inthepastithasbeenassumedthatthisresults fromincompetentexcavationorpost-depositionalagriculturaldamageorthe like,andthereareplainlymanyinstanceswherethisisthecorrectexplanation. Butevenundercontrolledconditionsofrecoverythesamephenomenonhas beenobserved,sothatweareforcedtotheconclusionthatsomefragmentationanddispersalwas ‘anintegralpartofmortuarypractice’ inEuropean prehistory(Larsson,2009:111).

Theideaofdeliberatefragmentationisnotnew.JohnChapman(2000)in particulardevelopedtheconceptof ‘enchainment’ throughfragmentationof artefactsorhumanremainsforthesouth-eastEuropeanNeolithic,andithas beenvariouslydiscussedinthecontextofEuropeanprehistory(Chapmanand Gaydarska,2007;Rebay-Salisburyetal.,2010).Insomecemeteriesburials havebeenuncoveredinwhichthereappearstohavebeenameasureof selectivityorrecurrenceintheremovalofparticularbodyparts.Various reasonsmightbeadvancedforthispractice,whichcouldbelinkedtothe processofdefleshingofthebody,ortothepracticeofexcarnation.Inany event,mostcommentatorswouldprobablybasetheirdefinitionofburialson contextratherthanthequantityofsurvivinghumanremains.Eveninthecase ofcremationsinurns,thepercentageofburntboneincludedisoftensmall relativetotheexpectedresidueofahumancremation,sothatlogicallypartial inhumationsshouldhardlybeexcludedongroundsofincompleteness.

Cenotaphmemorialshavesometimesbeenpositedinthetotalabsenceof remains,whichcannotbeexplainedsimplythroughpoorconditionsof preservation.Butwheresuch ‘ graves ’ withoutburialsoccurinsomenumbers, asatFisonWay,Thetford,Norfolk(Gregory,1992),wemightinfersome specialritualoranomalouscircumstances.Thepossibilityremainsthatgraves withoutburials, ‘representationsofgraves’ (Danielssonetal.,2009:11),could havebeenonevariantriteamongdiversefuneraryconventions,evenwhenthe bodywasnotmissing,butwassubjecttosomeothertreatment.Weshall considertheissueofhoardsas ‘grave-goodswithoutgraves’ induecourse.

Butifwedonotdemandcompletebodyremains,wheredowedrawthe line?Ifthekeyisevidencethattheremainsweredeliberatelydeposited,why shouldweassumethatahumanfemurinthebottomofanenclosureditchwas notdeliberatelyplacedthereasaritualdepositinaliminallocation?Wouldit makeadifferenceifitwascasually flungintotheditch,orifitwas flunginto theditchasaprofoundlysymbolicgesture?Brück(1995:253)tookitas axiomaticthatfragmentaryhumanremainswerenottheproductof ‘ normativeburialrituals’ butthattheywere ‘usedasasourceofmetaphorinvarious contexts’.Butthisissurelyadistinctionbaseduponourownperceptionof whatconstitutesafunerarynorm,whereasinprehistoryitispossiblethat disposalofthedeadinsomecircumstancescouldhaveentailedfragmentation

oftheremainsinthecourseofthe ‘normal’ funeraryprocessandtheir distributioninaseriesofmetaphoricaldeposits.Wemustnotimposeour ownexpectationsofstandardizedpracticeonprehistory,andevenifthiswasa minoritypractice,oroneofanumberofminoritypractices,thatdoesnot makeit ‘abnormal’ .

Animportantcriterionfromthearchaeologist’sperspectiveisthe recurrence ofasetofactions,whetherdictatedbyformalrulesorsocialconvention, sinceitisthroughrecurrencethatsignificantpatternsarerecognized.This mightbewitnessedarchaeologicallymostobviouslybyaregularmodeof dispositionandorientationofabodywithinagrave,orbytheinclusionof grave-goodsorparticularcutsofmeat,perhapsevenplacedinparticular relationshiptothedeceasedinthegrave.Butevenwherethisoccurswithin cemeteriestherearecommonlygraveswithdifferentorientation,andthe inclusionofparticulargrave-goodsormeatofferingsisoftenlimitedtoa relativelysmallpercentageofgraves.EveninthecemeteriesoftheAylesford seriesthereisrathergreaterdiversityofpracticethanarchaeologicalclassificationmightimply.

Thebasicmisconceptionthatliesattherootoftheproblem,therefore,is thatpastsocietiesshouldhaveburiedtheirdeadaccordingtoaregularand recurrentconvention,thatis,thateachperiodshouldbecharacterizedbya recognizableburialriteandgravetypethatrepresentsthedominantconvention.Wheresucharecurrentformofburialisabsent,ratherthansupposing thattheriteadoptedwasonethatfortuitouslydidnotresultinapermanent impactonthearchaeologicalrecord,weshouldchallengethebasicassumption,thatthereshouldeverhavebeenaregularandrecurrentformofburial,as opposedtoavarietyofdifferentwaysofdisposingofthedead,eachaccording tocustom,need,orcircumstance.Infact,mighttherenothavebeenavariety ofwaysofdisposingofanyoneindividual?Ifthatindividualwashighly regardedinlifeandpotentiallystillcapableofexertinginfluenceoverthe livingindeath,mightnottherebereasonsfordistributinghisorhermortal remainsinmorethanonelocation?WehavealreadynotedthatlatepreRomanIronAgecremationburialsoftencontainonlyasmallproportionof thecrematedresidue.Arewereallytobelievethat,havinggonetotheextentof organizingacomplexfuneraryritual,thoseresponsiblecouldnotbebothered togatherupthebulkofthecrematedremains?Orwasatokensampleallthat wasrequiredorpermittedforburial,withtheresiduebeingdedicatedtosome otherend?Ifthatwasthecase,mightitnotalsohaveappliedtonon-cremated remains?

Insteadofimaginingregularandrecurrentritesthatleftnotracearchaeologically,therefore,weshouldinsteadrecognizethattherewasamultiplicityof rites,manyofwhichdidnotinvolvethesegregationofthedeadintoaspecial location,butwhichincludeddepositingthedeadorfragmentaryremainsof thedeadindomesticandsettlementcontextswheretheyremainedintegrated

withthelivingcommunity.Weareoftentoldbyanthropologiststhatthe livingandthedeaddonoteasilycohabit,butthearchaeologicalevidencefrom IronAgeBritainmaysuggestotherwise,thatfarfromfearinganddistancing themselvesfromthedead,somecommunitiesdistributedtheremainsoftheir forebearsaroundthem,wheretheymightconstituteabenignorevenprotectivepresence.Sinceethnographicevidencesuggeststhatitisoftenthe ‘limboperiod’,betweendeathandthepointatwhichonlydrybonesremain, duringwhichthedeadarecommonlyfearedasmalevolentforces,thismay haveinvolvedtemporaryburialorexposureforaninterimperiod,afterwhich thebones,completeorfragmentary,weregiven finalburialinoraroundthe settlement.Hillfortswouldhaveaffordedanobvioussecurelocationforan interimstageofintermentorexposure.

Asforanimalburials,againrepresentedbothbycompleteornear-complete skeletonsandbypartialorfragmentaryremains,theirinclusioninhuman graves,andnotsimplyasmeatofferings,wasapparentlypartofthefunerary ritual.Butwheretheyoccur,articulatedorotherwise,inpits,astheydo regularlyonsettlementsites,theirpurposeisplainlydebatable.Hererecurrenceofpracticecouldresultfromdomesticwastebeingdisposedofin orderedwaysdeterminedbyconvention,ratherthanindicatinganyspecial ritualsignificance.Demonstratingthedifferencearchaeologicallyislikelyto proveextremelydifficult.

RITESOFDEPOSITIONANDDISPOSAL

Whereformalburialsoccur,thedominantriteintheearlierandmiddle IronAgeinBritain,asindeeditwasincontinentalEurope,wasindividual inhumation.Inthelaterpre-RomanIronAge,againincommonwithmuchof northAlpineEurope,cremationisre-introducedtobecomethepredominant convention.Whatgovernedthesechangesinfashioncanonlybesurmised. Thechoiceofritemaybedeterminedbyattitudestowardsdeathandthe afterlife,ormayreflectprevailingsocialandpoliticalstabilityoritsabsence, withcremationcalculatedtoacceleratethedestructionofmortalremainsin circumstancesinwhichlongertermobservancescannotbeassured.

CremationandinhumationarealternativeritesthatarevariouslyrepresentedintheprehistoryofnorthAlpineEuropefromtheNeolithiconwards, sometimesoccurringtogetherinthesameregionatthesametime,evenin apparentlycontemporary ‘bi-ritual’ burials(Harding,2000:111–12),though notofthesameindividual,andmoreoftenwithoneritepredominating.Even intheBritishIronAgethereareinstancesofcremationsandinhumations(of differentpersons)beingincludedinthesamegrave.InEuropecremation becamealmostubiquitouswiththeUrnfieldphaseoftheLateBronzeAge,but

theUrnfieldphenomenonneverextendedtoBritain,wherethelimitedand localizedoccurrenceofcemeteriesintheLateBronzeAgerepresentsalate survivalofMiddleBronzeAgecremationpractices.Inhumationre-asserts itselfincontinentalEuropeinthecemeteriesoftheHallstattIronAge,a phenomenonthatagainmakesminimalarchaeologicalimpactinBritain. Nevertheless,burialsoftheearlierandmiddleIronAgeinBritainoverwhelminglyobservetheriteofinhumationuntilthelatepre-RomanIronAge,where thepracticeofcremationisonceagainadoptedinthoseareasofsouthernand south-easternEnglandthatwereinclosestcontactwiththelateLaTène societiesofcontinentalEurope.

Contemporarywesternpracticemightleadustoexpectthatfuneraryritual entailedessentiallyasingle,definedepisodeinvolvingcommemorationofthe deadanddisposal.Ethnographicanalogies,however,suggestthepossibilityof moreprotractedandcomplexfuneraryprocesses,perhapsinvolvingtemporary inhumationorexcarnation,sothattherecouldbeinterimstagesbefore final disposalinwhateverform.Wearealsoaccustomedtotheassumptionthat thedeadshouldbetreatedasanentity,howevertheirremainsaredisposed of,whereasintheIronAgethismaycommonlynothavebeenthecase.

Amajorprobleminrecognizingarecurrentburialconventionhasbeena presumptionthatburialsshouldbeassignedtoaspeciallocation,dedicated toacommunityofthedeadandconformingtoourpreconceptionof whatshouldconstituteacemetery.Thefactthatthishasbeenthedominant conventionforthepast2,000years,withthenotableexclusionofcertain categoriesofindividualsuchascriminalsorunbaptizedchildren,doesnot meanthatthispracticewasuniversalinprehistory.Onthecontrary,the archaeologicalevidenceforburialpracticesinIronAgeBritainsuggestsa broaddivisionbetweenthosewhowere segregated intocommunitiesofthe deadindedicatedcemeteries,andthosewhowere integrated intothecommunitiesoftheliving,ingravesorpitswithinsettlementsorinsupposedly liminalpositionslikeenclosureditchesorentrances.Thefactthattheremains followingexcarnationmightbedistributedinseveraldifferentlocationsmight seemevenmoreirregular.Whatpromptedtheburialofsomeindividualsin segregatedcemeteriesandotherstobeintegratedwithintheenvironsof settlementsisprobablyunknowable,butweshouldnotassumethatone practiceimpliesgreaterrespectforthedeadthantheother.

Withinthebroadcategoryofsegregatedcemeteries,weshouldrecognize thatnotallgravesneedtohavebeeninatightlyclusteredgroup.Cemeteries arecumulative,unlessviolenceordiseaseresultsinsimultaneousornearsimultaneousmultipledeaths,andmustthereforehavebegunwithjustoneor twoburials,orperhapsasmallgroupofburialsofcuratedremainsformingthe nucleusofacemeterythatsubsequentlyattractedmoreburials.Eventhefew initialgravesneednothavebeenincloseproximity,dependinguponwhat layoutwaschosenandwhoqualifiedtobeburiedinagivenplot.Weshallsee

severalexamplesofhowcemeteriesmayhavedevelopedfromsmallgroups, quitewidelyspaced,thatmayreflecttheirorigininkin-relatedbutsegregated groups.Howcemeteriesgrewovertimeisnotalwaysclear,andtheMünsingenmodeloflinearexpansion(Hodson,1968;Müller,1998)isnottheonly possibility.Furthermore,dependingonpoliticaloreconomiccircumstances, settlementstabilitymayhavebeendisrupted,sothatincipientcemeteriescould havebeenabandoned,resultinginwhatarchaeologicallyappearstobeahandful ofdispersedgraves.FormuchofBritain,ofcourse,thenumberofknownsmall groupsofburials,thoughincreasing,isatpresentfartoofewtoaccountfor morethanaverylimitedminorityoftheIronAgepopulation.Without proposinganyrigidclassification,therefore,wemayprovisionallyrefertolarger ormoreorderedsitesascemeteriesandsmallernumbersofmoreirregularly arrangedgravesasburialgrounds.Clearly,however,gravescouldalsooccur inisolation,thoughcircumstancesofexcavationdonotalwaysallowclearance onasufficientscaletoconfirmwhetheragraveisisolatedorpartofagroup.

Evenwheregroupedburialsdoconformtoourperceptionofacemetery,it isfrequentlyremarkedthattheremainsrepresenteddonotcorrespondtoa ‘normal’ demographicprofile,thatis,theproportionsbyage-grouporsexthat mightbeexpectedfromarepresentativecross-sectionofthecommunity.Yet thereisnobasisforassumingthatanyIronAgecemeteryshouldmirror societyinthisway,andinthecaseofsmallerburialgroundsthenumberof gravesself-evidentlycannotaccountfortheestimatedpopulationofadjacent settlementsovertheperiodoftimerepresented,sothat selectivity mustbe implicitinthesurvivingdata-base,whetherdeterminedbyage,sex,social status,kin,cultaffiliation,orcraftoroccupationalassociations.

Inthelatepre-RomanIronAgeinsouthernandsouth-easternBritain, wherelargersettlementswereacquiringthecharacteristicsofincipienturban communities,itisperhapshardlysurprisingthatcemeteriesliketheKing HarryLanesiteatVerulamium(SteadandRigby,1989)shouldhavecome intoexistencebytheearly firstcentury AD.Elsewhere,innorthernandwestern Britain,wherecommunitieswouldhavebeenmuchsmallerandmorewidely dispersed,burialpracticemayhavebeenmorevariedandtheremayhave beennocommunalregulationofburialortraditionofburialinacommon, dedicatedlocation.Formalcemeteries(outsidetheArrasgroupofeastern Yorkshire)mayhavebeenarelativelylatedevelopmentinBritain,butthe ritesofdisposalappeartohaveenduredthesocialdisruptionoftheRoman conquest.CremationcemeterieslikeKingHarryLanecontinuedintothelater firstcentury AD largelyunchangedintermsoffunerarypractice,reflecting onlythegreatereaseofacquisitionofRomanmaterialgoods.Likewisethe ‘Durotrigan’ traditioninsouthDorsetcontinuedlargelyunchanged,asexemplifiedatAlingtonAvenue(Daviesetal.,2002)andPoundbury(Farwelland Mollison,1993)inDorchester,wherethecemeteriescontinuedtobeused throughouttheRomanperiod.Thismayseemsurprisingsincecremation

cemeteriesoftheAylesford–SwarlingconventionandDurotriganinhumation burialswerethemselvesrelativelylateintroductions,anditisnotatallclear howeitherrelatetowhateverweretheprevailingconventionsfordisposalof thedeadforthebestpartofamillenniumbeforethat.Onerespectinwhichthe Romanoccupationwouldcertainlyhavehadanimpactisintherequirementfor formaldisposalofthedeadandtheencouragementofregularcemeteries.Any practicesthatinvolvedthedistributionoftheremainsofthedead,particularly inandaroundsettlements,wouldsurelyhavebeendiscouragedorsuppressed. Butitisclearthatsouthernandsouth-easternBritainhadbeeninregular contactwiththeRoman-occupiedworldinthecenturybeforetheconquest, withprofoundeffectsnotonlyontheeconomybutalsoonindigenouspolitical structureandsocialpractices,sothatitseemslikelythatthemostimportant changeshadalreadytakenrootwellbeforetheClaudianinvasion.

MEMORIALSOFTHEDEADANDSYMBOLS OFIDENTITY

Analternativeroleofburial,ofcourse,isthecreationofamonumentto commemoratethedead,orfocusedonwhichthelivingcanpaytheircontinuingrespectsorasserttheircommunalidentity.Incertaincircumstancesit ispossiblethatmajorfunerarymonuments,likethe Fürstengräber ofthelate HallstattperiodinwestcentralEurope,alsoservedasameansoflegitimizing theauthorityoftherulingregime.AsArnoldargued,lateHallstatt tumuliwereintendedtofunctionashighlyvisiblecommunalmonuments.They advertisedtheseniorityandimportanceofthelineages ... whicherectedthem.Their conspicuouslocationalongmajorroutesoftransportation(oftenonterracesclearly visiblefromaconsiderabledistance)andtheiradditionaldemarcationbymeansof ringsofstonesandstele,supportsthisinterpretation.

(Arnold,1995:45)

InBritaintherearerelativelyfewburialmoundsthatcouldbedescribedas monumentalinscale,thoughtheirlocationatprominentsitesinthelandscape oratterritorialboundariesortheintersectionoftracksorwaterwaysmight haveenhancedtheirvisibility.Asstatementsofidentityandlegitimacyofa rulinglineage,itmightbearguedthatsocietiesthatfelttheneedtocreate distinctiveburialswereessentiallyunstableinternallyorpoliticallyinsecure, andthatthismightexplaintheabsenceformuchoftheBritishIronAgeof distinctiveandrecurrentformsofburial,ifinsularcommunitiesdidnotfeel suchaneed.ThefactthatmoreconspicuousburialsappearinthelatepreRomanIronAgeinthosepartsofsouthernBritainthat firstcameintocontact withtheRomanworldmightwellbeevidenceinsupportofthisview.

STATUSANDHIERARCHY

Theassumptionthatstatusmightbeinferredfromburialsisbasedonabelief thatIronAgesocietywashierarchical,withchiefsorkingsatthetopofthe socialpyramid,supportedbyanaristocraticelitewhocontrolledresourcesand theirredistribution,therebysustainingtheirdominanceoverthesubordinate population.Thehierarchicalmodelgainedcredibilityfrompost-warresearch ontheprincelyburials(Fürstengräber)andstrongholds(Fürstensitze)ofthe westernlateHallstattzone(Kimmig,1969),theauthorityoftheeliteinthis instancebeingbasedoncontrolofaprestigegoodseconomy,notablyinvolving Mediterraneanimportsassociatedwithfeastinganddrinking(Frankensteinand Rowlands,1978).Themodelwasdoubtlessoversimplified,andhasrightlybeen challenged.Morerecently,thecorpusofevidenceforlateHallstattburialin south-westGermanyhasbeenreviewedbyBurmeister(2000),whohasargued foramoresubtlesocialhierarchy,involvingdistinctionsofageandsexaswellas apparentsocialstatus.

Itisacommonassumptionthatthestatusofthedeadinlifeisreflectedin thesizeandgrandeuroftheirgraves,andmoreparticularlyinthenumberand qualityofaccompanyinggrave-goods.Thislatterinferenceisseldomsubject torigorousscrutiny,oranyattempttodistinguishbetweenthedifferent componentsofthegraveassemblageandwhatpurposetheymighthave beenintendedtoserve,bywhomoronwhosebehalf.Ifindeedthedeceased washighlyregardedinlife,thenitseemslikelythathisorherachievements wouldhavebeencelebratedinthefuneraryprocessinmanywaysthatcannot survivearchaeologically,instories,music,ordance,forexample,andinrituals thatmayhavebeenprotractedoveraconsiderableperiodoftime.Suchrituals mighthaveincludedaformal ‘layingout’ stage,priorto finaldeposition,when appropriatepossessionsorgiftsmighthavebeendisplayed,ratherthanincorporatingthemintothegrave.

Acknowledgingthereforethatthegraveitselfrepresentsonlythe finalstagein apotentiallyprotractedprocess,neverthelesswemightexpectthesizeofa barrowmoundorditchedenclosuretoreflecttheimportanceaccordedtoa burial,togetherwiththesizeorelaborationoftheburialchamber.Inthecontext ofaformalcemeterytherelationshipofthegravetoothersmayindicateits communalaffiliationsorsocialpriority.Standingalone,asimplegravemay appearrelativelyinsignificant,whereasalargerandmoreconspicuousmonument,especiallyiflocatedstrategicallyinthelandscape,mayhavebeenintended tosignalamorepowerfulmessage,thoughnotnecessarilyregardingthestatus oftheincumbentdead.Thetreatmentofthedead,whetheraspeciallydressed orarrangedinhumation,orcremationinaspecialcontainerlikeabucketor cauldron,mightequallysignifythestatusorentitlementofthedeceased.

ForcontinentalEuropeitwouldbepossibletocitenumerousinstances fromtheLateBronzeAgethroughtheHallstattandLaTèneIronAges,

Another random document with no related content on Scribd:

“Most instructive volume.”

+ + Ath p1048 O 17 ’19 70w

The Times [London] Lit Sup p539 O 9 ’19 1450w

DONNELLY, ANTOINETTE. How to reduce: new waistlines for old. il *$1 Appleton 613

20–17245

This is a jolly little book which makes the trip from Fatland into Slimville an interesting adventure rather than a dismal undertaking. The author writes from a wide experience and her “simple and commonsensible rules for reduction” are emphasized by wit, humor and jingles which seem to defy her own rules by never losing weight. The menus given “require no additional expense to the household budget nor do they need to upset the meal planning to any unreasonable degree.” The exercises given are illustrated and the contents are: A little physical geography; Some Slimville arguments; Hard facts on a soft subject; The dangerous age; Get the weighing habit; Reduce while you eat; What is an average helping; Reduced thirty-six pounds in six weeks; Exercise; Recipes without butter, flour and sugar. The author is “beauty editor” of the Chicago Tribune.

DONNELLY, FRANCIS PATRICK. Art of interesting; its theory and practice for speakers and writers. *$1.75 Kenedy 808

20–18519

The author regards the imagination as the source of interest in written and oral speech, and says that “The place of imagination in prose ” might serve as a substitute title for his book. “In the earlier chapters various specific manifestations of the imagination are described and exemplified; then follow several chapters on particular authors, whose methods of interesting are examined in detail. The final chapters go into the theory of imagination.” (Preface) Among the titles are: The tiresome speaker; Interest from directness; The art of eloquence and the science of theology; Newman and the academic style; Macaulay and “journalese”; Tabb and fancy; Poetry and interest; Developing the imagination; Exercises for the imagination. Parts of the book have appeared in the Ecclesiastical Review, Catholic World and America.

“He has a delicate appreciation of the best in literature and a genius for penetrating beneath the polished work of art to discover the artistry.”

Cath World 112:389 D ’20 350w

DOOLEY, WILLIAM HENRY. Applied science for metal workers. il $2 Ronald 671

19–15024

“The suggestion of the title that the content is of value only to the metal-worker is misleading, for this book is in fact an elementary treatise in the field of technology in general. It deals with fundamental principles of chemistry and physics in their relation to

our daily life. One-eighth of the material handled, perhaps, applies specifically to metal-working trades; the remainder is of general informational value to the average layman as well as to the metalworker.” School R

Booklist 16:117 Ja ’20

“Mr Dooley has been very successful in many of the chapters in showing that the sciences of physics and chemistry, which in general are too abstract for students in the elementary school, can be put in such a way as to arouse a good deal of interest and promise full understanding on the part of immature students.”

El School J 20:393 Ja ’20 100w

Quar List New Tech Bks Ja ’20 100w

“The book is well within the range of evening- and continuationschool attendants, particularly those engaged in the distributive and productive industries. It should prove of value as a text in vocational high schools and in those regular high schools that are able to differentiate their courses for the benefit of that portion of their school population which graduates into industry.” H. T. F.

School R 28:155 F ’20 220w

DOOLEY, WILLIAM HENRY. Applied science for wood-workers. il $2 Ronald 684

The first chapters on the general principles of science underlying all industry are identical with those in “Applied science for metal workers.” These are followed by seven chapters specifically relating to woodworking trades.

+ 19–15025

Booklist 16:117 Ja ’20

El School J 20:393 Ja ’20 100w

Quar List New Tech Bks Ja ’20 40w

DORRANCE, MRS ETHEL ARNOLD (SMITH), and DORRANCE, JAMES FRENCH.

Glory rides the range. il *$1.75 Macaulay co.

20–5585

“Gloriana’s father was Blaze Frazer, owner of a horse ranch near the ‘Solemncholy desert.’ Frazer’s delicate and refined wife had mysteriously disappeared some years before the story opens. Frazer receives a penciled letter post-marked Nogales, Mexico, telling him that there is a woman there who ‘sometime cry for Blaze and Glory and says her name is Frazer.’ The writer further requests Frazer to come for the woman and bring with him $5,000 gold for ‘ expenses. ’ Frazer raises the money and starts for Mexico in the hope of finding his wife; before leaving he leases the ranch to one Timothy Rudd and arranges for the girl to live with a friend during his absence.

Gloriana, however, decides otherwise; Rudd was a bad character and, refusing to recognize the validity of the lease, she assumes charge of the ranch herself. The exciting incidents which followed her decision furnish the theme of this story. In the end Gloriana is in her mother’s arms and a prospective husband is hovering near by.” N Y Times

Boston Transcript p4 S 4 ’20 240w

N Y Times 25:287 My 30 ’20 320w

“When you read ‘Glory rides the range ’ you feel that Ethel and James Dorrance must have had a ‘bully good time’ writing it, so enthusiastically and blithely does it gallop from one thrilling situation to another.”

Pub W 97:999 Mr 20 ’20 340w

DOSTOEVSKII, FEDOR MIKHAILOVICH.

Honest thief and other stories. *$2 (1c) Macmillan

20–26192

This is the eleventh volume in Mrs Garnett’s translation of the works of Dostoevsky. It contains ten stories: An honest thief; Uncle’s dream; A novel in nine letters; An unpleasant predicament; Another man ’ s wife; The heavenly Christmas tree; The peasant Marev; The crocodile; Bobok; The dream of a ridiculous man.

“Perhaps Dostoevsky more than any other writer sets up this mysterious relationship with the reader, this sense of sharing. While we read, we are like children to whom one tells a tale: we seem in some strange way to half-know what is coming and yet we do not know; to have heard it all before, and yet our amazement is none the less, and when it is over, it has become ours. This is especially true of the Dostoevsky who passes so unremarked the child-like, candid, simple Dostoevsky who wrote ‘An honest thief’ and ‘The peasant Marey’ and ‘The dream of a ridiculous man. ’” K. M.

Ath

p1256

N

28 ’19 850w

Booklist 16:243 Ap ’20

“Fortunately for the reader, Dostoevski’s desperation of human nature drove him to ridicule rather than to melancholy, and for ridicule he was admirably equipped with a lively and stinging wit. Of the ten stories which make up the volume, ‘Uncle’s dream’ is probably the most entertaining.” G. H. C.

Boston Transcript p6 F 14 ’20 550w

“Insouciance, self-possession of the absolute much prized French variety, the all containing nonchalance, the iron-nerved sense of form, Dostoevsky apparently cannot claim. His close realism quite lacks easiness and is impersonal in a rough and elemental, not an accomplished way; he has no suggestion of the considered faint irony of Chekhov. His eminence is the eminence of endowment, not of training or consideration; he is the great artist of few accomplishments.” C: K. Trueblood

Dial 68:774 Je ’20 800w

“The stories and sketches in this volume of Dostoevsky are not among his best. His humor is not happy; his compassion is less exercised when he deals with the higher ranks of society. But always there is the incomparable steadfastness of vision and innocence of the imagination that follows life, that does not seek to distort it, and that finds man in his humanity alone.” L. L.

Nation 110:sup488 Ap 10 ’20 110w

“The restraint and aloofness of the great comic writers are impossible to him. It is probable, for one reason, that he could not allow himself the time. ‘Uncle’s dream,’ ‘The crocodile,’ and ‘An unpleasant predicament’ read as if they were the improvisations of a gigantic talent reeling off its wild imagination at breathless speed. Yet we are perpetually conscious that, if Dostoevsky fails to keep within the proper limits, it is because the fervour of his genius goads him across the boundary.” The Times [London] Lit Sup p586 O 23 ’19 950w

20–8513

The book is intended for use in the upper grades of the schools of the state, it being a law of Wisconsin that its history and government be taught in the common schools. It is as definite and as concrete as brevity permits. Beginning with Jean Nicolet, the first white man to

set foot on Wisconsin soil in 1634, the book describes the Indians, the first settlers, the various nationalities that have made Wisconsin their home, its attitudes in national crises, its laws and industries, etc.

Wis Lib Bul 16:117 Je ’20 30w

DOUGLAS, CLIFFORD HUGH. Economic democracy. *$1.60 (6c) Harcourt 330.1

20–5264

“This book is an attempt to disentangle from a mass of superficial features such as profiteering, and alleged scarcity of commodities, a sufficient portion of the skeleton of the structure we call society as will serve to suggest sound reasons for the decay with which it is now attacked: and afterwards to indicate the probable direction of sound and vital reconstruction.” (Preface) The author sees in the centralizing power of capital one of the chief reasons for this decay and in a decentralized cooperation of individuals a direction that a sound and vital reconstruction will take. After analysing our present decaying economic and political structure and considering the imminence of a general rearrangement, he rejects collectivism “in any of the forms made familiar to us by the Fabians and others” and insists on “the maximum expansion in the personal control of initiative and the minimizing, and final elimination, of economic domination, either personal or through the agency of the state.”

Am Econ R 10:571 S ’20 60w

“It is extremely difficult to find a flaw in this doctrine on the basis of ethics or equity, as for the practical workings of any system which attempts to put this poetic Justice into action we must await the event.”

Ath p445 Ap 2 ’20 1250w

“Those who agree with the premises will find the logic irresistible. Others will be stimulated by the original though unorthodox thinking and the fertile suggestions of the author’s scheme.”

Booklist 16:299 Je 20

“Mr Douglas is by no means clear as to the details of his case, although his general contention has substantial force.” Ordway Tead

Dial 69:412 O ’20 640w

“The orthodox economists are in such a helpless muddle in regard to soaring prices that it is a relief to find a thinker who does not scatter explanations with a shot gun all over the barn door but goes straight to his mark. Unfortunately the book is too brief. Excessive concentration has left it obscure in vital portions.”

Nation 111:19 Jl 3 ’20 350w

“Major Douglas knows his difficult subject from end to end. If the fates had blessed him with the gift of clear exposition we might have

had here a volume of note. When he determines to keep clear from terms which demand explanations, and concentrates on clarifying his message of social regeneration, those who pay lip service to formal political democracy will find in him a telling recruit to the growing band of thinkers who deny the name of democracy to any system not based upon economic freedom.”

Nation [London] 27:184 My 8 ’20 800w

“This small book offers much room for controversy both as to its technical analysis of the effects of current accounting and credit practices and as to the feasibility of remedies advocated. The ground for controversy is widened by the author’s unfortunately vague and sometimes bombastic style.” E. R. Burton

Survey 44:541 Jl 17 ’20 280w

DOUGLAS, OLIVE

ELEANOR

(CONSTANCE) (LADY ALFRED DOUGLAS).

Penny plain. *$1.90 Doran

A story of a quiet little Scottish town. Priorsford is the home of a number of quaint and interesting people. Here Jean Jardine lives with her two brothers and “the Mhor,” Gaelic for “the great one, ” the pretentious name given to a little boy of seven. Into this placid atmosphere comes the Honourable Miss Pamela Reston, who is tired of London life. The story tells of how she fits into Priorsford society and how she and Jean become fast friends, and there is much description of tea-parties and country social life. Then comes an unexpected legacy for kind-hearted little Jean and romance, too, appears in the person of Pam’s younger brother. Pam herself finds

the fulfilment of a hope of twenty years ’ standing which has kept her single all this long time. The title comes from the dialogue of the shopman and the small boy: the shopman saying “You may have your choice penny plain or twopence coloured.” the small boy choosing the penny plain, as “better value for the money. ”

“A pleasant book to read. But we cannot help thinking it would be pleasanter still without the perfunctory introduction of a loveinterest, and of other irrelevances considered more or less indispensable in fiction.”

Ath p244 Ag 20 ’20 120w

“The children make the book, especially Gervase and his dog. It is worth reading for them alone.” I. W. L.

Boston Transcript p4 D 11 ’20 480w

“Miss Douglas’s new book in two ways partakes of a quality little short of the miraculous. It is a post-war story without a trace of warweariness or bitterness; and it is full of people who are nice with the added charm of being entertaining. As a story ‘Penny plain’ leaves something to be desired. Let us add that if an author is to be judged by her literary preferences and illusions and quotations, Miss Douglas deserves a very high mark.”

Spec 125:342 S 11 ’20 440w

“A very able and delightful book, but it is not the kind of book that the Marxian kind of person would like. The author has a good style and a subtle sense of humour, together with the skill necessary for the gradual unfolding of the characters.”

DOWST, HENRY PAYSON.[2] Bostwick’s budget.

il *$1 Bobbs 331.84

20–18296

“An inspiring bit of a book for all those in debt; being the Odyssey of Sam and Lucy, who owed $4,016.69 and through the advice of a sagacious old lawyer and the use of grit, in a comparatively short time found themselves out of debt and with money in the bank.” Cleveland

Cleveland p106 D ’20 50w

N Y Evening Post p17 D 4 ’20 100w

“The story, as a story, is closely interesting, and as a sermon on thrift it ought to be read by 100 per cent of the newlyweds in America and by an equal ratio of people above and below that date line in their careers. ”

Springf’d Republican p7a D 26 ’20 190w

DOWST, HENRY PAYSON.[2] Man from Ashaluna. *$1.75 (2c) Small

20–18763

Judson Dunlap comes home from France with the desire to paint pictures. As a doughboy in Paris he had seen real pictures and a latent interest in art had awakened. He buys a painting kit and starts in by himself alone in the Ashaluna hills, his home. But the results are queer and he knows it. So he takes the patents on the churn he has invented to New York, hoping to sell them and get money to learn painting. He also hopes to meet Mary Beverly, the girl he had rescued from the snowdrifts the winter before. He is immediately plunged into a game of high finance, for two rival concerns are after him for his water rights on the Ashaluna and are willing to juggle with his churn patents as part of the price. Jud plays them off one against the other, meets Mary again, learns to wear the right clothes and use the right forks and, altogether, doesn’t find time to learn painting.

“A cleverly conceived, well told novel. While there is nothing particularly striking in this book in any one place, it is a well made piece of fiction.”

No vers libre for Sir Arthur. It is the old style meter with the old style rhyme and the old style powerful lilt to the old style ballad most suitable for recitations. They are all war poems and are: Victrix; Those others; The guards came through; Haig is moving; The guns in Sussex; Ypres; Grousing; The volunteer; The night patrol; The wreck on Loch McGarry; The bigot; The Athabasca trail; Ragtime! Christmas in wartime; Lindisfaire; A parable; Fate.

“The title-piece and others show Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to be a master of evening-paper balladry.”

Ath p558 Ap 23 ’20 70w

“It is good British song one finds in this slim little volume of Sir Arthur’s. And it is British all the way through, this little book; British militarily, British presumptuously satisfied with her destiny.” W. S. B.

Boston Transcript p4 Ap 21 ’20 400w

“Nothing so good for Friday afternoon readings in public schools has been written since ‘The charge of the light brigade.’”

Dial 69:323 S ’20 110w

“While the military expert may pass over many episodes as being non-essential, it is these very episodes which lure the general reader on from page to page. ” Walter Littlefield

“Sir Arthur Conan Doyle is a real benefactor to the organizers of town or village entertainments who want pieces of good quality for recitation. His poems, mainly patriotic, are irreproachable in sentiment, simple in expression, and always have a brave lilt. One longish piece, ‘The wreck on Loch McGarry,’ is in a vein of Gilbertian humour.” The Times [London] Lit Sup p783 D 25 ’19 80w DOYLE, SIR ARTHUR CONAN. History of the great war. v 5–6 il ea *$3 (3c) Doran 940.3

v 5–6 The British campaign in France and Flanders, 1918.

Volume 5, covering the first half of the year 1918, “carries the story of the German attack to its close.” The battle of the Somme is given seven chapters, with the battle of the Lys and the battles of the Chemin des Dames and of the Ardres treated in the concluding chapters. Volume 6 “describes the enormous counter attack of the Allies leading up to their final victory.” Both volumes are indexed and are illustrated with maps and plans.

“It is written in the author’s usual clear style, and sticks, for the most part, to the business in hand, although the occasional illinformed references to the Russian revolution are hardly in keeping with the rest of the narrative.” Ath p932 S 19 ’19 60w (Review of v 5)

Ath p195 F 6 ’20 90w (Review of v 6)

Booklist 16:273 My ’20 (Review of v 5–6)

Cath World 111:694 Ag ’20 190w (Review of v 6)

“While the military expert may pass over many episodes as being non-essential, it is these very episodes which lure the general reader on from page to page. ” Walter Littlefield

N Y Times p6 D 19 ’20 380w

Outlook 124:657 Ap 14 ’20 30w (Review of v 6)

“Within certain limits, Sir Arthur’s account will be found useful; his maps, so-called, are execrable.”

Review 3:422 N 3 ’20 1050w (Review of v 5–6)

Spec 123:373 S ’20 ’19 1850w (Review of v 5)

Spec 124:316 Mr 6 ’20 150w (Review of v 6)

“Perhaps the only possible criticism of Sir Arthur’s work is its official tinge. Considering his difficulties, Sir Arthur is to be congratulated upon his work.”

“Sir Arthur Doyle lacks the knowledge, for which he cannot be blamed, since official material is denied to him; and it is quite impossible that such a history as his should not be more or less hastily produced, so that he lacks also time. We fear that we must add, lastly that he fails in literary skill. One bright spot, indeed, there is in the shape of a few pages of actual experience which Sir Arthur has modestly relegated to the appendix of his final volume.”

− − + Springf’d Republican p13a My 2 ’20 850w (Review of v 5–6)

The Times [London] Lit Sup p164 Mr 11 ’20 1250w (Review of v 5–6)

D’OYLY, SIR

WARREN HASTINGS,

bart. Tales retailed of celebrities and others. il *$2 (4½c)

Lane

20–20076

“They are simple tales mostly such as are told in ordinary after dinner chit-chats round the fire, over a good cigar and a glass of good wine, when young men tell tales of presentday happenings to be capped by older men ’ s tales of the ‘good old times.’” (Preface) With a few exceptions they all relate to incidents which have come under the author’s own observation during a lifetime of over fourscore years. The contents are in two parts. Book I contains: A hundred years ago: Dorsetshire, Haileybury and Scotland; India; Tirhut, Bhaugulpore, and Arrah; Indian celebrities and others. Book II, Legends, contains:

Family legends and tales taken from “The house of D’Oyly” by William D’Oyly Bayley. F. S. A.

Ath p528 Ap 16 ’20 40w

“His jottings may entertain readers who know something of the circle in which he moved, or who may like a few anecdotes about the hunting of Indian big game. But the book as a whole can hardly claim to have much general interest.”

The Times [London] Lit Sup p141 F 26 ’20 110w

DOZIER, HOWARD DOUGLAS. History of the Atlantic coast line railroad.

*$2 Houghton 385

20–7433

The book is one of the Hart, Schaffner and Marx series of prize essays in economics. It is the history of the consolidation of a number of short railroads along the South Atlantic seaboard into the Atlantic coast line system and illustrates the growth of the holding company period and its decline. It includes much of the economic history and the economic conditions of the section involved and shows what a marked influence the consolidation had on the latter. Contents: Early trade and transportation conditions of the Atlantic seaboard states: Economic background of the north and south railroads of Virginia; The Petersburg and the Richmond and

Petersburg railroads before 1860: North Carolina and the Wilmington and Weldon railroad before 1860; The South CarolinaGeorgia territory and its railroads before the Civil war; Summary of railroad conditions along the Atlantic seaboard to 1860; Growth from the Civil war to 1902; Integrations and consolidations; Summary and conclusion; Appendix; Bibliographical note; Index; and insert maps and table.

“The student will find in this volume an important contribution to the economic literature of the country, not only because it adds to our knowledge of railway history but because it contains as a background a good discussion of the industrial development of the country through which the lines were built.” I: Lippincott

Econ R 10:593 S ’20 720w

“The later chapters, in fact, are notably lacking in the mention of personnel. Other faults lie in the construction of sentences and paragraphs, in the omission of dates of publication from the bibliography, and in occasional errors of statement. The book, nevertheless, is in general a substantial and well-considered contribution.” U. B. Phillips

20–18678

“Prof. Drachsler gives us an interpretation of a careful statistical study of the facts of intermarriage in New York city among immigrant groups. In view of our heterogeneous population, he states, the national ideal must be redefined and our life consciously directed toward it. Approaching the problem merely from an economic or cultural point of view is not enough. The fusion of races in America, in short, must be cultural as well as biological, and it must take place under an adequate economic environment if an American ideal is to be achieved. The most specific proposal which Prof. Drachsler makes to accomplish this is to develop in our schools a conscious attempt to study the comparative literature, politics and history of the races represented therein in order that their heritages may continue to be an inspiration and force.” Springf’d Republican

Boston Transcript p6 D 4 ’20 720w

N Y Times p10 D 12 ’20 1800w

“Prof. Drachsler’s approach is a stimulating and suggestive appeal to facts.” J: M. Gaus

Springf’d Republican p5a Ja 2 ’21 570w

“Each reader will interpret these facts in accordance with his own point of view. It is a merit of the book that the facts have been divided from interpretation of the facts. The book will no doubt be recognized as one of the few valuable discussions on the problem of assimilation.” J. B. Berkson

Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.