 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing?
|
|
|
Subject: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Banjo Johnny Date: 20 Jun 00 - 01:41 AM Just watching another PBS show about archaeologists exhuming another ancient grave. This time it's "The Snow Maiden" in Siberia. Why is it okay for them to dig up someone's body? Did this whole thing start with King Tut? I saw the King Tut exhibit and it was stunning - I never thought about this at the time. How old does a grave have to be, to make it okay to dig up the body and put it on public display? They are doing this all over the world in the name of Science. I AM ALL FOR SCIENCE, but I wonder if this IS Science, or something else. I am not particularly religious either, but don't human rights come into the question somewhere? Isn't there something about respect for the dead? I think the Indians are getting pretty upset about this, and I can't blame them. Will they be digging up my mother some day? Cutting open her stomach to see what her last meal was? Showing her naked bones on TV? -- then back to the Pledge Drive. I just don't know about this whole thing. == Johnny in Oklahoma City |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Mooh Date: 20 Jun 00 - 06:28 AM This is just one reason, there are others, I'd prefer to be cremated. Outside a town nearby here, great effort was recently spent to return a small cemetery that had become farmed over. Somebody finally became offended by the gradual removal of the markers. These were graves of the poor and unknown I believe. That the County (I think) who's responsibility it was to maintain the site completely abdicated its responsibility irks as much as their waffling about restoring the site. If the poor aren't significant to society in life, they surely aren't in death, to our everlasting shame. A shame we rarely have to face. Peace, Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Grab Date: 20 Jun 00 - 10:07 AM Depends on what you believe. I'm not sure why Christians get bothered by this - if they really believe their credo then the soul leaves the dead body, so the dead body is no more than an empty shell, and is therefore of no spiritual significance. I don't think you'll find any group other than religious who are worried about human rights after death - human rights focusses on treating ppl right while they're still alive. If the relatives of the person involved are still alive, they should decide whether they agree - maybe they wouldn't like it. If even the social group (eg. Indian tribe) to which the person belonged still exists, they should decide whether it's right - maybe it's against their religion. And if the country involved is against it, then they'll have a say too. But if no-one minds, then hey... And re the science side, you've said yourself that the Tutenkhamun (sp?) stuff is pretty impressive. The point is that these bodies show how that person lived, and by extension we can make some educated guesses about their level of technology, their trading routes and possibly even their social status - that's the point of archaeology, getting details about our common history. Just a few bits of mindless drivel... Grab. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Jim Dixon Date: 20 Jun 00 - 11:10 AM Johnny: Let me see if I understand: It doesn't bother you to have an open casket at a funeral or wake? It doesn't bother you to have relatives and casual acquaintances going up to the body and saying, "Doesn't he look nice?" -- but it bothers you to have people looking at bare bones several centuries later? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Bert Date: 20 Jun 00 - 11:20 AM They are shifting Daddy's bones to build a sewer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 20 Jun 00 - 11:33 AM I just read something called The Visitant, which kind of flashes back and forth between the prehistoric time when things were happening, and the modern-day archaeologists trying to figure it out, all in the context of the religious beliefs of the Native Americans with stweardship of the land, and the government regulations, and all. Not a gripping mystery but a very interesting treatment of the question. Personally, I think that just because something is science doesn't mean it isn't grave-robbing, or vice-versa. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 11:52 AM WARNING RAVING OPINION AHEAD!! Graveyeards are a waist of space in this world... a place to cling to medieval superstition... I'd love to see every graveyard bulldozed and turned into say, a playground or maybe some low rent housing to help the homeless (who are not homeless... a home is a concept... these people are HOUSE-LESS!!) and the poverty stricken.... As far as Archaeology goes, DIG 'EM ALL UP!!! Ya can't know where your going until you know where you've been and this world we live in needs all the direction it can possible get... I actually hope I get dug up by some future archaeologist and shown around the world for what ever reason.... One of the reasons why I'm making a chainmaille hauberk to be buried in... just to mess with their minds!! LOL!! RANT OFF |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Gervase Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:02 PM But digging up bodies has (in Western tradition at least) always been OK. After all, God's Acre is but an acre, and in a few generations it fills - hence the ossuaries that were once a feature of many old churches and other religious houses. Admittedly the bones that filled the ossuaries had been carefully dug and and then reinterred with a blessing - but only the big 'uns; the skull, humerus and femur generally. The rest just stays in the ground. Personally, if I felt that my old bits and bobs could enlighten someone in years to come were they to be dug up and examined by a spotty undergraudate, I wouldn't give a toss. Seriously, though, archaeology has become a science, and a fascinating one at that. Not that it hasn't had its share of robbers, plunderers and buccaneers - which is why the British Museum (and just about every other major national collection) is so magnificent. Surely, like our music, anything that helps us connect and understand who we are and where we come from must be to the good. It doesn't have to be ancient, either. I've sweated and strained through several digs - the latest one being a trench running to the Somme battlefield, which personally I found both fascinating and moving. Have a shufti here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Kim C Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:19 PM Digging up old cultures can often aid us in understanding our own. However, I do believe in doing it respectfully and I NEVER watch those sensational programs about opening mummy's tombs because I don't want to be party to any curse! :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mbo Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:21 PM Burial is NOT a "medieval superstition", it's a tradition. And as all of you bloody idiots know, tradition is what the stupid site is supposed to be about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:38 PM Curb youself Mbo... Refering to peole who don't share your beliefs as 'stupid idiots' is immature, intolerant and deffinatly not in the spirit of friendly discourse as the Mudcat should be... If the Cat is so 'stupid' and apparently you are not, then why are you here?
I'll make the distinction between burial and grave yards... Burial, some cultures used to do almost anywhere and the land wasn't wasted... grave yards are set aside places that breed superstition, speculation and ignorance... Most people treat grave yards as 'untouchable'... I look at them and think, "What a great field for a play ground", or "Wouldn't that be a good place for a skate park to get the kids out of the parking lots." Dig 'em up and let the kids play with the bones... {~` |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mbo Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:43 PM I'm starting to wonder that myself |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Jim Dixon Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:52 PM I agree that the British Museum has some great exhibits, of Egyptian mummies and so on, but I think that if anyone seriously proposed exhuming the bones of, say, Henry VIII and putting them on display, there would be a great hue and cry. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:53 PM Well Mbo, if ya gotta go, go... Too bad, but ya gotta do what feels right for ya... Stay cool, kiddo! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Amergin Date: 20 Jun 00 - 12:59 PM Hmmm, might be my imagination but this doesn't sound much like Mbo to me.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: SeanM Date: 20 Jun 00 - 01:24 PM On the actual topic, some historic figure or another (or maybe Indiana Jones, but hey, I'm not an archaeologist) once said something akin to "Most archaeology is just glorified grave robbing". The current trend I think is the best - verify it's ok with local governments/culture, and go for it. Interesting point with the body disposal angle - it seems to me that it's a fairly modern conceit that the body is an empty shell after death - burial rites are one of the truly universal elements of every society, and even the modern cremation still comes attendant with ritualistic trappings... M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 01:40 PM Good point SeanM... yer right, it is a fairly modern idea about the empty shell... but one that I think deserves much more consideration... But as long as it's done in the name of research and not strictly for anyone's personal gain, call it what you will... just keep giggin' 'em up! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 20 Jun 00 - 01:53 PM I actually agree with Clinton about graveyards and spaces dedicated to the dead detracting from the needs of the living. More space in NYC is occupied by the dead than by the living if you don't count upper stories, and they have a housing shortage. I also agree that homeless isn't homeless but houseless. I also agree that it didn't sound like Mbo at all. Must be something I ate... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: SINSULL Date: 20 Jun 00 - 02:46 PM Please note: It's Guest Mbo. HMMMM. Not even Guest Mbo at UC or wherever he usually writes from. Stupid question: Why is it OK to dig up the grave of a person who died 100 or 1000 years ago but sacrilegious to dig up one that is two years old (sanitation aside)? I have mentioned before that I will be cremated and my ashes scattered in the first snow storm. A dead body is to me rotting tissue. But I respect the beliefs of those who feel that a burial ground is sacred and a body should be left undisturbed. That includes ancient Egyptian civilizations, Indian Burial Grounds, poor blacks in lower Manhattan, etc. I was raised RC and we were taught that cremation was sinful because the body could not be resurrected whole. I don't agree but I respect the right of others to believe. The lack of respect for the dead and their traditions be it for scientific study or museum shows does offend me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Little Neophyte Date: 20 Jun 00 - 03:09 PM I don't think I would want the job of digging up graves. I saw a documentary about the curse placed on those who were involved in digging up King Tut's tomb and the tragedic events that followed. Pretty spooky. Did you know that 2 mummies were being transported on the Titanic? Something to think about. Clinton, how about when I die, they bury me standing up so that I don't take up so much space. Bonnie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Amergin Date: 20 Jun 00 - 03:11 PM Well, I know I don't want to take up any space in a graveyard. I want to be stuffed so I can take up space by the fireplace. Amergin |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Mbo Date: 20 Jun 00 - 03:16 PM Yeah, play with them. I heard thay the bones of dead infants make great beater sticks for bodhrans. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 03:17 PM There was no curse on King Tut's tomb!! LOL!! It was coincidence, and speculation in the extreem... That and ancient mold spores that were released when the tomb was opened... Banjo Bonnie, How about when we all die, they take every organ they can from our carcass, help people who need them, and process the rest of us to fertilise farmers fields?? That's what happens anyway, or it used to untill people started filling their dead bodies full of chemicles so they wouldn't decay... and sealing themselves into air tight coffins... What a stupid idea.... When I die and after they've taken any organs that might still be usefull, I want a acorn shovved up my butt and to be dropped into a shallow hole somewhere.. with any luck that tree will grow! LOL!!!
China does bury people standing up... but because they are so overpopulated and space it at such a premium, you only get to stay in the ground for 5 years... Or maybe that's Japan... where ever... I figure, why bother at all??? {~` |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: SINSULL Date: 20 Jun 00 - 03:53 PM "Oh when I die, don't bury me at all Just place my bones in alcohol And at my feet, place a snow white dove To tell the world that I died for love."
Clinton, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 03:56 PM DANG! SINSULL is onto my plan!! LOL!!!! {~` |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: SINSULL Date: 20 Jun 00 - 04:11 PM The world is. Why do you think they are having such a hard time getting people to donate organs? I saw a grisly TV movie about a doctor who anesthetized a "dead" woman to harvest her organs. He was in a hurry to get rare blood type parts. She wasn't dead and he knew it. AAAHHHHH. Thanks, I'll hold on to mine. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Clinton Hammond2 Date: 20 Jun 00 - 04:17 PM Ahhh... tv movies... the grand spreader of paranoia and misinformation!! I personally feel it should be illegal NOT to donate organs and tissue... But I can't for the life of me figure out what the sentance would be! LOL!! (Talk about thread creep eh! Sorry!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Ebbie Date: 20 Jun 00 - 04:32 PM Great image re the acorn, Clinton! I choose cremation, just as I opt for a memorial service rather than the body-being-present funeral. The button-pressing ritual of the latter not only does, but is meant to jerk the audience around, and I think that is obscene. I'm with Grab- if the 'church' believes you've gone to a 'better place', then why the moaning. As for the cremated body not being whole and capable of being reassembled, what about the mangled remains of wars and/or the amputated limbs that are scattered across the world, far from the surviving body. Does that mean there will be legless angels fluttering around? Nah. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 20 Jun 00 - 05:20 PM As to why Christians object to disturbing the body, when the soul is gone. I can't give you details, because I am not really a Christian, but my understanding is that at the Judgment Day the soul will be rejoined with the body, which will rise up incorruptible. Therefore one needs to keep the body entire. A likely story, in my own view, but the the doctrine is something like that. Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Jon Freeman Date: 20 Jun 00 - 05:28 PM Am am a Christain but I haven't a clue on that one, Dave. As far as I am concered, when I die, this body will be useless and I don't care what happens to it after death. Regardles of religion/ belief system, I do however feel that we should respect the wishes of the departed. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Rollo Date: 20 Jun 00 - 05:52 PM For sure Archeology is grave-robbery. As long there is somebody who cares about the dead, at least. When amerindians or jews demand the holyness of their burying ground then it has to be respected. But in the principle as long the scientists show respect to the body they dig out and inspect it's okay by me. And the ones I met so far have great respect for the dead, because they are surprised regurlarly by these dead whith astonishing details about their technical and cultural development. And even tourists defiling through Museums and gazing at mummies normally feel a touch of the past and wonder about the person that once inhabited the scattered remnants spread out before them. A curse on mummies tombs? Never. tons of mummies were minced to fertilizer and brought to europe during 19th century, making some english business men very rich. Is this a "mummies curse"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Jim Dixon Date: 20 Jun 00 - 06:21 PM Speaking of Christian theology, I recall reading that Thomas Aquinas - or maybe it was Augustine - once pondered the problem of what would happen at the resurrection to a cannibal who had eaten nothing in his entire life but other people's bodies. Since every atom in his body properly belongs in someone else's body, how can both he and his victims be resurrected? (The cannibal must be resurrected so that he can properly fry in hell, you know.) Trouble is, I can't remember what answer he came up with. Anybody else want to take a crack at it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Mbo Date: 20 Jun 00 - 06:26 PM Ok ok Jim, that's enough of that.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Banjo Johnny Date: 20 Jun 00 - 09:37 PM What a range of interesting opinions -- some very funny! I didn't mean to introduce the religious angle, but here's a thought. If a person's body needs to be "whole" for resurrection purposes, what about all the folks drowned at sea, eaten by wild animals, and so on?
# I'm not worried about being dug up because my will orders my cremation, and it's already paid for. However both my parents wanted to be buried in
# Sure it's great to learn about the way people lived in the past, but can't we draw a line somewhere? Dig up the ancient cities and they can find plenty of fascinating art, literature and technology, without bothering the graves.
# Still thinking about some of the other topics. Meanwhile, I'm leaving my brain to Science Fiction. == Johnny in Oklahoma City
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Banjo Johnny Date: 20 Jun 00 - 09:38 PM Even as I posted the above, they're starting another one called "The Ice Mummies". I'm not going to watch it. == Johnny in OKC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Hotspur Date: 20 Jun 00 - 10:07 PM I told my relatives i want to be buried in a plain pine box and used to fertilize somebody's field. Turns out you can't do that in NYS anymore. You have to have a concrete liner in the grave. Talk about wasted space!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Lepus Rex Date: 21 Jun 00 - 02:48 AM Well... At least in the case of the 'Snow Maiden' or whatever she's being called, it IS graverobbing. The part of the Russian Federation that she was found in, the Republic of Altai, is home to... shoot, i forget how many indiginous ethnic groups. 10 or so. Russia has ruled over them since the 1700s. The Russian scientists who excavated the tomb stole the mummy from the people of Altai, as they have stolen from all Russian 'minorities' for hundreds of years. Whether or not any of the present day peoples of the area are actually descended from the 'Pazyryks,' it should be their mummy to study or to display or to bury, not the Russians'. As for graveyards: They already are playgrounds of a sort. They may not be places for children and skaters to frolic, but remembering and honouring ones ancestors is an important part of many people's lives. One person's 'medieval superstition' could be my living tradition. Anyways, I'm going to bed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 21 Jun 00 - 10:44 AM I have to admit that I used to want to be cremated, but having now been to funerals and memorial services I think I'll leave it up to my survivors to decide what would comfort THEM best. After all, I'll be dead. But as an aside about whole bodies and resurrection, about a decade ago I had to have my gall bladder out, and I wanted to take it home in a jar, just for fun. But the hospital claimed that once they removed the organ it was THEIRS, not mine, and in order to argue with them I told them that my religious beliefs required that I have all my organs in the afterlife, so they gave it to me! I keep it in my kitchen cupboard with "other" non-perishable ingredients... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Jigger Date: 21 Jun 00 - 02:39 PM Jim Dixon- I believe it was Saint Augustine who postulated the theory in question. He wrote that if a man is starving and eats another man, even if the eaten man is absorbed into the starving man's flesh, God knows to whom each body belongs. The same holds true for a drowned man eaten by fish, wild animals, etc. God can extract a man's "essence" from bubbles of air. The man/fish/wild animal/whatever will have just "borrowed" the dead man's body for a time. I knew that degree in medieval history and literature would come in handy... As to archaeolgy as grave robbing, it seems to me that we all more object to the sensationalism of shows like "Opening the Lost Tombs" or "Digging up Banjo Johnny's Mum", rather than the archaeology itself. There's no scientific or cultural knowledge to be gained by letting celebrities traipse through old tombs. But, for an example, we wouldn't know much of anything about ancient Egyptian culture had it not been for the first archaeologists. They may have destroyed more artifacts than they saved, but they paved the way for modern scholars and scientists. And to be fair, many American museums, under NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act), have returned artifacts, bones, and objects to native groups that have requested them. Then again, I'm biased, since I work in a museum myself. Our museum has a native collection; we've returned some objects ourselves, and we work with tribal council to make sure that the rest of the objects we hold in the public trust are treated with due respect, and are represented fairly. I'm getting off my soap box now. Jigger |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Whistle Stop Date: 21 Jun 00 - 03:28 PM This is obviously one of those areas where people are going to have a range of strongly held beliefs, so we all need to show a certain amount of sensitivity regardless of what our individual beliefs are. For myself: (a) I don't care what happens to my dead body as long as it doesn't upset the friends and family members I've left behind -- so don't hang it in the town square, if you please; (b) I think the "grave robbing" aspect diminishes with time, because as time goes by you're less likely to offend anyone who actually knew the deceased; (c) if every burial site on this small planet is off-limits for all time, we'll soon have room for little else; (d) I often find that graveyards are conducive to quiet contemplation, so devoting space to them doesn't bother me; and (e) if my comment (d) seems to contradict my comment (c), refer back to my comment (b). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Penny S. Date: 21 Jun 00 - 03:50 PM Since the Ancient Egyptian gravegoods economy depended on grave-robbing (even openly - Smenkare's good being reused for Tut), that was just recycling! Modern archaeologists treat the bodies with more respect than those ancient robbers did. There are other, worse disrespects. Bulldozing graves, while relatives are still alive, to make room for development. I know of one place in Kent where a small disused timber non-conformist chapel was demolished and a house built. not being CofE, there were not the legal requirements which would have allowed people to know what was being done, until too late. No-one's lived there very long. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mbo_at_ECU Date: 21 Jun 00 - 04:05 PM Thanks, Jigger! Great words! --Mbo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Sourdough Date: 21 Jun 00 - 06:24 PM I had the opportunity to go to Cannakale in Turkey to an excavation thought to be the site of Homer's Troy in the Bronze Age. Now, fast forwarding several decades, we shift the scene to the Mojave Desert several decades later. I am standing in a trash pit of what I think is the foundation of a long-gone temporary (1933-1938) construction worker's hospital in an abandoned and grown-over work camp site not far from the Colorado River Aqueduct which brings Colorado River water to LA from Parker Dam on the Colorado. In the hot desert sun, I am working carefully to find an unambiguous item that will identify this hospital site for sure. The artifacts are very different from what was at Cannakale and the question leaps to mind, "At what point, as you move towards the present, does archaology cease and trash-picking begin?" In this case, it must have still been archaology because I was able to make the successful point that the site should become a California State Historical Site but move much closer to the present and I start having socks in my bureau drawers that are that age. Are they getting historical? Sourdough SOurdough |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Banjo Johnny Date: 22 Jun 00 - 02:56 AM More interesting opinions - and people! Yes, I think a large part of the disgust is about the sensationalism. That was a good one about opening Banjo Johnny's mom's grave -- add: with host Geraldo Rivera. How about George Washington's Corpse Up Close and Personal! with host Telly Savalas. But I digress. Sourdough is doing what we might call non-invasive archaeology, digging thru the ruins without bothering the dead. More power to him! (I thought Schliemann found Troy.) Mrr and others seem to take the position that the wishes of the living are more important. If I agreed, I would have had my folks cremated for $1000 a pop, instead of the thirty large we spent on funerals, church, caskets, graves, etc. The living could have used the dough. If St. Augustine was right, why are we knocking ourselves out to preserve dead bodies? Conversely, if we have a tradition of burying the dead, shouldn't they stay buried? Aside to Lepus Rex: I read a book called Tuva or Bust, by Richard Feynman. Told a lot about the people in that region. They have an interesting way of singing. Johnny in Oklahoma City
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Sourdough Date: 22 Jun 00 - 01:50 PM Banjo Johnny: You are right about it Schliemann having felt he found Troy and that was more than a century ago. There is some debate about whether or not it really is Troy but standing on the mounds of what used to be the city walls (through whose gate the Trojan Horse would have been wheeled) and looking out across the plain to the water (just across from Gallipoli but, as they they say, THAT is another story) where the great Greek fleet would have been been in clear sight, imagining Ajax, PAris, Agammenon, and above all, crafty Odysseus, all "fighting for the honor of Helen" (tapping his cigar, he continues archly,) "Which is more than she ever did", I decided to accept it as Troy until someone proves that it isn't. I don't know what the state of the excavations are now but there sure was still a lot left to excavate when I was there. Sourdough |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Mrrzy Date: 22 Jun 00 - 09:47 PM Banjo Johnny, where you say "Mrr and others seem to take the position that the wishes of the living are more important. If I agreed, I would have had my folks cremated for $1000 a pop, instead of the thirty large we spent on funerals, church, caskets, graves, etc. The living could have used the dough" - what I meant was that the survivors should do whatever will best help them deal with the grief, not what is practical or easy, necessarily. For instance, after our father was killed overseas (nothing returned stateside), my sisters and I wanted to have a memorial service but my mother was adamantly set against it. So we had one in which she was invited to not participate if she didn't want to. She did end up coming, but had she not, that would have been OK with the 4 of us. But it wasn't OK with us not to have one. None of us considered "what daddy would have wanted" - that wasn't what it was about. But other families have other needs. Another family might have overridden the deceased's wish not to have any remains brought back, for instance, and I wouldn't have blamed them one bit for not doing what the deceased had requested. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Grab Date: 23 Jun 00 - 09:31 AM Ppl have belief systems - I'll not dispute that. But when the concept of digging up a long-dead body doesn't go against the stated beliefs of anyone involved, then no-one else (including all us lot) has any right to say that they should or shouldn't have done it. To say "you shouldn't do that, bcos it offends my belief system" is hypocritical - if they'll let you believe what you believe, then let them do what they believe. Before anyone gets uptight, I'm not calling anyone names here or pointing fingers, I'm just giving my view. That Christian version of the 'body rejoining the soul' just doesn't hold water for anyone, and I bet the Jesuits would have made mincemeat of it. Do Christians actually believe that once buried, a body doesn't rot? A dead body becomes earthworm BigMacs! So once the worms have etten thee (on Ilkley Moor bah tat, etc...) how can the soul rejoin the body? Unless the body is somehow pulled back from the earthworms, in which case the same thing can happen for the ashes. Also, how does that square with the 'burning witches to save their souls' doctrine - if you're burned then you've combined death and cremation in one go, and if that means your soul can't rise again then that's not saving their soul, is it? By all means don't offend the living relatives (I have the greatest respect for Mrrzy's post), but there's no need to try and observe the beliefs of every group around. IIRC, the South American Indians go for 'sky burials', where they leave the body out for the vultures, but the North American Indians insist on burying in sacred spots and believe that disturbing those spots causes distress to their ancestors - these two beliefs are totally incompatible, so you can't please all the people all the time. Grab. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Lepus Rex Date: 23 Jun 00 - 05:16 PM Speaking of 'sky burials,' I was sort of thinking that would be a nice way to go after I die. But when I was a kid, I wanted to be tossed in a peat bog, hoping that my preserved remains would be discovered in a couple thousand years... Yeah right. I'm guessing that both of these options are illegal. Ah, well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: InOBU Date: 23 Jun 00 - 05:34 PM Oh a couple of ten years ago, I was sitting around with a pack of Native friends, talking about all the Native American bones in drawers at the Smithonian. One of the participants, Carol and I had been at a meeting with the director of the Smith. and Carol asked her, "Why do you have to keep my Grandmother in a drawer..." of cource as a Native meaning, all the bones of the women were her Grandmother and the men her Grandfather, the woman said, "If you can prove decent we will be happy to repatriate the bones to you..." to which Carol answered, "You just don't get it at all, do you?" In order that folks like that would "get it," one of our number came up with the idea of doing a dig at Arlington to see how, from the Civil War to say, Viet Nam, diet has changed among American soldiers... Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Lepus Rex Date: 23 Jun 00 - 05:56 PM Hi, Banjo Johnny. I've got that book somewhere, and I listen to alot of that sort of music:) During the documentary that apparently inspired this thread (if it's the same program I saw... how many can there be?), they played, if I remember right, some music from Tuva, Kazakhstan, and probably Mongolia and Altai Republic too, in the background. And they, again if I remember right, had some footage of an Altaian bard performing. Oops, nothing to do with graverobbing there... And you put 'Non-music' right there in the title. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Banjo Johnny Date: 23 Jun 00 - 11:45 PM Well it is prob'ly some kind of archaic singing, if you stretch a point. Somewhere it was lamely called "throat singing". If they are using their throats, what am I using -- my medulla oblongata? Maybe we should start a new thread called Weird Singing. I remember when I was a kid I found I could sort of sing, real low, by singing on the inhale, rather than the exhale. I wonder if it's something like that. I can't do it now, it sounds like I am croaking. Wonder if it would hurt my regular singing. Also, do you know anything about "circular breathing"? I think you are supposed to be able to sing or play a continuous sound without stopping. Something to do with didgery-doo players, and a rumor that Raasan Roland Kirk could do this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Metchosin Date: 24 Jun 00 - 01:34 AM Inuit traditional "throat singing" is called "katutjatut". Two women stand holding each other, face to face, using circular breathing and producing sounds in the bottom of the throat.
There is an uncanny similarity in the sound of the chants the Inuit women produce, with the sound of a digereedoo and that of the chants of Tibetan monks.
The Inuit chants are an imitation of different sounds of the wind, rushing water, geese, dogs, gulls and other natural sounds, which they use to tell stories of hunting, fishing and legends, to put their young children to sleep. Lullabyes with a difference.
If anyone is interested there is a wonderful CD by Alacie Tullaugaq and Lucy Amarualik that is available. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Lepus Rex Date: 24 Jun 00 - 02:04 AM The Tuvan styles of 'throat singing' are called 'khoomei'. You may find about a billion different transliterations of this word from Tuvan and Mongolian (xoomij, hoomi, etc...), plus the names of all the styles from both lands... And with all the umlauts I'm too lazy to include;) The Khakass and the various groups in Altai Republic have their own versions, but, at least in the Altaian 'kai' style, they don't produce the kickass overtones as in 'khoomei'. In Bashkortostan they have the similar 'uzlyau' style, so it was once probably pretty widesperad among Turkic and Mongolain peoples. 'Uzlyau' is interesting, but doesn't really blow me away. I'm writing this junk from memory, so if anyone wants to correct me, please do:) Ah, and there's a site with a lot of good links and info, dinging instructions, etc... Pretty much everyting you might want to know about Tuva and khoomei. Should be at: http://www.fotuva.org . I REALLY need to learn how to put spaces in my entries... I bet this comes out as one big paragraph, heh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Lepus Rex Date: 24 Jun 00 - 05:25 AM Metchosin... I've got a cd of that kind of Inuit singing somewhere... Really interesting stuff. Say, that reminds me: I have a National Geographic around somewhere that has an article about Inuit ice mummies. Has a mummified infant right on the cover... No idea if the present-day Inuit found this excavation offensive or not. Anyone know how they might feel about the desecration of their dead? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST Date: 24 Jun 00 - 08:54 AM To all who question why we practise our varied burial customs, and why we are outraged by sensationalism, the answer is simple. We love. We love our departed and hold them dear. So we spend "thirty large" (Mrrzy) and we give them the best send off we can. We don't necessarily do it for them but for ourselves. I remember a funeral for a friend where the minister talked of our sitting at a table with him. He said my friend had just moved to the other end of the table and was sitting at the right had of God. I am no Christian and I took no comfort from those words but his mother and the rest of the people ther did. And that is the point of our complex burial customs. Sensational exhumations and disrespectful archaeology, however, attacks those customs and our dead indirectly. If they can do that to the ancient peoples then they could do that to Uncle Bob! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST Date: 30 Jun 00 - 10:03 AM Burial custo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: GUEST,Mrr Date: 30 Jun 00 - 12:54 PM Thanks, Grab. I'm still wondering about the people who are worried that this will happen to their kin... why not? I'd love to see a study utilizing my ancestors, I think it would be TOO COOL to be able to indentify with what was on Nova instead of just touristing... Also, I think that the thing about Christians and Judgment Day includes some kind of "And then a miracle occurs" stage between the worms crawling in and the rising for the Last Day. I think the dead do rise from the grave but not in their current form. My guess (corrections from the cognoscenti appreciated) is that you get the form you had when you died, so if you were 10, you're 10, and if you were 90, you're 90. Whether you'd been dead for 10 or 10,000,000 years is probably irrelevant. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Non-music: Archaeology or Graverobbing? From: Whistle Stop Date: 30 Jun 00 - 02:32 PM Without the intervening miracle that Mrr mentions, this whole resurrection thing could be pretty damn unpleasant. The folks who died old and decrepit would spend eternity that way, as would the disease-ridden, and those who had had various body parts pared away in an effort to stave off death would have to enter God's kingdom without them. And then there's the smell... Hope this doesn't offend anyone's cherished beliefs, but the whole business is pretty ludicrous when you actually try to follow it through. I'm happy to believe in some sort of spiritual resurrection, but adding the physical to the metaphysical doesn't work so well. |