Unusual Death: Self-Mummification

Sokushinbutsu is the Japanese term for the practice of self-mummification done by some Buddhist monks and is unique to areas of northern Japan. It is unusual and I’m not really sure where it ‘fits in’ in terms of categorization, it’s not really burial since people don’t tend to bury themselves and the person is also not interned in the ground, instead in a tomb. Perhaps then it would fit into the category of accidental burials like Otzi, however it wasn’t really an accident, since it was self induced. Troubling....

Although there are not many cases of this practice, believed to be less than 40 mummies, it is thought that hundreds of other monks tried and failed. The monks began the process by fasting, easting only a diet of nuts and fruits combined with hardcore physical activities for 1000 days; this was in order to eliminate body fats. Then for another 1000 days they would eat bark and roots and drink poisonous tea. This step also involved self induced vomiting so that there would be loss of body fluids. The tea helped to poison the body to deter maggots. In the final stage of the process, the monk would enter a large stone tomb and sit in the lotus position to await death. He would ring a bell daily to let the other monks know he was still alive. When the bell stopped, the tomb was sealed for 1000 days. Then the tomb would be opened to see if the monk had been successful, more often than not they failed.

This practice was obviously done for religious reasons. Although the two elements together; (religious) suicide and intentional mummification/preservation, are common across the world, I think combining them in this way is unique to Japan.

IMAGE: http://s3.zetaboards.com/Tranquility/topic/628389/1/

Fantasy Coffins

A while ago while sitting in on a Friday night browsing Google for ‘weird dead things’ I came across the unusual fad in Ghana for unique coffin designs in the shape of all manner of things; giant fish, planes, cars, guitars and so on. Death and the passing of a love done is a highly celebrated event in the region and given a lot of though and effort. The 'fantasy coffins'  as they are called are designed by the deceased or their loved ones to have some sort of essence of the dead person and reflect their personality, or occupation.

This celebration of life and unique practice made me think about the choices that are made regarding death in our own society. It is still so sombre and austere, everybody in black, sullen and most importantly the black shiny coffin, which looks just like every other coffin. I wonder why we are still so reserved about death in our society, especially since we are so very individualistic in almost every other way; we love to personalise everything, difference and uniqueness is highly celebrated in our culture. Why then do we all insist on being the same when it comes to death and shunning the choices of those who want to be different?

I like these coffins; I think they celebrate the life of a person. I think I would probably be buried in a giant horse coffin, the horse would have fancy high heels (I love shoes) and be eating chocolate and there would with a union jack on it somewhere....

Graveyard Convention

I recently came across a BBC article documenting a huge argument over a graveyard that had began in a small English town between the city council, local residents and parents of deceased children. In short, after complaints the graveyard and the city council had banned the presence of a number of decorative objects including wind chimes, lights, balloons and teddy bears particularly on the graves of young children and the graveyard had been dubbed ‘tacky’.

It made me question what the protocol around death is and how to commemorate a loved one? And who gets to choose for us how it ‘should’ be done? I’m sure most of us believe we live in a particularly open and accepting society now, that we have moved on from the days of austere Victorian mourning and that one might be free to celebrate death how they see fit. However, I think that a lot of those century old ideas about death are still deeply engrained in us.

This article followed a recent English television documentary about the (Irish) traveller community in England; one episode showed a memorial that one father holds for his son every year at his grave. Hundreds of friends and family show up, they play ‘the son’s CDs’ from the car and there is lots of drinking. After this was shown there was huge uproar about how disrespectful and tacky such an exhibition was, yet I think we should all be free to commentate our loved ones in the way we see fit.

It made me wonder about such protocol in ancient societies and what the repercussions may have been for people breaking such protocol, additionally I wonder if such examples of going against social convention are visible anywhere in the archaeological record? What will future archaeologists think when they come across this particular grave site, with all these items, will it be an anomaly, how will they try to explain it in a similar manner as they do today?

This really made me re-address how I personally think about archaeological burials. There is obviously the tendency to distance ourselves from the dead in our society, particularly the ancient dead. I have often noticed that my ideas about the treatment of ancient remains differ quite a lot from my fellow classmate, a result I’m sure of being English and growing up exposed to a different set of social conventions about such things. For me now I find it important not to try and place distance between me and the dead, because the idea freaks me out. Instead I find myself wondering about their lives, who they were, who placed their particular grave goods with them and why? What did they mean to that person? What did they mean to the person who put them in? Do we have the right to take them away from that person, isn’t this like stealing. I had a very different approach to such things before, but when I sat down and really thought about it I began to think that we should really be a little more thoughtful to treat these burials as the people they were rather than just viewing them as objects without life.

Picture courtesy of; http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news-politics/should-graveyard-wind-chimes-and-plastic-displays-be-banned-t19290.html

Dealing with Mass Death in Japan

 

On Friday the 11th of March (2011) I, along with the rest of the world, watched in horror as Japan was hit by an strong earthquake measuring more than 8.9 on the Richter scale which triggered a subsequent tsunami. I followed the story all day on BBC News and watched the horrendous videos of the moment the tsunami struck the coast. The destruction and sheer loss of live is so saddening, I cannot even begin to imagine what it must have been like to go through that. Now the Japanese people and the survivors have to pick up the pieces. The death toll now stands at over 11,000, logistically (and archaeologically) that's an awful lot of dead to deal with at once. I was reading an article today about the thousands of bodies that washed up on Japanese shores yesterday and how the small coastal towns are just not equipped to deal with the number of dead; they have run out of body bags and coffins.

It all made me think back to the first reflective reading we did at the beginning of the term, about changing mortuary practices in Iran after a major earthquake and how this natural disaster and  the subsequent loss of life would show up in the archaeological record in the future. As it seems apparent, in the case of mass death due disaster the normal cultural conventions and ways of dealing with the dead often have to be adapted just through the sheer fact of having to dispose of thousands of bodies, quickly. In Japan most people opt to cremate their dead (rather than bury), but it is unlikely that people are being too strict about convention during this time. Archeologically, this would stand out as a shift in practices, with the occurrence of new cemeteries perhaps as well as less social distinction between classes for example. It is a very difficult and unique situation, the loss of a loved one is hard enough under regular circumstances yet trying to deal with the logistics of disposing of thousands of decaying bodies for obvious sanitation purposes whilst still trying to hold on to some sense of (cultural) normality and respect for the lost.

Group Field Work~ Reflections

For our group project-'monument analysis', we decided that we would look at Ross Bay Cemetery located by Dallas Road in Fairfrield. I met the rest of the group there and had to walk through most of the cemetery by myself. I really dont like cemeteries, or death or thinking about death in general. I havent been in one for quite a number of years and the second I entered it gave me a really weird feeling, i uspoose just since I never really give death or dying too much throught then being in a cemetery is quite overwhelming, being faced with so much death forces you to think about your won mortaltity (ie this will be me one day) 

I have always known I have quite an unhealthy fear of death, Im not sure where this comes from? Maybe as a result of being a stauch athiest? Ive always imagined part of the reasons humans need to believe in an afterlife is to distract us from the harsh physical realities of death. I do not believe in an afterlife as such, so perhaps it is the fear of the unknown and the ceasing to exisit in any way that so terrifies me?

If I think about my own death in any great detail it starts to really freak, to an unhealthy extent; sometimes in my half asleep state at night I think about dying in the sense of just ceasing to exist. It gives me the weirdest feeling; like having a panic attack and I have to get up and turn lights on and distract myself from it. My boyfriend thinks this is really weird and I was convinced its a little crazy ha!! Last time I was home it came up in conversation with my mum, now my mum is pretty logical and rational and as far as I know has some belief in an afterlife/God (we were raised very lax Anglican which is common in England where the church is mostly cultural) she told me she used to wake up crying about it in her teen year, I haven't gone that far yet thankfully!! But I'm not alone which made me feel better for a while till I mentioned it to my Nana later that day whose response to the topic of death "don't be daft, we all die, we don't go anywhere, just rot back into the earth, just you wont know anyway will ye, you'll be dead...I'm getting rid of the dog first thing when Grandad dies"...Thanks Gran...

After I got over my initial 'issue', the cemetery was actually quite eerily beautiful and peaceful. It was really interesting to look at all the headstones and see the old names; Ethel, Eliza, Agnes and also many of the headstones had inscriptions about where peoples were originally from; there weer obviously a lot of English immigrants, but I found it interesting to see a handful of really early Australian and Italian settlers. I think that now I might like to go back more often and walk through Ross Bay and enjoy it for what it is a beautiful landmark to our eventual fate.

Monument Analysis at Ross Bay Cemetery: Mausoleums

View Ross Bay Cemetery in Victoria, B.C. in a larger map

The map above is of Ross Bay Cemetery located in Fairfield, Victoria, British Columbia. The field work completed for this map was done as a group project in which all members of the group participated. We decided that we would focus on mausoleums and the data set we chose for the cemetery was ten randomly located mausoleums in various parts of the cemetery. The cemetery itself is quite small and there were only a handful of mausoleums, so ten seemed like a representative sample size. If the cemetery had been larger, or included a greater number of mausoleums then it would have most definitely been much more representative to increase our data set so as not to lead to a bias. However, this being said it cannot be sure that our small sample number is completely representative of early Victoria practice involving mausoleums throughout the early settlement.

We posed two research questions in regards to the mausoleums in Ross Bay cemetery. Firstly, we were aiming to understand how people in mausoleums were related to one another and secondly, to know the most common time period in which mausoleums were popular in the cemetery.
Our primary research question focused on the relationships between the deceased within mausoleums. Through understanding such connections a greater insight can be gained into familial organizations and relationships in the Victoria era of Ross Bay Cemetery. In England and the British Isles in general, where a majority of the people buried in Ross Bay cemetery originated from churchyard mausoleums had begun to appear in the mid eighteenth century and reached the peak of popularity by the mid to late 1800s (Pearson 2002). In England mausoleums began to appear mostly in response to the overcrowded churchyards and church crypts, taking the dead “outside the church walls while still retaining the all-important religious connection” (Pearson 2002: 4).

Historically, mausoleums are associated with wealthy families and high status burials (Pearson 2002); they provided “a safe haven for family remains, unsullied by contact with social inferiors (Pearson 2002: 6) and allowed for the re-enforcing of social hierarchy. The grandeur of mausoleums is a visible sign of wealth and social distinctions, it continues to elevate and separate the wealthy, even after death. This is very clear within Ross Bay Cemetery; it is the grand and auspicious mausoleums which immediately draw the eye.
From our data set, only half of the mausoleums we recorded visibly mentioned direct familial relationships and all of those were spouse relationships. They were the graves of Charles Chislett and his wife Elizabeth, Tom Hawkins and his wife Jessie, James Hopkins and his wife Margaret (Fullerton) and Kenneth Mackenzie and his wife Agnes. The other five mausoleums recorded did not mention any direct familial relations in their inscriptions. However, it is possible to conclude that people who shared a common surname were related and perhaps reconstruct these relationships through inference

An example of such inference could be made when looking at the mausoleum of the ‘Houston’ family, which contains the remains of Mary, Jemima and Alex Florence (interestingly none have the name Houston which sits so grandly carved on the outside of the mausoleum). One might infer that since Mary was more than 30 years older than both Jemima and Alex she could most probably be their mother. Alex and Jemima could be married or be siblings. If they were married then, it would have to be Jemima who married into the family and adopted the Florence surname, making Mary Alex’s mother. Another example can be found when examining the mausoleum of the ‘Collins’ family; Amelia Collins and George Collins were 28 years apart in age and died 7 years apart. Although it did not directly state it on the grave marker, one might infer that they were husband and wife since they share a surname and are located together in death. However, they could also have been siblings or father and daughter or even close cousins. It is the fact that they are buried together in the same ‘tomb’ that most probably points to them being husband and wife. A similar inference can be made about the people who share the ‘Johnson’ mausoleum; Byron and Kate Johnson were buried together and Marian and John Johnson were buried together also. Since Byron and Kate share a tomb and Marian and John another it can be inferred that they were probably married couples. However, they are all quite close in age, so one cannot rule out the possibility of them being siblings either. Although, our results do seem to show that people within the mausoleums were related mostly by marriage (spouse couples) or were parent and child.

However, one anomaly to this conclusion can be found with the ‘Clark’ family mausoleum; it contained two (probably) male relatives who shared the same surname yet were too far apart in age to be either siblings or father and son. WS Parker Clark died in 1912 and Frederick Parker Clark was not even born until 9 years later. It is also unclear if W.S was male or female; however we went on the assumption that he was most probably male as the initializing of the name common practice with male names during the Victorian era. Additionally, it is also unclear if the name ‘Parker’ which they both shared is a middle name or whether it forms a double barreled surname. It is most probable that they shared some familial tie, possibly grandparent and grandchild, although WS could be a great uncle or cousin. It is really interesting that there were no females in this mausoleum, only 2 distantly related family members in a chamber most obviously built for more.

In general it is difficult to establish the exact form familial relationships between mausoleum members if there is no inscription which directly states it. Although, it can be said that the people within the mausoleum did all share some form of family ties with one another, be it through blood or marriage. There are problems that arise with inferring relationships; our own cultural biases as to what constitutes family ties can mislead us, as well as a lack of understanding of the mindset of the people buried in the mausoleums and in the Victorian era in general. However, there could be other lines of evidence; since the cemetery is historical there are more than likely parish records which detailed the exact relationships and given for a greater understanding of early Victorian era family organization in the city of Victoria.

Our second research question aimed to conclude during what time period mausoleums were most popular in Ross Bay Cemetery. In England, where a majority of Victoria’s immigrants hailed from, mausoleums became less frequent in the early 1900's (Pearson 2002). From our findings we concluded that the earliest date mausoleums began to appear in Ross Bay cemetery was 1875, this was of Kenneth Mackenzie (the Mackenzie mausoleum). The latest date we recorded was that of Edward Patterson Rithet in 1981. We concluded that mausoleum popularity peaked between the 1920’s and 50’s in Ross Bay cemetery. I found this to be quite surprising as I had imagined mausoleums as a Victoria fad and presumed they had gone out of style past this period.
A more in depth study could be carried out by carrying out the same research questions in other colonial Canadian cities and in England. By comparing the results with the homeland of the immigrants one might be bale to infer changes in attitudes about death or social status in the new colonies that differed from the metropole.

References

Pearson, Lynn
2002 Mausoleums. Buckinghamshire: Shire Publications

Human Ornament? ...

 

*And on a bit of a side note;

As we all know, you don't have to look too far on the internet to unearth the weird (and creepy)!... I remembered about a story I came across a while ago while thinking about different attitudes towards death and the treatment of the body.

A young man from Puerto Rico as a last request wished to be standing at his own funeral. His wish was fulfilled; 24 year old Angel Pantoja Medina was specially embalmed and propped in the corner of his mother’s home during a three day wake. The story obviously took the media by storm and was all over the internet. 

Personally I find it really creepy, but each to their own, I just don’t think I’d want to have a family member propped in the corner of my house…

Story and pictures courtesy of Fox News

Conquer the skies…in death

In class a while back we began to talk about alternative ways of disposing of the dead besides the usual inhumation or cremation. A whole host of options came up, including some quite unusual ones that I had never heard of, ranging from having a loved ones cremated remains turned into diamond jewelry, launching the deceased into space and becoming part of a coral reef on the ocean floor. These ideas intrigued me and when I got home I started ‘googling’ them, this only opened the door to a Pandora ’s Box of slightly morbid oddity. What really surprised me through was just how commercialized the funerary industry had become, through I don’t know why I was so shocked really, almost all other aspects of our culture and society have been heavily commercialized in the same way, I suppose not having any proximity with death made me just never really give the industry too much thought. You can now get almost anything, all manner of weird and wonderful funerary paraphernalia online! It seems that funerals and death are big business these days!

 On my search I came across an organization that offers a unique way of scattering a loved ones ashes….on a skydive.  'Blue Sky Goodbye' offers to “return your loved one to nature”, accompanied by 2 experienced sky divers and includes a tribute video and a certificate of scattering all for FREE! It’s a pretty novel way to go…and it doesn’t involve being eaten by anything, which is always a plus in my books!!!! 

 The image is from blueskygoodbye's web page

Death, Ritual and Vultures

I really enjoyed today's lecture by the guest speaker on Chinese funerary rituals. It is the aspect of mortuary that interests me most (must be the cultural anthropologist in me) and I am quite looking forward to this weeks lectures on it. I do definitely learn more towards the cultural anthropology side of things and what fascinates me most are the intangible aspects of culture; worldview, ideology, religious beliefs, conceptual categories etc, things that are often really difficult to pin down in the archaeological record and obviously are open to a great deal of interpretation. This also reminds me of the first case study Erin mentioned in class about the the Bronze age site where human remains had been preserved for centuries and then placed under the houses, in particular the woman who had her two incisors bound in her hands. That was I assume due to a certain set of beliefs, beliefs that we will I'm sure never understand but its that part that fascinates me most; the desire to understand  how and what people were thinking, how they saw the world and how they understood death.


Something that really stood out for me was the concept of 'sky burials', obviously a cultural trait influenced in part due to the nature of the envirnonment and need to despose of the dead in a sanitary way (when you think about it, its a pretty good culttural adaptation!). However, something about it just kind of sat not quite right with me, the whole idea of it was quite unerving for me obviously due to my cultural bias and ideas about death. I had to kind of block all related imagery out of my head; being devoured by vultures in kind of horror movie style stuff!!! I assume that I was probably not the only one who felt a little...uncomfortable about it.

Death is quite an uncomfortable subject for me in general, its not something i like to think of often, actually, honestly it really freaks me out. This is obviously quite a culturally conditioned response due to the nature of death in our society. Death is just one of those highly charged topics, and the way we treat out dead obviously seems to be nothing more than the 'natural' way. I obviously know this not to be true, and my reactions, ideas and assumptions are so culturally bound. I am really fascinated to learn about ideas of death, and the treatment of death and the dead in other cultures and societies throughout time and place.I think that as with all my anthropological knowledge and learnings, it will make me question once again my innate assumptions and natural reactions and I hope to gain a different insight about the way people think/thought about death differently to me.

I think that my feelings of discomfort and unease will continue to resurface as I continue in the course, simply due to my avoidance and fear of death and all such topics. However, I really want to push myself to see things in a different perspective. I hope that by understanding how other people think/thought and feel/felt about death, no matter how vastly separated we are through time and place, I will gain a new respect and hopefully a slightly healthier attitude towards something so inevitable.

Introductions

Hi all in Anth 392! My name is Shannon and I'm a 3rd year anthropology major at UVIC. This was my first year at UVIC; I completed my first two years at Camosun. I'm originally from Manchester, England and plan to return home to complete my masters, although I'm still undecided about which route to take; archaeology vs cultural anthropology.
 
I am really exited by this course, although like many others I suppose, due to the nature of death in our culture I have often had quite an aversion to the topic. We are definitely distanced from death within our culture and for me the topic conjures slight fear. I hope to push myself past that and gain a new perspective and a different way of responding to the topic. I am really fascinated by what can be learnt about people's beliefs and worldviews by how they treated their dead in various places and times throughout history.