@Real_GayCaveman

Hello again fellow archaeologists!

Today in class Erin asked us to check out the social media frenzy surrounding "The Gay Caveman", and immediately, I WAS SOLD. Not only is this a prime example of the constant shenanigans that the majority of society and social media are pulling (and stalling the expansion of knowledge, I might add), but who hasn't had to answer to these kinds of biases while attempting to explain their major? Come on. I know you have. I HAVE. This blog post is going to be much more of a rant than an informational entry, but it is an issue within archaeology nonetheless, and needs to be addressed. Also, I have to admit that I giggled while reading these. I hope you do too.

While searching for popular information regarding "The Gay Caveman" I came across this gem and simply could not resist. It is an entire twitter account dedicated to the gay caveman and his prehistoric cave-man life problems. 

Shall we?

"I'm the world's first gay man and I knows I look good."

@Real_GayCaveman: "I was at a party last night and this one *jerk* 

wouldn't stop with all this "I invented the wheel" bull***"

@Real_GayCaveman: "Cavemen are portrayed as wearing shaggy animal hides, 

armed with rocks or cattle bone clubs and unintelligent-Screw you Wikipedia"

@Real_GayCaveman: "I have to go to a gay wedding in NYC, and 

I can't find shoes that will match my leopard skin singlet."

@Real_GayCaveman: "The wheel is probably the most important

 mechanical invention of all time...And the feather boa."

Pretty hilarious, I have to admit, but what are the implications of this kind of media attention and false betrayal of Holocene peoples for archaeology? This discipline requires a great deal of respect and understanding- of open mindedness and careful deliberation. We tend to turn the bones we dig up into artifacts and nothing more, but regardless of grave goods, orientation and amount of time since burial, these were people, with beliefs and customs of their own, who deserve a level of respect that this particular individual has been robbed of. "Gay Caveman" is so far from accurate, scientific or respectful that it should hardly be considered an appropriate or worthy title for the skeleton unearthed. Science tests out ability to remain objective and unbiased, a challenge which, obviously according to the aforementioned twitter account, most fail. The case of the "Gay Caveman" fiasco is cautionary for us all to be weary of what interpretations we make. 

Ritualistic prehistERIA!

Taking up the latest blog prompt, I came across Krystal's post regarding the possibility of early ritualistic practices at the site of Sima de Los Huesos in Spain, boasting H. heidelbergensis skeletal remains associated with various carnivore remains, all set in illustrious cave settings. Krystal mentioned the ritualistic potential of the site, discussed by the authors of the paper, a common theory for unusual sites set during the Paleolithic. I recently began reading the book "The Woman in the Shaman's Body" written by Barbara Tedlock, PhD. Tedlock begins the book by introducing the reader to the site Dolni Vestonice, located in Spain, and the beautiful and auspicious artifacts discovered there.

A photograph of the excavation of the burial of a female shaman underneath

 mammoth scapulae at Dolni Vestonice. 

Excavated within Dolni Vestonice was a burial of particular significance: the burial of a 40-year old woman clasping arctic fox remains, placed beneath two mammoth scapulae which leaned against each other to form a shelter. To many, this burial signifies an individual of great importance and high status within the community, especially when one considers the presence of fox remains which are often associated with ritual significance. Tedlock's interpretation of the woman's burial is that the way in which she was buried, as well as the significance of the fox remains clasped in her hands, indicates that her position within the community was shamanic. 

Artist's rendition of the burial of the female shaman clasping arctic fox skeletal remains.

What allows the archaeologist, or the author, to make these claims? In class, we spoke of indicators of high status such as burial goods, body placement and treatment, but can the presence of fox remains placed within the burial truly be an indicator across time and space of shamanic influence?  Tedlock's book discusses the tendency for society (that includes archaeologists) to assume that indivuduals of high  status or shamanic standing within the community are all male, but argues that status markers within burials disprove this assumption, were we to look more closely at the morphological sex of the skeletal remains. The importance of attempting to keep open minds in archaeological interpretation cannot be stressed enough, as we have all seen the consequences of narrowing our vision. How much could we really discover regarding the ritual or ceremonial practices of these people? How much should we?

Personally, I have no doubt in mind that this woman held an important, possibly spiritual, position within her community. The effort and intention put into her burial displays this. I suppose my questions are "What can we truly know regarding ritual or ceremonial practices within a paleolithic community? Are there truly universal indicators of shamanism or ritual? Are many of these individuals women but assumed to be men and is this relevant to further understanding social structure within these communities?"

I intend to research this further! I hope you enjoyed this little intro to Dolni Vestonice and the topic :)

An artist's rendition of what the Paleolithic village of Dolni Vestonice 

would have looked and functioned like. 

Graveyard.... Adventure?

Hello all... It's been awhile since I've posted, but now it's time to do some reflecting on the monument analysis trip and work so far. First off, I'd like to say that I am infinitely grateful for being a part of a kind, competent and entertaining group; it made our cold visit to the graveyard a little more bearable :)

For our monument analysis, our group chose St. Luke's graveyard; a small and old graveyard which now only has room for cremation burials. Upon reaching the graveyard, we immediately questioned the protocol. "What do we do? Should we ask to be here and especially do we ask to take photos? What if we get in trouble?" We decided to go ahead and deal with challenges as they arose. We began by wandering through the rows to get a general idea of the landscape and feel of the area. Immediately we noticed date ranges, grave types, and associated patterns. From these observations, we decided to look specifically at grave markers which were unfinished. This means that the markers generally had room left for a spouse or other family member who hadn't died yet, and thus hadn't been inscribed onto the marker (or their death date hadn't). Though I did my best to focus on the task at hand, there was an uncomfortable feeling looming over the entire experience. Personally, I have no religious beliefs which effect my presence there, but my concern came from those who do. What if someone came and found what we were doing disrespectful? I kept thinking to myself, "Thank god it isn't sunday" (Which, given my previous statement is purely an expression).

While filling out our monument sheets, I frequently made faces as if I was Indiana Jones surrounded by snakes and unable to discern where to step. Like this:

and questioned... "What is the protocol here?". I found myself unsure of where to step, what to touch, where to kneel, and what to think. There was an uninvited internal struggle which demanded attention and thought towards answering these questions and contemplating my personal judgements and preconceptions upon entering the graveyard. This struggle came to its peak when a couple arrived to place flowers at a relatively recent cremation grave (late 2012) in the yard. Though we weren't near that side at the time, it put the monument analysis sheet in my hand into perspective, and honestly, I found it hard to continue.

A few noteworthy moments from the experience:

-Pete found the "first white baby to be born in Victoria"'s grave

-I drew a great cat (from a monument)

-Bonding time with the group over where to step

-An older man wandering the graveyard asked us what we were doing and upon answering he told us he too was being scholarly and looking for interesting things growing amongst the graves

-I literally found a bone (I think it may have been deer)

All in all, visiting St. Luke's for the monument analysis was an interesting experience to say the least. Although the focus was meant to be towards the monuments themselves, I think I learned more about myself and my own issues towards death in this society, and how better to deal with the discomfort and awkwardness of lurking in a cemetery. Turns out the key to surviving any situation is humour.