Buried: An alternative history of the first millennium in Britain

Product Information

The author doesn’t let speculation get out of control regarding possible belief or cultural systems. Interesting that cannibalism is now a well established behaviour for some of the peoples excavated! Though whether for food or ceremonial reasons is unclear. Whereas actually, I think what we're saying here is, it's far from anonymous, at least in those tombs, where we've got this evidence of relatives buried in the same place. And perhaps what we are seeing is, is kind of family plots, you know, which we're obviously familiar with, later on, and up until quite recently. And it may be that these are essentially family tombs for the elite. Because we are entering a period of time where we're seeing a more kind of hierarchical structure of society. And they're making their mark in the landscape. It’s a fascinating time, because this Neolithic period is the first time we get people really stamping their identity on the landscape. And, you know, creating big monumental architecture in the landscape, from stones circles, to these amazing chamber tombs.

Actually, the burials themselves are rather pre-history of Britain, but as the story of each burial includes the history of its initial discovery and of its further investigation, the "history" in the title is not irrelevant as many of these burials had been known since nineteenth century. In a way, this book is also the history of archaeology in seven burials. One of its main topics is DNA analysis -- the new insights into prehistory that it provides as well as its limitations. And then when we're looking for solutions in a similar way, to do that as objectively as possible and to strip away ideology. And I feel in the UK that we've particularly been very ideology-driven. This “following the science thing is not true at all, we've been following an ideology, and trying to shoehorn the science into that. There's always kind of worries about what's going to happen to science in a time of crisis, that we're depending on it so much. And that if there is, if there's any kind of nuance, or uncertainty around various facts and figures, then, you know, the public might feel uneasy about that, or anxious about that. And I think that's, I don't think that's the reason to pretend that the evidence is either more robust or more certain than we know it to be. I think the absolute fundamental point is that we need to maintain trust, and that we need to, we need scientists who are engaging with the public in a very level way. An audio-version of this book has been sitting in my audible app library for a while now: prehistory, ancient burials, bones, paleontology -- of course, I had to buy it. I finally got to it on the verge of a trip to Britain -- after all, what could be a better suited pre-travel read than a history of Britain in seven burials.;) Then a new branch of science comes along, with some seriously disruptive technology, and says: we may be able to provide an Answer to this Question. The priests of Archaeology stroke their beards (some of them really do have beards, even quite long ones – while many don’t) and express doubts as to whether a geneticist could even begin to understand the Question. But the geneticists go ahead and drill the bones, extract the ancient DNA, retreat to their labs, do some fancy statistics, and – like some kind of alchemist cooking up a dull lump of lead into gold – they come up with an Answer. They present it to the priests: ‘We think this is what you’ve been looking for.’ But the priests narrow their eyes, sigh and fold their hands in their laps. It's just Fools Gold', they say, "Iron pyrites. You can make fire with it. But it is not the Answer. It isn't the Answer because it doesn't agree with the sacred texts of Post-Processualism"." I’m happier with the dry factual side of the book really. The author is honest in saying what is and is not possible to determine from these excavations - it’s very hard to say anything about the culture, or what they believed, though grave goods and burial positions can give hints, strong ones even. It takes some time for archeologists to be even sure at what stage genuine graves were made as opposed to the human remains being accidentally buried by natural forces!

Games

It's really difficult, isn't it? Because I think I mean, I've included that in there. And I do wonder if there's some kind of remembrance of that as a hill of sin? Because recent genetic evidence has shown that a man buried in Newgrange is the incestuous son of either a parent and a child, or two siblings. So you’ll never know if it's a parent and child or two siblings, we just know it was two first degree relatives. Although not a central topic of this book, she traces how the adoption of Christianity as an organised religion shaped the way our ancestors lived and died, and how our ancestors shaped Christianity to meet their own aspirations and political ends, when the Anglo-Saxons, like the Romans before them, began to realise the exceptional potential of institutionalised religion. This is followed by discussion of decapitated burials, starting with an example of seventeen decapitated Roman period burials at Great Whelnetham cemetery, near Bury St Edmunds, which distinguishes between victims of beheadings and post-mortem decapitations. Roberts emphasises that there can be no ‘one size fits all’ approach to the post-mortem decapitations, discussing possible fear of revenants, the ‘evil dead’, but also considering the idea that that some may be slaves. From 1st July 2021, VAT will be applicable to those EU countries where VAT is applied to books - this additional charge will be collected by Fed Ex (or the Royal Mail) at the time of delivery. Shipments to the USA & Canada: I liked that this book is written by a professional archaeologist who didn't go out of her way to dumb everything down for the benefit of general public and to please everybody. I loved that she spoke about her personal atheistic views sincerely and unapologetically.

Highlights importance of using an interdisciplinary approach when attempting to understand history. Particularly the last chapter around the current divisions we have in society and attitudes to migration and 'otherness'.

Toys

Roberts explains, clearly and without jargon, the intricacies of determining gender and biological sex from burials, and how it's important not to project modern cultural concepts onto the dead. Early archaeologists had a tendency to assign sex and gender based on grave goods (brooches for women, swords for men) but osteoarchaeology shows that there isn't a definite correlation between the biological sex of a skeleton -- where it can be determined: the majority can't -- and the goods in their grave. Roberts mentions a number of theories: heirloom jewellery in a man's grave; jewellery worn by men and women alike; individuals biologically male living as female, and vice versa. There is also a long second chapter about the “Red Lady” excavated at Paviland Cave, which I had read about at least twice before, but it is the major early burial, so Roberts probably had no choice but to discuss this burial. Some readers might find this book with its constant talk about burials and bones too macabre for their taste, but I quite enjoyed it, including the overview of British burial practices from ancient to modern times. After all, paleontology and prehistory is very much about bones and burials. Besides, death doesn't disappear if we don't mention it--at least, I'm long past this pleasant illusion. But Roberts' frustration here is not one-sided. The implications of migrations being associated with the spread of the Beaker culture she puts into perspective, including the deep-seated fear of a return to processualism, which was part of a view of human development used to justify colonialism and genocide. Roberts is not afraid to talk about the politics behind scientific debate, nor to call on scientists to move through, not away, these discussions. Alice Roberts examines several unusual burials from Roman and medieval times, and uses them to illustrate the diversity and the history of the first millennium AD in Britain. As she writes, these are 'the traces of ordinary lives, and people whose stories were never written down': there's a fair amount of speculation here in these very human stories, like the man buried with a pipe poking out of the earth above the grave, which may have its roots in Greek Orthodox tradition: wine, or blood, may have been poured down the pipe as a way of including the deceased in a graveside feast. (Apparently this custom was also practiced in Soviet Russia.)

Some of the burials discussed here are poignant, such as the remains of a very young child (perhaps a late foetus) which had been dismembered, most likely during obstetric surgery. There are lethal acts of violence, too, with little care being taken over the interment of the bodies: decapitated corpses, possibly victims of 'headhunting' or of superstitions about the walking dead, and a group of 'foreigners' found in a ditch in Anglesey, their bones revealing that they came from as far away as Scandinavia, to be executed with considerable violence.

Table of Contents

You have that whole idea about what makes us human, or what differentiates humans rather from other species. I think it's obviously a huge question and one of particular interest, perhaps to humanists, but also more broadly. And then I wonder also, if what we're talking about now, the kind of story and myth and legend, if that's another thing that might be differentiating. There's certainly a lot of that in what Alice was talking about. It's a shame that the book is marred in this way. One expects something more impartial from an academic author, even in a popular book. I actually thought it was lazily written, had the air of being rushed, poorly organised, repetitive, and actually in places quite boring. I am no slouch when it comes to difficult books but this seemed often wide of the mark for a popular historian. The first chapter, a long and pointless trudge through the history of archaeology and a deadly parade of forgotten Victorian archaeologists, of little relevance to what I expected to be the point of the book. Constant repetition - she needed a good editor. And stylistically dire - I found the constant and pointless use of hyphenated sub-clauses - like this - really annoying. I've just proved the point. The book is full of them.