Hubbry Logo
Grave goodsGrave goodsMain
Open search
Grave goods
Community hub
Grave goods
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Grave goods
Grave goods
Grave goods
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
The gilded throne of Pharaoh Tutankhamun is but one of the treasures found within his tomb.

Grave goods, in archaeology and anthropology, are items buried along with a body.

They are usually personal possessions, supplies to smooth the deceased's journey into an afterlife, or offerings to gods. Grave goods may be classed by researchers as a type of votive deposit. Most grave goods recovered by archaeologists consist of inorganic objects such as pottery and stone and metal tools, but organic objects that have since decayed were also placed in ancient tombs.[1] If grave goods were to be useful to the deceased in the afterlife, then favorite foods or everyday objects were supplied. Oftentimes, social status played a role in what was left and how often it was left.[2] Funerary art is a broad term but generally means artworks made specifically to decorate a burial place, such as miniature models of possessions - including slaves or servants - for "use" in an afterlife. (Ancient Egypt sometimes saw the burial of real servants with the deceased.[3] Similar cases of human sacrifice of slaves, retainers and wives feature in graves in (for example) the Americas, ancient Germania, and ancient Mesopotamia.[4] Compare suttee.)

Where grave goods appear, grave robbery is a potential problem. Etruscans would scratch the word śuθina, Etruscan for "from a tomb", on grave goods buried with the dead to discourage their reuse by the living.[5] The tomb of pharaoh Tutankhamun is famous because it was one of the few Egyptian tombs that was not thoroughly looted in ancient times.

Grave goods can be regarded as a sacrifice intended for the benefit of the deceased in the afterlife. Closely related are customs of ancestor worship and offerings to the dead, in modern western culture related to All Souls' Day (Day of the Dead), in East Asia the "hell bank note" and related customs.[6][7][8] Also closely related is the custom of retainer sacrifice, where servants or wives of a deceased chieftain are interred with the body.[9] As the inclusion of expensive grave goods and of slaves or retainers became a sign of high status in the Bronze Age, the prohibitive cost led to the development of "fake" grave goods, where artwork meant to depict grave goods or retainers is produced for the burial and deposited in the grave in place of the actual sacrifice.[10]

History

[edit]
Reconstruction of an elite burial of the Varna culture, Bulgaria, c. 4500 BC

There are disputed claims of intentional burial of Neanderthals as old as 130,000 years. Similar claims have been made for early anatomically modern humans as old as 100,000 years. The earliest undisputed cases of homo sapiens burials are found in Upper Palaeolithic sites.

Burials that include intentional artifacts come much later. There is evidence of Egyptians (of the Badarian culture) being buried with grave goods very early in their prehistory. Examples of these items include pots, shells, combs, stone vessels, animal figurines, and slate palettes.[11][12]

Beads made of basalt deposited in graves in the Fertile Crescent date to the end of the Upper Paleolithic, beginning in about the 12th to 11th millennium BC.[13]

The distribution of grave goods are a potential indicator of the social stratification of a society. Thus, early Neolithic graves tend to show equal distribution of goods, suggesting a more or less classless society, while in Chalcolithic and Bronze Age burials, rich grave goods are concentrated in "chieftain" graves (barrows), indicating social stratification.[14] It is also possible that burial goods indicate a level of concern and consciousness in regard to an afterlife and related sense of spirituality. For example, when they buried pharaohs in ancient Egypt, they buried common house hold items, food, vehicles, etc. so they could have a comfortable afterlife.[15]

Famous grave sites

[edit]
Conical loaves of bread as grave goods exactly as laid out in the Great Tomb, North Necropolis, Gebelein, 5th Dynasty (Old Kingdom), 2435–2305 BC. Excavations by Ernesto Schiaparelli, 1911. Egyptian Museum, Turin, S. 14051–14055

The expression of social status in rich graves is taken to extremes in the royal graves of the Bronze Age. In the Theban Necropolis in Ancient Egypt, the pyramids and the royal graves in the Valley of the Kings are among the most elaborate burials in human history. This trend is continued into the Iron Age. An example of an extremely rich royal grave of the Iron Age is the Terracotta Army of Qin Shi Huang.[16]

In the sphere of the Roman Empire, early Christian graves lack grave goods, and grave goods tend to disappear with the decline of Greco-Roman polytheism in the 5th and 6th centuries. Similarly, the presence of grave goods in the Early Middle Ages in Europe has often been taken as evidence of paganism, although during the period of conversion in Anglo-Saxon England and the Frankish Empire (7th century), the situation may be more complicated.[17] In the Christian Middle Ages, high-status graves are marked on the exterior, with tomb effigies or expensive tomb stones and still had certain grave goods such as accessories and textiles.[18]

The practice of placing grave goods with the dead body has thus an uninterrupted history beginning in the Upper Paleolithic, if not the Middle Paleolithic. Many people would assume that the introduction of Christianity led to the absence of grave goods, however, there were many different Christian tombs that were shown to still have grave goods such as jewelry.[18][19]

Role in archaeology

[edit]
Model of the warrior's burial 'Hamburg-Marmstorf Grave No. 216', dating to circa 50 A.D., Hamburg-Marmstorf, Hamburg, Germany. At the upper edge are turf and the plough horizon. Below are the burial in a ceramic urn and beneath that the grave goods.

The importance of grave goods, from the simple behavioral and technical to the metaphysical, in archaeology cannot be overestimated. Because of their almost ubiquitous presence throughout the world and throughout prehistory, in many cases the excavation of every-day items placed in burials is the main source of such artifacts in a given prehistoric culture. However, care must be taken to avoid naïve interpretation of grave goods as an objective sample of artifacts in use in a culture. Because of their ritual context, grave goods may represent a special class of artifacts, in some instances produced especially for burial. Artwork produced for the burial itself is known as funerary art, while grave goods in the narrow sense are items produced for actual use that are placed in the grave, but in practice the two categories overlap.

Grave goods in Bronze Age and Iron Age cemeteries are a good indicator of relative social status; these wealthier graves may have included earrings, necklaces, and exotic foreign materials such as amber. Some even had the spectacular sighting of gold as their grave goods which contrasted from the less wealthy graves which were more deficient.[20] Also, in a 2001 study on an Iron Age cemetery in Pontecagnano Faiano, Italy, a correlation was found between the quality of grave goods and Forensic indicators on the skeletons, showing that skeletons in wealthy tombs tended to show substantially less evidence of biological stress during adulthood, with fewer broken bones or signs of hard labor.[21]

Along with social status, grave goods also shed light on the societal norms with regards to sex. Common binary societies had women perform duties such as mothering, processing activities, cooking, etc. and men perform duties such as hunting and fighting. These societies would bury their women with jewelry and their men with axes. The Durankulak cemetery on the Bulgarian Black Sea Coast had findings to match this society structure.[22] There are societies where the roles are switched. The Sauromatian society's women were highly respected warriors. Their graves were full of weapons and horse trappings.[23] When it was difficult to determine sex of the individual due to bone decay, the grave goods became the determining factor.

In modern times

[edit]

Grave goods continue to be important in modern funerary rituals. In contemporary English and American culture, bodies may be buried with goods such as eyewear, jewelry, photographs, and letters.[24] In addition, objects are sometimes left above ground near or on top of gravestones. Flowers are common, although visitation stones are preferred in Jewish culture.[25] In addition, coins for the dead (including challenge coins) are sometimes left on American military graves by comrades of the deceased.[26]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Grave goods

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Grave goods are artifacts intentionally deposited with human remains in burials, encompassing items such as jewelry, weapons, pottery, tools, and personal possessions that accompany the deceased. These objects, found across archaeological contexts worldwide, often reflect cultural beliefs in an afterlife, social status, or ritual practices, and may include both perishable and durable materials. The practice of including grave goods dates back to prehistoric periods, with evidence from sites in later showing a spectrum of depositional contexts, including furnished inhumations, cremations, and even body-less deposits that challenge traditional definitions. In early medieval , from the 5th to 8th centuries CE, grave goods were common in row-grave cemeteries, featuring dress accessories, vessels, and weapons that varied regionally—such as higher frequencies in and compared to . Notable examples include the richly furnished ship burials at and Prittlewell in , which contained high-status items like swords, shields, and imported goods, highlighting commemoration. Archaeologists use grave goods to infer aspects of past societies, including economic systems, trade networks, and inequality, as seen in frameworks like QuantWealth, which quantifies value through factors such as manufacturing time, skill, scarcity, and prestige in prehistoric Moravian burials (ca. 2700–2000 BCE). However, their inclusion declined in regions like early medieval by the late , shifting toward unfurnished burials possibly due to Christian influences or changing social norms, while depositional ambiguity—such as distinguishing grave goods from hoards or deposits—continues to inform broader understandings of funerary .

Definition and Purpose

Definition

Grave goods refer to objects or materials intentionally deposited with a deceased within a context, serving as accompaniments to the body in funerary practices across various societies. These items encompass a wide range of personal belongings, such as jewelry and clothing accessories, utilitarian tools like knives and awls, provisions including food offerings, weapons such as spears and daggers, vessels, and occasionally living beings like animals or retainers sacrificed for the purpose. Common materials used in grave goods include durable substances like metals—such as and for ornaments and implements—ceramics for containers, and textiles for garments or wrappings, alongside more perishable organic elements like food residues or animal remains that often survive only as traces. These materials are selected for their cultural significance and practicality, forming curated assemblages that accompany the deceased. A key distinction exists between deliberate grave goods and incidental inclusions; the former are purposefully placed by mourners, whereas the latter consist of unintentional elements like , natural deposits, or debris from the environment. This underscores the nature of grave goods, separating them from accidental grave contents. Grave goods can be categorized into basic typologies based on their apparent roles: sumptuary items, such as elaborate jewelry or exotic materials, which signify ; utilitarian objects, like tools and provisions, intended to equip the deceased for practical needs in an ; and symbolic tokens, including amulets or personal mementos, that represent beliefs, relationships, or protective intentions.

Purposes and Symbolism

Grave goods primarily served to provision the deceased for the , including tools for daily needs, offerings for sustenance, and items to facilitate a spiritual journey. This practice reflects widespread human beliefs in continued existence beyond , where such goods ensured the deceased's comfort or functionality in a posthumous realm. Archaeological interpretations emphasize that these inclusions were not merely practical but rooted in intuitive reasoning about postmortem needs, with studies showing that a significant portion of burial participants (46%-91%) attribute grave goods to utility. In addition to provisioning, grave goods functioned to display and , often through the inclusion of high-quality or exotic materials that signified the deceased's rank within society. This role highlights how burials acted as public performances of , where the elaboration of goods communicated prestige to the living community. Symbolic representations of identity—such as items denoting , occupation, or personal roles—further underscored these displays, allowing grave goods to encapsulate the individual's . The symbolic dimensions of grave goods extended to religious beliefs and magical protections, including offerings to deities or apotropaic amulets intended to ward off forces. In animistic belief systems prevalent in early societies, objects were selected for their perceived spiritual agency, treated as extensions of the deceased's essence or relational ties to the living world. Later influences from monotheistic traditions shifted emphases toward structured spiritual preparations, though core symbolic functions persisted. Theories in mortuary , such as those positing intuitive afterlife , suggest these practices stem from evolved human predispositions rather than solely cultural dictates. Variations in the quantity and quality of grave goods often reflected social hierarchies, with elites receiving elaborate assemblages of multiple items while commoners or lower-status individuals were interred with simpler or fewer goods. This differential treatment reinforced communal structures, where richer burials (e.g., involving prestige artifacts) signaled elevated positions, whereas minimal inclusions sufficed for others. Such patterns, analyzed through frameworks like those examining mortuary variability, illustrate how grave goods both mirrored and perpetuated societal inequalities.

Historical Development

Prehistory and Early Periods

The practice of including grave goods in burials emerged during the period, around 40,000 BCE, marking one of the earliest indications of intentional funerary behaviors among anatomically modern humans. These inclusions were typically minimal and symbolic, consisting of natural materials such as red ochre for body adornment, marine shells used as beads or pendants, and simple stone or bone tools placed alongside the deceased. A prominent example is the site of Sungir in , dated to approximately 34,000–30,000 years ago, where multiple burials contained thousands of beads, fox incisors fashioned into pendants, and flint tools, suggesting ritualistic or status-related significance even among societies. During the (c. 10,000–5,000 BCE) and into the (c. 10,000–3,000 BCE), grave goods became more varied and structured, reflecting the transition from mobile foraging to semi-sedentary lifestyles. In megalithic tombs across Europe and the , such as those in the and Britain, burials often included polished flint tools, jet or beads, and vessels, which archaeologists interpret as evidence of increasing social complexity, including possible hierarchies or communal rituals. This period saw a proliferation of collective tombs, where goods were shared among multiple interments, contrasting with the more individualized practices. The shift toward more elaborate inclusions was closely tied to the advent of and during the , which enabled the accumulation of surplus resources and formalized mortuary traditions. At the settlement of in (c. 7500–5700 BCE), subfloor burials beneath house platforms frequently contained mirrors, stone jewelry like beads and bracelets, and clay animal figurines, indicating personal adornment and symbolic associations with domestic or spiritual life. These developments laid foundational patterns for grave goods in subsequent eras, influencing practices in emerging civilizations.

Ancient Civilizations

In ancient civilizations of the and Classical periods, grave goods evolved into highly organized and ritualistic elements, reflecting societal hierarchies, religious beliefs, and state-sponsored preparations for the . These practices marked a shift from simpler prehistoric tool burials, continuing traditions of provisioning the dead but with greater elaboration in urbanized societies. In and , burials around 2600–2500 BCE featured intricate artifacts symbolizing status and function, often tied to royal authority. Mesopotamian and Sumerian graves, particularly in the Royal Cemetery at , included cylinder seals made of , , or shell, inscribed with scenes of banquets or contests and placed with elite individuals to signify identity in the . Weapons such as daggers with silver sheaths and axeheads were common in royal tombs like PG 755, underscoring martial prowess and protection. The death pits, exemplified by PG 1237 (the Great Death Pit), contained up to 74 human sacrifices—mostly women dressed in elaborate headdresses and jewelry—arranged in rows alongside lyres and other instruments, suggesting ritual accompaniment for the primary burial. These findings, excavated in the 1920s–1930s, highlight the scale of state-orchestrated ceremonies. In the Indus Valley Civilization, Harappan graves from around 2500 BCE incorporated terracotta figurines, often depicting human forms, alongside clay pots and beads, indicating beliefs in an where such items served practical or symbolic roles. Gold jewelry, including necklaces, bangles, and beaded ornaments, accompanied burials at sites like , reflecting craftsmanship and possible social distinctions despite relatively egalitarian mortuary patterns. These artifacts, discovered in the , suggest a cultural emphasis on continuity and provision without overt displays of hierarchy. Pharaonic Egyptian preparations exemplified state influence, with tombs constructed over years under royal oversight to house grave goods like amulets for protection and provisions such as food and clothing. This systematic approach began in the (c. 2686–2181 BCE), while more elaborate elements, including shabti figurines to perform labor in the and guidance from texts like the , developed in the Middle Kingdom (c. 2055–1650 BCE) and New Kingdom (c. 1550–1070 BCE), respectively. While burial practices with goods date to the Archaic period (c. 800–480 BCE), the custom of coin offerings, such as a bronze obol placed in the deceased's mouth as payment for , the ferryman of the , emerged in the Classical period and is evident in burials from c. 470 BCE, found in about 4–10% of Classical s. White-ground lekythoi, slender vessels filled with for anointing, often depicted funerary scenes and were interred or used as grave markers, emphasizing and transition. Roman customs, spanning 800 BCE to 500 CE, frequently featured urns of colored glass or to hold ashes, accompanied by amulets like phallic pendants for warding off or bent nails scattered as magical protections against restless spirits, as seen in 2nd-century CE . These items, including coins and jewelry, were placed in necropolises to facilitate the soul's journey, blending practical and apotropaic elements under imperial cultural norms. Across these societies, state influence amplified the ritualistic nature of grave goods, transforming personal provisions into displays of power and cosmic order.

Medieval to Modern Eras

In medieval , from approximately 500 to 1500 CE, the inclusion of grave goods transitioned under Christian influence, which discouraged elaborate pagan traditions in favor of simpler burials focused on spiritual preparation rather than material provisions for the . Early medieval graves, particularly in the 6th to 8th centuries, exhibited regional variability, with a noticeable decline in grave goods as spread, reflecting theological shifts away from beliefs in otherworldly utility of objects. Despite these restrictions, certain items persisted to signify piety or status, such as rosaries symbolizing devotion and pilgrim badges commemorating holy journeys, often found in ecclesiastical or high-status burials. Weapons and armor were commonly interred in knightly tombs, underscoring martial identity and social rank, as seen in elite sepulchers across regions like and . Islamic burial practices from around 600 to 1500 CE emphasized in line with religious edicts promoting equality in death and avoidance of ostentation, resulting in sparse grave goods that prioritized spiritual over material elements. The body was typically shrouded in simple white cotton textiles, with no personal possessions included to prevent or inequality. However, Quranic inscriptions appeared on tombstones and grave markers as reminders of faith and , serving a commemorative rather than utilitarian role. Inscribed textiles known as tiraz, featuring pious phrases or caliphal names, were sometimes wrapped around the deceased's head during , blending artistry with religious symbolism. Byzantine practices between 600 and 1500 CE similarly reflected Christian austerity, with grave goods diminishing over time in favor of ritual purity, though variations existed based on . In the from the 4th to 7th centuries, wealthier individuals were buried in rock-cut tombs containing occasional ceramics, jewelry, or coins, while lower classes used plain pit graves with minimal or no accompaniments. By the Middle Byzantine period, grave goods like vessels or adornments became rare, supplanted by epitaphs and church-based commemorations. During the colonial era from the 16th to 19th centuries, grave goods often blended indigenous traditions with European imports, illustrating cultural exchanges amid conquest and trade. In Native American burials, such as those of the and Dakota, European trade items like metal tools, beads, and fabrics were interred alongside traditional artifacts, signifying adaptation and economic integration. Victorian mourning jewelry, incorporating hair locks, jet, or symbolic motifs like willow trees, served as personal mementos for the bereaved in Britain and its colonies, with rare instances of such items being included in burials to extend remembrance. The and Enlightenment from the 16th to 19th centuries accelerated the decline of elaborate grave goods across , promoting and Protestant simplicity that viewed such inclusions as superstitious remnants of Catholicism. Burials shifted toward inscriptions and epitaphs on monuments, emphasizing moral legacies over physical objects, as seen in the reduced grave furnishings in Protestant cemeteries. This evolution marked a broader cultural pivot from material symbolism to textual commemoration.

Cultural and Regional Variations

Africa and the Middle East

In , from approximately 3000 BCE to 30 BCE, grave goods were essential components of burial practices, reflecting beliefs in an where the deceased required provisions and assistance. Tombs, ranging from simple pits to elaborate structures like pyramids, contained items such as food offerings, furniture, jewelry, and specialized funerary objects to ensure the deceased's comfort and functionality in the next world. Among these, canopic jars held particular significance, serving as containers for the preserved internal organs removed during mummification; each jar featured a lid shaped like one of the —Imsety (human-headed, for the liver), Hapi (baboon-headed, for the lungs), Duamutef (jackal-headed, for the stomach), and Qebehsenuef (falcon-headed, for the intestines)—to protect the organs under their divine guardianship. Shabti figurines, also known as ushabtis, were another key grave good, consisting of small mummiform statuettes placed in tombs to act as servants for the deceased. Crafted from materials like wood, stone, or faience, these figures—often numbering in the dozens or hundreds for elite burials—were inscribed with Chapter 6 of the Book of the Dead, a spell invoking them to perform laborious tasks such as cultivating fields or irrigating canals in the afterlife, thereby freeing the tomb owner from such duties. The term "ushabti" derives from the Egyptian word for "to answer," emphasizing their responsive role when summoned by the deceased. This practice evolved over dynasties, with early examples from the Middle Kingdom (c. 2050–1710 BCE) being simpler, while New Kingdom (c. 1550–1070 BCE) versions became more detailed and numerous. Nubian burial traditions, spanning from around 2500 BCE to 1000 CE across kingdoms like , , and , incorporated grave goods influenced by but distinct from Egyptian customs, often in pyramid-shaped that were steeper and smaller in scale. These structures, numbering over 250 across Nubian sites with more than 200 at alone, housed elites and rulers, with interiors containing ivory tusks, bone ornaments, and semiprecious stone jewelry symbolizing wealth and status. Glass beads, frequently imported and multicolored, adorned necklaces and were deposited in graves to signify trade connections and personal adornment, as seen in X-Group burials (c. 350–550 CE) where , , and blue glass beads accompanied the deceased. Ivory items, such as carved handles and amulets, highlighted the region's access to resources, underscoring economic ties along the . Aksumite burials in northern and , from roughly the BCE to 1000 CE, featured elite tombs marked by massive granite stelae up to 33 meters tall, symbolizing multi-story houses for the . Grave goods in these subterranean chambers included imported glass beads—often from or the Mediterranean, found in hundreds per —used in jewelry and as status markers, alongside local carvings and elephant tusks that reflected Aksum's role in Red Sea trade networks. Pottery vessels and metal tools were common, but foreign imports like these beads were notably absent from non-elite graves, suggesting deliberate exclusion to maintain cultural boundaries during . Pyramid-like structures at sites like prefigure later Aksumite forms, with goods emphasizing continuity between life and provisioning. In sub-Saharan African traditions, such as those of the Yoruba people in present-day Nigeria, pre-colonial burials involved mound graves where ancestor offerings reinforced communal ties to the spiritual realm. Goods like coral and glass beads, symbolizing wealth and divine favor, were placed with the deceased or offered during funerals to honor egungun (ancestral spirits), while calabashes—gourds used for rituals—contained food or symbolic items to sustain the ancestor's journey. These practices, documented in 19th-century accounts, emphasized fertility and lineage continuity without elaborate tombs. Similarly, in central African mound burials of the Kisalian culture in the Democratic Republic of Congo, such as at Kamilamba (c. 1000–1300 CE), iron tools, pottery, and copper or iron jewelry were included as grave goods, reflecting the deceased's social role and Iron Age craftsmanship; an anvil and ornaments beside the body indicated skilled professions carried into the afterlife. Middle Eastern , particularly among nomadic groups, featured minimal grave goods due to Islamic influences prohibiting excess, but rituals included camel sacrifices to provide sustenance for the soul's journey. In some practices, a was sacrificed at the grave site shortly after burial to honor the deceased and feed mourners, with the animal's meat distributed communally; this occurred within 24 hours of death, marking the grave with a simple . Persian traditions, from Achaemenid to later Islamic periods, incorporated textiles like woven carpets or tomb covers (qabr-push) over graves to signify and , often featuring intricate patterns; lamps were placed nearby during to symbolize guidance in the , as seen in Safavid-era where such items evoked continuity with pre-Islamic Zoroastrian provisioning.

Europe and the Mediterranean

In the Mediterranean, grave goods in Minoan Crete around 2000 BCE often included seals and jewelry placed in larnakes, clay coffins used for secondary burials that reflected and continuity. These larnakes, found in communal like those at Archanes-Phourni, contained items such as stone seal stones, gold jewelry, and bronze tools alongside human remains, suggesting offerings tied to personal identity and beliefs. During the Celtic Iron Age (c. 800 BCE–100 CE), burials across temperate Europe emphasized warrior and elite status through goods like , , and weapons, often deposited in or . The burial in eastern (c. 500 BCE) exemplifies this, featuring a massive gold weighing nearly 0.5 kg, a dismantled four-wheeled , and imported Greek , indicating high-status female interment with symbols of power and connectivity. Chariot burials, such as those at Newbridge in and Wetwang in England (5th–3rd centuries BCE), included iron weapons, horse fittings, and personal adornments, highlighting mobility and martial themes in elite rites. Bog deposits, including bodies like those from and Britain, accompanied offerings of iron weapons and items, interpreted as sacrifices to deities or boundaries. Viking ship burials (c. 800–1100 CE) in showcased elaborate provisions for the , with the Oseberg ship (834 CE) in containing a richly equipped vessel for two high-status women. Grave goods included four elaborately carved sledges, a ceremonial , exquisite tapestries and woolen textiles, beds, tents, and kitchen tools, all crafted from wood, metal, and fabric to ensure comfort in the next world. Sacrificed animals, such as horses and dogs placed outside the ship, served as offerings, underscoring themes of status, journey, and companionship in Norse funerary tradition. In Renaissance Italy (15th–17th centuries), noble crypts in cities like Florence and Venice incorporated grave goods blending Christian symbolism with classical revival, including effigies, commemorative medals, and herbal amulets for protection. Tombs of the Medici family in Florence's San Lorenzo Basilica featured marble effigies by artists like Michelangelo, depicting the deceased in eternal repose alongside symbolic items evoking virtue and legacy. Commemorative medals, often cast in bronze or gold with portraits and mottos, were placed in crypts as personal talismans, reflecting humanist ideals of immortality through art. Herbal amulets, containing rosemary or myrtle for warding off evil, appeared in elite burials, adapting medieval Christian practices to Renaissance interests in natural magic and piety. These elements marked a continuity from medieval Christian adaptations, where grave goods shifted from pagan abundance to symbolic restraint.

Asia and Oceania

In Asia and Oceania, grave goods reflect diverse philosophical and spiritual traditions, including Confucian emphases on ancestral continuity, Buddhist concepts of impermanence and rebirth, and indigenous beliefs in ancestral connections to land and sea. These practices evolved from prehistoric roots in the region, where early burials included simple tools and ornaments symbolizing daily life and status. During the in (c. 206 BCE–220 CE), elaborate tombs contained grave goods intended to equip the deceased for immortality, influenced by Daoist and Confucian ideas of the . Mingqi, or spirit articles, included terracotta figurines of servants, animals, and guardians to serve the deceased, replacing earlier human sacrifices. Luxurious items such as garments, lacquerware, and bronze vessels were common, while elite burials featured jade suits—elaborate coverings sewn with gold thread—believed to preserve the body and soul due to jade's perceived purifying properties. For example, the tombs yielded well-preserved fabrics and over 1,000 artifacts, including numerous mingqi such as 162 terracotta figurines from Tomb 1, illustrating the era's focus on replicating worldly comforts in the . In , the (c. 250–538 CE) saw the construction of large keyhole-shaped burial mounds () for elite individuals, incorporating grave goods that blended indigenous animism with continental influences like . , hollow clay figures depicting warriors, houses, and animals, were placed around mound perimeters to protect the tomb and symbolize the deceased's worldly domain. Inside, bronze mirrors—often imported from and symbolizing divine authority—along with swords, jewels, and , were deposited to ensure the spirit's prosperity. The Daisen Kofun, attributed to , exemplifies this with its massive scale and associated artifacts, highlighting social hierarchy and ritual continuity. Indian burial practices from the (c. 1500–500 BCE) to early Buddhist eras emphasized , aligning with Hindu and Buddhist views of the soul's transmigration, though some regional variations included inhumation with goods. Vedic rites involved burning the body on a , collecting ashes in urns, and interring them with beads, , and iron tools to aid the journey to the ancestors. Buddhist lay burials, often secondary to relic depositions for monks, featured urns containing cremated remains mixed with aromatic substances like , alongside carnelian beads and shell ornaments symbolizing purity and merit. Sites like those in the Gangetic plain reveal these items in pit burials, underscoring ritual purity over material excess. In , indigenous practices integrated grave goods with connections to environment and ancestry, varying by island culture. Among the Maori of , burials often included carved (nephrite jade) pendants, such as figures representing fertility and protection, placed with the deceased to maintain spiritual ties. These greenstone items, sourced from rivers, were personal heirlooms symbolizing mana (prestige). Australian Aboriginal groups used rock shelters for interments, incorporating red —applied to bodies and sprinkled as powder—for its life-giving properties in Dreamtime beliefs. Grave goods like ochre nodules, boomerangs, and shell beads accompanied flexed burials, as seen in sites like , where ochre rituals linked the dead to ongoing cultural landscapes.

Americas

In pre-Columbian North, Central, and , indigenous cultures incorporated grave goods into burial practices to provision the deceased for the , reflect social status, and honor spiritual beliefs, with variations tied to regional environments and political structures. In , spanning approximately 2000 BCE to 1500 CE, elaborate tomb constructions in pyramid complexes underscored hierarchical societies. Maya royal burials, such as those in , , featured artifacts symbolizing rebirth and divinity, including mosaic earflares, pectorals, and beads placed as adornments or offerings; blades and disks, often from distant sources like , , were included for ritual or as tools for the . vessels containing theobromine residues confirmed (cacao) offerings, evoking sustenance and sacred connections to the Maize God. Aztec sites like the in Tenochtitlán yielded similar prestige items in elite interments, including blades for ceremonial use and mosaics, alongside symbolic offerings that reinforced imperial cosmology. In the , Inca mummification practices from around 1400 to 1533 CE preserved bodies for ongoing communal , accompanied by grave goods that blended utility, administration, and . Mummified elites received gold and silver figurines, such as conopas, symbolizing fertility and solar devotion; these were often sacrificed or buried to invoke agricultural prosperity. —knotted cord devices of wool and —recorded vital data like censuses and offerings, sometimes interred to aid the deceased in ancestral oversight. sacrifices, involving heart extraction during festivals, provided meat and blood for provisions, linking the living to the dead through shared herds. North American Mississippian mound-builder societies, active from circa 800 to 1600 CE, emphasized earthen platform tombs for elites, as seen at . burials contained shell gorgets engraved with cosmogonic motifs, sourced from Gulf Coast shells, and repoussé plates depicting avian deities, hammered from metals to signify chiefly authority and celestial journeys. These artifacts, often layered in beaded caches exceeding 20,000 marine shell beads, highlighted trade networks and ritual theater. Amazonian and Arctic Inuit traditions exhibited more localized, shamanistic elements in grave goods, adapted to and lifeways. In Amazonian contexts, such as Marajoara urn burials at the river's mouth (circa 400–1400 CE), perishable feather headdresses from and plumes adorned the deceased, symbolizing avian spirits and ecological ties, though organic preservation is rare. Inuit culture graves (circa 1000–1600 CE) included harpoons carved with theriomorphic motifs, essential for and seal hunts in the , often bundled with toggling heads and shafts to ensure provisioning in the harsh north. European colonial incursions disrupted these practices, suppressing indigenous rituals and repurposing sites.

Archaeological Significance

Methods of Study

Archaeologists employ stratigraphic excavation methods to uncover grave goods while preserving their spatial and chronological , removing layer by layer based on natural or cultural deposits rather than arbitrary levels. This approach, which identifies up to 71% of distinct contexts compared to 51% in arbitrary methods, allows for the careful isolation of grave fills and features, often using trowels to scrape at low angles and detect subtle changes in texture or color. In-situ and detailed recording of artifact positions are integral, capturing the original layout before any disturbance, as seen in controlled excavations of burial sites. Sieves with fine mesh are routinely applied to processed , recovering small items such as beads or seeds that might otherwise be lost, ensuring comprehensive artifact retrieval during both stratigraphic and arbitrary processes. Dating grave goods relies on a combination of absolute and relative techniques to establish timelines for burials and associated artifacts. is applied to organic materials like wood, , or textiles from graves, measuring the decay of isotopes to provide calendar dates up to about 50,000 years old, though accuracy can be affected by or the marine reservoir effect in coastal contexts. targets ceramics by assessing trapped electrons released upon heating, offering ages for fired found in graves, particularly useful when organics are absent. Typological analysis provides relative sequencing by comparing artifact styles—such as shapes or tool forms—across graves to infer chronological order based on evolutionary changes, often cross-referenced with dated sequences from known sites. Preservation of grave goods post-excavation addresses the rapid deterioration caused by exposure to air and moisture, with metals and organics presenting distinct challenges. Metals, frequently from salts and chlorides, require immediate and application of inhibitors like for alloys, followed by storage in low relative humidity (below 35%) to halt active processes. Organic materials, such as or , are prone to cracking and microbial decay if not kept in stable conditions; waterlogged items are maintained wet with agents like before controlled drying, while desiccants or climate-controlled environments at 45-55% RH prevent further breakdown. These measures ensure long-term stability for analysis and display. Documentation techniques enhance the study of grave goods by enabling precise reconstruction of burial layouts and artifact associations. , using or laser methods, captures high-resolution models of graves and items , facilitating virtual analysis without physical handling. GIS mapping integrates spatial data to visualize grave orientations, depths, and good placements, supporting across sites. These digital tools, increasingly standard in fieldwork, allow for non-invasive post-excavation review and among researchers.

Interpretations and Challenges

Grave goods serve as key artifacts for reconstructing ancient economies, particularly through evidence of trade networks indicated by exotic materials such as metals or imported ceramics that suggest long-distance exchange systems. For instance, in the Moravian Corded Ware Culture, the presence of metals sourced from distant locations like Špania Dolina (approximately 200 km away) or even Romanian gold (700 km) in burials highlights specialized crafting and scarcity-based trade exclusivity, with such items confined to wealthier graves. Similarly, grave goods inform gender roles by associating specific items with biological sex, as seen in Early Bronze Age burials at Franzhausen I, Austria (c. 2050–1680 BC), where daggers accompanied males and jewelry like arm spirals or necklaces marked females, reflecting a binary social structure from childhood onward. This pattern aligns with broader ritual positioning, such as males on the left and females on the right, though rare exceptions, like a female buried with male-typical goods, suggest potential fluidity or elevated status. In terms of belief systems, grave goods reveal ritual patterns tied to eschatological practices and social ideologies, often symbolizing continuity in the afterlife or communal reinforcement of hierarchies. Archaeologists interpret items like weapons or vessels not merely as personal possessions but as elements in performative rites that enacted cultural myths or protected the living from spiritual pollution, emphasizing experiential aspects over strict doctrinal adherence. However, these interpretations face significant challenges, including looting and disturbed contexts that result in the loss of provenience—the spatial and temporal positioning essential for linking goods to specific rituals or individuals. In sites like the Moche tombs at Sipán, Peru, pre-excavation looting in 1987 obliterated contextual data, preventing accurate reconstruction of trade or belief patterns, while systematic pit-digging across regions like Peruvian valleys has destroyed thousands of graves, rendering unprovenienced artifacts nearly useless for analysis. Additional biases arise from excavation practices that prioritize elite tombs, often overlooking commoner graves and skewing understandings of social dynamics through grave goods. At Great Zimbabwe, focus on elite zones with exotic items like glass beads has historically overstated wealth disparities, whereas evidence from underrepresented commoner areas shows similar pottery and beads, indicating shared access to trade goods and more nuanced power relations. Theoretical frameworks in archaeology further shape these analyses: processual approaches treat grave goods as indicators of systemic social structures, such as status hierarchies or economic roles, using quantitative methods to generalize patterns. In contrast, post-processual perspectives emphasize symbolic and agentive meanings, viewing goods as communicative tools in rituals that construct identity and ideology within local contexts, critiquing processualism's perceived overemphasis on materialism. Case studies illustrate common misinterpretations, such as assuming all grave goods served functional purposes in the rather than performative or symbolic ones. In early medieval European burials, coins were traditionally seen as practical "Charon's penny" for passage to the , but interdisciplinary evidence reveals they often functioned as gifts to deities or identity markers for the living community, varying by regional customs. Similarly, in Early contexts like and Britain, grave goods like axes were initially interpreted as utilitarian tools, yet their deliberate placement suggests metaphorical roles in constructing relational identities during mortuary rites, underscoring the risk of overlooking emotional or cultural symbolism. These examples highlight the need for contextual analysis to avoid reductive readings that ignore the multifaceted agency behind practices.

Modern Contexts

Contemporary Funerary Practices

In funerals, personal mementos such as photographs, favorite for children, or even smartphones are commonly placed in coffins to honor the deceased's and provide comfort to the family. These items reflect a shift toward individualized burials, echoing ancient status displays in a modern, secular context. Eco-friendly adaptations have also emerged, including biodegradable urns embedded with wildflower seeds or tree pods that allow the remains to nourish new growth upon . Global religious practices maintain continuities with grave goods, adapted to 20th- and 21st-century contexts. In Hindu cremations, garlands of flowers and offerings like rice balls are placed on or burned with the body to aid the soul's journey, symbolizing respect and transition to the afterlife. Jewish traditions emphasize minimalism, with visitors placing small stones on graves as a lasting sign of remembrance and to mark the site's care, avoiding elaborate items in line with prohibitions on idolatry. Among Muslims, simple offerings such as dates or other fruits may be distributed at funerals or placed near graves in some cultural variations, particularly in regions like Egypt, to commemorate the deceased without excess. Celebrity burials often highlight cultural expressions through grave goods, blending personal identity with public legacy. For instance, rock musicians like were interred with their guitars, symbolizing their lifelong passion for music, while others like Abbott had custom instruments placed alongside them. Sci-fi influences appear in space-themed funerals, where ashes are launched into orbit via services like Celestis, fulfilling wishes for a cosmic send-off inspired by popular media. Post-2000 trends emphasize hyper-personalization, with 3D-printed items such as custom urns or keepsakes modeled after the deceased's hobbies or likenesses becoming more accessible. These physical goods are increasingly supplemented by digital memorials—online platforms hosting videos, photos, and messages—that extend remembrance beyond the gravesite, allowing global participation in mourning. The illicit trade in grave goods poses significant ethical and legal challenges, as these artifacts are often looted from archaeological sites and sold on black markets, depriving communities of their cultural heritage. The 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property explicitly addresses this by defining cultural property to include products of archaeological excavations, such as grave goods, and requiring state parties to prohibit their illicit movement and facilitate recovery and return. A stark example occurred following the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, where the National Museum of Iraq in Baghdad was looted, resulting in the loss of over 15,000 artifacts, including ancient grave goods like cylinder seals and items from Parthian-Sasanian cemeteries, while widespread site looting across southern Iraq exacerbated the destruction of contextual funerary evidence. Repatriation efforts represent a key legal response to the historical removal of grave goods, aiming to restore ownership to descendant communities. In the United States, the Native American Graves Protection and Act (NAGPRA) of mandates the return of Native American human remains, funerary objects (including grave goods), sacred items, and objects of cultural patrimony from federal lands and institutions to affiliated tribes. Significant revisions to NAGPRA regulations, effective January 12, 2024, have strengthened repatriation processes by mandating faster timelines and enhanced tribal involvement, resulting in notable increases in returns, including over 2,600 ancestors and 35,000 funerary objects repatriated by the as of 2024. Under NAGPRA, notable repatriations have included Zuni sacred masks and figures, such as the Ahayu:da (twin war god icons) returned by the to the Pueblo of Zuni, highlighting the act's role in addressing pre-existing collections acquired without consent. Museums face ongoing ethical dilemmas regarding the display of grave goods and associated human remains, balancing educational value against cultural sensitivity and origins of acquisition. Debates often center on whether such items should be exhibited or reburied in their original contexts, with critics arguing that decontextualized displays perpetuate colonial harms and disrespect ancestral dignity. Climate change introduces additional preservation threats by accelerating erosion and permafrost thaw, which expose grave goods and remains in vulnerable regions like Arctic Inuit sites. In areas such as Nuvuk, Alaska, coastal erosion has unearthed ancient Inuit burials since the 1990s, prompting urgent reinterment to protect cultural integrity amid rapid environmental shifts. Adaptive management strategies, including community-led salvage archaeology and site prioritization based on risk assessments, are essential but hindered by limited funding and data on permafrost changes, as seen in efforts at Walakpa Bay where storms have destroyed portions of 4,000-year-old sites containing potential grave goods.

References

  1. https://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue56/11/full-text.cfm
  2. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1380203820000197
  3. https://journal.caa-international.org/articles/10.5334/jcaa.86
  4. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/6037b98b-cf6f-4bfe-8a9d-e0a2fa2deda9/external_content.pdf
  5. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.13263
  6. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/memoirs-of-the-society-for-american-archaeology/article/mortuary-practices-their-study-and-their-potential/9B6C488D3E9F16EAB42DC0D5651921B9
  7. https://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue56/11/ia.56.11.pdf
  8. https://archaeology.org/news/2018/02/14/180214-russia-sunghir-burials/
  9. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/517592
  10. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/321801
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4720281/
  12. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/526097
  13. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3643084
  14. https://whc.unesco.org/uploads/nominations/1405.pdf
  15. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/658861
  16. https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/what-do-we-know-about-the-people-buried-in-the-royal-cemetery/
  17. https://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-asia/death-pit-of-ur-mesopotamia-0010297
  18. https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zcsbr82
  19. https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/world-history/world-history-beginnings/ancient-india/a/the-indus-river-valley-civilizations
  20. https://australian.museum/learn/cultures/international-collection/ancient-egyptian/preparation-for-death-in-ancient-egypt/
  21. https://deathinantiquity.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/charons-myth-in-relation-to-classical-athenian-funeral-practice/
  22. https://greekreporter.com/2023/12/11/greek-funeral-customs-from-ancient-times-to-today/
  23. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/in-this-ancient-necropolis-romans-left-fine-glass-ossuaries-platforms-for-feasting-and-phallic-pendants-180984232/
  24. https://www.livescience.com/roman-era-tomb-scattered-with-magical-dead-nails-and-sealed-off-to-shield-the-living-from-the-restless-dead
  25. https://www.metmuseum.org/essays/pilgrimage-in-medieval-europe
  26. https://books.casematepublishers.com/Interpreting_Medieval_Effigies_Online_Appendices.pdf
  27. https://www.everisforever.com/articles-tools/grief-healing/islamic-burial-practices-steps-muslim-funeral-rites-traditions/
  28. https://www.curationist.org/editorial-features/article/honoring-the-dead:-funerary-ornamentation-and-ritual-in-islam
  29. https://www.metmuseum.org/essays/tiraz-inscribed-textiles-from-the-early-islamic-period
  30. https://www.academia.edu/125214735/Burials_of_the_Byzantine_Near_East_4th_7th_centuries_Volume_2_of_2
  31. https://pam-journal.pl/article/160597/en
  32. https://www.mnhs.org/fortsnelling/learn/fur-trade
  33. https://www.nationaljeweler.com/independents/2058-the-history-behind-victorian-mourning-jewelry
  34. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/94151/9781040257579.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  35. https://www.lakewoodcemetery.org/2019-11-27-epitaphs/
  36. https://www.britishmuseum.org/learn/schools/ages-7-11/ancient-egypt/label-canopic-jars
  37. https://smarthistory.org/ushabti-ancient-egyptian-afterlife/
  38. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/553541
  39. https://www.memphis.edu/egypt/exhibit/hori.php
  40. https://www.getty.edu/art/exhibitions/nubian_jewelry/explore.html
  41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/543348
  42. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/sudan-archaeology-pyramdis-kush-nubia
  43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41966062
  44. https://online.ucpress.edu/sla/article/3/4/508/109366/From-Tusk-to-TownIvory-Trade-and-Craftsmanship
  45. https://pressbooks.ulib.csuohio.edu/bright-continent/chapter/chapter-3-9-art-and-death/
  46. https://africa.si.edu/exhibitions/current-exhibitions/striking-iron-the-art-of-african-blacksmiths/africas-iron-origins-archeological-evidence/
  47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40460432.pdf
  48. https://khamseen-emamzadeh-yahya-varamin.hart.lsa.umich.edu/en_covers.php
  49. https://scholarworks.brandeis.edu/view/pdfCoverPage?instCode=01BRAND_INST&filePid=13419015820001921&download=true
  50. https://www.academia.edu/95973813/Pre_and_protopalatial_Minoan_larnax_individuals_vs_collective_identity_in_pre_and_protopalatial_Crete
  51. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1707/death-burial--the-afterlife-in-the-ancient-celtic/
  52. https://www.laits.utexas.edu/ironagecelts/vix.php
  53. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/proceedings-of-the-prehistoric-society/article/iron-age-mortuary-practices-in-britain-an-assessment-of-current-trends-and-their-characteristics-within-contemporary-northwestern-european-traditions/27E13B9274D55B6AE045542ABF55122E
  54. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2606704/
  55. https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1787&context=stu_hon_theses
  56. https://www.khm.uio.no/english/research/projects/saving-oseberg/oseberg-find/
  57. https://www.vikingtidsmuseet.no/english/news/brief-intro-the-oseberg-ship.html
  58. https://scholar.stlawu.edu/corpses-coffins-and-crypts-exploration-mortuoarchaeology-ancient-and-renaissance-italy
  59. https://resources.metmuseum.org/resources/metpublications/pdf/Italian_Renaissance_and_Baroque_Bronzes_in_the_Metropolitan_Museum_of_Art.pdf
  60. https://www.getty.edu/publications/resources/virtuallibrary/9780892365371.pdf
  61. https://asia-archive.si.edu/learn/for-educators/teaching-china-with-the-smithsonian/explore-by-dynasty/han-dynasty/
  62. https://www.academia.edu/52627779/Chinese_Art_Zhou_Han_Dynasty
  63. https://deathscent.com/2023/04/13/lady-dai/
  64. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstreams/a66f7657-47f4-4113-874f-d814b8cb8779/download
  65. http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/63886/1/forsyth_danielle_2009.pdf
  66. https://www.academia.edu/24330200/Beyond_the_Monastery_Walls_The_Archaeology_of_Early_Buddhism_in_North_Coastal_Andhra_Pradesh_India_Ph_D_Dissertation_
  67. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstreams/7312037e-70ae-6bd4-e053-0100007fdf3b/download
  68. https://www.gia.edu/gia-news-research/nephrite-jade-road-evolution-green-nephrite-market
  69. https://www.firstpeoplesrelations.vic.gov.au/fact-sheet-aboriginal-burials
  70. https://sites.utexas.edu/butzer/files/2017/07/Wreschner_Butzer-1980-OchreCommentary-2.pdf
  71. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstreams/9c440cba-e154-407a-8016-2667826ed998/download
  72. https://www.depts.ttu.edu/sasw/Research/Downloads/2010_AM_Houk-et-al_Chan-Chich-Tomb.pdf
  73. https://ehrafarchaeology.yale.edu/traditions/nu93/summary
  74. https://peabody.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/public-education/13%20machu%20picchu.pdf
  75. https://www.academia.edu/45059566/Cahokias_Mound_72_shell_artifacts
  76. https://libsysdigi.library.illinois.edu/oca/Books2008-08/cahokiamounds121moor/cahokiamounds121moor.pdf
  77. https://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/E0/04/11/00/00001/duin_r.pdf
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9869439/
  79. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/20548923.2016.1229916
  80. https://hraf.yale.edu/teach-ehraf/relative-and-absolute-dating-methods-in-archaeology/
  81. https://sha.org/conservation-treatments/
  82. https://www.canada.ca/en/conservation-institute/services/preventive-conservation/guidelines-collections/archaeological-collections.html
  83. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212054817300371
  84. https://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0312/photogrammetric-modeling-plus-gis.html
  85. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305440322000073
  86. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.anthro.36.081406.094425
  87. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225773225_Looting_collecting_and_the_destruction_of_archaeological_resources
  88. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327165620_Elites_and_commoners_at_Great_Zimbabwe_Archaeological_and_ethnographic_insights_on_social_power
  89. https://web.stanford.edu/~mshanks/MichaelShanks/files/140558.pdf
  90. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304624228_Contextualising_Grave_Goods_Theoretical_Perspectives_and_Methodological_Implications
  91. https://doi.org/10.1080/13576275.2013.870544
  92. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258157989_Material_metaphors_The_relational_construction_of_identity_in_Early_Bronze_Age_burials_in_Ireland_and_Britain
  93. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-15/the-unique-items-people-are-buried-with/11176586
  94. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna28182292
  95. https://www.cnn.com/2017/05/03/world/eco-solutions-capsula-mundi
  96. https://www.empathy.com/funeral/funerary-and-mourning-practices-in-hindu-tradition
  97. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/ask-the-expert-stones-on-graves/
  98. https://thefuneralmarket.com/funerals-customs-around-the-world/egypt
  99. https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/articles/features/these_8_rock_stars_were_buried_with_some_pretty_unusual_stuff-150305
  100. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/07/magazine/space-burial.html
  101. https://inthelighturns.com/blog/revolutionary-impact-of-3d-printed-urns
  102. https://www.honoryou.com/digital-memorials-changing-funeral-traditions/
  103. https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-means-prohibiting-and-preventing-illicit-import-export-and-transfer-ownership-cultural
  104. https://isac.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/shared/docs/oimp28.pdf
  105. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nagpra/
  106. https://www.bia.gov/service/nagpra
  107. https://www.propublica.org/article/native-american-remains-returned-repatriation-nagpra
  108. https://naturalhistory.si.edu/media/3607
  109. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20240118-is-it-ever-ethical-for-museums-to-display-human-remains
  110. https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/history-melting-how-climate-change-destroying-arctic-archeological-sites
  111. https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/investigating-barriers-building-climate-adaptation-cultural-natural-heritage-sites-polar-regions/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.