Matthew Gagarin

9 October 2019

Anthropology

Mike Parker Pearson, Andrew Chamberlain, Matthew Collins, Christie Cox, Geoffrey Craig,

Oliver Craig, Jen Hiller, Peter Marshall, Jacqui Mulville & Helen Smith. 2007. Further evidence

for mummification in Bronze Age Britain. ​Antiquity​ Project Gallery 81(312):

http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/parker312/

Research Assessment #4

This article is about a group of researchers headed for Cladh Hallan, Britain, in search of

more evidence for mummification in Bronze Age Britain. Previously in 2005, researchers

discovered evidence of mummified skeletal remains in the area, but concluded that they were a

part of a cemetery, however recent discoveries have proven this not to be the case. They

discovered many skeletal parts including an entire mummy (most importantly, the knee of the

mummy), the burial pit of a male mummy, jaw bones, the burial pit of a small child, and pottery.

All of this evidence combined and analysed, as well as surveys of the buildings on the site and

other sciences such as the pH of the soil conclude that they can refute the counter-argument that

all of the remains on this site are coincidentally together, and that they are connected. The

evidence also disproves other theories such as using acid on the bones to preserve them and that

the decay of the bodies was rapid and sudden. However, the underlying motive still remains

unknown.

Reading this research paper, I learned and picked up terminology and methods

archaeologists use in the real world. Time-depth was used to calculate the age in which the
skeletons were buried, a process that correlates to knowing how old an object is based on how

deeply it is buried in a type of soil. I also learned that skeletons are referred to as green or fresh

when it is recent because of the collagen levels in the body. Osteology terms were also frequent

in this scientific essay. Many recurring terms like mandible, tibia, and fracture, that are relevant

to the dig are frequently used and the audience is expected to have these known, as they do not

explain the terms.

Evidence leading to conclusions are often incorrect as beginner archaeologists project

modern standards to ancient people, leading them to misinterpreting evidence and going down

rabbit holes of false-conclusive evidence. In the real world, many conclusions are often taken in

the beginning stage of research, as there could be many possibilities when there is only a set

number of evidence to analyze. Some times, the most conclusive statement that can be made is

the ones that can only disprove of other hypotheses, and often new discoveries lead to new

understandings. Archaeologists, as I have learned in my first interview, take on a lot of different

sciences when analysing evidence. In this research, the archaeologists used chemistry,

odontology, osteology, biochemistry, carbon dating, and others as they used many types of

research to analyze their findings.