Book
An analysis of mortuary ritual at the Dawenkou site, Shandong, China
[s.n.] • [S.L.] • No publication date • Pages:
By: Underhill, Anne P..
AbstractBrief abstract written by HRAF anthropologists who have done the subject indexing for the document
This is a study of changes in mortuary practices in the Dawenkou culture, based on the 1959 Dawenkou site report of 139 burials. Underhill first carries out two multivariate statistical techniques and identifies two major groups of burials, which she classifies as Early and Late Periods. She then goes on to determine the differences in burial practices between the two periods with respect to size and orientation of graves, body disposition, sex and age of individuals, and tomb artifacts. In the Early Period, most graves were the same size, but varied in number and types of artifacts, which correlated with the gender of the deceased. In the Late Period, graves varied in size, and in the number and kinds of artifacts, suggesting status differentiation. Also present in the Late Period were prestige goods made from jade, ivory, and alligator skin. Another criteria distinguishing burials is the difference in labor invested in both constructing tombs and making of artifacts.
- SubjectsDocument-level OCM identifiers given by the anthropology subject indexers at HRAF
- Comparative evidence
- Labor and leisure
- Status, role, and prestige
- Burial practices and funerals
- Chronologies and culture sequences
- traditionCulture name from the Outline of World Cultures (OWC)
- Dawenkou
- RegionThe area the document pertains to
- Asia
- Sub RegionThe more specific area the document pertains to, which is located within the Region
- East Asia
- Document TypeMay include journal articles, essays, collections of essays, monographs, or chapters/parts of monographs
- Book
- Evaluation
- Creator TypeThe type of person writing the document, e.g. Ethnographer, Missionary, Archaeologist, Folklorist, Linguist, Indigenous Person, and so on.
- Archaeologist
- Document Rating A ranking done by HRAF anthropologists based on the strength of the source material on a scale of 1 to 5, as follows: 1 - poor; 2 - fair; 3 - good, useful data, but not uniformly excellent; 4 - excellent secondary data; 5 - excellent primary data.
- 4: Excellent Secondary Data
- 5: Excellent Primary Data
- NotesAdditional notes
- Anne P. Underhill
- Includes bibliographical references (p. 34-39)
- LCSHLibrary of Congress Subject Headings
- China--Antiquities