|
|
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
his classificatory system for pottery finds. My approach to the material from Qustul and Ballana, similar to his approach to ceramics, has, at the outset, been one of “splitting”, rather than of “lumping” (Adams 1986b, 8, 90).
This most basic decision, to split rather than to lump, was also ultimately informed by two other framing concerns that I have already mentioned: an increasing interest in the aesthetic qualities of the remains at the cemeteries, and the possibility that the boundaries between humans, animals, and artefacts might not be as straightforwardly delineated as they are often considered to be. The recording of the detailed data in a relational manner within the database allowed these apparent boundaries to be traversed and collapsed when necessary.
This explanation presents a rather neat and linear picture of what was, in reality, a constantly changing idea about where significance might lie, and how to attempt to find it. Ideas, theoretical concepts, and a detailed understanding of the material culture evolved in tandem. My concern was always to be able to tie together what are so often erroneously constructed as two opposing entities: hard data versus abstract theory. Yet, behind this attempt was a basic concern for the fundamental differences in the material character of the remains—these were objects and bodies that mattered. (For more graphs, figures, and a detailed explanation of the construction of the database, see Dann 2006.)
Scope of the Present Volume
This research is based on the material from the excavations at Qustul and Ballana conducted by Emery and Kirwan, and then subsequently by Farid. The material from the OINE excavations is not the main focus of discussion in this research, and it was not used in any of the quantitative analyses that are discussed herein. There are a number of reasons for placing such a limitation on the parameters of this research. Firstly, the excavations conducted by Emery and Kirwan, and later by Farid, concentrated on the larger tumuli that are broadly designated as the royal tumuli. The OINE research was concerned with non-royal