CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Ancient Egypt and ArchaeologyAncient and Medieval Archaeology StudiesDeath, Funerary Practices, and Mourning

Social Relationships in Predynastic Burials

Open access
Stevenson, Alice·2009·The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
DOI 10.1177/030751330909500110
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Of all Ancient Egyptian eras, it has been the Predynastic (primarily the fourth millennium BC) that has received the greatest attention from anthropologically derived models of mortuary behaviour. Following an overview of developments in mortuary archaeology, this article aims to contribute to the discussion of alternative social models of Predynastic mortuary remains. In particular, it aims to challenge the overriding assumption that burial form and content is a reflection or correlate of individual status or identity, or that it simply forms an index for social ranking. Rather, it is argued that these contexts may additionally reveal aspects of the relationships between people, objects, and places. In doing so, it is possible to consider some of the ideological aspects of Predynastic burials in addition to the social-economic aspects that are more often discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/030751330909500110

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Predynastic assemblages vary: some have large quantities of pottery but little else, others have modest amounts of ceramics yet are well equipped with exotic artifacts.

    “some with large quantities of pottery but little else, others with modest amounts of ceramics yet well equipped with exotic artifacts (Stevenson 2009c).”

    From The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation (2016) · cites this paper as Stevenson 2009c

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. P. Ucko, 'Review of Chapman et al and Humphreys et al.', Proceeding of the Prehistoric Society 48 (1982), 522-4.
  2. J. M. Rowland, 'The application of Mortuary Data to the Problem of Social Transformation in the Delta from the Terminal Predynastic to the Early Dynastic Period', in S. Hendrickx, R. F. Friedman, K. M. Ciałowicz, and M. Chlodnicki (eds), Egypt at its Origins: Studies in Memory of Barbara Adams. Proceedings of the International Conference 'Origin of the State. Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt', Krakow, 28 th August-1st September 2002 (OLA 138; Leuven, 2004), 991- 1007;
  3. J. M. Rowland, 'The Transition to State Society in Egypt: Problems and Possibilities of Applying Mortuary Evidence', in A. Cooke and F. Simpson (eds), Proceedings of Current Research in Egyptology, II: Liverpool 2001 (BAR IS 1380; Oxford, 2005), 57-63;
  4. J. M. Rowland, 'Trends in Burial Evidence: Evaluating Expectations for the Regional and Temporal Distribution of Mortuary Behaviour in Predynastic Egypt', in R. Ives, D. Lines, C. Naunton, and N. Wahlberg (eds), Current Research in Egyptology, III (BAR IS 1192; Oxford, 2003), 63-8.
  5. E. Hallam and J. Hockey, Death, Memory and Material Culture (Oxford, 2001), 132;
  6. S. Tarlow, 'The aesthetic corpse in nineteenth-century Britain', in Y. Hamilakis, M Pluciennik and S. Tarlow (eds), Thinking Through the Body. Archaeologies of corporeality (New York, 2002), 93. A. Stevenson, 'The aesthetics of Predynastic burial: Funerary performances in the fourth millennium BC', Archaeological Review from Cambridge 22(1) (2007), 75-91;
  7. See also Rowland, in Hendrickx et. al., Origins, 998-9. inference and mortuary practices: an experiment in numerical classification', WorldArch 7 (1975), 1- 15;
  8. C. Carr, 'Mortuary Practices: their social, philosophical-religious, circumstantial, and physical determinants', Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2 (1995), 105-200;
  9. I. Morris, 'The archaeology of ancestors: the Saxe/Goldstein hypothesis revisited', CAJ 1 (1991), 147- 69;
  10. M. Parker Pearson, The Archaeology of Death and Burial (Stroud, 1999);
  11. J. A., Tainter, 'Mortuary practices and the study of prehistoric social systems', in M. B. Schiffer, (ed.), Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 1 (New York, 1978), 105-41.
  12. J.J. Castillos, 'Evidence for the appearance of social stratification in Predynastic Egypt', in C. Eyre (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress of Egyptologists, Cambridge, 3 -9 September 1995 (OLA 82; Leuven, 1998), 255-9;
  13. J. J. Castillos, 'Wealth evaluation of Predynastic Tombs', GM 163 (1998), 27-31;
  14. C. Ellis, 'A statistical analysis of the Protodynastic "valley" cemetery of Kafr Tarkhan', in E.C.M. van den Brink (ed.), The Nile Delta in Transition: 4th -3rd Millennium B.C. (Tel Aviv, 1992), 241-58;
  15. W. A. Griswold, 'Measuring inequality at Armant', in R. F. Friedman and B. Adams (eds), The Followers of Horus. Studies Dedicated to Michael Allan Hoffman 1944-1990 (Oxford, 1992), 193-8;
  16. S. Savage, 'Descent group competition and economic strategies in Predynastic Egypt', Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 16 (1997), 226-68;
  17. T. Wilkinson, State Formation in Egypt. Chronology and Society (BAR IS 651; Oxford, 1996).
  18. Binford, in Binford (ed.), An Archaeological Perspective, 235.
  19. D. P. Braun, 'A critique of some recent North American mortuary studies', American Antiquity 46 (1981), 398-416;
  20. I. Hodder, Symbols in Action: ethnoarchaeological studies of material culture (Cambridge, 1982);
  21. E. Pader, Symbolism, Social Relations and the Interpretation of Mortuary Remains (BAR IS 130; Oxford, 1982);
  22. M. Parker Pearson, 'Mortuary practices, society and archaeology: an ethnoarchaeological study', in I. Hodder (ed.), Symbolic and Structural Archaeology (Cambridge, 1982), 99-112.
  23. I. Hodder, 'Social structure and cemeteries: a critical appraisal', in P. Rahtz, T. Dickinson and L. Watts (eds) Anglo-Saxon Cemeteries 1979: The Fourth Anglo-Saxon Symposium at Oxford (BAR 82; Oxford, 1980), 167;
  24. Parker Pearson, in Hodder (ed.) Symbolic and Structural Archaeology.
  25. M. S. Chesson (ed.), Social Memory, Identity and Death: Anthropological Perspectives on Mortuary Rituals (Arlington, 2001);
  26. Hallam and Hockey, Death, Memory and Material Culture; H. Williams (ed.), Archaeologies of Remembrance. Death and memory in past societies (New York, 2003). The theme has is also discussed by Wengrow throughout Archaeology of Early Egypt. 39 Meskell, Archaeological Review from Cambridge 13(2);
  27. S. Tarlow, Bereavement and Commemoration (Oxford, 1999);
  28. J. Barrett, 'Comments', Archaeological Review from Cambridge 11(1) (1992), 157-67.
  29. W. Davis, 'Artists and patrons in Predynastic and Early Dynastic Egypt', SAK 10 (1983), 122.
  30. Brück, 'Material metaphors'; J. M. King, 'Grave goods as gifts in early Saxon burials', Journal of Social Archaeology 4 (2004), 214-38;
  31. Parker Pearson, Archaeology of Death, 82.
  32. N. Thomas, Entangled Objects. Exchange, Material Culture, and Colonialism in the Pacific (Cambridge, 1991);
  33. A. Weiner, Inalienable Possessions. The Paradox of keeping while giving (Berkley, 1992). A discussion of gift exchanges is also included in L. Meskell, Object Worlds in Ancient Egypt. Material biographies past and present (Oxford, 2004), Chapter 1.
  34. As explicitly stated by Hoffman, Egypt Before the Pharaohs, 110. See also P. Delrue, 'The Predynastic cemetery N7000 at Naga ed-Dêr. A re-evaluation', in H. Willems (ed.), Social Aspects of Funerary Culture in the Egyptian Old and Middle Kingdoms (OLA 103; Leuven, 2001), 27, for the argument that the wealth of a tomb was proportional to the wealth of the occupant.
  35. As argued by Rowland, in Goyon and Cardin (eds), Proceedings, 1638.
  36. R. F. Friedman, A. Maish, A. G. Fahmy, J. C. Darnell and D. Johnson, 'Preliminary report on field work at Hierakonpolis: 1996-1998', JARCE 36 (1999), 4.
  37. R. F. Friedman, Spatial Distribution in a Predynastic Cemetery. Naga-ed-Dêr 7000, MA thesis, University of California, Berkeley, 1981, 73-4.
  38. S. Savage, Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, although these interpretations were strongly refuted by Delrue, in Willems (ed.), Social Aspects, 21-66. See also M. Campagno, 'Kinship and the Emergence of the State in Egypt', BACE 11 (2000), 35-47. Tomb groupings based on familial relations has also been observed for historic Egypt, e.g. see E. J. Brovarski, The Senedjemib Complex I: The mastabas of Senedjemib Inti (G 2370), Khnumenti (G 2374), and Senedjemib Mehi (G 2378), (GMas 7; Boston, 2001).
  39. W. Anderson, 'Badarian burials: evidence of social inequality in Middle Egypt during the early Predynastic era', JARCE 29 (1992), 62.
  40. G. A. Wainwright, 'Chapter 1. The site of el-Gerzeh', in W. M. F. Petrie, G. A. Wainwright, and E. MacKay (eds), The Labyrinth, Gerzeh and Mazghuneh (BSAE/ERA 21; Warmister, 1912), 1-24;
  41. Although see W. Davis, 'Cemetery T at Naqada', MDAIK 39 (1983), 17-28.
  42. 'Presencing' is a term introduced by K. Ray in, 'Material metaphor, social interaction and historical reconstructions: Exploring patterns of association and symbolism in the Igbo-Uko corpus', in I. Hodder (ed.), The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings (Cambridge, 1987), 66-77. It refers to the virtual introduction of individuals or categories into contexts and interactions that they are not directly involved in by means of material culture. 83 Helms, Ulysses' Sail, 13.
  43. J. Baines, 'Stone and other materials in ancient Egypt: Usages and values', in C. Karlhausen and T. Dr Putter (eds), Pierres Égyptiennes, chefs d'oeuvre pour l'eternité (Mons, 2000), 29-41. 85 Over 600 beads were removed from around the head and the hands. 86 For the non-ceramic elements see Payne, Catalogue 2 : cat. nos. 1130, 1159, 1199, 1603, 1655, 1719- 23, 1854, 1927, 1934, 2063, 2067, 2081, 2112.
  44. That these are meteoric in origin has not been definitively confirmed, see J. Ogden, 'Metals', in P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw (eds), Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology (Cambridge, 2000), 166-7. 100
  45. Rowland, in Goyon and Cardin (eds), Proceedings, 1637. 104 There is reference on the tomb cards to a second double pot in grave 118, also broken. 105 Lythgoe and Dunham, Naga-ed-Dêr, 386. 106 Traces of polish on stone vessel handles caused by hanging are frequently observed, e.g. Payne, Catalogue 2 , 137. Ancient mending is also visible on some mortuary specimens e.g. Ibid, cat. no. 706. 107 B-ware pot in Crubézy et al. Adaïma, 77; 2 B-ware vessels and 1 R-ware vessel in Brunton, Mostagedda, pls. XXXIII (14), XXXVI (16), XXXVII (7). 108
  46. See comments in R. F. Friedman, 'The Predynastic cemetery at HK43: Excavations in 2002', Nekhen News 14 (2002), 9. 111
  47. D. Jeffreys, 'All in the family? Heirlooms in Ancient Egypt', in J. Tait (ed.), 'Never had the like occurred' Egypt's view of its past (Encounters with Ancient Egypt; London, 2003), 197-212;
  48. K. Lillios, 'Objects of memory: the ethnography and archaeology of heirlooms', Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 6 (1999), 235-62. 112
  49. The departure point for this is A. Appadurai, The Social Life of Things: Commodities in cultural perspective (Cambridge, 1986). 114
  50. M. Shanks 'The life of an artifact in an interpretive archaeology' Fennoscandia Archaeologica 15 (1998), 15-30. 115
  51. Gosden and Marshall, WorldArch 31(2), 169.
  52. A. Stevenson, 'The material significance of Predynastic and Early Dynastic palettes', in R. Mairs, and A. Stevenson (eds), Current Research in Egyptology VI (Oxford, 2007), 148-62.
  53. R. Skeates, 'Animate objects: a biography of prehistoric 'axe-amulets' in the central Mediterranean region', Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 61 (1995), 279-301. 123
  54. M. Chlodnicki, R. Fattovich and S. Salvatori, 'The Nile Delta in transition: A view from Tell el- Farkha', in van den Brink (ed.), Nile Delta in Transition, 182. See also Wengrow, Early Egypt, 36.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • The Egyptian Predynastic and State Formation

    Stevenson, A. (2016) · Journal of Archaeological Research · doi:10.1007/s10814-016-9094-7 · Cited by 72 · see citing works

    “…2006) reworked Petrie’s innovative system into the ‘‘Naqada chronology,’’ and it has continued to be scrutinized and refined, primarily in the development of localized site chronologies (Buchez 2011a; Hartmann 2011a, b; Hendrickx 2011a; Jucha and Mączyńska 2011; Stevenson 2009a, pp. 25–40).”
    BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citation

Authors
Stevenson, A.
Corresponding author
Stevenson, Alice
ORCID
Stevenson, Alice
Venue
The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2009-01
Volume
95
Issue
1
Pages
175-192
ISSN
  • 0307-5133 (ISSN-L)
  • 2514-0582
DOI
10.1177/030751330909500110
OpenAlex
W203881304
Cited by
20
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient Egypt and Archaeology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Ancient and Medieval Archaeology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Death, Funerary Practices, and Mourning
Keywords
Predynastic Egypt, interpersonal relationships, funerary practices, social status, social ranking, 4th millennium BC, grave goods, funerary archaeology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review