Mississippian Burial Traditions

Burial traditions vary across time and space. Looking at societies in similar stages of development, trends in how individuals of various statuses are buried become visible. In looking at a few of the Mississippian cultures and the famous tombs of King Tutankhamen and The Death Pit at Ur, one can explore how these trends and differences appear. Additionally, these case studies can be used to examine larger issues within the field of archeology -- such as looting and preservation -- and to explore missteps in previous excavations in order to prevent those mistakes in the future. Mississippian burials are very modest in comparison to the graves found in Ur and in Egypt, representative of how the Mississippians were at a different stage …show more content…
In ranked societies, there are distinctions made between those who are powerful and those who are not, but it is relatively egalitarian based on their access to resources (O’Shea). There are some Mississippian societies who had a level of inequality more similar to a ranked society than a stratified one (O’Shea). While the elite have access to “exotic” goods -- items that required much skill to make or are crafted from non-local resources -- the common folk make still be buried with jewelry, pots, and weaponry, although remarkably less expensive (Lecture 14). Although the non-elite may not have the ability to gain as many or expensive goods as the elite do, they are not denied being buried in the same place or with the same techniques simply because they are less powerful or wealthy (Brunson-Hadley and …show more content…
As sites are destroyed, which they have to be to some extent in order to remove materials for study, some may feel as if the true cultural importance of those sites is lost. Especially for the cultures that those sites belong to, it may feel like they are losing part of their heritage. To make matters worse, looting is a widespread issue that is preventing the conservation of sites, many before they can even be properly studied, that is hard to enforce legally and stop the public from participating in, such as at the Spiro Mounds in Oklahoma. Looting is destroying sites with cultural importance more severely than research ever could. Without widespread and thorough education, the public won’t know how vital it is to not participate in looting or to support the conservation of sites, and with a ticking clock on the existence of these sites, there is little time to ensure that that education occurs. Additionally, tourism -- which seems like method of education that assists the preservation of important sites -- in actuality can lead to site degradation when there are large crowds. There is often not enough resources to prevent or repair this type of degradation. Patrimony, while having the clear benefit of preventing cultures from stealing valuable goods from another, also makes archeology more difficult. If an archeologist wants to conduct an investigation but the culture that owns that