• Open Access close
• Embargo close
• Publications close
• Other literature type close
• Review close
• SE close
• Danish close
• Digitala Vetenskapliga Arkivet - Ac... close
• Publikationer från Uppsala Universi... close
• Digital Humanities and Cultural Her... close

Titele in WoS: The metropolises of the Middle East

The aim of this paper is to examine if any homogeneity or heterogeneity can be traced in burials from Preboreal, Boreal and Early Atlantic period, in the area of the Baltic Sea. Furthermore, the paper will deal with the Early Mesolithic burials based on theoretical perspectives on rituals, materiality and agency.To enable the purpose of identifying the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the data, relational multi-varied Correspondence Analysis of the individuals and their artifact variations, body position, burial type etc. have been applied.The data used in this study contain information from 41 sites including 171 graves with 194 individuals from nine different countries (Denmark, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway Poland, Russia and Sweden). The study is based on the work Mesolithische Bestattungen in Europa. Ein Beitrag zur vergleichenden Gräberkunde. Teil I-II of Judith M. Grünberg from 2000, however some new sites and graves have been added.This study is expected to contribute new contextual interpretations of the Early Mesolithic burials of the area of the Baltic Sea.

Majesties, archaeology and history of archaeology: Socially the context of archaeology is supposed to have travelled from kings, princes and aristocracy down to the bourgeoisie and the middle class. However members of the royal family still have a central role as it is seen from the current exhibition “Queen Margrethe II and archaeology” on Moesgård Museum at Århus and the National Museum in Copenhagen. The aim is here to examine the royal archaeology with king Gustaf VI Adolf of Sweden and queen Margrethe II of Denmark as examples. What kind of archaeology is it that kings and queens have exercised or supported? Does it deviate from archaeology in general? What does the engagement from kings and queens mean to archaeology? Might royal archaeology lead to misuse? Does royal archaeology mean a win-win-situation to all, which makes it difficult to discuss? Finally, might the theory on distinction by Pierre Bourdieu be relevant even to the highest elite of society, however with a reversed formula.