1 / 10

Conflict in the Treatment of the Battle-Dead in Classical Antiquity

Conflict in the Treatment of the Battle-Dead in Classical Antiquity. Joanne Ball, University of Liverpool. Treatment of the dead?. Ritual and compromise. Post-battle: lack of time and ability to bury the dead individually = mass graves commonly used Other options: Repatriation to civilian

garin
Télécharger la présentation

Conflict in the Treatment of the Battle-Dead in Classical Antiquity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Conflict in the Treatment of the Battle-Dead in Classical Antiquity Joanne Ball, University of Liverpool

  2. Treatment of the dead?

  3. Ritual and compromise • Post-battle: lack of time and ability to bury the dead individually = mass graves commonly used • Other options: • Repatriation to civilian or military cemetery • Removal to neutral position e.g. allied territory • Abandonment Towton, AD 1461

  4. The battle-dead in antiquity • Athenian repatriation: Thuc. 2.34 • Other poleis: battlefield disposal or removal to neutral territory multiple battlefield graves (Plataea Hdt. 9.85; Marathon Pau. 1.32.3) • Romans: battlefield disposal cremation (Livy 27.2.9; Tac. Ann. 1.49) inhumation (Livy 23.46.5; Caes. BG. 1.26.5 later burial (Plut. Pomp. 39.1; Tac. Ann. 1.61-62)

  5. Scholarship • ‘[Greek] soldiers fallen in war were buried or cremated at the site of battle’ (Felton 2007: 88) • Pritchett Greek State at War volume 4 (1985) • Low 2003: ‘this Thespian monument... represents an unusual deviation from the regular Greek practice of burying the dead on the battlefield’ (pp. 108) • Low 2006: ‘the nomoi regulating their [the battle-dead’s] subsequent treatment varied from polis to polis’ (pp. 85)

  6. Questions? • What did the Greeks and Romans actually do with their battle-dead? • Were the actions pre-decided and governed by ritual, or pragmatic responses to individual circumstance? • How influential were contemporary mortuary attitudes? • Non-burial taboos and ghosts (e.g. Pau. 1.32.4; Tac. Ann. 1.65)

  7. On the battlefield • Greek : Marathon Chaeronea • Roman : Kalkriese (Varus) • Roman fear of exhumation: Pliny NH 7.54 • ‘And so, six years after the fatal field, a Roman army, present on the ground, buried the bones of the three legions; and no man knew whether he consigned to earth the remains of a stranger or a kinsman, but all thought of all as friends and members of one family’ (Tac. Ann. 1.62)

  8. Repatriation Himera, Sicily • Demographic characteristics: • Males aged 18-35 • Skeletal trauma / embedded projectiles • Communal / spatially-linked burial Spartans in kerameikos

  9. Repatriation • Thespiae: cremation and inhumation polyandrion • Himera: 7 inhumation graves, 65 individuals • Krefeld-Gellep: multiple individual inhumations; Roman and Germanic • Roman tombstones: RIB 3218; RIB 3364; • Maiden Castle: Briton casualties

  10. Conclusion • Archaeological and historical evidence are broadly consistent in identifying battlefield burial • Repatriation did occur outside the Athenian world, but may have been in limited circumstances • Greeks more likely to remove the battle-dead; Roman typically only when the battle occurred in cemetery-proximity

More Related