Chapter 3 – Methods of Mythology
The mythological narrative plays an important role in the cultural aspects of society by celebrating the development of a people through their stories. When items of material culture or people appear in the stories that are retold over generations, it demonstrates that those objects and individuals are vital to the development of that community’s culture. The inclusion of the adzing-toki in New Zealand (and to the greater extent, Eastern Polynesian) culture as a burial good is representational of the importance placed on environmental control by families in human societies. If this hypothesis is true, there are certain shared conditions we would expect to see in various cultures worldwide.
To prove this hypothesis, I have been following a literature-based methodological system. So far in this paper, I have been scouring academic journals for burial sites, attempting to focus on the Neolithic, but expanding through the Iron Age at the latest, to match burial sites with the ceremonial burial of tools. This first goal was achieved in chapter two, in which I compiled a Western to Eastern summary of what goods are commonly included in graves, along with archaeological interpretations. From these, I determined that communities included tools in graves as a type of ornamentation in order to show the others in the community the respect and status that was endowed to the tool. This second section will focus on the tools’ use within the societies’ cultural background by examining mythologies for stories in which the tool plays a vital role. The literature I reference presents an increasing importance as the archaeologists’ interpretations come into play while comparing the tools’ use in relation to the deity who wields it and the link between the tools’ power and nature. Once I have presented the continuous thread of logic connecting these ideas in various locations around the world, I will show that New Zealand sites follow the same patterns. In building this model, I have summarised these aspects in terms of four points, which are as follows:
First: that there is a record of tools and their use within the mythology of a culture.
Second: that these tools are associated with the ability to control and manipulate the environment in which people live.
Third: that this manipulation concerns bringing a piece of nature into the realm of culture.
Fourth: because of the mythological associations these tool types have ideological significance to communities and are often used as grave goods.
This combination of conditions leads to the gifting of these materials, especially tools, to the deceased, connecting the item’s purpose of use to the person in the burial and the cultural mythology. Through my interaction with various interpretations of those mythological stories, I will demonstrate the connection with the innately human idea of taking something from the Earth. The material would be refined to fit a cultural picture, utilising it as a means of power and control, then gifting it back to the natural world along with the person whom the community is signifying as its wielder. Finally, because we can see these trends repeating time and again in other societies around the world, the same would be able to withstand scrutiny in Eastern Polynesia, and specifically, New Zealand. In short, I will use examples from worldwide literature about burials in other Neolithic societies and the interpretation behind tools in their mythological significance to hypothesise why adzes, as tools, would have been grave goods.
The overall significance is from a cultural identity, showing that the people who are creating the burials have the power to form the chaos of nature into a human context, and thus also have the power to release it. Because many societies contain cultures based on an oral historic context, it is vital that we take all of their stories into account. To preface this, I am using mythology, legends, and stories as all-encompassing terms due to the limited vocabulary of the English language. In no way am I suggesting that these are all fictional, unimportant, or from an extinct culture or society. Instead, mythology is defined as a traditional story, especially one concerning the early history of a people to explain natural or social phenomena, and typically involves beings or events that tend more to the ‘supernatural’. Legends involve the traditional background of mythology, but are rooted closer to human beings and events which are based in fact, though not usually proven in and of themselves. Finally, the term story is simply the telling of the account of the two formers (Bird, 1997: 336, 345-346).
Across the world, societies will have commonly held beliefs that they want to demonstrate the community’s belief using the act of burial, and the items buried within will have this purpose. In the next chapter, I will be showing that the inclusion of the toki in Māori mythology is directly connected to the meaning that it is bestowed during its life. To compare that inclusion with other mythologically significant tools as burial goods in other cultures, in this chapter, I will demonstrate that the appearance of these tools within burials is a demonstration of control. Within this chapter, I will be using mythology as the support for my thesis and thus will be utilising many words from outside the English vocabulary, which will be explained the first time they appear in context.
Myths from different CULTURAL AREAS with TOOLS OF CONTROL
Hammers
A similarity between the jewellery of Eastern Polynesia and Scandinavia is the tradition of wearing pendants shaped as tools as necklaces. In the Scandinavian countries, as well as the countries that witnessed the expanding migration of the people from the region, that pendant is in the shape of Mjölnir, the hammer of Thor or Donar.
Figure 1. (From left to right and top down) Photo of Thor’s hammer, found in Nord-Trondelag, currently in Bergen Museum (Staecker, J., 1999). Drawing of a silver-gilted Thor's hammer found in Skåne, Sweden (Stevens, G. 1878). Drawing of a 4.6 cm gold-plated silver Mjolnir pendant found at Bredsättra on Öland, Sweden. (Source: Nordisk familjebok 1913 vol.18 p.716). Silver Thor's hammer amulet found in Fitjar, Hordaland, Norway (Rygh, O. 1885). Amulet in the form of a Thor's hammer, found in 1874, in Mandemark, Møn, Denmark. Plate 41 (Müller, S 1895).
According to Littledale, Mjölnir is an extension of the solar god's hammer or battle-axe of light, which was used and brought to importance to crush, pound, or grind the ‘solid grains’. This was both meant literally for food and metaphorically for knowledge, just as Thor’s hammer was used to crush the Frost Giants to help the people of Midgard, Earth (Littledale, 1985: 282-3). He arrives at this conclusion based on language transliteration; Mjölnir originally came from the Proto-Germanic language word malanan, meaning “to grind or mill” meal or flour, and ultimately the Sanskrit mr̥ṇā́ti, meaning to “crush, smash, slay" (Grimm in Derksen 2008: 307). Mjölnir itself is thought to have the power to level mountains, “Then [Brokkr, one of the two dwarfs who crafted Mjölnir] gave the hammer to Thor, and said that Thor might smite as hard as he desired, whatsoever might be before him, and the hammer would not fail; and if he threw it at anything, it would never miss, and never fly so far as not to return to his hand; and if be desired, he might keep it in his sark (shirt), it was so small; … This was [the Aesir’s] decision: that the hammer was best of all the precious works, and in it there was the greatest defence against the Rime-Giants…” (Sturluson, 1200: 148). And this shows Mjölnir as more than a weapon [as shown in the painting of Figure 2], it was even said to be a tool to create and maintain order from the chaos and anarchy of the utengard (outside).
Figure 2. Tor's (Thor’s) Fight with the Giants. M.E. Winge 1872. Stockholm.
Figure 3. Daikokuten, from Mythological Japan. Source: drawn in Japan, by native artists (1902).
Uchide no kozuchi, the legendary Japanese magic wooden hammer, which can “tap out” anything wished for, is held in the hand of the deity Daikoku-ten [illustrated in Figure 3] (Sargent, 1959). Unlike Mjölnir, the iconography of the deity wielding the mallet is what is often depicted on pendants and tokens of good fortune, which are often still sold at the toshi-no-ichi or year-end market (Thakur, 1986: 190). The image of the hammer, however, is a popular tattoo. Daikoku-ten is the god of great darkness or blackness and is one of the Fukujin (seven lucky gods) who were a reinterpretation of the Hindu god Mahākāla, whose name translates into English as ‘beyond time’ or death (Mookerjee, 1988). Deikoku-ten is typically shown sitting atop a mound of cereals or rice to depict that there is plenty of food. A later version of the Issun bōshi fairytale tells that the hammer was a treasure owned by the oni, ogres, who had dropped it after the oni had lost a ‘fight’ with the title character, the one-inch tall boy. After Issun bōshi protected the princess, he presented her with the hammer and made Issun bōshi normal-sized because the hammer can “strike out anything that is desired” (Antoni, 1991). This connects to the notion of creating and controlling the world with a tool made out of wood, creating order and culture from the chaos of the outside.
Hephaestus, the Greek god of smithing and craftsmanship, is often represented by the symbols of a hammer, an anvil, and tongs to demonstrate the work he did for the gods on Mount Olympus. In the Iliad, the story of the Trojan War, he crafted the armour of Achilles to use in the battle [shown below in Figure 4]. Being the lame son of Hera, and depending on the story, Zeus, he may have been the patron god of craftsmen, but Hephaestus is not, nor are any of his tools often depicted as specifically magical in their own right. Instead, the deed for which Hephaestus is most known is that he used a double-edged axe (labrys) to split open Zeus’ head to allow Athena to be born (Kerényi, 2016). This axe type was, however, more symbolic of the older Minoan culture on Crete.
Figure 4. Thetis receiving the arms of Achilles from Vulcanus [Hephaestus]. Artist: Peter Paul Rubens.
To summarise, the meaning of hammer-wielding is connected to craftsmanship and creation. A magical hammer could be used to punish evil and make anything good appear, often being used for both, as seen in the Nordic countries and Japan. This creates the dichotomy for what society deems as good and evil, and is useful for determining which side fits into the cultural norms versus the chaos and trouble from outside forces.
Axes
It had been suggested by Mayer in 1892 that the word labrys has an etymological relationship to labyrinthos from which labyrinth is derived (Waites, 1923: 26). The labyrinth is the staple setting within which the Minotaur, the monstrous son of the Cretan bull and King Minos’ wife, is trapped on the island of Crete. The Greeks combined the ideas of the older Aegean Bronze Age (c. 2700-1100 BCE) civilisation of the Minoans further by depicting the labyrinth along with the Minotaur’s bullhorns on vases and reliefs depicting the double-edged axe throughout the Greek islands (Hutchison, 1948: 62-63). With the inherent danger that is recounted in the myth, the symbols of the labyrinth and the horns imbue power to the double-sided axe. It was believed that only someone with power could wield the labrys because of its extra ability to control lighting, similar to Mjölner. Scattered across Asia Minor, cults later appeared and attributed this feat to Zeus, the father of the gods and the god of lightning, making the axe and the labrys a masculine tool of destruction (Waites, 1923: 43-44). But, the presence of female idols in the shrine of Cnossus, as well as depictions on seals and “the golden signet from Mycenae above the seated goddess and her worshippers” on the island of Crete suggests that the labrys had instead originally belonged to the Goddess-Mother (Weites, 1923: 28). Waites also states that the lightning axes are typically depicted as single sided, while another version of this tool became used for creation while combining the male and female elements, as seen on the Greek coins. One side of a coin found in Tenedos [shown below in figure 5] shows a dual-headed person, male on the left, female on the right, with the labrys on the opposite side of the coin (Waites, 1923: 33, Kouremenos, 2016: 46). This presents an androgynous duality, which can tie together with the inherent creation and destruction caused by the tool, and humanity in general. In particular, when Hephaestus released Athena, the goddess of wisdom, from Zeus by splitting his head with his axe, it is symbolic of the nature of man to use a tool for both breaking and creating. In a sense, this act revealed more intelligence and the ability for human culture to continue in the form of a strong woman.
Figure 5. Silver tetradrachm of Tenedos (4th century)– showing the dual-faced character on one side and the dual-headed axe (the labrys) on the other. Originally from Classical Numismatic Group, private collection (Kouremenos, 2016: 46).
The Maya rain deity Chaak/Chac strikes the clouds and produces thunder and rain with his celt (axe), the most frequently associated tool of this deity. Chaak (Tlaloc in Central Mexico) is the principal deity of water, both underground in caves, relating to the watery underworld, and the rain in the sky (Ishihara, 2008: 177-178). His single-edged axe is referenced in the K’atun II, the second set of dates in the Books of Chilam Balam, mythology by always drawing the axe in Chaak's hand [example in Figure 6 below] (Vail & Hernández, 2013: 202). While it was often held up in the air it has been suggested that he also has power over the seeds and their germination due to the purpose of the rains (Vail & Hernández, 2013: 73). This also links directly back to agriculture and the act of taking something natural and pulling it into the cultural realm, in this case both the food and the stone. An earlier example of this ethnographic connection between lightning and maize is from Teotihuacan in the Classic period. Here, Chaak is represented on a vessel chopping a tortoise shell in half with his lightning axe, and from the crack grows the Tonsured Maize God (from the Popol Vuh) [in figure 6 above] from which the current version of humans is made (Taube, 1986: 57-58). Chaak has also been depicted holding the lightning serpent, which is often conflated in artworks with the special axe if they are not shown separately (Taube, 1992: 20-22).
Figure 6. Popol Vuh mythological scene from Classic Maya tale. The Maize God coming out of the Earth as a tortoise carapace with forms of the God Chaak with snakes and smoking flint on either side. A “roll-out painting on a Late Classic polychrome vessel, by Diane Griffiths Peck” Reproduced with permission of Michael D. Coe (Taube, 1986; 57 & Thompson, 1996: illus. 62).
Figure 7. Glyph for K'awil ( Kettunen & Helmke, 2014 :84).
Also from Maya mythology is the god of kingship, K’awil [Figure 7 above], whose name means ‘abundance of food’ and who is often associated with Chaak because he is another god of lightning and sustenance, and is shaped like an axe (Vail & Hernández, 2013: 79). This god is also conflated with the Tonsured Maize God in art works as they both will symbolize power and leadership, and are shown with the cranial torch of either corn stalks, smoke, or snakes (Vail & Hernández, 2013: 47-50). The general reasoning that archaeologists have worked through as to why they are connected is that a great king will always provide enough food for his people, since he is also supposed to be the reincarnation of the god of maize [various examples shown in Figure 8 below].
Figure 8. Various images of the Tonsured Maize God. (A) Late Classic vessel (Smith, 1952: 252). (B) Late Classic Vase Photo from Coe. (C) Incised bone from Copan (drawing by L. Schele and M.E. Miller, 1986: pl 20). (Taube, 1986).
Another tool of Scandinavian origin and found in Slavic mythology, the Axe of Perun, also called a hatchet amulet, is shaped like a battle-axe. Just like Mjölnir, the axe is often worn as a necklace pendant with two different designs [shown in Figure 9 below] (Kucypera & Wadyl, 2011).
Figure 9. Two types of axes (Kucypera & Wadyl, 2011).
Kucypera makes the note that the process of miniaturisation was not specific in this cultural area; rather, it happened with various tools all across Europe (Koktvedgaard 1997, Staecker 1999, & Capelle, 2003 in Kucypera & Wadyl, 2011: 122). The god Perun was the god of lightning and thunder, equivalent to Thor from Norse mythology, but in the Slavic Perun was the highest god in the pantheon, while Thor is under his father Odin. But, as many of the small amber or large flint versions of the axes have been found in many of the countries near the Baltic Sea, it is thought that they had the same significance as Thor’s Hammer. Less of a weapon or tool that was used and more a symbol of the god Perun, who brought the rains and favourable weather to the agricultural community that was built into and beside the nearby forests (Bojtár, 1999: 289).
Lastly, in Chinese mythology, the god Pan Gu [shown below in Figure 10] began creating the world when he separated Yin from Yang with a swing of his giant axe through the chaos of the 18,000-year-old cosmic egg, creating the Earth (murky Yin) and the Sky (clear Yang). To keep them separated, Pan Gu stood between them and pushed up the Sky for another 18,000 years until he died and his body became various pieces of nature (translated from Xu in Brown & Brown, 2006: 87). With this mythology being influenced by the teachings of Confucianism, and by tenets of Daoism, which arose from Buddhism, the creation of the universe and mankind had to fall in line with the Buddhist tenets of morality, that good people were rewarded and evil people were punished (Brown & Brown, 2006: 86). Because Pan Gu does perish at the end this would not have been seen as a punishment, as he created our world and in some stories humanity as well, therefore he would have been another example of creating the proper way of life out of the chaos from before. While in this case the axe does not have its own name, it is the tool for making the universe something in which humanity could exist.
Figure 10. Found in China, Pangu is an example of Cosmic Man. Li Ung Bin - Outlines of Chinese History, Shanghai 1914
Axes in mythology could be summarised in a similar way to hammers; they can be used for both destruction and creation, depending on how the tool is used. The dual-sided labyrus was a representation of duality itself, of mankind and even the gods themselves. The axe was the tool of separation by which the world as we know it came to exist, both literally and figuratively, chopping apart the Earth from the sky and/or separating order from chaos. This led to the axe becoming a symbol in ornamentation, often being associated with power, good luck, and leadership.
Adze
Figure 11. Anubis from Egyptian Mythology and Egyptian Christianity de Samuel Sharpe (1863)
Adzes were not only used as a carving tool; in Egyptian mythology, it was part of the long staff carried by the god of mummification, Anubis. This tool, called a was (w3s)-sceptre [Figure 12a], was ritualistic in nature and thought to have the meaning of power and control. The hieroglyph of was, when included in ancient Egyptian texts had the meaning of power or rule [Figure 12b], which is why this figure was included in the nome of Thebes, the capital city of Upper Egypt, (Waset) [Figure 12c] and the epithet “dji ankh djed was” included after the pharaohs’ name in a text [Figure 12d] (Allen, 2014: 343). In the funerary context, the inclusion of the symbol in text and in the pictures on coffins and in tombs would have been carved or painted for the well-being of the deceased, as well as been included within the wrappings as an amulet. These were seen in the burial of Horemheb – KV 57 as part of the Theban mapping project. The same symbol is also depicted in ‘Adze-on-block’ hieroglyphic texts and has been thought to mean “chosen of”, which also has a relation to the pharaoh (Betrỏ, 1995, Collier & Manley, 1998). With either option, the context is clearly saying that this person or place is to be respected, as they have been bestowed a great power.
Figure 13. The carved, fingers-like adze tool for the opening of the mouth ceremony (Roth 1993).
This power takes its active form in the mouth-opening ritual, and the process is not only depicted on the walls of tombs, but the miniature versions were buried with the deceased as amulets inside the mummy’s wrapping from the Old Kingdom into the Roman Period (Assmann, 2005; Roth, 1992; Roth, 1993). They were often made of dark material, including glass and gilt, and generally had the shape of two fingers [Figure 13 above UC2413, UC2415, & UC 2412] to invoke the ritualistic meaning within the opening of the mouth by Horus, which was described on the wall:
sem-priest, lector-priest, imy-is priest standing around him
Words spoken: my father, my father, my father, my father
Words spoken: Oh N! your mouth is ... (?): I have balanced your mouth and bones for you
N! I have opened your mouth for you
N! I open your mouth for you with the nua-blade
I have opened your mouth for you with the nua-blade,
the meskhetyu-blade of iron, that opens the mouths of the gods
Horus is the opener of the mouth of N, Horus; Horus has opened the mouth of N
Horus has opened the mouth of N with that with which he opened the mouth of his father, with which he opened the mouth of Osiris
with the iron that came from Seth, the meskhetyu-blade of iron
with which the mouths of the gods are opened - may you open the mouth of N with it
so that he may walk and speak with his body before the great Nine Gods in the great mansion of the official that is in Iunu
and so that he may take up your White Crown there before Horus lord of the nobility
(Translation done by the University College London, 2003).
As guidance for the journey into the afterlife, the painting discusses the beginnings and the reason for the ritual itself. Horus had to open his father Osiris’ mouth before completing the mummification so he could continue to speak prayers in the afterlife (Assmann & Lorton, 2005). This ritual continued in order to pass on knowledge, even in death, especially because of the necessity of answering the negative questions that the gods ask at the heart weighing ceremony. If the dead are unable to speak the truth and answer the questions to the Gods’ expectations, Amut would devour them and their soul would cease to exist (Egyptian Book of the Dead referenced in Assmann & Lorton, 2005). While the act of opening a mouth may not relate directly to agriculture or creating a human environment, the way that other burial amulets have, there is a metaphysical connection. Part of Egyptian mythology is that the writings, paintings, and prayers made on the sarcophagi and tombs become real in the afterlife. Both the written and spoken wishes were, therefore, represented by the adze tool for the deceased to continue their prayers and live in eternity in a world of their own making, which would not be possible without the gift of knowledge and their ability to speak.
Ea/Enki, the god of wisdom and fresh waters, had given the duty of building the ark to a man named Ziusudra, and later Utnapishtim meaning ‘he who saw life’, for when the great flood waters came in the story of Descent of Inanna, and was the patron of craftsmen, artisans and exorcists in the story Inanna and the God of Wisdom (Mark, 2011). He is also a main character in stories about the world’s creation and his and his son’s roles in taming the chaos within it. The king and Enki’s son, Marduk, killed Quingu, the bodyguard of Tiamat, Enki’s mother, and Tiamat to create the world from the swirling waters it was before (Mark, 2011). In Sumerian, the word for adze is nañar, translating directly to na: stone and ñị̉r: knife, meaning: wood chisel, adze, carpenter, or craftsman (Holloran, 2006:58). The tool it is said that Enki gave the pious man was an adze, as that would have been the general tool to craft the ark that Zjusudra needed to survive the flooding. It has been suggested that this handing over of the adze could be symbolic of Enki’s giving of knowledge to allow the human race to survive, along with the control and responsibility over the animals that had to be collected two-by-two by Zjusudra (Mark, 2011).
As a summary, the adzes are made to reflect the various cultures in the societies they’re made in, often being used as tools of crafting and knowledge. In Egypt, Anubis, the God of mummification, carried a staff with the adze on the top to signify the mouth opening ritual and the ability to speak in the afterlife. Another ancient society, Sumer, has the God Enki being associated with the adze tool and with the knowledge that was presented with it. The story that is most transliterated through the centuries was of Enki, giving the tool and the knowledge of how to use it to the human Zjusudra to build an ark to save all the world's species from the chaos of the disastrous floodwaters.
BURIAL SITE EXAMPLES WITH TOOLS: Archaeological records showing BURIALS WITH TOOLS
Burials have been rediscovered in multiple locations with various tools included, which this section will focus on. The examples include specific locations where the tools, or their smaller and unusable analogue versions, have been found. There, the meanings that archaeologists have attributed to the artefacts and their placement in terms of the mythology are aligned with the hypothesis that the tools reflect the society’s manipulation of nature to fit under human control.
Egypt – Theban Mapping Project
As mentioned in the previous section, one of the tombs mapped as part of the Theban project belonged to Horemheb, KV 57. Within the Valley of the Kings, on the opposite bank from ancient Thebes (or present-day Luxor), Horemheb was laid to rest around the year of c. 1292 BCE as the last pharaoh of the 18th dynasty. Like his two predecessors, Ay and Tutankhamun, his tomb’s artefacts and wall art reflect the return to the polytheistic religion that Egyptians followed for centuries before Akhenaten (Tut’s father) reformed the country’s religion. The walkway itself was carved with a similar steep descent as with earlier tombs, which included stairs; however, the shape was unique because it demonstrated a transitional period from the bent- to straight-axis tombs [see Figure 14 below]. This change in tradition is also reflected in the art on the walls, because, although all completed, the murals depict Horemheb alongside deities and, for the first time, scenes pulled from the Book of Gates (Martin, 2008).
Figure 14. Straight-axis layout of Horemheb's tomb (Martin, 2008) from the Theban mapping project.
Unfortunately, Horemheb’s mummy had not been recovered from his tomb because there were incidents of grave robbing during which the red quartzite sarcophagus lid was smashed open and everything inside that was valuable was stolen (Martin, 2008). While this may seem to be the end of the use of this burial for this thesis, the murals can also serve this purpose. The Book of Gates is the narration of a recently deceased person’s soul moving into the next world, and it served as a manual for the rites and rituals continuing throughout the New Kingdom (Hornung, 1999). Part of these rites involves the wrapping of the mummy, adding amulets in between the linen layers, and the opening of the mouth ceremony. Because everything written or drawn on the walls becomes real in the afterlife, they had to follow all of the practices as closely as possible. The adze that was wielded by Anubis was drawn on many tombs, including Horemheb’s and Tutankhamun’s, alongside their physical forms, which were included in either the mummy’s wrappings as an amulet, off to the side of the burial, or both. In whatever form, it is considered to be part of the same symbolic purpose, humans’ ability and right to speak truth to meaning, to give commanding orders, and to praise the gods for the protection of our world from chaos and destruction.
Scandinavia
In much of Western Europe and Scandinavia, the Viking culture dominated, and the evidence of their burial rites is scattered across many of the countries in which they conquered. Two sites will be covered, one Neolithic and one Iron Age, because they both demonstrate the evolution of a community while retaining the society’s culture and practices.
One example is Kverrestad, a site from the Neolithic, located in southeastern Scania or the region of southernmost Sweden [shown in the map of Figure 15]. According to Karsten, tools were commonly destroyed in sites dating from the Early to Late Neolithic (Karsten, 1994), but they were found less in burial contexts during the Early to Middle (Larsson, 2000: 607). In the Late Neolithic Battle Axe Culture, dating to c. 3860±75 BP, burnt tools were deposited at the entrances of megalithic tombs (Vandkilde, 1996: 166 in Larsson, 2000: 604). Larsson initially argues that because there are no unpolished axes entombed with the bodies, these would not have been burial offerings, since they were deposited “just like axes in other kinds of offerings” (Larsson, 2000: 607). But sacrificial ritual objects do not have to be prestigious or elaborate to connect to the ideals of the community. More importantly, they must be tied to their usage and to the land, suggesting that their utilisation widely represents the power the society holds. Ritual burning and the sacrificing of tools, especially the tools that were found: flint axes, thin axes, scrapers, and chisels, would have been burned in effigy for the burials; part of the same traditions were lacking in the earlier Funnel Beaker Culture (Larsson, 2000: 603). Another aspect specific to the burnt clay is that it is an exotic material, as there are no sources nearby. There is also a higher correlation to axes being fire broken than the other tools, as 90% of the axes found display the changes brought on by the process of firing (Larsson, 2000: 605), relating to the Battle Axe Culture in which this takes place. Larsson, through his experimentation, postulates that the cracking and the colour change of the flint from black or grey to white could be connected to a rite of passage, as undergoing this process makes them look similar to the fragmented cremated human bones with the burials nearby (Larsson, 2000: 609).
Figure 15. Map of Scania, the southernmost region of Sweden. Locations of sites with flint artefacts and fire destruction (Larsson, 2000; 603).
Archaeologists think that the meaning is, “the destruction of material culture would have been very obvious and the wealth represented by the number of tools and exotics included must have been considerable” (Larsson, 2000: 609). In these massive deposition sites, such as Kverrestad and its earlier mirror, Svartskylle, there is a clear use of destruction by fire to sacrifice these tools, mostly axes, in conjunction with the tomb located directly next to the monumental pyres. Larsson continues in a paper, examining creation burial pits and large tombs in various Neolithic and Bronze Age sites, which all show that the purpose of participating in these mortuary activities is as a “reproduction of [the] social structure… to an extraordinary degree” (Larsson, 2003: 155). Showing what the culture should look like relates to the mythology and the mortuary rituals enacted, according to Larsson from Bloch and Parry (1982), as the creation of the society itself, which gives the community the feeling of control in the “social arena” (Larsson, 2003: 163-164). In the Battle Axe Culture, control would have been signified by the axe for power over the chaos and destruction of everything around the community on behalf of the ancestors of whom the deceased will be joining and will be given a gift by the gods (Larsson, 2003).
Later, in the Iron Age (during the 9th to 11th centuries CE), the hammer-rings, also mentioned in the previous sections, were buried with the bodies to serve the same purpose as the flint cremation pyres of the Neolithic. In fact, in the spread of Scandinavian societies, extra artefacts have been laid to rest after the cremation pyres were burnt out. The archaeologist Williams argues that these would not be the ‘objects of memory’ which would be connected to neither the true nor idealised versions of the lives of the deceased (Williams, 2013: 196). But they are instead ‘commemorative catalysts’, artefacts or materials that created memories, protected the deceased, and did “not simply ‘honour’ the dead; it re-made them” (Williams, 2013: 197). Therefore, looking specifically in the Lake Mälaren Region of Sweden, the cremated Thor’s Hammer-Rings, whether originally burned with or after the body, were also seen as evidence for the worship of Thor by Andersson for the benefit of the deceased person and the entire community (Williams, 2013).
In this case, the mythology is highly recognised as playing a part in the direct purpose of including hammer rings in the burial. As in the Norse myths that were discussed earlier in the chapter, both the hammer Mjölnir and Perun’s axe were connected to the power of the gods of lightning and thunder. Williams states that Andersson noticed that the hammers themselves could be attributed to Thor’s gift of the creation of fire and his protection over the forces of chaos (Williams, 2013: 199). The ring that the pendant lies upon, however, also speaks to the unending notion of cycles, regeneration, and order versus destruction and chaos (Andersson in Williams, 2013: 199). This led to speculating that all the artefacts included in the burials were part of the aforementioned commemorative catalysts, placed for memory and not of memory (Williams, 2013: 204). Williams also identifies the 8th century CE onward burial custom of including rock flakes in urns at Vittene in nearby Västergötland, Sweden. This is significant because Williams makes the argument that “seemingly ‘natural’ materials may…have held important roles” was a carryover from the centuries-old Greco-Roman period in which the stones were perceived “as belonging to the earth and ‘planted’ by burial” (Williams, 2013: 202). This connects to the idea of taking a piece of the Earth, the tools and plain stones that affect the human community with its own life force, use it, and then lay the material and its energy to rest just as a person would be, as a flesh and bone “commemorative act” (Williams, 2013: 202).
Cyprus
Figure 16. Map of Cyrus with Bronze Age sites marked, numbers indicate earlier and later chronological dates for sites (Keswani, 2005: 345).
The same older traditions are evident within the burial sites Khirokitia and Erimi on the island of Cyprus [map figure 10 above] in the westernmost region of Anatolia. The sites are classified as prehistoric and were mainly occupied from the Neolithic well into the Bronze Age. The monumental burial structures here are called tholoi, or beehive burials, within which the number of burials may only depend on the size of the structure (Dikaios, 1940). The architectural characteristics vary a bit between the tholoi of Khirokitia and Erimi in the locations of support posts and the amount of use in daily life; however, they are similar in terms of the individual goods present in burials underneath the floors (Dikaios, 1940: 77). Tools such as grinding stones, both single and double headed axes, and fishing gear are all present, with the axes and grinding stones most commonly made out of flint and chert throughout the various island locations. While not the only items included in many of the burials, the most extravagant of materials present was the obsidian, which was traded from Syria and Eastern Anatolia. The specific burial site, Vouncous A, which dates to around c. 2800 BCE (according to dating done on a ceramic vase), contained tools, such as knives, awls, and axes made out of copper [Figure 17 below] (Keswani, 2005: 365 & Dikaios, 1940: 82).
Figure 17. Copper objects and a whetstone from Bellapais Vounous site A, tomb 105. (A) Tangless knife, (B-D) Flat-tangled Knives, (E) weapon with a hooked tang, (F & G) Axes, (H) awl, (I) whetstone (Keswani, 2005: 365).
Similar to Egypt, archaeologists have stated that the meaning is to equip the deceased for the afterlife, saying, “[they] clearly believed the dead wanted or needed many of the same goods, provisions, tools, and ceremonial regalia that were used” (Keswani, 2005: 360). And as Dikaios states, “the folk… appear to have been pastoral and to have practised agriculture” (1940: 79). Therefore, the inclusion of these tools and other ceremonial artefacts of significance is because of the ritual importance they had within their mythology and what was the greater importance of shaping the chaos of nature. Looking specifically at the later tombs of Vounous, patterns of increasing occupancy are evident, seemingly due to the later generations being entombed with their ancestors and creating larger, multi-chambered tombs whenever possible (Keswani, 2005: 361). As time progressed, the purposes of having individual burials with prestige goods waned, and the social backing and shared inheritance of the wealth and social prestige in the family burial plot would have been markedly more important. And because there were already goods being pulled together between family members, all the newly deceased would have been able to show off their families’ symbolic control of the world around them to all the others of the community.
Mesoamerica
In the Maya Preclassic (c. 1000 BCE – 250 CE) and Classic (c. 250 – 900 CE) periods, there are larger groupings of flaked celts within various burials around the populated region, with the highest amount located in the Maya Lowlands. These celts (siliceous stone ungrooved axes, adzes, and hoes) are also the tools depicted on the stelae in areas such as Tikal, Palenque, and Copan in Guatemala (Thompson, 1996). One example of tool use in burials can be found in Tikal within burial 48, which contained two sacrificed youths. The tools buried alongside were a set of a mano and metate, a set of grinding stones, for the production of food from maize. These offerings were symbolic of the Maya’s human cremation myth out of maize from the Popol Vu (Scherer, 2015: 157-158). Because these were found with two children, possibly a representation of the Hero Twins, who had not yet been able to specialise, the entirety of burial 48 would have been symbolic in nature and demonstrated its importance as part of mythology (Scherer, 2015: 158).
Examples of the axe as a grave good are difficult to find, as most descriptions of tomb sites don’t specify what tools made of obsidian and basaltic included within the burials are. Unfortunately, past archaeologists have seen these offerings as general waste objects and general cache pits because most burials belonged to the commoners and were located in subfloor graves to retain the connection to individual families (Kunen et al., 2002:198-199). Thus, the main published writings on burials from this general area, upon which we can learn, can be found under the homes of Teotihuacan. Grave one, underneath the floor of Room VII, is thought to be from one of the earliest periods in Teotihuacan’s history because there is evidence of the floor being re-laid, but the remains were unconnected (Linné, 2003:54). The contents of this grave were the skeletal remains, common dishware, utilitarian clay tripod pottery with decorations, various obsidian objects, and a single stone axe (Linné, 2003: 56). It is rare to find axes in Teotihuacan and with the limited use of obsidian as axes and ornaments, the stone would have had to have been obtained through trade because the site is far from any other rock quarry (Linné, 2003: 58). The connection this has with the mythology is found from the combination of the painted ceramics and the exotic material of the axe. One vessel from grave one [Figure 18 below] contains a border of the symbols of rain clouds and droplets, which are thought to symbolise the power of the god Tlaloc, the Aztec equivalent to Chaak, whose face is also represented in the centre (Linné, 2003: 58, Milbrath, 2017: 163).
Figure 18. Tri-footed vessel from grave 1 at Teotihuacan. Decorated with symbols of rain clouds, water droplets, and the face of Tlaloc/Chaak (Artefact 24 in Linné, 2003: 58, Milbrath, 2017: 163).
Figure 19. Representations of Chac with lightning serpents. A) Chac as a warrior holding the axe, lightning serpent, and shield from the Dresden Codex page 66a. B) Impersonator dressed up to resemble Chac, wielding the lightning serpent axe from Dresden Codex (Thompson, 1996).
Within the Dresden Codex, the god Chac wields his hafted copper celt, more specifically the baat, a single-handed hatchet. Linguistic evidence has shown the Mayan word ch’ak means to chop or decapitate, which Thompson has related to the Maya god Chac, who came from Chac-Xib-Chac, who has the iconography of Batab, the hatchet-wielder (Thompson, 1996: 127). The Batab glyph [Figures 19a and b above] has a hatchet included and is part of the title of Batabob, who led warriors into battle (Morley et al. 1983: 215-216 in Thompson, 1996: 130). People holding them, therefore, “appear to be lords or warriors in similar stylised postures, which might be termed the ‘hatchet-wielding’ motif. [S]imilar to that of the gods illustrated in the Late Postclassic codices, also depicted in murals and on painted ceramics” (Thompson, 1996: 122). If they are depicting the lord and warriors as the gods, the implication is that they will have the same duties and power [Figure 19b above]. Replicating the deity of farming, water, and kingship leads to the kings displaying their ability to provide for their subjects as the gods could [Figures 20 and 21 below], like when Chac would call in the rains.
Figure 20. Late Classic Maya altar (Quirigua Alter O) carved with the form of Chac in Cauac markings surrounding a T-shaped cave. Above the cave, lightning strikes to break the stone, and below, nine grains of maize are growing. "From Coe 1980: illus. 62" (Thompson, 1996).
Figure 21. "The birth of the rains, personified by Chaak", from the Dresden Codex 31b-35b (Forstemann, 1880 & Thompson, 1996).
CONCLUSIONS
A few patterns for tool use depictions emerged within stories from a number of distinct mythologies. The first shows that because tools are produced in every human society, they are not inherently special and so are given a mythological context and backstory. These stories from mythology depict the gods already wielding and using their signature tools and not creating them, potentially because their construction was already common knowledge, and thus did not need recording. Sometimes myths would involve gods being given a special tool, but it is an action that the tool played in the distant past, and that particular goal had already been achieved. The second is that because stone tools are from nature, the gods humans worship had to imbue the tools with an energy to keep the chaos of the wilderness at bay. And the third is that burials are events for the communities to honour those who died and the gods, so the tool, which would have the closest link to the gods, is gifted back to the natural world to complete its cycle.
This signals that, for protection and stability, society uses tools as a means to change the chaos of nature into a world for humans to survive in. This is reflected by the gods’ positions within the realm of the society’s mythological beliefs. The mortuary service is not so much a direct reflection on the individual, but is a framing of an entire family or community because they leave imprints on the minds of all who witness it. The various deities and traditions of these communities, which are understood through the lenses of lore and narrative, are a means of justifying and paying homage to the world that we humans cannot readily control without assistance from those who are greater. Those who supposedly made the world the way it is for human use. With the tools and energy of ritual that the aforementioned deities gave to us, humankind created the act of leaving tools in burials to be a sign of wealth and influence because of the environmental control that is implied through those same rituals in the mythos of the culture.
With the information that I have gathered in Chapters Two and Three, I have built a model utilising the aspects laid out within this chapter. These aspects can be summarised in terms of the four points as follows:
First, there is a record of tools and their use within the mythology of a culture.
Second, within the mythology, these tools are associated with the ability to control and manipulate the environment in which people live.
Third, the manipulation stems from bringing a piece of nature into the realm of human culture.
Fourth, it is because of these mythological associations that these tool types have ideological significance to communities and are often found as grave goods.
We have found that this model applies in cultures around the world and with whatever tool is in the forefront of use in any particular society. Thus, it is appropriate to say that the adze or toki, as a backbone and necessary tool of the Māori toolkit, and because of its use by the Atua within their stories, should be granted the same status. This is because adzes were often used and were not only ritualistic, based on the marks from rework, redressing, and chips along the edges. Highly polished examples have been found that would have been larger than an average worker would find easy to carry, implying either limited use or a purpose of ritual only. Many, however, that had been left with the bodies may not be finished, highly polished, or larger than one’s palm. These latter examples imply that the use of a burial adze was important; without the mana being utilised in some way over its life, there is less ritual significance to repatriate it to the earth as part of human ritual.
In the next chapter, I will be applying the model built in this chapter to look specifically at the context in New Zealand. First, I will be focusing on the adzing-toki tool, by definition and production. Second, I will be examining the tool’s place within the mythology of the Māori and, to an extent, the Hawai’ian peoples. Third, I will examine burial sites containing the toki as a grave good. Fourth, I will bring all of these together for an analysis of interpretations to reason the ideological purpose of using the toki as a grave good.
