Page 83 - DILMUN 12

1969:18). The three attempts at excavating these large “Royal Tombs” undertaken by
Pridcaux, Mackay and Bibby recovered little in terms of material remains perhaps due to
earlier looting. Nevertheless, the absence of material remains in the tombs is compensated for
by a display of wealth evident in the different labor costs of constructing these earthen covered
stone sepulchers.

This paper has attempted to point out (1) the relatively high percentage of tombs on
Bahrain that lack either human burials, material remains or both; (2) the relative impoverish­
ment of material remains in the tombs; (3) the ideological significance of Dilmun and the
Sumerian world order; (4) the paradoxical situation between the texts of Sumer stressing the
commercial importance of Dilmun and the absence of wealth in their tombs; and (5) the
distinction between Dilmun’s single graves and Magan’s collective tombs. It has also suggested
a series of hypotheses which may shed light on the above points; namely, (1) single burials as
opposed to collective burials arc suggestive of a greater social stratification resulting from the
breakdown of communal corporate group ownership (2) Societies involved with a primary
emphasis upon production, as opposed to those primarily involved with commerce, arc more
likely to dispose of capital in their burials. Societies more involved with a commerce of
unfinished goods are benefitted by continual circulation of goods for exchange value (3)
personal wealth and status, first evidenced exclusively by material remains (private capital) in
tombs becomes later manifest in the exploitation of labor value in the construction of status
monuments and the reduction and/or elimination of capital in tombs. As the past is vastly
different from the present so in death people often become what they were not in life. The
easily observable may be insignificant and indeed may obscure complex patterns of interrela­
tionship. The enormity of the number of Bahrain tumuli cannot resist observation. This paper
seeks to explore that which is far from self-evident or observable: their meaning and structure
within the social organization of Dilmun.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alekshin, V.A. ‘Burial Customs as an Archaeological Source’
1983 Current Anthropology, vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 137-150.

Bibby, G. ‘Fern of Bahrain’s Lundrede Tusinde Gravhoje’
1954 KUML.pp. 140-166.

1969 Looking For Dilmun Harmondsworth, Pelican Books.
Binford, L.
‘Mortuary Practices : Their Study and Their
1971 Potential’ in J.A. Brown (ed.) Approaches to the
Social Dimensions ofMortuary Practices. Society of
Cleuziou, S. American Archaeology Memoir, vol. 25, Washington, D.C.
1977
Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates. Department
Cornwall, P.B. of Tourism, A1 Ain (U.A.E).
1943
“Dilmun: The History of Bahrain Island Before Cyrus.”
Durand, E.L. Ph.D. dissertation, History Department, Harvard University.
1880
“Extracts from Report on the Islands and Antiquities
of Bahrein” Journal ofthe Royal Asiatic.Society,
N.S. vol. 12, pp. 189-201.

22
••