Details
argued, based on ethnographic literature, that cemeteries indicate the existence of control over resources. No other discipline has recognised this link. Because their ideas were developed in a processual context, they were systematically rejected as part of the post-processual shift, and yet their theory internalised an impressive complexity, recognised a 'real' cross-cultural pattern, and contained within it a potential which has rarely been recognized. Geographers, ethnologists, and others have studied territoriality, but at its core it is a human behaviour and archaeology is uniquely placed to explore it from a human perspective. The main research questions with which this study is concerned involve: 1. Are hunter-gatherers territorial? 2. Is the Saxe-Goldstein hypothesis relevant to archaeologically documented hunter-gatherers? 3. What is a 'cemetery'? 4. Is it possible to identify what resources were controlled? 5. Can we understand how cemeteries were able to stand as ideological claims over resources? Chapter 2 argues that the Saxe-Goldstein hypothesis - albeit with some ideological modification - does have relevance to archaeological investigations, and that there is ethnographic support for territorial behaviour among contemporary hunter-gatherer communities. Chapter 3, and is based on a comparative analysis of mortuary practices. A database containing information on 1747 individuals from sites in Western Europe and North Africa is analysed to investigate the role of cemeteries in territorial control; it is included on a CD as a series of Excel files and summarised in Chapter 4 to identify high minimum number of individuals sites in the regions not considered in the case studies. Two detailed case studies - Mesolithic (c. 9000-4000 BC) Scandinavia and Ibéromaurusian and Capsian (c.18,000-4000 BC) North Africa follow in Chapters 5 & 6. Chapter 7 brings together various strands, in particular with regards to understanding what 'cemeteries' are and the relationship of the different territorial regimes to notions of property.