Impossible. This would be the word that springs to mind had someone just asked me if it were possible to tell if the social status of a deceaded individual was middle class, judging by their grave goods and grave location. Well at least impossible for a the archaeological record predating the industrial revolution. The term middle class did not exist before the industrial revolution. Instead you could be either a member of the ruling elite (king, duke, lord, bishop etc), a freeman labourer (tradesman, land owning farmer, paid labourer), a slave/serf (unpaid labourer or tradesman, owned by a lord), or a begger (those unable to work and with no one to take care of them).
However during the industrial revolution a new class of wealthy individuals independent of the church and without royal title arose. These individuals were and still are wealthy industrialists who, unlike the Rich, still had to work for there money, but unlike the poor, were able to afford lavish housing and factories etc.
The middle-class-men still exsit in society today and have largely replaced the Rich as the ruling elite. Because of this many of us mix up who is considered the true middle class in modern society.
For example in Canada, the middle class are made up of those who many Canadians would consider rich, such as the Westons (owners of superstore and other grocery chains) or Rogers (media empire). Included are also are top level politics such as the Prime Minister. Though wealthy these individuals are not in actual fact "rich" they are middle class for they do not own vast tracts of land or royal titles. The only truely rich memebers in Canada are visiting members of the British Royal Family.
The rest of us poor sods are mearly working class. Sure your dad might own a nice car and his own house but he isn't a wealthy industrialist, though he may work for one. Worst yet the majority of Canadians are classified as the working poor (mainly due to the ever dropping poverty lines which disallows them from being classified as poverty stricken and therefore saves the government from having to hand out large numbers of wellfare cheques).
If we continue to imporperly label members in our own society how can we possibly define the social status of those we just dug up from a society a thousand years older then our own. It would be like having future archaeologists dig up the grave of Pierre Trudeau and declare that he was a king, when actual fact he was a middle class elected official who stepped away from the socialist party and joined the liberal party in order to beat out the candidate of the reform party.
Ok, that's very interesting and I'm quite sad to learn that I am a poor worker... damn! No, seriously, this is an interesting observation and it is true that we might have some difficulty identifying the class of a buried individual if the labeling of our own system is incorrect, but...
ReplyDeleteWhat about the power of comparisons between contemporary individuals? According to your definition, there is no High class individuals in North America. Given that an archaeologist was to dig up Pierre Trudeau, he/she would likely be wrong in stating that this individual was high class. In the absence of 'real' high class in the continent however, couldn't we simply push those middle class rich people to a relative high class?
I think that it is actually dangerous to put those labels on the archaeological record, as those change with time and perspective (as you clearly point out in the fact that we label our system incorrectly). In this situation, the attempt to identify the class of a buried individual would entail different assumptions from different backgrounds and different perspectives.
I'll stop here because I could go on to say that this relates to the big picture of inclusion/exclusion and categorization in Anthropology and Archaeology, but then we would be here for hours. So, in summary: good blog entry! Such a simple subject that brings layers and layers of complex questions and issues!