Child Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece: a synthesis

This pdf of your paper in Childhood in the Past 4 belongs to the publishers Oxbow Books and it is their copyright.

As author you are licenced to make up to 50 offprints from it, but beyond that you may not publish it on the World Wide Web until three years from publication (September 2014), unless the site is a limited access intranet (password protected). If you have queries about this please contact the editorial department at Oxbow Books ([email protected]).

Childhood in the Past 4, 2011

Editor: Eileen M. Murphy

ContentsEditorial 1Eileen M. Murphy

ObituariesProfessor Beryl Rawson 5Dr Geoffrey Egan 8

Invited PaperChildhood, Art and Education in Late Nineteenth Century Berlin: An Autobiographical Account 11Original German Text: Paul JacobsthalIntroduction and Translation: Katharina Ulmschneider and Sally Crawford

Part 1: Research PapersChild Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece: A Synthesis 31Mercourios Georgiadis

Reconciling Identities in Life and Death: The Social Child in the Early Helladic Peloponnese 46David Michael Smith

Microcosms of Migration: Children and Early Medieval Population Movement 63D. M. Hadley and K. A. Hemer

Children and Agency: Religion as Socialisation in Late Antiquity and the Late Medieval West 79Sari Katajala-Peltomaa and Ville Vuolanto

Part 2: Special Section on Ancient Mayan ChildhoodEditorial 101Traci Ardren

ii Contents

Maya Sub Adult Mortality and Individual Physiological Frailty: An Analysis of Infant Stress by Means of Linear Enamel Hypoplasia 105Andrea Cucina

Becoming Maya: Infancy and Upbringing Through the Lens of Pre-Hispanic Head Shaping 117Vera Tiesler

Empowered Children in Classic Maya Sacrificial Rites 133Traci Ardren

Buried with Children: Reinterpreting Ancient Maya ‘Toys’ 146Betsy M. Kohut

Book Reviews 162

Childhood in the Past 4, 2011, 31–45

Child Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece: A Synthesis

Mercourios Georgiadis

Author’s address: Mercourios Georgiadis, 7 Mona Street, Beeston, Nottingham NG9 2BY, Email: [email protected]

Abstract The treatment of children during the Mesolithic and Neolithic in southern Greece can provide us with a rare insight of age differentiations, social practices and beliefs in these early periods. The diachronic presentation and analysis of this particular group of burials will provide a better understanding of the social and conceptual changes the role of children had in these communities. Their comparison to the adult treatments provides a template on which regional and sometimes local beliefs and practices can be viewed. At the same time broader socio-economic changes can be detected, emphasising or de-emphasising symbolically the social role and importance of children and infants in the local communities.

Keywords: Mesolithic, Neolithic, inhumation, cremation, pithos burial, built grave

IntroductionChildren are an important component of the demography of any given society, especially those with a high mortality rate (Baxter 2005, 10; Lewis 2007, 84, 86, table 5.1). The archaeological interest in children is a recent development, resulting from a new dynamic seen in gender analysis (Lillehammer 2000, 18–20; Parker Pearson 1999, 102). In prehistoric societies the majority of evidence for the presence of children is derived from burial contexts. These burials allow us to understand social groups and more specifically socialisation, age group divisions and horizontal differentiations, expression of status, symbolisms and various beliefs relating to the afterlife, within a local context. Although these ideas and data have an almost universal application, the behaviours by which they are expressed and the forms in which they are finally

32 Mercourios Georgiadis

manifest vary immensely (Becker 2007, 291–2; Lillehammer 2010, 12). Children were active participants in many aspects of everyday life including the social, economic and ritual, while other aspects of daily life would have been inaccessible or subject to restriction (Baxter 2005, 11; Lillehammer 2010, 17). The active participation of children in learning and/or production has been strongly advocated in other contexts, notably during the Early Mesolithic in south-western Norway (Dugstad 2010, 73) and in Greece during the Late Bronze Age (Gallou 2010, 162–7). Moreover, burial contexts are, alongside iconography, the easiest and most unambiguous, way to recognise sub-adults in the archaeological record (Baxter 2005, 93). Although the number of cemeteries and graves from the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods are relatively few in southern Greece, they provide sufficient data to suggest some general trends and a better understanding of the beliefs and practices of local groups, and are analysed here in the light of other known burials from central Greece, the Peloponnese, Cyclades, the Dodecanese and Crete. If burial practices and symbolic behaviours are the result of choices made by family members on behalf of the deceased, this should be clearest in the messages transmitted from adults for, and to, their dead children (Baxter 2005, 94). Synthetic studies of burials from these early prehistoric periods are rather limited and no significant age differentiation has been attempted for the Neolithic phases (Gallis 1996). Thus, an analysis of child burials in southern Greece will add an important perspective to the available data, allowing new insight into the importance of children in these societies. The Mesolithic and Neolithic both represent significant periods of time and, in order to map the development of practices and beliefs over this extended timescale, a diachronic phase-by-phase presentation will follow. Furthermore, an analysis of the position and, importantly, the role of children within the funerary framework and in society more generally, will allow us to place these children within their temporal and socio-economic framework and to understand how they developed through time.

Mesolithic (c. 8500–6700/6500 BC)The Mesolithic period in Greece lasted for approximately two millennia and marked a significant change in lifestyle from the Palaeolithic period, exemplified by an increased exploitation of marine resources (Perlès 2001). Although many Mesolithic sites have been discovered throughout Greece, very few of them have been excavated or extensively studied. Four of these have yielded burial evidence, three in cave contexts and one at an open-air site. Burial evidence from the northern part of Greece is derived only from cave sites, at Theopetra in Thessaly (Kyparissi-Apostolika 2000) and Cyclops on Youra (Sampson 2008a, 214–15), which have both produced a single adult burial. In the south, the funerary record has provided a richer set of burial data (see Fig. 1; Table 1). Franchthi Cave is located in south-east coastal Argolid which, during the period under review, was only a few hundred metres from the sea. As many as twenty-eight Mesolithic burials of all age groups have been recovered here. However, post-depositional conditions within the cave are problematic, and the bone scatters by which these individuals are represented are found throughout the cave (Angel 1969, 380;

33Child Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece

Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 5–6; Cullen 1995, 278–80; Cullen and Cook 1991). Whether these scatters derive from intentional funerary practice or whether they result from natural processes taking place within the cave over the course of millennia, such as flooding, animal or human intervention, or similar, is unknown (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 6). Whatever the case, children are represented within these Mesolithic bone scatters suggesting that, at the very least, they were subject to similar treatment as adults within the burial context. At the same site, there were also five inhumations placed in pits, belonging to the Lower Mesolithic phase. The dead include four adults of both sexes and an infant, buried in a semi-contracted position, in close proximity (Angel 1969, 380; Cullen 1995, 276). In the Upper Mesolithic stratum, an infant inhumation was found, close to which shell and charcoal remains were noted (Cullen 1995, 277). This

Figure 1: Map showing the location of the sites with child burials discussed in the text. 1. Elateia; 2. Halai; 3. Tharrounia; 4. Franchthi; 5. Aria; 6. Lerna; 7. Prosymna; 8. Limnes Cave; 9. Kalamaki; 10. Kouveleiki Caves; 11. Alepotrypa Cave; 12. Kefala; 13. Maroulas; 14. Knossos; 15. Kalythies Cave.


Site Period No. of subadult burials

Burial Types Grave Offerings

Maroulas Mesolithic infants+ children pit+ cist graves shells Franchthi

Mesolithic EN MN FN

2 infants+ child bones infants+ children 1 infant children

pit graves pit graves pit grave pit grave

shell? none clay jar + marble bowl

Knossos EN 7, infants+ children pit graves none Prosymna MN 1 child pit cremation none Halai MN 1 child pit grave none Lerna MN 4 infants+ 3 children pit graves 1 infant pot

2 children 1 pot Limnes Cave LN 1 child+ 1 adolescent scattered

bones none

Kalythies Cave LN 7 children scattered bones

none

Elateia LN 1 child pit grave none Tharrounia LN

FN

1 infant+ 4 children+ 1 adolescent 2 infants+ 1 child- cave 1 infant+ 4 children+ 1 adolescent – open air

scattered bones scattered bones built graves (multiple)

none none few

Alepotrypa Cave

LN/FN 9 infants+ 67 children+ 4 adolescents

scattered bones pit graves child cremation

none none shell beads

Kouveleiki Caves A & B

FN A & B, children A, 1 child

scattered bones pot burial

none none

Aria FN 1 child pit grave 2 pots Kalamaki FN 1 child pithos burial none Kefala FN 5 infants

9 children

4 pot burials 1 cist grave 8 built graves 1 cist grave

none none limited none

Table 1: Details of the Mesolithic and Neolithic sites in southern Greece that contain infant and child burials (EN = Early Neolithic; MN = Middle Neolithic; LN = Late Neolithic; FN = Final Neolithic).


practice has also been observed in one Lower Mesolithic adult example from Franchthi Cave. Two further cremation burials of this period have also been recorded, although they belong to adults of both sexes (Cullen 1995, 278–80; Cullen and Cook 1991). The coastal open-air site of Maroulas on the island of Kythnos also dates to the Mesolithic period. It is possible that this site, like Franchthi, was located at some distance from the sea, during this period. More than sixteen graves have been unearthed so far, most of which were pits cut into the bedrock, although a few cist graves were also evident (Sampson 2006, 41; 2008a, 215; 2008b, 15). The burials were evenly distributed across intramural and extramural spaces, the first made under the floors of houses and the latter in very close proximity to the houses (Sampson 2008a, 215; 2008b, fig. 2.2). The interments belong to adults of both sexes, as well as to children and infants, all placed in semi-contracted positions (Sampson 2006, 42; 2008a, 215). Some of the individuals – both adults and children – bore evidence of ochre on their bones, others had a stone slab lying on their chest, while others were accompanied by shells (Sampson 2006, 58; 2008a, 216).

Early Neolithic (c. 6700/6500–5700 BC)The Early Neolithic (EN) witnessed the introduction of agriculture, the domestication of plants and animals, and the foundation of permanent settlements. New ideas and socio-economic conditions existed across the Aegean, which reoriented the way of life, from one of foraging, hunting and gathering to one of farming (see Table 1). Franchthi Cave continued to be occupied during this period, serving both as living space and a burial ground. Although burials within the cave continued to take the form of pit burials and included adults, children and infants, the majority comprised those of infants or children aged up to eight years old (Angel 1969, 380–1; 1973, table 1; Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 7). Stones or slates usually covered the infant burials, whilst one child was placed with its head resting on several stones, arranged as a pillow (Jacobsen 1969, 373; Jacobsen and Cullen 1981). Interestingly, a new burial cluster was established in this period, outside the cave in the area known as Paralia, which seems to have been reserved for adults. The settlement at Knossos on Crete was founded in the Aceramic Neolithic phase (c. 7000–6500 BC), represented by Stratum XI. However, the earliest burials belong to the Early Neolithic Stratum X, contemporary with EN Franchthi (Evans 1964, 136). On the bedrock, a concentration of six infant and child burials were found, each of which appeared to have been positioned in a semi-contracted position within shallow pits (Evans 1964, 136, 139–40, figs. 7–8, pl. 29:2–4). Some distance to the east, another single child burial was uncovered, placed into a pit cut into bedrock and covered by a stone slab (Evans 1964, 136, fig. 7, pl. 30:1–3). No artefacts appear to have accompanied any of these seven children.

Middle Neolithic (c. 5700–5200 BC)For the Middle Neolithic (MN) period, funerary data are more readily available and it is possible to gain a more substantial understanding of burial practices at this time. Many of the burials derive from the Argolid (see Table 1).


At Franchthi, both the cave and Paralia continued to be used for burial in the same manner as during the preceding Early Neolithic. A single infant inhumation, accompanied by a clay monochrome jar, which had been deliberately broken into two pieces, and a small marble bowl date to the Middle Neolithic (Jacobsen 1969, 373). This is the only instance of a burial offering within the cave, although an adult female inhumation at Paralia was accompanied by similar offerings. Prosymna is an inland site in the Argolid, where scattered bones were found on the floor of a small natural cave, in addition to within six small depressions (Blegen 1937, 25–6). Remains of cremated bodies have been found in shallow pits, mainly belonging to adults, but a cremated child was recovered in Depression Four, which had been covered with a mound of stones (Blegen 1937, 27, figs. 28–30). Similar cremation practices are known from other burial contexts at Mesolithic Franchthi, as well as Early and Late Neolithic sites in Thessaly (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 8; Fowler 2004, 23, 66; Gallis 1982, 173–4, 182; Hourmouziadis 1973, 202). The open-air site at Lerna is located in the coast of western Argolid and included a settlement as well as an area for burial. Although the graves were extramural, they were located in close proximity to contemporary houses (Angel 1971, fig. 5). Thus, whether a space had been reserved only for burials or not is currently unclear. In this cemetery nine Middle Neolithic burials were found, of which two belonged to adults, four to infants and three to children up to ten years old (Angel 1971, 39–40; Vitelli 2007, 131, table 9.2). All infant and child burials were treated in a similar way as far as the grave was concerned – placed in shallow pits and covered by low mounds of either earth or stone. However, an important difference existed between the two age groups in relation to the grave goods they had received, with only two of the three child burials having been accompanied by offerings (Vitelli 2007, 132, table 9.2). Cups were noted, but the burial of an infant within a painted bowl is of particular interest. The two adult burials, represented only by forearm and hand bones, emphasise the special position of child burials in this cemetery. They are most probably the result of a secondary treatment, and they belong to a male and a female. Their position seems to be closely related to the infant and child burials, perhaps suggesting a degree of companionship and/or affection which continued to the afterlife (Angel 1971, 39; Vitelli 2007, 131–2). From within the Middle Neolithic strata at the open-air site of Halai in coastal east Phthiotis a child burial was recovered. The preliminary report suggests that the child, although partly disturbed, was inhumed within the settlement, but no accompanying finds have been noted (O’Neill et al. 1999, 292, fig. 6).

Late Neolithic (c. 5200–4500 BC)During the Late Neolithic (LN), child burials occurred within organised cemeteries (see Table 1). At Limnes Cave, located close to Kastria in the Kalavryta area, excavations have revealed both a habitation area and a burial ground. Within the Late Neolithic strata several scattered human bones have been collected (Sampson 1997, 40–50, 60–2, 68), which may represent a practice reminiscent of that seen for Mesolithic horizons at Franchthi Cave. They belong to at least fifteen individuals and, among those for whom age could be determined, there was a child of six to eight years as well as an adolescent (Stravopodi et al. 1997, 460–2, table 77).


Tharrounia Cave is situated in an inland mountainous region of Euboia. As at Limnes, this cave was also used both as a living space and as a burial site. A total of eight burials, both adult and children, have been recovered, again in the form of bone scatters. It is most probable that they represent primary inhumations that have been disturbed post-deposition (Sampson 1993, 289). The bones of this phase represent an infant, four children, one adolescent and two adults, one of whom was identified as male (Stravopodi 1993). Of particular interest is the skull of a child, which was deliberately placed in an isolated position within a niche. Kalythies Cave is located in the north-east of Rhodes, several kilometres away from the sea. Scattered bones collected from the cave represent the remains of more than twenty individuals (Fountoulakis 1987, 164–6; Sampson 1987, 21–2), of which thirteen seem to have been adults while seven comprised children aged between three and twelve years (Fountoulakis 1987, 166, chart III). The disposition of preserved remains strongly suggests that the cave acted as a primary burial ground. At a later stage the skulls and long bones were collected from the cave and re-deposited elsewhere, following a secondary burial practice i.e. a symbolic re-burial at another site. A single Late Neolithic example comes from an open-air settlement at Elateia in Phthiotis, in the form of a child inhumed within a pit beneath the floor of a Late Neolithic house (Hourmouziadis 1973, 210).

Final Neolithic (c. 4500–3200 BC)During the Final Neolithic (FN), the number of cemeteries increases, with the majority of those identified including the burials of children (see Table 1). During the Final Neolithic phase at Franchthi, the cave was no longer used as a burial site, but the Paralia burial cluster was still in use. In the latter, adults, especially females, were interred alongside a smaller number of children (Fowler 2004, 77, table 5.2). This burial ground appears to have been positioned in close proximity to the Paralia habitation area, but was distinguished from it by the construction of a wall. During the Final Neolithic period at Tharrounia a new burial ground was founded 400 m to the west of the cave (Sampson 1993, 233). Although the cave continued to be used during this phase, it received fewer interments in comparison to both the preceding Late Neolithic and the contemporary open-air cemetery. The character of the burials within the cave remained the same as in the previous period, i.e. scattered bones, possibly derived from disturbed inhumations. From this context, the remains of five individuals were recovered – two infants, one child and two adults (Stravopodi 1993). In the open-air cemetery, eight built graves (above ground stone constructions covered with earth) were found (Sampson 1993, 233). The graves, which were roughly oval or trapezoidal in shape, contained multiple semi-contracted burials, representing the remains of twenty-five individuals. Most of the interments belong to adults, both male and female, although one infant, four children and one adolescent were also recorded (Stravopodi 1993). Very few burial offerings seem to have been deposited within these graves. The cave appears to have been used as a place of primary burial, following which remains were subject to secondary burial, wherein bones were exhumed and reinterred in the built graves of the open-air group. Aria is an open-air settlement located in the Argolid, on a hill two kilometres to the


east of the modern town of Nauplion. In the Late Neolithic strata of the settlement, a Final Neolithic pit grave was found, marked by a circle of stones which was only partly preserved (Douzougli 1998, 132). It contained the inhumation of a child, up to four years old, which was accompanied by two vessels placed near the legs as offerings. At Kalamaki in Kato Achaea, chamber tombs of both Early Helladic and Mycenaean date have been located. However, among them, a child pithos burial (a burial placed within a container vessel) was recovered which has been dated to the Final Neolithic period based on the style of the pithos (Alram-Stern 2004, 680; Vasilogamvrou 1998). Kouveleiki Caves A and B are situated in south-east Laconia, along the Parnon mountain range. In both caves, the disarticulated remains of adults and children have been identified within the Late and Final Neolithic strata (Kontaxi 1994, 838; 1996, 711–12; Papathanasiou 2001, 128; Stravopodi 1994, 836; 1996, 710; 1999, 1006). Within Final Neolithic Kouveleiki Cave A, a pit was found that contained an infant burial placed inside an urn. This vessel had been placed upside down within a larger one, which had been sealed by a flat stone (Stravopodi 1994, 836). Alepotrypa Cave in south-west Laconia, has yielded a significant number of burials contemporary with the Late and Final Neolithic occupation period of the cave. Two ossuaries have been found, which were reserved for adults, while at the northern part of Ossuary I the inhumation of a child was recovered, placed on a layer of stones (Papathanasiou 2001, 33; 2009, 23). Beneath this was another child inhumation, also laid on stones, while, at an even lower level, on the bedrock underneath this stone floor, a small mass of bones were recovered which represent the remains of two infants. Elsewhere in the cave, a pit contained multiple burials of six to ten adults and adolescents (Papathanasiou 2001, 34; 2009, 23). Some of the individuals had been placed in a contracted or extended position, while the skeletons of others had been disarticulated. Inside a niche in the deepest part of the cave the remains of two cremated child burials were found (Papathanasiou 2009, 24; Papathanasopoulos 1996, 176–7). They were both accompanied by shell beads, and had been covered with a large quantity of pottery sherds. From the 161 individuals identified within the cave, eighty-one were adults of both sexes, and eighty were aged below eighteen years of age, and included nine infants, sixty-seven children and four adolescents (Papathanasiou 2001, 35, table 2). At Kefala on Keos, forty pit, cist, pithos and built graves have been recovered (Coleman 1977, 44–8; Fowler 2004, 86). They contained inhumations, often multiple, of adult males and females, as well as children, placed on a layer of pebbles in contracted and semi-contracted positions. The majority of those interred were adults (fifty-one), but there were also five infants and at least nine children (Angel 1977, 134–5; Coleman 1977, table 2). Infants were found only as pot burials; one unique example contained the remains of two infants, and another was placed inside a cist grave (Coleman 1977, 48, table 2). Children were placed within built graves either in association with adults or on their own, while in one case they were found on their own within a cist grave. Burial offerings occasionally accompanied the adults, although none at all have been found with infant remains and they were very rarely associated with children (Coleman 1977, 51).


Discussion In the Mesolithic period, caves and open-air sites served both as living spaces and areas for burial. In some cases, graves were located directly beneath habitation areas, while others were situated in close proximity to them. Although different burial treatments were evident, such as inhumation and, possibly, intentional bone disarticulation, they seems to have been equally utilised across all age groups – adults, children and infants. The limited evidence for cremation, just two examples from one site, does not allow us to assess which demographic groups were considered suitable recipients of the practice. Nonetheless, during the Early Neolithic period, new socio-economic conditions appeared which seem to have affected burial traditions (Perlès 2001). At Franchthi, a second burial cluster, reserved for adults, was established outside the cave, while children and infants continued to be buried within the cave. At the open-air site of Knossos, infants and children, similarly, were placed within the habitation area, although no comparable adult grave has so far been recovered. There seems to have been no differentiation in treatment or burial types between adults and sub-adults, but spatial separation was certainly introduced during this phase (Parker Pearson 1999, 103). Perhaps the differentiation had to do with status within these small societies, connected either with age and socialisation, or perhaps associated with the labour resource that each individual provided for agricultural work. The proximity of children and infants to habitation areas could have had additional meaning, wherein the child is conceived to be a ‘protective spirit’, important for the well-being of the family, kin-group, or even the community. This belief may have already been present during the Mesolithic period, but from the Early Neolithic onwards it seems it was specifically directed toward children and infants, rather than to all deceased. Perhaps we can see here a dichotomy between the polluting adult dead placed outside the habitation area (Metcalf and Huntington 1992, 80–1), and the benevolent child dead buried within the living space. During the Middle Neolithic phase, more cemeteries were recorded that contained child burials, thereby providing a more varied picture of contemporary funerary practices. There still seems to be no differentiation in the treatment of adults and children; one adult and one child, for instance, received the same offerings at Franchthi. At Prosymna, too, cremation was used equally for adult and child, at a separate site reserved only for burials. While adults and children are treated in the same manner in the same space at this site children are, notably, under-represented with just a single recorded example. The general absence of infant remains may suggest an intentional age differentiation in this context (McHugh 1999, 19). Perhaps, alternatively, the position of this lone child could be related to special circumstances of death, status or age group. At Halai, a child burial was retained within the settlement, similar to the earlier examples from Knossos, and may also reflect a set of protective beliefs ascribed to them. The child cemetery at Lerna highlights the importance attributed to children and infants during this period. In this burial ground the age groups of infants and children are well defined, by the inclusion of offerings with the latter group. Furthermore, the presence of adult forearms and hands symbolically suggest protection, companionship


and affection towards these interments. This may be a symbolic offering by the living towards the dead, who in turn expected the protection of the benevolent spirits. The presence of age-orientated burial grounds can be seen already from the Early Neolithic period, suggesting a definite horizontal division. This is a recognised characteristic of small communities, where the survival of children is a critical factor for continuity (Brown 1981, 28–9). The Late Neolithic burial evidence comes from three caves and an open-air site. In these caves, adult and child interments co-existed, and revealed similar treatments in both primary and secondary burials. At the same time, however, there were also important differences. At Limnes Cave children were under-represented in the burial data, while no infants at all have been reported. In contrast to this, at Tharrounia, children still represented the majority of burials within the cave, and one infant burial was present. Moreover, the presence of a child’s skull placed on a niche within the cave emphasises the importance of children and their symbolic significance within the local context. At Kalythies Cave, children received the same burial treatment as adults, suggesting an equal status as far as this aspect of funerary practice was concerned (Lillie 1997, 223–4; Parker Pearson 1999, 103). The presence of a child burial under a house within an open-air site, as at Elateia, is a practice evident in earlier periods and strengthens the hypothesis that these burials contained a long-standing and inherent symbolism related to the protective character of a child within a household. In the Final Neolithic period the number of cemeteries increased, in both caves and at open-air sites, providing a substantial dataset by which to analyse the treatment of children within the funerary framework. At Franchthi, only the burial cluster outside the cave remained in use; it received both adults and children, although the latter were under-represented. At Tharrounia, infants and children were more frequently interred inside the cave, and are under-represented at the open-air cemetery, with a child to adult ratio of 1:5. It seems that the secondary treatment of the deceased at this site was reserved for adults and a small proportion of sub-adults (McHugh 1999, 21). The built graves at Tharrounia contained multiple burials and, as a result, possessed a communal character. Thus it seems that certain selection criteria, related to status, age or other, would have had to be met in order for someone to be included. As such, it is not surprising to find only one infant included among a burial group of twenty-five interments (see Table 1). At Kouveleiki Caves A and B, and at Kalamaki, it is difficult to assess the representation of children and infants during the Late and Final Neolithic periods. At the Late/Final Neolithic Alepotrypa Cave, sub-adults were attested in significant numbers, although children were better represented than infants. The presence of three successive infant-child burials at the same spot within the cave may suggest intentional spatial differentiation in comparison to the adults. The same hypothesis can be proposed for the cremated children, a tradition which seems to have been reserved only for two examples. These children were separated spatially from the other burials and placed in a niche along with offerings, suggesting a special care distinct from the vast majority of other burials (Brown 1981, 28–9). At Aria, a child burial was found within the settlement, a practice also seen during earlier phases, but this child was accompanied with two vessels as an offering. At the open-air cemetery at Kefala, the recovery of five infants and nine children, compared with an adult burial group of thirty-seven, demonstrate that again, children were under-represented. Their


treatment also has different character, with individual infants placed in pot burials and not within the multiple built graves alongside the adults. The number of children was almost double that of infants, and they were equally attested as individual internments and multiple burials alongside adults, but, in almost all cases they are placed inside the built graves (see Table 1). At Kefala, it is not only the limited number of sub-adult groups that is clear, but also their apparent differential treatment. Age differentiation is a cultural and social construct variously expressed in diverse societies, contemporary or not (Baxter 2005, 97). The apparently equal treatment of all age groups in Mesolithic southern Greece is in accordance with Mesolithic burial data obtained from the Dnieper Rapids in the Ukraine, which suggested there were no horizontal distinctions manifest in funerary practice, unlike those cases known from the Mesolithic south-east Baltic and Scandinavia (Janik 2000, 128; Lillie 1997, 224). Thus it could be proposed that, as at the Dnieper Rapids, the burial data from Mesolithic southern Greece reveals that all members of the community, irrespective of age, were considered equally important as social actors (Lillie 1997, 223–4). Possibly, this might reflect a more egalitarian ideology, expressed within the funerary context of this period. Although there is an equal treatment, or even an emphasis on infant and child burials during the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic periods, this practice changed, in southern Greece at least, from the Middle Neolithic, if not earlier at those sites where we can already see the spatial separation of infants/children and adults during the Early Neolithic. In many cases, caves were a preferred resting place for infants and children, unlike adults who were most often interred within open-air cemeteries outside the settlement. Cemeteries devoted to infants and children are known from Early Neolithic Knossos and Middle Neolithic Lerna, but these may be only localised phenomena. Varying levels of separation and/or incorporation across these age groups are evident according to local practices throughout the Late and Final Neolithic phases. They may well be responses to contemporary socio-economic conditions resulting from the various size and complexity of these communities (Brown 1981, 28–9). Infants seem to have received the same treatment as children and, in most cases, adults, in the Mesolithic and Early Neolithic periods (see Table 1). However, this clearly changed during the MN, with no infant burials found at Prosymna, and their differentiation through burial offering practices at Lerna. Some, or all, children were probably recognised as social actors worthy of ‘adult’ treatment in the burial framework, something rarely seen in infant burials (McHugh 1999, 19). From a total of 285 individuals noted from the Late and Final Neolithic burial contexts at Limnes Cave, Kalythies Cave, Alepotrypa Cave, Tharrounia and Kefala, infants comprised only c. 6% (eighteen) and children c. 33% (ninety-three) of the total group (see Table 1). Nonetheless, there are cases of elaborate infant burial, as seen at Kouveleiki Cave A. The age differentiation between infants and children can also be well demonstrated at Kefala, where infants were interred as single pot burials, unlike all other age groups which were placed in multiple built graves. In this cemetery, infants were separated both from communal graves and, ideologically, from the community, and received a different burial treatment indicative of a lower status in the local society. From those Late and Final Neolithic burial sites with enough quantitative evidence, such as Late Neolithic Kalythies Cave, Final Neolithic Tharrounia and Final Neolithic Kefala, infants/children seem to represent approximately one-third of the total burial


assemblage in each case. For the Limnes Cave, the percentage was even lower, while at Alepotrypa Cave, at 50%, it was significantly higher. Thus, children were under-represented in most formal burial grounds, both open-air and caves, which were used exclusively as cemeteries, with the exception of Middle Neolithic Lerna (Parker Pearson 1999, 103). They were more commonly found in caves along with adults (MN Prosymna; LN Kalythies; LN–FN Tharrounia; LN–FN Kouveleiki A and B; LN–FN Alepotrypa), in caves on their own (EN Franchthi), under houses (LN Elateia) or within a settlement (EN Knossos; MN Halai; FN Aria), where adults were buried less frequently. Hence, age groups were defined through spatial separation, rather than treatment or burial type. Nevertheless, a different burial type appears to have been used exclusively for infants and/or children in the Final Neolithic phase, if not earlier – the pot burial. This phenomenon has been attested at Kalamaki, Kouveleiki Cave A and Kefala, while parallels to these pot burials can be found at earlier sites in Thessaly at Late Neolithic Rachmani, Late Neolithic Soufli Magoula and in a cremation from Late Neolithic Platia Magoula Zakrou, (Cavanagh and Mee 1998, 7; Gallis 1982, 112–14; Hourmouziadis 1973, fig. 139). Adolescents, where recognised, appear to have enjoyed the same treatment as adults and are found in association with adults throughout the Neolithic period. It is possible that those individuals within this age group were considered social actors of adult, or near-adult, status by these societies and were represented as such in the funerary context. At the same time, there are cases where special attention was paid to child burials. This is evident in two examples – at Late Neolithic Tharrounia cave, where a child’s skull was placed in a niche as part of a unique secondary funerary treatment at the site, and at Late/Final Neolithic Alepotrypa, where two children were cremated, unlike the vast majority of the burials at this site, and also placed in a niche. The role played by these examples is unclear, although a ritual character cannot be excluded. Middle Neolithic Lerna might also be included when considering incidents of special treatment, in light of the association of infant/child burials with an adult forearm and a hand from another adult, perhaps a display of tenderness and protection intended to invoke the protection of benign spirits. This belief is more clearly seen at the open-air sites, where child burials were deposited within habitation areas and under houses.

ConclusionsChildren and infants were treated as equals to adults in death and perhaps, to some extent, as social personas in life. Practices and burial types were commonly used for both, such as the grave types, body treatment and the presence or absence of funerary offerings. Perhaps only during the Final Neolithic period, when pot burials were used, did some kind of grave-type differentiation appear between infants/children and adults. From the Mesolithic to the Early Neolithic, infants and children are well represented, revealing both their significance to local society and the high mortality rate. In times of social stress, child burials tend to come to embody an important symbolism related to the future of the specific settlement (Brown 1981, 28–9). The small groups that comprised these local societies revealed their egalitarian character without social hierarchy or horizontal differentiation, based on gender, age or other


social or biological characteristics. This may be true for the socio-economic conditions of this period as a whole, or only for their expression within the burial framework. However, this picture starts to change from the Middle Neolithic period onwards when infants, in particular, and children to a lesser degree, seem to lose their significance, and are buried in smaller numbers. The increase in settlements during these phases may suggest an increase in population and, at the same time, a lower level of social stress for these local societies (McHugh 1999, 28). The practice of placing child burials within habitation areas, either caves or open-air sites, began during the Mesolithic but became prevalent, particularly, during the Neolithic, when adults were placed in formal cemeteries. Children appear to have a significant symbolic role for the family, representing a benevolent spirit with protective powers for the household and, possibly, for the community as a whole. Child burials belonging to these early phases of prehistory allow a clearer understanding of children in the past. Beliefs and practices relating to the afterlife constitute an important interpretative aspect to the study of children in antiquity, and the Stone Age in particular. More thorough research will highlight further the social, symbolic and ideological significance of children at both a local and regional level.

Received February 2011, revised manuscript accepted May 2011.

ReferencesAlram-Stern, E. 1996. Die Ägäische Frühzeite: 2. Band- Die Frühbronzezeit in Griechenland mit

Ausnahme von Kreta. Wien: Der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Angel, J. L. 1969. Αppendix ΙΙ: Ηuman skeletal material from Franchthi cave. Hesperia 38,

380–1.Angel, J. L. 1971. The People of Lerna. An Analysis of a Prehistoric Population. Princeton: The

American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Angel, J. L. 1973. Neolithic human remains. Hesperia 42, 277–82.Angel, J. L. 1977. Appendix 5: Human skeletons. pp. 133–56 in Coleman J. E. (ed.), Keos I,

Kephala. A Late Neolithic Settlement and Cemetery. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Baxter, J. E. 2005. The Archaeology of Childhood: Children, Gender, and Material Culture. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press.

Becker, M. J. 2007. Childhood among the Etruscans: mortuary programs at Tarquinia as indicators of the transition to adult status, pp. 281–92 in Cohen, A. and Rutter, J. B. (eds.), Constructions of Childhood in Ancient Greece and Italy (Hesperia Supplement 41). Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Blegen, C. W. 1937. Prosymna, the Helladic Settlement Preceding the Argive Heraeum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, J. A. 1981. The search for rank in prehistoric burials. pp. 25–37 in R. Chapman, Kinnes, I. and Randsborg, K. (eds.), The Archaeology of Death (New Directions in Archaeology), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cavanagh, W. and Mee C. 1998. A Private Place: Death in Prehistoric Greece (Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology 125). Jonsered: Paul Åström.

Coleman, J. E. 1977. Keos I, Kephala. A Late Neolithic Settlement and Cemetery. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Cullen, T. 1995. Mesolithic mortuary ritual at Franchthi cave, Greece. Antiquity 69, 270–89.


Cullen, T. and Cook, D. C. 1991. Mesolithic cremation at Franchthi cave, Greece: evidence and implications. American Journal of Archaeology 95, 305.

Douzougli, A. 1998. Άρια Αργολίδος – Χειροποίητη Κεραμική της Νεότερης Νεολιθικής και της Χαλκολιθικής Περιόδου. Athens: Demosievma tou Archaiologikou Deltiou 66.

Dugstad, S. A. 2010. Early child caught knapping. A novice Early Mesolithic flintknapper in south-western Norway, pp. 65–74 in Lillehammer, G. (ed.), Socialisation: Recent Research on Childhood and Children in the Past. Stavanger: AmS-Skrifter 23.

Evans, J. D. 1964. Excavations in the Neolithic settlement of Knossos 1957–60. Part I. Annual of the British School at Athens 59, 132–240.

Fountoulakis, M. 1987. Νεολιθικά σκελετικά ευρήματα του σπηλαίου Άγιος Γεώργιος στις Καλυθιές της Ρόδου, pp. 164–73 in Sampson, A. (ed.), Η Νεολιθική Περίοδος στα Δωδεκάνησα. Athens: Demosieusi tou Archaeologikou Deltiou 35.

Fowler, K. D. 2004. Neolithic Mortuary Practices in Greece (BAR International Series 1314). Oxford: Archaeopress.

Gallis, K. 1982. Καύσεις Νεκρών από τη Νεολιθική Εποχή στη Θεσσαλία. Athens: Tamio Archaologikon Poron.

Gallis, K. 1996. Burial customs, pp. 171–4 in Papathanasopoulos, G. A. (ed.), Neolithic Culture in Greece. Athens: Nicholas P. Goulandris Foundation, Museum of Cycladic Art.

Gallou, C. 2010. Children at work in Mycenaean Greece (c. 1650–1050 BCE): a brief survey, pp. 162–7 in Brockliss, L. and Montgomery, H. (eds.), Childhood and Violence in Western Tradition (SSCIP Monograph 1). Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Hourmouziadis, G. 1973. Burial customs, pp. 201–12 in Theocharis, D. (ed.), Neolithic Greece. Athens: National Bank of Greece.

Jacobsen, T. W. 1969. Excavations at Porto Cheli and vicinity, preliminary report, II: The Franchthi Cave, 1967–1968. Hesperia 38, 343–81.

Jacobsen, T. W. and Cullen, T. 1981. A consideration of mortuary practices in Neolithic Greece: burials from Franchthi Cave, pp. 79–101 in Humphreys, S. C. and King, H. (eds.), Mortality and Immortality: The Anthropology and Archaeology of Death. London: Academic Press.

Janik, L. 2000. The construction of the individual among North European fisher-gatherer-hunters in the Early and Mid-Holocene, pp. 117–30 in Sofaer Derevenski, J. (ed.), Children and Material Culture. London: Routledge.

Kontaxi, C. 1994. Β Κουβελέικη σπηλιά Αλεποχωρίου. Archaeologikon Deltion, Chronika 49, 837–9.

Kontaxi, C. 1996. Β Κουβελέικη σπηλιά Αλεποχωρίου. Archaeologikon Deltion, Chronika 51, 711–12.

Kyparissi-Apostolika, N. 2000. Η ανασκαφή του σπηλαίου Θεόπετρα 1987–1998, pp. 17–36 in Kyparissi-Apostolika, N. (ed.), Σπήλαιο Θεόπετρας, Δώδεκα Χρόνια ανασκαφών και Έρευνας 1987–1998. Athens: Institute for Aegean Prehistory.

Lewis, M. E. 2007. The Bioarchaeology of Children: Perspectives from Biological and Forensic Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lillehammer, G. 2000. The world of children, pp. 17–26 in Sofaer Derevenski, J. (ed.), Children and Material Culture. London: Routledge.

Lillehammer, G. 2010. Introduction to socialisation: recent research on childhood and children in the past, pp. 9–19 in Lillehammer, G. (ed.), Socialisation: Recent Research on Childhood and Children in the Past. Stavanger: AmS-Skrifter 23.

Lillie, M. C. 1997. Women and children in prehistory: resource sharing and social stratification at the Mesolithic-Neolithic transition in Ukraine, pp. 213–28 in Moore, J. and Scott, E. (eds.), Invisible People and Processes: Writing Gender and Childhood into European Archaeology. London: Leicester University Press.


McHugh, F. 1999. Theoretical and Quantitative Approaches to the Study of Mortuary Practice (BAR British Series 785). Oxford: Archaeopress.

Metcalf, P. and Huntingdon, R. 1992. Celebrations of Death: The Anthropology of Mortuary Ritual (second edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

O’Neill, K., Yielding, W., Near, J., Coleman, J. E., Wren, P. S. and Quinn, K. M. 1999. Halai, the 1992–1994 field seasons. Hesperia 68, 285–341.

Papathanasiou, A. 2001. A Bioarchaeological Analysis of Neolithic Alepotrypa Cave, Greece (BAR International Series 961). Oxford: Archaeopress.

Papathanasiou, A. 2009. Mortuary behaviour in the Alepotrypa cave: assessments from the study of the human osteological material, pp. 21–8 in Cavanagh, W. G., Gallou, C. and Georgiadis, M. (eds.), Sparta in Laconia. From Prehistory to Pre-Modern (British School at Athens Studies 16). London: British School at Athens.

Papathanasopoulos, G. A. 1996. Burial customs at Diros, pp. 175–7 in Papathanasopoulos, G. A. (ed.), Neolithic Culture in Greece. Athens: Nicholas P. Goulandris Foundation, Museum of Cycladic Art.

Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The Archaeology of Death and Burial. Somerset: Sutton.Perlès, C. 2001. The Early Neolithic in Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Sampson, A. 1987. Η Νεολιθική Περίοδος στα Δωδεκάνησα. Athens: Demosieusi tou

Archaeologikou Deltiou 35.Sampson, A. 1993. Σκοτεινή Θαρρουνιών, το σπήλαιο, ο οικισμός και το νεκροταφείο. Athens:

TAPA editions.Sampson, A. 1997. Το Σπήλαιο των Λιμνών στα Καστριά Καλαβρύτων. Athens: Etaireia

Peloponnisiakon Spoudon 7.Sampson, A. 2006. Προϊστορία του Αιγαίου, Παλαιολιθική-Μεσολιθική-Νεολιθική. Athens:

Atrapos.Sampson, A. 2008a. The Cave of the Cyclops: Mesolithic and Neolithic Networks in the Northern Aegean,

Greece, Vol. I: Intra-Site Analysis, Local Industries, and Regional Site Distribution. Philadelphia: INSTAP Academic Press.

Sampson, A. 2008b. The Mesolithic settlement and cemetery of Maroulas on Kythnos, pp. 13–17 in Brodie, N. J., Doole, J., Gavalas, G. and Renfrew, C. (eds.), Horizon: A Colloquium on the Prehistory of the Cyclades. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Stravopodi, E. 1993. An anthropological assessment of the human findings from the cave and the cemetery, pp. 378–91 in Sampson, A. (ed.), Σκοτεινή Θαρρουνιών, το σπήλαιο, ο οικισμός και το νεκροταφείο. Athens: Privately published.

Stravopodi, E. 1994. Α Κουβελέικη σπηλιά Αλεποχωρίου. Archaeologikon Deltion, Chronika 49, 835–7.

Stravopodi, E. 1996. Α Κουβελέικη σπηλιά Αλεποχωρίου. Archaeologikon Deltion, Chronika 51, 710–11.

Stravopodi, E. 1999. Σπήλαιο Κουβελέικη Α. Archaeologikon Deltion, Chronika 54, 1005–7.Stravopodi, E., Manolis, S. K. and Neroutsos, A. 1997. Μελέτη του ανθρώπινου σκελετικού

υλικού από το σπήλαιο Λιμνών, pp. 456–82 in Sampson, A. (ed.), Το Σπήλαιο των Λιμνών στα Καστριά Καλαβρύτων. Athens: Etaireia Peloponnisiakon Spoudon 7.

Vasilogamvrou, A. P. 1998. Πρωτοελλαδικό νεκροταφείο στο Καλαμάκι Ελαιοχωρίου-Λουσίων Αχαΐας, pp. 366–99 in Πρακτικά του Ε Συνεδρίου Πελοποννησιακών Σπουδών. Athens: Etaireia Peloponnisiakon Spoudon.

Vitelli, K. 2007. The Neolithic Pottery from Lerna. Princeton: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

Child Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece: a synthesis

Documents

Transcript of Child Burials in Mesolithic and Neolithic Southern Greece: a synthesis