Pedogeochemical investigation of the Bell Beaker Culture graves from sites Hodonice and...

45

pEdogEoChEMiCal invEstigation of bEll bEaKEr Culture Graves from HodoniCe and těšetiCe-

KyjoviCE, Moravia, CzECh rEpubliC

Jan Petřík1

Department of Geological Sciences, Masaryk university, Kotlářská 2, Brno 60200, Czech Republic; corresponding author, [email protected]

Lubomír Prokeš2

Department of Chemistry, Masaryk university, Kamenice 5, Brno 62500, Czech Republic

David Humpola3

Institute for Archaeological Heritage Brno, Department Znojmo, Vídeňská 23, Znojmo 66902, Czech Republic

Zuzana Fajkošová4, Martin Kuča5, Klára Šabatová6, Eliška Kazdová7

Department of Archaeology and Museology, Masaryk University, Arna Nováka 1, Brno 60200, Czech Republic

Abstract: Pedogeochemical analyses could provide additional information to address various archaeological questions. This can be effectively demonstrated by soil phosphate analysis which was used to explore the diversity in funerary rites of prehistoric societies.

This investigation aims to illustrate potential options, limitations and perspectives of systematic pedogeochemical sampling of prehistoric graves with circular ditches from selected sites. It is possible to distinguish three categories of grave finds on the basis of macroscopic attributes: a grave pit without skeleton, a complete skeleton, and a disarticulated skeleton or incomplete skeleton. Specific interpretations may be correctly assigned to burial categories only after a synthesis of archaeological, anthropological, taphonomic and geochemical observations. That is why it is necessary to precisely document the archaeological situation: distinguish individual contexts, accurately note positions and degrees of preservation of skeleton remains, and conduct systematic soil sampling (Duday and Guillon 2006; Dupras et al., 2006; Hunter and Cox 2005; Holliday 2004, White and Folkens 2005). Samples from three graves from the Hodonice site represent one possible application of the method, even during rescue excavation.

Keywords: Pedogeochemical analysis, Phosphate analysis, Bell Beaker culture, Funerary rite, Secondary disturbance

Introduction

Archaeological interpretation is limited by the precision of the excavation and the descriptive system selected. The majority of data is lost. It is impossible to capture all data from an archaeological context and archaeologists are forced to choose which information they will record (Neustupný 2007, 86). This choice is influenced by many factors including limitations in time and technology, our capabilities, and the subjective theoretical position of the practitioner. The investigation of neglected evidence may provide new knowledge, which may not correspond to common assumptions. It is likely that this kind of evidence may be derived from analyses of the chemical composition of the soil in the archaeological context.

1 Soil samples laboratory analyses, categorisation of skeletons in grave pits, GIS analyses2 Categorisation of skeletons in grave pits, taphonomical observations, statistical analyses3 Hodonice site excavation, terrain documentation and soil sampling4 Soil samples laboratory analyses, bone preservation analysis5 Těšetice-Kyjovice site excavation and documentation6 Těšetice-Kyjovice site excavation and documentation7 Těšetice-Kyjovice site excavation

A good illustration of this can be found in the application of phosphate soil analysis to investigations of graves and burials. Work in this field was pioneered in the 1950’s (e.g. Stoye 1950; in Czech Pelikán 1954). S. Piggot’s paper, with an important appendix by A. H. Johnson (Piggot 1956), described finding higher phosphate concentrations in the central part of barrows. In this case they identified the phenomenon of ‘ghosts’ or ‘silhouettes’ in areas with acidic soils. Another example was the identification of the position of remains (and possibly a cenotaph) of an Anglo-Saxon burial ground at Sutton Hoo (Barker et al., 1975).

Studies concerning the usage of phosphate soil analysis for grave identification or identification of special burial rites appear in numerous Czech publications. L. Págo (1963) identified gravimetrically higher phosphate concentration of a cremation of Lussatian culture in Moravičany. J. Pelikán (1954) successfully identified anthropogenic phosphates from Early Únětice culture graves with poor or unpreserved skeletons. Subsequently phosphate analysis was repeatedly used as supporting evidence of burial rite variability, particularly for the Early Únětice culture (Turek

Pedogeochemical Investigation of Bell Beaker Culture

46

and Majer 1999; Ernée 2000; Ernée and Majer 2009). The recent paper of M. Erné and A. Majer discusses the real possibilities of phosphate analyses and of the geochemistry and geoarchaeology of burial rites. They conclude that given the right geochemical conditions it is possible to say with high degree of probability whether or not soft tissue decomposition has taken place within a specific grave pit (Ernée and Majer 2009, 494).

In this paper we present a categorization of grave finds, including a summary of their interpretations, based on published studies of burial rites and thinking about the formative processes. Furthermore we will suggest a potential method to systematically sample for these categories and apply both during research into Bell Beaker grave sites in south Moravia.

Geochemical evidence of human remains in prehistoric graves

Although it appears that the symbolic system of the Únětice culture is the result of continuous development from the Bell Beaker culture (Kruťová 2003), we do find significant differences in secondary mortuary practices. Bell Beaker in central Europe is presumed to have relatively orthodox mortuary practices, compared to the variable complex of practices within the Early Únětice culture (Kruťová 2003). However situations have appeared where interpretations using conventional excavation method have proven problematic.

The utilisation of phosphate soil analyses could help resolve some situations, especially in cases where there are doubts about whether or not graves where skeletal remains are not preserved are the result of decomposition or intentional removal. This situation exists in sites such as grave 830 in Brankovice (Matějíčková 2008, 159) and the multi-occupation site at Stříbrnice ‚Lopaty‘ near Přerov, where a large Late Neolithic burial site was excavated (Peška and Tajer 2007, 67).

Formation processes

M. Schiffer (1976) views the formation process as a transformation in which objects lose their function within the cultural system and become part of the archaeological context. Schiffer makes a distinction between cultural transformations (C-transforms) and natural causes (N-transforms). From the standpoint of time it is possible to differentiate primary depositional pathways and post-depositional processes (Clarke 1973). In the case of phosphates found in archaeological contexts the determination of formative process is rather problematic. Based on D. L. Clarke (1973, 16), J. M. O’Shea (1984) identifies primary depositional pathways and postdepositional processes. O’Shea subdivides primary depositional pathways of burials into intentional, coincidental and accidental, where it is possible for example, to find phosphate rich deposits from other contexts. O’Shea

divides post-depositional processes into cultural and non-cultural, which include decomposition of organic material and leaching phosphates into soil. Knowledge of formative processes and the ability to differentiate between them is crucial for geochemical research of grave pit soil deposits. In so doing we are able to create general models which will enable us to understand the results of our analysis.

Phosphates and depositional formative processes

In the case of grave pits, high levels of phosphate result from bioaccumulation, that is, the localised increase of soil phosphate due to the deposition of a human body. It has been shown that soft tissue decomposition can increase the phosphate concentration in soil (e.g. Prokeš 2007, 10).

During the formative depositional process burial sites can be enriched by anthropogenic phosphates coming from other sources, such as settlement activities. High concentrations of anthropogenic phosphates can also be found in areas of housing, which can be transported into burial contexts in various ways. A rich source of anthropogenic phosphates can also be found in cultural layers disrupted by grave digging. Cultural formative process can include the deposition of different inclusion into grave pits ground. Some artefacts and ecofacts can be transformed by the influence of the other formative processes to the extent that they will not be recognized by any conventional archaeological method. In many instances, phosphate analysis can help detect concentrations that can be interpreted in a manner similar to the absent object itself, such as the detection of phosphate concentrations in a dish that can be interpreted as the remains of an organic addition (Duma 1972, 129).

Phosphates and postdepositional formative processes

When soft tissues decompose they release a large number of substances. From the standpoint of archaeology the important matter is whether these substances will fix in soil deposit. Phosphates are distinguished by the fact that they can be bound to the ions of calcium in alkaline soils and of iron, aluminium and manganese (Crowther 2002, 405). The measure of their fixation is influenced by many factors especially the degree of pH and soil texture (Crowther 2002). For this reason it is important to take these soil characteristics into account during interpretation.

Phosphate ions of soft tissues are absorbed by soils (H2PO4-

in acidic soil and HPO42- in alkaline soil), which are very

non-stable and so easy available for plants (it is different for phosphates in crystalline form) or phosphates weakly fixed on other minerals. Changes in alkaline environment (pH > 7) leading to the formation of stable apatite and eventually fluorapatite (Herz and Garrison 1998) are the most stable phosphate minerals. It has been demonstrated that the mineral form of phosphates directly corresponds to the degree of preservation of bone material. If the bone weathers, apatite is changed to variscite (Weiner et al.,

Jan Petřík et al.

47

1993). Ions of iron and aluminium are dominant in acidic soils. The phosphates which they can make include strengite (FePO4.2 H2O), variscite (AlPO4.2 H2O) and barrandite (a combination of iron and aluminium).

Skeleton position and positional transformation

Skeletal positioning in grave pit is ordinarily perceived as a funerary rite. I. Pleinerová (1967) recorded multiple human body parts and skulls. Havel (1978) takes grave goods into account in the Bell Beaker funerary rite and I. Hásek (in Pleiner 1978, 367-372) discussed phenomenon of ‘grave looting’ in reaction to the funerary rite.

Taphonomic (in the sense of transformation) knowledge can identify position transformations, which are influenced by the type of funerary rite and the grave pit construction (e.g. Černý 1995, Duday 2009). Their inclusion into any of the other categories of formative processes is sometimes impossible without implicit interpretation. A good illustration of this can are the Únětice culture grave finds from Bohemia, where the so called subsequent burials (noted for their displacement of earlier burials), finds of isolated body parts, and the specific example of a buried male on whom were deposited the bones of three other individuals in non-anatomical position (Jiráň et al., 2008, 65). Many authors mentioned the importance of taphonomical observation in recognising a primary hollow space (e.g. Čech and Černý 1996; Roksandic 2002; Duday 2009).

In sum, spatial transformations relate to type of grave construction and so taphonomic processes identification could be valuable for the interpretation of the funerary rite (Černý 1995, 301).

Disarticulation sequence research can help us to identify primary and secondary burials or, for example, the presence of soft tissues (e.g. Černý 1995; Duday 2009). The existence of two different locations with different levels of skeletal disarticulation is one of the attributes of secondary burial activities ( D. Sosna, 2007, 179).

Methodological consideration

With regard to the variability of natural conditions, the diversity of grave finds, and different technical possibilities of excavation, it is not possible to determine the most suitable methodological approach for grave soil chemical analysis. In practice the requirements for optimal soil sampling can clash with other aspects of research. In such situations constructive dialogue is necessary. Most archaeological research is restricted in some fashion (mostly in terms of time or finances) and archaeologists are often left with the dilemma of how to apportion limited human and financial resources. An important part of archaeological soil analysis occurs during excavation and that’s why a degree of flexibility in methodology is necessary, modifying for different contexts and questions.

Due to the above mentioned limitations a tailored and selective approach to soil sampling is often necessary.

Some concluded, that the definition and application of macroscopic grave categorisation without implicit interpretation (and its comparison with taphonomic and geochemical evidence) is a suitable way to study secondary disturbed graves. Published classifications are based on skeletal preservation (Gordon and Buikstra 1981; Bátora and Staššíková – Štukovská 1993) or on the level of skeleton dislocation in secondary opened graves (Bátora 2000, 454).

M. Ernée and A. Majer classified graves at Praha 9-Míškovice on the basis of their macroscopic appearance, into regular crouched burials, regular pits without bones and inclusions, pits with incomplete bone remains in quasi anatomical position and pits with relatively good preserved incomplete bone remains in non-anatomical position (Ernée and Majer 2009, 493-494). In addition to skeletal position it is necessary to identify anatomic position, possible deviations and disarticulations, and the state of preservation of single bones, for which established categories exist (Gordon and Buikstra 1981; Ubelaker and Jon 2003). The state of bones is an important indicator of the environment in which the body was situated and it can also indirectly predict the amount of phosphates released from bones into the soil (Duday et al., 1990; Duday and Guillon 2006; Roksandic 2002).

Categorization of grave pits

Deductive approach was accentuated during classification development: the table of skeleton presence, phosphate detention conditions (soil texture + phosphate binding elements present), phosphate anomalies presentation, bone preservation and soil reaction combination was created. The first column in the table corresponds with main interpretation categories, which are subdivided after descriptors in the upper row (Figure 1).

Building on macroscopic indicators we suggest the theoretical categorization of grave pits into the following groups:

1. Pit without skeleton

If the characteristics of the feature correspond to a grave pit but does contain identifiable human remains, these possibilities follow:

1.1. Empty grave pit into which no human remains were deposited (may be a ‘cenotaph’): no skeletal remains, no phosphate anomaly (e.g. Ernée and Majer 2009, 493, obr. 5: A).

1.2. Empty grave pit into which human remains were deposited and later removed: no skeletal remains, phosphate anomaly corresponds with regular burial, conditions at site


48

are suitable for preserving bones, high pH values (alkaline environment), other grave pits contains bones (e.g. Ernée and Majer 2009, 493, obr. 3).

1.3 Empty grave pit into which human remains were deposited and subsequently decomposed through post-depositional processes:

Phosphate concentrations, indicative of the original presence of a skeleton, depend on the presence of phosphate-binding elements. The total decomposition of human bones without any phosphate retention can occur in some cases (Crowther 2002, 410). The second possibility is total decay as a result of biogenous microbial and fungal decomposition (e.g. Piepenbrink 1986, Staššíková – Štukovská et al., 1994).

2. Pits with articulated skeleton

These are regular burials of intact bodies characterized by complete or nearly complete preservation of skeletal remains in anatomical position (Ernée and Majer 2009, 502). Conditions at the site enable material preservation (at least at some spatially limited scale). If the conditions on site were suitable for phosphate fixation, and if there was no contamination from other sources, it can be presumed that a high amount of phosphate was released during decomposition at the site of the skeleton. In this case phosphate soil samples extracted in a regular grid would have bimodal characteristics, where samples taken below the skeleton contain higher phosphate concentrations then samples taken in the surrounding space where phosphates from other anthropogenic sources are situated. Sources of phosphate are not restricted to soft tissues but may also include skeletal material. For this reason it may be more useful to divide skeletal finds according to their state of preservation. We suggest differentiation of remains into six categories. It is unlikely but also possible that a skeleton in anatomic position was a secondary deposit. That‘s why two theoretical possibilities are taken into account:

2.1. Skeleton is in primary position – where decomposition of soft tissues occurred

2.2. Skeleton arranged to articulated position (seemingly

articulated skeleton) – where decomposition of soft tissues did not occurred.

3. Pits with disarticulated skeleton

This group can be quite problematic, because disarticulation is not always recognisable (e.g. inverted position of femur can be difficult to identify). In this case identification of the degree of skeletal preservation degree is very important. Various examples includes isolated bones situations (e.g. isolated skulls buried with another complete skeleton in Blšany grave 9 – Pleinerová 1967, 22) as well as almost complete skeletons disarticulated by postdepositional processes. Interpretation count following theoretical possibilities:

3.1. Deposition of isolated skeletal remains without soft tissues: high degree of disarticulation, skeleton often incomplete, without phosphate anomaly (e.g. Ernée and Majer 2009, 493, obr. 3: hrob 8).

3.2. Deposition of isolated skeletal remains with soft tissue and/or ligament: existing joint junctions, incomplete skeleton, phosphate anomaly (possible examples without geochemical evidence include graves XI and LII from Březno – Pleinerová 1967, 22; Borkovský 1961).

3.3. Skeletal remains split up before decomposition of soft tissues: phosphate anomaly only or also in space of dislocated skeletal material, taphonomical evidence of material cohesion during dislocation (disturbing body remains during decomposition of soft tissues – e.g. Lewis 2008).

3.4. Skeletal remains split up after decomposition of soft tissues: phosphate anomaly in space of primary deposition, without taphonomic evidence of material cohesion during dislocation (e.g. positional transformation of skeleton in primary or secondary hollow space after decomposition of soft tissues).

Determination of basal information and sampling method

In the section about formative processes it was noted that

Articulation level

Skeleton completeness level

Bone preservation

Phosphate retention conditions

Phosphate anomalies presention

Soil reaction

Pit without skeleton X X X

Pit with articulated skeletonPit with disarticulated skeleton

Figure 1. Table of skeleton presence, phosphate detection conditions, presence of phosphate anomalies, bone preservation and soil reaction versus skeleton presence and articulation.

Jan Petřík et al.

49

the preservation of anthropogenic phosphates depends on many factors. Meaningful interpretation of geochemical soil analyses cannot be done without checking the basic chemical and physical characteristics of deposition, which should include following information:

a) depth of grave pit and deposited skeletonb) upper soil context (topsoil, cultural layer)c) kind of subsoild) soil reaction (pH)e) phosphate-binding elements ratiof) organic matter ratiof) texture of infill and subsoilg) colour of infill and subsoilh) geomorphological situation, hydrological conditions

The sampling method is often determined by time and resources available in each specific excavation. Sampling strategies may be modified to fit the situation.

1. Point sampling

We choose this option if we expect high number of graves and little time for field sampling. If the graves are correctly and systematically sampled, it is possible to get high-quality data set after analysis. In the suggested scheme the sampling position is marked (Figure 2). The point sampling method is especially useful when grave pits contain skeletons without bigger/higher deviation from anatomic disposition. Comparison of the samples taken from below and above the skeleton provides a means to identify or exclude the existence of a phosphate anomaly.

2. Net sampling

Sampling through a regular net is the most time consuming method. Benefits include a high-quality data set enabling the creation of distribution maps and interpretations with

far higher certainty. This method is also suitable if we want to record such features as organic grave additions, which are not related to the buried body.

3. Transect sampling

Sampling in one or more transects through the archaeological context is a compromise between the above two methods. This makes detection of places with higher phosphate concentration possible, not their delimitation.

Laboratory phosphate determination

Soil samples were prepared for phosphate analysis according to A. Majer (1984). Dried soil is carefully crushed in mortar and stones larger than 0.25mm removed with a sieve. Samples are then take into lockable plastic bags and ready for phosphate analysis. Phosphate extraction was done in HCl according to W.G. Cawanagh et al. (1988). Phosphate solution measurement was done photometrically using the method of Murphy and Riley (1962).

Case study: Grave H27, Těšetice – Kyjovice ‘Sutny’, Znojmo District

The site is situated approximately 2km from the village of Těšetice, within the Kyjovice cadastral area, in the district of Znojmo (Figure 3). It is a multi-occupation site on a south-eastern slope at an elevation of 265-290m. A Bell Beaker grave pit at this site had a rectangular shape (3 x 2.5m). Where it intersects an LBK pit, the southern edge of the grave is unclear. The grave pit H27 was surrounded by a circular ditch. The pit contained an adult male skeleton with six Bell Beakers, six silex arrowheads, two golden ‘Lockenringe’, a copper dagger and two other stone tools (probably a hammer and cushion stone). The excavation of the grave pit wasn’t complete at the time this article was written. The burial category, basic chemical and physical

Figure 2. Example of point sampling pattern.


50

Burial category Category 2: Skeleton in articulated position without apparent abnormality in anatomically correct position

Secondary disturbance in grave pit filling None evident

Bone stateLevel 4: Highly decomposed (after Gordon and Bukistra 1981),Erosion also affected the innercavums/antrums, larger and smaller exfoliates. Some bones cannot be identified (grades 4-5 according to Ubelaker and Jon 2003).

Depth of grave pitWhile excavation remains incomplete, the pit is at least1.6m deep. Samples were taken at 110cm and 130cm below the surface. The 130cm layer was situated closely under the skeleton.

Topsoil Cultivated topsoil 30-40cm thickSubsoil Loess, Loess soilSoil reaction Alkaline, pH 7-8Soil texture Silty loamGeomorphology and hydrology Gentle slope, without groundwater

Grave H27: Burial category, basic chemical and physical characteristics of skeleton and soil deposit

Figure 3. Těšetice – Kyjovice and Hodonice sites position on the map of Czech Republic.

Figure 4. Basic chemical and physical characteristics of grave H27 soil deposit.

Jan Petřík et al.

51

Figure 5. Těšetice - Kyjovice site, grave H27, boxplots of the phosphates values at different

documentation levels.

characteristics of skeletons, and soil deposit are introduced in table (Figure 4).

Sampling method

Samples were taken during excavation for phosphate analysis (according Eidt 1977) from each documentation level within a regular grid (five samples per 1x1m quadrant). The sampling grid was intensified were higher phosphate concentrations were found, at 110cm below the surface (above skeleton). Under the skeleton, in documentation level 130cm, samples were taken within a 15x15cm grid. All samples were mapped by total station.

Results8

Analysis of phosphate samples shows that the highest variability is present within the topsoil (widest range of the boxplot), at 20cm below the surface (Figure 5). This is not surprising when we consider that the phosphate distribution in topsoil (the ploughing layer) can be highly variable given plant nutrition, the spread of manure, and the scattering of archaeological features by ploughing. The median is slightly higher (between 40 and 110cm). The highest concentration is indicated at 130cm9, where the skeleton was located. Kernel density estimation (KDE) indicates that the 130cm level differs from 110cm in polymodal distribution of soil phosphate values (Figure 6, Figure 7)10. The values modality was tested after Silverman (Silverman 1981; Baxter and Cool 2010). According to the suggestion of Baxter and Cool (2010) the outliers, which

8 Data evaluation was done using R 2.11.1, ESRI ArcGis 9.3 and Quantum Gis 1.6.0.9 The results are preliminary as not all samples have been fully evaluated.10 The bandwidth was calculated after Sheather and Jones (1991).

makes their own modes and can influence results of the test, were deleted. At 130cm the tests on two modalities were positive. At 110cm one mode was indicated.

If we interpolate measured data in space using the natural neighbour method, the differences in phosphate distribution are clearly evident. There is a remarkable anomaly with respect to the area of the skeleton (displaced slightly to the right), a high concentration in the area of the legs in south-eastern part of the grave and also discrete concentrations located to the western and eastern edge of the distribution map (Figure 8). Polymodality of the dataset and spatial phosphate distribution at 130cm is probably related to soft tissue decomposition of the body (subcategory 2.1?) or organic grave additions. The scatter of higher phosphate values is indicative of bone decomposition, because the alteration by acidic products of soft tissue decomposition is possible (e.g. Crowther 2002; Núněz 1975; Pelikán 1954).

Case study: Hodonice, Znojmo District

The site is also situated in the Znojmo District approximately 8 km south-south-east from ‘Sutny’ in the cadastral area of Hodonice (Figure 3). A rescue excavation recorded part of a broad multi-occupation site at which Neolithic to Bronze Age settlement activities were identified. Among them were three Bell Beaker grave pits (Hodonice 525, Hodonice 528, Hodonice 666). Basic chemical and physical characteristics of soil deposit are introduced in table (Figure 9).

Sampling method (Hodonice 525, Hodonice 528, Hodonice 666)

Samples were taken at the bottom of the feature in a regular grid of 20cm (and also at some points proximate to the


52

Figure 6. Těšetice – Kyjovice site, grave H27, kernel density

estimation of phosphate values at documentation level 110cm.

Figure 7. Těšetice – Kyjovice site, grave H27, kernel density

estimation of phosphate values at documentation level 130cm.

Jan Petřík et al.

53

Figure 8. Těšetice – Kyjovice site, grave H27, natural neighbour interpolation of phosphate values.


54

skeleton), from the Bell Beaker, animal grave goods and a cremation. The third grave pit was sampled at level 1 and 2.

Hodonice 525

This is a square grave pit with a possible timber wall, terraced bottom and corner post holes. This grave is analogous to grave 1/90 from Tvořihráz (Bálek et al., 1999). The skeleton originally lay on the right side, with bones of the right leg (articulated reciprocally) and left leg fibula (left tibia is slightly dislocated, left femur is missing) still in position. The position of the skeletal remains indicates secondary disturbance especially for the head and chest. The character of dislocation, especially of the skull, chest and upper limbs shows that disturbance occurred while a hollow space (coffin and/or chamber) and possibly some articular joins still existed (perhaps just a few years after death).

Burial characteristics are introduced in table (Figure 10)

Results

Kernel density estimation showed one peak (Figure 11), however a significant cluster above 190 μg per gram of soil11 was found. Silverman’s test (Silverman 1981; Baxter and Cool 2010) indicates the presence of one mode. But the picture of spatial distribution obtained by the ‘natural neighbour’ method shows highly significant spatially separation, which correlates to a barrier between two sections of the grave (Figure 12). It is interesting that the amount of phosphates is also rather low in the space with animal bones. In regard to the position of the skull and some bones found partly outside the space, accompanied by a relatively high phosphate concentration, it seems that

11 μg or ug characters symbolising micrograms of P2O5 per one gram of soil.

a disturbance occurred after soft tissue decomposition (but articular joins still existed). The higher concentration of phosphates to the sides of the skeleton, and the low phosphate concentration near skull may relate to pedoturbation during secondary disturbance. The higher concentration of phosphate in the corners and near the edges is an interesting anomaly. One hypothesis offered is that those phosphate concentrations may relate to organic grave goods. In regard to categorization and methodical thought that in this case it is a matter of bone remains picked up after soft tissue decomposition (category 3.4).

Hodonice 528

Decorated beaker and a copper dagger were found in this rectangular grave pit which contained a cremation and timber walls. The whitish colour of cremated bones occurs when there is a sufficient amount of oxygen.

Burial category, bone condition and grave pit depth are introduced in table (Figure 13).

Results

The most significant is distinct value polymodality in soil phosphate values (Figure 14). The Silverman’s test (Silverman 1981; Baxter and Cool 2010) indicated a polymodality of soil phosphate values (three to four modes). This can be caused, in part, by the presence of a cremation. But in this case it doesn‘t clarify the polymodality of the measured dataset sufficiently. In other samples taken from under a cremation such high values are not present. Another explanation may be the character of deposits, in which two secondary disturbances formed by different infilling are apparent. The second infill, which may be stratigraphically younger, is similar to the grave infill, though it contains marks of organic soil and the cremation at its base. The

Topsoil Cultivated to 40cmSubsoil Loess bank on fluvial sandsSoil reaction Alkaline, pH 7-8Soil texture Silty and sandy soilGeomorphology and hydrology Flat river terrace with localised occurrences of loess banks, ground water level wasn’t located

Figure 9. Basic chemical and physical characterisation of the Hodonice site.

Burial category Category3: Disarticulated skeleton, apparent marks of secondary manipulation especially to head and chest.

Secondary disturbance in grave pit filling Not apparent.

Bone preservationLevels 2-3 after Gordon and Buikstra (1981). Bone remains are characterised by rough and eroded areas with bone interiors visible. Differences in bone preservation between primary and secondary position wasn’t visible.

Grave pit depth 75cm from upper rim of loess subsoil

Figure 10. Basic chemical and physical characteristics of grave 525.

Jan Petřík et al.

55

homogeneity of both infills indicates a rather quick material accumulation. The phosphate anomaly doesn‘t correspond to either infill, as is evident from the interpolation of GIS values (Figure 15). The explanatory hypothesis suggested is not based on what is possible to see but rather what isn’t seen. If we will accept the cremation as stratigraphically younger then the primary grave pit filling, then the grave pit is without skeletal remains (category 1.). Amongst many possible interpretations is one that suggests that phosphates found in the middle of the grave pit are the remains of a decomposed organic inclusion or even human remains (whose bones were removed). From cultural anthropological studies we know that in some cultures whole skeleton removal does occur (Sosna 2007). The most probable interpretation is that a human body was not deposited in a burial rite (category 1.1.), or that the skeletal remains were removed after decomposition of soft tissues (category 1.2.).

Hodonice 666

This is a grave pit with peripheral timber. Given the context, other built remains likely include a roof, and terraced wood flooring. It is a male inhumation. Grave inclusions comprise five decorated beakers, sheet-metal hair decoration and two chipped stone artefacts.

Lumbar vertebrae near the skull indicate the presence of a concave space and a secondary disturbance. The disposition of the right pelvis reflects the typical ‘effet de paroi’ related to a barrier, such as a coffin wall, which prevented the pelvis from settling to a stable position at the rim of

the coffin (Duday et al., 1990; Duday and Guillon 2006; Roksandic 2002). This phenomenon happens in a concave space. It’s possible to observe it on a female Bell Beaker burial at grave 523/83 from Pavlov-Horní Pole (Dvořák et al., 1996, 34, Taf. 43B; Peška and Rakovský 1990, 23, Fig. 5). A barrier, presumably part of coffin, isn’t apparent, but is presumed from the disposition of the left side of the chest, humeral girdle, left pelvis bone and the feet. It is similar to the case of the preserved coffin remains in grave 192 from the Únětice culture cemetery in Rebešovice (Ondráček 1962, 37, Obr. 22-2; Stuchlík 1990). In the case of grave 10/36 from the Bell Beaker cemetery at Vyškov-Markova cihelna (Dvořák and Peška 1993, 37, Tab. 1 a 2) a ceramic vessel was the barrier holding the right pelvis bone in an unstable position. Samples were taken away from the bottom of this feature in nearly regular grid of 20cm across two documentation levels.

Burial category, bone condition and grave pit depth are introduced in table (Figure 16)

Results

In first documentation level (120cm underneath the upper boundary of loess subsoil) the macroscopic remains of a destroyed barrow ceiling were recorded, precipitating soil sampling. An isolated skull (near the north-eastern wall) and a group of disarticulated bones in the south corner were also recorded. Kernel density estimation shows non-homogeneous distribution (Figure 17). But Silverman’s test (Silverman 1981; Baxter and Cool 2010) didn‘t verify the presence of more modes. High phosphate values are

Figure 11. Hodonice site, grave 525, kernel density estimation of

phosphate.


56

Figure 12. Hodonice site, grave 525, natural neighbour interpolation of phosphate values.

Jan Petřík et al.

57

concentrated in the pelvic region (situated under this documentation level), and continue northward toward the skull (Figure 18) and may indicate secondary disturbance12. A funnel shape infill at presumed location of chest supports this interpretation. Stratification of context indicates seasonality and therefore a long deposition time within the space. Soil samples taken along the eastern wall were a deep yellow-brown colour, as a result of the biochemical changes of plant remains that occur in locations of human remains. This correlates with other features including timber ceiling remains.

At the second documentation level (150cm under upper boundary of loess subsoil) a pelvis, together with leg bones, were recorded in sand. Kernel density estimation shows (Figure 19) remarkable concentration of approximately 300 to 340 μgP2O5 per gram of soil. Silverman’s test (Silverman 1981; Baxter and Cool 2010) did not indicate the presence of more modes. There is a slight frequency

12 The deposit of this disturbance includes high amounts of organic matter.

increase of samples with higher values (400 μgP2O5 per gram of sample). Phosphate values in the space underneath the pelvis and in places where we expect skeletal remains are very low (Figure 20). This surprising finding can be caused by the deposit of remains onto a wooden base, which would preclude soft tissue decomposition and phosphate concentrations underneath the skeleton. Low values can also be caused by a generally low phosphate concentration in wood. Near the pelvis some object was interpreted as the remains of an organic base. Soil solution of some samples apparently contained human substances. An alternative explanation of low phosphate concentrations under the pelvis can be also pedoturbation caused by secondary disturbance. The only noticeable phosphate anomaly is situated in eastern part of the grave pit. This area was obvious as a dark infill (indicative of high organic content).

The interpretation of such a complicated context is not possible on the basis of available data. Samples taken away documentation level 2 apparently do not contain evidence of soft tissue decomposition in the skeletal area. Additional

Burial category 1. Grave pit without skeleton.

Secondary disturbations in grave pit filling

Two secondary disturbances were identified. Infill of the larger secondary disturbance is formed by highly organic soil. The second smaller deposit is stratigraphically younger and includes sandy soil with organic soil inclusions and cremation remains at the base. Both deposits are homogenous. A cremation was identified at the base of smaller disturbation.

Bone condition Apart from the cremation and a small fragment no bones remained. Grave pit depth 90-95cm from upper rim of loess subsoil

Figure 13. Basic chemical and physical characteristics of grave 528.

Figure 14. Hodonice site, grave 528, kernel density estimation of

phosphate values.


58

Figure 15. Hodonice site, grave 528, natural neighbour interpolation of phosphate values.

Jan Petřík et al.

59

sampling of pH, carbonates, organic matter, iron and other soil characteristics could help isolate the origin of the dark organic infill found in the square feature on the eastern part of the grave pit. On the basis of taphonomical evidence it appears in this case, that the skeletal remains were disturbed after soft tissue decomposition (category 3.4.).

Conclusion and discussion

It is possible to distinguish three categories of grave finds on the basis of macroscopic attributes: a grave pit without skeleton, a complete skeleton, and a disarticulated skeleton or incomplete skeleton. The relevant subcategories and interpretations were discussed in section above. Specific interpretations may be correctly assigned to burial categories

only after a synthesis of archaeological, anthropological, taphonomical and geochemical observation. That is why it is necessary to accurately document the archaeological situation: distinguishing individual contexts, accurately noting positions and state of preservation of skeleton remains, and systematic soil sampling. In cases where the irreversible destruction of a site is inevitable, it is necessary to design everything in advance and to collect and describe everything possible. We offer a list of possible descriptors from an archaeological perspective in the chapter Categorization of grave pits. We tried to apply the suggested methodological framework (partly in retrospect) to four graves sites belonging to the Bell Beaker culture.

The first case study concerns a Bell Beaker grave found at

Burial category

Category 3: Skeleton is partly disarticulated and divided into two groups. The first consists of secondary dislocated remains, character of their distribution suggests the presence of a concave space (or open hole). Second group consists of lower extremities, pelvis and calvarium in original articulation, lying on the left side.

Secondary disturbances in grave pit filling

Secondary disturbance is evident within infill. Infill formed from organic silty loam with evidence of more organic material in lower layers, a sad layer midway, and unequal stratification in the upper layers

Bone condition

Conditions of preservation differ between groups. Secondary dislocated bones are preserved better (grades 1-2 according Gordon and Buikstra, 1981). Bone group in primary position is badly preserved and corresponds to levels 2-3 (after Gordona and Buikstra 1981) by state of preservation.

Grave pit depth Documentation level 1 recorded at 120cm from upper rim of loess subsoil. Documentation level 2 at 150cm. Intact subsoil recognised to 165cm.

Figure 16 . Basic chemical and physical characteristics of grave 666.

Figure 17. Hodonice site, grave 666, documentation level 1, kernel

density estimation of phosphate values ().


60

Figure 18. Hodonice site, grave 666, documentation level 1, natural neighbour interpolation of phosphate values.

Jan Petřík et al.

61

the ‘Sutny’ site in the Kyjovice cadastral area of the district of Znojmo. In this grave a male inhumation was found (at documentation level 130cm) with poorly preserved bones, but without obvious marks of secondary intervention. At this level two phosphate tests showed positive, while at the documentation at 110cm (just above the skeleton) unimodality of soil phosphate values was affirmed. Using the natural neighbour method in GIS we mapped the spatial distribution. The high phosphate concentration under the skeleton (with a slight dislocation to the east) and some other anomalies, especially in eastern part of grave, are clearly evident.

The second case study concerns three Bell Beaker graves from the Hodonice cadastral area in the Znojmo district. Grave 525 was divided into two parts by a barrier. In one part a disturbed but likely complete skeleton was deposited, as indicated by a broad phosphate anomaly (except for the skull, which was probably moved after soft tissue deposition). Multimodality of phosphate values wasn’t fully verified. The skull and some bones are found partially displaced. There is a relatively high phosphate concentration suggesting that intervention/disturbance happened after soft tissue decomposition (but when joints were still functional). Higher amount of phosphates to the sides of the skeleton and low values in the skull area may be related to pedoturbation during secondary intervention.

In another grave pit an intact skeleton was found. The infill was probably disturbed twice. The larger of them was probably stratigraphically younger then another smaller secondary disturbance in which a cremation was found.

Phosphate values in samples taken away from the level under the cremation shows obvious polymodality in soil phosphate values. The phosphate anomaly in the middle of the grave pit does not coincide with secondary disturbances. One hypothesis is that the source of the phosphates in the central part of the grave pit maybe decomposed organic inclusions or even partial human remains.

The most complicated situation was found in grave 666. The grave pit was sampled in two documentation levels. On the first level finds correspond with the destruction of a ceiling (approximately 120cm under the loess surface) include an isolated skull, and an accumulation of bones at the south corner. High phosphate values above the putative burial site are probably related to a funnel shaped secondary disturbance. Humid acid substances were found in soil samples, which may be related to the remains of a timber crib and chamber ceiling. In documentation level 2 (approximately 150cm under the loess surface) a pelvis with both legs was recorded (possibly in their primary position). Phosphate values from the area under the pelvis and those places where the original deposition was thought to have taken place, are very low. This may be a result of the remains being placed on a wooden floor, which would preclude the deposition of the products of soft tissue decomposition in the space under the skeleton, or by the low phosphate content of the wood, or by pedoturbation from secondary intervention. Polymodality of phosphate values wasn’t proven in the first nor second documentation level.

Figure 19. Hodonice site, grave 666, documentation level 2, kernel density

estimation of phosphate values.


62

Figure 20. Hodonice site, grave 666, documentation level 2, natural neighbour interpolation of phosphate values.

Jan Petřík et al.

63

References

Bálek, M., Dvořák, P., Kovárník, J. and Matějíčková A. 1999. Pohřebiště kultury zvoncovitých pohárů v Tvořihrázi (okr. Znojmo). Pravěk Supplementum 4, Brno, Ústav archeologické památkové péče Brno.

Barker, H., Hughes, M. J., Oddy, W. A. and Werner, A. E. 1975. Report on phosphate analyses carried out in connection with the cenotaph problem. In R. C. S. Bruce-Mitford (ed.), The Sutton Hoo Ship-Burial 1, 550-572. London, British Museum.

Bátora, J. 2000. Das Gräberfeld von Jelšovce. Ein Beitrag zur Frühbronzezeit im nordwestlichen Karpatenbecken. Das Gräberfeld von Jelšovce/Slowakei. Ein Beitrag zur Frühbronzezeit im nordwestlichen Karpatenbecken. Prähistorische Archäologie in Südosteuropa, Band 16, Teil 2, 309-617. Kiel, Verlag Oetker/Voges.

Bátora, J. and Staššíková-Štukovská, D.1993. Einzellängsflöten aus der Frühbronzezeit in der Slowakei? In J. Pavúk (ed.), Actes du XIIe Congrès International des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques Bratislava, 1-7 septembre 1991, 370-375. Bratislava, Institut archeologique de l’Academie slovaque des sciences.

Baxter, M. J. and Cool, H. E. M. 2010. Detecting modes in low-dimensional archaeological data. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 2379-2385.

Borkovský I. 1961. Hrob čís. 12 z pohřebiště v Bartolomějské ulici v Praze I. Sborník Československé společnosti při ČSAV 1, 11-15. Brno, Krajské nakladatelství.

Cavanagh, W. G., Hirst, S. and Litton, C. D. 1988. Soil phosphate, site boundaries and change point analysis. Journal of Field Archaeology 15, 67-83.

Clarke, D.L. 1973. Archaeology: the loss of innocence. Antiquity 47, 6–18.

Crowther, J. 2002. The experimental earthwork at Wareham, Dorset after 33 years: retention and leaching of phosphate released in the decomposition of buried bone. Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 405 – 411.

Čech, P. and Černý, V. 1996. Nové možnosti studia pohřebního ritu na příkladu únětických hrobů z Konobrží, okr. Most. Archeologické rozhledy 48, 35-45.

Černý, V. 1995. Význam tafonomických procesů při studiu pohřebního ritu. Archeologické rozhledy 47, 301-320.

Duday, H., Courtaud, P., Crubezy, E., Sellier, P. and Tillier, A. M. 1990. Ľ anthropologie „de terrain“: reconnaissance et interprétation des gestes funéraires. Bulletins et Mémoires de la Societé ď Anthropologie de Paris 2, 29-50.

Duday, H. and Guillon, M. 2006. Understanding the circumstances of decomposition when the body is skeletonised, in A. Schmitt, E. Cunha and J. Pinheiro (eds.), Forensic Anthropology and Medicine: Complementary Sciences from Recovery to Cause of Death, 117-157. Totowa, Humana Press.

Duday, H. 2009. The Archaeology of the Dead. Lectures in Archaeothanatology. Oxford, Oxbow Books.

Duma, G. 1972. Phosphate Content of ancient Pots as indication of Use. Antiquity 13, 1, 126-129.

Dupras, T. L., Schultz, J. J., Wheeler, S. M. and Williams, L. J. 2006. Forensic Recovery of Human Remains. Archaeological Approaches. Boca Raton, CRC Press.

Dvořák, P., Matějíčková, A., Peška, J. and Rakovský I. 1996. Gräberfelder der Glockenbecherkultur in Mähren II (Bezirk Břeclav). Katalog der Funde. Brno – Olomouc, Petr Dvořák Verlag.

Dvořák P. and Peška J. 1993. Příspěvek k poznání kultury se zvoncovitými poháry na Moravě. Časopis Moravského muzea, vědy společenské 78, 29-49.

Eidt, R. C. 1977. Detection and examination of anthrosols by phosphate analysis, Science 197, 1327-1333.

Ernée, M. 2000. Hroby únětické kultury z Prahy 9 – Miškovic – Gräber der Aunjetitzer Kultur aus Prag 9 – Miškovice, in P. Čech and M. Dobeš (eds.), Sborník Miroslavu Buchvaldkovi – Festschrift für Miroslav Buchvaldek, 71–76. Most, Ústav archeologické památkové péče severozápadních Čech.

Ernée, M. and Majer, A. 2009. Uniformita, či rozmanitost pohřebního ritu? Interpretace výsledků fosfátové půdní analýzy na pohřebišti únětické kultury v Praze 9 – Miškovicích, Archeologické rozhledy 61, 493-508.

Gordon, C. C. and Buikstra J. E. 1981. Soil pH, bone preservation and sampling bias at mortuary sites. American Antiquity 46, 566-571.

Havel, J. 1978. Pohřební ritus kultury zvoncovitých pohárů v Čechách a na Moravě. Praehistorica 7, Varia Archaeologica 1, 91-117.

Herz, N. and Garisson, E. G. 1998. Geological methods for archaeology. Oxford-New York, Oxford University Press.

Holliday, V. T. 2004. Soils in Archaeological Research. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Hunter J. and Cox M. 2005. Forensic Archaeology. Advances in Theory and Practice. London – New York, Routledge.

Jiráň, L. 2008 (ed.). Archeologie pravěkých Čech 5. Doba bronzová. Praha, Archeologický ústav Akademie věd České republiky v Praze.

Kruťová, M. 2003. Bell Beaker and Únětice Burial Rites. Continuity and Change in Funerary Practices at the Beginning of Bronze Age, in J. Czebreszuk and M. Szmyt (eds.): The Nordeast Frontier of Bell Beakers, British Archaeological Reports, International Series 1155, 209-214. Oxford, Archaeopress.

Lewis, M. E. 2008. A traitor‘s death? The identity of a drawn, hanged and quartered man from Hulton Abbey, Staffordshire. Antiquity 82, 113-124.

Majer, A. 1984. Relativní metoda fosfátové půdní analýzy. Archeologické rozhledy 36, 297–313.

Matějíčková, A. 2008. Pohřebiště kultury zvoncovitých pohárů z Brankovic, okr. Vyškov. Pravěk Nová řada 18, 153-164.

Murphy, J. and Riley, J. P. 1962. A modified single solution method for determination of phosphate in natural waters. Analytica Chimica Acta 27, 31-36.


64

Neustupný, E. 2007. Metoda archeologie. Plzeň, Aleš Čeněk.

Núñez, M. 1975. Phosphorus determination of the graves of Kilteri in Vantaa, Southern Finland. Suomen Museo 82, 18-25.

Ondráček J. 1962. Únětické pohřebiště u Rebešovic na Moravě. Sborník Československé společnosti archeologické 2, 5-100.

O’Shea, J. M. 1984. Mortuary Variability: An Archaeological Investigation. New York, Academic Press.

Págo, L. 1963. Chemický výzkum pohřebiště lužického lidu popelnicových polí v Moravičanech, okr. Šumperk, Přehled výzkumů 1962, 38-40.

Pelikán, J. B. 1954. Chemický posudek k výzkumu v Brodcích n. J. v roce 1953, Památky archeologické 45, 324-328.

Peška J. and Rakovský I. 1990. Břeclavsko v pozdní době kamenné. Mikulov, Regionální muzeum Mikulov.

Peška, J. and Tajer, A. 2007. Hrob KZP s nadzemní konstrukcí a zlatem ze Stříbrnic, in M. Bém, and J. Peška, (eds.), Ročenka 2006, 67-87. Olomouc, Archeologické centrum Olomouc.

Piepenbrink, H 1986. Two examples of biogenous dead bone decomposition and their consequences for taphonomic interpretation, Journal of Archaeological Science 13, 417-430.

Piggott, S. 1956. Excavations in Passage-graves and Ring-Cairns of the Clava Group, 1952–3. Proceedings of The Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 88, 200-207.

Pleiner, R. 1978 (ed.), Pravěké dějiny Čech. Praha, Academia.

Prokeš, L. 2007. Posmrtné změny a jejich význam při interpretaci pohřebního ritu (ke vztahu mezi archeologií a forenzními vědami). Archaeologia Mediaevalia Moraviana et Silesiana, Suppl 1. Brno, ÚAM FF MU.

Roksandic, M. 2002. Position of skeletal remains as a key to understanding mortuary behaviour, in W. D. Haglund and M. D. Sorg (eds.), Advances in Forensic Taphonomy. Method, Theory, and Archaeological Perspectives, 100-117. Boca Raton, CRC Press.

Schiffer, M.B. 1976. Behavioral Archeology. New York, Academic Press.

Sheather, S. J. and Jones, M. C. 1991. A reliable data-based bandwidth selection method for kernel density estimation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 53, 683-690.

Silverman, B. W. 1981. Using kernel density estimates to investigate multimodality. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B 43, 97-99.

Staššíková–Štukovská, D., Fabiš, M., Thurzo, M., Korytárová, O. and Reinprecht, L. 1994. Absolútna dekompozícia na pohrebiskách. Prvé výsledky experimentov v Borovciach. Slovenská archeológia, 42/1, 187-205.

Stoye, K. 1950. Die Anwendung der Phosphatmethode auf einem mittelalterlichen Friedhof. Jahresschrift für Mitteldeutsche Vorgeschichte 34, 180-184.

Stuchlík, S. 1990. Die sekundäre Eingriffe in den Gräber der Únětice Kultur. Anthropologie 28, 159-167.

Sosna, D. 2007. Sekundární pohřební aktivity: Srovnávací studie, in T. Budil and T. Zíková (eds.), Antropologické sympozium V, 169-182. Plzeň, Dryada.

Turek, J. and Majer, A. 1999. Příklad aplikace fosfátové půdní analýzy na pohřebním areálu v Tišicích (okr. Mělník) – An Application of the Phosphate Analysis on the Prehistoric burial find from Tišice (Mělník District). Archeologie ve středních Čechách 3, 205-212.

Ubelaker, D. H. and Jon, E. B. 2003. Biological and Cultural Analysis of Human Remains, in D. H. Ubelaker, E. B. Jon and D. B. Landers (eds.), Human Remains from Voegtly Cemetery, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Washington, Smithsonian Institution Press.

Weiner, S., Goldberg, P. and Bar-Yosef, O. 1993. Bone preservation in Kebara Cave, Israel using on-site Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometry. Journal of Archaeological Science, 20, 613–627.

White, T. D. and Folkens, P. A. 2005. The Human Bone Manual. New York, Elsevier.

Pedogeochemical investigation of the Bell Beaker Culture graves from sites Hodonice and...

Documents

Transcript of Pedogeochemical investigation of the Bell Beaker Culture graves from sites Hodonice and...