Sie sind auf Seite 1von 20

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K.

Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation*
Zusammenfassung: Zwischen 2009 und 2011 wurden in Pusztataskony-Ledence 1 (Ostungarn) drei sptbronze- / frheisenzeitliche Siedlungsgruben ausgegraben, die groe Mengen menschlicher Knochen in verschiedenen Stadien der Dekomposition erbrachten. Die Komplexe enthielten sowohl einzelne Knochen, Schdel wie auch Teil- und komplette Skelette in annhernd anatomischem Verband. Zugehrige Funde u. a. eine der Kalakaakultur zuzuordnende Keramikscherbe waren selten und fragmentiert. Im ersten Teil des Beitrags geben die Autoren einen berblick ber die stratigraphischen Beobachtungen und die Struktur der Befunde. Im zweiten werden die Methoden, Probleme und Mglichkeiten der Interpretation ausgelotet. Die Ergebnisse der anthropologischen Untersuchung und der mikromorphologischen Analysen, gestellt in den Kontext gleichzeitiger Massenfunde menschlicher Skelettreste aus Sdosteuropa, erffnet die Mglichkeit, die Entstehung einer mehrstufigen Bestattungspraxis zu diskutieren. Summary: Between 2009 and 2011, three Late Bronze Age / Early Iron Age settlement pits, containing large amounts of human remains in different states of decomposition, were unearthed at the site PusztataskonyLedence 1 (Eastern Hungary). The deposits contained both single bones and clear crania, complete skeletons and body parts in approximate anatomical order. Associated finds with a potsherd of the Kalakaa culture amongst them were sporadic and fragmented. In the first part of the paper the authors summarize stratigraphical observations, giving a description of the deposit structure, while in the second part methods, problems and the possibilities of interpretation are examined. The results of the anthropological survey and the soil micromorphological analysis, placed in context with contemporaneous mass deposits of human remains from South-Eastern Europe raise the possibility of an emerging multi-stage funerary practice in the area.

Description of the finds and basic observations


The site of Pusztataskony-Ledence 1 is situated on the left bank of the river Tisza, at the western edge of the Great Hungarian Plain (fig. 1,13). Preceding the building of a new water reservoir, large-scale excavations were carried out here by the Institute of Archaeological Sciences of the Etvs Lornd University (Budapest, Hungary) between 2009 and 2011. The site roughly covers one of the areas small elevations, which in prehistoric times before the regulation of the river in the 19th century created the nearest continuously dry spot at the river bank (fig. 1,34). The building of a channel as part of the reservoir system enabled us to uncover a 72 m wide, whole cross-section of the site, where the finds of eleven archaeological periods were detected. The Late Bronze Age is represented by abundant remains of a settlement of the Late Tumulus Culture (from Reinecke B2B2 / C1) and that of the Early Gva Culture (to Reinecke BD / Ha A1, maybe later) as well. Amongst these, scarce traces of an Early Iron Age (Reinecke Ha B2 / C1) presence were also de-

tected during the excavation, which, with hindsight, may be interpreted as marks of a small but probably independent settlement horizon. As the evaluation of the material has just begun, we do not have a clear view of the settlement relations of the site yet, but the few pits related to the Early Iron Age seem to bear witness to a scanty group of hamlets. Amongst the settlement objects we found three distinctive features huge pits, more or less filled with commingled human remains which are the subject for the present study. The first feature, object 2-0111 was found in 2009, while the second and
* We would like to thank L. Dowdy for her noteworthy remarks and A. Jczik for his most valuable help in proofreading the manuscript. 1 Originally, the site was thought to form two separate ones and was numbered accordingly (PusztataskonyLedence 1 and 2). As a result of the excavations the two sites were united under the name Pusztataskony-Ledence 1, resulting in doublings in the documentation (object and stratigraphical numbers). Therefore, at every citation, the original site numbers are presented at the head of the identification numbers.

268

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

Fig. 1. Pusztataskony-Ledence 1, Hungary. Location of the site and the position of the deposits. 12 location of the site; 3 natural surroundings of the site before the regulation of the river Tisza (red patch marks excavation area); 4 elevation map with the hypothetical hydrological circumstances of the immediate surroundings of the site; 5 distribution of the objects of the Late Bronze / Early Iron Age settlements and the position of the three deposits.

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

269

third ones, objects 1-550 and 1-701 were excavated during the season 2011. The exact spatial relation of the features to the contemporary settlement objects is still unclear, but the distribution of the former is fairly even, suggesting that the deposits were not separated from the area of the living (fig. 1,5). All three human deposits are placed as a form of secondary usage in abandoned clay extraction pits. The basic structure of the pits is similar, consisting of a step-like shallow part in one side, surrounded by one or more deeper niches. The phenomena are similar as well in that after the layers of human remains had entered more or less on the bottom of these pits, the depressions were filled up to ground level. In all three cases the fill contained archaeological material similar to that of the later period of the Late Bronze Age settlement. Feature 2-011 (fig. 2) The first and smallest of the three features is positioned at the southern border of the southern settlement patch. The basic pit had a sole deeper niche at its southern side. The bottom was perfectly cleared before the human remains were entered (fig. 2,1). As we learned later, by revealing the structure of the second feature, the scarce, patchy, ashy layer observed at the bottom of the deepest part right under the skulls was probably shovelled in as a kind of opening act of the deposition sequence. Over the charred layer, disarticulated bones and the skeletal remains of articulated body parts or segments covered the entire bottom of the pit (fig. 2,24). There was no detectable order in the arrangement of the remains, though the skeletal remains of the less decomposed bodies (a nearly complete skeleton amongst them, with only one arm missing) were located in the shallow northern area. The deeper part was filled with commingled remains which at the time of the deposition must have been mostly tissueless. This way, the four other skulls, found at the deepest zone of the bone layer probably rolled together, showing an ostensible pattern that at first glimpse may seem purposeful. Associated finds were scarce amongst the bones. A bronze ring or small bracelet, found under a pile of scattered bones, was interred with the remains. In the filling of the pit, above the closed bone layer, there were no human remains, only Late Bronze Age potsherds (probably settlement material). The presence of pottery with Gva characteristics is, however, of no determining chronological value: a radiocarbon date places the object in the Early Iron Age2.

Feature 1-550 (fig. 34) The excavation of the second and largest feature proved to be both a methodological and a logistic challenge. The deposit contained 25 skulls altogether, six of which belonged to complete and nine to partially preserved bodies. Beside these, the skeletal remains of probably far more individuals, in every possible state of decomposition at the time of the interment, were piled up in the infill. To unearth this complex properly, we tried to follow the natural separation of the phenomena where it was possible and worked with artificial levels when it was necessary. As in the case of the other features, a documentation grid of 0,5 0,5 m was placed on the axis of the main section and all data was recorded accordingly. The basic pit was broadly a round one, of approximately 3 3 m, with a bottom split by a shallow raising in the southern part and three niches of various depths around. The relative height difference between the highest and the lowest points of the bottom was about 80 cm. At the beginning of the deposition sequence the northwestern deep point was partly filled with mixed soil, the others cleared completely (fig. 3,1). The first act of entering the remains was the spreading of a thin layer of charcoal and ashes all over the bottom surface, mostly in the southern area (fig. 3,2). The ash must have been hot when it was shovelled in: the attaching surface of a vertebra fragment, lying partly on a small piece of charcoal was discoloured by heat. This indicates a very short span for the whole event. In the second phase the intact and nearly complete bodies were placed in a somewhat ordered arrangement: four of them to fill the two smaller, western dents and the others around the western side of the greater eastern niche. Partial torsos, limbs and separate skulls were tucked along the sides of the pit, and larger body segments were piled up in its southwestern corner (fig. 3,34). Most of the associated finds of the bone layer were found in this level. These include the fragments of a great conical bowl, a fake spondylus (limestone) bead, a small bronze spiral ring on a finger belonging to a partial hand (fig. 4,3), a bronze bracelet under the right shoulder of a partial body (fig. 4,4), and five astragali, one of them pierced through, right under the foot bones of the complete skeleton of an infant (fig. 4,5; the sixth piece was found in the infill). The most significant find here was a fragment of a Kalakaa vessel from
821796 calBC (68,2 %). The human bone sample no. Poz-41895 was measured by the Poznan Radiocarbon Laboratory. The raw date, 2640 30 BP, was calibrated with OxCal 4.1.5.
2

270

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

Fig. 2. Pusztataskony-Ledence 1, Hungary. Feature 2-011. 14 Phases of the deposition sequence; 5 overview of the excavated feature, uppermost bone layer (phase 4). Colour scheme: shades of orange complete skeletons; blue partial skeletons; gray single bones; pink single skulls.

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

271

Fig. 3. Pusztataskony-Ledence 1, Hungary. Feature 1-550. 16 Phases of the deposition sequence. Colour scheme for the bones: shades of yellow / orange complete skeletons; shades of blue partial skeletons; gray single bones; pink single skulls. Colour scheme for the soil layers: brown ash; black / dark gray mostly charcoal; light brown / yellow mixed soil and subsoil.

272

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

Fig. 4. Pusztataskony-Ledence 1, Hungary. Feature 1-550. 1 Overview of the feature with the completely unearthed bone layer in the middle and western parts (see phases 36 on fig. 3), that in the eastern depression is mostly untouched; 2 lower part of the bone layer in the eastern niche, after removing the single bones (referring roughly to phase 3 on fig. 3); 3 bronze spiral ring on the finger bone of a partial hand; 4 bronze bracelet under the right scapula of a partial body, lying directly on the charcoal layer; 5 six astragali, two of them pierced through, from under the legs of a complete skeleton; 6 Kalakaa vessel fragment from amongst the bones of segmented cadavers in the lowermost layer.

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

273

Fig. 5. Pusztataskony-Ledence 1, Hungary. Feature 1-701. 16 Phases of the deposition sequence; 7 overview of the feature, uppermost bone layer (phase 6). Colours added for illustrative purposes only.

274

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

amongst the scattered bones of the lowermost level (fig. 4,6)3. This sherd, on the one hand, connects the feature with the Balkan area to the south. On the other hand it has chronological value as well, as it dates the object to the Early Iron Age (Reinecke Ha B2 / B3C1), i. e. into the same horizon as feature 2-011. Though the phases of the deposition process cannot be separated perfectly, it seems that the infilling of the huge amount of tissueless bones took place mainly as a consecutive action to the deposition of intact and more or less segmented cadavers. While the latter were placed seemingly as close to the edges as possible, the former were simply shovelled into the empty places left, with the tissueless skulls thrown between, until the eastern niche was completely filled forming a half meter thick layer of scattered bones (fig. 3,5). After this, the whole pit was filled to ground level with mixed brown soil containing some fragmentary Late Bronze Age settlement material (fig. 3,6). Feature 1-701 (fig. 5) The third feature is situated in the middle of the excavated part of the site, in the northern zone of the southern settlement patch (fig. 1,5). The deposit differed from the first two as it contained the skeletal remains of 14 complete corpses only, with practically no scattered bones or bones belonging to segmented bodies. The basic structure of the pit was similar to that of feature 1-550, with a shallow step in the southern area of the bottom, surrounded by three smaller niches (fig. 5,1). The northern one was filled shortly before the bodies were entered, and, as in the former case, contained the fragments of a great conical bowl with inverted rim. A polished stone axe, probably of Neolithic origin, lay on the bottom as well (fig. 5,2). This time there was no trace either of fire, ashes or any other preliminary action in the filling. Six of the bodies were simply tucked in one after another to fill the western niche, and the seventh, a small child, was placed nearby, with its body laying on the edge of the shallow step and its head hanging down (fig. 5,35). The other bodies were laid in the deeper eastern niche or piled up in the lower zones of the step (fig. 5,56). The significant variance of depth and thick layers of earth between the bodies of the eastern niche may indicate a major temporal gap, but as there was no perceptible deviation in the texture of the filling of the bone layer and as the logical interpretation of the observed sequence of the deposition suggests a short span, one may find this implication insupportable. Both associated finds and structural similarities speak for the contemporaneity of the three objects, but at this point, having no sets of reliable radiocar-

bon data at hand, their exact relative chronological positions cannot be established. As scattered bones, skeletal remains of partial cadavers and complete skeletons occur in relatively many objects of the Late Bronze Age settlements as well (Reinecke BD / Ha A1 or Ha A2 at the latest), at first the three deposits were thought to be connected to this period; but the first radiocarbon data from object 2-011 and the Kalakaa sherd found in pit 1-550 surely date at least two of the three deposits to the period Reinecke Ha B2 / B3C1, suggesting a considerable time gap between them and the more or less similar Late Bronze Age phenomena of the site.

Results of the preliminary anthropological survey


A preliminary anthropological analysis of the three deposits was carried out in 20092010 and in 2012. Preceding a microanalysis by T. Hajdu, this was restricted to an estimation concerning the minimal number of individuals and to the detection of potential traumatic and taphonomic lesions. The results show that feature 2-011 contained remains of at least 20 individuals. The deposit consisted almost exclusively of single bones and the skeletal remains of segmented bodies articulated chest bones, upper and lower limbs, the latter occasionally together with pelvic bone of both sexes and all age ranges. Only one nearly complete skeleton was identified here: a child lay in a flexed position, with the bones of its forearm and hand absent, on the shallow part of the bottom of the pit. In feature 1-550, containing at least 25, more likely approximately 40 individuals, the proportions change: under a huge amount of single bones, crania, and calvaria several complete skeletons were laid some in contracted positions, while the setting of others showing no marks of intentionality. Feature 1-701 showed a completely different picture as apart from some randomly occurring single bones it was dominated by 14 complete skeletons, which
3 Vessels with slight differences in decoration were found in the second mass grave of Hrtkovci-Gomolava (TASI 1972, 36, fig. 4,1.3; TASI 1972 / 1973 [1976], fig. 109,1; 113,41; 114,45) and everywhere in the settlement layer of the Bosut Culture on the same site (MEDOVI 1978, plate VIII 1). However, this kind of pottery is one of the most characteristic finds from the Kalakaa horizon, and several further analogies could be mentioned here (e. g. Moorin: FALKENSTEIN 1998, plate 33,4.8; 35,1516; Titel: ibd. plate 37,1; Farkadin: MEDOVI 1978, plate XLVII 2; Beka, Kalakaa: POPOVI 1981, plate III 2; Kredin: ibid. plate IV 8; Vrdnik, Peine: ibid. plate IX 6).

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

275

Feature 2-011 Children (d + s) Humerus Radius Ulna Femur Tibia Fibula 17 + 14 13 + 19 13 + 22 12 + 18 8 + 10 15 + 20 Males & females (d + s) 25 + 11 25 + 7 13 + 11 40 + 24 29 + 15 33 + 6 (d + s) 11 + 11 10 + 12 9 + 11 15 + 13 13 + 15 4+6

Feature 1-550 Children Males & females (d + s) 3+4 1+3 3+3 9+6 5+5 2+1

Tab. 1. Number of long bones in features 2-011 and 1-550. d dextra (right); s sinistra (left).

were deposited over each other in contracted position or laid irregularly. In any case, it was not possible to associate the different partial skeletons and clean bones within the features4. Summary of the preliminary results 1. All three pits contain remains of children and adults as well, of both sexes and all age groups (the lack of 0-year old newborn range is characteristic at prehistoric series). There is no recognizable relation between sex, age at death, state of disintegration and the position of the bodies (were they deposited either with or without intentional arrangement). Table 1 summarizes the long bones from pits 2-011 and 1-550. The type distribution shows clearly how accidental the collecting of the remains must have been, and therefore, how arguable in these cases a mere estimation of the interred individuals number would be. 2. At the time when the remains were interred the decay of the corpses was in progress. Distinct states of disintegration (common presence of whole skeletons, parts of skeletons in anatomical order, single bones) suggest different dates of death for particular individuals in the same pit. 3. Apart from a couple of cases (e. g. a deep cut mark on one of the skulls from feature 2-011, the blow probably causing immediate death), there were no physical injuries on the bones, and marks of cannibalism (e. g. signs of intentional defleshing, boiling or human gnawing) are also absent. Would the pits contain remains of victims of some natural disaster or a lasting epidemic, by traditional anthropological analysis cannot be determined. 4. Marks of animal (rodent or scavenger) gnawing are also missing, indicating that the corpses were not kept in the open prior to burial. The lack of weather marks (e.g. sun bleaching, desiccation caused by direct sunlight or warping caused by extreme temperatures) affirms this assumption. The presence of partial skeletons in anatomical order indicates textile wrapping or clothes.

In conclusion, the different stages of disintegration and the lack of physical injuries are evidence that the pits contained the remains of individuals who died at different dates and by distinct causes, and the cadavers of which were, in the first stage of the burial process, putrefied for various times and retained during this process in a closed context elsewhere. After death, every (?) member of the community, regardless of sex, age, or cause of death, was treated the same way. The sex and age of individuals shows no correlation either with the state of decomposition of the remains (single bones, associated body parts, crania or complete skeletons) or in the case of intact cadavers the way of treatment (either showing signs of intentionality or not). In all three deposits the state of the human remains implies that the majority of the corpses were disposed of in the pits when their decay was already in progress. Taxonomic analysis Complex analysis of the human remains shows that the series of the three pits is characterized by taxonomic heterogeneity, an overall characteristic of prehistoric series of the Carpathian Basin, caused mainly by varying interbreeding ratio of taxonomic variants. The Pusztataskony population is dominated by low and high faced, leptodolichomorph individuals of both short and tall stature. Some of the individuals belong to the curvoocipital brachymorph taxonomic variant, and the cromagnoid component is also present. There is no recognizable correlation between taxonomic variants and the sex of the individuals, and all components are present in every pit.
4 The anthropological investigation was prepared according to the methods of ALEKSEIEV / DEBETZ 1964; RY et al. 1963; JOHNSTON 1961; MARTIN / SALLER 1957; NEMESKRI et al. 1960; SCHOUR / MASSLER 1941; SJVOLD 1990.

276

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

PusztataskonyLedence, features 2-011, 1-550, 1-701 Males & females Hurbanovo culture Vatya culture Fzesbony culture Maros culture Battonya III & Deszk Csanytelek Mokrin Szreg-C I Szreg-C II Szreg-C III Ostojievo I Ostojievo II Tumulus culture, Tp Bosut culture, Gomolava II Mezcst culture 0.282 0.698 0.290 0.179 0.980 0.067 0.138 0.151 0.434 0.434 0.223 0.196 0.146 0.443 Females ~ 1.439 0.858 0.103 0.597 0.369 0.182 0.337 0.648

Tab. 2. Distances (CR2 values) according to the Penrose analysis between the series from Pusztataskony and other series from the Carpathian Basin.

Taxonomic comparison of the people of the Pusztataskony pits and the territorial predecessors (the population of the Gva culture) is not possible as there are only a few skeleton burials known from the Gva culture, leaving its general taxonomic image unclear. However, by extending the search for materials to include in the taxonomic comparison, it is possible to identify convincing archaeological analogies roughly 300 km to the south, in sites from Voivodina (Northern Serbia) of the Kalakaa horizon of the Bosut Culture (Bosut IIIa, Reinecke Ha B2 / B3C1), which are contemporaneous with the Pusztataskony features. Regrettably, the pit of Novi Sad-ADECO is nearly completely and another at Novi Sad-Klisa is partly ruined5, and the anthropological material of the first mass grave from Hrtkovci-Gomolava (Syrmia) was not retained. The greatest mass grave of the Kalakaa horizon is that of Hrtkovci-Gomolava II6 (see descriptions below). The condition of the anthropological material from the burials of Vajuga-Pesak at the Iron Gates, a site representing the next horizon of the Bosut culture is so poor that it did not fit either for craniometric or for taxonomic analysis7. Biostatistical analysis Both the male-female series from the three pits, combined according to the method of Aleksejev and Debetz8 and the separate female series meet the requirements of Penrose distance analysis9. That al-

lowed us to perform to eliminate subjectivity a biostatistical comparison of the Pusztataskony finds and other cranial series from the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age of the Carpathian Basin. The smaller the CR2 value (referring to the generalized size-shape distance), the more probable is the biological proximity or even identity of the different series. The analysis, based on the ten main cranial measurements covered altogether 15 series (tab. 2). Similar analyses were carried out before the Pusztataskony material became available10. Present results did not change the general picture, only shaded our (anthropologically still limited) knowledge about the biological relations of Bronze and Iron Age populations of the Carpathian Basin. As it concerns archaeological problems, both explanation, evaluation or contradiction of the significant relations determined by Penrose analysis exceed the limits of the present study. In this sense, the results of the already completed preliminary investigations (unlikely to be changed by the microanalyses of

5 6 7 8 9 10

Anthropological investigation: ZOFFMANN in press. ZOFFMANN 1997. ZOFFMANN 1998. ALEKSEJEV / DEBETZ 1964. PENROSE 1954. ZOFFMANN 2006 <<a or b>>; ZOFFMANN 2009.

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

277

Fig. 6. Penrose distances between the available Bronze and Early Iron Age series from the Carpathian Basin. CR2 values refer to the generalized size-shape distance. Smaller CR2 values indicate more probable biological proximity or even identity of the different series (represented by thicker connection lines).

T. Hajdu) are restricted to the determination that the individuals buried in the pits of Pusztataskony were members of an autochthon community descending from the population of the local Middle Bronze Age Maros-Perjmos culture. The Early Iron Age community is not only related to the Maros-Perjmos cemeteries of the Great Hungarian Plain, which by Penrose results seem to form a closed block (fig. 6), but to the population of the mass grave of HrtkovciGomolava II, i.e. the Kalakaa horizon of the Bosut culture of Syrmia as well (though the separate female series does not show this connection).

Problems and possibilities In the theoretical discussions of Hungarian research, special prehistoric deposits with human remains have intractably been linked to cultic, ritual or at least symbolic human activities or considered to be proof of prehistoric cannibalism, human sacrifice or warfare11. Just like in other parts of Europe, most of the earliest interpretations were put forward without either proper definitions of related concepts or an explicit contextual study of the phenomena. In order to avoid further misunderstandings, contemporary research has turned towards a better understanding of conceptual distinctions and the application of clear nomenclature with exact definitions for anything under study12. Accordingly, a nomenclature

Interpretation of the Pusztataskony features


At first sight in 2009, the then-unique feature 2-011 at Pusztataskony seemed to contain victims of a mass slaughter or an epidemic that eradicated the population of a nearby homestead. One imagined a group of people (maybe members of a nearby community) finding the cadavers few weeks or months later and giving final honour to the deceased by interring them in a large pit that was open at the time. But as the anthropological survey progressed, the emerging evidence forced our team to seek an alternative explanation. Aware of that, the excavation of the second and third features in 2011 focused on the deposition sequence and the possibilities of reconstructing the treatment of the cadavers and revealing the primary context of the human remains.

A few examples of cultic and sacrificial interpretation from Hungarian research. Neolithic: RACZKY 1974, 201; 205 (foundation deposit); ZALAI-GAL 1984, 2427 (skull cult with hints of cannibalism); BNFFY 1990 / 1991, 192194; 218231 with a list of so-called construction offerings from the Neolithic of Austria, (the former) Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Early Bronze Age: KALICZ-SCHREIBER 1981, 81 f. (sacrifical pit). Iron Age: PETRES 1972, 371 f. 381 (human remains in settlements with features linked to libation sacrifices). Sometimes the interpretations of the same feature highly differ, e. g. in the case of the Late Neolithic mass grave of Eszterglyhorvti, where mechanical injuries on the few skull fragments suggest the presence of violence (ZOFFMANN 2007, 50): J. MAKKAY (2000, 62) describes the feature as remains of a massacre, while J. P. BARNA (1996, 153; 156) interprets them as human sacrifice. 12 E. g. MURPHY 2008; RITTERSHOFER 2007.
11

278

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

concerning deviant burials and mortuary processes was recently outlined13. In the last few decades the essentiality of comprehending the actual cultural context in which special deposits were created became clear. J. D. Hill pointed out that the main aim of interpreting such assemblages must be to determine the particular practice that resulted in that particular deposit at a specific place and time instead of deciding whether it is of ritual origin or not14. Considering human remains, as E. Weiss-Krejci similarly emphasized, the archaeologist must explain the differences in the physical remains of the dead and determine the causes that are responsible for variability in the mortuary record. One first step to accomplish such a goal is to decide whether deposits with human remains represent expressions of funerary behaviour or result from other processes15. Evidently, different factors agents being either taphonomic16 or cultural in nature17 may enter the process at any stage and, despite having different origins, can produce similar patterns in the archaeological record and vice versa. Only when the determinative factors and probable stages of the formation process are revealed, can the interpretation of any phenomenon be started. Formation processes of the deposits As the evaluation of the entire Early Iron Age settlement material is still in progress, for the moment one must work without data on the middle-range context. Therefore, the discussion here is restricted to the reconstruction and comparison of the individual formation processes of the three features, covered by a cross-cultural analysis of the phenomenon. First of all, the information gained by stratigraphical observations and preliminary anthropological investigations are summarized. 1. All three features are characterized by great amounts of human remains clustered in settlement (?) pits. The round pits were used originally for clay extraction, abandoned later and used for waste disposal for some time prior to the interment of the human remains. As there is no sign that the pits were designed especially for placing the dead, the location of the cadavers final resting place must have been chosen haphazardly and was determined probably by practical considerations. As quite a small proportion of the site is uncovered, further mass deposits of human remains may be present at Pusztataskony. 2. The ashy layers observed in both features 2011 and 1-550 indicate the presence of preceding actions including fire before the deposition of the human remains. However, this must have taken place outside the deposition pits as no traces of in situ firing were observed in or around the features.

At this moment, no direct relationship between the fire and the human remains can be detected. 3. As the human remains in all three features are tightly clustered, stratigraphically the bone layer of each deposition sequence can be regarded as a closed unit. As there were no signs of later cultural disturbance, each deposition process must have been a single, short-term and definitive event. Although all three features are relatively close to each other and at least two of them can surely be dated to the same chronological horizon (Reinecke Ha B2 / B3 or even C1), the determination of the accurate extent of possible time gaps between their formations requires further investigation. 4. The overall presence of both sexes and all age ranges, and the fact that the stage of the cadavers decomposition at the time of interment shows no correlation with either sex or age, suggest that the compilation of the deposits was not influenced by any kind of intentional selection based on biological criteria. 5. As traces of any kind of flesh removal are totally absent, the decay of tissue must have taken place naturally. 6. The joint occurrence of the remains of individuals who died at different times, and the practically complete absence of lethal injuries and other kinds of pre- or perimortem trauma on the bones exclude massacre from the interpretations. Furthermore, the unstructured arrangement of the mostly fragmented accompanying finds in the deposits exclude ritual killing or human sacrifice as well. 7. At the moment the time span between particular deaths cannot be defined exactly, but based on the average rhythm of thanatological changes several years or even decades may be assumed. Therefore, as cadavers in different stages of decomposition are deposited jointly, forming a closed unit in each feature, the position of the human remains must be secondary. This means that literally none of the deposits can be considered as a mass grave18. 8. Based on archaeological observations and the results of the anthropological analysis very little is to be said on the closed context of the preceding burial phase (indicated both by the joint occurrence of cadavers in different stages of decay at the time of their final interment, and the lack of animal gnawing
13 14 15 16 17

Recent summary and lists of criteria for defining mass graves: JESSEE / SKINNER 2005; KNSEL et al. 2007, 130 and references.
18

2005.

ASPCK 2008; SRBU 2003; WEISS-KREJCI 2011. HILL 1996, 25. WEISS-KREJCI 2005, 155. E. g. DUDAY 1978; 2006; DUDAY et al. 1990. GOWLAND / KNSEL 2006; RAKITA / BUIKSTRA

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

279

or weather marks on the bones). Primary inhumation graves (single or collective), or a roofed, closed storage buildings, a house of the dead, could have served as primary storage places. These were later, at some point, at an unknown occasion and for a yet unknown reason, eliminated, and the corpses each in its actual state of decomposition redeposited in one of the pits serving from then on as their final resting place.

Results of the soil micromorphological survey


In order to gain information regarding the context of the previous burial phase, a thin section soil micromorphological survey was carried out on altogether seven samples from pit 1-550. Samples with sequences of the fill layers and of the subsoil (PT-04, PT-10, PT-13, PT-14) and others containing human bones from either complete or partial skeletons (PT08, PT-12, PT-15) were examined. Samples PT-10 and PT-15 contained parts of the subsoil and the lowermost layer of the fill. In these samples the two layers could clearly be separated. No indications were found that would suggest that the pit, or at least the part from where the samples were taken was initially used for anything else but interment. The presence of iron nodules in the subsoil is the result of excess water caused by rainfall and indicates a gradual filling of the pit19. Stratigraphical observations suggest that the north-western part of the pit was cleaned immediately before the interment of human remains. It also could be ascertained that every layer of all samples apart from a patch of charcoal consists exclusively of mineral components (quartz, biotite, chlorite, muscovite, glauconite etc.), i. e. natural soil-like materials. None of the investigated samples contains botanic material (pollen, phytoliths or decomposed organic matter) indicating that the fill layers either with or without human bone originate from deeper soil horizons, and also that no botanic additions were enclosed with the human remains20. The soil layer containing human bones could be clearly separated from the stratum beneath. The different structure of the infill layers suggests that the bones and some of their previous incorporate medium were brought here together, and laid upon the lower soil stratum, i. e. the earlier fill layer of the pit. Biological activity could not be observed in the layers that incorporated the human remains. The lack of phytoliths and other plant residues implies that the human remains were deposited formerly at deeper soil levels as downwards the proportion of organic elements in the soil profile decreases and finally runs out. The presence of clay coatings fur-

ther supports this assumption: it is typical of the accumulation soil layer (B horizon) as rainwater washes down the fine clay fraction to deeper soil levels, where it encrusts the pore walls21. There was no additional alien matrix to be observed around the bones, i. e. no differences in structure or composition. As such there is no evidence for more than one replacement of the remains. The primary sediment medium was present around the bones not only as a coating but forming a layer, meaning that the bones were replaced together with the original incorporating context rather than picked up and cleaned one by one22. The sediment matrix around the bones suggests that the human remains were formerly placed elsewhere but at a similar (or in the same) soil level. It could also be observed that tiny bone fragments were mixed with the primary sediment medium around the human bones. Microscopic observations showed that these were fragments of larger bone pieces, detached due to the decay process23. This conclusion confirms the existence of a former burial context that was presumed on the basis of the results of the anthropological survey. Although it cannot be proven via the micromorphological samples, it is possible that during the first burial phase the placement of particular persons might have taken place individually, rather than piling them upon each other as in the excavated pits. In order to get more information about the location of this prior interment, it would be useful to take further samples from the potential cemetery soil layers in the vicinity of the assemblages24. Concluding the results of the thin section soil micromorphological survey it has to be reaffirmed that every individual found at least in feature 1-550 of Pusztataskony must have been formerly buried somewhere else, most probably in the neighbourhood of the deposits. Thereafter, at a particular date and for a particular reason of which we remain unaware, the corpses in different states of decomposition were exhumed and buried for the second time in the cleared clay pits. In the light of the results of the soil micromorphological survey of the samples from the feature 1-550 it seems to be at least possible that in the cases of the other two features the soil between the remains of the bodies is the very same one in which the cadavers were interred before elsewhere.

19 20 21 22 23 24

KOVCS 2012, 8. Ibid. 15. Ibid. 4. Ibid. 5. Ibid. 4. Ibid. 10.

280

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

Contemporaneous mass deposits with human remains from the Eastern Carpathian Basin and beyond
Though many of the observed features have their parallels in several sites of prehistoric Europe, the combination in which these appear in the Pusztataskony deposits is virtually unique. In order to completely understand such an unprecedented find it would be essential to examine these features both in their regional and chronological context. Such a survey would by far exceed the limits of this paper, therefore, in the present, first discussion we focus only on the culturally related assemblages. During a preventive archaeological excavation in 2006 a Late Bronze Age settlement with six pits, containing the skeletal remains of partly decomposed human cadavers (four single or double burials and two mass deposits) was found only 30 km south of Pusztataskony, at the site of Tiszab, Galamb-dl, Jsz-Nagykun-Szolnok county, Hungary25. The settlement was dated to the Gva culture by H. Oravecz, but fragments of a horn-handled cup from one of the mass graves26 may suggest an Early Iron Age presence as well. As it was mentioned above, the most accurate analogies of the Pusztataskony assemblages were found in sites from the Serbian Bosut IIIa phase or Kalakaa horizon (Reinecke Ha B2 / B3C1). The greatest deposits of this period are known from Hrtkovci-Gomolava II (Syrmia)27. The first pit was discovered in 1954. By then it was partially destroyed by erosion, but the remaining part still covered an area of 2,42 1,37 m. It contained the skeletons of 32 individuals in four layers, the fragments of 24 vessels, a few bronze and iron implements and three fragmented querns or grindstones28. Unfortunately, a detailed publication of the feature has still not yet been released, and, what is even more regrettable, the human remains from the deposit were not retained by the excavators29. The second, circular pit of the same site with a maximum diameter of 2,90 m was excavated in 1971 and contained the remains of 78 individuals of both sexes and all age ranges, in different states of disintegration, divided into three hypothetical layers. The first bone layer consisted of individual crania, some single bones and articulated body parts, mixed with fragments of grindstones and parts of the skeleton of an ox. Complete skeletons were placed along the periphery of the pit. The separation of the second and third bone layers was most hypothetical as their distinction was based on the notion of the excavators that the skeletons of the second group were laid with their heads oriented towards the centre of the pit, while the individuals of the lowermost layer were positioned with their heads outwards30. Beside the

human remains, the second assemblage contained a greater amount of cereal grains in the middle of the pit, the fragments of nine vessels, bronze fibulae, pendants, bracelets, buttons, rattles, phalerae, fragments of an iron bracelet and beads made of bone, clay, crystals or amber. According to the observations of N. Tasi, the ornaments turned up mainly in the immediate vicinity of adult individuals31. Both a preliminary anthropological investigation by Gy. Farkas and a detailed study by Zs. K. Zoffmann confirmed the lack of violent injuries, taphonomic lesions and signs of pathology on the bones32. N. Tasi supposed that the corpses had originally been arranged by design, and that the dislocation of some bones or body parts was a result of later cultural or natural disturbances of the pits33. He considered that in spite of the mixture of the osteological material in the tomb, the skeletons were not simply thrown into the pit, as it seemed when the tomb was first discovered, but were laid according to a definite pattern. grave goods corroborate the assumption that the collective tomb was not formed by simply throwing in bodies (of defeated enemies or victims of a large-scale epidemic) into the pit, but was formed by burying the dead according to a specific ritual which can be reconstructed only partly on the basis of the arrangement of the skeletons and the grave goods in the pit34. In the light of the evidence from Pusztataskony-Ledence some kind of reconsideration of this opinion may be necessary. It is very conceivable that the individual crania and articulated body parts found in the second assemblage of Gomolava may also be explained by the remains having been (re) deposited at a time when their natural decay process was already in progress. Tasi also related the presence of animal bones, cereals and grindstones to some kind of ritual involving agricultural sacrifices. As he wrote, their occurrence in both cases may be interpreted as associated with a ritual action, which, viewed in connection with the presence of cereals in the tombs, indicates the agricultural component in the culture
ORAVECZ 2007, 297. Personal communication of H. Oravecz. 27 In this context it is noteworthy that the craniometric analysis suggests some kind of link between the populations of Pusztataskony and Hrtkovci-Gomolava II (tab. 2; fig. 6). 28 TASI 1972, 32. 29 ZOFFMANN 1997, 249. 30 TASI 1972, 29. 31 Ibid. 30. 32 FARKAS 1972 / 1973 [1976]; ZOFFMANN 1997. 33 TASI 1972, 29. 34 Ibid.
25 26

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

281

of the people to whom the tomb belonged. The complex of sacrificial actions and beliefs in afterlife comprises the practice of sacrificing whole, or parts of, animals. Tomb II contained part of the skeleton of an ox, and in tomb I bones of a deer and a dog were found. Their occurrence and the presence of grave goods in both tombs lead to the conclusion that these ritual objects did not come there by chance, during a hasty burial of dead tribesmen or of enemies captured or killed in battle, but that they were placed there as a result of certain ritual actions35. Though this line of thought may seem worth considering, it is not supported by scientific data or detailed contextual analysis. In the deposits of Pusztataskony no features indicating this kind of ritual behaviour were detected. On the contrary, several hints suggest that the corpses had been subjects of earlier primary burials. Bearing this in mind, it is also conceivable that the sherds of ceramic vessels, the bone and stone tools, the set of astragali and the bronze ornaments found together with the human remains may have served as grave goods in the previous stage of the burial (i. e. at the former interment), and were dug out and re-deposited accidentally with the human remains. Concerning the animals found in the features of Gomolava, one may rather relate their presence to some even perhaps ritualistic action taking place during the final deposition of human cadavers. Two further mass deposits with human remains from the Kalakaa horizon were found recently in the vicinity of Novi Sad, Vojvodina36. A pit containing human bones has been unearthed at Novi SadADECO (structure unknown) by D. Aneli, and in 2008 another deposition of complete skeletons and single bones was found at a large-scale excavation at Novi Sad-Klisa37. Some features of the find circumstances led D. Aneli to the suggestion that such collective depositions may be typical for the end of the Kalakaa horizon38. To prove this hypothesis, however, a systematic chronological and contextual analysis of all assemblages from this horizon is needed in the future39. Significant data proving a direct relationship between the Late Bronze Age / Early Iron Age population of the Middle Tisza Region and the contemporaneous groups of South-Eastern Europe has not yet been published. In this light the finds of Pusztataskony may be considered rather important, as in their case the above-mentioned two groups do not only seem to have a common practice of depositing human remains in round pits, but a fragment of an original, probably imported Kalakaa vessel also showed up in feature 1-55040.

Concluding remarks: funerary behaviour of the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age in the Eastern Carpathian Basin
In order to shed some light on this yet unclear situation, it is necessary to survey the funerary practices of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages in the eastern part of the Carpathian Basin. As a result of the large-scale excavations in the last two decades, more and more human remains are known from non-funerary, mainly settlement contexts from our focus period and territory. With the difficulties of the cultural classification even of some regular burials, and in absence of a proper relative chronology for that period, a reasonable analysis of the irregular finds cannot be carried out for the moment. At the present state of research one can only assert that the number of settlement complexes with human remains definitely increases41 with a simultaneous decline in the number of normative or traditional burials42.

TASI 1972, 32. Personal communication of D. Aneli. 37 Archaeological evaluation by D. Aneli; anthropological survey: ZOFFMANN in press. 38 Personal communication of D. Aneli. 39 It is important to note that at the beginning of the 1990s J. Chochorowski linked the features found at the Bosut culture settlement of Hrtkovci-Gomolava (ZOFFMANN 1997) and at the Late Urnfield settlement of Stillfried in Austria (BREITINGER 1980, 107; EIBNER 1980, 107; EIBNER 1988, 77; SZILVSSY et al. 1988; ZOFFMANN 2001; see also Griebl / Hellerschmid in this volume) to a hypothetical horizon dominated by violent attacks of the so-called Cimmerians (CHOCHOROWSKI 1993, 218230). According to his thesis, the arrival of the steppe-people terminated the development of the former Late Bronze Age cultures. A very similar picture was drawn by G. Ilon as a result of the analysis of some skeletons from a pit of the Late Urnfield settlement of Gr-Kpolnadomb in Hungary (ILON 2001, 248 f.; anthropological analysis by Zs. K. Zoffmann: ZOFFMANN 2001, 270; ZOFFMANN 2006b, 156). C. Metzner-Nebelsick argued that the mass graves in question can also be seen as signs of internal conflict, since no significantly Cimmerian or steppe bound artefacts can be associated with them (METZNER-NEBELSICK 2010, 128 note 28). The presence of violent action was only proved in the case of the outstanding mass grave of Stillfried (CHOCHOROWSKI 1993, 219221; WILTSCHKE-SCHROTTA 2006, 414). 40 URK / MARTA 2011, 160. 41 Main publication in English: TASI 1972; in Serbian: TASI 1972 / 1973 (1976). Anthropological analyses of the second pit: FARKAS 1972 / 1973 [1976]; FARKAS / MARCSIK 1976; ZOFFMANN 1997. 42 KIRLY in press, 114123.
35 36

282

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs

Human remains within Late Bronze and Early Iron Age settlements usually turn up in different states of decay, as complete skeletons, skeletal remains of articulated bodies or body parts, single and fragmented bones and cremated remains. In the case of the Gva culture the sequence is clearly dominated by complete skeletons (almost 40 %) of both sexes and all age ranges, and the position of the bodies often shows signs of intentional placing43. None of the examined bones shows either traces of violence or taphonomic lesions44, which means that these people, just like the ones at Pusztataskony, most likely suffered a natural death, and their bodies were immediately buried or at least protected against the weather and kept out of the reach of carrion eaters. Exactly the same situation was sketched out for the Early Iron Age of the Balkan area by S. C. Ailinci and his colleagues45. Considering their results it is likely, that beginning at the latest phase of the Bronze Age of the Eastern Carpathian Basin and its southern neighbourhood a radical change takes place in mortuary treatment, while a sporadic survival of traditional burial customs is still observable. The new practice involves at least a temporary putrefaction of the dead in settlement complexes. It still remains a question however, whether this element is really a part of the funerary cycle or only a random way of disposing of particular members of the same, or maybe of a different (hostile) community. Burial a generally used but often misconceived term is hard to define. Most of the languages face the problem that the funerary practice is described by a word that fundamentally describes the act of putting something usually the corpse into the ground (Engl. burial; Germ. Bestattung; Fr. enterrement; Hun. temets). Actually, burying is only one possible way to dispose of the corpse, but the notion is obviously burdened by our own modern concepts, making it even harder to understand the mortuary behaviours of past people. For most human communities, biological death caused by natural or violent events is followed by a transitional phase called funerary cycle. The elements of a particular funerary cycle depend on several choices of the mourning community: e. g. on the positive or negative valuation of the deceaseds personality or on the circumstances of his / her death. The cycle may consist of different methods of corpse treatment like washing the dead, evisceration, embalming, active or passive excarnation of the body, cremation or primary burial. The liminal phase ends with the social death of the deceased and the final deposition of the cadaver, but it is crucial that this action does not necessarily involve the placing of the corpse in the ground46. Depending on the particular community, a final resting place may be located individually or in groups, in- or outside of a

cemetery or a settlement, in archaeologically visible or invisible contexts. Certain groups may also practice tertiary burial or manipulate the human remains taken from their primary burial context acts of socalled extra-funerary formation processes47. Several examples of multistage funerary cycles that may appear archaeologically as secondary collective burial features are known from both prehistoric and historic times. One of the most famous examples is the delayed collective burial practice of some particular prehistoric American tribes, e. g. the Potomacs48 or the Virginian mound builders49. Some of these communities buried their dead only at specified occasions once a year or even several years. The individuals who had died between two collective burials were stored somewhere for the next occasion, usually underground, therefore they entered the final funerary context with their cadavers in different states of decomposition. Other case studies, for example from the Middle Ages draw the attention to the role of temporary storage preceding long-distance transport of the corpse in a society where the system of beliefs is highly focused on sacred lands and kinship50. However, one must be constantly aware that none of these distant analogies should be used as direct models to explain the deposits of Pusztataskony, not least because these assemblages cannot be considered as secondary burials with certainty, as they lack the majority of indicators51. The information on the Pusztataskony features currently available represents only a small part of the data required to determine their place in the funerary cycle of the Early Iron Age. Perhaps it will never be possible to reveal the reasons or to reconstruct the particular and presumably extraordinary social situation that included the exhumation of primary burials and the collective, seemingly careless act of clearing away the more or less decomposed remains. The presence of similar features with semi-decayed corpses in individual or collective graves, probably as secondary interment, in sites at great distances from each other, however, suggests that this kind of

KIRLY 2011, 115177. Ibid. 118. 45 AILINCI et al. 2005 / 2006, 9294; AILINCI 2008, 2728; 30 f. 46 WEISS-KREJCI 2011, 7176. 47 Ibid. 76; postfuneral processes: WEISS-KREJCI 2005a, 168170; WEISS-KREJCI 2005b, 48; 53. 48 UBELAKER 1974, 120. 49 DUNHAM et al. 2003, 122125. 50 WEISS-KREJCI 2005a, 168 f. 51 Listed in CARR / KNSEL 1997; DUDAY 1978; OLSEN / SHIPMAN 1994, 384 f.
43 44

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation

283

funerary practice may have spread to large areas or at least reached several places at great distances at the turn of the Bronze and Iron Ages. Nevertheless, the detection of the origins and the agents of this custom if it is really a custom requires further archaeological and anthropological investigations.

Bibliography
ALEKSEIEV / DEBETZ 1964 V. P. ALEKSEIEV / G. F. DEBETZ, Kraniometrija. Nauka (Moskva 1964). AILINCI 2008 S. C. AILINCI, The Place for the Dead in Early and Middle Iron Age Lower Danube Area. In: V. Srbu / L. Vaida (eds.), Funerary Practices of the Bronze and Iron Ages in Central and South-Eastern Europe. Proceedings of the 9th International Colloquium of Funerary Archaeology. Bistria, Romania, May 9th11th, 2008 (Cluj-Napoca 2008) 933. AILINCI et al. 2005 / 2006 S. C. AILINCI / G. JUGNARU / A. C. RLEA / M. VERNESCU, Early Iron Age Complexes with Human Remains from the Babadag Settlement. Peuce N. S. 3 / 4, 2005 / 2006, 77108. ASPCK 2008 E. ASPCK, What Actually is a Deviant Burial? Comparing German-Language and Anglophone Research on Deviant Burials. In: MURPHY 2008, 735. BNFFY 1990 / 1991 E. BNFFY, Cult and Archaeological Context in Middle and SouthEast Europe in the Neolithic and the Calcolithic. Antaeus 19 / 20, 1990 / 1991, 183249. BREITINGER 1980 E. Breitinger, Skelette aus einer spturnenfelderzeitlichen Speichergrube in der Wallburg von Stillfried an der March, N. Forsch. Stillfried 4, 1980, 46106. BARNA 1996 J. P. Barna, A lengyeli kultra tmegsrja Eszterglyhorvtiban (The Common Grave of the Lengyel Culture in Eszterglyhorvti). Zalai Mz. 6, 1996, 149160. CARR / KNSEL 1997 G. Carr / C. Knsel, The Ritual Framework of Excarnation by Exposure as the Mortuary Practice of the Early and Middle Iron Ages of Central Southern Britain. In: A. Gwilt / C. Haselgrove (eds.), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies. New Approaches to the British Iron Age. Oxbow Monogr. 71 (Oxford 1997) 167173. CHOCHOROWSKI 1993 J. CHOCHOROWSKI, Ekspansja kimmeryjska na tereny Europy rodkowej. Uniw. Jagielloski Rozprawy Habilitacyjne 260 (Krakw 1993). DUDAY 1978 H. DUDAY, Archologie funraire et anthropologie. Application des relevs et de ltude ostologique linterprtation de quelques spultures pr- et protohistoriques du midi de la France. Cahiers Antr. 1, 1978, 55101. DUDAY 2006 H. DUDAY, Larchothanathologie ou larchologie de la mort (Archaeothanatology or the Archaeology of Death). In: GOWLAND / KNSEL 2006, 3056. DUDAY et al. 1990 H. DUDAY / F. LAMBACH / S. PLOUIN, Contribution de

284

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs and Mass Grave-Related Sites. Forensic Scien. Internat. 152, 2005, 5559. JOHNSTON 1961 F. E. JOHNSTON, Sequence of Epiphyseal Union in a Prehistoric Kentucky Population from Indian Knoll. Human Biol. 33, 1961, 6681. KALICZ-SCHREIBER 1981 R. KALICZ-SCHREIBER, Opfergruben aus der Frhbronzezeit in der Umgebung von Budapest. Slovensk Arch. 29, 1981, 7586. KIRLY 2011 . KIRLY, A Gva-kultra temetkezsei az Alfldn (Unpubl. Master thesis Budapest 2011). KIRLY in press . KIRLY, A Biritual Cemetery of the Gva Culture in the Middle Tisza Region and Some Further Notes on the Burial Customs of the LBAEIA in Eastern Hungary. In: M. Liviu (ed.), Proceedings of the colloquium The Beginnings of the First Millennium B.C. in the Tisa Plain and Transylvania. The Gva culture 17th18th June 2011, Satu Mare. Stud. si Comun. (Satu Mare in press). KNSEL et al. 2007 CH. KNSEL / A. OUTRAM / S. KNIGHT, A Comparison of Human and Animal Deposition at Velim-Skalka Through an Intergrated Approach. In: A. Harding / R. umberov / Ch. Knsel / A. Outram (eds.), Velim. Violence and Death in Bronze Age Bohemia. The Results of Fieldwork 199295, With a Consideration of Peri-mortem Trauma and Deposition in the Bronze Age (Prague 2007) 97136. KOVCS 2012 G. KOVCS, Rgszeti talaj-mikromorfolgiai jelents a Pusztataskony-Ledence 01, 550. objektum talajmikromorfolgiai mintirl (mintavtel 2011) (Archaeological Soil Micromorphological Report on the Samples of Pusztataskony-Ledence 01, Feature Nr. 550. [sampling 2011]) (unpubl. manuscript 2012). MAKKAY 2000 J. MAKKAY, Egy si hbor. Az eszterglyhorvti ks neolitikus tmegsr (An Early War. The Late Neolithic Mass Grave from Eszerglyhorvti) (Budapest 2000). MARTIN / SALLER 1957 R. MARTIN / K. SALLER, Lehrbuch der Anthropologie III (Stuttgart 1957). MEDOVI 1978 P. MEDOVI, Naselja starijeg gvozdenog doba u jugoslovenskom Podunavlju (Die relative Chronologie der Siedlungen der lteren Eisenzeit im jugoslawischen Donaugebiete). Arch. Iugoslavica Diss. et Monogr. 22 (Beograd 1978). METZNER-NEBELSICK 2010 C. METZNER-NEBELSICK, Aspects of Mobility and Migration in the Eastern Carpathian Basin and Adjacent Areas in the Early Iron Age (10th7th centuries BC). In: K. Dzigielewski / M. S. Przybya / A. Gaw-

lanthropologie de terrain linterprtation architecturale dun ensemble funraire: la tombe 12 du tumulus 2A Nordhouse (Bas-Rhin). Nouvelles Arch. 40, 1990, 1518. DUNHAM et al. 2003 G. H. DUNHAM / D. L. GOLD / J. L. HANTMAN, Collective Burial in Late Prehistoric Virginia: Excavation and Analysis of the Rapidan Mound. Am. Ant. 68,1, 2003, 109128. EIBNER 1980 C. EIBNER, Die Mehrfachbestattung aus einer Grube unter dem urnenfelderzeitlichen Wall in Stillfried an der March, N. Forsch. Stillfried 4, 1980, 107142. EIBNER 1988 C. EIBNER, Die Mehrfachbestattung aus Stillfried aus archologischer Sicht. In: F. Felgenhauer / J. Szilvassy / H. Kritscher / G. Hauser (eds.), Stillfried. Archologie Anthropologie. Verff. Mus. Ur- u. Frhgesch. Stillfried Sonderbd. 3 (Stillfried 1988) 7786. RY et al. 1963 K. RY / A. KRALOVNSZKY / J. NEMESKRI, Trtneti npessgek rekonstrukcijnak reprezentcija (A Representative Reconstruction of Historic Populations). Anthr. Kzlemnyek 7, 1963, 4190. FALKENSTEIN 1998 F. FALKENSTEIN, Die Siedlungsgeschichte des Titeler Plateaus. Feudvar 2 = Prhist. Arch. Sdosteuropa 14 (Kiel 1998). FARKAS 1972 / 1973 [1976] Gy. FARKAS, Izvetaj o ispitivanju antropolokog materijala iz grupne grobnice sa lokaliteta Gomolava. Rad Vojvoanskih Muz. 21 / 22, 1972 / 1973 [1976], 125129. FARKAS / MARCSIK 1976 GY. FARKAS / A. MARCSIK, Das Sammelgrab von Gomolava (Jugoslawien) aus der Urzeit. Anthropologie (Brno) 14, 1976, 9399. GOWLAND / KNSEL 2006 R. GOWLAND / CH. J. KNSEL (eds.), Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains. Stud. Funerary Arch. 1 (Oxford 2006). HILL 1996 J. D. HILL, The Identification of Ritual Deposits of Animals. A General Perspective from a Specific Study of Special Animal Deposits from the Southern English Iron Age. In: S. Anderson / K. Boyle (eds.), Ritual Treatment of Human and Animal Remains (Oxford 1996) 1732. ILON 2001 G. ILON, Siedlungswesen und Bestattungssitten in Gr. Zum bergang von der Urnenfelder- zur Hallstattzeit. In: A. Lippert (Hrsg.), Die Drau-, Mur- und Raab-Region im 1. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. Universittsforsch. Prhist. Arch. 78 (Bonn 2001) 243267. JESSEE / SKINNER 2005 E. JESSEE / M. SKINNER, A Typology of Mass Grave

Early Iron Age Mass Graves in the Middle Tisza Region: Investigation and Interpretation lik (eds.), Migration in Bronze and Iron Age Europe. Prace Arch. 63 (Krakw 2010) 121151. MURPHY 2008 E. MURPHY (Hrsg.), Deviant Burial in the Archaeological Record. Stud. Funerary Arch. 2 (Oxford 2008). NEMESKRI et al. 1960 J. NEMESKRI / L. HARSNYI / GY. ACSDI, Methoden zur Diagnose des Lebensalters von Skelettfunden. Anthr. Anz. 24, 1960, 7095. OLSEN / SHIPMAN 1994 S. OLSEN / P. SHIPMAN, Cutmarks and Peri-mortem Treatment of Skeletal Remains on the Northern Plains. In: D. W. Owsley / R. L. Jantz (eds.), Skeletal Biology in the Great Plains: Migration, Warfare, Health and Subsistence (Washington D. C. 1994) 377387. ORAVECZ 2007 H. ORAVECZ, Tiszab, Galamb-dl. Rgszeti Kutatsok Magyarorszgon 2006, 2007, 297298. PENROSE 1954 L. S. PENROSE, Distance, Size and Shape. Ann. Eugenics 18, 1954, 337343. PETRES 1972 . PETRES, On Celtic Animal and Human Sacrifices. Acta Arch. Acad. Scien. Hungaricae 24, 1972, 365 383. POPOVI 1981 D. POPOVIC, Keramika starijeg Gvozdenog doba u Sremu (Die Keramik der lteren Eisenzeit in Syrmien). Fontes Arch. Iugoslaviae 4 (Beograd 1981). RACZKY 1974 P. RACZKY, A lengyeli-kultra legksbbi szakasznak leletei a Dunntlon. Arch. rtest 101, 1974, 185 210. RAKITA / BUIKSTRA 2005 G. RAKITA / J. BUIKSTRA, Introduction. In: G. Rakita / J. Buikstra / L. Beck / S. Williams (eds.), Interacting with the Dead: Perspectives on Mortuary Archaeology for the New Millennium (Gainesville 2011) 111. RITTERSHOFER 2007 K. F. RITTERSHOFER (ed.), Sonderbestattungen in der Bronzezeit im stlichen Mitteleuropa: Westund Sddeutscher Verband fr Altertumsforschung, Jahrestagung vom 5.20. Juni 1990 in Pottenstein (Frnkische Schweiz) Kolloquium der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Bronzezeit. Internat. Arch. 37 (Espelkamp 1997). SCHOUR / MASSLER 1941 I. SCHOUR / M. MASSLER, The Development of the Human Dentition. Journal Am. Dental Assoc. 28, 1941, 11531160. SJVOLD 1990 T. SJVOLD, Estimation of Stature from Long Bones Utilizing the Line of Organic Correlation. Human Evolution 5, 1990, 431447. SRBU 2003 V. SRBU, Arheologia funerar i sacrificiile: o termi-

285

nologie unitar (Funerary Archaeology and Sacrifices: an Unifying Terminology) (Brila 2003). SZILVSSY et al. 1988 J. SZILVSSY / H. KRITSCHER / G. HAUSER, Eine urnenfelderzeitliche Mehrfachbestattung in Stillfried an der March, N. In: F. Felgenhauer / J. Szilvassy / H. Kritscher / G. Hauser (eds.), Stillfried. Archologie Anthropologie. Verff. Mus. Ur- u. Frhgesch. Stillfried Sonderbd. 3 (Stillfried 1988) 976. TASI 1972 N. TASI, An Early Iron Age Collective Tomb at Gomolava. Arch. Iugoslavica 13, 1972, 2738. TASI 1972 / 1973 (1976) N. TASI, Nalazi gvozdenog doba na Gomolavi istraivanja 19691971 god. Rad Vojvoanskih Muz. 21 / 22, 1972 / 1973 (1976), 99123. UBELAKER 1974 D. H. Ubelaker, Reconstruction of Demographic Profiles from Ossuary Skeletal Samples. A Case Study from the Tidewater Potomac. Smithsonian Contribution Anthr. 19 (Washington D. C. 1974). URK / MARTA 2011 M. URK / L. MARTA, Human Remains of the Late Bronze Age Settlements in the Upper Tisza Area New Researches and New Evidence. In: S. Berecki / R. E. Nmeth / B. Rezi (eds.), Bronze Age Rites and Rituals in the Carpathian Basin. Proceedings of the International Colloquium from Trgu Mure, 810 October 2010. Bibl. Mus. Marisiensis Ser. Arch. 4 (Trgu Mure 2011) 155162. WEISS-KREJCI 2005a E. WEISS-KREJCI, Excarnation, Evisceration, and Exhumation in Medieval and Post-medieval Europe. In: G. Rakita / J. Buikstra / L. Beck / S. Williams (eds.), Interacting with the Dead: Perspectives on Mortuary Archaeology for the New Millennium (Gainesville 2011) 155172. WEISS-KREJCI 2005b E. WEISS-KREJCI, Formation Processes of Deposits with Burned Human Remains in Neolithic and Chalcolithic Portugal. Journal Iberian Arch. 7, 2005, 3773. WEISS-KREJCI 2011 E. WEISS-KREJCI, The Formation of Mortuary Deposits. Implications for Understanding Mortuary Behaviors of Past Populations. In: S. C. Agarwal / B. A. Glencross (eds.), Social Bioarchaeology. Blackwell Stud. Global Arch. 1 (Chichester 2011) 68106. WILTSCHKE-SCHROTTA 2006 K. WILTSCHKE-SCHROTTA, Eine anthropologisch, detektivische Herausforderung. In: I. Hellerschmid, Die urnenfelder- / hallstattzeitliche Wallanlage von Stillfried an der March. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen 19691989 unter besonderer Bercksichtigung des Kulturwandels an der Epochengrenze Urnenfelder- / Hallstattkultur. Mitt. Prhist. Komm. sterreich. Akad. Wiss. 63 (Wien 2006) 414415.

286

gnes Kirly, Katalin Sebk, Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann and Gabriella Kovcs Polgr hatrban feltrt hrom temetjnek elzetes antropolgiai ismertetse (A Preliminary Anthropological Review of Three Cemeteries of the Fzesabony Culture Explored Near Polgr). Debreceni DriMz. vk. 2006, 3341. ZOFFMANN 2006b Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Embertani leletek az Urnamezs kultra Gr-Kpolnadomb lelhelyrl. Savaria 30, 2006, 145158. ZOFFMANN 2007 Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Anthropological material from a Neolithic common grave found at Eszterglyhorvti (Lengyel culture, Hungary). Folia Anthropologica 46, 2007, 4552. ZOFFMANN 2009 Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Biostatistical Data on the Origin of Bronze Age Ethnic Groups in the Carpathian Basin. Tisicum 19, 2009, 493503. ZOFFMANN in press Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Antropoloki ostaci grobova i masovne grobnice iz Kalakaa horizonta ranog gvozdenog doba sa lokaliteta Novi Sad-Klisa [E75] (Anthropological Remains from Graves and a Mass Grave Dated to the Early Iron Age [Kalakaa horizon] from the Site Novi Sad-Klisa [E75]) (in press).

ZALAI-GAL 1984 I. ZALAI-GAL, Neolitikus koponyakultusz s emberldozat leletek Tolna megybl (Neolithische Schdelbestattungs- und Menschenopfer-Funde aus dem Komitat Tolna, SW-Ungarn). Bri Balogh dm Mz. vk. 12, 1984, 342. ZOFFMANN 1997 Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Anthropologische Charakteristik der Bevlkerung der frheisenzeitlichen Bosut-Kultur aufgrund des Kollektivgrabes von Gomolava. Balcanica 28, 1997, 249257. ZOFFMANN 1998 Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Anthropological Finds from the Vajuga-Pesak site. In: P. Popovi / M. Vukmanovi, Vajuga-Pesak: nekropola starijeg gvozdenog doba (Vajuga-Pesak: Early Iron Age Cemetery). erdapske Sveske Posebna Izdanja 3 (Beogard 1998) 6568. ZOFFMANN 2001 Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, Anthropological Remains from the Urnfield Period Site of Gr-Kpolnadomb. In: A. Lippert (Hrsg.), Die Drau-, Mur- und Raab-Region im 1. vorchristlichen Jahrtausend. Universittsforsch. Prhist. Arch. 78 (Bonn 2001) 269270. ZOFFMANN 2006a Zs. K. ZOFFMANN, A bronzkori Fzesabonyi kultra

gnes Kirly Katalin Sebk Institute of Archaeological Sciences of the Etvs Lornd University Mzeum krt. 4 / b H1088 Budapest koldoknezo@gmail.com sebokkata@gmail.com Gabriella Kovcs Matrica Museum Gesztenys u. 13 H2440 Szzhalombatta antropologus@yahoo.com Zsuzsanna K. Zoffmann Rzsa str. 36.VII. H1042 Budapest zoffmann@freemail.hu

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen