A Case Study of Funerary Cave Use from Je’reftheel, Central Belize

Osteophageous insect damage on human bone from Je'reftheel, a Maya mortuary cave site in west‐central Belize

“…The current study focuses on Maya mortuary deposits from Je'reftheel (aka “Franz Harder Cave”), located in the Roaring Creek Works of central Belize within the modern Mennonite village of Springfield (Figure ). Je'reftheel is characterised by a small entrance and a single, narrow passage that eventually opens into several small chambers that contain 12 cultural deposits comprising the remains of approximately 25 individuals, as well as associated artefacts (Helmke & Wrobel, ; Wrobel et al, ; Figure ). Initial mapping and documentation of the cave and its cultural contents were carried out by members of the Belize Valley Archaeological Reconnaissance project (Helmke, ).…”

“…Initial mapping and documentation of the cave and its cultural contents were carried out by members of the Belize Valley Archaeological Reconnaissance project (Helmke, ). Later investigations in Je'reftheel by the Central Belize Archaeological Survey focused on excavation and on detailed in situ mapping and removal of bones, followed by skeletal inventory and analysis conducted at the Michigan State University Bioarchaeology Laboratory (Helmke & Wrobel, ; Michael, ; Wrobel et al, ). Use of the cave appears likely to have been entirely limited to mortuary ritual, and both diagnostic ceramics and AMS radiocarbon dates place its use in the Late and Terminal Classic periods ( ad 600–900).…”

“…Though there is a wide range of ages that includes infants and an old adult, an overabundance of young adults and a lack of infants in comparison with a “typical” palaeodemographic distribution indicates non‐random selection of individuals. Wrobel et al () argued that mortuary ritual was consistent with funerary, rather than sacrificial, ritual based in large part on reconstructions of mortuary pathways that demonstrated careful preparation and placement of bodies, followed by movement and commingling of most elements, as well as a complete lack of evidence for perimortem trauma. However, interpretation of these complex deposits has required careful consideration of their ritual and environmental contexts in order to distinguish the effects of a variety of potential cultural and taphonomic processes.…”

“…Within the two largest deposits in Chambers 2 and 3, the presence of articulated bones indicated that at least some of the individuals had been deposited as complete bodies in a variety of body positions and that at least some had been wrapped (Wrobel et al, ). None of these individuals were completely articulated, though all scattered elements appear to originate from complete bodies.…”

“…In her discussion of the role of taphonomy in Maya bioarchaeology, Tiesler () reviews taphonomic considerations relevant to interpretations of Maya mortuary contexts, focusing particularly on the timing of disarticulation of different joints. Through careful consideration of the position of bones in situ following Duday's () archaeothanatology approach, Mayanists have been able to reconstruct mortuary processes by identifying and distinguishing particular intentional (cultural) and unintentional (taphonomic) processes (Cook, ; Geller, ; Novotny & Kosakowsky, ; Scherer, Golden, Arroyave, & Pérez Robles, ; Tiesler et al, ; Wrobel, Helmke, & Freiwald, ). Other approaches involve consideration of differential representation of specific elements in commingled deposits to reconstruct patterns of post‐mortem bone movement and manipulation (Duncan, ; Weiss‐Krecji, ).…”