Applying Zooarchaeological Methods to Interpret Mortuary Behaviour and Taphonomy in Commingled Burials: The Case Study of the Late Neolithic Site of Bolores, Portugal

Abstract

The rock-cut tomb of Bolores in the Portuguese Estremadura dates primarily to the Late Neolithic/Copper Age (2800-2600 BC) and, in a series of recent excavations, has yielded thousands of fragmented, commingled human bone specimens. The primary goals of the present study were to determine the minimum number of individuals interred in the tomb and to analyse spatial patterns in fragmentation intensity to identify natural and anthropogenic taphonomic processes. To investigate these research questions, the authors employed a simplified version of an established method in zooarchaeology to the study of human remains. Human bone specimens were recorded by the presence of osteological landmarks rather than the zones used in similar studies. This recording system allowed for calculation of the minimum number of individuals (further refined through dental analysis) and generated the NISPs (Numbers of Identified Specimens), minimum number of elements, fragment counts and landmarks sums essential to the conjoining and fragmentation studies. Fragmentation analysis led to the identification of four possible use areas in the tomb: two for primary inhumations and two for secondary deposits created by cleaning out the burial chambers at Bolores. We found that the application of multiple zooarchaeological methods to the study of commingled human remains has the potential to provide a more fine-grained understanding of site biography and taphonomy than human osteological methods alone.

Who lived on the Swiss Plateau around 3300 BCE? Analyses of commingled human skeletal remains from the dolmen of Oberbipp

“…Working with commingled remains, the morphological analyses become challenging and prone to methodical bias depending on the degree of fragmentation and disturbances (Mack et al, ). The skeletal remains from Oberbipp were subjected to taphonomic changes indicated by the low number of complete larger bones ( n = 83; MNI 42).…”

“…For Oberbipp, an extended supine position with some lower limb bending of a few individuals is observed. The challenge of verifying burial positions when dealing with commingled remains comes in addition to the fact that dolmen were intended to be collective burials and therefore are associated with relocation and fragmentation of bones (Mack et al, ). Sex‐specific burial sides or positions have not been found in megalithic dolmen, such as postulated for Oberbipp (Figure , discussed below).…”

“…However, the variation in the quantities of skeletal elements found can be attributed to the individual bone structures, because more dense and compact bones, such as the femora, are preserved more frequently than fragile bones, such as the viscerocranium (Figure ; Mack et al, ; Manifold, ). Additionally, fragile bones might not be underrepresented rather than being unnoticed as such, due to their degree of fragmentation and therefore being recorded as indeterminable.…”

“…Bones were recorded at excavation as either single, clearly distinguishable bones with no association to other fragments, several bones that were in anatomical association, or bone complexes without clear context. They were morphologically analysed in detail in the laboratory and classified with regard to their anatomical features and position similar to Mack, Waterman, Racila, Artz, and Lillios () and Osterholtz, Baustian, Martin, and Potts (). The preservation and representation of the skeletal remains were not further evaluated due to overall fragmentation and taphonomic alterations.…”

“…The MNI was established using the most often occurring and identifiable bones, which could be assigned to a side of the body and an age category (Mack et al, ; Osterholtz et al, ). To ensure that for the MNI calculation each individual was only included once, an overlap of features had to be present of the fragmented remains.…”