What’s in a hearth? Seeds and fruits from the Neolithic fishing and fowling camp at Bergschenhoek, The Netherlands, in a wider context

This paper presents new results from the Early Neolithic Dutch wetland site of Bergschenhoek (ca. 4200 cal b. c., Swifterbant Culture), which are compared with finds from similar features and sites. The data indicate the presence of predominantly eutrophic, nutrient-rich reed and forb vegetation and suggest the preparation of meals consisting of fish and fruits. The finds from the hearth, dominated by uncarbonised remains of wetland taxa, form a remarkable part of the find assemblage. Therefore, the discussion concerns assemblages, deposition processes and interpretations of uncarbonised and carbonised finds from hearths at comparable, contemporary sites. The wide variation of macroremains assemblages of hearths indicates that plant deposition in hearths is understood only partly and remains a topic for further research.Peer reviewe

How can we understand researchers' perceptions of key research developments? A case study focusing on the adoption of agriculture in Ireland

Understanding how researchers perceive key research developments in their fields is not straightforward. This paper reports on a project focusing on perceptions of key developments in the adoption of agriculture (Mesolithic-Neolithic transition) in Ireland. The project involved over 60 interviews with active researchers, generating qualitative data that provide overview of these perceptions. Despite much diversity, several areas emerge as having been particularly important: including methodologies and wider developments in archaeological practice. Variation between Ireland and other areas of north-west Europe is suggested by some aspects of the data.Other funderUCD President’s Research Fellowship 2007-2008sp, ke, ab - TS 06.12.1

Cannibalism versus funerary defleshing and disarticulation after a period of decay: comparisons of bone modifications from four prehistoric sites

Objectives Humanly induced modifications on human and non‐human bones from four archaeological sites of known funerary rituals (one interpreted as cannibalism and three interpreted as funerary defleshing and disarticulation after a period of decay) were analyzed to ascertain whether macromorphological and micromorphological characteristics of cut marks can be used to distinguish cannibalistic from secondary burial practices. Material and methods Four collections were analyzed: the Magdalenian assemblage from Gough\u27s Cave (UK) and the Mesolithic‐Neolithic bone samples from Lepenski Vir, Padina and Vlasac (Serbia). A total of 647 cut marks (345 on human and 302 on non‐human remains) were imaged and measured using an optical surface measurement system, the Alicona InfiniteFocus, housed at the Natural History Museum (London, UK). Results The frequency of cut marks at Gough\u27s Cave exceeds 65%, while it is below 1% in the Serbian sites, and no human tooth marks and only one case of percussion damage have been observed on the three Serbian collections. The distribution of cut marks on human bones is comparable in the four assemblages. Cannibalized human remains, however, present a uniform cut mark distribution, which can be associated with disarticulation of persistent and labile articulations, and the scalping and filleting of muscles. For secondary burials where modification occurred after a period of decay, disarticulation marks are less common and the disarticulation of labile joints is rare. The micromorphometric analyses of cut marks on human and non‐human remains suggest that cut marks produced when cleaning partially decayed bodies are significantly different from cut marks produced during butchery of fresh bodies. Conclusions A distinction between cannibalism and secondary treatment of human bodies can be made based on frequency, distribution and micromorphometric characteristics of cut marks