Bone modification and the conceptual relationship between humans and animals in Iron Age Wessex

archaeological records. As a result of the manner in which human and animal remains are traditionally studied and reported on, the analysis of taphonomic processes which affect the character of specimens between death and incorporation into forming deposits is often confined to butchery, burning and fragmentation. This paper argues that current methods of osteoarchaeological analysis fail to recognise the potential of a substantial and easily accessible source of information in paying little attention to the processes of weathering, gnawing, trampling, abrasion and longitudinal/spiral fracturing. More detailed taphonomic assessments have tended to focus on one specific process to answer a particular research question rather than taking a holistic approach to pre-depositional affects (e.g. Outram 2001). Consequently biographies of skeletal material are only partially complete, as the period in the material existence of bone prior to subterranean deposition is not fully investigated. The aforementioned taphonomic processes can provide substantial evidence for human decision making regarding the treatment of different classes of remains. This research explores the potential of holistic taphonomic analysis in a sample of c.9500 human and faunal specimens from the Iron Age sites of Winnall Down and Danebury. These sites were selected as they are located in the heart of Wessex, an area about which there has been considerable discourse and disagreement regarding the nature of human and animal bone treatment in the Iron Age. Through comprehensive taphonomic analysis, highly regulated, socially circumscribed behaviours surrounding bone handling were revealed. These results are suggestive of separate practices relating to the treatment of human and faunal remains with the latter exhibiting significantly greater evidence of exposure. The analysis of bone modification in features containing both human and faunal remains reveals a blurring of the boundary between human and animal identities, as the treatment of the two classes of material differs to a significantly lesser degree than when analysing the entire assemblage. Therefore each class of material is subjected to a more closely related mode of treatment. This might be seen as indicative of a conceptual proximity of human and faunal remains

Patterns in the modification of animal and human bones in Iron Age Wessex: revisiting the excarnation debate

Social practices concerning the treatment of human and animal remains in the Iron Age have long been a focus of debate in archaeological literature. The absence of evidence of a formal burial rite and the regular retrieval of human remains from ‘special’ deposits or ABGs has led to widespread discussion surrounding what majority rite was practised in Iron Age Wessex and excarnation has been a popular explanation. The deposition of unusual configurations of faunal remains, often associated with human remains may be suggestive of an interrelated pre-depositional and depositional practise between the different classes of remains. This paper explores how a holistic analysis of bone taphonomy can contribute to the understanding of social practises surrounding the pre-depositional treatment of humans and animals. In a case study of the sites of Winnall Down and Danebury, it was demonstrated that humans and animals were treated significantly differently. Human remains exhibited far less modification than faunal material, suggesting that excarnation was unlikely to have been the majority rite. However, results indicate that either exposure in a protective environment or exhumation was practised so that partial or total disarticulation could occur with little taphonomic modification. Taphonomic analysis of faunal material demonstrates that it is not only humans and animals that were treated differently, as dog and horse remains exhibit significantly different patterns of modification to other animals. Results are indicative of rigidly controlled culturally constituted social practices relating to the treatment of different classes of bone

Flesh on the Bones: Animal Bodies in Atlantic Roundhouses

This volume presents the state of research across Europe to illustrate how comparable interpretative frameworks are used by archaeologists working with both prehistoric and historical societies

New evidence for diverse secondary burial practices in Iron Age Britain: A histological case study

Iron Age (c. 700 BCe43AD) funerary practice has long been a focus of debate in British archaeology. Formal cemeteries are rare and in central-southern Britain human remains are often unearthed in unusual configurations. They are frequently recovered as isolated fragments, partially articulated body parts or complete skeletons in atypical contexts, often storage pits. In recent years, taphonomic analysis of remains has been more frequently employed to elucidate depositional practice (e.g. Madgwick, 2008, 2010; Redfern, 2008). This has enhanced our understanding of modes of treatment and has contributed much-needed primary data to the discussion. However, only macroscopic taphonomic analysis has been undertaken and equifinality (i.e. different processes producing the same end result) remains a substantial obstacle to interpretation. This research explores the potential of novel microscopic (histological) methods of taphonomic analysis for providing greater detail on the treatment of human remains in Iron Age Britain. Twenty human bones from two Iron Age sites: Danebury and Suddern Farm, in Hampshire, central-southern Britain were examined and assessed using thin section light microscopy combined with the Oxford Histological Index (OHI). Results suggest that diverse mortuary rites were practised and that different configurations of remains were subject to prescribed, varied treatment, rather than resulting from different stages of the same process. Practices that may be responsible for these patterns include exhumation followed by selective removal of elements and sheltered exposure prior to final burial. Only one sample provided evidence for excarnation, a practice that has been widely cited as a potential majority rite in Iron Age Britain

Patterns in the modification of animal and human bones in Iron Age Wessex: revisiting the excarnation debate

Social practices concerning the treatment of human and animal remains in the Iron Age have long been a focus of debate in archaeological literature. The absence of evidence of a formal burial rite and the regular retrieval of human remains from ‘special’ deposits or ABGs has led to widespread discussion surrounding what majority rite was practised in Iron Age Wessex and excarnation has been a popular explanation. The deposition of unusual configurations of faunal remains, often associated with human remains may be suggestive of an interrelated pre-depositional and depositional practise between the different classes of remains. This paper explores how a holistic analysis of bone taphonomy can contribute to the understanding of social practises surrounding the pre-depositional treatment of humans and animals. In a case study of the sites of Winnall Down and Danebury, it was demonstrated that humans and animals were treated significantly differently. Human remains exhibited far less modification than faunal material, suggesting that excarnation was unlikely to have been the majority rite. However, results indicate that either exposure in a protective environment or exhumation was practised so that partial or total disarticulation could occur with little taphonomic modification. Taphonomic analysis of faunal material demonstrates that it is not only humans and animals that were treated differently, as dog and horse remains exhibit significantly different patterns of modification to other animals. Results are indicative of rigidly controlled culturally constituted social practices relating to the treatment of different classes of bone

What makes bones shiny? Investigating trampling as a cause of bone abrasion

Taphonomic modifications on animal bones have the potential to provide a wealth of information on the depositional histories of faunal assemblages. However, certain modifications have received little attention and their interpretation remains complex due to their varied or uncertain aetiology. This has hindered progress in approaches to taphonomic research and it remains relatively rare that a comprehensive suite of modifications is recorded during zooarchaeological analysis. Abrasion, defined as a shine or polish on bone, is one such modification, with a plethora of processes having been cited as a potential cause. Relatively little holistic analysis of archaeological specimens has been carried out and consequently the interpretative potential of the modification is yet to be realised. This paper examines the degree to which the process of trampling causes bone abrasion. Trampling causes multiple, sub-parallel, linear striations on bones and has been suggested by some researchers as a cause of abrasion (see Andrews and Cook, Man 20:675–691, 1985; Behrensmeyer et al., Palaeogeogr Palaeocol 63:183–199, 1986; Fiorillo, Univ Wyoming Contrib Geol 26:57–97, 1989; Myers et al., Am Antiquity 45:483–490, 1980; Nielsen, Am Antiquity 56:483–503, 1991; Olsen and Shipman, J Archaeol Sci 15:535–553, 1988). Research presented here involves statistical analysis of a large and diverse faunal dataset from seven British sites. Results from both correlation and logistic regression analysis demonstrate the very close relationship between the two modifications, although this is not the case at every site. These findings strongly suggest that trampling is a major cause of abrasion in a British context. Once the relationship is established at a specific site, the modification can be more reliably used for reconstructing the taphonomic trajectory of an assemblage