Bouman, Marjolein T. I. J.

van Kappel, Kirsten

Verniers, Linda P.

Institutional Repository of the Freie Universität Berlin

Special Volume 3 (2012), pp. 155–159Marjolein T.I.J. Bouman – Kirsten van Kappel – Linda P.VerniersLocation, Location, Location: the Construction andPreservation of Roman Burial Mounds in the DutchRiver Deltain Wiebke Bebermeier – Robert Hebenstreit – Elke Kaiser – Jan Krause (eds.), LandscapeArchaeology. Proceedings of the International Conference Held in Berlin, 6th – 8th June 2012Edited by Gerd Graßhoff and Michael Meyer,Excellence Cluster Topoi, BerlineTopoi ISSN 2192-2608http://journal.topoi.orgExcept where otherwise noted,content is licensed under a Creative CommonsAttribution 3.0 License:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0Marjolein T.I.J. Bouman – Kirsten van Kappel – Linda P. VerniersLocation, Location, Location: the Constructionand Preservation of Roman Burial Mounds inthe Dutch River DeltaRoman period; burial mounds; river delta; The Netherlands; palynology; micromorphol-ogy; construction; preservation.IntroductionDuring an excavation in the Holocene Rhine river delta (The Netherlands), six largelyintact Roman burial mounds dating from the 2nd and 3rd century AD were found.1 Sucha discovery is a unique find for The Netherlands. Why were these mounds built at this lo-cation and why have these mounds been preserved? These questions have been answeredusing an interdisciplinary approach. This study included field observations, micromor-phological analyses, grain-size measurements, AMS 14C-dating and a palynological study.By combining the results of these studies, we were able to make a reconstruction of thepalaeo-landscape and the environmental changes that occurred through time.Site Description: Soil Profiles and Burial MoundsThe site is located on the Over-Oudland fossil channel belt which was active from theNeolithic till the Bronze Age. A residual channel from this channel belt was found on thesite. A palaeo A-horizon had formed in the upper sandy and silty overbank deposits fromthis channel belt. The burial mounds were built on top of this palaeosol. Lithologically,the burial mounds were difficult to discern from the surrounding soil.The palaeo A-horizon and burial mounds are covered by a 20-cm-thick bluish claydeposit. The presence of this clay layer was vital for discerning and recognising the burialmounds because it was draped over the former terrain surface—including the burialmounds—thereby conserving the original topography in the subsurface. As a result, itwas possible to discern the shape and form of the burial mounds by following the bluishclay layer (Fig. 1). A second palaeo A-horizon had formed in the upper part of the blueclay layer. This palaeosol is also overlain by a sandy to silty clay deposit of approximately1 meter thickness. Modern soil has developed on the top of these sandy and silty clays.The burial mounds are approximately 40 to 50cm high. Of the six burial mounds,three were circular and two were square. Three of the burial mounds were surrounded bya ditch and one, a square mound, was surrounded by an earthen wall. The burial moundswere probably built by people who lived in a nearby settlement, the remains of whichwere found in an earlier research project, located 200 meters to the southwest of the site.The remains of cremations were found in the top of four burial mounds. In two mounds,these remains also included pottery which had been added to the grave as a burial gift.On the basis of the pottery remains, the burial mounds could be dated to the 2nd and 3rdcentury AD.1 Verniers 2012.156 Marjolein T.I.J. Bouman – Kirsten van Kappel – Linda P. VerniersFig. 1 | Profile of one of theexcavated burial mounds.MethodsMicromorphological analyses were conducted on samples taken from the top, the flank,the surrounding ditch and the surrounding earthen wall of one burial mound. Also thesedimentary characteristics of a natural, undisturbed soil profile were studied. Samples forgrain size analyses were taken from all burial mounds and from different locations withina natural soil profile. The organic fill of the nearby residual channel provided material fora palynological study and material for AMS 14C-dating. All the samples were processedand analysed using the standard method.ResultsThe palynological record from the nearby residual channel gives us the vegetation devel-opment from the Early Iron Age (810–515 BC)2 to the Early Roman Age (73–227 AD)3.In the Iron Age, patches of deciduous forest with oak and hazel are present in the area.In the surrounding area, cereals and other crops were grown. In the Early Roman periodthe landscape opened up as the cultivation of cereals expanded along with an increase inthe area of fallow land. This increase in fallow land coincides with a decrease in grasslandand can probably be related to land clearings for the construction of the burial mounds.Meanwhile, the water depth in the residual channel decreased from 150cm to 50–100cm inthe Roman period. A dense vegetation cover in the channel and immediate surroundingslimited access to the water.The burial mounds were built on top of a palaeo A-horizon. During the micromor-phological analyses, little to no evidence was found regarding preparations of this soilprior to mound building. An increase in charcoal particles on the boundary between thepalaeo A-horizon and the burial mound could suggest the use of fire to clear the area priorto building.Micromorphological analyses suggest that the burial mounds were constructed usinglocal materials. The sediment used to construct the mounds shows the same lithologicalcharacteristics as the sediment taken from the natural soil profiles. Grain size analysesshowed that all mounds were constructed of very silty clay. Because the mounds con-sisted of a uniform sediment matrix, it is likely that they had been built in one phase.Volumetric calculations indicated that the material removed from the surrounding ditches2 2560 ± 45; KIA-43210.3 1870 ± 30 BP; Poz-41826.Location, Location, Location: the Construction and Preservation of Roman Burial Mounds 157Fig. 2 | Impression of the landscape in the Late Roman period: drawing by L. van der Feijst.alone could not account for the volume of clay needed to raise the mounds. Additionalclay was therefore needed to construct the mounds. An area was found on the site wherethe natural soil had been disturbed without the presence of a mound. It is thereforeproposed that this area was used as a source for the material used for building the burialmounds.It was found that the site did not experience large-scale erosion or degradation. Thisis evidenced by the micromorphological research which revealed that the top of theburial mounds were virtually undisturbed. Furthermore, limited soil formation on thetop of the burial mounds suggests that the mounds have been exposed for just a shortperiod of time favouring preservation. However, grain size measurements suggest thatminor disturbances of the burial mounds did occur, probably caused by wind and watermovements. The sedimentary characteristics of a thin ‘transitional’ layer on top of themounds showed similarities to the sediment from the burial mounds as well as to theclay layer deposited on top of the burial mounds. This layer is therefore interpreted as amixing layer created by erosion and redeposition of water-saturated sediment.We believe that the burial mounds were inundated by a flood. However, this flooddid not have a significant erosional impact in the immediate surroundings of the burialmounds. The clayey deposit on top of the burial mounds had a very low sand and siltcontent. This sediment type is associated with low-energy environments (low-velocitywater flow or standing water), which explains the minimal erosion found in the micro-morphological record. Based on the age of the burial mounds, the start of activity of thenearby Hollandse IJssel River and minimum soil formation, the flooding of the burialmounds and deposition of the 20-cm-thick bluish clay layer should have taken place inthe Late Roman period.The flooding and deposition of the Late Roman clay layer has not only preservedthese mounds but also given us a vital guide in finding and recognising the burial mounds.The burial mounds were further buried during the Middle Ages which helped conservethe mounds even more.158 Marjolein T.I.J. Bouman – Kirsten van Kappel – Linda P. VerniersConclusionsBased on the analyses of the different proxies, we conclude that:1. the Late Roman burial mounds were constructed on former pastures near a watersource (residual channel). The mounds were built on top of a palaeo A-horizonwhich was not prepared;2. the mounds were constructed using local materials and were not built only usingthe material from the surrounding ditches;3. the top of the burial mounds had been reworked but no large-scale erosion ordegradation had taken place;4. subsequent flooding and deposition of clay favoured preservation of the mounds.An impression of the landscape in the Late Roman period with the burial mounds isshown in Fig. 2.Location, Location, Location: the Construction and Preservation of Roman Burial Mounds 159BibliographyVerniers 2012L.P. Verniers, ed. Grafheuvels in IJsselstein. Een archeologische opgraving van een Ro-meins grafveld uit de 2e eeuw. ADC Rapport 3012. Amersfoort: ADC ArcheoPro-jecten, 2012.Marjolein T.I.J. Bouman (corresponding author), ADC ArcheoProjecten, P.O. Box 15133800 PN Amersfoort, The Netherlands, m.bouman@archeologie.nlKirsten van Kappel, ADC ArcheoProjecten, P.O. Box 1513 3800 PN Amersfoort, TheNetherlandsLinda P. Verniers, ADC ArcheoProjecten, P.O. Box 1513 3800 PN Amersfoort, TheNetherlands

Location, Location, Location: the Construction and Preservation of Roman
Burial Mounds in the Dutch River Delta

https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/bitstream/fub188/19437/1/131.pdf

Location, Location, Location: the Construction and Preservation of Roman Burial Mounds in the Dutch River Delta

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Institutional Repository of the Freie Universität Berlin