Diversity of Prehistoric Burial Customs

This study examined the diversity of the Balkan Prehistoric burials according to data from settlement burials and flat cemeteries and based on a general classification of the burial (chapter 1). Both patterns have regional and temporal peculiarities that make them a very important record for the analysis of the diversity of prehistoric burials in general.

Settlement burials were distributed in the Early Bronze Balkans and include inhumations, cremation, and symbolic burials. The first group predominates, typified by individual interments. Double and multiple inhumations occur as exceptions. In the regional context, the burials of newborn babies characterize the southern Balkan settlement burial pattern that connect the region with Anatolian and continental Greek burial rituals. In the northwest Balkans settlement burials are connected with the Middle Danube basin pattern of the Baden culture complex (individual, double, and multiple inhumations). The Early Bronze is the second period (after the Early Neolithic) of vast distribution of the settlement burial pattern in the Balkans.

The meaning of the burials in the settlements in multi-aspected, as it is related not only to the cult of ancestor, but also to the cults of the house and was an important element in the social identity of the households and communities. Some elements of the ritual indicate that the pattern glorified the small family in the Early Bronze Balkans, especially in the period of the development of the initial chiefdoms.

The flat cemeteries from Balkan Later Prehistory also include a rich archeological record on the variety and diversity of the prehistoric burial. The crouched inhumations to their side predominate, but there is a variety in the position of the legs and the arms. While in the Final Copper the predominate position was to the left, in the Early Bronze Age the gender differentiation culminated at Mokrin, where the women were buried to the right and men to the left.

The burial-goods in the flat cemeteries comprise a variety of ceramic vessels. The standard of one or two vessels was elaborated in some community funeral rituals, as well as the symbolism of the increase of the number of the ceramic vessels as an indicator of a high social status. This symbolism characterized the Final Copper and Early Bronze burials from different cultures in the Balkans (Ostrovul Corbului, Devnya, Vucedol, Mokrin, Zemun, etc.). The other burial-goods include implements/weapons, a variety of adornments, ochre, etc.

A special problem that occurs in the context of the social reconstruction of the funeral ritual is the relation between social status and the burial. The examined problem of the explanation of some double burials suggests, in some instances, that the burials were a sacrifice of the chief’s wife (Vucedol-Gradac), or a sacrifice of a child for the funeral of an old head of household. However, individual burials predominate in the Balkans. Some of them indicate a spatial relationship that can be explained with the family burial pattern. But the flat cemeteries represent a variety of spatial organizations of the burials there. Thus, rich burial-goods are of primary importance when distinguishing high status burials. High-status burial-goods in later Balkan prehistory consist of daggers (in male, female and children’s graves), gold and silver adornments, numerous ceramic vessels, etc.

The recent approach toward social archaeology is an attempt to examine the archeological record for gender, family, household and community social reconstruction based on the diversity of the prehistoric burials.

This study is a part of a broad investigation of prehistoric burial customs. In the future, the themes will go deep into Balkan Prehistory, up to the Mesolithic, as well as into a geographic comparative analyses. To provide a social analysis, different types of archaeological investigations are required, so in the context of common cultural processes, we can recognize the development of society.

The next parts will provide new investigations on Tumulus burials, as well as on Neolithic and Copper burial rites investigated to reconstruct social models and to be compared with Later Balkan prehistory.

At this point, we have the obvious contradiction between archaeological evidence and social models. While some archaeological analyses of Mesolithic burial rites suggest a stratified, complex society, the general cultural model infers, most likely, an egalitarian society. On the other hand, while the Late Copper Varna cemetery is the richest in Balkan prehistory, its contextual analysis suggests that is belongs to a less complex society in comparison to the Early Bronze Age. For the last period, initial chiefdoms have been assumed, although the burial rites to some extent are less representative in comparison to the Late Copper Age. Can we find further arguments to prove or disprove this recent state of research?

Further analysis of the family and its relation to burials is one objective of future research. Recently, the household has been recognized as a basic social unit in prehistory. However, it is still very difficult to recognize the family in the cemeteries. And there are instances in which a possible gender but not household structure is represented in the burial grounds.

The family as a social unit and as a microstructure with gender and age characteristics is to become a primary research objective, including not only the burial rites, but complex data from settlement archaeology, social environment and all additional bodies of evidence related to the topic.

The development of the archaeological analysis of the communities (usually limited to gender, age, burial goods) toward social analysis will require collecting and analyzing comparative data from close and distant regions. It is possible to use new tools of analysis such as DNA samples, cutting-edge investigations, and simulation analysis to trace new directions of investigation into the archaeology of the burial, which in turn, will reflect social and cultural reconstruction.

In conclusion, the archaeology of death is a component of the archaeology of society, in particular of the archaeology of the ethnos. The controversial interrelations between the latter two topics – a result of the record base, different methodologies of investigations, and different levels of individual authors abilities of understanding and interpretation of the facts—has resulted recently in different and even opposite theses. One of the ways to develop the social archaeology of death is to test modern social theories against prehistory and, in particular, Balkan prehistory. At the same time, as this study has shown, the systematic investigation of burial customs contributes to social theory, which, in turn, prepares the background for new directions of investigations.