ArticlePDF Available

Some considerations about a new grave discovered at Sultana-Ghețărie (Southeastern Romania)

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

During the archaeological campaign of 2012 in the area of the Sultana-Ghețărie flat settlement, Mânăstirea commune, Călăraşi county, an inhumation grave belonging to the Gumelnița culture was discovered. The grave contained the skeleton in anatomical connection and moderate state of preservation, laid in a lateral foetal position, on the left side, oriented E – W. The legs were accentuated flexed. The both arms were bent with the hand towards the skull. The funerary inventory consists in a bi-lobed needle and a stone axe. The unusual location of this isolated grave will be discussed in this article.
Content may be subject to copyright.
The following ad supports maintaining our C.E.E.O.L. service
SomeconsiderationsaboutanewgravediscoveredatSultanaGhețărie
(SoutheasternRomania)
«SomeconsiderationsaboutanewgravediscoveredatSultanaGhețărie
(SoutheasternRomania)»
byGabrielVasile;CătălinLazăr;MonicaMărgărit
Source:
StudiesofPrehistory(StudiidePreistorie),issue:9/2012,pages:101111,onwww.ceeol.com.
Some considerations about a new grave discovered at
Sultana-
Ghețărie
(Southeastern Romania)
Cătălin LAZĂR*
Gabriel VASILE*
Monica MĂRGĂRIT**
Abstract:
During the archaeological campaign of 2012 in the area of the Sultana-
Ghețărie
flat
settlement, Mânăstirea commune, Călăraşi county, an inhumation grave belonging to the Gumelnița culture was
discovered. The grave contained the skeleton in anatomical connection and moderate state of preservation, laid
in a lateral foetal position, on the left side, oriented E – W. The legs were accentuated flexed. The both arms
were bent with the hand towards the skull. The funerary inventory consists in a bi-lobed needle and a stone axe.
The unusual location of this isolated grave will be discussed in this article.
Rezumat:
În timpul campaniei arheologice din anul 2012, în perimetrul așezării plane de la Sultana-
Ghețărie
, com. Mânăstirea, jud. Călăraşi, a fost descoperit un mormânt de inhumație atribuit culturii Gumelnița.
Mormântul conținea un schelet în conexiune anatomică, cu o stare de conservare medie, depus în poziție chircită,
pe partea stângă, orientat E-V. Inventarul funerar consta într-un ac de os bilobat și un topor de piatră șlefuită.
Localizarea neobișnuită a acestui mormânt izolat o vom discuta în acest articol.
Keywords:
Eneolithic, Boian and Gumelnița cultures, isolated grave, bi-lobed needle, stone axe
.
Cuvinte cheie:
eneolitic, culturile Boian și Gumelnița, mormânt izolat, ac bilobat, topor de piatră.
Introduction
The flat settlement from Sultana-
Ghețărie
belonging to the Boian culture, Vidra phase, is
located in the southeast of Romania, on the right bank of the old Mostiştea River (which has been
converted into several artificial lakes), about 7 km from the Danube river, near the border with
Bulgaria (fig. 1). From an administrative point of view the site is located in the Sultana village, Călărași
County. From topographical point of view the settlement is located on a promontory at the western
limit of the high terrace of the Mostiștea Lake (fig. 2), at 320 m (±1 m) west from the Sultana-
Malu
Roșu
cemetery (C. Lazăr
et alii
2012). The geographic coordinates of the Sultana-
Ghețărie
flat
settlement are 44°15'37.83072" N / 26°51'47.93720" E and the corresponding absolute altitude of this
area is at least 44.891 m and maximum 46.399 m. All data are reported in the STEREO-70 projecting
system of coordinates and 1975 Black Sea elevation system reference.
This settlement is known from the archaeological literature for a long time (D. Șerbănescu, G
Trohani 1978), however, unfortunately, systematic excavations have not been made. Due to the
continuous degradation of the site as result of clay exploitations by local people, in 2008 were realized
two test pits (R. Andreescu
et alii
2009) and in 2012 systematic excavations were started. Thus, more
surfaces have been opened as well as the profiles of some of the pits excavated by locals for clay
extraction have been cleaned and straightened. The research led to the discovery of more Boian pits,
as well three inhumation graves. Of these, two graves are from a later chronological sequence than
the Eneolithic (graves no. 2 and 3), but one (grave no. 1) was assigned to the Gumelnița culture. This
grave forms the subject of the present article.
Context and stratigraphy
Grave no. 1 was discovered in Son 2/2012, A4 Square, at the altitude of 44.81 m.a.s.l. The
geographical coordinates of the grave are 26° 51' 47.8033" E and 44° 15' 37.8363" N.
* National History Museum of Romania, Calea Victoriei 12, sector 3, 030026, Bucureşti; acltara@yahoo.com;
gsvasile@yahoo.com
** Valahia University, Bd. Carol I 2, 130024, Dâmbovița county, Târgovişte; monicamargarit@yahoo.com
Studii de Preistorie 9, 2012, p. 101-111.
Cătălin LAZĂR, Gabriel VASILE, Monica MĂRGĂRIT
From stratigraphic point of view the grave was identified in the stratigraphic unit (s.u.) 1005,
which is a yellow, compact and homogenous sediment containing numerous pieces of white
carbonates and few archaeological materials.
Fig. 1. Location of Sultana-
Ghețărie
archaeological site.
Localizarea sitului arheologic Sultana-
Ghețărie.
Fig. 2. General plan of high terrace of Mostiștea Lake and location of Sultana-
Ghețărie
flat settlement.
Planul general al terasei înalte a lacului Mostiştea şi localizarea aşezării plane de la Sultana-
Ghețărie.
102
Access via CEEOL NL Germany
Some considerations about a new grave discovered at Sultana-
Ghețărie
All the Eneolithic features researched at Sultana-
Ghețărie
are cutting this unit. S.u. 1005 is
corresponding
grosso modo
to s.u. T1003 from the cemetery1, which is equivalent of a prehistoric
walking level. At the top, this stratigraphic unit (s.u. 1005) is overlapped by s.u. 1002, which is a
yellowish-brown sediment with archaeological materials, that corresponds to the occupational level of
the prehistoric settlement. At the bottom, s.u. 1005 is overlapping a natural level of
loess
.
Fig. 3. Grave no. 1 from Sultana-
Ghețărie
.
Mormântul nr. 1 de la Sultana-
Ghețărie
.
Grave structure
The funeral pit had an oval shape made for an individual grave without any traces of related
constructions (fig. 3). It presents a maximum length of 1.218 m and a maximum width of 0.564 m.
The surface of the pit was 0.531 m2 and the base of the pit was at 44.63 m.a.s.l. (s.u. 1005). The
filling of the funeral pit (s.u. 1012) was a yellow, homogenous and compact sediment, containing
carbonates. Also, it was disturbed by a few burrows, some of them shifting the position of the bones.
The level of digging of the pit was not identified, but most probably, this was somewhere
between the lower limit of the s.u. 1002 and the upper limit of the s.u. 1005. At the top no traces of
marking of the grave area were identified.
Funerary treatment
The grave contained the skeleton in anatomical connection and moderate state of
preservation, laid in a lateral foetal position, on the left side, oriented E – W (fig. 3). The legs were
accentuated flexed. The both arms were bent with the hands towards the skull.
1 The Sultana-
Malu Roșu
cemetery and the flat settlement of Sultana-
Ghețărie
are on the same terrace of the
Mostiștea Lake, so it is normal to be some correspondence between stratigraphic units of these two sites.
103
Cătălin LAZĂR, Gabriel VASILE, Monica MĂRGĂRIT
In general, the funerary treatment applied to the dead from this grave is similar with that
observed at the neighbouring necropolis of Sultana-
Malu Roșu
, which contained graves belonging to
the Boian and Gumelnița cultures. In terms of the basic elements of the funerary ritual, the individual
from the grave no. 1 reflects common burial practices characteristic for the Gumelniţa communities.
The deposition of the dead in a foetal position, preferentially on the left side and E – W
oriented has been documented in several other necropolises belonging to the Kodjadermen-
Gumelniţa-Karanovo VI cultural complex in Bulgaria and Romania (E. Comșa 1960, 1974, 1995; H.
Todorova
et alii
1975, 2002; D. Şerbănescu 1985; I. Angelova 1986, 1991; C. Lazăr 2001, 2011, etc.).
Fig. 4. Location of the inventory pieces in relation to the body of the dead: the stone axe (left) and
the bone needle (right).
Localizarea pieselor de inventar în corpul defunctului: toporul de piatră (stânga) şi acul de os
(dreapta).
Grave goods
The funerary inventory is not consistent from a quantitative point of view as only two pieces
were deposited in the grave (a stone axe and a bone needle). However, from the perspective of their
typological representativeness the two pieces are special (figs. 5/a-b and 6).
In terms of location of the inventory pieces in relation to the body of the dead, both pieces
were found in the skull area (fig. 4). Thus, the needle was found on the back of the skull, at a
distance of ca. 8.5 cm NNE of the skull (fig. 4). The stone axe was found in front of the skull with the
blade entering the cranium (fig. 4). Even if, apparently, the axe seems to have been stuck in the
deceased’ head, a situation which may suggest the cause of the death, this is not the case. The
position of the axe simply reflects post-depositional phenomena, the sliding of the axe over the skull,
and by no means a violent action.
The bi-lobed needle
was made by a long bone diaphysis diverted from a large mammal (fig.
5/a-b). The item is proximally fractured and, moreover, presents lime scale in surface, which make
indecipherable the technological actions which led to its processing.
Morphologically, it is formed of two lobes and a trunk with circular section. From a
morphometric perspective, it presents a maximum width, at the level of the lobes, of 31 mm, a
maximum thickness of 4 mm and a diameter at the trunk level of 5.5 mm.
Only at the intersection of the lobes we identified technological marks (fig. 5/c), consisting of
several cuts made by sawing, probably meant to ensure the release of the two lobes. Without any
doubt it was also applied a method of shaping the fracture sides, but we do not know the used
technique. At the trunk level, appear several red coloured spots (fig. 5/e), but it is hard to say if they
appeared after sedimentation or if they are anterior to this stage (painted piece, contact with painted
hair, etc.). As functional hypothesis we can invoke that of hair pin, stating both from its morphology
and from the discovery context (at the skull level).
Even if they are not present in great number, such hair pins, with a bi-lobed morphology, are
also mentioned in other Neolithic or Eneolithic necropolises or settlements in Romania and Bulgaria. It
is the case of the necropolis from Cernica, belonging to the Boian culture (Gh. Cantacuzino, S. Morintz
104
Some considerations about a new grave discovered at Sultana-
Ghețărie
Fig. 5. The bi-lobed needle: a, b – anterior and posterior views; c – cutting marks, for the lobes
release (50x); d – lobe extremity, attesting a shaping method of the fracture sides (50x); e – traces of
red colorant, present on the trunk of the piece (100x); f – the morphology of the piece at the
intersection of the trunk and one of the lobes (30x).
Acul bilobat: a, b – vedere anterioară și posterioară; c - stigmate de tăiere, destinate degajării lobilor
(50x); d – extremitatea lobului, atestând o metodă de regularizare a marginilor de fractură (50x); e –
urme de colorant roșu prezente pe trunchiul piesei (100x); f – morfologia piesei la intersecția
trunchiului cu unul dintre lobi (30x).
105
Cătălin LAZĂR, Gabriel VASILE, Monica MĂRGĂRIT
1963, fig. 7), where was found a hair pin which was considered a stylized representation of a feminine
figure but which, in its superior side, presents the same bi-lobed morphology. In the Gumelniţa
culture it appears mostly in settlements, as is the case of the pieces from Vidra, Pietrele, Ruse or
Tangâru (G. Georgiev, N. Angelov 1957, fig. 56/1; E. Comșa 1997, fig. 3/1-3; S. Hansen
et alii
2011).
The stone axe
was made of polymictic sandstone with quartz and biotite (dark mica) with
carbonate cement and rare calcite diaclase. Morphologically, the axe is pentagonal in shape (fig. 6)
and has a hole for hafting at its proximal part (Ø = 18.05 x 17.64 mm). The length of the axe is 192
mm, the maximum width is 48 mm, and has a thickness of 28.67 mm. From a functional perspective,
the axe has no use-wear traces, what allows us to put forward the hypothesis of a pure symbolic
function for this piece and not a utilitarian one. This type of axe, quite rare in discoveries belonging to
the Kodjadermen-Gumelniţa-Karanovo VI cultural complex, present especially in necropolises, in some
cases do not present use-wear traces (e.g., grave no. 43 from Varna I cemetery), reason for what it
can be considered a prestige item. Similar pieces with the one from Sultana
-Ghețărie
were found
rarely in settlements (e.g., Ruse, Gumelnița, Vlădiceasca) but quite frequent in graves (Chirnogi-
Şuviţa
Iorgulescu
, Curcani, Durankulak , Gumelnița I, Gumelnița II (
Valea Mare
), Liljak, Spanțov, Varna I,
Vinitsa, etc.) (Vl. Dumitrescu 1925; G. Georgiev, N. Angelov 1952, 1957; D. Ovcharov 1963; E.
Ghianopoulos 1966; A. Radunčeva 1976; I. Ivanov 1978; K. Kănchev 1978; D. Șerbănescu 1985; S.
Marinescu-Bîlcu 2000; H. Todorova
et alii
2002).
2
3
Fig. 6. The stone axe found in grave no. 1 from Sultana-
Ghețărie
.
Toporul de piatră din mormântul nr. 1 de la Sultana-
Ghețărie
.
Anthropological data
Even though the skeleton from grave no.1 from Sultana-
Ghețărie
being partially complete, the
bones are very fragmentary. In terms of representativeness, at the level of the cephalic segment, the
following bones have been identified: the frontal bone (a fragment of squama, the supraorbital margin
and the right frontal eminence), the parietal bones (approximately complete), the left temporal bone,
2 There are some cases of axes of this type which present use-wear traces (e.g., Varna I cemetery) or traces of
degradation (e.g., the isolated grave from Curcani) (E. Ghianopoulos 1966; K. Kănchev 1978).
3 Very interesting is the fact that the pieces from this necropolis are in a fragmentary state.
106
Some considerations about a new grave discovered at Sultana-
Ghețărie
the right temporal bone (petrous pyramid and a fragment of the mastoid process) and the occipital
bone (a fragment of squama occipitalis and two fragments from the basilar part with the occipital
condyles). The elements of the facial skeleton are lacking.
The dento-maxillary apparatus is represented by the left maxilla (a fragment containing the alveoli of
the premolars), the right maxilla (a fragment containing alveoli for incisors, canine and premolars) and
the mandible (a fragment of the body with alveoli of the canine and left premolars, the right
hemimandible being approximately complete, lacking a fragment of the horizontal ramus containing
the corronoid process and the mandibular condyle).
The dentition is permanent, being identified the following teeth (the lacking teeth were lost
post-mortem
):
Right Left
- - - P2 P1 C I2 I1 - I2 C P1 P2 M1 M2 -
M3 M2 M1 P2 P1 C I2 I1 - I2 C P1 P2 M1 - -
The axial skeleton is very weak represented, among its constitutive elements being identified
only three cervical bodies of vertebrae, 12 fragments at the levels of vertebral arches and four rib
fragments.
From the level of the shoulder girdle are lacking the scapulae. The left clavicle is lacking the
sternal extremity, and the right one is represented by a fragment of diaphysis.
The skeleton of the upper limbs is represented by the left humerus (four fragments of
diaphysis, without anatomical connection), the right humerus (the proximal third is missing), the left
radius (proximal extremity) and the left ulna (a fragment of diaphysis).
From the pelvic girdle are preserved only two fragments comprising the bilateral acetabular
fossa.
The lower limbs are represented by the left femur (approximately complete, unrestorable,
with damages at the level of proximal and distal extremities and of the trochanter), the right femur
(complete diaphysis, and fragmentary at the level of extremities), the left patella (approximately
complete), the left tibia (fragmentary, with the proximal third lacking), the right tibia (a fragment of
diaphysis and the distal epiphysis), the left fibula (a fragment of diaphysis), the right fibula (a
fragment of diaphysis and the distal extremity), the left tarsus (astragalus and calcaneus) and the
right tarsus (astragalus, with damages).
Sex determination
. For determining this parameter were utilized the general morphological
characteristics of the skeleton, especially those at the level of the skull (the pelvis, which reflects also
the sexual dimorphism, being largely damaged, was not utilized). The characteristics were
scored/calculated after the algorithm established by J.E. Buikstra and D.H. Ubelaker (1994, p. 16-21)
as follows: nuchal crest (+3), mastoid process (+3), supraorbital margin (+5), glabella (+4) and
mental eminence (+4). The results show that the analysed individual was a male.
Estimation of age at death
. Due to a high degree of fragmentation of bones, as well as due to
the lack of that elements which assure a high accuracy in establishing the age at death (pubic
symphisis, auricular surface, rib extremities), the age of the analyzed individual was estimated based
on the degree of dental wear of the molars, utilizing the system described by D. R. Brothwell (1981, p.
72). All molars present a strong and unequal attrition (degree 5+ and 5++) what indicates an age at
death of above 45 years (old adult).
Stature estimation and pathological conditions
. The estimation of the stature was not possible
as none of the long bones were completely preserved. Also, no dental or osseous pathological
modifications were observed.
Non-metric characteristics
. There were evaluated both the epigenetic traits at the level of the
skull, following the book of G. Hauser and G. F. De Stefano (1989) and those at the level of the
postcranial skeleton, based on the study of M. Finnegan (1978). There were identified the following
characteristics: right supraorbital groove, a sutural (wormian) bone on the track of the left lambdoid
suture (at this level, the wormian bones have the highest frequency of occurrence),
foramen mentale
(right), and a right hypotrochanteric fossa (with unclear origin: genetic, metabolic or mechanical).
Biometry
. The calculated measurements and the related indices were given after R. Martin
(1914) and G. Bräuer (1988,
apud
R. Martin 1914) and are presented in the following table:
107
Cătălin LAZĂR, Gabriel VASILE, Monica MĂRGĂRIT
Dimensions and mandibular indices
Values (mm)
69. height of mandibular symphysis 29,96
69(1). height of mandibular body (right) [beside
foramen mentale
] 26,81
69(2). height of mandibular body (right) [beside M2] 22,85
69(3). thickness of mandibular body (right) [beside
foramen mentale
] 8,72
69b. thickness of mandibular body (right) [beside M2] 12,38
71. width of mandibular vertical ramus (right) 30,55
– height index of mandible (right) [69(2) : 69)] 76,26
– height-width index of mandibular body (right) [69(3) : 69(1)] 32,52
Dimensions and indices for postcranial skeleton
Values (mm)
– width of humeral epicondyle (right) 64,63
– minimum perimeter of humeral diaphysis (right) 66,00
sagittal diameter (anterior-posterior) radial head (left) 20,85
– circumference of radial neck (left) 44,00
– maximum length (height) of patella (left) 40,66
– maximum thickness of patella (left) 22,58
– width of distal fibular epiphysis (right) 31,17
– maximum length of astragalus (left) 59,15
– maximum length of astragalus (right) 60,44
– width of astragalus (right) 45,03
– height of astragalus (right) 31,06
– index length-width of astragalus (right) 74,50
– index length-height of astragalus (right) 51,38
– maximum length of calcaneus (left) 77,25
– height of calcaneus (left) 39,36
Discussion and conclusions
Following research conducted in the summer of 2012, we can say that the flat settlement of
Sultana-
Ghețărie
has two occupational levels (s.u. 1001 and s.u. 1002), both assigned to the Vidra
phase of the Boian culture. All researched features are pits, most of them being garbage pits. No
dwelling structures are identified until present. All these data indirectly indicate that the promontory
where research was conducted is a marginal area of the settlement, where various specific activities
probably took place. The actual settlement, with the related housing structures, is to be found
probably further south, on the high terrace of the Mostiștea Lake.
Returning to the chrono-stratigraphical situation, along with artefacts and features belonging
to the Boian culture, pits and stray finds assigned to post-Eneolihic periods were also discovered.
However, there are no other materials or features attributable to the Gumelnița culture. Under these
circumstances the question put forward is: how can be explained the presence of a Gumelnița grave
in a settlement belonging to the Boian culture?
A first working hypothesis proposed was that the Eneolithic necropolis from Sultana-
Malu
Roșu
extended until this area, taking into account the fact that the distance between the two sites is
quite small (only 320 m). To verify this hypothesis, between the area under research from Sultana-
Malu Roșu
necropolis and the small valley separating at east the promontory where the settlement of
Sultana-
Ghețărie
is located (fig. 2), we made an alignment of 17 test pits, with dimensions of 3 x 1 m
placed from 10 to 10 metres, paralleled by an alignment of 19 drill cores. These test pits led to the
identification of numerous features from the Eneolithic (both Boian and Gumelnița cultures) and also
from later periods. Some graves were discovered close to necropolis but not more than 80 metres
west of the cemetery. Otherwise, the Eneolithic features discovered are pits of different dimensions.
Based on these results and also on the absence of evidence for other Gumelnița funerary discoveries
108
Some considerations about a new grave discovered at Sultana-
Ghețărie
in the perimeter of the promontory from Sultana-
Ghețărie
4, we considered this first hypothesis
unfounded.
A second working hypothesis proposed was that of the presence in the studied area of an
another cemetery (or of a group of graves) belonging to Gumelnița communities but chronologically
later than the period of use of the settlement from Sultana-
Ghețărie
. To verify this hypothesis, we
made a long trench (Son 21/2012) with dimensions of 20 x 2 m, oriented from north to south. The
trench was put in the immediate vicinity of the grave no. 1. We started from the idea that if the
Gumelnița grave belongs to a necropolis than close to grave no. 1 must be also other contemporary
graves. Unfortunately, in this trench were discovered only pits belonging to the Boian culture or later
periods, but no graves or other features attributable to the Gumelnița culture. As a result, this working
hypothesis was also abandoned.
We can conclude that, based on data collected and taking into account the rejection of the
above mentioned hypotheses, we are dealing with an isolated grave belonging to the Gumelnița
culture, of whose presence in the perimeter of the settlement of Sultana-
Ghețărie
we can not explain.
Why the Gumelnița people from the
tell
of Sultana-
Malu Roșu
chose to bury a member of the
community not in the neighbouring cemetery but in an isolated place, remains a question to which we
can not respond at this time. The fact that the grave contained special funerary inventory excludes
any suppositions related to punishment or opprobrium. We hope that future research and maybe
other similar discoveries will contribute to a better understanding of the problems put by this isolated
grave.
Acknowledgments
We thank Ciprian Astaloș (University College London) for the improvement of the English
translation, and Anca Luca and Marin Șecleman (Faculty of Geology Bucharest) for determining the
petrography of the stone axe.
This work was supported by three grants of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific
Research, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project numbers PN II-RU code 16/2010 (Cătălin LAZĂR), PN-II-ID-PCE-
2011-3-1015 (Gabriel VASILE and Monica MĂRGĂRIT).
Bibliography
R. Andreescu
et alii
2009 R. Andreescu, C. Lazăr, M. Florea, K. Moldoveanu, T. Ignat, A. Ion,
A. Soficaru, A. Bălășescu, V. Radu, M. Chiţonu, Sultana, com.
Mânăstirea, jud. Călărași, Punct: Malu Roșu, in M.V. Angelescu, I.
Oberländer-Târnoveanu, F. Vasilescu (eds.),
CCA
. Campania 2008,
Valahica, XXI, București, p. 205-207.
I. Angelova 1986 Praistorijki nekropol pri gr. Tărgovište,
Arheoloijski Institut i muzej
na Ban. Interdiscijplinarni Izsledvanija
, XIVA, p. 49-66.
I. Angelova 1991 A Cahalcolithic Cemetery near the Town of Tărgovište, in J.
Lichardus (ed.),
Die Kupferzeit als historische Epoche. Symposium
Saarbrücken und Otzenhausen 6-13.11.1988
, Teil 1, Bonn,
p. 101-105.
A.K. Behrensmeyer 1978 Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering, in
Paleobiology
, 4, p. 150-162
4 Remember that the area where the settlement of Sultana-
Ghețărie
is situated, was, and still is utilized by local
people for clay extraction for various household activities. Starting in 2001, we checked yearly all the pits
resulting from these activities, but we never discovered materials or features belonging to the Gumelnița culture.
109
Cătălin LAZĂR, Gabriel VASILE, Monica MĂRGĂRIT
G. Bräuer 1988 Osteometrie, Sonderdruck Band I/1: Wesen und Methoden der
Anthropologie, in Rainer Knußmann (ed.),
Anthropologie: Handbuch
der vergleichenden Biologie des Menschen, zugleich 4, Auflage der
Lehrbuchs der Anthropologie
, begr. von Rudolf Martin, Gustav
Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart-New York, p. 160-232.
J.E. Buikstra, D.H. Ubelaker
1994
Standards for data collection from human skeletal remains
, Arkansas
Archaeological Survey Research, Series No. 44, Fayetteville.
D.R. Brothwell 1981
Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment, and Study of Human
Skeletal Remains
, 3rd edition, British Museum (Natural History),
Oxford University Press.
Gh. Cantacuzino, S. Morintz
1963
Die jungsteinzeitliche Funde in Cernica,
Dacia N.S
., VII, p. 27-89.
E. Comșa 1960 Considérations sur la rite funéraires de la civilisation de Gumelniţa,
Dacia N.S.
, IV, p. 5-30.
E. Comșa 1974 Die bestattungssitten im rumänischen neolithikum,
Jahresschrift für
Mitt-eldeutsche Vorgeschichte für das Landesmuseum für
vorgeschichte in Halle-Forschungsstele für die Bezirke Halle und
Magdeburg
, 58, p. 113-156.
E. Comșa 1995 Necropola gumelniţeană de la Vărăşti,
Analele Banatului S.N.
, IV, 1,
p. 55-193.
E. Comșa 1997 Acele pentru păr, lucrate din os și din corn, din epoca neolitică
descoperite în sudul României,
Pontica
, 30, p. 7-15.
Vl. Dumitrescu 1925 Fouilles de Gumelniţa,
Dacia
, II, p. 29-103.
M. Finnegan 1978 Non-metric variation of the infracranial skeleton,
Journal of
Anatomy
, 125, 1, p. 23-37.
G. Georgiev, N. Angelov
1952
Razkopki na selištnata mogila do Ruse prez 1948-1949,
Izvestija na
Arheologiskija Institut
, XVIII, p. 119-190.
G. Georgiev, N. Angelov
1957
Razkopki na selištnata mogila do Ruse prez 1950-1953,
Izvestija na
Arheologiskija Institut
, XXI, p. 41-127.
E. Ghianopoulos 1966 Un mormânt neolitic la Curcani,
Revista Muzeelor
, V, p. 446-447.
S. Hansen
et alii
2011 S. Hansen, M. Toderas, A. Reingruber, D. Nowacki, H. Norgaard, D.
Spanu, J. Wunderlich, Die kupferzeittliche Siedlung Pietrele an der
Unteren Donau, Bericht uber die Ausgrabungen und
geomorphologishen Untersuchungen im sommer 2010,
Eurasia
, 17,
p. 45-120
G. Hauser, G.F. De Stefano
1989
Epigenetic variants of the human skull
, Schweizerbart, Stuttgart.
110
Some considerations about a new grave discovered at Sultana-
Ghețărie
I. Ivanov 1978 Les fouilles archéologiques de la nécropole chalcolithique a Varna
(1972-1975),
StudPraeh
, 1-2, p. 13-26.
K. Kănchev 1978 Microwear Studies of Weapons and Tools from Chalcolithic
Necropolis at the City Varna,
StudPraeh
, 1-2, p. 46-49.
C. Lazăr 2001 Descoperiri funerare aparţinând culturii Gumelniţa pe teritoriul
României, in S. Marinescu-Bîlcu (ed.),
O civilizaţie "necunoscută":
Gumelniţa
, cd-rom editat de cIMeC, Bucureşti.
C. Lazăr 2011 A Review of Gumelniţa Cemeteries from Romania,
Izvestija na
Regionalen Historicheski Muzej Ruse
, 14, p. 146-157.
C. Lazăr
et alii
2012 C. Lazăr, M. Voicu, G. Vasile 2012, Traditions, Rules and Exceptions
in the Eneolithic Cemetery from Sultana-Malu Roşu (Southeast
Romania), in R. Kogălniceanu, R. Curcă, M. Gligor, S. Stratton
(eds.),
Homines, Funera, Astra. Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Funerary Anthropology, 5-8 June 2011
, 1 Decembrie
1918’ University (Alba Iulia, Romania),
BAR (IS)
, no. 2410, Oxford,
p. 107-118.
S. Marinescu-Bîlcu 2000 Mormânt, in C. Preda (ed.),
Enciclopedia Arheologiei şi Istoriei Vechi
a României
, vol. III, Bucureşti, p. 112-117.
R. Martin 1914
Lehrbuch der Anthropologie
, Jena, Verlag Von Gustav Fischer.
D. Ovcharov 1963 Eneoliten nekropol do s. Lilyak, Targovište,
Arheologija
, V, 1,
p. 53-56.
A. Radunčeva 1976
Vinitsa - Eneolitno seliste i nekropol
, Razkopki i proucvanija, VI,
Sofia.
D. Şerbănescu 1985 Vestigii neolitice descoperite la Ulmeni,
CCDJ
, I, p. 25 – 35.
D. Șerbănescu, G. Trohani
1978
Cercetările arheologice pe Valea Mostiştea, in V. Vrabie (ed.),
Ilfov.
File de Istorie
, Bucureşti, p. 18-32.
H. Todorova
et alii
1975 H. Todorova, I. Ivanov, V. Vassliev, M. Hopf, H. Quitta, G. Kohl
1975,
Selistnata mogila pri Goljamo Delcevo
. Razkopki i proucvanija,
V, Sofia.
H. Todorova
et alii
2002 H. Todorova, T. Dimov, J. Bojadjiev, I. Vajsov, K. Dimitrov, M.
Avramova 2002, Katalog der prähistorischen gräber von Durankulak,
in H. Todorova (ed.),
Durankulak, Band II. Die Prähistorischen
Gräberfelder
, teil 2, Sofia, p. 31-87.
111
Article
Full-text available
Prehistoric personal adornments have benefited from detailed studies because they are an inexhaustible source of reflection. From these objects can be identified the symbolic and religious behaviour of prehistoric groups; they may also reflect the socio-economic aspects of these communities and may even serve as markers of cultural boundaries and exchange networks in prehistory. Appreciating the considerable potential of personal adornments, the central purpose of this study is to analyse and compare the types of ornaments used by Eneolithic communities (c. 5000-3500 BC) in the area to the north of the Danube, to provide an integrated image on the ways in which the use of certain types of ornaments had socio-economic effects. Among local species, the shells of Lithoglyphus sp. gastropod were used to make bracelets and necklaces and the valves of Unio sp. were processed into small circular beads. Alsoidentified were beads made of Cyprinus carpio opercular bones, a unique find for this stage of European prehistory. Exotic raw materials are represented by various forms of Spondylus adornments, bracelets of Glycymeris valve or tubular beads of scaphopod shells. While in the first case, we have identified pieces in various processing stages, from entire valves, shells or bones, simply perforated, and irregular fragments, to finished beads, used as decorative objects – certainly processed in situ; the artefacts of exotic raw materials arrived at the communities north of the Danube in a finished form, as a result of inter-community exchanges. Very interesting is the fact that the ornaments of exotic raw materials (e. g., Spondylus sp., Glycymeris sp., Antalis sp.) were identified mainly in funerary contexts and less in settlements, proving they were prestige goods and accompanying the deceased to “the other world”. Therefore, it seems, apparently depending on the local or exotic origin of the raw material, that these personal adorments had differing socio-economic meanings.
Article
Full-text available
During the archaeological campaign of 2012 in the area of the Sultana-Ghetarie flat settlement, Mânastirea commune, Calaraşi County, Romania, an interesting pit (C13) was discovered and researched. That complex belonging to the Boian culture, Vidra phase, was a typical pit for these prehistoric communities. The pit contained different archaeological materials (e.g. sherds, animal bones, flint artefacts etc.). To the bottom of the pit, 18 fragments of a ceramic stand were found. They were analysed in technological, typological and functional terms. This type of artefact was particular for prehistoric communities from Vidra phase of Boian culture, and we will also discuss the analogies for it, based on other similar finds in Boian sites in Romania.
Book
Full-text available
The study of funerary rites and rituals used by different prehistoric communities is one of the most difficult issues of the scientific research, because of the complexity of the phenomenon itself and the so-called "opacity" of the archaeological discovery. Given these conditions, the subject needs careful attention, both from the perspective of the structure of the existing data but also of the different types of possible interpretations.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The Eneolithic cemetery of Sultana-Malu Roşu is located in the southeast of Romania, Sultana village, in the commune of Mânăstirea, Călăraşi County. From a cultural point of view it was used by two communities belonging to the Boian and the Gumelniţa cultures. Between 2006 and 2011 50 inhumation graves have been discovered there. Most of the graves are similar to each other and, in terms of basic elements of the rite and funerary rules, they reflect common burial traditions characteristic to the Eneolithic sequence. Most of the skeletons were found in normal anatomical position. Most of them had been laid in a foetal position (lateral, dorsal or ventral) on their left side. Only in three cases were the skeletons lying in foetal positions on their right side. There is no relationship between the age or sex of the individuals and the position of the skeletons. Re-burials represent a special situation. We consider these situations as representing the result of accidental or exceptional circumstances that did not allow for normal conduction of funerary rites. This paper will try to present the traditions, rules and exceptions identified in the cemetery from Sultana- Malu Roşu based on the archaeological evidence.
lucrate din os și din corn, din epoca neolitică descoperite în sudul României
  • Acele Pentru Păr
Acele pentru păr, lucrate din os și din corn, din epoca neolitică descoperite în sudul României, Pontica, 30, p. 7-15.
A Review of Gumelniţa Cemeteries from Romania, Izvestija na Regionalen Historicheski Muzej Ruse
  • C Lazăr
C. Lazăr 2011 A Review of Gumelniţa Cemeteries from Romania, Izvestija na Regionalen Historicheski Muzej Ruse, 14, p. 146-157.
Katalog der prähistorischen gräber von Durankulak
  • H Todorova
  • T Dimov
  • J Bojadjiev
  • I Vajsov
  • K Dimitrov
  • M Avramova
H. Todorova, T. Dimov, J. Bojadjiev, I. Vajsov, K. Dimitrov, M. Avramova 2002, Katalog der prähistorischen gräber von Durankulak, in H. Todorova (ed.), Durankulak, Band II. Die Prähistorischen Gräberfelder, teil 2, Sofia, p. 31-87.
Sonderdruck Band I/1: Wesen und Methoden der
  • Osteometrie
Osteometrie, Sonderdruck Band I/1: Wesen und Methoden der
Selistnata mogila pri Goljamo Delcevo. Razkopki i proucvanija
  • H Todorova
  • I Ivanov
  • V Vassliev
  • M Hopf
  • H Quitta
  • G Kohl
H. Todorova, I. Ivanov, V. Vassliev, M. Hopf, H. Quitta, G. Kohl 1975, Selistnata mogila pri Goljamo Delcevo. Razkopki i proucvanija, V, Sofia.