Burial Ground Analysis

2194 Words5 Pages

However once a body is buried, the local flora and fauna can also impact the condition in which the remains are found. Roots of plants may modify bone surface by leaving their imprints, known as etching on the bone. This etching is the result of humic acid, which is produced from either fungus on decaying roots or the roots themselves (Lyman, 1994:375). Plant roots are also capable of destroying bone by increasing the porosity or even splitting them apart (Denys, 2002:478). Some plants in particular thistles, have long extensive roots, which have been observed causing skeletal remains to fragment (Littleton, et al., 2012:3368). Small animals have the ability to burrow, disturb, remove, and even destroy bone. When bone is gnawed upon, it becomes more vulnerable to degradation (Brain, 1980:108-109; Denys, 2002:478; Hamre, 2013:3; Lyman, 1994:193-194). When these particular taphonomic processes are realized, inferences of a burial site may alter.
Humans are one of the last extrinsic factors to cause skeletal remains to be preserved poorly. Grave robbers looking for various goods can damage remains, in addition to leaving a burial site exposed (Littleton, et al., 2012:3363). Primary burials tend to leave the body whole and intact. Whereas when moved to a secondary grave, some of the body …show more content…

For instance at Abu Hureyra II, a Neolithic settlement in Syria, many of the houses show burials under them. Neonate and infants were not among the remains; however, they were found outside of the houses, in the space between the buildings. The suggestion was made that the burial of neonates and infants stemmed from the fact that they were too young to be members of this Neolithic society (Andrews and Bello, 2006:15). Yet can these investigators be correct in their inferences, or are they over reaching with such

More about Burial Ground Analysis

Open Document