Trent M. Trombley, António Matias, Sabrina C. Agarwal
{"title":"“Taphonomic Trajectories: Funerary Taphonomy and Preservation at the Medieval Site of Largo Cândido dos Reis, Portugal”","authors":"Trent M. Trombley, António Matias, Sabrina C. Agarwal","doi":"10.1007/s10816-024-09683-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper presents taphonomic data from the medieval Portuguese site of Largo Cândido dos Reis that contains the presence of both Christian (<i>n</i> = 217) and Islamic (<i>n</i> = 422) burials. The presence of two faith communities with differing funerary customs utilizing the same geographic space offers a unique opportunity to conduct a comparative approach and examine the extent to which funerary rites influence preservation in human skeletal remains within the same cemetery complex. A sub-sample of 363 individuals was analyzed for taphonomic factors including erosion, cracking and flaking, and skeletal preservation using the anatomical conservation index (ACI) and bone representation index (BRI). These latter two indices were then used to calculate the proportion of well-preserved skeletons (WPS) and well-represented skeletons (WRS) by funerary group. Results demonstrated that, on average, skeletons from Islamic burials exhibited ACI scores of ~ 32% while those from Christian contexts exhibited ACI scores of ~ 44%, respectively. The proportion of well-preserved skeletons from Islamic burials was also significantly lower than those from Christian burials. Elements from Islamic burials also exhibited significantly higher severity of erosion and higher prevalence of malacofaunal remains compared to their Christian counterparts. Results are interpreted in relation to ethnohistoric context, specifically how grave construction varied between Islam and Christianity in central Portugal during the medieval period. These results are an important step in understanding the biocultural dimensions and taphonomic trajectories that funerary behaviors can have, especially in spaces where urban development and sub-surface construction are frequent risk factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09683-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper presents taphonomic data from the medieval Portuguese site of Largo Cândido dos Reis that contains the presence of both Christian (n = 217) and Islamic (n = 422) burials. The presence of two faith communities with differing funerary customs utilizing the same geographic space offers a unique opportunity to conduct a comparative approach and examine the extent to which funerary rites influence preservation in human skeletal remains within the same cemetery complex. A sub-sample of 363 individuals was analyzed for taphonomic factors including erosion, cracking and flaking, and skeletal preservation using the anatomical conservation index (ACI) and bone representation index (BRI). These latter two indices were then used to calculate the proportion of well-preserved skeletons (WPS) and well-represented skeletons (WRS) by funerary group. Results demonstrated that, on average, skeletons from Islamic burials exhibited ACI scores of ~ 32% while those from Christian contexts exhibited ACI scores of ~ 44%, respectively. The proportion of well-preserved skeletons from Islamic burials was also significantly lower than those from Christian burials. Elements from Islamic burials also exhibited significantly higher severity of erosion and higher prevalence of malacofaunal remains compared to their Christian counterparts. Results are interpreted in relation to ethnohistoric context, specifically how grave construction varied between Islam and Christianity in central Portugal during the medieval period. These results are an important step in understanding the biocultural dimensions and taphonomic trajectories that funerary behaviors can have, especially in spaces where urban development and sub-surface construction are frequent risk factors.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field, presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline. The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology. Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines. Specific topics covered in recent issues include: the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology, new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing. The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues. Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm