2016

04Extra

Homenaje a Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann

ARPI 04 Extra

Homenaje a Rodrigo de Balbín Behrmann

Publicación Extra: 2016 ISSN: 2341-2496 Dirección: Primitiva Bueno Ramírez (UAH) Subdirección: Rosa Barroso (UAH) Consejo editorial: Manuel Alcaraz (Neanderthal Museum); José Mª Barco (Universidad de Alcalá); Cristina de Juana (Universidad de Alcalá); Mª Ángeles Lancharro (Universidad de Alcalá); Adara López (Universidad de Alcalá); Estíbaliz Polo (Universidad de Alcalá); Antonio Vázquez (Universidad de Alcalá); Piedad Villanueva (Universidad de Alcalá). Comité Asesor: Rodrigo de Balbín (Prehistoria-UAH); Margarita Vallejo (Historia Antigua- UAH); Lauro Olmo (Arqueología- UAH); Leonor Rocha (Arqueología – Universidade de Évora); Enrique Baquedano (MAR); Luc Laporte (Laboratoire d'Anthropologie, Université de Rennes); Laure Salanova (CNRS). Edición: Área de Prehistoria (UAH) Foto Portada: Cantos de Chaves (Foto R. de Balbín)

SUMARIO Editorial 05-19 Selection of cave shelter by Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) and spotted hyaenas (Crocuta crocuta) at the Calvero de la Higuera sites (Pinilla del Valle, Madrid Region, Spain) Baquedano, Enrique; Laplana, César; Arsuaga, Juan Luis; Huguet, Rosa; Márquez, Belén; Pérez-González, Alfredo 20-33 Avance del estudio geoarqueológico de los depósitos fluviales de la terraza +8M del río Manzanares y del antiguo arroyo Pradolongo en el tramo final del valle medio del Manzanares (Madrid, España) Tapias, Fernando; Cuartero, Felipe; Alcaraz-Castaño, Manuel; Escolá, Marta; Dones, Vanessa; Manzano, Iván; Sánchez, Fernando; Sanabria, Primitivo Javier; Díaz, Miguel Ángel; Expósito, Alfonso; Marinas, Elena; Ruiz-Zapata, M. Blanca; Gil, María José; Silva, Pablo G; Roquero, Elvira; Torres, Trini-dad de; Ortiz, José Eugenio; Morín, Jorge 34-48 El Paleolítico Superior pre-magdaleniense en el centro de la Península Ibérica: hacia un nuevo modelo Alcaraz-Castaño, Manuel 49-63 Un ornamento singular atribuido a cazadores recolectores solutrenses en el yacimiento al aire libre de La Toleta (Puerto Serrano, Cádiz) Giles Pacheco, Francisco; Gutiérrez López, José María; Carrascal, José María; Giles Guzmán, Francisco J.; Doyague Reinoso, Ana Mª; Domínguez Bella, Salvador 64-77 First approach to the chronological sequence of the engraved stone plaques of the Foz do Medal alluvial terrace in Trás-os-Montes, Portugal Figueiredo, Sofia Soares de; Nobre, Luís; Xavier, Pedro; Gaspar, Rita; Carrondo, Joana 78-94 La fuerza del pasado. Lecturas actuales Bueno Ramírez, Primitiva 95-117 Referencias crono-culturales en torno al arte levantino: grabados, superposiciones y últimas dataciones 14C AMS Viñas, Ramón; Rubio, Albert; Ruiz, Juan F. 118-132 El Abric V d’Ermites (Ulldecona). Descubrimiento de nuevas figuras y problemáticas de conservación Ruiz López, Juan F.; Quesada Martínez, Elia; Pereira Uzal, José M.; Pérez Bellido, Rubén; Alloza, Ramiro; Viñas Vallverdú, Ramón 133-150 Modelo de distribución del arte rupestre post-glaciar en Madrid, Toledo y Guadalajara Lancharro, Mª Ángeles 151-164 Cronologías y estratigrafías en el arte rupestre de la sierra de San Mamede (Portugal/España) Oliveira, Jorge de 165-181 Les stèles gravées du plateau de la Bretellière à Saint-Macaire-en-Mauges (Maine-et-Loire, France) Mens, Emmanuel; Berthaud, Gérard; Raux, Paul; Berson, Bruno; Joussaume, Roger; Le Jeune, Yann; Jupin, Stéphane; Barreau, Jean-Baptiste; Bernard, Yann; Cousseau, Serge; Pfost, Didier 182-190 Piliers de dolmen se chevauchant: Phénomène de convergence… ou relations à longues distances Le Goffic, Michel

191-204 Reciprocity ↔ Mutuality: Funerary behaviour in Middle Tagus region (Central Portugal) Cruz, Ana Pinto da 205-220 Lo que heredamos. Ideas sobre arte megalítico Carrera Ramírez, Fernando 221-236 Neolítico y arte rupestre en As Campurras (Gondomar, Pontevedra) Villar Quinteiro, Rosa 237-247 Nouvelles [et anciennes] données sur l’art mégalithique en Alentejo Rocha, Leonor 248-263 Construyendo un paisaje. Megalitos, arte esquemático y cabañeras en el Pirineo Central Montes Ramírez, Lourdes; Domingo Martínez, Rafael; Sebastián López, María; Lanau Hernáez, Paloma 264-285 Solo contrastando: Calcolítico vs. Bronce en la Prehistoria del interior peninsular Barroso Bermejo, Rosa M. 286-297 Rituales campaniformes en contextos no funerarios: la factoría salinera de Molino Sanchón II (Villafáfila, Zamora) Delibes de Castro, German; Guerra Doce, Elisa; Abarquero Moras, Javier 298-323 La cronología actual de los sistemas de fosos del poblado calcolítico de Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla) en el contexto del Sur de la Península Ibérica Mederos Martín, Alfredo 324-344 Comportamiento social e implicaciones territoriales derivadas del análisis de dos estructuras tumulares en el Noroeste de la Península Ibérica Cano Pan, Juan A. 345-356 Aspectos hidrogeológicos, paleoambientales, astronómicos y simbólicos del Bronce de La Mancha Benítez de Lugo Enrich, Luis; Mejías Moreno, Miguel 357-367 La estela de guerrero de las Herencias (Toledo) Chapa Brunet, Teresa; Pereira Sieso, Juan

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 191

RECIPROCITY ↔ MUTUALITY: FUNERARY

BEHAVIOUR IN MIDDLE TAGUS REGION

(CENTRAL PORTUGAL)

Ana Pinto da Cruz (1)

Abstract

Prehistoric grave goods materialize a mirror image of everyday’s life transporting us to prehistory

domestic life. Whatever may be the architectural forms (use of caves, dolmens, burrows or mounds) the affinity

of the ‘offerings’ are universal and connected to the production mode and spiritual environment. The deposition

of symbolic items reveals a modestly understood mystic behavior which created a singular system of beliefs.

Archaeographic objectivity enables prevailing sampling of ancient reality granting clues on the

behaviors the living expressed towards the deceased and death itself. Philosophy, Sociology, and Ecology con-

tribute to the theoretical basis of a new approach to the Archaeology of Death in the Middle Tagus Region.

Key words: Funerary Architecture, Grave Goods, Death, Culture, recent Prehistory.

Résumé

Le mobilier funéraire de la Préhistoire Récente semble être un reflet de la vie quotidienne, nous trans-

portent vers la vie domestique. Quelles que soient les formes architecturales (utilisation des grottes, dolmens,

tumulus ou monticules) la ressemblance des «offres» sont universels et connectés au mode de production et à

son environnement spirituel. Le dépôt d'objets symboliques révèle un comportement mystique particulier,

établi par un système de croyances qui peut être légèrement réalisé.

L’objectivité archaeographic nous donne une réalité ancienne comme un indice au sujet de la manière

comment les vivants traitées avec le défunt. Philosophie, Sociologie et Écologie contribuent à la base théorique

d'une nouvelle approche à l'Archéologie de la Mort dans la région du Moyenne Tage.

Mot-Clées: Architecture Funéraire, Mobilier Funéraire, Mort, Culture, Préhistoire récente.

(1) Prehistory Center of Institute Polytechnic of Tomar; Campus da Quinta do Contador, Edifício M, 2300-313 Tomar (Portugal); Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro ; anacruz@ipt.pt

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 192

INTRODUCTION

It is with overwhelming emotion that I

accepted to pay this tribute to a great man and

Researcher Professor Rodrigo de Balbín-

Behrmann. It is in fact an honour, that for many

reasons, suppressed by the fact that he makes His-

tory.

Would there be words to honour an

Historian truly humble and whose intellectual

militancy, culminated in Siega Verde and Tito

Bustillo, archaeological sites considered as

UNESCO World Heritage Sites ?

Saint-Exupéry showed me these tribute

words,

"You - you alone will have the stars

as no one else has them …

In one of the stars I shall be living.

And so it will be as if all the stars

were laughing, when you look at

the sky at night …

You - only you -

will have stars that can laugh."

(Antoine de Saint-Exupéry [The Little

Prince]).

All the Prehistory research developed in

common with Primitiva Bueno Ramirez and Rosa

Barroso within the framework of Caves, Rock Art,

Megaliths and Funerary Archaeology, are an

inspiration for my share of the work that has been

developed in the Middle Tagus Portuguese valley.

1.- THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

When dealing with mortuary practices

through material culture, it is important to

establish the concept of Culture in use. While the

historical-cultural trend is a set of standard

customs in the framework of human groups’

intellectual life, the pattern of transmission of

information being susceptible to change, for

processualism is an extra-somatic element of

Man’s adaptation , contrived of energy, matter and

information (Binford 1971: 23). This posture kept

researchers away from the sacred premises that

only later, with the post-processual and cognitive

paradigms proposed interpretations of rituals,

symbolism and the role of religion in daily life of past

communities (Kaliff 2007: 15-22; Šeiner 2009: 6).

Theoretical Historical and Cultural currents

perceived burials as religious beliefs closely

related to intangibility; thus one would expect a

high skepticism regarding the reconstruction of

living societies throughout burials. However, this

current insofar is using the typology of exhumed

findings as an ideological engine of society, while

at the same time, data from burials is used to

establish timelines and to characterize Cultures

since they are in closed environments and

relatively preserved (Lull 2000: 576).

Neo-theoretical currents emerged after

World War II contradict obsolete models through

the rise of new ones (Tainter 1975, 1978; Binford

1964, 1971; Rothschild 1979; Greber 1979; Saxe 1970;

Blakely 1977; Goldstein 1981; O'Shea 1981, 1984;

Peebles 1971, 1972, 1974; Carr 1995: 108-109).

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 193

Concerning our discussion it is significant

to refer the French School Annals (Philippe Ariès

and Jean-Marie Pesez) which presented the idea

that the patterns of burial practices underwent

change as a result of social, demographic and

economic issues (Brown 1995: 7).

Processualism interpreted funerary

practices of the Archaeology of Death as an

expression of social reality in all its complexity

proposing that social reality and its complexity

could be analyzed through the funerary practices

which would be so much more complex depending

on the complexity of social reality (Lull 2000: 577).

The Processual approach is quite useful since it scru-

tinizes the meaning of the terms 'symbolic' and

'identity (Byrd and Monahan 1995; Goldstein 1981;

Chesson 1999; Kuijt 1996; Schroeder 2001: 79). At

the same time research on mortuary practices has

developed significantly with the input of biological

anthropology (the study of age, sex and probable

social differentiations) (Saxe 1970; Binford 1971).

Saxe's discussion intended to consider the

funerary behavior as dependent on the variability

of the 'individual persona' adding to it 'social

personality' (1970), e.g. variations in the funeral

treatment are altered depending on the social

status that the deceased held during its life in the

social structure (Brown 1995: 18; Budja 2010: 43).

Through the concept 'social persona' (Binford 1971:

19-20; Byrd and Monahan 1995: 252) the funerary

rituals and beliefs connected with them were not

only determined by the individual-status of the

deceased, but also by the obligations that living

members had towards him. Thus, body treatment,

grave architecture, votive elements, would be a

reflection of the complexity of the social structure

(Budja 2010: 44).

Another approach comes from Post-

Processualist Archaeology, where the main idea is

centered on the dynamism of funerary behavior

and subsequent symbolic dimension, considering

that it is manipulated by living communities that

can change traditional ideologies or nuances of

pre-existing identity power of the dead (Cannon

1989; Hodder 1982a, 1982b, 1982c, 1982d, 1982e,

1984; Pearson 1982, 1984, 1993; Little et al. 1992;

Carr 1995). For them archaeology should under-

stand the symbolic changes that underlie the vo-

tive findings, considering that the structure of the

social system acknowledges symbolic principles

that connect the variants (Lull 2000: 577). Thus,

they claim that the social system rules are not a

direct reflection of funeral elements as the funeral

variability is not reflected by the individual’s social

status. Questions like particular funeral standards

cannot be considered by the universal rules of

social complexity since power struggles within

social dynamics could be reflected as a symbolic

representation in mortuary practices (gender, class

or ethnic conflict) (Hodder 1982a: 199, 578).

2.- DEATH IN THE MIDDLE TAGUS REGION

The Middle Tagus Region is a regional

entity located in the center of Portugal, occupying

municipalities both in the North and South of the

Tagus River. The main tributaries of the Tagus

River basin are the Alviela, Almonda, Nabão and

Zêzere Rivers, that are respectively running across

three different geological units: Limestone

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 194

Massif, Hesperian Massif and the Quaternary

Terraces (Fig. 1).

Lithological and geomorphological

variability are juxtaposed within a landscape

distributed on the right and left banks of the Tagus

River which contributed to the creation of a daily

humanized cartographic map, showing contrasts

related to the raw-material availability. The

different settlement patterns, the hunting and

fishing territories varied according to natural

cycles and also the ideological relationship

between profane and sacred spaces.

My Holy-Death archaeographical approach

is an important tool to record and interpret the

'living operational chain behaviours' towards the

inevitability presence of a corpse, that reminds Her

= His name, laugh, tears or familiar, social and

labour relationships.

The excavated funerary contexts of the

Middle Tagus region are mostly from Recent

Prehistory and can be organized into a tripartite

funerary modus operandi: karstic landscape in

small cavities, gneiss megalithic monuments and

tumuli sedimentary rocks in the Hesperic Massif

landscape. All these contexts exhibited devoted

goods from Early Neolithic to Late Bronze Age,

showing strong evidences of both inhumation and

cremation (Fig. 1).

There are considerable differences in the

ways societies dealt with corpses and the

correspondent architectural approaches

represented both by positive and negative

structures. It is possible to observe

pro-individualization postures towards the corpse

in caves, pro-megalithic monument and tumulus

and also pro-socializing postures of death in caves,

dolmens and funerary monuments.

In caves 'collective' burials, human bones

and grave goods appear completely

de-contextualized, piled up due to the direct

interventions of the living by systematically

re-using the cavities. This ritual operational chain

suggests a first moment when the corpse is

deposed (individual burial) shortly followed by

another individual burial ceremony, giving rise to

either a physical disorderly secondary deposition

or to a distinctive socialisation of death in a

stratified secondary ossuary.

Fig. 1.- Funerary site location in the Middle Tagus region.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 195

Regarding the Individual Inhumation

funerary modus operandi observes two

sub-classes, one with the deposition of the corpse

in simple architecture where the shallow pits were

hidden by circular stone structures covered by

clayish and sandy sediments creating a perceived

opacity (Cadaval Cave, Nossa Senhora das Lapas

Cave, Souto 1 tumulus), another that resorted is

building a huge outcrop a hillside pro-dolmen

(Pedra da Encavalada). As far as Communitarian

Inhumations are concerned, it is also possible to

divide them into three sub-classes, one that takes

into account the mega constructions strategically

deployed in order to have an excellent landscape

visibility Dolmen 1 of Val da Laje, Dolmen 2 of Val

da Laje, Dolmen 3 of Val da Laje, Dolmen 4 of Val

da Laje, Dolmen 5 of Val da Laje, Dolmen of

Pederneira, Dolmen 1 of Vale Chãos, Dolmen 2 of

Vale Chãos, Dolmen 1 of Jogada, Dolmen 2 of

Jogada, Dolmen 3 of Jogada and Dolmen 4 of

Jogada, another showing caves' reuse (Cadaval

Cave, Nossa Senhora das Lapas Cave, pit I and II of

Morgado Superior Cave, Ossos Cave and, one

more, very similar to the Individual Inhumation,

but with peculiar efficient architecture addorsed

in a big outcrop (Colos Monument) completely

sealed, disguised in the landscape by the outcrop,

creating once again a non-existent = non-identified

burial. It would be very interesting to discuss the

ideological pattern of these hidden presences,

since they most likely were performed to avoid

coeval vandalism, i. e., the rear reintroduction of

artifacts in daily tasks.

As for the economic framework in each

burial it is possible to observe that all of them

shared the production system with slight

difference, either more agricultural or more

pastoralist (depending on the geomorphologic

features and climate fluctuations) with daily

domestic tools like pottery, polished stone axes,

blades, arrowheads and geometrics being

deposited (Fig. 2).

Fashionable items, such as perforated river

shells (Theodoxus fluviatilis) (Linnaeus, C. 1758) an

aquatic gastropod mollusk that still exists in Nabão

River), the marine teardrop beads, Glycymeris

glycymeris (Linnaeus, 1758) marine bivalve

mollusks that have its habitat in the European

Atlantic coasts and Mediterranean Sea) who seem

to be an imported good; which can also be found in

Estremadura caves (Lapa da Modeira, Alto da

Feteira, Senhora da Luz, Lapa da Bugalheira, Gruta

de Mosqueiros, Gruta dos Carrascos, Gruta

do Lugar do Canto, Algar do Barrão, Algar do Bom

Santo, Gruta do Escoural), and a small sea snail

(a marine gastropod mollusk, Trivia monacha

(Da Costa, 1778) that lives in the Mediterranean

Sea), green-grayish rock beads and decorated hair

pins and either a bronze diadem or a collar (Fig. 3).

The symbolic items exhumed are few but

the scallop flat shell, Pecten maximus (Linnaeus,

1758) the only migratory bivalve, which curiously

Fig. 2.- Offerings from Dolmen of Val da Laje (Figures 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7). Drawings: Paulo Félix 1992.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 196

has a particular connotation when used by the

catholic pilgrims crossing the Santiago de

Compostela route, that began in the IX century AD

and still exists today.

Similar small lagomorph figures were also

found in Estremadura and Alentejo (Gruta da

Galinha, Lapa do Suão, Cova da Moura, Cabeço da

Arruda, Gruta da Carrasca, Quinta das Lapas, Cas-

tro da Ota, Monumento de Casainhos, Gruta de

Carenque, Monumento das Conchadas, Lapa do

Bugio, Anta da Comenda da Igreja, Anta do Olival

da Pega, Perdições’s ditches enclosure) (Cardoso

and Carvalho 2008) and simplified anthropo-

morphic idol (painted with ochre) which holds

some similarities with the one of Lapa do

Fumo (Serrão and Prescott 1994). The coexistence

of zoomorphic and anthropomorphic figures

transports us into an Imaginary orb based on

daily compelling themes, that could have

simultaneously particular connotations and

functions (toys, representations of gods or

goddesses, fertility meaning). The decorated schist

-plaque (Fig. 4) emerges as a universal item during

Neolithic and Chalcolithic in Portugal. Hyaline

quartz crystal can be found in granitic pegmatite.

geographically proximal and in the Santarém

vicinity, about 50 kilometers far from the karst

necropolis of Nabão valley.

My interpretation of these votive gifts is

that they can lead to two main topics stressed be-

fore: the productive mode and the ethos set.

One can only deduce that the daily life

offerings would be related to the belief on life

beyond death. Some of the lithic tools carry

use-ware traces as a way of inviting the deceased

to proceed its own tasks in another (maybe better)

village, notedly reserved for the deceased. This

behavior towards death can be compared to the

central idea of many philosophical and religious

systems from the ancient eastern world

(Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and Taoism) and

even in the Catholic resurrection dogma. So, bowls

and vessels, polished stone axes, blades, bladelets,

arrowheads, fashionable and symbolic items are

not really offerings to the deceased, but a social

and communal tenet duty, since corpses will need

to carry on their assignments in the new village

community remaining, at the same time faithful

Fig. 4.- Figure 4: Offerings from Nossa Senhora das Lapas Cave (Figure 1), Morgado Superior Cave (Figures 2, 3), Dolmen of Val da Laje (Figure 4) and Cadaval Cave (Figure 5). Photographs: Ana Cruz 2002, 2012; Drawing: Paulo Félix 1992; Photograph: Ana Cruz, 2004.

Fig. 3.- Offerings from Nossa Senhora das Lapas Cave (Figures 1 and 2), Cadaval Cave (Figures 1 and 4), Ossos Cave (Figures 3 and 4), Morgado Superior Cave (Figures 4, 5 and 6), tumulus 1 of Souto (Figure 7). Photographs: Filipe Marques 2015; Ana Cruz 2001.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 197

to His or Her’s consuetudinary and transcendental

convictions.

These universal types of artefacts have a

chronological span of 7.000 years which indicates

the endurance of a globally accepted lifestyle

(Fig. 5). Blending political, social and economic

infrastructures allows stability and a progressive

rank of power that can also be seen in each

chronological period, where offerings present

mostly daily life tasks that could represent a

specific concern with the individuality or

communal gathering rituals.

Rendering Death in the Middle Tagus

region means the perception of the performed

mortuary practices trough disruptions on

sacralisation of death and the deceased (either

inhumation or cremation) where changes that can

only be understood within a cosmogonical context.

Once the operational chains of the

'deceased architectures' are understood, the real

challenge lies in trying to find a dialectical

explanation of the cognitive and mythological

context which we comfortably call Religion.

Setting a behavioral sequence between

Death ∑ Religion ∑ Culture phenomenon that

transform the Sacred and the Profane into

psychological entities, leads us to a framing

exercise of cultic inductions regarding the ancient

manner of conducting funerary practices (which

can only be tied in to archaeography), integrating

both biological and infrastructural characteristics

such as economy and society.

Customary perceptions are also important

to understand psychological constraints towards

biological decay. One of them is Fear which

represents an emotional reaction on an

environmental menace (Plutchik 2002; Ekman

2008).

It is therefore, with objectivity, that one

should use ethnographic and anthropological

arguments, even if these allow distinct interpretive

readings of heterogeneity in ritual practices,

providing the Archaeology of Death with vivid

social and cultural dynamics (Ucko 1969).

2.1. Researchers diverge upon the

relationships between: Human Being ↔ Society ↔

Culture ↔ Death ↔ Magical Practices.

So, in order to create an intelligible

interactive framework three variables are

proposed:

a) Deceased ∑ Decay = Living ∑ Fear was a

matter of discussion among researchers which

presented ideas about the existence of society and

culture that are subordinated to the fear of death

(Morin 1997). The living ones facing the universal

fear of the corpse that became a belief in the

existence of soul and in life after death, as the fate

of the soul being linked to the fate of the body

(Frazer 1890; Hunting and Metcalf 1991), another

important matter concerning the approach on

biological dysfunctions related to mortuary

practices must have evolved into self-preservation

and emotional revelations (Malinowski 1948;

Barley 1983). The existence of constraining

mechanisms in rituals as the existence of concepts

in society regarding the cause of death, specific

Archaeological Sites Lab. BP Dating Calibration 2 - Sigma Archeological

Layer Method

Gruta de Nª: Sª das Lapas I-17.247 5.130±140 4.290-3.672 cal BC B topo C14 - homo

ICEN-802 6.100±70 5.230-4.847 cal BC B base C14 - homo

Gruta do Cadaval I-17.241 5.180±140 4.354-3.732 cal BC. C C14 - homo

ICEN-803 5.390±50 4.350-4.045 cal BC. D C14 - homo

ICEN-464 5.160±50 4.212-3.817 cal BC. D C14 - homo

Beta-189995 4.550±40 3.520-3.350 cal BC ? C14 - homo

Gruta do Caldeirão TO 349 4.940±70 3.950-3.541 cal BC. D C14-A.M.S.- homo

OxA 1037 5.970±120 5.220-4.583 cal BC. Ea NA1 C14-A.M.S. - bos

OxA-1036 5.870±80 4.941-4.540 cal BC. Ea NA1 C14-A.M.S. - bos

TO-350 5.810±70 4.895-4.510 cal BC. Ea NA1 C14-A.M.S.- homo

ICEN 296 6.870±210 6.110-5.380 cal BC. Ea NA2 C14 - carbon

OxA-1035 6.330±80 5.474-5.087cal BC Ea NA2 C14-A.M.S. - ovis

OxA-1034 6.230±80 5.340-4.946 cal BC. Ea NA2 C14-A.M.S. - ovis

OxA-1033 6.130±90 5.296-4.843 cal BC. Ea NA2 C14-A.M.S.- homo

Gruta do Morgado Superior Beta-359086 4260±30 2910-2880 cal BC UE 2

A.M.S. - homo

Beta-359087 4180±30 2890-2830 cal BC

UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

2820-2660 cal BC UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

2640-2640 cal BC UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

Wk-40440 4505±20 3344-3263 cal BC

UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

3244-3102 cal BC UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

Wk-40441 4168±20 2879-2836 cal BC

UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

2816-2671 cal BC UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

4260±30 2910-2880 cal BC UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

4180±30 2890-2830 cal BC UE 2 A.M.S. - homo

Gruta dos Ossos ICEN-465 4.630±80 3.628-3.100 cal BC. I-III C14 - homo

I-17.368 4.460±110 3.400-2.880 cal BC. I-III C14 - homo

I-17.248 3.970±140 2.954-2.217 cal BC. IV C14 - homo

Beta-189996 4.240±40 3.020-2.890 cal BC ? C14 - homo

Anta 1 de Val da Laje ? 3.670±480 aC - C Pottery sherd - TL

? 3.750±380 aC - C Pottery sherd - TL

Pedra da Encavalada

ITN LUM A5-229 6.058±652 years - pit 1 - B Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-230 6.037±529 years - pit 2 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-231 6.033±711 years - pit 2 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-32 5.999±697 years - pit 2 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-233 6.082±620 years - pit 3 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-234 6.001±654 years - pit 3 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-235 6.069±545 years - pit 4 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-236 6.057±586 years - pit 5 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

ITN LUM A5-237 6.048±628 years - c 6 - B

Pottery sherd - TL

Tumulus 1 do Souto Beta-280041 12840±40 1120-910 cal BC urn A.M.S. - Homo

Fig. 5.- Middle Tagus Valley funerary radiocarbon dates from recent Prehistory.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 199

attitudes towards the body, fear of the spirits,

specific meaning to death as a concept, mourning

rituals, taboos related to the burial, the power to

use the deceased's name, and festivities for the

dead are a very interesting clue to justify the

pre-existence of rules as The Ten Commandments

(Bendann 1930), the singular Manichean system

dealing with the connotative dualism of myth

in relation to death and also the potential

relationships of life = death, body = soul, village =

graveyard (Lévi-Strauss 1989) or the dichotomic

proposal where the imaginary and the symbolic

solve the dilemma between life and death,

through reciprocity in the social structure

(Baudrillard 1996).

b) Recent Deceased → Ancestor is an

opposite perspective when the living dealt with

death, since it is not felt as a destruction of

individual life but seen as a social event, being the

starting point of a ceremonial process in which the

deceased becomes the ancestor. Death is seen as

a social initiation to posmortem life as if it was a

rebirth (Durkheim 1954; De Coppet 1981) linked to

the importance of emotional behavior through

mourning, analyzing not only the cultural context

but also the role of social context (Wilson 1939).

c) Death ∑ Society ∑ Magical-Religious

Practices arises as the genesis of religion showed as a

collective response of communities to Death (Palgi

and Abramovitch 1984) while, at the same time

cultural orientations of death undergo a cultural

change in which the old ways of looking at the

symbolic immortality are exchanged by others

(Lifton 1977). Allows for a different perspective

presenting this relationship as independent of their

biological, geographical and psychological

constraints (Van Gennep 1908), focuses in Magic

and Religion as categories of the rational and the

irrational are present in religion, in which the

collective dimension gives rise to individual

experience (Otto 1923) setting Death as a process of

loss of homogenizing parts of the group (Radcliffe-

Brown 1922) where manifestations of the sacred

bear something irrational that can interact with the

profane world (Eliade 1999). Finally, ritualizing

Durkheim’s performance (1912) brings together

different patterns of behavior embodied in religious

concepts, in which the ceremonies and religious

practices are presented as the cement of solidarity

and social cohesion (Schechner 2006).

Having presenting some ideas about the

strong transversal influence that Death causes in

human societies, one thing is certain, the human

mind will choose several paths to reach the

Transcendental Universe as a mechanism to justify

what it cannot or does not want to explain.

What is left is Materiality’ like the type of

funerary architecture, the corpse’ disposal, votive

offerings and, as a result of additional laboratory

studies, suggestions of solid ties between the

Living and the Deceased that could be molded by

mourning relationships within the social structure.

Death's influence in cosmogonic beliefs

can be seen in several sorts of burials, either

inside settlements or in funerary monuments

built far from the settlements (organized in

necropolis or isolated) and often reused over Time.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 200

Those mortuary options could reflect

either an invitation for the deceased to keep on

living in communion with His or Her’s community

or it implied a new landscape reference merely

being the Thorp’s Departed.

3.- BEYOND LIFE

Circa 60.000 years BC, Shanidar IV

(Bradost Mountain in Iraqi Kurdistan) (Solecki

1977; Sommer 1999; Watson 2014) revealed to the

archaeological researchers a truth that rocked and

ultimately changed old perspectives towards

emotional feelings of this Homo species. Suddenly

Neanderthalensis became human because She = He

mourned Hers = His deceased.

The several interpretive paradigms,

sometimes contradictory, address the complex

relationship of each individual’ Humanity with the

Transcendental that is ruled by a series of

goddesses and gods.

Combining mortuary practices, grave

goods, and some theoretical models the approach

now presented combines the concept of

Reciprocity in the social structure (Baudrillard

1996), the Pre-Socratics idea of cosmogony

(namely Hesiod) and the concept of Ecological

Mutualism (Ricklefs 2003).

This Meta-Model becomes a special index

device to the archaeological interpretation since it

is a puzzle aggregator of the non-recorded

societies. Baudrillard’s model results in an

encounter with his concept of the gift and the

anti-gift. For him, the gift is the better image to

emphasize the notion of symbolic exchange

contributing to the riddle versatility of the Social

Being. He never writes about reciprocity but about

equivalences, nevertheless he clearly establishes

the path from the symbolic to the semiotic, from

ambivalence to equivalence, from the sacred to

the profane. Hesiod’ Theogony tells the story of the

beginning of the world and the existence of gods

throughout the impersonation of life’s features

metamorphosed in real entities by right.

Mutualism derives from Interspecific ecological

relationships where one can observe the

protection and the survival of some species

throughout a food and metabolic products

reciprocity pattern.

These three notions together are the foun-

dations of the Meta-Model “Mutual Cosmogony”

which amplifies the Death ∑ Society ∑ Magical-

Religious Practices hypothetical rapport and

explains at the same time how Beliefs’ Perception

can be read as Social-Culture Human Reciprocity

↔ Survival Symbiosis Mutuality.

REFERENCES

Araújo, A.C. y Lejeune, M. 1995: Gruta do Escoural:

necrópole neolítica e arte rupestre paleolítica.

Trabalhos de Arqueologia. Instituto

Português do Património Arquitectónico e

Arqueológico. Lisboa. 8.

Barley, N. 1983: Symbolic Structures: An Explora-

tion of the Culture of the Dowayos. Cambridge

University Press. Cambridge: 4-6.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 201

Bachofen, J. 1967: An Essay on Ancient Mortuary

Simbolism. Routledge & Kegan. London.

Bartel, B. 1982: A historical review of ethnological

and archaeological analyses of mortuary prac-

tices. Journal of Anthropological Archaeolo-

gy. Elsevier. New York. 1: 32-58.

Baudrillard, J. 1996: A Troca Simbolica e a Morte.

Editions Loyola. São Paulo.

Bendann, E. 1930: Death Costums. Dawsons. Lon-

don.

Binford, L. 1964: Archaeological Investigations on

Wassam Ridge. Archaeological Salvage Re-

port. Carbondalc: Southern Illinois University

Museum. 17.

Binford, L. 1971: Mortuary Practices: Their Study

and Their Potential. En Brown, J. A. (ed.): Ap-

proaches to the Social Dimensions of Mortuary

Practices. Memoirs of the Society for American

Archaeology. Washington DC. 25: 6–29.

Blakely, R. L 1977: Sociocultural adaptations in

prehistoric America. Southern Anthropologi-

cal Society Proceedings. 11.

Bloch, M. 1971: Placing the Dead. Seminar Press.

London.

Bloch, M. y Parry, J. (eds.) 1982: Death and the

Regeneration of Life. Cambridge University

Press. Cambridge.

Brown, J. A. 1995: On Mortuary Analysis – with

Special Reference to the Saxe-Binford Re-

search Program. En Regional Approaches to

Mortuary Analysis. Lane Anderson Beck. Ple-

num Press. New York: 3-26.

Budja, M. 2010: The archaeology of death: from

‘social personae’ to ‘relational personhood’.

Documenta Praehistorica. XXXVII: 43-54.

Byd, B. y Monahan, C. 1995: Death, mortuary ritu-

al, and Natufian social structure. .Journal of

Anthropological Archaeology. 14: 251-287.

Cannon, A. 1989: The historical dimension in mor-

tuary expressions of status and sentiment.

Current Anthropology. 30: 437-458.

Cardoso, J. y Carvalho, A. 2008: A Gruta do Lugar

do Canto (Alcanede) e sua importância no

faseamento do Neolítico no território

português. En Homenagem a Octávio da

Veiga Ferreira. Estudos Arqueológicos de

Oeiras. Câmara Municipal. Oeiras. 16: 269-

300.

Carr, C. 1995: Mortuary Practices: Their Social,

Philosophical-Religious, Circumstantial, Phys-

ical Determinants. Journal of Archaeological

Method and Theory. 2. 2: 105-200.

Carvalho, A. F., Antunes-Ferreira, N. y Valente, M.

J. 2003: A gruta-necrópole neolítica do Algar

do Barrão (Monsanto, Alcanena). Revista Por-

tuguesa de Arqueologia. Lisboa. 6. 1: 101-119.

Chesson, M. 1999: Libraries of the dead: Early

Bronze Age charnel houses and social identity

at urban Bab edh-Drha’ in Jordan. Journal of

Anthropological Archaeology. 18: 137-164.

De Coppet, D. 1981: The Life Giving-Death. Aca-

demic. London: 175-204.

Douglas, M. 1970: Natural Symbol. Pantheon

Books. New York.

Duarte, C. 1998: Necrópole neolítica do Algar do

Bom Santo: contexto cronológico e espaço

funerário. En Revista Portuguesa de

Arqueologia. Lisboa. 1. 2: 107-118.

Durkheim, E. 1954: The Elementary Forms of

Religious Life. Firth. London.

Eliade, M. 1999: O sagrado e o profano: a essência

das religiões. Martins Fontes. São Paulo.

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 202

Ekman, P. 2008: Emotional Awareness: Overcom-

ing the Obstacles to Psychological Balance and

Compassion. Times Books.

Fahlander, F. y Oestigaard, T. 2008: The Materiali-

ty of Death: Bodies, Burials, Beliefs. En

Fahlander, F. y Oestigaard, T. (eds.): The Ma-

teriality of Death. Bodies, burials, beliefs. BAR

International Series 1768: 1-16.

Ferreira, O. V. 1970: Alguns objectos inéditos,

bastante raros, da colecção do Professor

Manuel Heleno. En O Arqueólogo Português.

Lisboa. Série III. 4:165-173.

Frazer, J. 1890: The Golden Bough. MacMillan.

London.

Goldstein, L. 1976: Spatial Structure and Social

Organization: Regional Manifestations of Mis-

sissippian Society. Unpublished Ph.D. disserta-

tion. Department of Anthropology. Evanston.

Northwestern University.

Goldstein, L. 1981: One-dimensional archaeology

and multi-dimensional people: Spatial organi-

zation and mortuary analysis. En Chapman,

R., Kinnes, I. y Anddsborg, C. (eds.): The Ar-

chaeology of Death. Cambridge University

Press. Cambridge: 53-70.

Goody, J. 1971: Technology, Tradition, and the

State in Africa. Oxford University Press. Ox-

ford.

Greber, N. 1979: Variations in Structure of Ohio

HopeweU Peoples. Mid-Continental Journal of

Archaeology. 4: 35-76.

Hertz, R. 1907: Contribution à une étude sur la re-

présentation collective de la mort. Année So-

ciologique. 10: 48-137.

Hodder, I. 1982a: The identification and interpreta-

tion of ranking in prehistory: A contextual

perspective. En Renfrew, C. y Shennen, S.

(eds.): Ranking, Resource and Exchange: As-

pects of the Archaeology of Early European

Society. Cambridge University Press. Cam-

bridge: 150-154.

Hodder, I. (ed.) 1982b: Symbolic and Structural

Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.

Cambridge.

Hodder, I. 1982c: Symbols in Action: Ethnoarchae-

ological Studies of Material Culture. Cambridge

University Press. Cambridge.

Hodder, I. 1982d: The present past. Bastford.

London.

Hodder, I. 1982e: Theoretical archaeology: A

reactionary view. En Hodder, I. (ed.): Symbol-

ic and Structural Archaeology. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press: 1-16.

Hodder, I. 1984: Burials, houses, women and men

in the European Neolithic. En Miller, D. y Til-

ley, C. (eds.): Ideology, Power, and Prehistory.

Cambridge University Press. Cambridge: 51-

68.

Huntington, R. y Metcalf, P. 1991: Celebrations of

Death: the Anthropology of Mortuary Ritual.

Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

Kaliff, A. 2007: Fire, Water, Heaven and Earth. Rit-

ual practice and cosmology in ancient Scandi-

navia: An Indo European perspective. Stock-

holm: Riksantikvarieämbetet. Oxbow Books.

Oxford.

Kuitj, I. 1996: Negotiating equality through ritual:

A consideration of Late Natufian and Prepot-

tery Neolithic A period mortuary practices.

Journal of Anthropological Archaeology. 15: 313

-336.

Leitão, M., North, C. T., Norton, J.; Ferreira, O. V. y

Zbyszewski, G. 1987: A gruta pré-histórica do

Lugar do Canto, Valverde (Alcanede). En O

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 203

Arqueólogo Português. Lisboa. Série IV. 5: 37-

66.

Lévi- Strauss, C. 1989: O Pensamento Selvagem.

Papirus. Campinas.

Lifton, R. 1977: The Sense of Immortality: On

Death and the Continuity of Life. En Feifel, H.

(ed.): New meanings of death. McGraw-Hill.

New York: 273-290.

Little, B., Lanphear, K. y Owsley, D. 1992: Mortu-

ary display and status in a Nineteenth Century

Anglo-American cemetery in Manassas, Vir-

ginia. American Antiquity. 57: 390-418.

Lull, V. 2000: Death and Society: a Marxist ap-

proach. Antiquity. 74: 576-580.

Malinowski, B. 1948: Magic Science and Religion.

Faber & West. London.

Mandelbaum, D. 1965: Social Uses of Funeral

Rites. En Fulton, R. L. (ed.): Death and Identi-

ty. Wiley. New York: 189-217.

Morin, E. 1997: O homem e a morte. Publicações

Europa – América. Lisboa.

Odum, E. 1988: Ecologia. Guanabara Koogan S.A.

Rio de Janeiro.

O’Shea, J. 1984: Mortuary Variability: An Archaeo-

logical Investigation. Academic Press. New

York.

Otto, R. 1923: The Idea of the Holy. Oxford Univer-

sity Press. Oxford.

Palgi, P. y Abramovitch, H. 1984: Death: A Cross-

Cultural Perspective. Annual Review of An-

thropology. 13: 385-417.

Pearson, M. 1982: Mortuary practices, society and

ideology: an ethnoarchaeological study. En

Hodder (ed.): Symbolic and Structural Ar-

chaeology. Cambridge University Press. Cam-

bridge: 99-113.

Pearson, M. 1984: Economic and ideological

change: Cyclical growth in the pre-state socie-

ties of Jutland. En Miller, D. y Tilley, C. (eds.):

Ideology, Power, and Prehistory. Cambridge

University Press. Cambridge: 69-92.

Pearson, M. 1993: The powerful dead: Archaeolog-

ical relationships between the living and the

dead. Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 3. 2:

203-229.

Peebles, C. 1971: Moundville and surrounding sites:

Some structural considerations of mortuary

practices II. En Brown, J. (ed.): Approaches To

the social dimensions of mortuary practices.

Society for American Archaeology. Memoirs.

25: 68-91.

Peebles, C. 1972: Monothetic-divisive analysis of

the Moundville burials: An initial report.

Newsletter of Computer Archaeology. 8. 2: 1-

13.

Peebles, C. 1974: Moundvitle: The Organization of

a Prehistoric Community and Culture. Un-

published Ph.D. dissertation. Department of

Anthropology. Santa Barbara: University of

California.

Peebles, C. y Kus, S. 1977: Some archaeological

correlates of ranked societies. American An-

tiquity. 42. 3: 421- 448.

Penney, D. 1983: Imagery of the Middle Woodland

Period. The Birth of a North American Icono-

graphic Tradition. Paper presented at the

Douglas Fraser Memorial Symposium on

Primitive and Precolumbian Art, Department

of Anthropology, Columbia University, April

15. NewYork.

Penney, D. 1985: Continuities of imagery and sym-

bolism in the art of the Woodlands. En Brose,

D., Brown, J. A. y Penney, D. W. (eds.):

ARPI. Arqueología y Prehistoria del Interior peninsular 04-2016 204

Ancient Art of the American Woodland Indians.

Harry Abrams. New York: 147-198.

Plutchik, R. 2002: Emotions and Life: Perspectives

from Psychology, Biology, and Evolution.

American Psychological Association.

Washington, DC.

Radcliffe-Brown, A. 1922: The Andaman Islanders:

a study in social anthropology. The University

Press. Cambridge.

Raven, H., Evert, R., Eichorn, S. 2001: Biologia

Vegetal. Guanabara Koogan S. A. Rio de

Janeiro.

Ricklefs, R. 2003: A economia da natureza.

Guanabara Koogan S.A. Rio de Janeiro.

Rothscild, N. 1979: Mortuary behavior and social

organization at Indian Knoll and Dickson

Mounds. American Antiquity. 44: 658--675.

Saxe, A. 1970: Social Dimensions of Mortuary Prac-

tices in a Mesolithic Population from Wadi

Halfa, Sudan. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.

Department of Anthropology, University of

Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Schechner, R. 2006: Performance Studies: An In-

troduction. Routledge. London.

Schroeder, S. 2001: Secondary Disposal of the

Dead: Cross-Cultural Codes. World Cultures.

12. 1: 77-93.

Šeiner, J. 2009: Sacred Places, Sacred Persons:

Religion, Death and Leadership in Roman Iron

Age Scandinavia. Sacra. 7. 2: 5-29.

Serrão, E. y Prescott Vicente, E. 1959: Escavações

em Sesimbra, Peniche e Olelas - métodos

empregues. Actas e Memórias do 1º

Congresso Nacional de Arqueologia. Lisboa. 1.

Solecki, R. S. 1977: The Implications of the

Shanidar Cave Neanderthal Flower Burial.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

293: 114–124.

Sommer J. D. 1999: The Shanidar IV ‘Flower Buri-

al’: a Re-evaluation of Neanderthal Burial Rit-

ual. Cambridge Archaeological Journal. 9: 127

-129.

Tainter, J. 1975: The Archaeological Study of Social

Change: Woodland Systems in West-Central

Illinois. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation.

Department of Anthropology. Evanston:

Northwestern University.

Tainter, J. 1978: Mortuary practices and the study

of prehistoric social systems. Advances in Ar-

chaeological Method and Theory. 1: 105-141.

Turner, V. 1967: The forest of symbols; aspects of

Ndembu ritual. Ithaca. Cornell University Press.

New York.

Turner, V. 1969: The Ritual Process. Aldine. Chica-

go.

Ucko, P. 1969: Ethnography and archaeological

interpretation of funerary remains. World

Archaeology. 1. 2: 262-280.

Van Gennep, A. 1978: Os ritos de passagem. Vozes

Editora. Petrópolis.

Watson, J. 2014: Neanderthals: Threatening Thugs

or Kindhearted Caregivers? How burial prac-

tices and evidence of trauma disprove com-

mon misconceptions. Collegiate Anthropolo-

gist. XXXIV. 1: 6-12.

Wilson, G. 1939: Nyakyusa Conventions of Burial.

Bantu Studies. 13: 1-31.