Ancient

Cyprus

Home
Periods
Sites
People
papers
projects
Resources for Study
RESOURCES BY COUNTRY
TECHNIQUES

site map

 

 

 

project

 

 

 

Audemou-Kamares

 

by kind permission of the ETANA team, search the ABZU database:

subscribe to the Ancient Cyprus discussion list:
or click here for more
information

 


 

 

Four Chamber Tombs at Audemou-Kamares, Cyprus

(c. 2000-1700 BC)

Osteological Analysis*

 

Lilian Karali1 and Anastasia Tsaliki2

1 Ass. Prof in Environmental Archaeology, University of Athens, Greece

2 Doc. Researcher in Bioarchaeology, University of Durham, UK

Preliminary Osteological Analysis

The four chamber tombs contained rich assemblages of both human and animal remains. The preliminary results are presented here. Further osteological analysis, interpretation, and comparison with other sites are forthcoming at the RDAC (Report of Antiquities of Cyprus) journal.

Methodology: Based on the excavation data, we concluded that the bones had been recovered according to their taphonomic scattering. Therefore, their in situ position is of no ritual burial value. The identification of human and animal bones has been painstaking as the fragments reached high numbers (tens of hundreds). Bones have been studied macro- and micro- scopically (Bass 1995, Brothwell 1981, Hillson 1992, Schmid 1972, White 1991). Two small bags with grave filling have also been thoroughly examined (from Tombs 16 and 17).

Results: The grave filling consisted of soil sediment, roots, tiny bone, tooth, shell, and pottery fragments, insect remains, charcoal, seeds, and a bead from T 17. The bones from all tombs were heavily damaged and fragmented due to taphonomic conditions and modern human handling. They were covered by sediments and/or bore signs of weathering and/or animal scavenging.

1.    Human remains:

¨      Tomb 14: MNI = 1 adult Female (?). The bones of the cranial vault were heavy, with thickened diploe and mild porotic hyperostosis.

¨      Tomb 15: MNI= 2 => 1 younger and 1 older adult. One lumbar vertebra showed marked osteophytosis and a large Schmorl’s node.  Osteochondritis dissecans has been observed on a patella.

¨     Tomb 16: MNI = 2 => 1 young gracile adult aged 18-22 years-old (based on femoral head and lesser trochanter fusion) and 1 child aged approx. 9 years-old (based on estimated length of incomplete left radius, and on the morphology of the development of the root and on the attrition of a permanent 2nd left mandibular premolar). 

¨     Tomb 17: MNI = 4 => 1 adult Male, 1 young adult aged 23-35 years-old (Suchey and Brooks method), 1 gracile adult, 1 more adult (based on epiphyseal union), and one child of approx. 5 years of age (based on estimated length and morphology of incomplete left femur and humerus). Squatting facets from dorsiflexion have been observed on an adult calcaneus and one metacarpal shows active periostitis with new bone addition.

2.      Animal Remains: Bone and teeth fragments revealed the presence of: Lepus (hare), Mus (mouse), Sus (pig), Equus (horse), Bos (cow), Avis (bird) - Gallus (chicken) has been positively identified -, Ovis / Capra (Sheep/ Goat). Possible presence of Cervidae. Two crab claws (Carcinus sp.) were found in Tomb 16. Cut marks on bones have been recorded and absence of or separately found animal epiphyses confirm the killing of subadult individuals. The above mentioned animal species were common to almost all tombs. Some animals were scavengers, trapped in the tombs accidentally. The bones found represent all parts of the animal (i.e. skull, main body, and limbs). Number of individuals, sexing, more specific ageing, and metrical analysis could not be applied due to the high fragmentation of the bones. From T 15 three small pieces (approx. 1 x 2 - 2.5 cm) of worked bone bearing circular symmetrical motifs have been recovered.

Conclusions: Many bones from all tombs bore gray spotting, probably from contact with ash and/or burnt grave offerings. The highly weathered surface of the bones made observation and identification difficult, as in the majority of cases the diagnostic morphological markers have been erased or altered. Erosion also prohibits secure diagnosis of pathological conditions on the bones, as it may have produced cases of “pseudopathology”.

* (Part of poster presentation:

Manginis G. , Karali L , Tsaliki A. , Vavouranakis G. (2001) “An interdisciplinary approach towards burial practices in Prehistoric Bronze Age Cyprus: Artifactual and Osteological material from Audēmou-Kamares”, British Association of Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology (BABAO) 3rd Annual Conference, University of Durham, 14-15 July 2001)

introductory bibliography to osteological analysis

 

 

 


 

Please send any comments or suggestions for the project or website to
Co-ordinator@ancientcyprus.ac.uk
The Ancient Cyprus Web Project is affiliated to the Council for British Research in the Levant


Technical note: this site is best viewed using Internet Explorer. Visitors using other browsers, for example Netscape, may experience some difficulties on certain pages of this site. We are working to address these difficulties.

 

Search:
Keywords:
In Association with Amazon.co.uk
   

 

Search:
Keywords:
In Association with Amazon.com
   

 

return to top of page

 

 

 

web