Research master thesis | Archaeology (research) (MA/MSc)
closed access
The material category of cremation remains is of high importance for archaeologists. For many time periods, cremation was the prime way of disposing the dead and therefore has significant value for...Show moreThe material category of cremation remains is of high importance for archaeologists. For many time periods, cremation was the prime way of disposing the dead and therefore has significant value for understanding burial rituals of past societies. Next to that, in many areas including large parts of the Netherlands, cremations are more often retrieved than inhumation burials due to their resistibility to acidic soil circumstances. Although highly important, knowledge on how this material can be of assistance in archaeological research is often underestimated or misunderstood. This study therefore gives an up to date overview of possibilities and limitations of the material. The second part of the thesis is concerned with the ability of cremation research to shed new light on the burial ritual of the Urnfield culture in the South of the Netherlands. Although Urnfields are a well studied phenomenon, relatively little is still known about how the deceased were cremated and how the ritual took place. This thesis therefore seeks to give further insight in the possibility to gain more insight into the performed ritual, based on the information which can be extracted by osteological analysis. The study focuses on material from the Urnfield of Maastricht Ambyerveld, used as a case study. Attention is put on the possibilities to integrate histological and tooth cementum annulation research in standard cremation analysis as well.Show less
West-Frisia is an archeologically rich area of prehistoric remains, that are excellently preserved in the calcareous soil. However, not much is known from this interesting period, although many...Show moreWest-Frisia is an archeologically rich area of prehistoric remains, that are excellently preserved in the calcareous soil. However, not much is known from this interesting period, although many investigations have been carried out in the last several decades. This is mainly the case for the Bronze Age period. Most of these investigations are not elaborated in papers or simply not published at all. The continuous agricultural purposes in the area are a direct threat to the preservation of our past and important information is therefore about to be lost. Yet, we do know that the area became inhabitable around 3000 BC (Van Heeringen and Theunissen 2001; De Mulder and Bosch 1982) and that it did not take long before the first inhabitants settled down. The earliest occupation traces are known from Zandwerven, generally dated around 2600 BC (Hallewas and De Mulder 1987, 170; Hogestijn and Woltering 1990, 155). There exists a general occupation model of West-Frisia. It stresses that as a result of extreme wettening the area became uninhabitable at the end of the Late Neolithic and people were therefore forced to move elsewhere. At the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age, when the area offered excellent circumstances for occupation again, West-Frisia became colonized (Brandt 1980; Brandt 1988; Fokkens 2005b; IJzereef and Van Regteren Altena 1991; Van Wijngaarden-Bakker and Brinkkemper 2005; Woltering 1985; Woltering and Sarfatij 1976). The area remained inhabited until the end of the Late Bronze Age, when wettening circumstances eventually made the area uninhabitable again (IJzereef and Van Regteren Altena 1991). However, indications of Early Bronze Age occupation are known (Van Beek and Hamburg 2002; De Boer and Molenaar 2006; Hallewas and De Mulder 1987). Therefore it seems unlikely to hold on to the outdated occupation models. Chance finds like for instance Barbed Wire sherds are known as well, but these finds seem to become generally ignored. The area of West-Frisia is thus likely to have been continuously inhabited from the Late Neolithic until the Late Bronze Age onwards. Geologically the area was inhabitable during the Early Bronze Age. The fact that not much artefacts or house plans of that particular period (represented as the Barbed Wire Culture) are known, is a similar problem concerning all regions in the Netherlands (Arnoldussen and Fokkens 2008; Fokkens 2005b; Fokkens 2008). The habitation history of West-Frisia is clearly a little more complicated than is previously thought and it is time for new investigations and assumptions about this interesting period and area. The assumed colonization of West-Frisia at the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age is questionable. Indications for Early Bronze Age occupation are inevitable and the arguments that support the colonization theory are no longer up to date. The Hoogkarspel-oud ceramics which date to the Middle Bronze Age are generally seen to originate from the area of Het Gooi because it bears resemblances to the Hilversum-Draken-Laren ceramic sequence (Van Beek and Hamburg 2002; Brandt 1980; Brandt 1988). But in fact the Hoogkarspel ceramics bears resemblances to all Early Bronze Age ceramics in the Netherlands. Only the variations in shape and decoration are much more elaborated compared to other ceramic assemblages at the time of the Late Bronze Age (Butler and Fokkens 2005, 377). Moreover, the Hoogkarspel ceramic assemblage misses the characteristic horseshoe-shaped ears and handles of the Hilversum-Draken-Laren ceramics (Butler and Fokkens 2005, 375-376). As is described above, the lack of Early Bronze Age indications are not restricted to West-Frisia. This problem accounts for the whole Netherlands (Arnoldussen and Fokkens 2008; Fokkens 2005b; Fokkens 2008). The geological processes that took place in West-Frisia from the Late Neolithic period on, are likely to be responsible for the erosion of Early Bronze Age traces (Lohof and Vaars 2005, 14; Woltering 1985, 19). The pattern of gully systems changed over time (De Boer and Molenaar 2006; Van Heeringen and Theunissen 2001; Mol 2002; De Mulder and Bosch 1982; Woltering 1985), forcing inhabitants to move along with the system. As a result, habitation was present at different areas each time the pattern of gullies and creeks had changed. This is reflected in the eastwards movement of habitation during the Middle Bronze Age. It is therefore likely that colonization never happened. The inhabitants of Middle Bronze Age eastern West-Frisia are likely to be the descendants of the Early Bronze Age inhabitants in western West-Frisia. Hence, West-Frisia was never abandoned completely. Most likely the area was continuously inhabited from the Late Neolithic period until, at least, the Late Bronze Age.Show less
In the summer of 2010, the Faculty of Archaeology of Leiden University conducted an excavation at Slabroekse Heide, in the south of the Netherlands. Earlier excavations in 1923 and 2005 had...Show moreIn the summer of 2010, the Faculty of Archaeology of Leiden University conducted an excavation at Slabroekse Heide, in the south of the Netherlands. Earlier excavations in 1923 and 2005 had uncovered burial mounds dating to the bronze age, the iron age and the Roman period. During the 2010 excavations several „new‟ burial mounds were discovered. Despite the poor preservation, due to levelling and ploughing of the ground in modern times, some cremation graves and an inhumation grave were found. The so-called „Princess grave‟ is the rich inhumation grave of a woman who probably played an important role in the affairs of her community. The oldest elements of the grave field are burial mounds dating back to the middle or late bronze age. In the early iron age, an urnfield was constructed around the mounds, consisting of a large number of smaller mounds. Their positioning indicates a positive appreciation of the earlier graves. The urnfield is divided in two parts. The eastern part contains smaller mounds with little space between them; the western part has larger, more dispersed mounds. The meaning or function of this division is not clear. Two rows of poles were uncovered in 2005 and 2010. The longest of these may be related to this division; it does not extend, however, across even half the grave field. A more plausible explanation is that the rows were constructed in relationship to individual grave monuments, perhaps connecting them to lower-lying ritual wet places. The prehistoric use of the grave field ends with the construction of at least two grave monuments in the middle iron age. In the Roman period the grave field was used once more, but only ten graves from this period have been found. Again there seems to be a positive appreciation of the older monuments. In this period the site appears to have been used only for a short time, and by a small amount of people. No traces of habitation have been found in the vicinity from either the Roman period or the iron age. But it is likely that the people who buried their dead at Slabroekse Heide, lived on the flanks of the valley of the nearby stream known as Kraaienloop. In the fourteenth or fifteenth century, a long ditch was dug through the prehistoric gravefield which served to protect or defend the land. Apart from that, the burial mounds survived more or less intact until the early 1900‟s when the grave field was levelled and developed as farmland. In 2011, several grave monuments have been reconstructed based on the results of the 2010 excavation. Thus, the grave field is now visible in the landscape once more.Show less
In this thesis the cultural situation in the Netherlands during the middle Neolithic and the late Neolithic-A is described. The Vlaardingen culture (3400-2500 BC) and the Funnel beaker culture (TRB...Show moreIn this thesis the cultural situation in the Netherlands during the middle Neolithic and the late Neolithic-A is described. The Vlaardingen culture (3400-2500 BC) and the Funnel beaker culture (TRB) co-existed during the middle Neolithic. Several aspects of both cultures are described. These aspects contribute to the characterization of both cultures. On the other hand, a comparison between these aspects allow similarities and differences between both cultures to be determined. Based on the pottery and the occupied environment, the Vlaardingen culture and the TRB seem clearly distinguishable from one another. The aim of this thesis is to determine in what way both cultures are distinct from each other, but even more important is to nuance this division. Several finds that are the result of contacts between the Vlaardingen culture and the TRB are discussed. Additionally, certain objects were present in both cultures and there is evidence for the existence of an exchange network which incorporated both cultures. It appeared the cultures remained “pure” for over 500 years. Still, sporadic contacts took place between the people of both cultures. These were however not so intensive that acculturation occurred. The second and shorter part of this thesis deals with the Single Grave culture (2900-2500 BC). When the TRB ceases to exist, the SGC succeeds it. The Vlaardingen culture endures in the west (3400-2500 BC). It is examined whether the Vlaardingen culture and the SGC were just as strictly divided over the landscape as the TRB from the Vlaardingen culture. Characteristics of the SGC have been briefly discussed and the distribution of the culture throughout the Netherlands has been described. It is swiftly apparent that the SGC maintained a less strict preference for environment than the TRB. The SGC seems to have spread into the wetlands of the west as well as the uplands in the west. However the Vlaardingen culture persists and the presence of the SGC within Vlaardingen settlements is remains limited. Finally, it turns out that the current chronology is not accurate enough to make clear statements on the distribution pattern of the SGC throughout the Netherlands.Show less
De afgelopen jaren is door Rijkswaterstaat in Son en Breugel, bij het industrieterrein Ekkersrijt een verkeersknooppunt aangelegd. Dit knooppunt moet de doorstroming van het verkeer op de snelwegen...Show moreDe afgelopen jaren is door Rijkswaterstaat in Son en Breugel, bij het industrieterrein Ekkersrijt een verkeersknooppunt aangelegd. Dit knooppunt moet de doorstroming van het verkeer op de snelwegen A58 (naar Tilburg-Breda) en A50 (naar Veghel-Oss-Nijmegen) verbeteren. Dat er sporen uit het verleden te vinden waren op het braakliggende terrein was bekend geworden dankzij vondsten, die onder andere vrijetijd-archeoloog R. (Geit) Emmery uit Son en Breugel had verzameld. Daarnaast was door het archeologisch onderzoeksbureau BAAC een archeologisch booronderzoek uitgevoerd.1 De oppervlaktevondsten en de boringen maakten aannemelijk dat de bodem nog oorspronkelijk en ongeroerd was, en dat archeologische sporen in de bodem nog in takt zouden zijn. Het grootschalige grondverzet dat voor de aanleg van het knooppunt noodzakelijk is, zou de bodem verstoren en daarmee de oudheidkundige sporen uitwissen. De éénmalige gelegenheid om de archeologische informatie veilig te stellen werd door provinciaal archeoloog dr. M. Meffert aanbevolen. Voor de uitvoering van het project benaderden de gemeente Son en Breugel en Rijkswaterstaat het Archeologisch Centrum Eindhoven en Helmond. De opgravingen vonden plaats in het voorjaar van 2006, het najaar van 2007 en de eerste helft van 2008. Daarbij is de volgorde van de werkzaamheden nauwkeurig afgestemd met Rijkswaterstaat en de aannemerscombinatie Mourik-Besix zodat de aanleg van het verkeersknooppunt geen vertraging zou oplopen. Gaandeweg bleek dat in de bodem de resten van nederzettingen uit de midden- en late bronstijd en vroege ijzertijd bewaard waren gebleven. Nog niet eerder werd zo’n groot aantal huizen en erven uit deze periode uit de prehistorie opgegraven in Zuid Nederland en België. Daarmee krijgt het archeologisch onderzoek in Ekkersrijt een bijzondere plaats in het nederzettingsonderzoek naar de bronstijd en ijzertijd in Zuid-Nederland. Deze synthese is een samenvatting en interpretatie van de belangrijkste resultaten. Eerst wordt in het kort ingegaan op de landschappelijke en geologische context van het gebied (hoofdstuk 2), vervolgens op de historische achtergronden (hoofdstuk 3) en eerdere archeologische waarnemingen in de omgeving van het onderzoeksgebied (hoofdstuk 4). Daarna volgt een beschrijving van de belangrijkste onderzoeksvragen en methoden (hoofdstuk 5). De resultaten van de opgraving zijn verdeeld over de aangetroffen structuren (hoofdstuk 6), vondsten (hoofdstuk 7) en ecologische resten (hoofdstuk 8) Tenslotte wordt de verkregen informatie in een aantal conclusies samengevat (hoofdstuk 9).Show less
The contemporary view on the so-called secondary burials in the Early Iron Age (800 BC– 500 BC) is that it is a very common phenomenon that started in the Middle Bronze Age A. This custom has its...Show moreThe contemporary view on the so-called secondary burials in the Early Iron Age (800 BC– 500 BC) is that it is a very common phenomenon that started in the Middle Bronze Age A. This custom has its peak in the Early Iron Age. When looking at the facts this phenomenon appeared to be more nuanced than is assumed in the literature. It is a rare phenomenon, at which a distinction can be made between reuse of a contemporary barrow and re-use of an older barrow. Most secondary burials appeared to be placed in a contemporary barrow, but in the transition period from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age the re-use take place in an older, not contemporary barrow. It is argued that these different forms of re-use have a different meaning.Show less
For this Master thesis the site Wijchen de Berendonck was analysed. The site is situated on the edge of a riverdune (donk) and near to the Wijchense Ven. The excavations took place from 1976 until...Show moreFor this Master thesis the site Wijchen de Berendonck was analysed. The site is situated on the edge of a riverdune (donk) and near to the Wijchense Ven. The excavations took place from 1976 until 1980. Because the site was excavated such a long time ago a lot of information which would be useful today is missing. There were for instance no intersection drawings available and many features were not described. This lack of information made it hard to analyse the site properly. The general subject of this thesis was the reconstruction of structures from the features and to date these structures by examining and dating the pottery from the features. The analysis of the features revealed twelve structures which consist of; five houses, five outbuildings, one larger outbuilding and one circular ditch. Due to the pottery found within the postholes it was possible to date these structures. In order to accomplish this the characterisations of the pottery were compared to other research and pottery typologies. The examination of the pottery revealed that all the structures date from the late bronze age (c. 1100-800 BC) and early iron age (c. 800-500 BC). The houses which were examined differ from other houses in the surrounding area for this time period. One of the houses is for example characterised by a three aisled house plan and a fixed distance between the central postholes. These kinds of structures are typical for the middle bronze age (c. 1800-1100 BC). Within the site only a few pottery sherds were found which could be dated to the middle bronze age (though 1,5% of the fragments). The pottery from the three aisled house and the corresponding rubbish pits only revealed late bronze age pottery. Maybe this house could be viewed as a ""transitional house"" from the large three aisled middle bronze age houses to the smaller two aisled late bronze age and early iron age houses. Also the two aisled late bronze age and early iron age houses were different from the houses usually found in this region and this time period. These house plans are bigger and three aisled, instead of two aisled. These results may indicate that the houses of Wijchen de Berendonck represent local building traditions. In the last chapter the site was compared to other sites on the riverdune, hereby focussing especially on the habitation variations through time and the relation with the landscape.Show less
The chieftain’s grave of Oss, which was discovered and excavated in 1933, concerns a large Early Iron Age barrow, with the burial of a so called chief of Oss. The burial contained a rich set of...Show moreThe chieftain’s grave of Oss, which was discovered and excavated in 1933, concerns a large Early Iron Age barrow, with the burial of a so called chief of Oss. The burial contained a rich set of grave goods, of which several of them were imported from abroad. The most important of them: a bronze situlae, an iron Mindelheim sword and bronze horse bits. Early typological examination had shown that these objects were imported from the Central European Hallstatt culture. Despite the fact that the barrow and its grave goods were already published several times, the real meanings of the grave goods were actually never researched and published in great detail and larger context. This thesis discusses therefore specifically the Mindelheim sword from the chieftain’s grave of Oss. The main question of this thesis is: What was the ‘special’ purpose and meaning of the sword of the chieftain’s grave of Oss in relation to its Central European origins? The sword has a striking appearance. The iron blade is of a considerable length, has a distinct hat-shaped pommel and has gold leaf as decoration on its pommel and wooden grip. Adding to that, the sword was bent to fit in the situla. At first it was thought that the sword of Oss was a prestigious object with practical purposes as a sword for a horse riding warrior. This was thought because swords from the Mindelheim type are generally interpreted in this way. However, with the use of parallels from both regions, the Hallstatt area and the Lower Rhine area, and background information of the regional circumstances this thesis shows that it is more likely that the Mindelheim sword of Oss had a symbolic purpose. Its appearance (gold decoration etc.) already suggests that the sword must have been a valuable object, which exuded prestige and power. The (regional) context and its associations with other grave goods point also in the direction of a symbolic usage. The monumental size of the barrow, and usage of a specific set of imported grave goods as well implies the adoption of an elite ideology from the Hallstatt culture. The treatment of the sword seems to be an indigenous twist of the adopted elite ideology: the sword was bent not only to fit in the situla, but probably to be deposited in direct contact with the cremation remains. Several arguments thus imply the symbolic purpose of the sword. The chief of Oss might have wanted to send a message to the society he left behind. The sword is hereby one of the features from the chieftain’s grave of Oss that exudes the power and prestige of the man who was cremated and buried afterwards.Show less
The municipality of Oss (Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands) is one of the most archaeologically heavily researched areas of the Netherland and maybe even Europe. While the Iron Age, Roman period and...Show moreThe municipality of Oss (Noord-Brabant, the Netherlands) is one of the most archaeologically heavily researched areas of the Netherland and maybe even Europe. While the Iron Age, Roman period and Middle Ages are well represented in the publications concerning Oss, the Bronze Age has been scarcely researched. This main goal of this thesis is to shed a light on this period by means of dating features using ceramics as a dating method and thereby sketching a brief picture of the habitation of the area during the Bronze Age. At the same time the ceramics research is used to take a closer look at what is known about Bronze Age pottery sequences and to demonstrate any falsehoods, if there are any. Features containing more than ten fragments of pottery (not including grit) were described, divided per excavation and per feature type. Extra attention was given to structures of a datable type and features of which a C14 date was available. During the research it became clear that the traditional division of the Bronze Age in ‘early’, ‘middle’ and ‘late’ would not suffice as a partition. In the end there were four distinct periods to examine: ‘late’ Early Bronze Age and Middle Bronze Age A, Middle Bronze Age B and ‘early’ Late Bronze Age, Late Bronze Age and ‘late’ Late Bronze Age or Early Iron Age. In years this would respectively be: ±1850 BC – 1500 BC, 1500 BC – ±1075 BC, ±1075 BC - ±875 BC, ±875 BC – 500 BC. The ‘early’ and ‘late’ Late Bronze Age are assumed to be periods of about 75 years. The features of the examined ceramics matched up quite well to the proposed model. Some variables did not accord to the model but, in general, the model as proposed suited this research quite well. The ‘late’ Early Bronze Age and the Middle Bronze Age A are a period of relatively low amounts of features. This could mean that habitation levels were low in this period but, as structures from this period are badly recognized, there could have been more habitation then expected from the numbers of features. In the Middle Bronze Age B a rise in feature numbers is apparent as is the number in houses. As features from this period are recognized as such it seems habitation peaks at this period of the Bronze Age. There are only three features recognized as Late Bronze Age. Again there is a problem with recognisability of features from this period. It is assumed that habitation levels stagnated and people moved closer to the river Meuse, which was further away from Oss-North in this period than in the previous or following periods. In the ‘late’ Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age all researched excavations were again inhabited, very similar to the image one gets from the Middle Bronze Age B.Show less
