Revisiting the Dead: Tomb Reuse and Post-Burial Practices at Ascoli Satriano (Pre-Roman Apulia, Seventh–Fourth Centurybc)

Abstract

In the archaeology of death and burial, the premise that the dead were buried ritually and not simply disposed of seems to be accepted without argument. Where graves were reopened and reused for subsequent burials, however, the post-funeral manipulation of ‘older’ depositions is often regarded as having been primarily pragmatic and circumstantial. Countering this interpretative imbalance, we argue that the reuse of tombs was a highly complex procedure that forced communities into negotiating and formalizing, or even ritualizing, the way in which bodies and objects were acted on and engaged with. Taking the necropolis Giarnera Piccola/Ascoli Satriano in pre-Roman northern Apulia as a case study, and employing a microarchaeological-archaeothanatological perspective, we discuss the diverse and sometimes conflicting practices used to deal with pre-existing graves, objects and human remains, identifying tensions between maintaining or reconstructing the integrity of the body and intentionally manipulating and fragmenting it. We argue that repeatedly reused tombs constituted a socially and symbolically charged arena for a prolonged, active relationship with the deceased and for mobilizing, mediating and maintaining inter-generational memories.

Older Burial Disturbance: Postfunerary Manipulation of Graves and Corpses in Precontact Northeastern Brazil

“…According to a number of authors researching burial disturbance (Aspöck 2011; Aspöck et al 2020; Cauwe 2001; Crangle 2016; Duncan 2005; Fahlander 2010, 2018; Gleize 2020; Hoernes et al 2019; Nilsson Stutz and Larsson 2016; Weiss-Krecji 2011, 2020; Zielo 2018), these postfunerary actions can include a variety of ritual and nonritual manipulations of the human remains and grave goods, including disturbance of bodies and graves in the original resting place, exhumation and redeposition of bones, curation or loss of bones, comingling of human and animal remains, and the disarticulation and rearticulation of skeletons. The myriad reasons for postburial interventions include grave reuse; ancestral rites of appropriation, veneration, and commemoration; relic cults; tomb visits and tomb renewal rites; accidental superimpositions on disturbed unmarked older graves; and grave robbery, looting, and desecration.…”

“…In turn, Hoernes and colleagues (2019) argue that the different postfunerary manipulations of older deposits or the diverse practices used to deal with preexisting graves, especially reused graves, were often regarded as practical and incidental activities. The reopening, manipulation, and redeposition of the material remains of previous burials, including both bodies and associated goods, would have been full of meaning and social significance.…”

“…The postfunerary manipulation of bodies and graves may involve the reopening of previous burials; the disturbance, disarticulation, or reduction of the bodies or skeletons; subsequent tomb reuse and modification of older graves, including exhumation and the destruction or loss of bones; and lastly these bones’ redeposition at another place as relics, secondary deposits, or offerings (Fahlander 2010, 2018; Gleize 2020; Hoernes et al 2019). Postburial interventions beyond the funerary cycle do not involve secondary burials because these types of burials can also be subsequently disturbed (Weiss-Krejci 2011).…”

Gender Transformations in Prehistoric and Archaic Societies

“…It is also striking that, in the case of reused tombs especially, items of bodily adornment and weapons, but hardly any pottery, were still associated with their original 'owner' when that person's bones were repositioned within the tomb to create space for the new interment, indicating the 'individuality' of the association of these objects and their bearer (Hoernes et al 2018).…”