Navigation – Plan du site

Human and animal deposits in circular pits of the 5th millennium between the Rhine and the Danube

Philippe Lefranc, Rose-Marie Arbogast, Anthony Denaire, Fanny Chenal, Clément Féliu et Christian Jeunesse
Traduction de Louise Byrne
p. 109-111
Cet article est une traduction de :
Les dépôts humains et animaux en fosses de plan circulaire du 5e millénaire entre Rhin et Danube [fr]

Résumés

De récentes mises au point sur la chronologie absolue des dépôts en fosse de plan circulaire en Bavière, de nouvelles recherches bibliographiques ainsi qu’une série de découvertes réalisées dans le sud de la plaine du Rhin supérieur nous permettent d’émettre l’hypothèse d’une origine de ce phénomène en Europe centrale, entre la Tchéquie et la Bavière. Ces régions ont en effet livré les dépôts les plus anciens et leur typologie recouvre l’ensemble des catégories définies : inhumations en position conventionnelle ou non conventionnelle, dépôts asymétriques, dépôts mixtes, segments anatomiques, etc. L’introduction de cette pratique dans le sud de la plaine du Rhin supérieur et dans la vallée du Neckar, sans doute sous influence Münchshofen directe, intervient dans le second tiers du 5e millénaire. Elle est notamment illustrée par des dépôts mixtes, des segments anatomiques, des individus isolés en position conventionnelle ou non, des dépôts singuliers à connotation guerrière et des dépôts d’animaux. La culture de Michelsberg, attestée en Basse-Alsace à la fin du millénaire, perpétue cette pratique qui connaît un nouvel essor lors de l’étape moyenne de cette culture et une diffusion en direction de la Haute-Alsace. À l’est, en Slovaquie, il est possible que le groupe de Ludanice, touché par le phénomène dans les derniers siècles du 5e millénaire, ait joué le rôle de relais dans sa diffusion vers les groupes de la Trichterbecherkultur ancienne.
Au principe d’une diffusion progressive du phénomène du Chasséen vers le Michelsberg, puis vers les régions danubiennes, nous proposons donc de substituer un modèle polycentrique dans lequel le Midi et l’Europe centrale évoluent indépendamment et sans nécessaires interactions.

Haut de page

Notes de la rédaction

This article is not quite a traduction but rather is a long summary of the French article « Les dépôts humains et animaux en fosses de plan circulaire du 5e millénaire entre Rhin et Danube ».

Texte intégral

1The aim of this contribution is to reconsider the origin of the practice of human and animal deposits in circular-shaped pits between the Rhine and the Danube in the 5th millennium (fig. 1), based on new research and a series of recent discoveries, which have brought to light one of the cores of this trend in Central Europe. This revision of the data leads to a reconsideration of the thesis of the emergence of this practice in the South of France and its adoption by Michelsberg groups, who were thought to have played a relay role in its diffusion towards Central European groups (Jeunesse 2010, Lefranc et al. 2010).

Fig. 1 – Distribution map of circular-shaped grave deposits between the Rhine and the Vàh in the 5th millennium BCE

Fig. 1 – Distribution map of circular-shaped grave deposits between the Rhine and the Vàh in the 5th millennium BCE

1. Altdorf-Aich I (Landshut district, Germany)
2. Kleinfeld IV, Altdorf-Aich II (Landshut district, Germany)
3. Köferinger Feld, Alteglofsheim (Regensburg district, Germany)
4. Friedhof, Bergheim (Neuburg-Schrobenhausen district, Germany)
5. Eichendorf-Aufhausen (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany)
6. Aussiedlerhof, Feldkirchen II (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany)
7. Burgenfeld, Geiselhöring (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany)
8. Strassgwender, Grossmehring (Eichstätt district, Germany)
9. Ziegelstrasse, Inningen (Augsburg district, Germany)
10. Staatstrasse, Landau-Frammering I, OT Thalham (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany)
11. Bachleite, Landau-Frammering II, OT Thalham (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany)
12. Langenhettenbach-Lehmgrube Erlus (Landshut district, Germany)
13. Lenting-Kösching (Eichstätt district, Germany)
14. Wollersdorfer Feld, Mauern (Freising district, Germany)
15. Allmannsbacher Feld, Mengkofen-Süsskofen (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany)
16. Mettenbach (Landshut district, Germany)
17. Schinderäcker, Leitensiedlung, Oberpöring-Niederpöring (Deggendorf district, Germany)
18. Rote Breite, Oberschneiding I (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany)
19. Birkenfeld, Oberschneiding-Riedling (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany)
20. Osterhofen-Altenmark I (Deggendorf district, Germany)
21. Skala Kino, Regensburg (Regensburg district, Germany)
22. Hauptstrasse, Riekofen I (Regensburg district, Germany)
23. Riekofen II (Regensburg district, Germany)
24. Gewerbegebiet nördlich der A 30, Schwabmünchen (Augsburg district, Germany)
25. Marteläcker, Stephanspoching (Deggendorf district, Germany)
26. Wasserwerk, Straubing (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany)
27. Loher Höhe, Vilshofen-Pleinting (Passau district, Germany)
28. Vohburg-Menning II (Pfaffenhofen an der Ilm district, Germany)
29. Vohburg-Oberdünzing (Pfaffenhofen an der Ilm district, Germany)
30. Zieglberg, Wang (Echstätt district, Germany)
31. Eschenharter Strasse III, Wildenberg (Kelheim district, Germany)
32. Bajč-Ragońa (Slovak Republic)
33. Jelšovce II (Slovak Republic)
34. Nitra-Mlynárce (Slovak Republic)
35. Strasse, Achenheim (Lower Rhine, France)
36. Sauer, Bergheim (Lower Rhine, France)
37. Buckacker, Eichstetten (Breisgau-Hochschwartzwald district, Germany)
38. Les Abattoirs, Altmatt, Holtzheim (Lower Rhine, France)
39. Obernai (Lower Rhine, France)
40. Les Portes du Kochersberg, Vendenheim (Lower Rhine, France)
41. Ober Endinger Weg, Weisweil (Emmendingen district, Germany)
42. Trummelmatten, Merxheim (Upper Rhine, France)
43. Hummelberg, Leonberg-Eltingen (Böblingen district, Germany)
44. Schwieberdingen (Ludwigsburg district, Germany)
45. Helfta (Eisleben district, Germany)
46. Gäu, Kirchheim (Heilbronn district, Germany)
47. Loděnice (Czech Republic)
48. Mšeno (Czech Republic)
49. Praha-Střešovice (Czech Republic)
50. Vchynice (Czech Republic)
51. Schwoebenfeld, Geispolsheim (Lower Rhine, France)
52. Gingsheimerweg, Gougenheim (Lower Rhine, France)
53. Teugn (Kelheim district, Germany)
54. La Colline du Grand-Pré, Saint-Léonard (Switzerland)

CAD P. Lefranc

2The examination of the archaeological literature in the studied area enabled us to identify the first discreet signs of deposits in circular-shaped pits in a Stichbandkeramik context, in the Czech Republic. These deposits (Zapotocká 1998) are sometimes older than 4500 BCE (Lička 2016), which makes them the oldest deposits of this type in the studied area. They can be compared with the more recent deposits from the Münchshofen culture, due to the presence of plural deposits and anatomic segments. However, no filiation link between Bohemian and Bavarian deposits has been established as this practice has not yet been documented in the Stichbandkeramik in Bavaria.

3It is in Münchshofen, in Bavaria, in part of Lower Austria and the Upper Palatinate, that this practice really developed, with 80 individuals distributed in 53 deposits (Meixner 2009). The latter include all the categories of deposits defined up until now (Lefranc et al. 2018): individual or plural, layered, mixed associating humans and animals, whole individuals and anatomic segments (Husty and Meixner 2009), corpses in conventional and non-conventional positions, as well as asymmetrical burials denoting the practice of funerary accompaniment (Weinig 2012). There are also signs of peri mortem manipulations (Böhm 1998) and violent practices (Schmotz and Staskiewicz 2008). The 18 recorded animal deposits yielded 40 carcasses. More than half of these are swine, followed by canids, small ruminants, lagomorphs and cervids.

4The oldest Münchshofen deposits may have appeared at an early stage, around 4500 BCE (Meixner 2009), but they only multiplied during the classic phase, around 4400-4300 BCE, then declined from around 4000 BCE to the end of the late Münchshofen. On account of the early age of these deposits in this region of Central Europe, their frequency and their typology, we infer that the hub of the origin of the diffusion of this practice is located around Slovakia and the Váh Valley to the east, and towards the Rhine Valley to the west.

5Towards the west, deposits in circular-shaped pits reach Eastern Bischheim in Saxony-Anhalt (Hupe 2004), the Schwieberdingen group, on the Neckar (Lüning 1969) – where they remain rare – and the Rhine Valley, in Lower Alsace. This latter region recently yielded data enabling us to reconsider the question of the origin and diffusion of this type of deposit. The corpus for the 5th millennium is still rather small, with eleven occurrences for the four centuries between 4450 and 4050 BCE, during which the Rhine Bischheim, the Bruebach-Oberbergen and the Western Bischheim of the Upper Rhine succeed each other (Jeunesse et al. 2004). However, the record is sufficient to consider that the appearance of deposits in circular-shaped pits in Lower Alsace not only precedes the Michelsberg installation in this region, but in particular, that it is not a marginal trend. The Bischheim and Epiroessen corpus comprises individual inhumations in conventional position, mixed deposits, deposits of anatomic segments, isolated individuals in non-conventional position, as well as two very singular deposits, at Bergheim (Chenal et al. 2015) and Achenheim (Chenal and Lefranc 2017; fig. 11), demonstrating an episode of intense regional conflict, characterized by practices of taking trophies and Overkill, and perhaps opposing the native Bruebach-Oberbergen groups to the newly arrived BORS (Chenal and Lefranc 2017). Although these two deposits are on the fringes of the corpus, it is important to note that the last gesture carried out, i.e., discarding the corpses in circular-shaped pits, probably transcribes adherence to the ideological principles underlying the general trend of deposits in circular-shaped pits, and the role of the receptacle for ritual deposits (Lefranc and Chenal 2019). The mixed deposit of Obernai, containing two immature individuals in a non-conventional position and the remains of four whole canids (fig. 15), also undoubtedly represents complex ritual gestures and we cannot rule out a sacrificial dimension. The animal deposits in Lower Alsace are dominated by canids (9 animals), which is one of the rare factors differentiating them from the Alsatian and Bavarian corpuses (dominated by swine).

Fig. 11 – Strasse, Achenheim (Lower Rhine), simultaneous deposits of six male individuals and four additional upper left limbs, structure 124, Bruebach-Oberbergen

Fig. 11 – Strasse, Achenheim (Lower Rhine), simultaneous deposits of six male individuals and four additional upper left limbs, structure 124, Bruebach-Oberbergen

Photo P. Lefranc

Fig. 15 – Parc d’activités, Obernai (Lower Rhine), deposit of two immature individuals and four canids, structure 2588, Bruebach-Oberbergen

Fig. 15 – Parc d’activités, Obernai (Lower Rhine), deposit of two immature individuals and four canids, structure 2588, Bruebach-Oberbergen

Photo F. Chenal

6The hypothesis of a direct influence from Münchshofen in Lower Alsace, in the second half of the 5th millennium, appears to be the most economic and the only postulate taking into consideration the early presence of these deposits in the region. In addition, this hypothesis is supported by the discovery of two typical Wulstrandschüsseln type vases from Münchshofen productions (Lefranc et al. 2018).

7In Slovakia, the Ludanice group, considered by some specialists to begin during the last three or four centuries of the 5th  millennium (Gleser 2012), yielded eight individual or plural deposits, mainly consisting of individuals in conventional positions (Točik 1991, Kuzma and Kopčeková 2007). An asymmetrical deposit is also recorded (Pavúk and Bátora 1995). The Ludanice group could have played a relay role in the diffusion of the practice at the beginning of the 4th millennium in early Trichtebecherkultur groups (Baalberge).

8Finally, towards 4050 BCE, the early Michelsberg of the Upper Rhine spreads to Lower Alsace and extends the practice of deposits in circular-shaped pits to this geographic area – but also to Bavaria, in the region of Ratisbonne, in direct contact with the late Münchshofen (Lefranc et al. 2010). Its diffusion from Lower Alsace to the Neckar during the middle Michelsberg horizon did not go beyond the 5th millennium boundaries in the Rhine Basin and remained ignored by most of the Michelsberg groups, from Rhineland to Saxony and from Belgium to the Paris Basin. Therefore, these Michelsberg groups are not responsible for the introduction of this type of deposit in the Rhine Valley, as this practice emerged there four centuries earlier, but they are responsible, from 3900 BCE onwards, for its development in Rhineland and its diffusion towards Upper Alsace and the bearers of the Munzingen culture during the 38th century BCE (Lefranc et al. 2018b). Thus, the hypothesis of a unique and southern origin for this trend, posited in 2010, is no longer inevitable. Indeed, the absence of this type of deposit in the north of the Paris Basin, the formative Michelsberg area where this culture was in contact with groups affiliated to the Chassean in the second half of the 5th millennium, with no deposits in circular-shaped pits, prompts us to consider that this hypothesis is no longer valid.

9The emergence of deposits in circular-shaped pits occurs at an early stage in the South of France (Schmitt et al. 2017), in the first half of the 5th millennium, in contexts earlier than the Chassean, contemporaneous with the earliest Stichbandkeramik. They persist between the Garonne and Durance in the Chassey type Middle Neolithic (Schmitt and Van Willigen 2016), alongside the development of the practice in Münchshofen and in groups from Bischheim, but for now, nothing allows us to consider these two poles together in spite of numerous similarities. The only noteworthy difference is the absence of asymmetrical deposits in the Chassean. The latter appeared around 4250 BCE in Bavaria, are suspected around 4050 BCE in Lower Alsace, and make a late entrance, possibly under Rhine influence, in the middle valley of the Rhône in a La Roberte context, between 3900 and 3600 BCE (Beeching and Crubézy 1998). Today, it seems impossible to settle between the hypothesis of a shared origin for the Mediterranean and Central European assemblages, a diffusion from one pole towards the other or reciprocal influences (which are not corroborated by material elements), and the hypothesis of a simple analogy. New data will undoubtedly shed more light on this community of practices carried out in distant territories. In the meantime, it appears pertinent to study these two blocks by considering them as independent assemblages with parallel trajectories, without ruling out possible, but not compulsory interactions.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Beeching A., Crubézy E. 1998Les sépultures chasséennes de la vallée du Rhône, in Guilaine J. (ed.), Sépultures d’occident et genèses des mégalithismes, Paris, Errance, p. 147-164.

Böhm K. 1998 – Münchshöfener Bestattungen in Ostbayern, in Michálek J., Schmotz K., Zápotocká M. (eds.), Archäologische Arbeitsgemeinschaft Ostbayern/West- und Südböhmen, 7. Treffen, Landau an der Isar, 11.-14. Juni 1997, summary of communications, Rhaden, Verlag Marie Leidorf, p. 47-59.

Chenal F., Lefranc P. 2017 – Violence préhistorique à Achenheim, Archéologia, 550, p. 12-13.

Chenal F., Perrin B., Barrand-Emam H., Boulestin B. 2015 – A farewell to arms: A deposit of human limbs and bodies at Bergheim, France, c. 4000 BC, Antiquity, 89(348), p. 1313-1330.

Gleser R. 2012 – Zeitskalen, stilistische Tendenzen und Regionalität des 5. Jahrtausends in den Altsiedellandschaften zwischen Mosel und Morava, in Gleser R., Becker V. (eds.), Mitteleuropa im 5. Jahrtausend vor Christus. Internationalen Konferenz in Münster, Oktober 2010, Münster, Lit Verlag (Neolithikum und ältere Metallzeiten. Studien und Materialien 1), p. 35-103.

Hupe H.J. 2004 – Eine Mehrfachbestattung der Rössener Kultur bei Helfta, Ldkr. Mansfelder Land, Archäologie in Sachsen-Anhalt, 2, p. 175-181.

Husty L, Meixner G. 2007 – Münchshöfen oder Michelsberg? – Ein jungneolithisches Grabenwerk bei Riedling. Gemeinde Oberschneiding, Landkreis Straubing-Bogen, Niederbayern, Archäologische Jahr im Bayern 2007, p. 18-19.

Jeunesse C. 2010 – Les sépultures en fosses circulaires de l’horizon 4500-3500. Contribution à l’étude comparée des systèmes funéraires du Néolithique européen, in Barray L., Boulestin B. (eds.), Morts anormaux et sépultures bizarres. Les dépôts humains en fosses circulaires ou en silos du Néolithique à l’âge du Fer. Actes de la table ronde interdisciplinaire de Sens, 29 mars-1er avril 2006, Dijon, Éditions universitaires de Dijon, p. 26-48.

Jeunesse C., Lefranc P., Denaire A. 2004 – Groupe de Bischheim, origine du Michelsberg, genèse du groupe d’Entzheim. La transition entre le Néolithique moyen et le Néolithique récent dans les régions rhénanes, Zimmersheim, Association pour la Promotion de la recherche archéologique en Alsace (Cahiers 18-19), 280 p.

Kuzma I., Kopčeková M. 2009 – Fortsetzung der Grabung in Nitra – Mlynárce, Archeologické Výskumy a Nálezy na Slovensku v Roku 2007, p. 131-133.

Lefranc P., Chenal F. 2019 – Deposits of bodies in circular pits in the Neolithic period (mid-fifth to the mid-fourth millennium BCE). Deposits, waste, or ritual remnants?, Human Remains and Violence, 5(1), p. 55-69.

Lefranc P., Denaire A., Chenal F., Arbogast R.-M. 2010 – Les inhumations et les dépôts d’animaux en fosses circulaires du Néolithique récent du sud de la plaine du Rhin supérieur, Gallia Préhistoire, 52, p. 61-116.

Lefranc P., Denaire A., Jeunesse C., Boulestin B. 2018 – Dismembering bodies and atypical human deposits of the 4th millennium in the Upper-Rhine valley: Part of sacrificial practices?, in Bickle P., Sibbesson E (eds.), Neolithic bodies, Oxford and Philadelphia, Oxbow Books (Neolithic Studies Group Seminar Papers 15), p. 92-112.

Lička M. 2016Osídlení ze starší etapy vývoje kultury s vypíchanou keramikou ve Mšeně, Prague, Národní muzeum (Fontes Archaeologia Pragenses 43), 209 p.

Lüning J. 1969Die jungsteinzeitliche Schwieberdinger Gruppe, Stuttgart, Verlag Müller und Gräff (Veröffentlichungen des Staatlichen Amtes für Denkmalpflege Stuttgart Reihe A, Vor- und Frühgeschichte 13), 36 p.

Meixner D. 2009 – Ausnahme oder Regel – Zum Phänomen der Münchshöfener Bestattungen, Vorträge des Niederbayerischen Archäologentages, 27, p. 91-144.

Pavúk J., Bátora J. 1995Siedlung und Graber der Ludanice-Gruppe in Jelšovce, Nitra, Archäologisches Institut der Slowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Archaeologica Slovaca Monographiae 5), 208 p.

Schmitt A., Baradat A., Remicourt M. 2017 – Les inhumations du site du Clos de Roque (Saint-Maximin-la-Sainte-Baume) : de nouvelles données sur les traditions funéraires du Néolithique moyen dans le midi de la France, Bulletin archéologique de Provence, 38, p. 17-28.

Schmitt A., Van Willigen S. 2016 – Des morts chez les vivants au Néolithique moyen en France méridionale ?, in Cauliez J., Sénépart I., Jallot L., Labriffe P.-A. de, Gilabert C., Gutherz X. (dir.), « De la tombe au territoire » et actualité de la recherche. Actes des 11e rencontres méridionales de préhistoire récente, Montpellier, 25-27 septembre 2014, Toulouse, Archives d’Écologie préhistorique, p. 13-24.

Schmotz K., Staskiewicz A. 2008 – Gewalt im Jungneolithikum: Zwei bemerkenswerte Skelette der Münchshöfener Kultur in Stephansposching, Landkreis Deggendorf, Niederbayern, Archölogische Jahr im Bayern 2008, p. 24-26.

Točik A. 1991 – Erforschungstand der Lengyel-Kultur in der Slowakei. Ein Rückblick und Ausblick, in Lichardus J. (ed.), Die Kupferzeit als historische Epoche, Saarbrück, Rudolf Habelt Verlag (Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Altertumskunde 55), p. 301-317.

Weinig J. 2012 – Eine Münchshöfener Mehrfachbestattung in Kösching, Archäologische Jahr im Bayern 2011, p. 26-28.

Zápotocká M. 1998Bestattungsritus des böhmischen Neolithikums (5500-4200 B.C.), Prague, Archäologisches Institut der Akademie der Wissenschaften der Tschechischen Republik, 247 p.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Fig. 1 – Distribution map of circular-shaped grave deposits between the Rhine and the Vàh in the 5th millennium BCE
Légende 1. Altdorf-Aich I (Landshut district, Germany) 2. Kleinfeld IV, Altdorf-Aich II (Landshut district, Germany) 3. Köferinger Feld, Alteglofsheim (Regensburg district, Germany) 4. Friedhof, Bergheim (Neuburg-Schrobenhausen district, Germany) 5. Eichendorf-Aufhausen (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany) 6. Aussiedlerhof, Feldkirchen II (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany) 7. Burgenfeld, Geiselhöring (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany) 8. Strassgwender, Grossmehring (Eichstätt district, Germany) 9. Ziegelstrasse, Inningen (Augsburg district, Germany) 10. Staatstrasse, Landau-Frammering I, OT Thalham (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany) 11. Bachleite, Landau-Frammering II, OT Thalham (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany) 12. Langenhettenbach-Lehmgrube Erlus (Landshut district, Germany) 13. Lenting-Kösching (Eichstätt district, Germany) 14. Wollersdorfer Feld, Mauern (Freising district, Germany) 15. Allmannsbacher Feld, Mengkofen-Süsskofen (Dingolfing-Landau district, Germany) 16. Mettenbach (Landshut district, Germany) 17. Schinderäcker, Leitensiedlung, Oberpöring-Niederpöring (Deggendorf district, Germany) 18. Rote Breite, Oberschneiding I (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany) 19. Birkenfeld, Oberschneiding-Riedling (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany) 20. Osterhofen-Altenmark I (Deggendorf district, Germany) 21. Skala Kino, Regensburg (Regensburg district, Germany) 22. Hauptstrasse, Riekofen I (Regensburg district, Germany) 23. Riekofen II (Regensburg district, Germany) 24. Gewerbegebiet nördlich der A 30, Schwabmünchen (Augsburg district, Germany) 25. Marteläcker, Stephanspoching (Deggendorf district, Germany) 26. Wasserwerk, Straubing (Straubing-Bogen district, Germany) 27. Loher Höhe, Vilshofen-Pleinting (Passau district, Germany) 28. Vohburg-Menning II (Pfaffenhofen an der Ilm district, Germany) 29. Vohburg-Oberdünzing (Pfaffenhofen an der Ilm district, Germany) 30. Zieglberg, Wang (Echstätt district, Germany) 31. Eschenharter Strasse III, Wildenberg (Kelheim district, Germany) 32. Bajč-Ragońa (Slovak Republic) 33. Jelšovce II (Slovak Republic) 34. Nitra-Mlynárce (Slovak Republic) 35. Strasse, Achenheim (Lower Rhine, France) 36. Sauer, Bergheim (Lower Rhine, France) 37. Buckacker, Eichstetten (Breisgau-Hochschwartzwald district, Germany) 38. Les Abattoirs, Altmatt, Holtzheim (Lower Rhine, France) 39. Obernai (Lower Rhine, France) 40. Les Portes du Kochersberg, Vendenheim (Lower Rhine, France) 41. Ober Endinger Weg, Weisweil (Emmendingen district, Germany) 42. Trummelmatten, Merxheim (Upper Rhine, France) 43. Hummelberg, Leonberg-Eltingen (Böblingen district, Germany) 44. Schwieberdingen (Ludwigsburg district, Germany) 45. Helfta (Eisleben district, Germany) 46. Gäu, Kirchheim (Heilbronn district, Germany) 47. Loděnice (Czech Republic) 48. Mšeno (Czech Republic) 49. Praha-Střešovice (Czech Republic) 50. Vchynice (Czech Republic) 51. Schwoebenfeld, Geispolsheim (Lower Rhine, France) 52. Gingsheimerweg, Gougenheim (Lower Rhine, France) 53. Teugn (Kelheim district, Germany) 54. La Colline du Grand-Pré, Saint-Léonard (Switzerland)
URL http://journals.openedition.org/galliap/docannexe/image/1603/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 631k
Titre Fig. 11 – Strasse, Achenheim (Lower Rhine), simultaneous deposits of six male individuals and four additional upper left limbs, structure 124, Bruebach-Oberbergen
Crédits Photo P. Lefranc
URL http://journals.openedition.org/galliap/docannexe/image/1603/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 2,0M
Titre Fig. 15 – Parc d’activités, Obernai (Lower Rhine), deposit of two immature individuals and four canids, structure 2588, Bruebach-Oberbergen
Crédits Photo F. Chenal
URL http://journals.openedition.org/galliap/docannexe/image/1603/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 1,0M
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Philippe Lefranc, Rose-Marie Arbogast, Anthony Denaire, Fanny Chenal, Clément Féliu et Christian Jeunesse, « Human and animal deposits in circular pits of the 5th millennium between the Rhine and the Danube »Gallia Préhistoire, 59 | 2019, 109-111.

Référence électronique

Philippe Lefranc, Rose-Marie Arbogast, Anthony Denaire, Fanny Chenal, Clément Féliu et Christian Jeunesse, « Human and animal deposits in circular pits of the 5th millennium between the Rhine and the Danube »Gallia Préhistoire [En ligne], 59 | 2019, mis en ligne le 30 octobre 2019, consulté le 09 avril 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/galliap/1603; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/galliap.1603

Haut de page

Auteurs

Philippe Lefranc

Inrap, UMR 7044 Archimède, 10 rue d’Altkirch, 67000 Strasbourg — philippe.lefranc@inrap.fr

Rose-Marie Arbogast

CNRS, UMR 7044 Archimède, Maison interuniversitaire des Sciences de l’Homme, 5 allée du Général Rouvillois, 67000 Strasbourg — rose-marie.arbogast@misha.fr

Anthony Denaire

Université de Bourgogne, UMR 6298 ArTeHiS, Bâtiment Droit-Lettres, 4 boulevard Gabriel, 21000 Dijon — anthony.denaire@u-bourgogne.fr

Fanny Chenal

Inrap, UMR 7044 Archimède, 10 rue d’Altkirch, 67000 Strasbourg — fanny.chenal@inrap.fr

Clément Féliu

Inrap, UMR 7044 Archimède, 10 rue d’Altkirch, 67000 Strasbourg — clément.feliu@inrap.fr

Christian Jeunesse

Université de Strasbourg, UMR 7044 Archimède, Maison interuniversitaire des Sciences de l’Homme, 5 allée du Général Rouvillois, 67000 Strasbourg — chjeunesse@unistra.fr

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Gallia Préhistoire

Haut de page
  • Logo Maison des sciences de l'Homme Mondes
  • Logo Logo CNRS
  • Logo Ministère de la Culture
  • OpenEdition Journals