446
From the Sunghir Children to
the Romito Dwarf
Aspects of the Upper Paleolithic Funerary
Landscape
Vincenzo Formicola
Department of Biology, University of Pisa, via A. Volta 6,
56126 Pisa, Italy (vformicola@biologia.unipi.it). 9 I 07
Because of their number, state of preservation, richness, and
diversity of associated grave goods, burials from the Upper
Paleolithic (28,000–10,000 BP) represent an important source
of information on ideological aspects modeling funerary be-
havior of these populations. Analysis of the European record
reveals an intriguing high frequency of multiple burials. A
multiple burial may be unrelated to simultaneous deaths.
However, absence of bone and grave goods displacement in-
dicates that the interments, if not simultaneous, were not long
separated in time. Moreover, while the most conservative ex-
planation for a multiple burial is a natural event such as
disease or an accident, burial composition by age and sex
suggests selective practices. In addition, some of the most
spectacular multiple burials include a severely deformed in-
dividual. This is the case of the extraordinarily ornamented
double burial of the Sunghir children (Russia), the triple in-
terment of Dolnı́ Věstonice (Moravia), which includes young
individuals lying in unusual positions, and the adolescent
dwarf from Romito Cave (Italy), buried together with a
woman under the engraving of a bull. These findings point
to the possibility that human sacrifices were part of the ritual
activity of these populations and provide clues on the com-
plexity and symbolism pervading Upper Paleolithic societies
as well as on the perception of “diversity” and its links to
magical-religious beliefs.
The appearance of ceremonial burials is one of the expressions
of the symbolism marking “modern” human behaviour (Har-
rold 1980; Mellars 1989; Gamble 1999; Klein 1999). However,
formal early Upper Paleolithic burials appear only with the
Gravettian, around 28,000 BP. Starting with these earliest ex-
amples, funerary practices show a combination of aspects that
points to the complexity and the intricacy of Upper Paleolithic
societies. While variety and richness of grave goods and gen-
eralized use of red ocher are the most striking and emphasized
archeological components, analysis of the human remains
themselves may add important clues to social organization
and conceptions of life and death in those populations.
On the basis of various criteria including age at death, site,
䉷 2007 by The Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research.
All rights reserved. 0011-3204/2007/4803-0006$10.00
and ritual of inhumation, Zilhão and Trinkaus (2002) and
Zilhão (2005) argue that Gravettian preadolescents were
treated differently from adolescents and adults while no dif-
ferences are apparent in the burial patterns of the various age-
classes during the late Middle Paleolithic. The differential
treatment based on age, as well as the rarity of female single
interments (Binant 1991; Riel-Salvatore and Clark 2001),
probably reflects differences in social conditions among sex-
and age-classes. This underscores the importance of combin-
ing biological and archeological evidence to infer ideological
aspects modelling funerary behaviour. An analysis of the
Gravettian skeletons from Sunghir (Russia) and Dolnı́ Věs-
tonice (Czech Republic) (Formicola, Pontrandolfi, and Svo-
boda 2001; Formicola and Buzhilova 2004) following this
approach raised intriguing questions regarding two aspects of
the Upper Paleolithic funerary landscape: the burial treatment
of pathological individuals and the nature of multiple inter-
ments. These two issues are addressed here in depth.
The Sunghir double burial is probably the most spectacular
and elaborate Upper Paleolithic funerary example. A boy and
a girl were placed head to head in a long, narrow, shallow
grave, covered with red ocher and ornamented with extraor-
dinarily rich and unique grave goods (fig. 1). These include
thousands of perforated ivory beads, which had probably been
sewn onto caps and clothing, hundreds of perforated arctic
fox canines, ivory pins, disc-shaped pendants, ivory animal
carvings, and, long spears of mammoth tusk, one of them
2.40 m long (O. Bader 1970; N. Bader 1998). Interestingly,
the ivory beads are about one-third smaller than those dec-
orating the adult male from the same site (Sunghir 1) (White
1995). This suggests that those beads were manufactured spe-
cifically for the children and possibly by very few specialists
(Soffer 1985).
Hip bone morphology and DNA analyses (Brůzek and No-
votný 1993; Mednikova, Buzhilova, and Kozlowskaya 2000;
Poltoraus, Kulikov, and Lebedeva 2000) indicate that the skel-
etons belong to a boy (Sunghir 2) and a girl (Sunghir 3) of
about 11–13 and 9–10 years, respectively. Moreover, the skel-
eton of the girl is abnormal, showing marked bilateral short-
ening and bowing of the femora. A congenital disease (con-
genital bowing of long bones), possibly linked to the diabetic
condition of the mother, is the most likely diagnosis (For-
micola and Buzhilova 2004). The absence of perturbation of
bones and grave goods and the direct uncalibrated 14C (AMS)
dates on the two skeletons (Sunghir 2, 23,830 Ⳳ 220 BP, and
Sunghir 3, 24,100 Ⳳ 240 BP) (Pettitt and Bader 2000) are
consistent with the hypothesis of simultaneous inhumation.
As previously pointed out, the emplacement of rich cere-
monial burials characterizes the Gravettian period—the time
span between 28,000 and 20,000 BP. Even in that context, the
richness of this burial is astonishing and superior to that
exhibited by the most ornamented contemporary skeletons—
Sunghir 1 (Bader 1967) and the so-called I1 Principe from
the Arene Candide cave in Italy (Cardini 1942). On the basis

Figure 1. The double child burial from Sunghir (Russia), showing the
long spears and the variety of grave goods. The pathological skeleton
(Sunghir 3) is on the right.
of experimental work, White (2003) suggests that each of the
ivory beads took more than an hour to make. This implies
an enormous amount of work, considering that the orna-
mentation of each of the children includes about 5,000 beads
(White 1995), not to mention the other ivory objects. Evi-
dently the burial was perceived as very important by the Sun-
ghir people.
Analysing funerary treatment in modern hunter-gatherers
and agriculturalists, Binford (1971) finds differences based on
sex and age and, more generally, on the personal qualities of
the dead. Among those populations, a rich burial is an ex-
pression of high status, acquired because of the ability to
perform activities important for the survival of the group. It
is hard to imagine this kind of motivation for two children.
Moreover, child burials are infrequent during the Gravettian,
as is pointed out by Zilhão and Trinkaus (2002) and Zilhão
(2005) and shown in table 1. (This table differs from that
reported by these authors because it includes only remains
from “formal burials”—excluding isolated or scattered bones,
the skeletons from Cussac found on the surface of the deposit
[Aujoulat et al. 2002], and the remains from Predmostı́ [Klı́ma
1991; Oliva 2001; Svoboda 2005a] and from the Cro-Magnon
site [Henry-Gambier 2002], whose burial condition cannot
be ascertained.)
On the basis of labor investment, ritual activity and variety,
and number of decorative objects, it has been hypothesized
that status differentiation existed among early Upper Paleo-
lithic people from the Russian Plain (Soffer 1985; White
2003). The issue of the level of social complexity reached by
these populations emerges again when looking at the large
Gravettian open-air site of Dolnı́ Věstonice in Moravia. Here,
three young individuals, their ages ranging from 16 to 25
years (Vlček 1991; Hillson et al. 2005), were found in a com-
mon grave in unusual positions: one face down and another
on its side with hands reaching the pubic region of the skel-
eton in the middle (fig. 2). While there is general agreement
that the individuals on the sides are males, the skeleton in
447
the middle is difficult to sex because of pelvic deformation.
As a result, it has been variably diagnosed as female or male
(e.g., Vlček 1991; Brůzek et al. 2005). The uncalibrated 14C
date obtained from charcoal associated with the skeletons
points to an age of 26,640 Ⳳ 110 BP (Svoboda 1995). Or-
namentation includes pierced carnivore canines, ivory pen-
dants, and powdered ocher around the skull. The skeleton in
the middle also has ocher in the pelvic area (Klı́ma 1987;
Svoboda 2005b). On the basis of the size of the Moravian
living sites, technological innovations (e.g., kilns for clay fig-
urines), richness of material culture, and elaborate funerary
behavior, Jelı́nek (1987, 1991) argues that the social organi-
zation of those populations was well beyond the band level.
An additional interesting aspect of the triple burial is the
pathological condition of the skeleton in the middle. This
individual (Dolnı́ Věstonice 15) shows asymmetric shortening
of the femur, bowing of the femur, humerus, and radius, and
elongation of the fibulae, possibly resulting from a rare in-
herited disorder (chondrodysplasia calcificans punctata) com-
plicated by trauma (Formicola, Pontrandolfi, and Svoboda
2001). This diagnosis would imply that this specimen is fe-
male, because males do not survive the disorder into adult-
hood. Trinkaus et al. (2005) disagree, suggesting an uniden-
tifiable systemic dysplasia that leaves the ultimate diagnosis
open.
The combination of a pathological condition apparent since
birth with a spectacular multiple burial of young individuals
recalls the contemporary child burial of Sunghir. Multiple
burials are probably absent in the Middle Paleolithic (May
1986; Zilhão and Trinkaus 2002)—the only possible exception
being the burial of Qafzeh 9 and 10 (Vandermeersch 1981)—
but become very frequent during the Gravettian (table 1).
Interestingly, the only evidence of this practice in the Euro-
pean Late Upper Paleolithic is in Italy, where the Gravettian
continues into the Epigravettian (Bietti 1990; Mussi 2001)
(table 2).
Among the five Epigravettian double burials from Italy, the
Table 1. Composition of European Gravettian Burials

448
Burial Age Sex

Specimen Single Multiple Child Adolescent Adult Male Female Unsexed

Sunghir 1 x – – – x x – –
Sunghir 2 and 3 – double S3 S2 – S2 S3 –
Kostenki 2 x – – – x x – –
Kostenki 3 x – x – – – – x
Kostenki 4 x – x – – – – x
Brno 2 x – – – x x – –
Dolnı́ Věstonice 3 x – – – x – x –
Dolnı́ Věstonice 13, 14, and 15 – triple – DV 13 DV 14 and 15 DV 13 and 14 x DV 15
Dolnı́ Věstonice 16 x – – – x x – –
Pavlov 1 x – – – x x – –
Předmostı́ 27 x – – – x – – x
Krems–Wachtberg – double xx – – – – xx
Grotta delle Veneri (Parabita) 1 and 2 – double – – xx GV 1 GV 2 –
Ostuni (S. Maria di Agnono) 1 x – – – x – x –
Ostuni (S. Maria di Agnano) 2 x – – – x – – x
Paglicci 12 x – – x – x – –
Paglicci 25 x – – – x – x –
Arene Candide 1 x – – x – x – –
Bausu da Ture 1 x – – – x x – –
Bausu da Ture 2 x – – – x x – –
Bausu da Ture 3 x – – x – – – x
Barma Grande 1 x – – – x x – –

Current Anthropology Volume 48, Number 3, June 2007

Barma Grande 2, 3, and 4 – triple – BG 3 and 4 BG 2 BG 2 BG 3 and 4 –
Barma Grande 5 x – – – x x – –
Barma Grande 6 x – – – x x – –
Caviglione 1 x – – – x – x –
Grotte des Enfants 4 x – – – x x – –
Grotte des Enfants 5 and 6 – double – GE 6 GE 5 GE 6? GE 5 –
Paviland 1 x – – – x x – –
Lagar Velho 1 x – x – – – – x

Note: Specimens are listed by geographic location from north-east to south-west and are numbered according to Oakley, Campbell, and Molleson (1971) and, for the Italian remains,
Alciati, Pesce Delfino, and Vacca (2005).
 449

The latter possibility becomes more tenable when we take

the Sunghir and Dolnı́ Věstonice cases into account. The three
burials share significant points: all include a pathological in-
dividual, all are multiple burials, and all possibly include in-
dividuals of different sexes. It could be argued that the skeletal
abnormalities exhibited by the Romito dwarf are more severe
than those affecting either Sunghir 3 or Dolnı́ Věstonice 15,
weakening the idea of a patterned relationship between anom-
alous individuals and extraordinary burial treatment. The
physical diversity of the latter individuals, however, may have
been more perceptible than is suggested by skeletal changes
alone, given that the hypothesized pathologies are frequently
associated with soft-tissue anomalies (Formicola et al. 2001;
Formicola and Buzhilova 2004).
Multiple burials raise additional questions. The phenomenon
is not restricted to pathological individuals and appears with
intriguing frequency in the Gravettian around Europe and the
Italian Epigravettian (tables 1 and 2). Additionally, whenever
sex can be confidently diagnosed, a multiple burial includes
individuals of different sexes, the only exception being the Ar-
ene Candide burial V (Cardini 1980)—in which an adult male
Figure 2. The triple burial of Dolnı́ Věstonice (Moravia). The is associated with a child of the same sex as determined by
specimen in the middle (Dolnı́ Věstonice 15) is pathological.
DNA analyses (Tarsi et al. n.d.)—and possibly the triple burial
of Dolnı́ Věstonice, given the uncertainty regarding the sex of
first, found in the Romito Cave (Calabria), deserves particular the pathological skeleton.
attention. The burial, dating to 11,150 Ⳳ 150 BP (uncalibrated A multiple burial is not necessarily the result of a single
14
C date) (Alessio et al. 1966), includes an adolescent that event. Depending on temperature and soil conditions, soft-
appears to be held in the left arm of an adult female (fig. 3). tissue and ligament decay may take weeks or months (Duday
The skeletons are lying parallel to a large stone with a beautiful et al. 1990). Thus the reopening of a burial after a time for
engraving representing a bull (Graziosi 1963; Bachechi and a further emplacement would not necessarily disturb the an-
Martini 2002). Romito is one of the few caves in Italy with
parietal art, and this and the additional Epigravettian burials
found there suggest that the site was probably embedded in
a ritualistic context. More important, the adolescent skeleton
(Romito 2) is abnormal, showing the typical stigmata of dwarf-
ism. The diagnosis is that of acromesomelic dwarfism, an
inherited autosomal recessive disorder resulting in severe
growth deficiencies, marked bowing of the forearm bones,
and frontal bulging, among other changes (Frayer et al. 1987;
Frayer, Macchiarelli, and Mussi 1988).
The meaning of the burial of the dwarf has been a matter
of debate. Frayer and coworkers (1987) stress that, despite
the physical impairments that would have been a substantial
handicap in nomadic hunting and gathering, the dwarf sur-
vived to about 17 years of age and was buried in a selected
cave. For these reasons, they consider this burial an early
example of tolerance and care for a severely deformed indi-
vidual. Dettwyler (1991) questions this view, which is based
on the attitude towards disabled people in modern societies,
and argues that the ethnographic record points to a wide range
of reactions towards individuals perceived as “different.”
These individuals may be feared, hated, or revered. Dettwyler
concludes that we do not know whether this adolescent re- Figure 3. The double burial from Romito Cave (Italy). The dwarf
ceived special burial treatment in spite of being a dwarf or (Romito 2) is on the right and appears to be held in the left arm
precisely because he was a dwarf. of the female individual.
Table 2. Composition of Epigravettian Burials from Italy

450
Burial Age Sex

Specimen Single Multiple Child Adolescent Adult Male Female Unsexed

Riparo Villabruna 1 x – – – x x – –
Riparo Tagliente 1 x – – – x x – –
Arene Candide 2 x – – – x x – –
Arene Candide 5 and 6 – double AC 6 – AC 5 xx – –
Arene Candide 8 x – x – – – – x
Arene Candide 10 x – – – x x – –
Arene Candide 11 x – x – – x – –
Arene Candide 13 x – – x – – – x
Arene Candide 14 and 15 – double AC 15 – AC 14 – – xx
Arene Candide 16 x – – x – x – –
Grotte des Enfants 1 and 2 – double xx – – – – xx
Grotte des Enfants 3 x – – – x – x –
Vado all’Arancio 1 x – – – x x – –
Vado all’Arancio 2 x – x – – – – x
Riparo Continenza 7 x – – – x x – –
Grotta Maritza 1 x – x – – – – x
Paglicci 11 x – – – x x – –
Grotta delle Mura 1 x – x – – – – x
Romanelli 1 x – – – x x – –
Romanelli 2 x – x – – – – x
Romanelli 3 x – x – – – – x
Romito (Papasidero) 1 and 2 – double – R2 R1 R 2? R1 –

Current Anthropology Volume 48, Number 3, June 2007

Romito (Papasidero) 3 x – – – x x – –
Romito (Papasidero) 4 x – – x – x –
Romito (Papasidero) 5 and 6 – double – – xx R6 R5 –
San Teodoro 1 x – – – x – x –
San Teodoro 2 x – – – x – – x
San Teodoro 3 x – – – x – – x
San Teodoro 4 x – – – x – x –

Note: Specimens are listed by geographic location from north to south and are numbered according to Alciati, Pesce Delfino, and Vacca (2005).
 451

atomical connections of the individual buried first. In this ments by reviewers and discussion with colleagues. Among
case, however, the associated grave goods may be disturbed. these, I am particularly grateful to Patrizia Garibaldi for shar-
This scenario has been invoked to explain the position of a ing with me her stimulating ideas. This project was supported
few elements ornamenting the head of the adolescent (G.d.E. by the Institute for Bioarcheology.
6) of the Gravettian double burial from Grotte des Enfants
(Grimaldi, Italy) (Cartailhac 1912), even though displace-
ments by animal activity provide a valid alternative expla- References Cited
nation. In the case of the Sunghir children, the rich and
Alciati, Giancarlo, Vittorio Pesce Delfino, and Eligio Vacca.
various undisturbed ornamentation and in particular the long
2005. Catalogue of Italian fossil human remains from the
spears running parallel to the two skeletons strongly suggest
Palaeolithic to the Mesolithic. Journal of Anthropological
simultaneous inhumation.
Sciences (Rivista di Antropologia), suppl. 84.
The enormous amount of time required to prepare all those
Alessio, M., F. Bella, F. Bachechi, and C. Cortesi. l967. Uni-
ivory objects and the possibility that ivory beads were made
versity of Rome carbon-14 dates. Radiocarbon 9:346–67.
specifically for the two children by a few specialists would
Aujoulat, Norbert, Jean-Michel Geneste, Christian Archam-
imply that those grave goods were ready when the two chil-
beau, Marc Delluc, Henry Duday, and Dominique Henry-
dren died, which in turn leads one to wonder whether this
Gambier. 2002. La grotte ornée de Cussac, Le Buisson-de-
ceremony was foreseen long in advance. Clearly, the most
Cadouin (Dordogne): Premières observations. Bulletin de
parsimonious explanation for the simultaneous death of two
la Société Préhistorique Française 99:129–53.
or three individuals is an epidemic disease or an accident.
Bachechi, Luca, and Fabio Martini. 2002. Le sepulture. In
However, considering the frequency of multiple burials, the
Grotta del Romito, ed. F. Martini, 29–36. Firenze: Museo e
number of young individuals, and the generally different sexes
Istituto Fiorentino di Preistoria.
of the members of the common graves, it is legitimate to ask
Bader, Nicolai O. 1998. Upper Palaeolithic site Sungir (graves
whether sacrificial practices could offer an explanation in ad-
and environment) (in Russian). Moscow: Scientific World.
dition to natural causes and nonsimultaneous interments
Bader, Otto N. 1967. Eine ungewöhnliche paläolitische Be-
(Frayer 1997; Jelı́nek 1989; Buzhilova 2000).
stattung in Mittelrussland. Quartär 18:191–93.
Elaborate burials, selected individuals, rich ornamentation,
———. 1970. Das zweite Grab in der paläolitischen Siedlung
and site of inhumation continue to raise questions about the
Sunghir im mittleren Russland. Quartär 21:103–4.
ideas shaping Upper Paleolithic funerary practices and stim-
Bietti, Amilcare. 1990. The Late Upper Paleolithic in Italy: An
ulate reflections about social organization, conceptions of life
overview. Journal of World Prehistory 4:95–155.
and death, and the perception of diversity and its links to
Binant, Pascale. 1991. La préhistoire de la mort: Les premières
magical-religious beliefs. The archeology of death is a process
sépultures en Europe. Paris: Editions Errance.
made up of discovery, description, analysis, and interpretation
Binford, Lewis R. 1971. Mortuary practices: Their study and
(Pearson 2003), but the archeological traces left by funerary
their potential. In Approach to the social dimensions of mor-
rituals in such a distant past are poor indicators of the ideas
tuary practices, ed. J. Brown, 6–29. Memoirs of the Society
and gestures that lay behind them. As Jurmain, Kilgore, and
for American Archeology 25.
Trevathan (2005, 326) have put it, “behavior does not fos-
Brůzek, Jaroslav, and Vladimir Novotný. 1993. Diagnostic
silize.” Accordingly, the questions raised here remain open,
auxologique de l’os coxal des enfants de Sungir 2 et 3
but the recurring evidence from which they arise points once
(Paléolithique supérieur, Russie). Bulletin et Mémoires de
more to the complexity and importance of ritual activity and
la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris 5:151–58.
symbolism in Upper Paleolithic societies (Mellars 1985;
Brůzek, Jaroslav, Robert G. Franciscus, Vladimir Novotný,
Mussi, Cinq-Mars, and Bolduc 2000; White 2003).
and Erik Trinkaus. 2005. The assessment of sex. In Early
modern human evolution in Central Europe: The people of
Acknowledgments Dolnı́ Věstonice and Pavlov, ed. E. Trinkaus and J. Svoboda,
Presenting the results of this study in a symposium organized 46–62. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
in Rome provided the opportunity to see Amilcare Bietti for Buzhilova, Alexandra P. 2000. Pair and odd burials in Upper
the last time and to appreciate once again his vivid, broad Palaeolithic: Selective criteria of the buried. In Homo sun-
mind and the constructive contribution he made to the dis- girensis, Upper Palaeolithic man: Ecological and evolutionary
cussion. This work is dedicated to him. aspects of the investigation, ed. T. I. Alexeeva and N. O.
I am indebted to John Hoffecker for information about the Bader, 441–48. Moscow: Scientific World.
chronology of the Kostenki remains and to Nicolai Bader, Jiřı́ Cardini, Luigi. 1942. Nuovi documenti sull’antichità
Svoboda, and Fabio Martini for permission to publish the dell’uomo in Italia: Reperto umano del Paleolitico super-
photographs of Sunghir, Dolnı́ Věstonice, and Romito burials, iore nella Grotta delle Arene Candide. Razza e Civiltà 3:
respectively. I thank William Carlton for technical support in 5–25.
the preparation of the figures. This paper benefited from com- ———. 1980. La necropoli mesolitica delle Arene Candide
 452
(Liguria). Memorie dell’ Istituto Italiano di Paleontologia
Umana, n.s., 3:7–31.
Cartailhac, Emile. 1912. Les grottes de Grimaldi: Archéologie.
Monaco: Imprimerie de Monaco.
Dettwyler, Katherine A. 1991. Can paleopathology provide
evidence for “compassion”? American Journal of Physical
Anthropology 84:375–84.
Duday, Henry, Patrice Courtaud, Eric Crubezy, Pascal Sellier,
and Anne-Marie Tillier. 1990. L’anthropologie “de terrain”:
Reconnaissance et interprétation des gestes funéraires. Bul-
letin et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris 2:
29–50.
Formicola, Vincenzo, and Alexandra P. Buzhilova. 2004. Dou-
ble child burial from Sunghir (Russia): Pathology and in-
ferences for Upper Paleolithic funerary practices. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 124:189–98.
Formicola, Vincenzo, Antonella Pontrandolfi, and Jiřı́ Svo-
boda. 2001. The Upper Paleolithic triple burial of Dolnı́
Věstonice: Pathology and funerary behavior. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology 115:372–79.
Frayer, David W. 1997. Ofnet: Evidence of a Mesolithic mas-
sacre. In Troubled times: Violence and warfare in the past,
ed. D. M. Martin and D. W. Frayer, 181–216. Amsterdam:
Gordon and Breach.
Frayer, David W., William A. Horton, Roberto Macchiarelli,
and Margherita Mussi. 1987. Dwarfism in an adolescent
from the Italian late Upper Palaeolithic. Nature 330:60–62.
Frayer, David W., Roberto Macchiarelli, and Margherita
Mussi. 1988. A case of chondrodystrophic dwarfism in the
Italian Late Upper Paleolithic. American Journal of Physical
Anthropology 75:549–165.
Gamble, Clive. 1999. The Palaeolithic societies of Europe. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Graziosi, Paolo. 1963. Papasidero (Prov. Cosenza). Rivista di
Scienze Preistoriche 18:315.
Harrold, Francis B. 1980. A comparative analysis of Eurasian
Palaeolithic burials. World Archaeology 12:195–211.
Henry-Gambier, Dominique. 2002. Les fossiles de Cro-Mag-
non (Les Eyzies de Tayac, Dordogne): Nouvelles données
sur leur position chronologique et leur attribution cultu-
relle. Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société d’Anthropologie de
Paris 14:89–112.
Hillson, Simon W., Robert G. Franciscus, Trenton W. Hol-
liday, and Erik Trinkaus. 2005. The ages at death. In Early
modern human evolution in Central Europe: The people of
Dolnı́ Věstonice and Pavlov, ed. E. Trinkaus and J. Svoboda,
31–45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jelı́nek, Jan. 1987. New Upper Palaeolithic human remains
in Dolnı́ Věstonice, Czechoslovakia. Rivista di Antropologia
65:420–22.
———. 1989. Upper Paleolithic Gravettian population in
Moravia. In Hominidae, ed. G. Giacobini, 443–48. Milano:
Jaca Book.
———. 1991. Découvertes d’ossements de la population
gravettienne de Moravie. L’Anthropologie 95:137–54.
Current Anthropology Volume 48, Number 3, June 2007
Jurmain, Robert, Lynn Kilgore, and Wenda Trevathan. 2005.
Introduction to physical anthropology. Toronto: Thomson
Wadsworth.
Klein, Richard. 1999. The human career: Human biological
and cultural origins. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Klı́ma, Bohuslav. 1987. Une triple sépulture du Pavlovien à
Dolnı́ Věstonice, Tchécoslovaquie. L’Anthropologie 91:
329–34.
———. 1991. Das palaölitische Massengrab von Predmostı́:
Versuch einer Rekonstruction. Quartär 41/42:187–94.
May, Fabienne. 1986. Les sépultures préhistoriques. Paris: Edi-
tions du CNRS.
Mednikova, Maria B., Alexandra P. Buzhilova, and Maria V.
Kozlowskaya. 2000. Sunghir 2 and Sunghir 3: Age and sex
estimation from morphological criteria of skeletal system.
In Homo sungirensis, Upper Palaeolithic man: Ecological and
evolutionary aspects of the investigation, ed. T. I. Alexeeva
and N. O. Bader, 57–60. Moscow: Scientific World.
Mellars, Paul. 1985. The ecological basis of social complexity
in the Upper Paleolithic of Southwestern France. In Pre-
historic hunter-gatherers: The emergence of cultural com-
plexity, ed. T. D. Price and J. A. Brown, 271–97. San Diego:
Academic Press.
———. 1989. Major issues in the emergence of modern hu-
mans. Current Anthropology 30:349–85.
Mussi, Margherita. 2001. Earliest Italy: An overview of the
Italian Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic. New York: Kluver
Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Mussi, Margherita, Jacques Cinq-Mars, and Pierre Bolduc.
2000. Echoes from the mammoth steppe: The case of the
Balzi Rossi. In Hunters of the Golden Age: The Mid-Upper
Palaeolithic of Eurasia (30,000–20,000 BP), ed. W. Roe-
broeks, M. Mussi, J. Svoboda, and K. Fennema, 105–24.
Leiden: University of Leiden Press.
Oakley, Kenneth P., Bernard G. Campbell, and Theya I. Mol-
leson. 1971. Catalogue of fossil hominids. London: British
Museum (Natural History).
Oliva, Martin. 2001. Les pratiques funéraires dans le Pavlovien
morave: Révision critique. Préhistoire Européenne 16-17:
191–214.
Pearson, Mike P. 2003. The archaeology of death and burial.
Phoenix Mill: Sutton.
Pettit, Paul B., and Nicolai O. Bader. Direct radiocarbon dates
for the Sunghir mid Upper Palaeolithic burials. Antiquity
74:269–70.
Poltoraus, A. B., E. E. Kulikov, and I. A. Lebedeva. 2000. The
molecular analysis of DNA from the remains of three in-
dividuals from the Sunghir site: Preliminary data. In Homo
sungirensis, Upper Palaeolithic man: Ecological and evolu-
tionary aspects of the investigation, ed. T. I. Alexeeva and
N. O. Bader, 302–14. Moscow: Scientific World.
Riel-Salvatore, Julien, and Geoffrey A. Clark. 2001. Grave
markers: Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic burials and

the use of chronotypology in contemporary Paleolithic re-
search. Current Anthropology 42:449–79.
Soffer, Olga. 1985. Patterns of intensification as seen from the
Upper Paleolithic of the Central Russian Plain. In Prehis-
toric hunter-gatherers: The emergence of cultural complexity,
ed. T. D. Price and J. A. Brown, 245–70. San Diego: Ac-
ademic Press.
Svoboda, Jiřı́. 1995. L’art gravettien en Moravie: Contexte,
dates et styles. L’Anthropologie 99:258–72.
———. 2005a. Předmostı́: The context of paleoanthropolog-
ical discoveries (in Czech). Přehled Vyzkumů 46:63–91.
———. 2005b. The burials: Ritual and taphonomy. In Early
modern human evolution in Central Europe: The people of
Dolnı́ Věstonice and Pavlov, ed. E. Trinkaus and J. Svoboda,
15–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tarsi, T., F. Noto, C. Martinez-Labarga, R. Giampaolo, C.
Babalini, G. Scano, I. Contini, J. A. Lorente, M. Lorente,
E. Pacciani, M. Silvestrini, A. Del Lucchese, R. Maggi, E.
Lattanzi, V. Formicola, F. Mallegni, F. Martini, and O. Rick-
ards. n.d. Ricostruzione della storia genetica per via ma-
terna delle comunità paleolitiche del Balzi Rossi, delle Arene
Candide e del Romito e di quelle neolitiche di Fontenoce
di Recanati e di Samari. Origines: Progetti 3. In press.
Trinkaus, Erik, Simon W. Hillson, Robert G. Franciscus, and
Trenton W. Holliday. 2005. Skeletal and dental paleopa-
thology. In Early modern human evolution in Central Eu-
453
rope: The people of Dolnı́ Věstonice and Pavlov, ed. E. Trin-
kaus and J. Svoboda, 419–58. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Vandermeersch, Bernard. 1981. Les hommes fossiles de Qafzeh
(Israel). Paris: Editions du CNRS.
Vlček, Emanuel. 1991. Die Mammuthjäger von Dolnı́ Věs-
tonice. Archäologie und Museum 22:1–136.
White, Randall. 1995. Ivory personal ornaments of Aurig-
nacian age: Technological, social, and symbolic perspec-
tives. In Le travail et l’usage de l’ivoire au Paléolithique
supérieur, ed. J. Hahn et al., 29–62. Roma: Istituto Poli-
grafico e Zecca dello Stato.
———. 2003. Prehistoric art: The symbolic journey of hu-
mankind. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
Zilhão, João. 2005. Burial evidence for the social differenti-
ation of age classes in the early Upper Paleolithic. In Com-
portement des hommes du Paléolithique moyen et supérieur
en Europe: Territoires et milieux, ed. D. Vialou, J. Renault-
Miskowsky, and M. Patou-Mathis, 231–41. Études et Re-
cherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Liége 111.
Zilhão, João, and Erik Trinkaus. 2002. Social implications. In
Portrait of the artist as a child: The Gravettian human skel-
eton from the Abrigo do Lagar Velho and its archeological
context, ed. J. Zilhão and E. Trinkaus, 519–41. Trabalhos
de Arqueologia 22.