MAKING PITS WITH HUMAN AND ANIMAL BODIES AT HORTA DO JACINTO

(BERINGEL, BEJA, PORTUGAL).

LÍDIA BAPTISTA *
SÉRGIO GOMES **
CLÁUDIA COSTA *** Digging at Horta do Jacinto , Nelson Vale in the picture.

Introduction

Horta do Jacinto is a 2nd millennium site located in the south of Portugal at Beringel in Beja.
It was identified in 2007 during the construction of a water pipeline promoted by EDIA SA.
These works allowed the identification of two pits containing different kinds of materials,
namely a human body and pig, and the relationships of deposition between them. In this
poster we aim to present these contexts discussing how these two materials entailed
different practices of deposition, and how this was connected with contrasts in the
organization of space inside the pits.

These kind of features are traditionally interpreted in terms of the contents of their fills: as
domestic discard areas (whenever there are sherds, bones or other kind of fragmented
Strucuture 2
Strucuture 1 things); as storage structures (in the examples where there are seeds); or as burial
architecture (in those cases where there are human skeletons). Regarding these
interpretations there is a dichotomy between something that is fill (from which we define a
function to the structure), and the pit itself that is understood as a kind of architecture. In this
poster, with the example of Structure 1, we aim to discuss such a dichotomy, arguing that
when we look at these features within a conceptual framework that takes architecture as a

Location of Horta do Jacinto in the Iberian Peninsula.

practice and not as a “building record”, the pit and its fill are both elements of architecture
(McFadyen 2006). By doing this, instead of imposing a function on these features, we are
Strucuture 1, [116]. Structure 1, [111]. Structure 2, [203]. opening up the ways in which we can understand them.

Stone level sealing or capping the other fills. The deposit with the human body. The deposit with the animal body.

Briefly, we can systematize the filling of the structure in the following way:
● a stone level sealing or capping the other fills;
● a deposit of soil that has been shaped (reproducing the configuration of the
State of conservation: very broken (mainly because the action of roots)
pit) in order to receive the human body which has been placed in a vertical Deposition of the body: Seated on the feet

position; Position of the skull: with the occipital leaned to the wall of the structure
Position of the superior members: the left shoulder leaned to the wall of the structure; in the case of the right member was not possible to
● a horizontal stone level built at the base of the structure, in which has been analyze it position because it was not on an anatomical position
placed the animal body deposit. Position of the inferior members: Bent
Age to the death: 9-12 years (Ubelaker, 1989; Scheuer and Black, 2000)
Observations: Presence of hipotrocanteriana pit in both femurs
The internal organization of the pit is connected with the configuration of how the
bodies were deposited. Considering this we should highlight that:
● the animal's body is in a level below the plane of the human body;
● there is an opposition between the horizontality of the animal body and
verticality of the human one;
● the architectural device that is placed on the animal is built with stones, the
Sus sp. juvenile skeleton
structure in which the human body was deposited was constructed with Note: The morphological similarity between the Iberian wild boar and domestic pig makes the distinction between the two species very difficult (Albarella et al, 2005), that’s why the classification
of the nearly complete skeleton of animal is only possible in terms of gender: Sus sp.
sediment;
● the horizontality of the stone level contrasts with the verticality of the pit,
unlike the space where the human body was deposited which mirrors the Elements  

contour of the pit, adjusting to the dimensions of the body, the shape of the 3rd lower molar Unfused

Distal Humerus Fused

pit.
Proximal tibia Unfused

Distal tibia Unfused

By considering the relationships between what is put inside the pit and its internal
configuration, it seems that once we look at the feature as architecture then the
shape of the pit is as important as what is inside of it, and not just as a way to
think about a functionality but to understand it as an architectural device.
Anatomical representation of the individual Sus sp.: to note the absence of the lower parts
of the forelegs. The analysis of the joint surfaces did not reveal any cut mark related to
disarticulation.
Structure 1, profile.
Table
Epiphyseal fusion and development of the third lower molar. According to Bridault et
al (2000) the individual’s age range is expected to be between 9 and 16 months.

We would like to add another aspect regarding the materials and refitting. Indeed,
during the study of the materials, we notice that there was only fragments of artefacts.
By analyzing the refits, it would seem that the majority of the kinds of fragmentation
could be explained by post-depositional phenomena. However, there is one artefact
that entails another kind of discussion. It is between two pieces of a grinding stone:
one found at the stone level that closes the structure (at the top), and another from the
stone level at the base of the pit. In this case, fragmentation becomes a process within
an architectural practice, that gives sense to the process of filling the pit.
***
To recap, Structure 1 is constituted from actions that bring together soil, sculpted
shape and bodies. Furthermore the distribution of fragments of objects keep memory
at work in these spaces: they create a material tension between how things were and
Two pieces of a grinding stone, one from the upper level and the other from the lower level of the pit.
how things are now. Architecture here is not just a building activity, it constructs other
possibilities for how humans, animals and artefacts relate to each other in the world.
Remarks
Regarding the available data, in Late Prehistory of Southern Portugal, there are many known cases of faunal associations with
human burials, but it remains rare the associations with complete or nearly complete animal skeletons (Valera & Costa, 2010). In the
specific case of Horta do Jacinto, the spatial position of the animal corpse beneath the human corpse, with a layer of soil in between,
the probable disarticulation of both lower parts of the forelegs and the fact that both human and animal are juveniles, strongly
suggests a specific symbolism in the hole funerary ritual whose meaning is unknown.
Left tibia. Fragment of the left jaw.
References
ANTUNES, A.S.; DEUS, M.; SOARES, A.M.; SANTOS, F.;ARÊZ, L.; DEWULF, J.; BAPTISTA, L.; OLIVEIRA, L. “Povoados Abertos do Bronze Final na Médio e Baixo Guadiana” comunicação
apresentada no encontro Sidereum Ana II – El valle del Guadiana en el Bronce Final em Maio de 2008.
ALBARELLA, U., DAVIS, S. J. M., DETRY, C.. ROWLEY-CONWY, P. (2005) – “Pigs of the “Far West”: the biometry of Sus from archaeological sites in Portugal”, Anthropozoologica, 40, 2, pp. 27-40.
BRIDAULT, A., VIGNE, J.-D., HORARD-HERBIN, M.-P., PELLÉ, E., FIQUET, P., MASHKOUR, M. (2000) “Wild boar - Age at death estimates: The relevance of new modern data for archaeological
skeletal material.1. Presentation on the corpus. Dental and epiphyseal fusion ages”, Ibex Journal of Mountain Ecology - Anthropozoologica, 31:11–18.
FERREIRA, Teresa (2008), Horta de Jacinto, Bloco de Rega do Pisão, Beja, Estudo de Análise Antropológica, policopiado.
MCFADYEN, L. 2006. Material culture as architecture - Neolithic long barrows in Southern Britain. Journal of Iberian Archaeology. 8: 91-102.
POLLARD, J. (2001), “The aesthetics of depositional practice”. World Archaeology, vol.33(2), pp.315-333, Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/827905, accessed 24/01/2009.
SCHEUER, L, BLACK, S, 2000. Developmental Juvenile Osteology. London. Academic Press.
VALERA, A. C. & COSTA, C (2010) “Animal paws in funerary contexts in southern Portugal and the segmentation problem”, poster presented to the 11th International Council of Archaeozoology, in
Paris, 23-28 August 2010.
UBELAKER, D. (1989) Human skeletal remains: excavations, analysis, interpretation. 2ªed. Washington, Taraxacun Washington.

* PhD Student, CEAUCP – CAM, FLUP,Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (lidiabap@gmail.com)

** PhD Student, CEAUCP – CAM, FLUP, Arqueologia & Património (sergiogomes@arqueologiaepatrimonio.pt)
*** PhD Student, UNIARQ - Universidade do Algarve,FCHSUALG,Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (ccordeirocosta@gmail.com)

Our deepest gratitude to: Nelson Vale, Francisco Barros, José Grilo and Cláudio Jorge for their help studying the material, Rui Pinheiro (author of the drawings), João Molha
www.arqueologiaepatrimonio.pt (author of the photos), Zélia Rodrigues for her help with anthropology study and Lesley McFadyen for inspiring and discussing with us some of the ideas we present here.