Hakenbeck 2018

Infant Head Shaping in Eurasia in the First Millennium AD
Oxford Handbooks Online

Infant Head Shaping in Eurasia in the First Millennium
ad
Susanne Hakenbeck
The Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Childhood
Edited by Sally Crawford, Dawn M. Hadley, and Gillian Shepherd
Print Publication Date: May 2018

Subject: Archaeology, Archaeology of Eurasia, Identity and Ethnicity
Online Publication Date: Jun 2018 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199670697.013.26
Abstract and Keywords
Head shaping was a common practice in the areas around the Black Sea in the first
centuries ad. From there it spread into central and western Europe. By the fifth and sixth
centuries ad it was widespread in Hungary and Austria, and occurred in rare cases as far
west as France. Cranial modification is achieved by binding the head during early
childhood when the bones of the skull are still incompletely mineralized and unfused.
Ethnographic parallels show that head shaping was an aspect of childcare that required
high levels of knowledge and involvement by those caring for children. It was frequently
thought to provide benefits for the health, beauty, or intellect of the child. Skull
modification suggests that concepts of the body varied among different early medieval
populations, some of which considered the body as imperfect at birth and in need of
improvement through social intervention.
Keywords: skull modification, head shaping, infancy, Black Sea, Huns, cranial modification, early medieval
Head shaping or intentional cranial modification is initiated after birth when the bones of
the skull are still soft and unfused. The shape of the growing skull is altered using boards,
straps, cords, or pads (O’Brien and Stanley 2013; Tiesler 2014: 80–2) (Figure 26.1). This
can also occur incidentally, as a result of cradle-boarding or if tight bonnets are worn
(Crubézy 1990; Piper 2002). After the age of about three to five years, the bones of the
skull have fused sufficiently to make the cranial modification a permanent feature of a
person’s appearance. Cranial modification is a near universal practice. The earliest
evidence is from Neanderthal skulls at Shanidar (Kurdistan), dating from 45,000 BP
(Trinkaus 1982). Since then it has occurred in all parts of the world (Dingwall 1931).
Skull modification was an important practice among the pre-Columbian societies of South
and Mesoamerica, and here it is particularly well researched (e.g. Torres-Rouff 2002;
Blom 2005; O’Brien and Stanley 2013; Tiesler 2014). Individuals with artificially modified
skulls also occur in large numbers in Central and Eastern Europe in the first millennium
Page 1 of 25
PRINTED FROM OXFORD HANDBOOKS ONLINE (www.oxfordhandbooks.com). © Oxford University Press, 2018. All Rights
Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a title in
Oxford Handbooks Online for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).
Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

AD (Figure 26.2). Various forms of cranial modification have been documented right up to
modern times, in various parts of the world. Midwives in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries moulded the heads of infants immediately after birth, if they had been
malformed during labour (Obladen 2012: 676). The aim was to give the head a ‘natural’
rounded appearance. This is a concern that has continued into the present day where
babies are medically prescribed helmets for positional plagiocephaly (flat head syndrome
caused by a baby sleeping on his or her back).
Skull modification is a significant aspect of a person’s identity during adulthood, as it

leads to a permanent alteration of appearance. However, in contrast to other forms of
bodily modification, such as tattooing, scarification, or tooth filing, skull modification has
to be carried out in early infancy. It is performed on babies and toddlers, at a point in life
when their agency is still limited. Ethnographic studies, as well as modern-day (p. 484)
moulding helmet treatment, indicate that the practice requires a high degree of parental
investment, for at least one and a half to two years after birth (Seruya et al. 2013). A
study of skull modification can therefore offer important clues as to how societies dealt
with their infants, the extent to which they invested in their care, and their views of the
infant body. This chapter focuses on cranial modification in Eurasia during the first
millennium AD; it is a particularly interesting case, since it illuminates not only the effect
on peoples’ identities of migrations of populations from the Eurasian steppes into central
Europe, but also reveals how different concepts of the human body were negotiated.
Figure 26.1 Modification techniques that may have

been employed in Eurasia in the first millennium AD.
Drawing by Susanne Hakenbeck after Molnár et al.

(2014: fig. 6).
Page 2 of 25

Figure 26.2 Examples of modified skulls. (a) A

child’s skull of unknown provenance (© Susanne
Hakenbeck, Natural History Museum Budapest); (b)
Skull of an older (senilis) woman from grave 1108 in
Altenerding (Germany).
Reproduced with kind permission from Helmuth

(1996: pl. 9).
(p. 485) Early research on head shaping

Cranial modification in Europe and Central Asia has been a focus of research since the
later nineteenth century. Early research was undertaken by anthropologists and
anatomists who were primarily interested in the skulls’ racial characteristics (e.g. von
Lenhossék 1881). The first European skull to be studied comprehensively was found in
Grafenegg in Lower Austria in 1820 in a ploughed field (Schliz 1905: 206). It was
believed to be that of an Avar because of an Avar-period ring fort nearby, though no
associated grave goods were retrieved. Several plaster casts were made of it, which were
circulated in anatomical collections. Johann von Tschudi, a Swiss naturalist and explorer
who had travelled to Peru, recognized it as intentionally modified, due to the similarities
with Peruvian modified skulls that he had encountered (Schliz 1905: 206). Early medieval
skull modification was first considered in its archaeological context by Werner (1956) in a
comprehensive study of the archaeological evidence for a nomadic lifestyle during the
time of Attila (the first half of the fifth century) in Eastern and Central Europe. Since then
a number of survey studies have been published on skull modification in different
regions.1
Cranial modification in central Asia
In Eurasia, the practice occurs in the Bronze Age and then disappears until around the
middle of the first millennium BC (Sharapova and Razhev 2011: 220). Different types of
cranial modification can then be found in different parts of central Asia from the seventh
century BC through to the fourteenth century AD (Khodjaiov 2000). The earliest examples
are from the southern Tagisken cemetery on the Syr Darya, east of the Aral Sea in
Kazhakstan, dating from the seventh to sixth century BC (Torres-Rouff and Yablonsky
2005: 5). Further south, skull modification was practised in Yaz-Tepe in the oasis of Merv
in southern Turkmenistan, and it was identified at some cemeteries in the Ferghana
Page 3 of 25

Valley, in modern Uzbekistan, during the fifth and fourth centuries BC (Sharapova and
Razhev 2011).
From the second century BC onwards, cranial modification occurs with increasing
frequency. In the first century AD, there are clusters along the foothills of the Tien Shan
(Bernshtam 1952). The best known are those in the Talas Valley in Kirgizstan (Heikel
1918: 18–20) and on the Kenkol river, a tributary of the Talas (Bernshtam 1940; Field and
Prostov 1940: 416; Ginzburg and Zhirov 1949). At some sites on the middle reaches of the
Amur Darya (e.g. Dalverzintepa and Old Termez (Uzbekistan)) 20 to 70 per cent of the
urban and 5 to 50 per cent of the rural population had modified skulls between the
second century BC and the fifth century AD, while to the south-east of Lake Aral, at
Altynasar, Kosasar, and Tompakasar (Kazakhstan), 80 to 90 per cent of individuals had
modified skulls during the second to seventh centuries AD (Khodjaiov 2000: 31).
Between the second century BC and the second century AD, there is evidence for
(p. 486)
skull modification in Sargat-period cemeteries as far east as the forest steppes of the
trans-Urals and western Siberia (Sharapova and Razhev 2011: 220) and as far west as the
Caucasus and areas north of it. By the second and third centuries AD, it is also found on
the western shores of the Black Sea, where it has been associated with Sarmatians
(Zhirov 1940; Werner 1956: 12; Anke 1998a: 125).
These areas are not obviously linked by other uniform burial practices or settlement
types. While attempts have been made to tie the practice of skull modification to
particular ethnic groups, for example to the Xiongnu (Bernshtam 1940, 1952) or
Hephtalite Huns (Trofimova 1957, 1968), the burial practices and material culture
associated with individuals with modified skulls were actually very diverse. There is no
evidence to suggest that skull modification was exclusively practised by specific groups.
The central Asian steppe environments provided enduring routes for long-distance
communication and trade. Belt sets, bronze mirrors, cauldrons, and occasionally silk,
among other items, are evidence of extensive links between the Black Sea and Mongolia,
and even as far as northern China (Érdy 1994; Zaseckaja and Bokovenko 1994;
Simonenko 2001; Brosseder 2011). While the populations of the Eurasian steppe belt
were heterogeneous, the connections provided by the Silk Routes facilitated the exchange
of a shared repertoire of ideas and practices. Skull modification was a part of these.
Cranial modification in Europe
In eastern Europe, cranial modification first appears on the northern and western shores
of the Black Sea in the second and third centuries AD, and then spreads into the
Carpathian basin (Figure 26.3). Romanian cemeteries are among the oldest in this group.
Skull modification can be found in both rural cemeteries that have been associated with
Sarmatians and in late Roman contexts. Tîrgşor and Pogorăşti, for example, have been
identified2 as Sarmatian cemeteries. Pogorăşti, on the River Prut, near the border of
Moldova is a typical Sarmatian-period cemetery. It numbered 28 graves, two of these
containing individuals with cranial modification (Anke 1998b: 105; Miriţoiu 2005: 251).
Page 4 of 25

Tîrgşor, in Múntenia, includes about 40 Sarmatian-period graves in a cemetery of about

430 graves, most of which date from the third and fourth centuries (Diaconu 1965). Six of
the Sarmatian-period skeletons had modified skulls (Anke 1998b: 136; Miriţoiu 2005:
263).
By contrast, in Histria, a Roman city with Greek origins, nine individuals with modified
skulls were buried, three of these dating from the second and third centuries and two
from the fourth (or possibly fifth) century AD (Miriţoiu 2005: 192–4). Tejral (1974: 12) has
suggested that such incidences of skull modification in late Roman cemeteries in
Pannonia may also have been due to late Sarmatian influences. However, even in the
following—post-Sarmatian—centuries, modified skulls are frequently associated with late
Roman sites pointing to complex and ongoing interactions between individuals with
Roman and barbarian associations at these sites (Anke 1998a: 134–6). (p. 487) Individuals
with modified skulls occur in large numbers in the late Roman cemetery of Callatis,
modern Mangalia, on the Black Sea coast, dating from the fourth and the first half of the
fifth century (Preda 1980; Miriţoiu 2005: 216–17; Soficaru 2009: 569), at Viminacium, the
capital of Moesia Superior (Ivanišević, Kazanski, and Mastykova (p. 488) 2006; Mikić
2007), and in the southern cemetery of Keszthely-Fenékpuszta at the site of the Roman
settlement of Valcum (Pap 1983, 1984, 1985; Straub 2011).
Page 5 of 25

While skull modification is

quite rare in the fourth
century, the practice
becomes widespread in the
fifth century when it can
be found in great numbers
in the western Carpathian
basin (within the province
of Pannonia), along the
River Tisza and in the
northern Great Plain. It
also extends into Lower
Austria and Moravia.
Within Pannonia, skull
modification occurs in
large numbers in some
Figure 26.3 Distribution map of individuals with
modified skulls, across all periods. The size of the cemeteries. For example,
symbols gives an impression of the number of in Mőzs (Hungary) 49 of
individuals present at each site. Sites mentioned in
the text: 1. Pogorăşti; 2. Tîrgşor; 3. Histria; 4. 96 individuals had
Callatis; 5. Viminacium; 6. Keszthely-Fenékpuszta; 7. modified skulls (Salamon
Mőzs; 8. Szolnok-Szanda; 9. Ártánd-Lencsésdomb;
and Lengyel 1980; Ódor
10. Kiszombor B; 11. Cipău; 12. Floreşti; 13.
Frauenberg/Leibnitz; 14. Globasnitz; 15. Dravlje; 16. 2011). The majority of
Collegno; 17. Frascaro; 18. Maroneia; 19. St Martin modified skulls from Lower
de Fontenay; 20. Szegvár-Oromdűlő; 21. Devín; 22.
Gotland; 23. Lužec nad Vltavou; 24. Altenerding; 25. Austria also date from the
Straubing; 26. Weingarten. Regional groupings: A. first half or the middle of
Black Sea; B. Carpathian Basin; C. North-West
the fifth century. In this
Europe; D. Lake Geneva; E. Southern Europe. Roman
provinces map data provided by the Ancient World cluster, individuals with
Mapping Centre (Creative Commons Attribution- modified skulls on average
NonCommercial 3.0 Unported); Coast line and river
data from the GSHHG (Wessel and Smith 1996); make up between 10 and
20 per cent within their
Elevation data from the GMTED2010 (Danielson and
Gesch 2011).
respective cemeteries.
North of the Danube,
another big cluster can be found in the Morava valley in Lower Austria and Moravia
(Lorencová 1963; Tobias, Wiltschke-Schrotta, and Binder 2010).
To the east of the Danube, in modern Hungary, the practice has been linked to the Gepids
who were believed to have adopted it after their subjugation by the Huns in the early fifth
century (Bartucz 1936; Werner 1956: 17; Párducz 1963: 40). Skull modification occurs
here at several cemeteries, such as Szolnok-Szanda (Bóna 2002), Ártánd-Lencsésdomb
(Mesterházy 2005) and Kiszombor B (Bartucz 1936), but it is fairly rare (six of 223 at
Szolnok, one of ten at Ártánd-Lencsésdomb, ten of 143 at Kizombor B). Kiszombor B
includes some of the latest examples in this area, such as a juvenile/young adult male
from grave 234 dating from the second half of the sixth to the early seventh century AD
(Anke 1998a: 129, 1998b: 66).
Page 6 of 25

There is also a distinct complex of cemeteries with individuals with modified skulls
around Lake Geneva and near Dijon (France) (Steiner and Menna 2000: 290–1). They
have been dated to the late fifth and early sixth century. Werner (1956: 17) linked the
existence of the practice here to the effect of the Huns on the Burgundians, who, after
being routed by the Huns in battle in AD 443, were settled in the region by the Roman
general Aetius. However, more recent work has criticized this as a simplistic narrative,
highlighting the diversity of burial practices in the region (Buchet 1988: 64). While there
are foreign objects such as brooches in burials, these are not usually associated with
individuals with modified skulls. In contrast, these individuals are commonly buried in the
local, Romanized manner (Steiner 2003: 68).
In the sixth century, there are fewer individuals with modified skulls in the Carpathian
basin, though the practice continues in small numbers among Gepid-identified cemeteries
on the River Tizsa and in Transylvania, in modern-day Romania, for example at Cipău
where there were four cases (Miriţoiu 2005: 164), or the woman at Floreşti-Polus Center
(Ferencz, Nagy, and Lăzărescu 2009: 424). Further west, skull deformation occurs in
significant numbers in some sites south of the eastern Alps, for example five of 417 at
Frauenberg/Leibnitz, Styria (Austria) (Schweder 2002: 522–3), five of 252 at Globasnitz,
Carinthia (Austria) (Glaser 2004), and 13 of 49 at Dravlje (Slovenia) (Pogačnik 1975: 144–
5). In isolated cases, it has been found in northern Italy, for example at Collegno and
Frascaro (Giostra 2011: 10–12). These cases have been associated with Ostrogoths.
Individuals with modified skulls also occur in small numbers in other (p. 489) regions: as
far south as Maroneia in Thrace (Tritsaroli 2011), in St Martin de Fontenay in Normandy
(Pilet 1994: 213, 222–3), in southern France (Crubézy 1990), in Thuringia in central
Germany (Anke 1998a: 130; Huck 2007: 328), and Bavaria (Helmuth 1996: 93–4; Geisler
1998; Codreanu-Windauer and Schleuder 2009).
In the Carpathian basin, skull modification continues in the later sixth and the seventh
century, where it is now associated with Avars. For example, at the large early-Avar-
period cemetery at Szegvár-Oromdűlő (Hungary), 32 of 532 graves included individuals
with modified skulls. All of these were female (Fóthi 2000). After the seventh century,
skull modification is observed only sporadically. Some cases were found in Bulgaria
where they have been associated with proto-Bulgarians (Boev 1959; Enchev et al. 2010).
There are examples of circular modification dating from the tenth to twelfth centuries
from Devín in Slovakia (Beňuš, Masnicová, and Lietava 1999). Finally, there are three
intriguing cases from Gotland from the tenth and eleventh centuries (Kiszely-Hankó
1974). All were adult women, and two of the three were buried in typical Viking style.
These are the only cases of skull modification to be found this far north, and there is no
obvious link with the other examples from the same period. It is possible that these
women came to Gotland via the Viking continental trade routes.
Page 7 of 25

Skull modification: between the steppe and the

sown
These distribution patterns within Europe have been linked to the repeated intrusion of
steppic populations. Werner (1956: 16–18) specifically related the spread of skull
modification to the expansion of the Huns. He credited the Sarmatians, among whom the
practice had been observed prior to the fourth century, with a big contribution, since, in
his view, the Hunnic confederacy had included Sarmato-Alans as well as inner-Asian
Huns. He believed skull modification to have then spread into central Europe with the
Hunnic expansion in the early fifth century. Werner explained the presence of the practice
in the area around Lake Geneva with the political domination of the Burgundians by the
Huns, while assuming that the occurrences in regions where Hunnic involvement was not
historically attested, such as in Thuringia and the Morava valley, might have been due to
the cultural impact of the impressive successes of the Huns.
While the number of identified modified skulls has multiplied since the 1950s, the broad
outline of Werner’s interpretation has nevertheless retained widespread appeal for many
scholars. Isolated cases of modified skulls in western Europe have been explained as an
effect of the sudden growth of the Hunnic power sphere which led to the temporary
adoption of the practice (e.g. Anke 1998b: 129; Bierbrauer 2008: 43; Schmidt 1987: 474).
However, a closer look at the chronology of its transmission, and the burial contexts of
individuals with skull modification, shows that the spread of skull modification into
western Europe cannot be linked to this specific historical event. Neither (p. 490) the
associated funerary evidence nor the relatively slow transmission over the course of 300
years supports this theory. Funerary evidence from sites across central and eastern
Europe shows that individuals with cranial modification were usually buried in the local
manner and were only rarely associated with steppic material culture. Furthermore, the
frequent occurrence of the practice in Romanized contexts is an indicator that skull
modification cannot simply be regarded as an alien practice. The origins of skull
modification clearly lie in central Asia, but by the time it is regularly performed in
Europe, it has become a local practice.
Page 8 of 25

Areas where skull

modification occurs can be
broadly divided into
several regional
groupings: the Black Sea
littoral, the Carpathian
basin (including Lower
Austria and Moravia), the
region around Lake
Geneva (historic
Sapaudia), north-west
Figure 26.4 Sex distribution of skeletons in different Europe, and northern Italy
regions. ‘m’ is male, ‘f’ is female, and ‘indet.’ is of
indeterminate sex.
and the Balkans. The
distribution of skeletal sex
during the fifth and sixth
centuries shows significant demographic variations within these groupings (Figure 26.4).
In the cemeteries on the shores of the Black Sea and in the Carpathian basin around 40
per cent have been identified as female, just over 20 per cent as male, and in around 40
per cent of cases skeletal sex could not be identified, either because the individuals are
subadult or because skeletal preservation was too poor. In the southern group and the
area around Lake Geneva, the proportions of individuals identified as male are higher,
with 47 per cent in the southern group and 37 per cent in the Sapaudia, respectively. In
north-west Europe, these figures are distinctly different: 68 per cent here have been
identified as female, eight per cent as male, and 20 per cent are of indeterminate sex.
Looking at the age at death distribution, we can see a similarly variable distribution
(Figure 26.5). In the cemeteries by the Black Sea and in the Carpathian basin (p. 491) 27
per cent and 19 per cent of individuals with modified skulls, respectively, are children and
juveniles under the age of about 14. These mortality profiles are consistent with those of
other skeletal series in the region during the same time periods (Acsadi and Nemeskéri
1970: 230). While estimations of childhood mortality rates are problematic (Lewis 2007:
83), it is nevertheless clear that the mortality profiles of the north-western European
group, as well as populations around Lake Geneva and in southern Europe, are extremely
skewed towards adulthood. In north-west Europe only a single child with a modified skull
has been identified, at Lužec nad Vltavou in Bohemia (Chochol 1969). In the southern
group, there is also only one child with cranial modification, at Collegno in the Italian
Piedmont (Giostra 2011: 12).
Page 9 of 25

Such an age distribution

suggests that skull
modification was not an
indigenous practice in
these areas, otherwise we
would see it transmitted
across generations.
Furthermore, only one or
two individuals with
Figure 26.5 Mortality tables of individuals with
modified skulls have been
modified skulls in different regions. ‘I1’ is infans 1 found in each of the
(0–6 years), ‘I2’ is infans 2 (6–14 years), ‘child’ is a cemeteries, and the
generic age estimate, ‘J’ is juvenilis (14–20 years), ‘A’
is adultus (20–40 years), ‘adult’ is a generic age cemeteries often lie far
estimate, ‘M’ is maturus (40–60 years), ‘S’ is senilis apart. Only some
(>60 years), and ‘indet.’ is of indeterminate age.
cemeteries in southern
Germany have numbers
that are comparable to those further east: five in Altenerding (Helmuth 1996: 93–4), 12 in
Straubing (Geisler 1987), and three in Weingarten (Roth and Theune 1995). We can
therefore assume that these individuals were not local to the population with whom they
were buried.
The hypothesis that skull modification was restricted to recent arrivals has been given
support by isotopic analyses that were carried out on the cemeteries of Altenerding and
Straubing with a focus on dietary variations within these populations (Hakenbeck et al.
2010). Two of the individuals with skull modification at Altenerding exhibited strong C4
signatures in their bone collagen values. Their values were clear outliers in (p. 492) an
otherwise fairly homogeneous C3-plant based diet, suggesting that these individuals had
consumed a radically different diet from the rest of the population in which they were
buried. In Eurasia, the main indigenous cultivated C4 plants are millet varieties (Panicum
miliaceum and Setaria italica) and Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). Millet, in particular,
appears to have been a preferred cereal during times of economic or ecological stress,
due to its rapid growth cycle and ease of cultivation. It also seems to have played a role in
nomadic–pastoralist subsistence strategies. In east-central Europe, it is increasingly
cultivated over the course of the first millennium AD. During the third to fifth centuries
AD, millet and wheat (Triticum aestivum) were the most commonly farmed grains in the
area between Dnestr and Prut (modern Moldova) (Beranová 1980: 152–4). Over the
course of the first half of the first millennium AD, the Carpathian Basin also saw an
increase in millet consumption (Gyulai 2014). In Hungary, this began in the late Roman
period, particularly in the areas beyond the province of Pannonia (Gyulai 2006: 66) and in
Bohemia in the sixth century AD (Beranová 1980: 316–17). In southern Germany, by
contrast, only a limited amount of millet seems to have been consumed (Rösch 1998:
117). The average δ13C values at the sites in Bavaria also suggest that millet was not a
large component of the staple diet for most of the population (Hakenbeck et al. 2010: 11).
The spread of millet appears to map on to the spread of skull modification, and, while
Page 10 of 25

there may not be a causal relationship, we may nevertheless consider the popularity of
millet as part of a package of steppic influences on east-central Europe.
We can therefore assume that at least some of the women with modified skulls came from
regions where millet was commonly consumed, possibly from Austria or Moravia or from
further to the east, where numbers of individuals with skull modification were much
higher and also frequently exhibit elevated δ13C values (Hakenbeck et al. 2017). This
pattern of mobility—the movement of adult women—may be linked to exogamy, a practice
that is historically attested among royal and noble women (Nelson 2004: 186–8) and has
also been identified archaeologically at some sites (Alt et al. 2014: 9–10; Helmuth 1996:
36, 48; Schweissing and Grupe 2003: 1382).
Mothers, grandmothers, and midwives

If these women moved for the purpose of marriage, then why is there only limited
evidence for transmission of cranial modification across generations? We know from
modern moulding helmet treatments for positional plagiocephaly that skull modification
is ideally begun immediately after birth. It then needs to be maintained for about four to
five months. The best outcomes for plagiocephaly are before 12 months of age, since after
that the malleability of the skull bones is reduced (Couture et al. 2013; Seruya et al.
2013). Cranial modification was therefore probably completed when the infant was
around two years old. This aligns with the period during which children in non-industrial
societies were commonly breastfed (Fulminante 2015) and is the period of closest
interaction between mother and child. Historical and ethnographic evidence suggests
indeed that intentional skull modification was highly regulated and (p. 493) may have been
deeply tied up with notions of correct childcare, health, and beauty (Blackwood and
Danby 1955; FitzSimmons, Prost, and Peniston 1998). Where skull modification is not
passed on to the following generation, we can deduce that this suggests changes in child-
rearing practices.
In Mesoamerica, ethnographic, iconographic, and archaeological evidence for skull

modification is numerous. The practice was described by Diego de Landa in his
encounters with the indigenous populations of Mesoamerica in the sixteenth century.
According to de Landa, the skull was flattened between two boards, and the first
bandages were applied before the child was taken to a priest to be named (De Landa
2011: 55). Skull modification was deeply embedded in the Maya worldview (Duncan and
Hofling 2011). Since the top of the head was considered to hold the spiritual energy of a
person, it provided protection for the infant. Flattening the back of the head, in
particular, was considered to be essential to a healthy functioning of the body. While
midwives initiated the practice, it was then taken over by mothers as part of a social and
spiritual routine that enabled the infant to grow up safely and healthily (Tiesler 2011:
120).
Page 11 of 25

In many parts of the world, women other than the baby’s mother—midwives or
grandmothers—played an important role in making sure that knowledge about correct
practices for skull modification was passed on. Midwifery tracts in early modern Germany
instruct midwives to shape the heads of infants immediately after birth to give them a
rounded appearance if they had become malformed during labour (Obladen 2012: 676).
This was done as part of normal post-natal care during the first bath of the baby. In early
twentieth-century Baluchistan, cranial modification was still a widespread practice.
Nurses played an essential role in making sure it was carried out correctly. The Census of
India, 1911 (Bray 1913: 182) describes skull modification among the Pathan, thus:
[The nurse] carefully rounds the head with her hands. This done she takes a piece
of old muslin and lays it four-folded over the infant’s scalp. [She then binds the
child’s head] with a long strip of cloth, keeping it in place with a band, … which
must be either silk or muslin … Day by day the face is cleaned with a mixture of
kneaded flour and ghee, which after use is kept in some safe place for forty days
and then thrown into a stream. Every now and then the head is douched with the
mother’s milk. On the fortieth day the head and the whole body are bathed for the
first time. The folded napkin is now discarded, its place being taken by … a female
headgear made of silk or some other soft material. But the [band] is considered
indispensable for two or three years, to shield the tender head from the air. Not
until the child can pronounce [stone], do they consider that the bones of the head
have properly set.
In her study of the Arawe in New Britain in 1938, Blackwood noted that the mother
carried out the practice, advised by her own mother if she was new to motherhood
(Blackwood and Danby 1955). Mission stations discouraged head binding, and it seems
that fathers more commonly appeared to wish to comply with the missionaries, while the
mothers insisted that the practice should continue. In one case, a woman who had
(p. 494) grown up on a mission station had not had her own head bound, but aimed to
make sure ‘that her daughter did not suffer from the disability inflicted by her parents on
herself’ (Blackwood and Danby 1955: 175). A study of head shaping practices among
present-day immigrant populations in the USA also showed that it was exclusively women
who showed other women how to carry out head shaping correctly (FitzSimmons, Prost,
and Peniston 1998: 89). In these cases too, head shaping was integrated with other
aspects of childcare. Several techniques were employed, such as the use of bandages or
caps, in combination with massages, often after the baby’s bath.
Why shape the head?

Ethnographic and archaeological examinations of cranial modification suggest that
reasons for the practice varied widely. It was frequently a means for generating and
maintaining social identities, specifically high-status or ethnic group identities (e.g. Blom
2005; Torres-Rouff and Yablonsky 2005; Croucher 2006; Geller 2006). In Mesoamerica,
variations in head shapes may have signified clan or ethnic differences. These differences
Page 12 of 25

were maintained as family traditions that were actively shaped by women (Tiesler 2011:
126). In the Andes, too, different forms of skull modification may have created physical
differences (Torres-Rouff and Yablonsky 2005: 4).
While the examples from Mesoamerica suggest that skull modification was embedded in a
complex worldview within which skull modification played an important spiritual role
(Duncan and Hofling 2011), in other societies it seems to have been carried out primarily
for aesthetic reasons. Among the Arawe, Blackwood could not determine any legends or
religious reasons for the practice. Instead it was simply considered to be attractive to the
opposite sex and a matter of ancient tradition (Blackwood and Danby 1955: 173). Notions
that skull modification increases the beauty, health, and intelligence of babies were cited
by practitioners in the USA (FitzSimmons, Prost, and Peniston 1998). Moulding helmet
therapy for positional plagiocephaly is also undertaken primarily for aesthetic reasons
(Steinbok et al. 2007: 1276).
Among the populations practising skull modification in Europe in the first millennium AD,
there is evidence for some social differences. Individuals with skull modification occur in
varying proportions in the cemeteries where they were buried. Frequently numbers are
low or they were found in isolated graves or small clusters. Even in the Carpathian basin,
there are few cemeteries where individuals with modified skulls formed the majority, for
example at Viminacium, Mőzs, or Keszthely-Fenékpuszta (Pap 1983, 1984, 1985; Mikić
2007; Ódor 2011). At other sites, they make up about 10 to 30 per cent. Differentiation by
gender also seems to have been important. In the cemeteries on the Black Sea and in the
Carpathian basin, as well as in the region near Lake Geneva, there are about twice as
many women with modified skulls than men. It is interesting to consider the extent to
which we should see skull modification as being gendered in (p. 495) terms of the
recipients (the infants) or the practitioners. Perhaps it was undertaken more commonly
on girls than on boys because girls were treated differently in infancy from boys.
However, an analysis of grave constructions and burial assemblages associated with

these individuals with cranial modification does not indicate that they were marked out as
different when they died. In the Pannonian cemeteries, individuals with skull modification
commonly reflected the hybridized nature of late antique society, where Romanized,
‘barbarian’, and steppic elements became components of a frontier identity (Vida 2007:
323; Hakenbeck 2009: 72; Tejral 2010: 123; Hakenbeck et al. 2017). The women found in
cemeteries in north-west Europe are similarly not marked out as different. In Altenerding
and Straubing, for example, their grave goods are entirely in keeping with those of the
surrounding population (Geisler 1998; Losert 2003: 301). It is therefore difficult to
consider the practice as an indicator of ethnic distinction.
It is more likely that skull modification may have been used as an expression of kinship
and familial distinction, analogous to Mayan Mesoamerica. At the trading site of Xcambó
in northern Yucatan where eight per cent of individuals had cranial modifications of
varying types, strontium isotope analysis has indicated that more than half of the
population were not born locally (Sosa et al. 2014: 442). 20 of the foreign individuals also
Page 13 of 25

exhibited a greater variety in modification types than their local counterparts. In the Late
Classic period, the majority of subadults exhibited the local type of cranial modification,
suggesting that incoming women transmitted local head shapes into the next generation
(Tiesler 2011: 127). Here too it seems that the social norms of the wider community
altered the mothers’ childcare practices beyond what they might have been familiar with
in their place of origin. The situation could have been similar for the isolated women with
skull modification in north-west Europe. Having moved away from the communities
where they grew up, they may have lacked the practical knowledge and social support
that enabled them to carry out head shaping on their children.
The body unfinished at birth

Recent work on the body has highlighted its position as both a social and a biological
organism that is situated in a specific time and place (Sofaer 2006; Borić and Robb 2008;
Robb and Harris 2013). However, frequently the focus is only the adult body and its place
in the world. The particular situation of an infant—the development of a sense of self, but
also the great threat to life in the early years—is less commonly explored. In societies
with high infant mortality—most pre- or non-industrialized societies—parents and carers
may actively deny the newborn personhood. They adopt what Lancy (2014: 71) has
termed a ‘wait-and-see attitude’, to militate against the emotional fallout in case the
infant should die. Developmentally, by about two years of age a child can recognize him-
or herself as a distinct person (Amsterdam 1972). However, the sociocultural (p. 496)
moment when children are accorded personhood, physically and conceptually, is
culturally contingent. It may happen a week after birth or as late as six or seven years of
age. The appropriate point is often determined by a physical transformation (e.g. the first
shaving of the head, a change of skin colour or the appearance of teeth) (Lancy 2014: 79–
80). Conversely, if a baby dies, it may have been considered not human after all (Lancy
2015: 38).
Even though different populations have multifaceted reasons for cranial modification,
they share a concept of the body as malleable and improvable from its natural state. In
Aztec society children were seen as raw materials that needed to be worked upon to
become fully functioning and gendered persons (Joyce 2000: 474). From birth, every four
years on the way to adulthood were marked by bodily modifications, such as ear or lip
piercings and scarification, and special items of clothing (Joyce 2000: 478). Ethnographic
studies also indicate that in some societies the bodies of infants are initially perceived to
be unfinished or unripe. Personhood is then only achieved through active intervention by
adults, for example by swaddling or cradleboarding (Lancy 2014: 79; 2015: 40–1). Such
intervention explicitly focuses on the bodily attributes of the infant; the Nurzay in
Afghanistan view a baby’s body as ‘uncooked meat’, in Ecuador Huaorani parents aim to
‘harden’ it, and the Amele of Papua New Guinea require that an infant ‘becomes
stone’ (Lancy 2015: 41). The Bororo in Brazil only name their children when they are
Page 14 of 25

‘hardened’ enough, about five to six months after birth, and this naming ceremony then
signifies their social birth (Lancy 2014: 79).
The practice of head shaping in infancy therefore occupies an interesting theoretical

space, where the action is performed on a liminal body. At first sight, the high investment
necessary to shape a child’s head successfully, and the concomitant care and attention
afforded the child, may appear at odds with the casual attitude towards infants that
seems to be prevalent in non-industrialized societies (Lancy 2015: 33–8). However, skull
modification may have been used actively in the process of establishing a child’s
personhood. The bodily manipulation may transform the child from its initially liminal
state towards one that is fully human.
Conclusion
Skull modification in Eurasia in the first millennium AD has most commonly been
interpreted as a sign of ethnic distinction. However, comparative archaeological and
ethnographic evidence suggests that the social function of the practice was more complex
than this. It was rooted in a worldview in which human bodies can and must be altered
after birth. Such a worldview may see the infant as liminal and not yet fully human; the
initiation of skull modification immediately after birth may then put the infant body on a
trajectory towards personhood. Multiple generations participated in this process: the
infant, his or her mother, and an extended network of grandmothers, nurses, and
midwives who guided the mother in the correct procedure.
(p. 497) In north-west Europe, where skull modification was not an indigenous practice,
populations may have had a different, more rigid, notion of the human body that was
incompatible with the practice of skull modification. For the small number of women that
moved to these areas from the heartland of cranial modification, the intergenerational
links that perpetuated the practice were broken. Not being able to continue with a
practice that may have been a fundamental aspect of childcare to these women, must
have increased a sense of alienation from their childhood world, in addition to already
being geographically removed from it. It also meant that the children would become
physically more similar to the receiving population than to their mothers. On the other
hand, the adoption of different childcare practices must have facilitated their
incorporation into the receiving populations. In the distribution of skull modification in
Europe, we can thus also see how different concepts of the human body and the emerging
personhood of a child were perpetuated chronologically and geographically, but also
where such notions became incompatible with each other.
References
Acsadi, G. T. F. and Nemeskéri, J. (1970). History of Human Life Span and Mortality.
Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.
Page 15 of 25

Alt, K. W. (2006). ʻDie Artifizielle Schädeldeformation bei den Westgermanenʼ, in M.

Mednikova (ed.), Artificial Deformation of Human Head in Eurasian Past. Moscow:
Institute of Archaeology RAS, 115–26.
Alt, K. W., Knipper, C., Peters, D., Müller, W., Maurer, A.-F., Kollig, I., Nicklisch, N.,
(p. 498)
Müller, S., Karimnia, S., Brandt, G., Roth, C., Rosner, M., Mende, B., Schöne, B. R., Vida,
T., and von Freeden, U. (2014). ʻLombards on the Move—An Integrative Study of the
Migration Period Cemetery at Szólád, Hungaryʼ. PLoS ONE, 9/11: 1–15.
Amsterdam, B. (1972). ʻMirror Image Reactions Before Age Twoʼ. Developmental

Psychobiology, 5/4: 297–305.
Anke, B. (1998a). Studien zur Reiternomadischen Kultur des 4. bis 5. Jahrhunderts. Teil 2:
Katalog & Tafeln. Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas 8. Weissbach: Beier
& Beran.
Anke, B. (1998b). Studien zur Reiternomadischen Kultur des 4. bis 5. Jahrhunderts. Teil 1:
Text & Karten. Beiträge zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Mitteleuropas 8. Weissbach: Beier &
Beran.
Bartucz, L. (1936). ʻA Kiszombori Temető Gepida Koponyái (Die Gepidenschädel des

Gräberfeldes von Kiszombor)ʼ. Dolgozatok, 12: 178–216.
Beňuš, R., Masnicová, S., and Lietava, J. (1999). ʻIntentional Cranial Vault Deformation in
a Slavonic Population from the Medieval Cemetery in Devín (Slovakia)ʼ. International
Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 9/5: 267–70.
Beranová, M. (1980). Zemědělství Starých Slovanů. Praha: Academia Praha.
Bereczki, Z. and Marcsik, A. (2006). ʻArtificial Cranial Deformation in Hungaryʼ, in M.

Mednikova (ed.), Artificial Deformation of Human Head in Eurasian Past. Moscow:
Institute of Archaeology RAS, 96–114.
Bernshtam, A. N. (1940). Kenkol’skij Mogil’nik. Archeologičeskie Ėkspedicii

Gosudarstvennogo Ėrmitaža 2. Leningrad.
Bernshtam, A. N. (1952). Istoriko-arkheologicheskie Ocherki Ts︡entralʹnogo Ti︠a︡nʹ-Shani︠a︡ i

Pamiro-Alai︠a︡. Materialy i issledovanii︠a︡ po arkheologii SSSR. Moskva: Izd-vo Akademii
nauk SSSR.
Bierbrauer, V. (2008). Ethnos und Mobilität im 5. Jahrhundert aus Archäologischer Sicht:

Vom Kaukasus bis nach Niederösterreich. Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Abhandlungen. Neue Folge 131. München: Verlag der
Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Blackwood, B. and Danby, P. M. (1955). ʻA Study of Artificial Cranial Deformation in New

Britainʼ. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland,
85/1/2: 173–91.
Page 16 of 25

Blom, D. (2005). ʻEmbodying Borders: Human Body Modification and Diversity in

Tiwanaku Societyʼ. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 24/1: 1–24.
Boev, P. (1959). ʻProtobulgarische Künstlich Deformierte Schädelʼ. Acta Antiquae

Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae, 10: 155–8.
Bóna, I. (2002). ʻSzolnok-Szandaʼ, in I. Bóna and M. Nagy (eds), Gepidische Gräberfelder

im Theissgebiet I. Monumenta Germanorum archaeologica Hungariae 1. Budapest:
Magyar Nemzeti Múzeum, 197–237.
Borić, D. and Robb, J. (eds) (2008). Past Bodies: Body-Centred Research in Archaeology.
Oxford: Oxbow.
Brather, S. (2002). ʻEthnic Identities as Constructions of Archaeology: The Case of the

Alamanniʼ, in A. Gillett (ed.), On Barbarian Identity: Critical Approaches to Ethnicity in
the Early Middle Ages. Studies in the Early Middle Ages 4. Turnhout: Brepols, 149–75.
Bray, D. (1913). Census of India, 1911. Volume IV Baluchistan. Calcutta: Superintendent

Government Printing India.
Brosseder, U. (2011). ʻBelt Plaques as an Indicator of East–West Relations in the Eurasian

Steppes at the Turn of the Millenniaʼ, in U. Brosseder and B. K. Miller (eds), Xiongnu
(p. 499) Archaeology. Multidisciplinary Perspectives of the First Steppe Empire in Inner
Asia. Bonn Contributions to Asian Achaeology 8. Bonn: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-

Universität Bonn, 349–424.
Buchet, L. (1988). ʻLa Déformation Crânienne en Gaule et dans les Régions Limitropes
pendant le Haut Moyen Age son origine – Sa Valeur Historiqueʼ. Archéologie Mediévale,
18: 55–71.
Chochol, J. (1969). ʻEin Künstlich Deformierter Kinderschädel aus der Zeit der
Völkerwanderung (Fundort Lužec nad Vltavou, Bez. Mělník, Böhmen)ʼ. Anthropologie,
7/2: 11–17.
Codreanu-Windauer, S. and Schleuder, R. (2009). ʻHunnisches Schönheitsideal in Bayernʼ.

Archäologie in Deutschland, 4: 47.
Couture, D. E., Crantford, J. C., Somasundaram, A., Sanger, C., Argenta, A. E., and David,
L. R. (2013). ʻEfficacy of Passive Helmet Therapy for Deformational Plagiocephaly: Report
of 1050 Casesʼ. Neurosurgical Focus, 35/4: 1–6.
Croucher, K. (2006). ʻGetting Ahead: Exploring Meanings of Skulls in the Neolithic Near
Eastʼ, in M. Bonogofsky (ed.), Skull Collection, Modification and Decoration. British
Archaeological Reports International Series 1539. Oxford: Archaeopress, 29–44.
Crubézy, E. (1990). ʻMerovingian Skull Deformations in the Southeast of Franceʼ, in D.

Austin and L. Alcock (eds), From the Baltic to the Black Sea: Studies in Medieval
Archaeology. One World Archaeology 18. London: Unwin Hyman, 189–208.
Page 17 of 25

De Landa, D. (2011). Relación de Las Cosas de Yucatán. Barcelona: Linkgua Ediciones.
Danielson, J. J. and Gesch, D. B. (2011). Global Multi-Resolution Terrain Alevation Data

2010 (GMTED2010). U.S. Geological Survey (available at https://lta.cr.usgs.gov/
GMTED2010).
Diaconu, G. (1965). Tîrgșor, Necropola din Secolele III-IV e.n. Biblioteca de arheologie 8.
București: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române.
Dingwall, E. J. (1931). Artificial Cranial Deformation. London: Bale.
Duncan, W. N. and Hofling, C. A. (2011). ʻWhy the Head? Cranial Modification as

Protection and Ensoulment among the Mayaʼ. Ancient Mesoamerica, 22/1: 199–210.
Enchev, Y., Nedelkov, G., Atanassova-Timeva, N., and Jordanov, J. (2010).

ʻPaleoneurosurgical Aspects of Proto-Bulgarian Artificial Skull Deformationsʼ.
Neurosurgical Focus, 29/6: 1–7.
Érdy, M. (1994). ʻAn Overview of the Xiongnu Type Cauldron Finds of Eurasia in Three
Media, with Historical Observationsʼ, in B. Genito (ed.), The Archaeology of the Steppes:
Methods and Strategies. Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 379–438.
Ferencz, S., Nagy, S., and Lăzărescu, V.-A. (2009). ʻNecropola din Secolul al VI-lea p. Chr./
The Sixth Century A.D. Necropolisʼ, in S. Mustaţă, F. Gogâltan, S. Cociş, and A. Ursuţiu
(eds), Cercetări Arheologice Preventive la Floreşti-Polus Center, Jud. Cluj (2007)/Rescue
Excavations at Floreşti-Polus Center. Cluj-Napoca: Editura Mega, 419–54.
Field, H. and Prostov, E. (1940). ʻArchaeology in the Soviet Unionʼ. Antiquity, 14/56: 404–
26.
FitzSimmons, E., Prost, J. H., and Peniston, S. (1998). ʻInfant Head Molding: A Cultural
Practiceʼ. Archives of Family Medicine, 7: 88–90.
Fóthi, E. (2000). ʻTorzított Koponyájú Nepesseg a Szegvár-Oromdűlő Kora Avar Kori

Temetőbőlʼ. Anthropologiai Közlemények, 41: 23–39.
Fulminante, F. (2015). ʻInfant Feeding Practices in Europe and the Mediterranean from
Prehistory to the Middle Ages: A Comparison between the Historical Sources and
Bioarchaeologyʼ. Childhood in the Past, 8/1: 24–47.
Geisler, H. (1987). ʻDas Gräberfeld von Straubing-Bajuwarenstraßeʼ, in W. Menghin, T.

Springer, and E. Wamers (eds), Germanen, Hunnen und Awaren. Nürnberg: Germanisches
Nationalmuseum, 608–22.
Geisler, H. (1998). Das Frühbairische Gräberfeld Straubing-Bajuwarenstrasse I.

(p. 500)
Internationale Archäologie 30. Rahden/Westf.: Marie Leidorf.
Page 18 of 25

Geller, P. L. (2006). ʻAltering Identities: Body Modifications and the Pre-Columbian Mayaʼ,
in R. Gowland and C. Knüsel (eds), Social Archaeology of Funerary Remains. Oxford:
Oxbow, 279–91.
Ginzburg, V. V. and Zhirov, E. V. (1949). ʻAntropologicheskie Materialy iz Kenkol’skogo

Katakombnogo Mogil’nika v Doline r. Talas Kirgizskoi SSRʼ. Sbornik Muzeja Antropologii i
Etnografii, 10: 213–65.
Giostra, C. (2011). ʻGoths and Lombards in Italy: The Potential of Archaeology with
Respect to Ethnocultural Identificationʼ. Postclassical Archaeologies, 1: 7–36.
Glaser, F. (2004). ʻChristentum zur Ostgotenzeit in Noricum (493–536). Die Kirchen auf
dem Hemmaberg und das Gräberfeld im Talʼ. Mitteilungen zur Christlichen Archäologie,
10: 80–101.
Gyulai, F. (2006). ʻHistorical Plant-Biodiversity in the Carpathian Basinʼ, in E. Jerem, Z.

Mester, and R. Benczes (eds), Archaeological and Cultural Heritage Preservation.
Budapest: Archaeolingua, 63–72.
Gyulai, F. (2014). ʻThe History of Broomcorn Millett (Panicum Miliaceum L.) in the
Carpathian Basin in the Mirror of Archaeobotanical Remains II. From the Roman Age
until the Late Medieval Ageʼ. Columella – Journal of Agricultural and Environmental
Sciences, 1: 39–47.
Hakenbeck, S. (2009). ʻ“Hunnic” Modified Skulls: Physical Appearance, Identity and the
Transformative Nature of Migrationsʼ, in H. Williams and D. Sayer (eds), Mortuary
Practices and Social Identities in the Middle Ages. Exeter: Exeter University Press, 64–80.
Hakenbeck, S. (2011). Local, Regional and Ethnic Identities in Early Medieval Cemeteries
in Bavaria. Firenze: All’ Insegna del Giglio.
Hakenbeck, S. E., Evans, J., Chapman, H., Fóthi, E. (2017). ‘Practising pastoralism in an
agricultural environment: An isotopic analysis of the impact of the Hunnic incursions on
Pannonian populations’. PLOS ONE 12(3): e0173079.
Hakenbeck, S., Mcmanus, E., Geisler, H., Grupe, G., and O’Connell, T. C. (2010). ʻDiet and
Mobility in Early Medieval Bavaria: A Study of Carbon and Nitrogen Stable Isotopesʼ.
American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 143/2: 235–49.
Heikel, H. J. (1918). Altertümer aud dem Tal des Talas in Turkestan. Travaux
Ethnographiques VII. Helsinki: Societe Finno-Ougrienne.
Helmuth, H. (1996). ʻAnthropologische Untersuchungen zu den Skeletten von

Altenerdingʼ, in H. Helmuth, D. Ankner, and H.-J. Hundt (eds), Das Reihengräberfeld von
Altenerding in Oberbayern. Germanische Denkmäler der Völkerwanderungszeit. Serie A
18. Mainz: Philipp von Zabern, 1–143.
Page 19 of 25

Huck, T. (2007). ʻThüringer und Hunnenʼ, in H. M. d. P. Speyer (ed.), Attila und die
Hunnen. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss Verlag, 323–31.
Ivanišević, V., Kazanski, M., and Mastykova, A. (2006). Les Nécropoles de Viminacium à
l’Époque des Grandes Migrations. Collège de France CNRS Centre de Recherche
d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance Monographies. Paris: ACHCByz.
Joyce, R. A. (2000). ʻGirling the Girl and Boying the Boy: The Production of Adulthood in
Ancient Mesoamericaʼ. World Archaeology, 31/3: 473–83.
Khodjaiov, T. K. (2000). ʻObychai Prednamerennoi Deformatsii Golovy v Srednei Asiiʼ, in

G. V. Rykushina and N. A. Dubova (eds), Antropologicheskie i Etnograficheskie Svedeniya
o Naselenii Srednei Asii. Moscow: Izdanie Instituta etnologii i antropologii RAN, 22–46.
Kiszely, I. (1978). The Origins of Artificial Cranial Deformation in Eurasia from the Sixth
Millennium B.C. to the Seventh Century A.D. British Archaeological Reports International
Series 50. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.
Kiszely-Hankó, I. (1974). ʻA Brief Anthropological Characterization of Three

(p. 501)
Artificially Deformed Skulls from Swedenʼ. Ossa, 1: 38–50.
Lancy, D. F. (2014). ʻ“Babies Aren’t Persons”: A Survey of Delayed Personhoodʼ, in H. Otto

and H. Keller (eds), Different Faces of Attachment: Cultural Variations on a Universal
Human Need. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 66–110.
Lancy, D. F. (2015). The Anthropology of Childhood: Cherubs, Chattel, Changelings.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, M. E. (2007). The Bioarchaeology of Children: Perspectives from Biological and

Forensic Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lorencová, A. (1963). Studie Deformovaných Lebek z Moravy. Dizertační práce,

Univerzita Jana Evangelisty Purkyně, Brně.
Losert, H. (2003). Altenerding in Oberbayern. Berlin, Bamberg and Ljubljana: Scrîpvaz/

Založba ZRC.
Mesterházy, K. (2005). ʻÁrtánd-Lencsésdombʼ, in J. Cseh, E. Istvánovits, E. Lovász, K.

Mesterházy, M. Nagy, I. Nepper, and E. Simonyi (eds), Gepidische Gräberfelder im
Theissgebiet II. Monumenta Germanorum Archaeologica Hungariae. Budapest: Magyar
Nemzeti Múzeum, 54–6.
Mikić, Ž. (2007). ʻDeux Nécropoles de la Grande Migration des Peuples à Viminaciumʼ.

Balcanica, 38: 45–55.
Miriţoiu, N. (2005). Arhitectura Craniană şi Deformarea Artificială Intenţionată a

Craniului. PhD thesis, Centrul de Cercetări Antropologice „Fr. I. Rainer”, University of
Bucharest. Bucharest.
Page 20 of 25

Mordvintseva, V. (2013). ʻThe Sarmatians: The Creation of Archaeological Evidenceʼ.

Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 32/2: 203–19.
Nelson, J. L. (2004). ʻGendering Courts in the Early Medieval Westʼ, in L. Brubaker and J.
M. H. Smith (eds), Gender in the Early Medieval World. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 185–97.
O’Brien, T. G. and Stanley, A. M. (2013). ʻBoards and Cords: Discriminating Types of

Artificial Cranial Deformation in Prehispanic South Central Andean Populationsʼ.
International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 23/4: 459–70.
Obladen, M. (2012). ʻIn God’s Image? The Tradition of Infant Head Shapingʼ. Journal of
Child Neurology, 27/5: 672–80.
Ódor, J. G. (2011). ʻThe 5th-Century Cemetery and Settlement at Mőzs (Tolna County,
Hungary)—Some Issues Concerning the “East-Germanic” Period in Transdanubiaʼ, in O.
Heinrich-Tamáska (ed.), Keszthely-Fenékpuszta in Kontext Spätantiker
Kontinuitätsforschung Zwischen Noricum und Moesia. Rahden/Westf.: Marie Leidorf,
347–60.
Pap, I. (1983). ʻData to the Problem of Artificial Cranial Deformation, Part 1.ʼ Annales
Historico-Naturales Musei Nationalis Hungarici, 75: 339–50.
Pap, I. (1984). ʻData to the Problem of Artificial Cranial Deformation, Part 2ʼ. Annales
Pap, I. (1985). ʻData to the Problem of Artificial Cranial Deformation, Part 3ʼ. Annales
Párducz, M. (1963). Die Ethnischen Probleme der Hunnenzeit in Ungarn. Studia

Archaeologica 1. Budapest: Akadémia Kiadó.
Pilet, C. (1994). La Nécropole de Saint-Martin de Fontenay (Calvados). Supplément à

‘Gallia’. Paris: CNRS Editions.
Piper, C. (2002). ʻThe Morphology of Prehispanic Cradle-Boards: Form Follows

(p. 502)
Functionʼ, in K. A. Kamp (ed.), Children in the Prehistoric Puebloan Southwest. Salt Lake
City, UT: University of Utah, 41–70.
Pogačnik, T. (1975). ʻAntropološka Obdelava Osteološkega Gradivaʼ, in M. Slabe (ed.),

Dravlje, Crobišče iz Časov Preseljevanja Ljudstev. Ljubljana: Narodni Muzej, 143–57.
Preda, C. (1980). Callatis: Necropola Romano-Bizantină. Biblioteca de arheologie 38.

București: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România.
Robb, J. and Harris, O. J. T. (2013). The Body in History: Europe from the Palaeolithic to
the Future. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Page 21 of 25

Rösch, M. (1998). ʻThe History of Crops and Crop Weeds in South-Western Germany from
the Neolithic Period to Modern Times, as Shown by Archaeobotanical Evidenceʼ.
Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 7/2: 109–25.
Roth, H. and Theune, C. (1995). Das Frühmittelalterliche Gräberfeld bei Weingarten (Kr.
Ravensburg). Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Frühgeschichte in Baden-
Württemberg. Stuttgart: Kommissionsverlag K. Theiss.
Salamon, Á. and Lengyel, I. (1980). ʻKinship Interrelations in a Fifth-Century “Pannonian”

Cemetery: An Archaeological and Palaeobiological Sketch of the Population Fragment
Buried in the Mösz cemetery, Hungaryʼ. World Archaeology, 12/1: 93–104.
Schliz, A. (1905). ʻKünstlich Deformierte Schädel in Germanischen Reihengräbernʼ.

Archiv für Anthropologie, 3: 191–213.
Schmidt, B. (1987). ʻDas Königreich der Thüringer und seine Provinzenʼ, in W. Menghin,
T. Springer, and E. Wamers (eds), Germanen, Hunnen, und Awaren. Nürnberg:
Germanisches Nationalmuseum, 471–512.
Schweder, B. (2002). ʻAnthropologie der Skelettreste aus dem Spätantiken Gräberfeld auf
dem Frauenberg bei Leibnitz, Steiermarkʼ, in U. Steinklauber (ed.), Das Spätantike
Gräberfeld auf dem Frauenberg bei Leibnitz, Steiermark. Fundberichte aus Österreich
Materialhefte A10. Horn: Verlag Ferdinand Berger, 411–582.
Schweissing, M. M. and Grupe, G. (2003). ʻStable Strontium Isotopes in Human Teeth and
Bone: A Key to Migration Events of the late Roman Period in Bavariaʼ. Journal of
Archaeological Science, 30/11: 1373–83.
Seruya, M., Oh, A. K., Taylor, J. H., Sauerhammer, T. M., and Rogers, G. F. (2013). ʻHelmet
Treatment of Deformational Plagiocephaly: The Relationship Between Age at Initiation
and Rate of Correctionʼ. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 131/1: 55e–61e.
Sharapova, S. and Razhev, D. (2011). ʻSkull Deformation During the Iron Age in the
Trans-Urals and Western Siberiaʼ, in M. Bonogofsky (ed.), The Bioarchaeology of the
Human Head: Decapitation, Decoration, and Deformation. Gainesville, FL: University
Press of Florida, 202–27.
Shvedchikova, T. (2010). Iskusstvennaja Deformacija Golovy kak Istoricheskij Istochnik.

Unpublished PhD thesis, Institute of Archaeology, State University, Moscow.
Simon, C. (1995). ʻLa Déformation Crânienne Artificielle dans le Bassin du Léman: Etat de
la Questionʼ, in H. Gaillard de Sémainville (ed.), Les Burgondes. Apports de l’archéologie.
Dijon: Association pour la Connaissance du Patrimoine de Bourgogne, 205–15.
Simonenko, A. (2001). ʻChinese and East Asian elements in Sarmatian Culture of the
North Pontic Regionʼ. Silk Road Art and Archaeology, 7: 53–72.
Sofaer, J. (2006). The Body as Material Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Page 22 of 25

Soficaru, A. D. (2009). ʻUn Studiu de Bioarheologie Asupra Necropolei Romano-Bizantine

de la Callatisʼ. Pontica, 42: 561–83.
Sosa, T. S., Cucina, A., Price, T. D., Burton, J., and Tiesler, V. (2014). ʻVida y
(p. 503)
Muerte en el Puerto de Xcambó, Yucatán: Datos Arqueológicos, Mortuorios y

Poblacionalesʼ, in T. Stanton (ed.), The Archaeology of Yucatan: New Directions and Data.
Pre-Columbian Archaeology 1. Oxford: Archaeopress, 425–47.
Steinbok, P., Lam, D., Singh, S., Mortenson, P. A., and Singhal, A. (2007). ʻLong-Term
Outcome of Infants with Positional Occipital Plagiocephalyʼ. Child’s Nervous System,
23/11: 1275–83.
Steiner, L. (2003). ʻBurgondes et Francs en Suisse occidentale (Ve-VIIe Siècles): Une

Présence Germanique Précoce, Mais Discrète … ʼ. Journal of Swiss Archeology and Art
History, 60/1–2: 65–74.
Steiner, L. and Menna, F. (eds) (2000), La Nécropole du Pré de la Cure à Yverdon-Les-

Bains (IVe-VIIe s. ap. J.-C.). Lausanne: Cahiers d’Archeologie Romande.
Straub, P. (2011). ʻAngaben zum Hunnenzeitlichen Ostgermanischen Fundhorizont in

Südtransdanubien—Ausgehend von der Nekropole in Keszthely-Fenékpusztaʼ, in O.
Heinrich-Tamáska (ed.), Keszthely-Fenékpuszta in Kontext Spätantiker
Kontinuitätsforschung Zwischen Noricum und Moesia. Rahden/Westf.: Marie Leidorf,
325–45.
Szécsényi-Nagy, A. (2009). A Kkoponyatorzítás Szokása a Kárpátmedencében, az V-VI.

Században, Régészeti és Antropológiai Adatok Alapján. Masters Dissertation, Faculty of
Humanities, Eötvös Loránd University.
Tejral, J. (1974). ‘Völkerwanderungszeitliches Gräberfeld bei Vyškov (Mähren)’. Studie

Archeologického Ústavo Èeskoslovenské Akademie Vìd v Brnì, 2 (2): 1–60.
Tejral, J. (2010). ʻCultural or Ethnic Changes? Continuity and Discontinuity on the Middle
Danube ca. AD 500ʼ, in V. Ivanišević and M. Kazanski (eds), The Pontic-Danubian Realm in
the Period of the Great Migration. Collège de France CNRS Centre de Recherche
d’Histoire et Civilisation de Byzance Monographies 36/ Arheološki Institut Beograd
Posebna izdanja Knjiga 51. Paris and Belgrade: ACHCByz, 115–88.
Tiesler, V. (2011). ʻBecoming Maya: Infancy and Upbringing Through the Lens of Pre-
Hispanic Head Shapingʼ. Childhood in the Past, 4: 117–32.
Tiesler, V. (2014). The Bioarchaeology of Artificial Cranial Modifications. Interdisciplinary

Contributions to Archaeology 7. New York, NY: Springer.
Tobias, B., Wiltschke-Schrotta, K., and Binder, M. (2010). ʻDas Langobardenzeitliche

Gräberfeld von Wien-Mariahilfer Gürtelʼ. Jahrbuch des Römisch-Germanischen
Zentralmuseums, 57: 279–337.
Page 23 of 25

Torres-Rouff, C. (2002). ʻCranial Vault Modification and Ethnicity in Middle Horizon San
Pedro de Atacama, Chileʼ. Current Anthropology, 43/1: 163–78.
Torres-Rouff, C. and Yablonsky, L. T. (2005). ʻCranial Vault Modification as a Cultural

Artifact: A Comparison of the Eurasian Steppes and the Andesʼ. Homo, 56: 1–16.
Trinkaus, E. (1982). ʻArtificial Cranial Deformation in the Shanidar 1 and 5 Neandertalsʼ.

Current Anthropology, 23/2: 198–9.
Tritsaroli, P. (2011). ʻArtificial Cranial Modification on a Female Skeleton from the

Byzantine Site of Maroneia (Thrace, Greece)ʼ. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology,
21/4: 464–78.
Trofimova, T. A. (1957). ʻPalaeoanthropological Remains Coming from the Territory of

Ancient Xorezmʼ. East and West, 8/3: 283–302.
Trofimova, T. A. (1968). ʻIzobrazhenija Jeftalitskih Pravitelej na Monetah i Obychaj

Iskusstvennoj Deformacii Cherepa u Naselenija Srednej Azii v Drevnostiʼ, in A.
Vinogradov (ed.), Istorija, arheologija i etnografija Srednej Azii. Moskow: Nauka, 179–89.
Vida, T. (2007). ʻLate Roman Territorial Organisation and the Settlement of the Barbarian
gentes in Pannoniaʼ. Hortus Artium Medievalium, 13/2: 319–31.
(p. 504) von Lenhossék, J. (1881). Die Künstlichen Schädelverbildungen im Allgemeinen

und Zwei Künstlich Verbildete Makrocephale Schädel aus Ungarn, sowie ein Schädel aus
der Barbarenzeit Ungarns. Wien: Wilhelm Braumüller.
Werner, J. (1956). Beiträge zur Archäologie des Attila-Reiches. Bayerische Akademie der
Wissenschaften. Abhandlungen. Neue Folge 38 A. München: Verlag der Bayerischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Wessel, P. and W. H. F. Smith (1996). ‘A global, self-consistent, hierarchical, high-

resolution shoreline database’. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 101(B4):
8741–3.
Zaseckaja, I. P. and Bokovenko, N. A. (1994). ʻThe Origin of Hunnish Cauldrons in East-

Europeʼ, in B. Genito (ed.), The Archaeology of the Steppes: Methods and Strategies.
Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 701–24.
Zhirov, E. V. (1940). ʻOb Iskusstvennoj Deformacii Golovyʼ. Kratkie Soobshchenia, 8: 81–8.
Notes:
(1) A global survey, with chapters on Europe and Asia by Dingwall (1931); for Eurasia:
Werner (1956), Kiszely (1978), Anke (1998a, b); for central Asia: Khodjaoiov (2000) and,
more recently, a PhD thesis by Shvedchikova (2010); for western Europe: Alt (2006); for
the region around Lake Geneva: Simon (1995) and, briefly, Steiner and Menna (2000:
290–1); for Moravia: Lorencová (1963); for Austria: Tobias, Wiltschke-Schrotta, and
Page 24 of 25

Binder (2010); for Hungary: Bereczki and Marcsik (2006) and a more recent Master’s
dissertation by Szécsényi-Nagy (2009); for Romania: the PhD thesis by Miriţoiu (2005).
(2) Much of continental European and central Asian archaeology is dominated by the so-
called ethnic paradigm, whereby ethnic groups such as Xiong-nu, Sarmatians, or Gepids,
to name a few, are identified by particular elements within assemblages of material
culture that are considered diagnostic, for example pottery or jewellery items. This
approach presupposes a monolithic concept of ethnicity where groups are bounded and
can clearly be distinguished from one another. It also implies that material culture has a
purely representational function, beyond its functional uses, rather than playing an active
role in mediating social relations. Much has been written on this topic by way of critique
(e.g. Brather 2002; Hakenbeck 2011; and recently on the Sarmatians: Mordvintseva
2013). Nevertheless, such interpretations persist and have deeply influenced the
terminology of archaeological complexes, so that the phrase ‘Gepid cemeteries’, for
example, has become a shorthand for ‘cemeteries of the fifth and sixth centuries on the
eastern banks of the Tizsa’.
Susanne Hakenbeck
Susanne Hakenbeck, Lecturer in Historical Archaeology, University of Cambridge

(United Kingdom)
Page 25 of 25

Hakenbeck 2018

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hakenbeck 2018

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Infant Head Shaping in Eurasia in the First Millennium AD

Oxford Handbooks Online

Print Publication Date: May 2018

Abstract and Keywords

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Skull modification is a significant aspect of a person’s identity during adulthood, as it

Figure 26.1 Modification techniques that may have

Drawing by Susanne Hakenbeck after Molnár et al.

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Figure 26.2 Examples of modified skulls. (a) A

Reproduced with kind permission from Helmuth

(p. 485) Early research on head shaping

Cranial modification in central Asia

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Cranial modification in Europe

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Tîrgşor, in Múntenia, includes about 40 Sarmatian-period graves in a cemetery of about

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

While skull modification is

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Skull modification: between the steppe and the

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Areas where skull

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Such an age distribution

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Mothers, grandmothers, and midwives

In Mesoamerica, ethnographic, iconographic, and archaeological evidence for skull

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Why shape the head?

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

However, an analysis of grave constructions and burial assemblages associated with

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

The body unfinished at birth

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

The practice of head shaping in infancy therefore occupies an interesting theoretical

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Alt, K. W. (2006). ʻDie Artifizielle Schädeldeformation bei den Westgermanenʼ, in M.

Amsterdam, B. (1972). ʻMirror Image Reactions Before Age Twoʼ. Developmental

Bartucz, L. (1936). ʻA Kiszombori Temető Gepida Koponyái (Die Gepidenschädel des

Beranová, M. (1980). Zemědělství Starých Slovanů. Praha: Academia Praha.

Bereczki, Z. and Marcsik, A. (2006). ʻArtificial Cranial Deformation in Hungaryʼ, in M.

Bernshtam, A. N. (1940). Kenkol’skij Mogil’nik. Archeologičeskie Ėkspedicii

Bernshtam, A. N. (1952). Istoriko-arkheologicheskie Ocherki Ts︡entralʹnogo Ti︠a︡nʹ-Shani︠a︡ i

Bierbrauer, V. (2008). Ethnos und Mobilität im 5. Jahrhundert aus Archäologischer Sicht:

Blackwood, B. and Danby, P. M. (1955). ʻA Study of Artificial Cranial Deformation in New

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

Blom, D. (2005). ʻEmbodying Borders: Human Body Modification and Diversity in

Boev, P. (1959). ʻProtobulgarische Künstlich Deformierte Schädelʼ. Acta Antiquae

Bóna, I. (2002). ʻSzolnok-Szandaʼ, in I. Bóna and M. Nagy (eds), Gepidische Gräberfelder

Brather, S. (2002). ʻEthnic Identities as Constructions of Archaeology: The Case of the

Bray, D. (1913). Census of India, 1911. Volume IV Baluchistan. Calcutta: Superintendent

Brosseder, U. (2011). ʻBelt Plaques as an Indicator of East–West Relations in the Eurasian

Asia. Bonn Contributions to Asian Achaeology 8. Bonn: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-

Codreanu-Windauer, S. and Schleuder, R. (2009). ʻHunnisches Schönheitsideal in Bayernʼ.

Crubézy, E. (1990). ʻMerovingian Skull Deformations in the Southeast of Franceʼ, in D.

Subscriber: UC - Los Angeles (UCLA); date: 20 March 2019

De Landa, D. (2011). Relación de Las Cosas de Yucatán. Barcelona: Linkgua Ediciones.

Danielson, J. J. and Gesch, D. B. (2011). Global Multi-Resolution Terrain Alevation Data

Dingwall, E. J. (1931). Artificial Cranial Deformation. London: Bale.

Duncan, W. N. and Hofling, C. A. (2011). ʻWhy the Head? Cranial Modification as

Enchev, Y., Nedelkov, G., Atanassova-Timeva, N., and Jordanov, J. (2010).