Wow, fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing. A couple thoughts: 150+ bodies found in a single site is nuts! So much archeological data and info can come from this. Huh I wonder why this is so rare....
Wow, fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing. A couple thoughts:
The excavation teams also found many dislocated bones and believe the total number of bodies could exceed 150
150+ bodies found in a single site is nuts! So much archeological data and info can come from this.
Michaela Binder, who led the archaeological dig, said: “Within the context of Roman acts of war, there are no comparable finds of fighters. There are huge battlefields in Germany where weapons were found. But finding the dead, that is unique for the entire Roman history.”
Huh I wonder why this is so rare. I get that the number of bodies found is really high, but there's been countless battles throughout Roman history all over Europe, surely there have been at least a few other mass graves discovered?
Every skeleton examined showed signs of injury – to the head, torso and pelvis in particular.
For a second I thought about battle tactics and if those three regions were particularly targeted and what that would even look like, then I realized it was just a perfect example of survivorship bias. The bodies were found with injuries mainly to the head, torso, and pelvis not because there weren't injuries elsewhere, but because those who were injured in the limbs probably survived to fight another day.
Archaeologists hope DNA and strontium isotope analysis will help further identify the fighters, and whose side they were on.
Real curious to see what they find.
And not to bring the US into this article that has nothing to do with it, but there's this big trope in American media about Native American burial grounds and bad omens and whatnot from building things on top of them, yet it never really occurred to me that all over Europe there are places with crazy backstories. Such as this football pitch above a mass grave from antiquity. Funny to think about playing soccer/football on the same field where nearly 2000 years ago people were fighting for their lives.
They touch on it in the article a bit, but iirc cremation was the norm in Rome for the latter half of the Republic and the majority of the imperial period. Funerary practices in the Roman Empire...
Huh I wonder why this is so rare. I get that the number of bodies found is really high, but there's been countless battles throughout Roman history all over Europe, surely there have been at least a few other mass graves discovered?
They touch on it in the article a bit, but iirc cremation was the norm in Rome for the latter half of the Republic and the majority of the imperial period. Funerary practices in the Roman Empire are actually pretty interesting, with Rome's poorer citizens joining guilds in order to afford funerals; if you want to read into it more the Wikipedia page is really well done.
Edit: I suppose it is pretty interesting that there aren't as many battlefield graves; the Roman army was good, but I am also surprised there aren't more mass battlefield graves created after a botched battle or hasty retreat.
Could be that the people they tended to fight also tended to cremate, at least the bodies of their enemies? I could absolutely be wrong, but cremating a couple hundred dead bodies also seems a lot...
I am also surprised there aren't more mass battlefield graves created after a botched battle or hasty retreat.
Could be that the people they tended to fight also tended to cremate, at least the bodies of their enemies? I could absolutely be wrong, but cremating a couple hundred dead bodies also seems a lot easier than burying them, if nothing else?
That's true; the numerous cases of Roman-on-Roman violence would probably lead to the victor cremating the enemy dead. As @fefellama brings up though, it is surprising that there have been 0 other...
That's true; the numerous cases of Roman-on-Roman violence would probably lead to the victor cremating the enemy dead. As @fefellama brings up though, it is surprising that there have been 0 other findings of mass graves like this so far.
Perhaps we need to contact a Roman military funerary practices historian :p
First off, that's a great wiki article and a great rabbit hole for me to jump into, so thanks. Secondly, I read the line about cremation, and that makes sense to some extent. But I can think of...
First off, that's a great wiki article and a great rabbit hole for me to jump into, so thanks.
Secondly, I read the line about cremation, and that makes sense to some extent. But I can think of plenty of reasons where a bunch of bodies would be left out in the elements rather than someone having to take the time to cremate them. Maybe all of one side was wiped off, so there was no one left to do the cremation. Maybe they didn't have the resources/manpower to retrieve the bodies because of the location of the battle or the political situation in the empire. Maybe the bodies belonged to a group that didn't do cremations. Like the same way that this mass grave was found, surely there have to have been others I would think. It's just surprising to me that there haven't been any large gravesites like this one found before given the ubiquity of Roman sites in Europe and the amount of time that has passed since then.
This was my very uneducated guess. I could see it being a rare case that neither side has the remaining resources/will to deal with the dead.
Maybe all of one side was wiped off, so there was no one left to do the cremation. Maybe they didn't have the resources/manpower to retrieve the bodies because of the location of the battle or the political situation in the empire.
This was my very uneducated guess. I could see it being a rare case that neither side has the remaining resources/will to deal with the dead.
Or those who were wounded in the arm or leg lived long enough to be buried elsewhere. Infections before antibiotics were nasty and dangerous, but not immediately deadly.
Or those who were wounded in the arm or leg lived long enough to be buried elsewhere. Infections before antibiotics were nasty and dangerous, but not immediately deadly.
Wow, fascinating stuff! Thanks for sharing. A couple thoughts:
150+ bodies found in a single site is nuts! So much archeological data and info can come from this.
Huh I wonder why this is so rare. I get that the number of bodies found is really high, but there's been countless battles throughout Roman history all over Europe, surely there have been at least a few other mass graves discovered?
For a second I thought about battle tactics and if those three regions were particularly targeted and what that would even look like, then I realized it was just a perfect example of survivorship bias. The bodies were found with injuries mainly to the head, torso, and pelvis not because there weren't injuries elsewhere, but because those who were injured in the limbs probably survived to fight another day.
Real curious to see what they find.
And not to bring the US into this article that has nothing to do with it, but there's this big trope in American media about Native American burial grounds and bad omens and whatnot from building things on top of them, yet it never really occurred to me that all over Europe there are places with crazy backstories. Such as this football pitch above a mass grave from antiquity. Funny to think about playing soccer/football on the same field where nearly 2000 years ago people were fighting for their lives.
They touch on it in the article a bit, but iirc cremation was the norm in Rome for the latter half of the Republic and the majority of the imperial period. Funerary practices in the Roman Empire are actually pretty interesting, with Rome's poorer citizens joining guilds in order to afford funerals; if you want to read into it more the Wikipedia page is really well done.
Edit: I suppose it is pretty interesting that there aren't as many battlefield graves; the Roman army was good, but I am also surprised there aren't more mass battlefield graves created after a botched battle or hasty retreat.
Could be that the people they tended to fight also tended to cremate, at least the bodies of their enemies? I could absolutely be wrong, but cremating a couple hundred dead bodies also seems a lot easier than burying them, if nothing else?
That's true; the numerous cases of Roman-on-Roman violence would probably lead to the victor cremating the enemy dead. As @fefellama brings up though, it is surprising that there have been 0 other findings of mass graves like this so far.
Perhaps we need to contact a Roman military funerary practices historian :p
First off, that's a great wiki article and a great rabbit hole for me to jump into, so thanks.
Secondly, I read the line about cremation, and that makes sense to some extent. But I can think of plenty of reasons where a bunch of bodies would be left out in the elements rather than someone having to take the time to cremate them. Maybe all of one side was wiped off, so there was no one left to do the cremation. Maybe they didn't have the resources/manpower to retrieve the bodies because of the location of the battle or the political situation in the empire. Maybe the bodies belonged to a group that didn't do cremations. Like the same way that this mass grave was found, surely there have to have been others I would think. It's just surprising to me that there haven't been any large gravesites like this one found before given the ubiquity of Roman sites in Europe and the amount of time that has passed since then.
This was my very uneducated guess. I could see it being a rare case that neither side has the remaining resources/will to deal with the dead.
Or those who were wounded in the arm or leg lived long enough to be buried elsewhere. Infections before antibiotics were nasty and dangerous, but not immediately deadly.
Very true. War sucks.