Tumulus

A tumulus (plural tumuli, from the Latin word for mound or small hill, from the root tum- "to bulge, swell" also found in tumor) is a mound of earth and stones raised over a grave or graves. Tumuli are also known as barrows, burial mounds, or kurgans, and can be found throughout much of the world. A tumulus composed largely or entirely of stones is usually referred to as a cairn.

The method of inhumation may involve a cist, a mortuary enclosure, a mortuary house or a chamber tomb. Examples of barrows include Duggleby Howe and Maeshowe.

The Royal mounds of Gamla Uppsala from the 5th and the 6th centuries. Originally, the site had 2000 to 3000 tumuli, but owing to quarrying and agriculture only 250 remain.

Description

A tumulus (plural tumuli, from the Latin word for mound or small hill, from the root tum- "to bulge, swell" also found in tumor) is a mound of earth and stones raised over a grave or graves. Tumuli are also known as barrows, burial mounds, or kurgans, and can be found throughout much of the world. A tumulus composed largely or entirely of stones is usually referred to as a cairn.

Types of barrows

Archaeologists often classify tumuli according to their location, form, and date of construction. Some British types are listed below:

• Bank barrow
• Bell barrow
• Bowl barrow
• D-shaped barrow A round barrow with a purposely flat edge at one side often defined by stone slabs
• Fancy barrow A generic term for any Bronze Age barrows more elaborate than a simple hemispherical shape.
• Long barrow
• Oval barrow A type of Neolithic long barrow consisting of an elliptical, rather than rectangular or trapezoidal mound.
• Platform barrow The least common of the recognised types of round barrow, consisting of a flat, wide circular mound, which may be surrounded by a ditch. They occur widely across southern England with a marked concentration in East and West Sussex.
• Pond barrow a barrow consisting of a shallow circular depression, surrounded by a bank running around the rim of the depression. Bronze age
• Ring barrow a bank which encircles a number of burials.
• Round barrow a circular feature created by the Bronze Age peoples of Britain and also the later Romans, Vikings and Saxons. Divided into sub classes such as saucer and bell barrow. The Six Hills are a rare Roman example.
• Saucer barrow circular Bronze Age barrow featuring a low, wide mound surrounded by a ditch which may be accompanied by an external bank.
• Square barrow A burial site, usually of Iron Age date, consisting of a small, square, ditched enclosure surrounding a central burial, which may also have been covered by a mound

Britain

In Britain, early references to tumuli were made by William Camden, John Aubrey, and William Stukeley. During the 19th century in England the excavation of tumuli was a popular pastime amongst the educated and wealthy middle classes, who became known as "barrow-diggers." This leisure activity played a key role in laying the foundations for the scientific study of the past in Britain but also resulted in untold damage to the sites. Barrows were popularly used to bury the dead from the late Neolithic until the end of the Bronze Age, 2900-800B.C.E. Square barrows were occasionally used in the Iron Age (800B.C.E.-43C.E.) in the east of England. The traditional round barrow experienced a brief resurgence after the Anglo-Saxon invasion ,as Scandinavian burial practice became popular 500-600C.E. These later barrows were often built near older Bronze Age barrows.

Bulgaria

Memorial of the Battle of Varna of 1444 carved into an ancient Thracian burial mound. The sign in front is for Władysław III of Poland

Hundreds of Thracian burial mounds are found throughout Bulgaria, including the Kazanlak and Sveshtari tombs, UNESCO World Heritage sites. Located near the ancient Thracian capital cities of Seuthopolis (of the Odrysian kingdom) and Daosdava or Helis (of the Getae), perhaps they represented royal burials. Other tombs contained offerings such as the Panagyurishte and Rogozen treasures.

Canada

File:Mound001.jpg

The 7,500-year-old, rock-covered burial mound of a Maritime Archaic boy at L'Anse Amour, Newfoundland and Labrador.

Human settlement in L'anse Amour dates back at least 7,500 years as evidenced by the burial mound of a Maritime Archaic boy here. His body was wrapped in a shroud of bark or hide and placed face down with his head pointed to the west. The site was first excavated in the 1970s.

The Augustine Mound is an important Mi'kmaq burial site in New Brunswick.

Czech Republic

During the early Middle Ages, Slavic tribesmen inhabiting what is now the Czech Republic used to bury their dead under barrows. This practice has been widespread in southern and eastern Bohemia and some neighboring regions, like Upper Austria and Lusatia, which at that time have been also populated with Slavic people. However, there are no known Slavic barrows in central part of the country (around Prague), neither they are found in Moravia. This has led some of the archaeologists to speculations about at least three distinct waves of Slavic settlers, which have colonized Czech lands separately from each other, each wave bringing its customs with it (including burial rituals).

At places where barrows have been constructed, they are usually found in groups (10 to 100 together), often forming several clearly distinct lines going from the west to the east. Only a few of them have been studied scientifically so far; in them, both burials by fire (with burnt ashes) and unburnt skeletons have been found, even on the same site. It seems that builders of the barrows have at some time switched from burials by fire to burying of unburnt corpses; however, the reason for such change is unknown. The barrows date too far back in history (700 C.E. to 800 C.E.) to contain any Christian influences - it is almost certain that all people buried in them were pagans.

As Czech barrows usually served for burials of poor villagers, only a few objects are found in them except for cheap pottery. Only one Slavic barrow is known to have contained gold.

Most of the Czech burial barrows have been damaged or destroyed by intense agriculture in the densely populated region. Those which remain are usually located in forests, especially at hilltops in remote places. Therefore there is no general knowledge about burial barrows in the Czech population.

The best Slavic barrow sites can be found near to Vitín, a small village close to České Budějovice. There are two groups of barrows close to Vitín, each containing about 80 barrows ordered in lines. Some of the barrows are as much as 2 meters high.

There are also some prehistoric burial barrows in Czechia, built by unknown people. Unlike Slavic barrows, they can be found all across the country, though they are scarce. Distinguishing them from Slavic ones is not an easy task for the unskilled eye.

Hungary

There are many tumuli in the Great Hungarian Plain, the highest is near of the settlement of Békésszentandrás, in Békés county.(see the picture of "Gödény-halom")

Italy

Some big tumulus tombs can be found especially in the Etruscan culture. Smaller barrows are dated to the Villanova period (9th - 8th centrury B.C.E.) but the biggest were used in the following centuries (from the 7th century afterwards) by the etruscan aristocracy.

The Etruscan tumuli were normally family tombs that were used for many generation of the same noble family, and the deceased were buried with many precious objects that had to be the "grave goods" or the furnishings for these "houses" in the Afterlife. Many tombs also hold paintings, that in many cases represent the funeral or scenes of real life. The most important graveyards (necropolises) with tumulus tombs are Veio, Cerveteri, Vetulonia, Populonia. Many isolated big barrows can be found in the whole etruscan territory (mostly in Central Italy).

Israel

Jerusalem Tumulus #2 in 2004.

Near the western city limits of modern Jerusalem in Israel, 19 tumuli have been documented (Amiran, 1958). Though first noticed in the 1870s by early surveyors, the first one to be formally documented was Tumulus #2 in 1923 by William Foxwell Albright, and the most recent one (Tumulus #4) was excavated by Gabriel Barkay in 1983. Since 21 kings reigned in Jerusalem during the Israelite monarchy from David to Zedekiah (who was conquered and humiliated by the Chaldean king, Nebuchadnezzar), it is not unreasonable to suspect that these mounds were the locations of ceremonies to mourn/honor them after they had already received proper burial in the royal tombs (probably located in the heart of the city where they could be continuously guarded). See 2 Chronicles 16:14, 21:19 (which states that King Jehoram was not given this honor), 32:33, the book of Jeremiah 34:5 (a conditional promise for Zedekiah that he did not earn), and Biblical archaeology. Gabriel Barkay popularized this theory after studying tumuli near Salamis in Cyprus.

• More than half of these ancient Israeli structures have now been threatened or obliterated by modern construction projects, including Tumulus #4, which was excavated hastily in a salvage operation. The most noteworthy finds from this dig were two LMLK seal impressions and two other handles with associated Concentric Circle incisions, all of which suggests this tumulus belonged to either King Hezekiah (Barkay, 2003, p. 68) or his son Manasseh (Grena, 2004, p. 326).

• When comparing the number of these tumuli to the total number of Israelite kings (northern and southern), note that Saul never ruled in Jerusalem, and Athaliah was never crowned. She took the throne by force (2Kings 11:1-3), and would certainly not have been honored with a tumulus ceremony following her brutal assassination.

• The northern kings did not reign over the southern kingdom, and they would certainly not have been honored with a tumulus ceremony in Jerusalem; if any ceremonies were held for them, they would have transpired in the north (near Bethel, Tirzah, or Samaria).

• The association of these tumuli with the Judean kings who ruled Jerusalem does not substantiate Biblical history since it is mere speculation. No inscriptions naming any specific Judean king have been excavated from a tumulus.

Japan

Noge-Ōtsuka Kofun tumulus, Tokyo, early 5th century.

In Japan, powerful leaders built tumuli known as kofun. The Kofun period of Japanese history takes its name from these burial mounds. The largest is over 400 meters in length. In addition to other shapes, kofun include a keyhole shape.

Daisen Kofun, the tomb of Emperor Nintoku, Sakai
5th century

Kofun (古墳, Kofun) are megalithic tombs or tumuli in Japan, constructed between early 3rd century and early 7th century. They gave their name to the Kofun period (middle 3rd century - late 6th century). Most of the Kofun have the Keyhole-shaped mount (zenpo-koenfun (前方後円墳, zenpo-koenfun)), which was unique to the ancient Japan.

The kofun tumuli have taken various shapes through history. The most common one is a keyhole shape, having one square end and one circular end; there are also circular kofun (enpun (円墳, enpun)), rectangular ones (zempō-kōhō), and square ones (hōfun (方墳, hōfun)). Orientation of kofun is not specified. For example, in the Saki Kofun group, all of circular parts are looking toward the north, but there is no such formation in the Yanagimoto kofun group. Haniwa, terra cotta figures were arrayed above and in the surroundings to delimit and protect the sacred area.

Kofun range in size from several meters to over 400m in length. The largest kofun is Daisen kofun, the tomb of the Emperor Nintoku, and the largest tomb by area in the world.

The funeral chamber was located beneath the round part and consisted of a group of megaliths. In 1972 unlooted Takamatsuzuka Tomb was found in Asuka and some details were revealed. Inside the tightly assembled rocks, whilte lime cement plasters were pasted and drawn colored pictures depicting the court or constellations. Stone coffin was placed in the chamber and accessories, swords and bronze mirrors were laid inside and outside of the coffin.

Ishibutai kofun, the tomb of the Soga no Umako, Asuka
7th century

The oldest Japanese kofun is said to be Hokenoyama Kofun located in Sakurai, Nara, which dates to later 3rd century. In Makimuku district of Sakurai, earlier keyhole kofun (Hashihaka Kofun, Shibuya Mukaiyama Kofun) were built around early 4th century. The trend of keyhole kofun first spread from Yamato to Kawachi (where gigantic kofun as Daisen Kofun of Emperor Nintoku are built), and then throughout the country (except for the Tōhoku region) in 5th century. Later that century, keyhole kofun were also built in Gaya confederacy in Southern part of Korean peninsula.

The spreading of keyhole kofun is generally assumed to be an evidence of Yamato court's expansion in this age. However, some argues that it simply shows the spreading of culture based on progresses in distribution, and has little to do with political breakthrough. Whether keyhole kofun in Gaya was for local chieftains influenced by Japanese culture or for Japanese aristocrat is also argued. Some Korean scholars deny Japanese influences over Gaya, but most of archeologists recognize these keyhole-shaped kofun in Korea as the evidence of the cultural flow from Japan.

Keyhole-shaped kofun were disappeared in late 6th century, probably because of the drastic reformation taken place in Yamato court, where Nihon Shoki records the introduction of Buddhism at this era.

Korea

Burial mounds of the Silla kings in Korea.

The first burial mounds in Korea were dolmens which contained the material culture of the first millennium CE, such as bronze-ware, pottery, and other symbols of the elite of society.

The most famous tumulii in Korea, dating around 300 C.E., are those left behind by the Korean Baekje, Goguryeo, Silla, and Gaya states and are clustered around ancient capital cities in modern-day Pyongyang, Seoul, Jian, and Gwangju. The Goguryeo tombs, shaped like pyramids, are famous for the well-preserved wall murals like the ones at Anak Tomb No.3 which depict the culture and artistry of the people. The base of the tomb of King Gwanggaeto is 85 meters on each side, half of the size of the Great Pyramids.[2] Goguryeo Silla tombs are most noted for the fabulous offerings that have been excavated such as delicate golden crowns and glassware and beads that probably made their way to Korea via the Silk Road.

Korean tombs exhibit many styles borrowed by and from the Chinese, such as the styles of how the tombs were built and the use of the four guardian beasts, such as Ssu Ling. Additionally, many indigenous Korean artifacts and culture were transmitted, along with Chinese culture, to the tomb builders of early Japan, such as horsetrappings, bronze mirrors, paintings and iron-ware.

China

Tumulus structures date back to Neolithic times in China. Examples includs the 65-foot-tall neolithic tomb mound at the Sidun site of the Liangzhu culture , and the mound tombs of the Hongshan culture . More recent examples include the stone tumuli of the Western Xia dynasty .

Macedonia(Greek)

Some of the world's most prominent Tumuli, the Macedonian tombs and a cist-grave at Vergina, tomb of Philip II (359-336 B.C.E.) of Macedonia and father of Alexander the Great (336-323). Speculation that the other grave found there is that of Alexander IV is controversial. His corpse was allegedly buried in Memphis during the turmoil of the Diadochi after his death in 323 B.C.E.^{[citation needed]}.

Aigai is the ancient capital of Macedonia^{[citation needed]}, homeland of Phillip II. During the 19th century, the tomb of Philip II was discovered in Vergina, northern Greece. The Monumental Palace is lavishly decorated with painted stuccoes and mosaics accompanying a burial ground with as many as 300 tumuli. Some tumuli date from the 11th century B.C.E. However, the most renowned is the royal tomb of Philip II, father of Alexander the Great, who manage to unite by force many Greek cities, architect of the Hellenistic expansion.

This city lies on the northern slopes of the Pierian Mountains; Aigai has been identified as the capital of the Kingdom of Lower Macedonia^{[citation needed]}. The site was inhabited continuously form the Bronze Age. By the 11th – 8th century B.C.E. it was a densely populated and rich centre. The 7th-6th centuries B.C.E. saw the premium point of its prosperity and popularity; this continued into the 5th century B.C.E. Traditional sanctuaries were established, as were the seats of the Macedonian Kings. Royal tombs were known in antiquity to be opulent.

Burial of Oleg of Novgorod in a tumulus in 912. Painting by Viktor Vasnetsov.

Excavations were first undertaken at this site by 19th century. Archaeologists L. Heuzy of France and K. Rhomaios of Greece began but were stalled by the First and Second World Wars and excavations were not resumed until approximately 1952^{[citation needed]}. In the 1960s M. Andronicos was director of the excavations and the cemetery of the tumuli was investigated. The Palace of Philip II was excavated by a team from Thessaloniki University along with part of the necropolis being investigated by the Ministry of Culture. 1977 was the pivotal date that M. Andronicos brought to the attention of the world, the royal tombs in the Great Tumulus of Vergina, (ΜεγάΛα) tomb. Unfortunately, the townspeople of Vergina have put a halt to any more excavations for the time being, under the auspices of preserving their beautiful surroundings and heritage^{[citation needed]}.

Turkey

On the Anatolian peninsula, there are several sites where one can find the biggest specimens of these artificial mounds throughout the world. Three of these sites are especially important. Bin Tepeler (and other Lydian mounds of the Aegean inland), Phrygian mounds in Gordium (Central Anatolia) and the famous Commagene tumulus on the Mount Nemrut (Southeastern Anatolia).

Bin Tepeler and other Lydian tumulus sites

This is the most important of the enumerated sites with the number of specimens it has and with the dimensions of certain among them. It is in the Aegean inland of Turkey. The site is called "Bin Tepeler" (a thousand mounds in Turkish) and it is in the northwest of Salihli district of Manisa province. The site is very close to the southern shoreline of Lake Marmara (Lake Gyges or Gygaea). Bin Tepeler is a Lydian necropolis which dates back to 7th and 6th centuries B.C.E. These mounds are called "the pyramids of Anatolia" as there is even a giant specimen among them which attains 355 meters in diameter, 1115 meters in perimeter and 69 meters of height. According to the accounts drawn up by Herodotus, this giant tumulus belongs to the famous Lydian King Alyattes II who ruled between 619-560 B.C.E. There is also another mound belonging to King Gyges. The Gyges mound was excavated but the burial chamber hasn't been found yet. In this site, there are 75 tumuli dating back to Lydian period which belong to the nobility. A large number of smaller artificial mounds can also be observed in the site. There are other Lydian tumuli sites around Eşme district of Uşak province. Certain mounds in these sites had been plundered by raiders in the late 1960s and the Lydian treasures found in their burial chambers had been smuggled to United States which later had to cede them to Turkish authorities after a series of negotiations. These artifacts are now exhibited in the Archaeological Museum of Uşak.

Gordium and Phrygian tumuli

Gordium is the capital of the Phrygian Kingdom. Its ruins are in the immediate vicinity of Polatlı district of the Turkish capital Ankara. In this site, there are approximately 80-90 tumuli which date back to Phrygian, Persian and Hellenistic periods. Only 35 tumuli were excavated so far. The mounds had been built between 8th century B.C.E. and 3rd or 2nd century B.C.E. The biggest tumulus in the site is believed to belong to the famous Phrygian King Midas. This mound had been excavated in 1957 and several bronze artifacts were collected from the wooden burial chamber. Among these artifacts, "omphalos bowls" and famous "Phrygian fibulae" (hooked needles which were used by the Phryigians to bond the clothes they wore) are especially important.

Commagene Tumulus on Mount Nemrut

The Mount Nemrut is 86 km in the east of Adıyaman province of Turkey. It is very close to Kahta district of the same province. The mountain has, at its peak, 3050 meters of height above the sea level. A tumulus which dates back to the 1st century B.C.E. is situated at the peak of the mountain. This artificial mound has 150 meters of diameter and a height of 50 meters which was originally 55 meters. It belongs to the Commagene King Antiochus I Theos of Commagene who ruled between 69-40 B.C.E. The most interesting thing about the tumulus is that it is made of broken stone pieces which renders the excavation attempts almost impossible. The tumulus is surrounded by ceremonial terraces in the east, west and north. The east and west terraces have tremendous statues (reaching 8 to 10 meters of height) and bas reliefs of gods and goddesses from the Commagene pantheon where divine figures used to embody the Persian and Roman perceptions together.

Scandinavia

File:180px-Ottar03.jpg

Ohthere's mound in Vendel, Sweden from the early 6th century.

Burial mounds were in use until the 11th century in Scandinavia. In their undamaged state they appear as small, man-made hillocks, though many examples have been damaged by ploughing or deliberately damaged so that little visible evidence remains.

By burning the deceased, it was believed that the person was transferred to Valhalla by the consuming force of the fire. The fire could reach temperatures of 1500 °C. The remains were covered with cobblestones and then a layer of gravel and sand and finally a thin layer of turf.

Thus he (Odin) established by law that all dead men should be burned, and their belongings laid with them upon the pile, and the ashes be cast into the sea or buried in the earth. Thus, said he, every one will come to Valhalla with the riches he had with him upon the pile; and he would also enjoy whatever he himself had buried in the earth. For men of consequence a mound should be raised to their memory, and for all other warriors who had been distinguished for manhood a standing stone; which custom remained long after Odin's time. [...] It was their faith that the higher the smoke arose in the air, the higher he would be raised whose pile it was; and the richer he would be, the more property that was consumed with him. (Ynglinga saga)

King Björn's barrow in Håga.

As the old Scandinavians worshiped their ancestors, the mounds were also places of worship.

Of note is King Björn's barrow in Håga (Old Norse name: Haug) near Uppsala. This location has a very strong connection with Björn at Haugi. First, the Nordic Bronze Age barrow gave its name to the location Håga ("the barrow"), which became part of the cognomen of the king, at Haugi ("at the barrow"), and interestingly, the mound was later named after the king.

In Norse mythology, the draugr was an undead creature that haunted burial mounds.

Ukraine, Russia and Central Asia

The word kurgan is of Turkic origin borrowed from Russian language. In Ukraine and Russia, there are royal kurgans of Varangian chieftains, such as the Black Grave in Ukrainian Chernihiv (excavated in the 19th century), Oleg's Grave in Russian Staraya Ladoga, and vast, intricate Rurik's Hill near Russian Rurikovo gorodische. Other important kurgans are found in Ukraine and South Russia and are associated with much more ancient steppe peoples, notably the Scythians (e.g.,Chortomlyk, Pazyryk) and Proto-Indo-Europeans (e.g., Ipatovo) The steppe cultures found in Ukraine and South Russia naturally continue into Central Asia, in particular Kazakhstan.

Sarmatian Kurgan 4th c. BC, Fillipovka, S.Urals, Russian Federation. Archeological dig lead by Russian Academy of Sciences Archeology Institute Prof. L.Yablonsky, Summer of 2006. First known kurgan to be completely destroyed and then rebuilt to its original appearance.

Kurgan (Russian: курга́н) is the Russian word (of Turkic origin) for a tumulus, a type of burial mound or barrow, heaped over a burial chamber, often of wood. The distribution of such tumuli in Eastern Europe corresponds closely to the area of the Pit Grave or Kurgan Culture in South-Eastern Europe.

Kurgans were built in the Eneolithic, Bronze, Iron, Antiquity and Middle Age, with old traditions still smoldering in Southern Siberia and Central Asia. In time and space Kurgan Cultures are divided into a multitude of archeological cultures, most famous among them are Timber Grave, Pit Grave, Scythian, Sarmatian, Hunnish and Kuman-Kipchak cultures.

A plethora of placenames that include the word "kurgan" spread from Lake Baikal to the Black Sea.

Archaeology

Kurgan type barrows were characteristic of Bronze Age peoples, from the Altay Mountains to the Caucasus, Romania, and Bulgaria. Sometimes, burial mounds are quite complex structures with internal chambers. Within the burial chamber at the heart of the kurgan, members of the elite were buried with grave goods and sacrificial offerings, sometimes including horses and chariots. A circular burial mound constructed over a pit grave and often containing grave vessels, weapons, and the bodies of horses as well as a single human body; originally in use in the Russian Steppes but later spreading into eastern, central, and northern Europe in the third millennium B.C.E.

File:Cmentarzysko Jacwingow, Suwalszczyzna, Aug 2004 B.jpg

Sudovian kurgan near Suwałki, Poland

Frequently the monuments of these cultures are grouped territorially and coincide with the zone of Scythian-Saka-Siberian monuments. For Scythian-Saka-Sibirian monuments they are preceding cultures, have a number of the common features, and sometimes common genetic roots. The Pazyryk, an ancient people who lived in the Altai Mountains lying in Siberian Russia on the Ukok Plateau, near the borders with China, Kazakhstan and Mongolia have also be associated with these spectacular burial mounds. The archaeological site on the Ukok Plateau associated with the Pazyryk culture is included in the Golden Mountains of Altai UNESCO World Heritage Site.

Scythian-Saka-Sibirian classification include monuments from 8th c. BC to the 3rd c. BC. This period is called Early or Ancient Nomads epoch.

"Hunnic" monuments are dated from the 3rd c. BC to the 6th century AD, and Turkic ones from the 6th century AD to the 13th century AD, leading up to the Mongolian epoch.

In all periods, in the development of the kurgan structure tradition in the various ethnocultural zones, can be distinguished a presence of common components or typical features in the construction of the monuments. They are: funeral chamber, tomb, surface and underground constructions of different configurations, mound of earth, stone, with entrance or without, funeral, ritual, and other traits, a presence of altar in the chamber, stone fence, moat, bulwark, location of sacrificial site on embankments, inside the mound, inside moat, inside embankments, and in their their links, entryways, around kurgan), the presence of an entryway into the chamber, into the tomb, into the fence, into kurgan, location of fire pit in the chamber, over wooden roof under kurgan, at the top of the kurgan, around kurgan, location of stone statue, columns, poles and other objects, bypass passages inside kurgan, inside tombs, around kurgan, and funeral paths from the moat or bulwark.

Depending on combination of elements between the common components, each historical and cultural nomadic zone has its architectural peculiarities. The structures of the earlier Neolithic period from 4th - 3rd millenniums B.C.E., and Bronze Epoch until the 1st millennium B.C.E. in comparison with the Early Iron Age from the 8th c. BC to the 3rd c. BC display continuity of the archaic forming methods driven by the common ritually-mythological ideas.

Inside view of the Thracian mound tomb at Sveshtari, Bulgaria

Pre-Scythian-Saka-Sibirian kurgans are of the following types: kurgans with surface and underground wooden or stone tombs constructed on the surface or underground and then covered with kurgan. The kurgans of Bronze culture, practically across all the Europe and Asia had to be analogous with the housing. The methods of house construction applied in the construction of the tombs. Kurgan Ak-su - Aüly (12th - 11th cc. BC) with a tomb covered by a pyramidal timber roof under kurgan has space surrounded by double walls serving as a bypass corridor. This design has analogies with the following kurgans: Begazy; Sanguyr, Begasar, Dandybay, under-kurgan cysts construction. These building traditions survived into the early Middle Ages, to the 8th-10th cc. AD. The Bronze Pre-Scythian-Saka-Sibirian culture developed in close similarity with the cultures of Yenisei, Altai, Kazakhstan, southern and southeast Amur regions. In the 2nd millennium B.C.E. appeared so-called "kurgans-maidans." On a prepared platform were made earthen images of a swan, a turtle, a snake, etc., with and without burials. Similar structures were found in Ukraine, in South America, and in India.

Some kurgans had facing or tiling. Kurgan Recruitment in Ukraine under soil filling has 29 big limestone slabs set on the end in a circle. Externallly they were decorated with carved geometrical ornament of rhombuses, triangles, crosses, and on one slab are schematical figures of peopled. Kurgan is dated by the 3rd millennium B.C.E. Its reconstruction showed that over an ornamented cornice up to 2м in height rested a wooden cone of thick logs, and the earthen kurgan was not above, as usually, but on the inside, under the cornice and logs.

The Scythian-Saka-Sibirian kurgans in the Early Iron Age are notable for their grandiose mounds throughout all Euroasian continent. The base diameters of the kurgans reach 500 m in Siberia (Great Salbyk kurgan of the settled Tagar culture), in the neighboring China they reach 5000 m (kurgan of the first emperor of China in the 3rd c. BC near city Sian) (Mason, 1997: 71). The height of the kurgans reached astronomical marks: Great Salbyk kurgan is 22 - 27 m, i.e. the height of the 7-story building; the kurgan of the Chinese emperor is over 100 m. The presence of such structures in Siberia testifies to a high standard of living and construction culture of the nomads.

In the Bronze Age were found kurgans with stone reinforcements. Frequently some of them are believed to be Scythian burials with built-up soil, and embankments reinforced with stone (Olhovsky, 1991).

The most obvious archeological remains associated with the Scythians are the great burial mound (kurgans), some over 20m high, which dot the Ukrainian and Russian steppe belts and extend in many great chains for many kilometers along ridges and watershed. It is from them that most has been learnt about Scythian life and art.

Cultural influences

Oleg being mourned by his warriors, an 1899 painting by Viktor Vasnetsov. This burial rite, with the funerary tumulus, is typical of both Scandinavian, and Eurasian nomadic customs.

The tradition of kurgan burials touched not only the peoples who buried most of all of their deceased in kurgan structures, but also neighboring peoples who are known as not having a kurgan burial tradition among general population. Various Thracian kings and chieftains were buried in elaborate mound tombs found in modern Bulgaria, Phillip II, the father of Alexander of Macedon, was buried in a magnificient kurgan in present Greece, and legendary Midas, a king of ancient Phrygians, was buried in a kurgan near his ancient capital of Gordion

Kurgan hypothesis

The Kurgan hypothesis postulates that the Proto-Indo-Europeans were the bearers of the "Kurgan" (Yamna) culture of the Black Sea and the Caucasus and west of the Urals.

Marija Gimbutas introduced her Kurgan hypothesis in 1956, combining kurgan archaeology with linguistics to locate the origins of the Proto-Indo-European (PIE) speaking peoples. She tentatively named the culture "Kurgan" after their distinctive burial mounds and traced its diffusion into Europe. This hypothesis has had a significant impact on Indo-European research. Those scholars who follow Gimbutas identify a "Kurgan culture" as reflecting an early Indo-European ethnicity which existed in the steppes and southeastern Europe from the fifth to third millennia BC. Marija Gimbutas Kurgan hypothesis is opposed by Paleolithic Continuity Theory, which associates Pit Grave and Sredny Stog Kurgan cultures with Turkic peoples, and Anatolian hypothesis which denies Indo-European origin advocated by M. Gimbutas Baltic version of Chalcolithic Invasion Kurgan hypothesis, and is also opposed by Black Sea deluge theory. In Kurgan Cultures, most of the burials were in kurgans, either clan kurgans or individual. Most prominent leaders were buried in individual kurgans, now called "Royal kurgans," which attract highest attention and publicity.

File:SamaraKurganR2.jpg

Undated unattributed unexplored kurgan on west side of Samara Bend, Russian Federation, with visible tunnel of grave robbers.

Contemporary kurgans

Kurgan building tradition is alive in Poland. The Polish word for kurgan is kopiec. The next one for Pope John Paul II is hotly debated

In Russia, the memorial connotation of the word "kurgan" has survived through the centuries, and in the post-WWII period was resuscitated as an architectural device in building numerous WWII memorials (Glory Kurgan, Mamayev Kurgan).

United States

Mound building was a central feature of the public architecture of many Native American cultures from Chile to Minnesota. Thousands of mounds in the USA have been destroyed as a result of farming, pot-hunting, amateur and professional archaeology, road-building and construction. Surviving mounds are still found in river valleys, especially along the Mississippi, Tennessee and Ohio Rivers. Effigy mounds were used for burial, to support residential and religious structures, to represent a shared cosmology, and to unite and demarcate community. Common forms include conical mounds, ridge-top mounds, platform mounds, and animal effigy mounds, but there are many variations. Mound building in the USA is believed to date back to at least 1200 B.C.E. in the Southeast (see Poverty Point), and recent research shows that it may predate that as well. The Adena and Mississippian cultures are principally known for their mounds. The largest mound site north of Mexico is Cahokia, a vast World Heritage Site located just east of St. Louis, Missouri. The most visually impressive mound site (due to the area being free of trees) is in Moundville, Alabama. The largest conical burial mound can be found in Moundsville, West Virginia.

Serpent Mound – an ancient Native American ceremonial structure in Ohio.

Other sites in the U.S.A. include Indian Mounds Park, Wisconsin, Indian Mounds Park (Saint Paul, Minnesota), and Indian Mound Park, Alabama.

Miamisburg Mound, the largest conical mound in Ohio, is attributed to the Adena archaeological culture.

Mound Builder is a general term referring to the Native North American peoples who constructed various styles of earthen mounds for burial, residential, and ceremonial purposes. These included Archaic, and Woodland period, and Mississippian period Pre-Columbian cultures dating from roughly 3000 B.C.E. to the 1500s, and living in the Great Lakes region, the Ohio River region, and the Mississippi River region.

The term "Mound Builder" was also applied to an imaginary race believed to have constructed these earthworks, because Euroamericans from the 16th-19th centuries generally thought that Native Americans did not build the mounds.

The mounds and their structure

The namesake cultural trait of the Mound Builders was the building of mounds and other earthworks. These burial and ceremonial structures were typically flat-topped pyramids or platform mounds, flat-topped or rounded cones, elongated ridges, and sometimes a variety of other forms. The best known flat-topped pyramidal structure, which is also the largest pre-Columbian earthwork north of Mexico at over 100 feet tall, is Monk's Mound at Cahokia. Some effigy mounds were made in unusual shapes, such as the outline of culturally significant animals. The most famous effigy mound, Serpent Mound in southern Ohio, is 5 feet tall, 20 wide, over 1330 feet long, and shaped as a serpent.

The Mound Builders included many different tribal groups and chiefdoms, probably involving a bewildering array of beliefs and unique cultures, united only by the shared architectural practice of mound construction. This practice, believed to be associated with a cosmology that had a cross-cultural appeal, may indicate common cultural antecedents. The first mound building is an early marker of incipient political and social complexity among the cultures in the Eastern United States.

The most complete reference for these earthworks is Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, written by Ephraim G. Squier, Edwin H. Davis and Samuel Morton. It was published by the Smithsonian Institution in 1848. Since many of the features they documented have since been destroyed or diminished by farming and development, their surveys, sketches and descriptions are still used by modern archaeologists. All of their sites located in Kentucky came from the manuscripts of the deceased C.S. Rafinesque. A smaller regional study in 1931 by author and archaeologist Fred Dustin charted and examined the mounds and Ogemaw Earthworks near Saginaw, Michigan. Archaeological survey and recording of mounds is an ongoing task.

Many engraved conch shell artifacts, such as this one from a mound in Tennessee, have been found.

Eras

The Moundbuilding cultures can be divided into roughly three eras:

Archaic era

Poverty Point in what is now Louisiana is a prominent example of early archaic Mound Builder construction (c. 2500 B.C.E. - 1000 B.C.E.). While earlier Archaic mound centers existed (see Watson Brake), Poverty Point remains one of the best-known early examples.

Woodland period

Throughout the United States, the Archaic period was followed by the Woodland period (c. 1000 B.C.E. - 1000). Some well-understood examples would be the Adena culture of Ohio and nearby states, and the subsequent Hopewell culture known from Illinois to Ohio and renowned for their geometric earthworks. The Adena and Hopewell were not, however, the only mound building peoples during this time period. There were contemporaneous mound building cultures throughout the Eastern United States.

Mississippian culture

File:Emerald Mound.jpg

Occupied between 1250 and 1600 C.E., Mississippi's Emerald Mound is the second-largest ceremonial earthwork in the United States.

Around 900-1000 C.E. the Mississippian culture developed and spread through the Eastern United States, primarily along the river valleys. The location where the Mississippian culture is first clearly developed is located in Illinois, and is referred to today as Cahokia.

The Moundbuilder Myth

Through the mid-1800s, Native Americans were generally not believed to have built the mounds of the eastern U.S.

A key work in the widespread recognition of the true origins of the mounds was the lengthy 1894 report of Cyrus Thomas of the Bureau of American Ethnology, which concluded that the prehistoric earthworks of the eastern United States were the work of Native Americans. A small number of people had earlier reached similar conclusions: Thomas Jefferson, for example, excavated a mound and noted similarities between mound builder funeral practices, and the funeral practices of Native Americans in his time.

Several alternate explanations were forwarded as to the origins of the mound builders:

Benjamin Smith Barton proposed the theory that the mound builders were Vikings who came to America and eventually disappeared. Other people believed that they were Greeks, Africans, Chinese or assorted Europeans. The Ten Lost Tribes of Israel were often given credit for the mounds by Euroamericans who embraced a Biblical worldview. The Book of Mormon (first published in 1830) claimed that Israelite groups (called the Nephites, Lamanites and Jaredites) settled in the Americas and built magnificent cities (including large burial mounds), only to be later decimated by warfare. Reverend Landon West claimed that Serpent Mound in Ohio was built by God. He believed that God built the mound himself and placed it in Eden, which apparently was in Ohio. Some people went as far as to attribute the mounds to mythical cultures: Lafcadio Hearn suggested that the mounds were built by people from the lost continent of Atlantis.

The removal of most Indians from the mound builder regions by the 1830s, by means of the Trail of Tears, was partly justified by the theory that the Indians destroyed the mound builders. Because people thought that the mound builders were sometimes believed to be ancient Europeans, the removal of the Indians was justified in order to reclaim their land.

The mound builder myth was not just a simple hoax, but a misinterpretation of real data from valid sources. The myth was widely accepted by scholars and laymen. Reference to this alleged race appears in the poem "The Prairies" (1832) by William Cullen Bryant The widespread acceptance of the myth was based on a number of factors.

One was the belief the American Indians were simple beings that could not have constructed such magnificent earthworks and artifacts. The stone, metal, and clay artifacts were thought to be too complex for the primitive Indians to make. However, in the American Southeast, Northeast, and Midwest, there were numerous Indian cultures that were sedentary and participated in agriculture. Numerous Indian towns even had walls surrounding them for defense. If they were capable of this type of construction, building mounds should have been no more difficult. People who believed that the Indians were not responsible for the earthworks also used the argument that they could have not built them because they were nomadic peoples who followed their food. In this view, they could not have devoted the time and effort to construct mounds and other time-consuming projects.

When Europeans first arrived in America they never witnessed the American Indians building mounds; and when asked about the mounds, most of the Indians did not know anything about them. Yet there were numerous written accounts about the Indians' construction of the mounds by Europeans. One detailed account was by Garcilaso de la Vega, who wrote about how they built the mounds and the temples that were placed on top of the mounds. There were even French expeditions that stayed with Indian societies who built mounds.

People also claimed that the Indians were not the mound builders because the mounds and related artifacts were older than the Indian culture itself. Caleb Atwater's misunderstanding of stratigraphy led him to believe that the mound builders were a much older civilization than the Indians. In his book, Antiquities Discovered in the Western States (1820), Atwater claims that Indian remains are always found right beneath the surface of the earth. Since the artifacts associated with the mound builders are found fairly deep in the ground, Atwater argued that they must be from a different group of people. The discovery of metal artifacts further convinced people that the mound builders were not Native Americans because the Indians were not known to engage in metallurgy. This was another ignorant perception that was based on the assumption that all Indian cultures are similar. Some artifacts that were found in relation to the mounds were inscribed with symbols. The Europeans did not know of any Indian cultures that had a writing system, so they assumed it was another group who created them.

Hoaxes

Several hoaxes enforced the Moundbuilder Myth, leading people to believe in the myth even more.

In 1860, David Wyrick discovered the “Keystone tablet,” containing Hebrew language inscriptions written on it in Newark, Ohio. Soon after, he found the “Decologue” tablet nearby, also claimed to contain Hebrew. It was later discovered that a Reverend John W. McCarty created the stones and put them in a place where Wyrick would find them.

Another hoax related to the mound builder myth was the discovery of the Davenport tablets by Reverend Jacob Gass. These were also tablets with inscriptions on them that later were found to be fake.

The Walam Olum hoax had considerable influence in the mound builder myth. Constantine Samuel Rafinesque published in 1836 his translation of a text he claimed had been written in pictographs on wooden tablets. This text explained the origin of the Lenape Indians in Asia, told of their passage over the Bering Strait, and narrated their subsequent migration across the North American continent. This “Walam Olum” tells of battles with native peoples already in America before the Lenape arrived. It was assumed by others that these original people were the mound builders, and that the Lenape Indians overthrew them and destroyed their culture. David Oestreicher later branded Rafinesque's story a hoax, arguing that the Walam Olum glyphs derive from Chinese, Egyptian, and Mayan alphabets. Meanwhile, the belief that the Native Americans destroyed the mound builder culture had earned widespread acceptance.

The Kinderhook Plates ("discovered" in 1843) were another hoax planted in Native American mounds.

Other groups that have developed myths about the moundbuilders are certain sects affiliated with the Black nationalist Moorish Science philosophy. They argue that the moundbuilders were an ancient advanced Black civilization that developed the legendary continents of Atlantis and Mu as well as ancient Egypt and Mesoamerica.

Like other moundbuilder myths, they posit that the American Indians were too uncivilized and unable to develop cities and the technology necessary for building these mounds.

List of notable barrow diggers

• Thomas Bateman
• William Copeland Borlase
• Sir Richard Colt Hoare
• William Cunnington
• Rev. Bryan Faussett
• Canon William Greenwell
• Llewellyn Jewitt
• Rev. W. C. Lukis
• John Robert Mortimer
• Augustus Pitt Rivers
• John Thurman
• Charles Warne

Gallery

• 

  Salbyk kurgan before excavation, 5th-4th c.BC, upper Enisey-Irtysh interfluvial. Salbyk kurgan is surrounded by balbals, and topped with kurgan obelisk

• 

  Scythian royal Alexandropol (Gümri in Armenia) kurgan C14 dated 394-366 B.C.E., before excavation in 1852-6

• PerepyatichaKurganGroup.gif

  Engraving of Ukraine Perepyat kurgan cemetery group before its excavation

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Albright, William F. (1923). Interesting finds in tumuli near Jerusalem. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 10 (April): 1-3.

• Amiran, Ruth (1958). The tumuli west of Jerusalem, Survey and Excavations, 1953. Israel Exploration Journal 8 (4): 205-27.

• Barkay, Gabriel (2003). Mounds of mystery: where the kings of Judah were lamented. Biblical Archaeology Review 29 (3): 32-9, 66, 68.

• Grena, G.M. (2004). LMLK—A Mystery Belonging to the King vol. 1. Redondo Beach, California: 4000 Years of Writing History. ISBN 0-9748786-0-X. 

• Grinsell, L.V., 1936, The Ancient Burial-mounds of England. London: Methuen.

• Nelson, Sarah Milledge (1993). The Archaeology of Korea. ISBN 0-521-40783-4. 

• "Proto-Türkic rune-like inscription on silver cup (Issyk Inscription)" by A.S. Amanjolov, in "History Of Ancient Türkic Script," Almaty 2003
• "In Search of the Indo-Europeans: Language, Archaeology and Myth" by J. P. Mallory, ISBN 0-500-27616-1
• "The Kurgan Culture and the Indo-Europeanization of Europe: Selected Articles Form 1952 to 1993" von Marija Gimbutas u.a., ISBN 0-941694-56-9
• "Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture" ed. James Mallory, D. Q. Adams, ISBN 1-884964-98-2
• D. Ya. Telegin et al., Srednestogovskaya i Novodanilovskaya Kul'tury Eneolita Azovo-Chernomorskogo Regiona. Kiev: Shlyakh, 2001. Reviewed by J.P. Mallory, JIES vol. 32, 3/4, p. 363–366.
• "Reconstruction Of The Genofond Peculiarities Of The Ancient Pazyryk Population (I-II Millennium B.C.E.) From Gorny Altai According To The mtDNA Structure" Voevoda M.I., Sitnikova V.V., Romashchenko A.G., Chikisheva T.A., Polosmak N.V., Molodin V.I http://www.bionet.nsc.ru/bgrs/thesis/99/.
• O.Ismagulov 'Population of Kazakhstan from Bronze Epoch to Present (Paleoanthropological research)', Science, Alma-Ata, 1970

• Thomas, Cyrus. Report on the mound explorations of the Bureau of Ethnology. Pp. 3-730. Twelfth annual report of the Bureau of Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, 1890-91, by J. W. Powell, Director. XLVIII+742 pp., 42 pls., 344 figs. 1894.
• Feder, Kenneth L.. ‘’Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology’’. 5th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2006.

External links

• Lost Race Myth
• LostWorlds.org | An Interactive Museum of the American Indian
• LenaweeHistory.com | Mound Builders section, The Western Historical Society 1909, reprint.
• Artist Hideout, Art of the Ancients
• The Mound Builders, available for free via Project Gutenberg

• English Heritage Monument Class Descriptions

• Congletons barrows and burial mounds

• Kurgan Culture
• the Ipatovo kurgan
• excavated kurgans (archaeology.org).
• Ritual Sites, and Settlements: Eurasian Bronze and Iron Age book for download (www.csen.org)
• Definitions from Dictionary.com

• Japanese Archaeology: Kofun Culture
• Kofun Period
• Prehistoric Archaeology of Japan

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Tumulus  ^history
• Kurgan  ^history
• Mound_builder_(people)  ^history
• Kofun  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Tumulus"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.