TL;DR
Prime made for students and young adults
- Fast, free delivery for dorm and study essentials
- Prime Video and Amazon Music included
- Member-only deals
A study of two burials at Göbeklitepe suggests that many of the 928 scattered human bone fragments found across the site came from ordinary graves disturbed by erosion and slope movement. The findings do not rule out deliberate treatment of some remains, including skulls with cut marks.
Two Pre-Pottery Neolithic B burials at Göbeklitepe, dating to about 8,700 to 8,000 BCE, offer an explanation for hundreds of human bone fragments scattered across the archaeological site in southeastern Türkiye. A study published in PLoS One reports that many fragments may have come from graves elsewhere on the mound and later moved downhill through erosion and slope slides.
In a study published in PLoS One, researchers examined two burials and compared their remains with 928 human bone fragments recovered from the site’s monumental buildings. The two graves showed patterns of damage and breakage similar to those seen in the scattered remains. The comparison supports the explanation that many loose bones originated in graves and were later carried into the buildings with soil and debris.
One burial, beneath the plaster floor of a rectangular building, contained remains from at least three people: a woman aged 35 or older, a man estimated to be 20 to 30, and a girl aged 11 to 14. The arrangement of skulls and other bones in separate clusters shows that the bodies were no longer in their original positions. Small hand and foot bones survived, which researchers say suggests complete bodies or limbs had initially been placed in the grave. Some bones may belong to a fourth person.
The second grave held a young adult, likely a woman aged 20 to 30. Most of the skeleton remained in place, lying on its left side in a flexed position and facing east. Its bones were extensively damaged. The study reports that calcareous deposits penetrated parts of the bones, while pressure from surrounding soil and likely rodent activity contributed to cracks, breakage, or displacement.
How Graves Could Scatter Bones
The study’s authors say their findings provide a physical explanation for why human remains appear across roughly 3,000 square meters of Göbeklitepe and through deposits at different heights. They propose that people buried their dead beneath floors on higher parts of the mound. As the settlement accumulated soil and debris, erosion and slope movement could have carried bones downhill and mixed them into material inside the monumental buildings.
This matters because the scattered remains do not, by themselves, show that people at Göbeklitepe followed one unusual or organized burial rite involving the redistribution of bones. The new comparison suggests that many fragments may have moved after burial. It also offers a way to account for remains from people of different ages and sexes appearing together, without assuming that they were originally buried as a group.
The authors describe the interpretation as significant for understanding the site’s mortuary practices, but it does not settle how all the remains got there. Their study distinguishes evidence for ordinary burials from clues that some individuals may have received different treatment after death.
Earlier Clues in the Remains
Excavations at Göbeklitepe began in 1995, and archaeologists have since recovered hundreds of human bone fragments from its monumental buildings. Earlier research noted that cranial remains were overrepresented: the site assemblage includes 408 skull fragments and 283 fragments from other parts of the skeleton. Some skulls also bear deep cut marks, evidence consistent with deliberate treatment of at least some remains.
In their PLoS One study, the researchers describe the two newly examined graves as evidence from burials whose bones could be studied in their original archaeological settings. In the collective grave, they found no cut marks, heat damage, or traces of ochre on the bones. Some showed rodent gnawing, and many fractures occurred after death, including breaks linked to pressure and changes in the burial soil. In the second grave, calcareous deposits and soil pressure were associated with extensive fragmentation.
The authors’ comparison links these kinds of damage to the wider collection of scattered bones. Their account does not erase the earlier evidence for possible deliberate skull treatment. Instead, it suggests that the site’s human remains may reflect more than one process: burial practices, later movement of soil, and potentially distinct treatment of some skulls.
What the Bones Cannot Settle
The study’s authors do not establish that every scattered fragment came from an ordinary subfloor burial. They say the findings do not rule out other burial customs, and the cut marks on some skulls remain evidence of possible deliberate modification. How those practices related to the graves examined in the new study is not yet clear.
The proposed erosion pathway explains how bones could become widely dispersed, but the study does not provide a direct date for each fragment or a precise sequence for all the movement across the mound. The authors identify further bone analyses and direct dating as necessary to determine when different practices occurred and how the remains relate to one another.
Further Dating and Bone Studies
The study’s authors say further analysis of human bones and direct dating are needed to test the proposed timeline and clarify whether different burial and post-death practices occurred at different times. Those results could help researchers distinguish remains moved by erosion from evidence of deliberate handling.
The study, by J. Gresky and L. Clare, was published in PLoS One in 2026 as “First burials give insights into mortuary rites at Göbeklitepe, Early Neolithic Türkiye.” Until additional work is available, the authors’ explanation applies to many of the scattered fragments, while the origin and treatment of some remains remain open questions.
Key Questions
How old are the two burials?
They date to the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B period, between about 8,700 and 8,000 BCE.
How many people were found in the first burial?
Researchers identified remains from at least three people: an older adult woman, a man estimated to be 20 to 30, and a girl aged 11 to 14. Some bones may represent a fourth person.
Why are bones scattered across Göbeklitepe?
The study suggests that many came from graves elsewhere on the mound and moved downhill with soil and debris through erosion and slope slides.
Does the study rule out deliberate treatment of human remains?
No. Some skulls at the site have deep cut marks, and the researchers say other burial customs remain possible. Further bone studies and direct dating are needed to clarify when and how different practices occurred.
Source: hn
Fall Picks
fall essentials
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
