New dating of several key sites in eastern Central Europe refines our view of human presence there around the Last Glacial Maximum. The author shows that, with the advancing Ice Age, this part of Europe was abandoned later than the west, and a critical environmental factor was increasing aridity rather than the dropping temperatures.

Excavation of a Classic Kerma cemetery in Sudan revealed a number of burials segregated by age, throwing into question a presumed disregard for the burial of the young. Burial rites were varied according to the age of the deceased and show a remarkable concern for the ritual burial of infants and the stillborn

The authors present a unique long record of inner bark use by the Sami people of northern Scandinavia extending back to 2800 BP. Consistent patterns with respect to the direction and size of bark peeling scars shows that common values and standards were early applied. They further conclude that inner bark was important as a regular food and a vitamin C source at these northern latitudes. Bark-peeled trees as biological artefacts in forests also provide important data to understand subsistence strategies and spatial patterns of land use unique to areas with long winter seasons.

DNA analysis of a tooth found with imported pottery in Bali offers a strong possibility of the presence of a trader of Indian extraction in the late first millennium BC.

Combining history and ethnography with a survey on the ground, the author shows how the megalithic monuments of Cameroon were the remains of many different kinds of site. Some were house platforms, others places for washing dishes. Others are certainly ceremonial, for family and kin-group meetings. The memory and opinion of current residents adds a fascinating aside to the function of these monuments, probably introduced four centuries ago, and their subsequent rôles in society.

The Byzantine period in Jordan represents a dramatic change in landscape from the Roman period that preceded it. In this case study the author shows how a sixth century Byzantine church was surrounded by three cemeteries which reflected and maintained the social ranks of the congregation and their different roles in agricultural production.

Did the Slavs invade eastern Europe and settle there? The traditional verdict of placename and historical studies is “yes – in the sixth century”, and the archaeological evidence once seemed to fit this model too. Now Sebastian Brather presents some new archaeological thinking about the area: the cultural zones represented by pottery and burial practice are different from each other and must have other causes than invasion by homogeneous cultural groups; while new dating of the hillforts places them in the late eighth to the tenth century. Welcome to an exciting new world of local cultural diversity …

The Rose theatre – the place in Elizabethan London where one could see Shakespeare and Marlowe performed – may have started life as a bear-baiting arena. This is one of the deductions drawn from this new study of the archive from the excavations of 1989. The authors also present a new model for the theatre’s evolution, offer a fresh reconstruction of the building in its heyday and put in a powerful plea for more archaeological investigation on the ground.

The development of geophysical survey remains a spearhead-priority for new research and cultural resource management alike – since geophysics can find and map sites without destroying them. However, there are current weaknesses of sensitivity and resolution – the instruments cannot easily “see” small features like graves and post-holes of which so many ancient sites are principally composed. Great hopes have been invested in caesium vapour magnetometers, which the Centre for Archaeology has been promoting in England – perhaps nowhere with such dramatic success as at Stanton Drew, Somerset. Here, geophysical techniques have brought to light the lines of broad circles belonging to a previously unrecognised henge monument, and the caesium magnetometer showed these circles to be composed of individual pits about 1.4 m in diameter. The fine focus achieved for these buried features augers well for the discovery and preservation of similar sites and monuments in the future.

The authors present a new procedure for discovering where stone artefacts come from without having to cut a slice through them. The method is tested on axes of spotted dolerite bluestone from Preseli in Wales, source of monoliths at Stonehenge.

This interdisciplinary project, initiated by the National Heritage Board in Sweden, was undertaken to determine the environmental factors affecting the deterioration of archaeological bronzes in Scandinavia – while they still lie underground. The possible influence of soil acidification was obviously of special interest. The method was to examine 3200 prehistoric bronze artefacts from different museum collections in Sweden and Norway and compare the condition of specimens dug up in different areas at different times. The results showed that the condition of excavated bronzes had greatly deteriorated during the last 50–60 years, particularly along the North West Coast of Sweden, where the soil is very sensitive to pollutants. The archaeological context, e.g. the burial rite, was also among the factors influencing the preservation of the artefacts.

Satellite photographs, such as the CORONA series, are proving valuable instruments of archaeological reconnaissance, especially for landscapes that are relatively unknown or unprotected. Moreover, satellite imagery can be used for detailed mapping of remote areas, so that a topographic map or Digital Elevation Model can form the background for the archaeological information. However, images seen on the photographs may not be immediately recognisable as sites, and sites on the ground may escape detection from a satellite. In a current project in south Siberia the authors test the visibility of the one against the other.

The editor’s question “who do human skeletons belong to?” (Antiquity 78: 5) can be answered positively, but it must be answered in context. The question was prompted by reports from the Working Group on Human Remains established by the British government’s Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in 2001 to review the current legal status of human remains held in all publicly funded museums and galleries, and to consider and review submissions on the issue of the return of non-UK human remains to their descendent communities (DCMS 2003: 1-8). In effect, the report was primarily concerned with human remains from Indigenous communities, using a definition which follows the UN Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as “distinct cultural groups having a historical continuity with pre-colonial societies that developed on their territories” (DCMS 2003:7). Consequently, the report deals primarily with the Indigenous communities of Australia, New Zealand and North America.

When Davis and Thurman produced in 1865 their massive volume on aspects of the ancient skeletons excavated from British tombs and cemeteries, they had no interest in Victorian colonialism or establishing which early population was the most ‘primitive’ or ‘savage’ or ‘inferior’, although they did recognise differences in cultural dynamics (with the Romans getting top marks). The term “race” was used for long barrow people, Romans, Saxons and others, simply to refer to populations in a time and cultural frame. I say this to dispatch the idea, common in archaeology and the media, that these early scholars were only interested in establishing hierarchies of inferiority by reference to skeletal material. If anything, Victorian science was disadvantaged by the ever present class consciousness of the times, but these early scientists did try to avoid such influences.

The repatriation of human remains (Editorial Antiquity 78: 5) is a matter in which two viewpoints, both equally valid, are confronted. Human skeletal remains are part of the record of our past. They tell about our shared past – about the story of human adaptive radiation and dispersion. Recent research using modern and ancient DNA evidence is adding considerably to this understanding, and puts our diversity into context by the finding that we share something like 99 per cent of our genetic makeup with all other human beings. Research on human skeletal remains tells us also about how our predecessors lived and died, and has considerable potential to contribute to medical research. Medieval skeletons from a deserted medieval village in Yorkshire, for instance, have showed that osteoporosis was just as common among medieval women as it is now, giving fresh insight into the causes of osteoporosis and calling into question ideas that blame our modern lifestyle. The techniques used in this study were not available when the remains were first excavated; this illustrates the value of long-term retention of skeletal material, which allows application of new techniques so that new information can be obtained from old collections.

Treasure seems to be a popular subject in Britain at the moment. The BBC was first out with the television series Hidden Treasure, controversially focussing on the monetary value of archaeological finds, to the predictable and appropriate dismay of archaeologists. The programme is supported by an accompanying book (Faulkner 2003) and website (www.bbc.co.uk/history/archaeology/treasure) that fortunately both take a more balanced view. A professional offering on the same subject appeared almost simultaneously, in the shape of a conference at the British Museum and what the same institution has described as the first major exhibition of national archaeology for fifteen years.

Philip Rahtz, one of Britain’s finest excavators and first Professor of Archaeology at the University of York, offers his perception of the development of theory, practice – and, especially, of medieval archaeology.