The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy and Spatial Organization

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción(Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy and SpatialOrganization

El asentamiento de la Edad del Cobre de Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla).Demografía, metalurgia y organización espacial

Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé (*)Marta Díaz-Zorita Bonilla (**)Leonardo García Sanjuán (*)David W. Wheatley (***)

ABSTRACT

FALTA?

RESUMEN

FALTA

Key words: FALTAN

Palabras clave: FALTAN

1. INTRODUCTION

The archaeological site of Valencina de laConcepción (Seville) is located near the rightbank of the Guadalquivir River, about 6 km fromthe historic centre city of Seville to the west, oc-cupying the higher elevations of the region of El

Aljarafe Norte, mainly within the municipality ofValencina de la Concepción, but also partly inCastilleja de Guzmán. The prehistoric commu-nity lived in a physical environment very differ-ent from the present. The main features of thatearlier environment have recently begun to be de-termined from geo-archaeological studies of thelower reaches of the Guadalquivir river (ArteagaMatute et al. 1995a; 1995b) and of fluvial depos-its in the city of Seville and its surroundings(Barral Muñoz and Borja Barrera 2002; BorjaBarrera and Barral Muñoz 1999, 2003a; 2003b).This physical environment was characterizedabove all by the richness and diversity of naturalresources provided by the great marine gulf intowhich the Guadalquivir flowed, the complex net-work of river channels and marshes that occupiedthe mouth of the river, and the fertile lands of theEl Aljarafe platform (maximum elevation of 165metres at Cerro de la Cruz) (Fig. 1).

Scientific research on the prehistoric site ofValencina dates back to the late nineteenth cen-tury. The orientation and profile of the numerousexcavations and studies have changed over timein accordance with the general development ofarchaeology as a discipline in Spain. The list ofspecialists who have contributed to this researchincludes some of the most famous and influentialscholars across several generations of Spanishprehistorians.

The first studies on this prehistoric settlementfocused on its monumental megalithic construc-

TRABAJOS DE PREHISTORIA67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638

doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

(*) Becario FPU del Ministerio de Educación. Departamen-to de Prehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad de SevillaMaría de Padilla s/n. 41004. Sevilla (España). Correos electróni-cos: [email protected]; [email protected]

(**) Predoctoral Research Fellow. Department of Archaeo-logy. University of Durham. South Road, DH1 3LE, Durham.Reino Unido. Correo electrónico:[email protected]

(***) Senior Lecturer. School of Humanities, Departmentof Archaeology University of Southampton Avenue CampusHighfield. SO17 1BF. Southampton. Reino Unido. Correo elec-tronic: [email protected]

Recibido: XX-XX-XXXX; aceptado: XX-XX-XXXX.

tions, such as La Pastora, Matarrubilla, and On-tiveros (Tubino 1876; Obermaier 1919; Carriazoy Arroquia 1962; Collantes de Terán 1969). Fromthe end of the 1970s, but especially since themid-1980s, other megalithic constructions cameto light, often as the result of rescue excavationsrelated to construction projects that affected vari-ous parts of the site (Fernández Gómez and RuizMata 1978; Cabrero García 1985; Murillo Díazet al. 1990; Murillo Díaz 1991; Santana Falcón1991; Ruiz Moreno and Martín Espinosa 1993;Martín Espinosa and Ruiz Moreno 1995; RuizMoreno and Martín Espinosa 1995; Arteaga Ma-tute and Cruz-Auñón Briones 1999a; 2001).Since the mid-1980s, domestic and productivestructures were also found and excavated throug-hout the settlement (Fernández Gómez and OlivaAlonso 1986; Murillo Díaz et al. 1987; BlancoRuiz 1991, Ruiz Moreno 1991; Martín Espinosaand Ruiz Moreno 1992; Santana Falcón 1993,Arteaga Matute and Cruz-Auñón Briones 1999b;Cruz-Auñón Briones and Arteaga Matute 1999a;1999b; Ruiz Moreno 1999; López Aldana et al.2001; Vera Fernández et al. 2002; Nocete Calvoet al. 2007). As recently as in 2007, again througha “rescue intervention” caused by urban develop-ments, an excavation was begun of Montelirio, amegalithic structure similar in size to La Pastora

and Matarrubilla. The excavation and study ofthis monument continues today.

Several studies have proposed overall assess-ments of the site in accordance with the informa-tion available at each particular time, whether interms of broad chrono-cultural characterization(Ruiz Mata 1983; Martín de la Cruz and MirandaAriz 1988) or historiography (Murillo Díaz 2001;Gómez de Terreros Guardiola 2005; 2008). Theproduction of a “carta arqueológica” (inventory)of the excavations carried out at site (Ruiz Mo-reno 1995; Vargas Jiménez 2004a; 2004b) was anotable advance in the systematization of infor-mation and for the preliminary assessment of itsinternal organization.

Despite the considerable number of archaeo-logical surveys and excavations carried out,which perhaps make Valencina the most inten-sively excavated prehistoric settlement in Spain,the empirical basis currently available for itsanalysis is, paradoxically, rather limited. Severalfactors explain this limitation. One major factor iscertainly the ‘rescue’ character of the vast major-ity of excavations conducted so far, so that, firs-tly, several different teams have worked on thesite, often without coordination; secondly, thatthe reports and studies produced have been gen-erally very superficial (in the Autonomous Com-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

88 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Fig. 1a. Location of the Copper Age settlement of Valencia de la Concepción in the Iberian Peninsula.Fig. 1b. Map of the location of Valencina de la Concepción in relation to settlements and funerary sites of the 3rd and 2ndmillennia cal BP excavated in the lower Guadalquivir valley. The map shows the outline of the estimated coastline of theLate Prehistory.

munity of Andalusia rescue excavations do notlegally involve in-depth post-excavation analysisof the data obtained); and thirdly, that the publi-cations are often short, especially those containedin the Anuario Arqueológico de Andalucía(where some excavations have been described inarticles of just 1 or 2 pages).

To date, the complex of negative structures(underground and semi-underground), usually in-terpreted by their excavators as “silos,” “hutfloors” (fondos de cabaña), “dumps,” “ditches”or “trenches” has not been recorded on a unified,single cartographic basis, which complicatesgreatly the interpretation of their function andspatial distribution. Similarly, little has been donein terms of the analysis of the archaeological dataobtained in the excavations. The absolute chro-nology, for example, is rather insufficient, despitethe significant contributions made by recent stud-ies (Nocete Calvo et al. 2007). The 11 radiocar-bon dates published so far (Tab. 1 and Fig. 2)suggest that the occupation of Valencina ex-tended from the first centuries of the 3rd millen-nium to the mid-2nd millennium cal BC, whichcover almost the entire period conventionallydesignated as the Copper Age and the early partof the Bronze Age. The oldest dates, which arefrom the first half of the 3rd millennium, are con-

temporary with those obtained at the site ofParque de Miraflores, in the centre of modern Se-ville. The end of the period of Valencina’s occu-pation is not clear, since the only date so far pub-lished that spans the first half of the 2ndmillennium cal BC has a high standard deviation.The limited number of dates available has im-peded the analysis of problems such as the chro-nology of burial practices and the evolution of thesettlement’s occupation. Thus, it is basically un-known whether the large area of the settlement(estimated between c. 300 and 400 hectares) wasever occupied all at the same time, or whetherdifferent parts were occupied in different phases.Published interpretations regarding the organiza-tion of space within the settlement of Valencinahave only gone as far as proposing a subdivisioninto two main sectors: a “habitational” sector(functionally domestic and productive) to thenorth, and a “funerary” sector to the south (Var-gas Jiménez 2004; Arteaga Matute and Cruz-Au-ñón Briones 1995).

On the other hand, over the years some studieshave been published on different types ofartefacts from the site. This includes ceramics(Ruiz Mata 1975a, 1975b; González Vilchez1982; González Vilchez et al. 1999), lithic tools(Ramos Muñoz 1992; Murillo Díaz 1997, 1998,

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 89

SITE ABBREV. DATE BP DATE BC 1� CONTEXT REFERENCE

P. MIRAFLORES KIA-24925 4327 � 24 3010-2890 Domestic Lara Montero et al. 2006P. MIRAFLORES KIA-24927 4190 � 28 2880-2700 Domestic Lara Montero et al. 2006VALENCINA Ua-19475 4150 � 50 2872-2638 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008P. MIRAFLORES KIA-24924 4133 � 39 2870-2600 Domestic Lara Montero et al. 2006VALENCINA I-10187 4050 � 105 2870-2470 Domestic Castro Martínez et al. 1996VALENCINA Ua-24557 4135 � 45 2864-2627 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008LOS COVACHOS Beta-136699 4090 � 50 2860-2500 Funerary Caro Gómez et al. 2003P. MIRAFLORES KIA-24926 4109 � 28 2860-2580 Domestic Lara Montero et al. 2006VALENCINA Ua-32885 4120 � 40 2859-2620 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008VALENCINA Ua-32042 4104 � 40 2851-2580 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008EL AMARGUILLO OxA-3967 4030 � 65 2840-2460 Domestic Mederos Martín 1998VALENCINA Ua-22813 4050 � 45 2831-2489 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008VALENCINA Ua-19474 4045 � 50 2831-2482 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008VALENCINA Ua-24558 3995 � 75 2829-2350 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008VALENCINA GIF-4028 3910 � 110 2580-2200 Domestic Castro Martínez et al. 1996LOS COVACHOS Beta-136697 3780 � 40 2290-2130 Funerary Caro Gómez et al. 2003LOS COVACHOS Beta-136698 3670 � 80 2200-1930 Funerary Caro Gómez et al. 2003SE-B Beta-225413 3720 � 40 2200-2030 Funerary Hunt Ortiz et al. 2008SE-B Beta-225412 3660 � 40 2130-1960 Funerary Hunt Ortiz et al. 2008VALENCINA Ua-32043 3620 � 55 2112-1920 Metallurgic Nocete Calvo et al. 2008VALENCINA UGRA-72 3380 � 150 1880-1520 Domestic Castro Martínez et al. 1996

Tab. 1. Radiocarbon dates of Valencina de la Concepción and sites of the 3rd millennium cal BC in the province of Se-ville.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

90 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Fig. 2. Map of the Valencina de la Concepción archaeological site, showing the perimeters of the proposed domes-tic/productive and funerary areas (after Vargas Jiménez, 2004: 49).

1999, 2000; Sánchez Liranzo and Fernández Vera2000), the deposit of metal ‘javelin’ (or spear)heads found outside of La Pastora (AlmagroBasch 1962; Montero Ruiz and Teneishvili 1996;Mederos Martín 2000), and votive objects such asidols (Fernández Gómez and Oliva Alonso 1980;Martín Espinosa and Ruiz Moreno 1996). Otherstudies have addressed some collections of ani-mal remains (Hain 1982) and human bones (Al-cázar Godoy et al. 1992; Basabe and Benassar1982; Guijo Mauri et al. 1996; Lacalle Rodríguezet al. 2000). Unfortunately, these works do notbegin to cover the quantity, quality and complex-ity of the empirical record that has been obtainedin the numerous excavations carried out since themid-1980s.

Thus, although at present the site is indisput-ably a major reference for understanding CopperAge societies in southern Iberia (and especially inthe Guadalquivir valley), and has a bibliographythat is unusually rich in the context of IberianPrehistory, the reality is that the settlement ofValencina de la Concepción has now become acomplex palimpsest of information, the productof brief episodes rather than research projectsbased on explicitly defined objectives (and exe-cuted by relatively stable and organized teams ofspecialists). This poses many serious problems ofinterpretation in terms of the key social and cul-tural processes of which this prehistoric commu-nity was a part.

This paper aims to contribute to the scientificassessment of the prehistoric settlement of Va-lencina with new evidence and arguments. Thiscontribution is based on a series of previously un-published data on the demography and metallur-gical production at the site, the result of investi-gations carried out recently (and which are nowbeing expanded) by the University of Seville. Astatistical analysis of the meso-spatial distribu-tion of these new data (together with informationavailable in previous publications) is then con-ducted in order to propose an overall assessmentof the internal organization of the settlement. Inother words, through a spatial and quantitativeexamination of the empirical evidence regardingdemography and metallurgical production, aknowledge base capable of informing the debateon the social complexity of this community (and,by extension, of others that occupied the lowerGuadalquivir valley during the Copper Age) isdiscussed.

2. THE EMPIRICAL RECORD

2.1. Human osteology

During the long history of its study, the ar-chaeological site of Valencina de la Concepciónhas revealed a major collection of human boneswhich, with some exceptions, has never been thesubject of a comprehensive research. As men-tioned above, the only publications available sofar are those devoted to the sectors of El Corte Cde La Perrera (Basabe and Benassar 1982), LaCima and La Gallega (Alcázar Godoy et al.1992), Los Cabezuelos (Guijo Mauri et al. 1996)and Divina Pastora (Lacalle Rodríguez et al.2000).

The data analyzed here comprise a total of 135individuals. These data come from a recent re-view (1) that includes a compilation and organi-zation of data already available in published andunpublished reports, as well as a study of some ofthe human remains from the site that are pre-served in the Archaeological Museum of Seville,and which had never been investigated previ-ously (2). This systematization of the relevantdata on human osteology is in itself a significantcontribution to the analysis of the prehistoric set-tlement of Valencina, of which a demographicsynthesis has never been attempted. In this regardit should be made clear that no account has beentaken of published descriptions of osteologicalmaterial which do not provide critical data suchas the minimum number of individuals (MNI),sex, and age (i.e., publications in which there areonly general references to human remains whichwe were not able to examine directly). For thisreason, osteological material from the megalithicconstructions of Ontiveros (Carriazo and Arro-quia 1962) and La Pastora (Ruiz Moreno andMartín Espinosa 1993), as well as from somenon-megalithic sites such as Sitio de Valencina(Vargas Jiménez 2004) and Polideportivo (Mu-rillo Díaz et al. 1987) have not been included inthis study.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 91

(1) Díaz-Zorita Bonilla, M. 2007: Bioarqueología de DosComunidades de la Edad del Cobre en el Suroeste de la Penín-sula Ibérica: Valencina de la Concepción y Almadén de la Plata(Sevilla). Trabajo de Investigación para la obtención del DEA.Seville. Universidad de Sevilla. Unpublished

(2) At least in publications until 2004, the year of the lastvolume of the Anuario Arqueológico de Andalucía available aswe write these lines.

The general breakdown of the anthropologicalsample considered in this study (Tab. 2) requiressome preliminary comments and clarifications.One point to keep in mind is that the degree ofpreservation of human remains is generally notvery good, and varies from one excavation to an-other. In Corte C de La Perrera (Basabe andBenassar 1982) almost complete individuals weredocumented in a good state of preservation. Incontrast, at the sites that we examined ourselves(El Algarrobillo, La Cima, La Gallega and LaAlcazaba), the skeletons were highly fragmenteddue to taphonomical processes: there were someskulls but no long bones or pelves. For this reasonthe determination of sex was based on the dimor-phic sexual characteristics of the skull describedby Buikstra and Ubelaker (1994), and the age es-timation was made according to the degree ofdental attrition following the methods ofBrothwell (1987), and by comparison with thedegree of obliteration of the cranial sutures in ac-cordance with the data of Perizonius (1984). Toestablish a comparative analysis between the dif-ferent methodologies for estimating age, the age

ranges used were subadults (3), 20-30 years,30-45, � 45 years, adults, and indetermined.

A second important aspect to consider is thearchitectural, spatial, and functional context foreach find, which are based on the descriptions ofthe excavators. As mentioned above, one of theprinciple objectives of this paper is to examinethe internal organization of Valencina by studyingin detail (for the first time) the spatial distributionof the human osteological record. To this end, thecontexts where human remains have been foundhave been grouped into two simple categories:megalithic (basically tholoi) and non-megalithic.

The breakdown of the total skeletal populationof Valencina by sex and age is presented in Ta-bles 3 and 4. In general, this population shows awell balanced distribution of male and female in-dividuals. Also, individuals representing all agegroups are documented, although there is a pre-dominance of adult individuals between 20 and30 years old. It must be kept in mind, however,

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

92 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

EXCAVATION MNI CONT MNI MET SECTOR

Cerro de la Cabeza 1 Tholos 1 HEl Cuervo 1 Silo 0 HLa Alcazaba 7 Silo-shaped 0 HLa Candelera - Emisora 2 Ditch 9 HLa Cima 2 Oval 0 HLa Gallega 2 Circular 6 HLa Perrera 10 Ditch 3 HMariana Pineda 1 Silo 0 HMirador de Itálica 2 Circular 2 HP.P. Matarrubilla 6 Ditch 13 HDivina Pastora/Señorío de Guzmán 20 Tholos 3 FEl Algarrobillo 16 Circular 2 FEl Roquetito 48 Tholos 5 FLos Cabezuelos 14 Tholos 7 FMatarrubilla 2 Tholos 6 FPlan Parcial 3 1 Tholos 0 FLos Veinte 0 Tholos 3 FLa Pastora ? Tholos 31 FCaño Ronco ? Megalith 13 –Carretera TVE 0 – 1 H

TOTAL 135 105

Tab. 2. Breakdown of the anthropological data used in this study. It includes reference to the minimum number of indi-viduals considered (MNI), type of context in which the remains were found according to the description proposed by theexcavators (CONT MNI), number of metal objects in the area (MET), and the sectors of the settlement as proposed byVargas Jiménez (F: Funerary; H: Habitational).

(3) Individuals younger than 17 years of age (Brothwell1987).

that because of the large number of unidentifiedindividuals there is a relatively large margin oferror (4).

In relation to the context of appearance, thenumber of individuals found in megalithic con-texts is 86 (which represents 63.7 % of the sam-ple total), 15.1 % being female, and 11.6 % male.In non-megalithic contexts, the MNI is 49(36.3 %), with 18.3 % of females and 22.4 % ofmales. In both context types the predominant agegroup is that of 20-30 years (with 11.62 % inmegaliths and 24.4 % in non-megalithic struc-tures). Subadult individuals represent a very

small percentage, only 6.6 % of the total. Thisrepresents an interesting anomaly which could bedue to taphonomic (the deterioration of children’sbones), cultural (the corpses of subadult individu-als were subjected to burial practices that left novisible archeological remains) or epistemological(deficiencies in the observation and archaeologi-cal study of the site) causes. Due to the lack ofstudies of physical anthropology in the recordfrom Valencina de la Concepción, there is still avery high rate of indetermined individuals, some66.2 % in megalithic contexts and 34.6 % innon-megalithic.

The funerary ritual documented in Valencinaconsists primarily, although not exclusively, incollective inhumation, with successive deposi-tions of human remains in the same containerover extensive periods of time, as has been do-cumented in El Roquetito (Murillo Díaz et al.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 93

SECTORFEMALE MALE

S A?

TOTAL20-30 30-45 >45 A YA 20-30 30-45 >45 A ? 30-45

Matarrubilla 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2Los Cabezuelos 2 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 5 2 14Cerro de la Cabeza 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1El Roquetito 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 48Divina Pastora-Señorío de Guzmán 3 1 0 3 1 3 3 0 0 5 0 1 0 20Norte Castilleja 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Total 5 1 0 6 1 5 5 0 0 6 0 55 2 86

Tab. 3. Distribution of sex and age in megalithic funerary contexts.Abbreviations: (A): Adult; (YA): Young Adult; (S): Subadult; (?): Undetermined.

SITEFEMALE MALE

S A?

TOTAL20-30 30-45 >45 A YA 20-30 30-45 >45 A ? 20-30 30-45

El Algarrobillo 2 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 2 0 4 0 3 0 16La Alcazaba 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 2 0 7La Cima 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2La Gallega 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2La Perrera 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 0 10P.P. Matarrubilla 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 6El Cuervo 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1Mirador de Itálica 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2Mariana Pineda 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1La Candelera-Emisora 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2

Total 3 0 1 3 2 4 0 0 7 3 9 12 5 0 49

Tab. 4. Distribution of sex and age in non-megalithic funerary contexts.Abbreviations: (A): Adult; (YA): Young Adult; (S): Subadult; (?): Undetermined.

(4) The high rate of indeterminate individuals is due to twofactors: 1) the high degree of fragmentation which prevents thecomplete determination of sex or age; and 2) the absence of de-tailed anthropological data in some publications, which onlymention the MNI.

1990). To date no cases have been found of par-tial cremations of the type increasingly associatedwith Neolithic and Copper Age communities inthe southwestern part of the Iberian Peninsula(Weiss-Krejci 2005). Nor are there documentedcases of individual burial containers of cist or pittype, which from the end of the 3rd and early 2ndmillennia cal BC are common in other regions ofthe Iberian southwest (5). This observation is po-tentially interesting for the study of the culturalcontinuity (or, conversely, lack of discontinuity)that it suggests within this particular community.Nonetheless, probable examples have been iden-tified of the reuse of collective inhumation for in-dividualized burials, as is the case withinSepultura A (tholos) in the Los Cabezuelos sec-tor, as described below.

2.2. Metal objects and metallurgy

The data on the metal objects considered inthis study come from a synthesis carried out re-cently (6) which incorporates various sources, in-cluding reports published in the Anuario Arqueo-lógico de Andalucía (on excavations carried outup to the year 2004), two monographs that pro-vide the results of archaeometric studies andwhich derive from two doctoral theses (Hunt Or-tiz 2003; Bayona Rodríguez 2008), the ‘cartaarqueológica’ of the site (Vargas Jiménez 2004),as well as other articles in specialized scientificjournals.

Currently there are 105 metal artefacts re-corded from the prehistoric settlement of Valen-cina. This tally includes the 29 javelin pointsfound outside of the tholos of La Pastora, whichvarious studies (Almagro Basch 1962; MonteroRuiz and Teneishvili 1996; Mederos Martín2000) agree in dating to the Early Bronze Age(i.e. roughly after c. 2200/2100 cal BC), that is tosay, in later phase of the settlement’s occupation.Although their morphology, quantity, and appar-ent context of their deposition make these metalobjects exceptional, and although there are

doubts about whether they are indeed contempo-raneous with the deposits of Copper Age metalsin the settlement (as well as on the reliability ofthe records on the circumstances and context ofthe discovery), given that the currently availableC-14 dates of Valencina span the first centuries ofthe 2nd millennium cal BC, the decision has beenmade to include these items in this study.

Although no study has yet analyzed and as-sessed all the available information from a globaland multidisciplinary perspective, the Valencinade la Concepción collection of metal objects isone of the most important of the Copper Age insouthern Iberia, after those from Cerro del Ahor-cado (Puente Genil, Córdoba), which includes171 artefacts (although the site has never beenexcavated), and from La Pijotilla (Badajoz), with142 objects. Other settlements in the Southwestthat can serve for comparison have smaller quan-tities of items, as is the case of Cabezo Juré(Alosno, Huelva), with 54 artefacts, El Acebu-chal (Carmona, Seville), with 43, Santa Justa (Al-coutim), with 42, Perdigôes (Reguengos de Mon-saraz, Évora), with 19, El Amarguillo II (LosMolares, Seville), with 7, and Carmona (Seville),with 4. In the recount conducted by I. MonteroRuiz (1994), Los Millares (Santa Fe de Mon-dújar, Almería) had 96 artefacts and Almizaraquec. 90 (7).

For their analysis, the Valencina metal objectshave been divided into groups according to a gen-eralized functional classification similar to thatproposed by I. Montero Ruiz (1994) in his studyof prehistoric metallurgy in southeastern Iberia.This classification includes five categories: tools,tool-weapons, weapons, ornaments and artefactsof indeterminate function. The “tool-weapons”category includes objects such as arrowheads,daggers and axes, i.e. those devices that could beused for both domestic and productive purposesand for war or ideological purposes (social pres-tige) (Montero Ruiz 1994). The javelin pointsfrom La Pastora have been classified as “weap-ons” because it seems unlikely that they weremanufactured for purely domestic or utilitarianpurposes (e.g. for hunting) and they are uniqueartefacts (perhaps designed with a strong ideolog-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

94 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

(5) Various Early Bronze Age cist cemeteries, for which ra-diocarbon dates are available (Tab. 1), have been found withinthe province of Seville (Fernández Gómez et al. 1976; GarcíaSanjuán 1998; Hunt Ortiz et al. 2009).

(6) Costa Caramé, M.E. 2008: Las Producciones Metálicasdel III y II milenios cal ANE en el Suroeste de España. Trabajode Investigación para la obtención del DEA. Seville. Universi-dad de Sevilla. Unpublished.

(7) In the case of Almizaraque, which was excavated atgreat length, L. Siret mentioned 70 objects, to which must be ad-ded 20 from more recent digs, although I. Montero Ruiz (1994)was only able to identify 42, including those from recent exca-vations.

ical significance, and probably as objects of pres-tige). The sheets of copper and amorphous copperobjects have been included in the category of“artefacts of indeterminate function,” but we willreturn to this issue later.

In terms of metallurgical production, the firststudy of the settlement of Valencina de la Con-cepción was that made by M. Hunt Ortiz, accord-ing to which the Copper Age metallurgy of thesouthwestern Iberian Peninsula was generallycharacterized by a limited scale and technologicaldevelopment (Hunt Ortiz 2003: 303). Reductionof ores would have been carried out by means ofcrucible-furnaces, in which there would be a par-tial reduction, while globules of copper would betrapped in the slag, and the destruction of the slagwas required in order to recover these nodules ofmetal (Rovira Llorens and Ambert 2002). Thisrather crude and inefficient process suggests thatthis activity would not have been carried out byfull-time specialists, but may haven been insteada domestic activity spread across more or lessspecialized (part-time) members of the commu-nity (Hunt Ortiz 2003: 378). In terms of its tech-nological characteristics and the socio-economicorganization of production, the metallurgical pro-duction at Valencina would not have differedmuch from that documented in other settlementsof southern Iberia.

The excavations carried out recently at thePlan Parcial Matarrubilla site, revealed a largenumber of crucibles, crucible-furnaces, slag andminerals, as well as metal artefacts that have beenincluded in a recent doctoral dissertation andhave been studied by archaeometric techniques(Rodríguez Bayona 2008). In this area, semi-un-derground structures that contained slag and min-erals were found, and they have been interpretedas furnaces (Nocete Calvo et al. 2007). The pro-posed metal production for this area is above oneton, a figure based on the estimated number ofcrucibles in use (which itself is derived from thenumber of crucible fragments) and the number oftimes these crucibles may have been re-utilised(Nocete Calvo et al. 2007: 728).

3. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

3.1. Objectives

Based on the data described in the precedingsection, an analysis with the aim of examining the

organization of space within the settlement ofValencina de la Concepción has been conducted.This objective can be divided into two more spe-cific ones. The first is to determine the validity ofthe conventional spatial division between a do-mestic-productive sector in the north and a funer-ary sector in the south. The second objective is toinvestigate the degree of functional specializationof space within this prehistoric community, bothin economic and social terms, specifically in rela-tion to metallurgical production and the use anddeposition of metal objects. On a methodologicallevel, the productive and/or functional specializa-tion of space, the existence of significant differ-ences in the size and nature of domestic struc-tures and the presence of “social zoning,” areparameters usually considered to be of relevancein the archaeological analysis of the emergence ofhighly hierarchical, stratified and state-like soci-eties (Haas 1982: 107; Brown 1987: 233; Smith1987: 298; Hendon 1991: 895; González Marcénet al. 1992: 142; Wason 1994: 135, etc.).

The methods of data analysis used to examinethese two problems include both conventionaland spatial statistical tests, which are commonlyused in current archaeological research, such asdensity analysis, �2 test, nearest neighbour analy-sis, and Moran’s I test for spatial autocorrelation– see discussions in Hodder and Orton 1976;Pinder et al. 1979; MacNutt 1981; Blankholm1991; Shennan 1992; Wheatley and Gillings2002. It should be borne in mind that, given thelack of a truly accurate cartography of the archae-ological contexts in which the osteological andmetal evidence analyzed here was found, themain spatial reference for their geo-referencingare the land plot polygons where the excavationswere carried out (Fig. 3). In other words, the spa-tial analysis presented below uses the centroids ofthe excavation polygons to locate the contextsand items referred to. Therefore, all the referencepoints considered in this spatial analysis have amargin of error which in principle is undeter-mined, but which in any case is not more than afew tens of metres.

3.2. Results

Regarding the first of the aims stated above,analysis of MNI/m2 density shows that humanosteological material appears distributed through-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 95

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

96 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Fig. 3a. Map of the distribution of the sites excavated in the settlement of Valencina de la Concepción.

Fig. 3b. Map of the distribution of the funerary contexts of Valencina de la Concepción considered in this study. In pa-rentheses is the MNI verified in the excavation (not the MNI of a specific context).

Fig. 3c. Map of distribution of the archaeometallurgical evidence from Valencina de la Concepción considered in thiswork. In brackets is the count of artifacts from each excavation and the crosses indicate the presence of remains of slag.

out the entire area of the settlement (Figs. 3B and4, Tab. 2). While in the southern sector, conven-tionally known as the “necropolis,” a greaternumber of individuals (MNI = 101) has beenfound, the number recorded in the northern sector(the “domestic” or “productive” area) is not at allnegligible (MNI = 34). Within the northern sec-tor, the contexts in which human remains havebeen identified were described by their excava-tors as a “silo” (Mariana Pineda and El Cuervo),“silo-shaped structure” (La Alcazaba), a “ditch”(La Perrerea) a “pit” (La Candelera-La Emisoraand Plan Parcial Matarrubilla), and an “under-ground structure” with an oval or circular layout(La Cima, La Gallega and Mirador de Italica). Inthis study, these contexts are grouped under theheading “non-megalithic.” The northern sector ofthe settlement does however include at least onemegalithic structure: the tholos of Cerro de laCabeza. Within this group of contexts, the largestnumbers of individuals were found at the “ditch”of La Perrera (10), the “silo-shaped” structure ofLa Alcazaba (7) and the “pit” of the Plan ParcialMatarrubilla (6). In the southern part of the settle-ment (or “necropolis”), human remains appearpredominantly in megalithic constructions. Al-though the number of these contexts is compara-tively smaller (6), some yielded larger numbersof individuals, especially El Roquetito (48), Di-vina Pastora (20), El Algarrobillo (16), and Los

Cabezuelos (14). It is also worth mentioning thatamong the 6 deposits of human osteological ma-terial identified within this sector, at least one isnon-megalithic (El Algarrobillo) (8).

Nearest neighbour analysis of the 16 datapoints with osteological deposits results in a near-est neighbour index of 1.61, which suggests thatthe distribution tends to a dispersed spatial pat-tern (9). Applied to assess the spatial distributionof MNI, Moran’s I test produces a value of –0.16,an expected index of –0.06 and a Z score of–0.27, which with a significance level of 0.05,suggests a random distribution of points (10). Asa result of these two tests, it appears that the dis-tribution pattern of osteological deposits in Va-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 97

Fig. 4. Map of the density of the skeletal population (MNI) of the settlement ofValencina de la Concepción.

(8) This is debatable, however. El Algarrobillo (whichcomprises the third largest osteological deposit of the site) is lo-cated in between the two conventionally differentiated sectorsfor this settlement. Unfortunately, the only available publicationof the excavation (Santana Falcón 1993) does not specify inwhich part of the area the structures were found, so in this case itwas decided to do away with the centroid and locate the data-point in the extreme South of the excavated area, within the “fu-nerary sector” because this is the best option for reinforcing theaccepted conventional assumption that we are testing.

(9) The nearest neighbour index is the ratio of the observeddistance over the expected distance and is expressed betweenzero for perfect clustering and 2.149 for a perfectly dispersedpattern.

(10) The Moran’s I tests calculated for the centroids of landparcels have been compared with those of the land plot poly-gons, in order to avoid the possibility of the results being a sta-tistical artefact of the chosen data structure.

lencina is between random and scattered, but inno case concentrated, which runs counter to thevery notion of a “necropolis” properly so called –see further discussion of this particular point be-low.

In examining the distribution of osteologicaldeposits in relation to context types, it has alreadybeen stated that the funerary population is higher

in megalithic (MNI = 86) than in non-megalithiccontexts (MNI = 49). Beyond this, however, thereappears to be little pattern to the distribution ofthe population in burial contexts. Table 5 showsthe distribution of individuals according to sex(left), and age (right) across the two contexttypes. Although females and subadults are mar-ginally more frequent in megaliths, the �2 statistic

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

98 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Fig. 5. Map of the density of the skeletal population of the settlement ofValencina de la Concepción by basic age groups.

Fig. 6. Map of the density of the skeletal population of the settlement ofValencina de la Concepción by sex.

indicates that neither of these are significant atthe 0.05 level or even at the 0.1 level. These re-sults can be compared with those from the Mo-ran’s I test, which suggests that the spatial distri-bution of the burials does not significantlydeviate from randomness however they are clas-sified (Tab. 6).

With regard to metal objects, in principle, fol-lowing the conventional division of the settle-ment in two sectors (a division which for the sakeof argument is followed here), 57 (54 %) of the105 metal objects were recovered in the southernpart of the settlement (the “necropolis”), while 48(46 %) were found in the northern sector (the do-mestic-productive area). The analysis of theirspatial density (Fig. 7) shows that there are threemain concentrations. The first is to the north,where the excavations carried out at La Gallega,Candelera, and La Emisora revealed a total of 15objects, to which one more, from the nearbytholos at Cerro de la Cabeza, can be added. Thesecond is in the central part of the settlement, in

the space enclosed by the megalithic structures ofLa Pastora (29 objects), Matarrubilla (6) El Ro-quetito (5), Los Cabezuelos (7) and Los Viente(3), to which the findings in the metallurgicalzone (in the domestic sector) of the Plan Parcialde Matarrubilla (13) must be added. Finally, thethird is to the south, about 1300 meters awayfrom the settlement, at the dolmen of CañoRonco, where 13 objects were found. When thesedata are analyzed in terms of the weight of ob-jects (Fig. 8), the result is very similar, with theonly difference that the maximum values are ob-tained in the second of the concentrations de-scribed above, right in the area between the fu-nerary and domestic sectors of the settlement(indeed, occupying parts of both), because of thestrong quantitative effect of the javelin points ofLa Pastora.

At the same time, with regard to the context ofdeposition, the number of objects found in con-texts with human remains (both megalithic andnon-megalithic) is 68 (65 %), while in those in-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 99

GENDER MEGALITHICNON-

MEGALITHICAGE MEGALITHIC

NON-

MEGALITHIC

FEMALE 13 9 ADULTS 23 29MALE 10 11 SUBADULTS 6 3

Result: 0.57 Result: 1.54Critical value: 3.84 (at 0.05) or 2.7 (at 0.1) for 1 degree

of freedomCritical value: 3.84 (at 0.05) or 2.7 (at 0.1) for 1 degree

of freedom

Tab. 5. �2 test for the MNI in megalithic and non-megalithic funerary contexts according to the sex and age of the popula-

tion.

AGE MORAN’S INDEX Z SCORE PATTERN

ADULTS –0.77 –1.66 RandomSUBADULTS 0.03 0.26 RandomUNDETERMINED 0.009 0.39 Random

GENDER MORAN’S INDEX Z SCORE PATTERN

FEMALE –0.2 0.35 RandomMALE –0.6 1.25 RandomUNDETERMINED –0.03 0.11 RandomSUBADULTS 0.03 0.26 Random

Expected index: –0.06Critical values: –1.96 (dispersed) and 1.96 (concentrated) at the 0.05 significance level

Tab. 6. Moran’s I statistics for sex and age of the population.

terpreted as “domestic” 37 (35 %) were found(Tab. 7). These latter percentages are howeverstrongly influenced by the 29 javelin points foundoutside of La Pastora. If these pieces are looselyconsidered “votive” rather than strictly “funer-ary” (there is no evidence that they were associ-ated with human remains), and were removedfrom the count, then the number of objects asso-

ciated with human remains is 39, and the twocounts become almost equal. In assessing theseobjects according to their weight (11), again theresults are quite dependent on the javelin points

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

100 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Fig. 7. Map of the density of metal artefacts in the settlement of Valencina dela Concepción (recount of the objects).

Fig. 8. Map of the density of metal artefacts in the settlement of Valencina dela Concepción (weight).

(11) The estimate of total weight was made by multiplyingthe average weight of each artefact type by the number of themfound.

of La Pastora. If they are considered as part ofa funerary rite, then there is a clear preponder-ance of the metals associated with burial (4.456kg) over those associated with domestic con-texts (1.093 kg) (Tab. 7). Therefore, given thestrong quantitative effect that the 29 javelinpoints have on the total sample in this study, andin order to improve the comparative value of theresults, the statistical tests were performed twice,in one case including them and in the other ex-cluding them.

Taking this into consideration, it is possible tomake some interesting observations with regard

to the spatial distribution of metal objects accord-ing to their basic functional categories (Tab. 7,Fig. 9). Almost all of the metal sets found in con-texts interpreted as “domestic” consist of tools,while in burial contexts there is a greater numberof weapon-tools, and especially of ornaments. Itis particularly interesting that all the gold ar-tefacts found in Valencina appeared in megalithiccontexts. The weight data agree that most of themetal found in domestic contexts was used toproduce tools and weapon-tools, especially axes,which have a comparatively high average weight(250 grams).

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 101

FUNCTIONAL

CATEGORIES

CONTEXTS

NUMBER OF OBJECTS

(COUNT)

WEIGHT OF OBJECTS

(IN GRAMS)

DOMESTIC FUNERARYUNDETER-

MINEDDOMESTIC FUNERARY

UNDETER-

MINED

TOOLS 30 7 0 345,0 72,3 0WEAPON-TOOLS 4 20 0 775,5 2695 0GOLD ORNAMENTS 0 10 0 0 5 0WEAPONS 0 0 29* 0 0 1421*UNDETERMINED 3 2 0 20 10 0

TOTAL 37 39 29 1093,6 2782 1421

Tab. 7. Number of artefacts and quantity of metal according to their function and context.(*) Values for the 29 javelin points of La Pastora.

Fig. 9. Percentage distribution of the functional composition of each group of metal artefacts.

The �2 test can be applied to investigatewhether there are statistically significant differ-ences in the distribution of metal artefact classesbetween different contexts (Tab. 7). Using onlythe primary characterization of the contexts (do-mestic vs. funerary) and excluding the javelinpoints of La Pastora, the calculated �2 (35.14)comfortably exceeds the critical value of 12.84for three degrees of freedom and a confidence in-terval of 0.01. This suggests that there is a signifi-cant pattern by which objects classified as toolstend to appear in domestic contexts, while objectsclassified as weapon-tools and ornaments (all ofthem made of gold) tend to appear in funerarycontexts. If the deposit of javelin points is also in-cluded in this test, an even more robust result of60.26 is obtained, which also exceeds the criticalvalue for four degrees of freedom and a confi-dence interval of 0.01, showing that there is a dif-ference in the distributions of both categories ofartefacts.

The results of the significance test applied tothe distribution of metal objects within burialcontexts (megalithic vs. non-megalithic) areshown in Table 9. In this case, the distribution oftools vs. weapon-tools do not appear to be statis-tically different. However, if the categories of or-naments (gold) and weapons are included, thenthere is a strong statistically significant differ-ence, regardless of whether the La Pastora javelin

points are included, as the ornaments only appearin megalithic contexts.

Spatial statistics were again applied to verifythe existence of specific patterns of clustering ordispersion in the spatial distribution of the metalobjects. First, the nearest neighbor index is 1.41which suggests a random pattern in the spatial dis-tribution of metal artefacts. Moran’s I test, appliedtwice for the reasons explained above (includingand excluding the javelins of La Pastora) indicatethat there is a tendency to randomness in the distri-butions of both the total number of artefacts and inthe total amount of metal (weight) (Tab. 8).

Another significant aspect of the spatial analy-sis of the settlement of Valencina is the evidenceof metallurgical processing that has been found invarious excavations. All sites with evidence ofmetal production are located in the northern sec-tor (the “domestic-productive” sector). Unfortu-nately, the data included in some publicationscannot be compared with those obtained more re-cently in the area of Plan Parcial Matarrubilla,which has been studied in greater depth, becausethose publications fail to include crucial informa-tion such as the weight of the slag or the numberof pots, crucibles and crucible-furnaces found,and do not analyse the materials using archae-ometric techniques. So far, apart from the materi-als found in the area of the Plan Parcial Mata-rrubilla, only a slag fragment that appeared in El

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

102 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

MORAN’S

INDEX

Z SCORE

(EXCLU-

DING

THE

JAVELIN

POINTS)

PATTERNMORAN’S

INDEX

Z SCORE

(INCLU-

DING

THE

JAVELIN

POINTS)

PATTERN

TOTAL NUMBER OF ARTIFACTS –0.12 –0.56 Random –0.03 0.45 RandomAMOUNT OF METAL (GR.) 0.02 1.24 Random 0.06 1.44 RandomTOTAL NUMBER OF TOOLS –0.07 –0.07 Random –0.07 –0.07 RandomTOTAL NUMBER OF WEAPON-TOOLS 0.03 1.11 Random 0.03 1.10 RandomTOTAL NUMBER OF WEAPONS – – – –0.04 0.53 RandomTOTAL NUMBER OF ORNAMENTS –0.09 1.78 Random –0.09 1.78 RandomTOTAL NUMBER OF ARTIFACTS OF

UNKNOWN FUNCTION –0.1 –0.34 Random –0.1 –0.34 Random

Expected index: –0.07 (excluding and including the deposit of javelins)Critical values: –1.96 (dispersed) and 1.96 (concentrated)

Tab. 8. Moran’s I test statistics for the spatial distribution of the metal artefacts. With a confidence interval of 0.05 (95 %probability of certainty) the results above the critical value of 1.96 indicate a clustered spatial pattern, while those belowthe value –1.96 suggests a dispersed pattern.

Algarrobillo had been analyzed (Hunt Ortiz2003: 148). At El Algarrobillo all stages of metal-lurgical production have been documented, al-though it is unknown what relationship couldhave existed between this area and others whereminerals, slag, and slagged ceramics have alsoappeared.

Nearest neighbour analysis of the distributionof the excavations in which metallurgical remainshave appeared gives a nearest neighbour index of1.89, indicating that those remains tend to a dis-persed spatial pattern. With the idea of investigat-ing the possible existence of patterns of spatialconcentration of metallurgical production to-gether with the use/consumption/deposition ofmetal objects (and to examine the theoretical as-sumption that a specific social group might havecontrolled both the process of production and thepossession of the metals), a correlation analysisto investigate the relationship between the size ofthe deposit of objects (by both number andweight) and the linear distance from the depositto the closest place of metal production was con-ducted (Tab. 10). The only slight association thatappeared is that between the amount of metalused and the distance, indicating that in 52 % ofthe documented cases the increase in distance isrelated to an increase in the amount of metalused. This result, which is contrary to the effectone would expect of a concentrated pattern of

production, use, consumption, and/or depositionof metals, is due to the strong effect produced bythe set found at Caño Ronco, which has about 1.6kg of metal and is 2.8 km away from the nearestproductive sector. If the values of this collectionof objects are removed, then a correlation coeffi-cient of 0.1 and a determination coefficient of0.01 is obtained, indicating that the two variablesare independent and thus are not related. There-fore there is no relationship between proximity toa place of production and the size of the deposit(neither according to the number of artefacts, norto the amount of metal used).

3.3. Evaluation

Regarding the first objective of this work, em-pirical analysis shows that in the prehistoric set-tlement at Valencina de la Concepción, there ap-pears to be no pattern of concentration of humanosteological remains that would justify retainingthe notion of a “funerary” sector as opposed to a“domestic” sector. The documented burial prac-tices extend throughout the entire known area ofthe settlement, with no statistically discerniblespatial grouping in the number of individuals bur-ied (size of the osteological deposits), or in thedistribution of the population by sex or age, re-gardless of the morphology of the container andfunerary context.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 103

OBJECTSCONTEXT

MEGALITHIC FUNERARY NON-MEGALITHIC FUNERARY

TOOLS 2 5WEAPON-TOOLS 8 12

Result: 0.29Critical value: 3.84 (at 0.05 for 1 degree of freedom)

TOOLS 2 5WEAPON-TOOLS 8 12GOLD ORNAMENTS 10 0WEAPONS 0/29 0UNDETERMINED 2 0

Result including the javelin points: 34.78Critical value: 9.49 (at 0.05 for 4 degrees of freedom)

Result excluding the javelin points: 13.67Critical value: 7.81 (at 0.05 for 3 degrees of freedom)

Tab. 9. �2 test for the metal artefacts found in funerary contexts (megalithic and non-megalithic) according to their func-

tion.

It is true that, morphologically, most of thecontexts (or ‘containers’) with human remains inthe northern part of the settlement are non-mega-lithic (underground or semi-underground struc-tures), although there is the exception of theCerro de la Cabeza tholos. On the other hand, inthe southern sector (hitherto interpreted as “fu-nerary”), the contexts are predominantly mega-lithic (mainly of the tholos type), although thereare also possible exceptions here, as evidenced bythe excavations in Plan Parcial 3 and El Algarro-billo. This distinction invites investigation of thepossible reasons why in different parts of the set-tlement morphologically different containerswere predominantly (but not exclusively) usedfor human bone deposits, but does not necessarilyjustify to keep the traditionally accepted dichot-omy between a “domestic” and a “funerary” sec-tor. Human bones were deposited all over theknown area of the Valencina settlement.

Regarding the second objective of this study,that is, investigating the degree of functional spe-cialization of space, the analysis again provides a

range of relevant conclusions. On the one hand,broadly speaking, the traditional division of thesettlement into domestic and funerary sectors isnot reflected in the spatial distribution of metal ob-jects, which are distributed fairly regularly anduniformly throughout its surface. Interestingly, thehighest density of metal objects is in the centralpart of the settlement, halfway between the greatmegalithic construction of La Pastora and the PlanParcial de Matarrubilla metallurgical area. Withregard to the contexts in which the metal objectswere found, if we remove from the sample the jav-elin points of La Pastora, the number of thosefound in megalithic burials (22 among El Roque-tito, Los Viente, Los Cabezuelos, Matarrubilla, Se-ñorío de Guzman and Caño Ronco) and non-me-galithic burials (18 among the deposits ofCandelera/La Emisora, La Gallega, El Algarro-billo and PP Matarrubilla) are almost even.

On the other hand, however, there are someindications of possible underlying patterns. The�2 test suggested that there is a significant trendto objects classified as tools to appear more fre-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

104 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

NameDistance from the closest

productive zone (m)Number of artifacts

Estimation of weight

(gr.)

El Algarrobillo 0 2 18La Gallega 0 6 292La Candelera 0 9 104Plan Parcial Matarrubilla 0 13 384La Perrera, Corte C 0 3 52Carretera a TVE 99 1 No dataEl Mirador Itálica 115 2 28Cerro de la Cabeza 413 1 250El Roquetito 434 5 778La Pastora 653 31 1422Matarrubilla 715 6 25Los Veinte 753 3 1Los Cabezuelos 904 7 119Divina Pastora/ Señorío Guzmán 1260 3 264Caño Ronco 2862 13 1593

TOTAL – 105 5545

Correlation

Coefficient

Correlation

Coefficient

Distance (m)/num. artifacts 0.24 0.05Distance (m)/weight artifacts 0.63 0.39Num. artifacts/quantity of metal 0.73 0.53

Tab. 10. Distance from areas with metal artefacts to areas with remains of metallurgical production and estimate theamount of metal used in their manufacture (including the deposit of javelin points of La Pastora).

quently in domestic contexts, while objects clas-sified as weapon-tools and ornaments (all of themmade of gold) tend to appear in funerary contexts.This could in principle be interpreted as suggest-ing that some specific artefact types are selectedas grave goods over others. The indications of apossible underlying patterning in the way someartefact types were used and/or deposited in spe-cific contexts suggest the possibility that someartefact types conveyed a stronger ideologicaland sociological significance than others. This isplausible within the context of 3rd and 2nd mil-lennia Iberian societies where certain metal ob-jects are increasingly valued as status markers, al-though the available empirical record for theValencina funerary practices is far from unambig-uous – see further discussion below. On the otherhand, the significance test applied to metal ob-jects within burial contexts showed that thedistribution of tools vs. weapon-tools is not statis-tically different between megalithic vs. non-me-galithic contexts, which suggests than being bur-ied in a ditch or a megalith made no difference interms of how likely a person was to get a certaintype of tool as a grave good. In fact, moreweapon-tools have been found in non-megalithic(12) than in megalithic contexts (8).

This whole discussion is complicated by vari-ous factors. First, weapon-tool objects are diffi-cult to interpret in terms of the social and ideo-logical prestige they may have conveyed.Second, other than the 29 javeling points of LaPastora (and there is no evidence that they wereused as funerary goods), there are in Valencina noartefacts that qualify within the definition of‘weapon’ used here. As mentioned earlier, it isalso difficult to assign a function to gold objects,which are small and often fragmented. It has beenclaimed that they could have been attached toclothing as personal accessories (Montero Ruiz1994). We must note, however, that in other sitesthey are often associated with (or even attachedto) portable plaques or figurines (12). Assumingthat gold objects had a particularly high ideologi-cal significance related to the expression of thesacred, then it makes sense that they were linked

to figurines (that perhaps represented gods) andplaced inside megalithic monuments, which arethe most architecturally elaborate and costlystructures of the site.

In relation to metallurgical processing, spatialanalysis shows that this activity was carried outthroughout the northern part of the settlement.While it is true that the production activity docu-mented in the area of the Plan Parcial Matarrubi-lla is significantly larger in scale and volume, thespatial distribution of the remains of slag knownso far shows a relatively large spatial amplitude(which is also true of the distribution of the metalartefacts), which suggests that this productioncould have taken place in a dispersed and notconcentrated way.

Overall, the demographic and archaeometal-lurgical evidence considered in this study inviteus to rethink ideas about the spatial organizationof the prehistoric community of Valencina de laConcepción. Rather than as a settlement with asharply dual space, whereby one sector was occu-pied by the living (“domestic/productive” sector)and one by the dead (“funerary” sector), the Va-lencina site should be understood as a large spaceof occupation and use in which various functionsand activities (productive, domestic, funerary andvotive) overlapped, both in space and in time, ac-cording to complex patterns which at this timeare not yet fully understood. The archaeologicalrecord of the northern half of the Valencina sectorreminds us of Richard Bradley’s claim that Euro-pean Neolithic society was permeated by ances-tor’s cult (Bradley 1998: 66), something thatseems to hold true for quite a significant numberof southern Iberian ditched enclosures of the 3rdmillennium BC, where deposits of human re-mains are consistently found in ditches and pitslike those of Valencina de la Concepción (Díazdel Río 2008: 136; Márquez Romero and JiménezJáimez 2008: 165).

At least two major implications emerge fromhere. On the one hand, there is a need to handlewith care (and even revise) some of the func-tional interpretations that have been made of theunderground and semi-underground features, ac-cording to which they are almost always labelledas “domestic” or “habitational” despite the factthat in many cases they include significant struc-tured deposits of human remains. The usual de-scriptions of these structures in the excavation re-ports by terms such as “hut floors” (fondos de

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 105

(12) This is true of the fragmented gold foil rectangle deco-rated with eye motifs of the tholos of Las Canteras (Seville)(Hurtado Pérez and Amores Carredano 1984: 164), the idol witha “belt” of gold of Marroquíes Bajos (Jaen) (Cámara Serrano etal. in press), and the idol of Logrosán (Cáceres), made of silver(Hunt and Ortiz Hurtado Pérez 1999: 267).

cabaña), “silos,” “dumps,” “pits,” or “trenches”carry implicit functional readings which are quitea priori, and are not based on detailed studies ofthe stratigraphy and the deposits of artefacts andremains of plants and/or animals. Recent reviewsof such contexts in settlements of the 4th and 3rdmillennia BC in southern Iberia suggests thatcaution must be applied when assigning singlefunctions to these contexts, since in many cases, athorough review of their morphological charac-teristics and/or stratigraphical deposits has madepossible alternative interpretations (Márquez Ro-mero 2002; 2006; 2008; Jiménez Jáimez andMárquez Romero 2008; Márquez Romero andJiménez Jáimez 2008). In addition, overtly sim-plistic classifications also ignore the possibilitythat the function and meaning of such structuresmay have changed through time. A number of re-cently identified contexts in the prehistoric settle-ment of El Seminario (Huelva), which have mor-phology and dimensions similar to those usuallyinterpreted as “silos” or “dumps” in the excava-tions of Valencina, contained deposits of ideolog-ical artefacts of high symbolic value (cylindricalidols, sacred stones, etc.) (González González etal. 2008), so clearly in this case its function wasnot (or at least not ultimately) to store staplegoods or to serve as dumps of waste. The vari-ability of the deposits found in semi-undergroundand underground contexts such as El Algarrobillosuggests that reliable functional interpretationscannot be made solely on the basis of observa-tions made in situ, and without proper evaluationof the evidence available from study of the site’santhropology, archaeofauna, sedimentology,chronology, and so on.

Given that in the case of Valencina de laConcepción, the vast majority of these structureshave been found as a result of “rescue excava-tions,” and that none has been subjected to a care-ful post-excavation analysis focused on its sedi-ments, fauna, micro-stratigraphy, etc. (andtaphonomy, ultimately), it would be advisable tosuspend judgment on their specific function untilmore and better evidence is available, and there-fore to use in field descriptions (and in subse-quent publications) designations based on mor-phology and not on their (alleged) uses andfunctions, thus avoiding much confusion.

On the other hand, the successive generationswho occupied Valencina de la Concepción in the3rd millennium cal BC seem to have shared cul-

tural patterns that, at least in part, were differentfrom those that have been identified in settle-ments of the same period located in other Iberianregions. The well-defined spatial demarcation be-tween an area dedicated to domestic activities(housing, workshops, etc.) and another dedicatedto burial practices that occurs in a site like LosMillares deviates considerably from what isfound in Valencina de la Concepción. No funer-ary deposits in non-megalithic structures (likethose which are abundant in Valencina) have everbeen found in Los Millares. The physical demar-cation of the perimeter of the settlement by awalled enclosure, as found in Los Millares and inmany other settlements of the 3rd millennium calBC, is absent in Valencina de la Concepción,which suggests a significant variability of pat-terns in the organization of the settlement space.In other words, the social and cultural tradition ofwhich the human community of Valencina de laConcepción was part presents a number of pecu-liarities, which suggest that, within the societiesthat occupied southern Iberia during the CopperAge, there may have been a significant variabilityin the strategies of organization and specializa-tion of space (and therefore, in the social struc-ture) that is in danger of passing unnoticed if thecomplexities and nuances of the available archae-ological record are not properly taken into ac-count.

4. DISCUSSION

4.1. Demographics

Judging by its wide extension (estimated be-tween 300 and 400 ha), it is tempting to assumethat the community that lived in Valencina duringthe Copper Age was accordingly large (13).However, the interpretation of this indicator is notconclusive for several reasons. In the first place,the absolute chronology currently available is in-sufficient to completely rule out the possibilitythat the extent of the space occupied corre-sponded to a sequence of occupation and usesover time, rather than a single large village with asteady population. Second, in light of our re-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

106 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

(13) The specialized archaeological and anthropological li-terature accepts a general positive correspondence between de-mographic scale and social complexity.

search it is difficult to establish a clear delinea-tion of the area of strictly domestic use (e.g. interms of households and production) and to eval-uate it in terms of population. Third, even if it isaccepted that it represents only a fraction of thetotal original population, the MNI of 135 individ-uals obtained from the documented skeletal pop-ulation does not seem to keep a proportion withthe extension ascribed to the settlement - for anestimated period of occupation of more than amillennium. In this regard, it should be kept inmind that in just one tomb (number 40) at LosMillares (Almería), the remains of 114 personswere identified (100 in the chamber and 14 in thecorridor) (Molina González and Cámara Serrano2009), and that in Tomb 3 of La Pijotilla (Bada-joz), around 300 individuals were found (HurtadoPérez et al. 2002: 254).

Overall, the results of this study suggest thatValencina was an area of occupation and use withcomplex patterns of evolution in space and timethat must be interpreted only on the basis of goodquality data. The possibility of a direct correla-tion between its estimated extension and the sizeand complexity of its human contingent must beassessed with caution.

4.2. Organization and functionalspecialization of space

Spatial zoning into physically separatedgroups and the specialization of productive facili-ties are two indicators commonly associated withthe emergence of highly hierarchical, stratified,and state-like societies in prehistory. None of theevidence used in this study suggests the existenceof social zoning in Valencina, in the sense thatsuch zoning exists, for example, in some later(basically Bronze Age and Iron Age) Europeancommunities, where an elite appears spatiallysegregated from the rest of the communitythrough an organization of space that includesphysical barriers (acropolis, walled enclosures,ways of access, etc.) and significant differencesin the size and complexity of housing. The linearstructures (“pits” and “trenches’) found in Valen-cina could hypothetically have played a boundaryrole within the settlement, but given the difficul-ties already identified in the available archaeo-logical record, at the present time it is impossibleto prove or disprove such a point. In this regard, it

is worth noting the remarkable absence at Valen-cina of the walled enclosures which are commonin other villages of the 3rd millennium in south-ern Iberia. Similarly, the distribution of osteo-logical deposits and metal objects suggests thatgreat prudence must be observed before trying toidentify functionally specialized areas. Both met-allurgical wastes and metal objects found show abroad pattern of spatial distribution without sta-tistically significant concentrations. In addition,the available radiocarbon dates do not excludethe possibility that the documented metallurgicalproduction occurred over a long period of time.

4.3. Scale of the metallurgical production

Valencina has yielded one of the largest col-lections of Copper Age metal artefacts identifiedto date in Iberia, as well as significant evidence ofmetal production. In general terms, this suggestsan important dynamic of metallurgical productionand consumption. In order to assess the scale ofproduction in relative terms, however, two factorsmust be noted. First that Valencina is one of themost (if not the most) intensively excavated pre-historic sites of Iberia. Second, the difference ofthe metal collection with respect to other contem-porary settlements (e.g. Los Millares), is not pro-portionate to the size (i.e. area) that is generallyascribed to Valencina. In other words, given theextent generally ascribed to Valencina, a muchgreater difference between its numbers and vol-ume of metal objects and those found in othercontemporary sites would be expected.

In connection with the scale of metallurgy, ithas already been mentioned that a recent studyhas suggested that the figure of metal productionfor the Plan Parcial de Matarrubilla site is aboveone ton. This figure, based on the number of cru-cible fragments found, the estimated number ofcrucibles in use and the number of times thesecrucibles may have been re-utilised, is in sharpcontrast with the amount of metal represented bythe 105 metal objects documented throughout thesettlement, which according to our estimationweigh 5.29 kg. (Tab. 5). Ideally, the theoreticalnumber of metal objects existing in Valencinamay one day be extrapolated from the total exca-vated area. Unfortunately, the currently availableliterature does not provide data of sufficient qual-ity to estimate the total area of the settlement that

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 107

has been excavated. Methodologically, however,an estimate based on documented objects is morereliable than one that, departing from a count ofcrucible fragments infers a total number of cruci-bles and then the number of their re-uses – twoinferences that necessarily rely on a particular in-terpretation of the nature of the smelting process.This is more so because the Plan Parcial de Mata-rrubilla publication does not include archaeome-tric analysis of the slags and slagged potteries(claimed to be furnaces), which makes it impossi-ble to create a productivity model of the smeltingprocess such as that proposed by I. Montero Ruizfor some sites of the Iberian South-East (MonteroRuiz 1994: 233). In addition, it should be notedthat the proposed amount of metal smelted atPlan Parcial de Matarrubilla seems all the lessplausible when considered at a broader regionallevel: the total number of metal objects attributedto the Copper Age (a period conventionally ac-cepted as covering the period c. 3300/3200-2200/2100 cal BP) found in the entire SpanishSouth-West (including the provinces of Cadiz,Cordoba, Seville, Huelva and Badajoz) is 758,which represents an estimated weight of 48.21 kgof metal (14).

On the other hand, it has been claimed that themetallurgical production taking place at Valen-cina during the first half of the 3rd millenniumwould have had a significant environmental im-pact, including deforestation and pollution withheavy metals at local and regional levels through-out western Andalusia (Nocete Calvo 2004: 339;Nocete Calvo et al. 2007). According to conven-tionally accepted estimates, producing 1 kg ofcopper with the technological conditions prevail-ing in the 3rd millennium BC would have re-quired the use of 16 kg of charcoal, made from112 kg of wood, which can be obtained from thetrunk of a single pine tree about 100 years oldgrown in not-too-fertile soils (Montero Ruiz1994: 303). The total amount of copper metalcurrently documented in Valencina in the form ofobjects could therefore have been processed withthe use of 6 pines. If, however, this documentedvolume of metal is increased by a factor of 1000(and let us note that far more than a thousandth

part of the site has been excavated), then the re-sulting amount of metal would have required theburning of about 6000 pine trees, which, for a pe-riod of about 1000 years (and the occupation ofValencina could have been even longer), wouldhave meant an average of about 6 pines per yearin the period under consideration. Increasing themetal production by a factor of 100,000 wouldnot yield a significantly different result. Unless itcan be demonstrated that the whole metallurgicalproduction involved took place over a relativelyshort period of time, the impact caused by suchexploitation of the environment can hardly bequalified as deforestation. Considering the abovementioned weight of all objects recorded at a re-gional level (48.21 kg) divided by 1000 years andmultiplied by the above-mentioned factor of1000, the trees needed to process the metal wouldhave meant, at most, the deforestation of an areaof 0.5 ha per year, which, within a territory of67,198 km2 (i.e. more than 6.5 million hectares)that includes major wetlands and forests, repre-sents a negligible environmental impact.

As the above discussion suggests, diverginginterpretations about the scale of metallurgicalproduction at Valencina are possible dependingon the type of evidence that is selected for analy-sis. The claim that the metal found in the excava-tion of Plan Parcial Matarrubilla represents an“optimized industrial production” that wouldhave caused a major environmental impact is notin accordance with the evidence considered inthis study and must be carefully pondered withina broader regional and technological context, es-pecially in light of the complexity and diversityof the methodological problems presented by thearchaeological investigation of environmentalpollution (Montero Ruiz et al. 2007: 36).

4.4. Labour investment in monumentalarchitecture

Social complexity often shows a positivecovariation with the extension and generalizationof monumental buildings of a public, funeraryand ritual character. In the case of Valencina, nomajor stone structures, such as terraces, platformsor walls, which are known in numerous settle-ments of the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC, were evererected. However, large “ditch” structures, whichdid require significant investments of labour are

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

108 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

(14) Costa Caramé, M.E. 2008: Las Producciones Metáli-cas del III y II milenios cal ANE en el Suroeste de España. Tra-bajo de Investigación para la obtención del DEA. Seville. Uni-versidad de Sevilla. Unpublished.

present. They may have delineated enclosed areasto some extent similar to those found at the settle-ment of Marroquíes Bajos, further up the Gua-dalquivir valley (Zafra de la Torre et al. 1999,2003). As already mentioned, however, there isno published cartography of these structures thatwould allow reliable estimates of their size, de-velopment and cost (an interesting discussion ofthis problem in relation to the Valencian Neo-lithic can be found in Bernabéu Aubán et al. 2006and Orozco Köhler et al. 2008).

The largest monumental works so far docu-mented in Valencina de la Concepción are un-doubtedly its megaliths, some of which (Matarru-billa, La Pastora and Montelirio) are among thelargest and most elaborate of southern Iberia. Asan indicator of social complexity and hierarchyamong societies from the 5th to the 2nd millenniacal BC, megalithic structures must be assessedwithin a broader system of empirical indicatorsthat includes also the analysis of settlements. Be-ginning in the 5th millennium cal BC there existall along the European Atlantic seaboard greatmegalithic constructions that are associated withvery simple settlements with little or no evidenceof hierarchy or social or political stratification,such as defensive architecture, specialized inter-nal organization, social zoning, funerary stratifi-cation, etc. This is the case, for example, of Ave-bury (Wiltshire, United Kingdom), the largestmonumentalized space of the Late Prehistory ofWestern Europe. Built between the 4th and 3rdmillennia, Avebury consists of a henge typestructure of c. 500 m in diameter, enclosed byditches and embankments of up to 10 metres indepth and height, of various circles of hugestones and two great avenues of access and sev-eral kilometres in length which are flanked bymenhirs (Smith 1965, Pollard and Reynolds2002). In its environment there is a group ofmegalithic burial chambers which include someof the largest examples known in the British Isles,like for example West Kennet Barrow. Despitethe large amount of research conducted at themonument itself (Gillings et al. 2008) and in itssurroundings (Evans et al. 1993), the only placesof habitation so far documented are a few smalland irregular pits, and dispersions of lithic mate-rial, while settlements of an obviously permanentcharacter are completely unknown, and there areno domestic structures (e.g. huts) bounded bywalls or ditches. One could speak in similar terms

of the settlements associated with other enormousmegalithic constructions of the 4th to 2nd millen-nia, such as Newgrange (Ireland) and Stonehenge(United Kingdom). In other words, the existenceof large-scale megalithic construction does not byitself demonstrate the presence of a high degreeof social hierarchy within a given prehistoriccommunity, much less that the megalithic monu-ments were appropriated by the elites within a co-ercion-based state system. Each specific casemust be assessed within its own cultural and so-cial terms, and of course starting from the factthat megalithic sites were built and used oververy long periods of time during which societiesevolved and their characteristics changed.

In this context, an interesting indicator is ofcourse the duality that is found in Valencina be-tween the non-megalithic and megalithic burialcontainers. Since the latter imply a higher cost oflabour and increased energy expenditure, it hasbeen suggested that their construction and usemay have been linked to an elite (wealthy buri-als), while the former, since they are much moresimple in their construction, were linked to therest of the population (poor burials) (15). Unfor-tunately, data on the specific burial practices ineach type of container have not yet been fully ex-amined, so there is a fundamental lack of knowl-edge about issues that are key to a sociologicalinterpretation of burial practices, such as the as-sociations between human remains and gravegoods. Nonetheless, the data on demographics(number of burials and categories of sex and age)and metal production collected in this study donot reveal significant differences between the twocategories of burial containers, except in regardto the ornaments manufactured of gold leaf,which, as mentioned above, seem to be associ-ated with representations of a sacred nature.Moreover, the fact that the anthropological MNIidentified in megalithic containers (86 individu-als) is greater than that identified in non-mega-lithic containers (49) goes directly against anytheoretical premise that would expect to associatemegalithic monuments with a possible elite class,

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 109

(15) In this respect, it is worth maintaining some reservewith regard to the specific funcional character of the largest me-galithic constructions in Valencina, such as Las Pastora or Mata-rrubilla. Given that little or no osteological remains were identi-fied inside them, it is possible that these great monumentsserved for general ideological or religious purposes, rather thanas burial containers in the strict sense.

since by definition, an elite is not a majoritywithin the wider society of which it is part.

4.5. Visibility of social ranking within thefunerary ideology

In the ample funerary record documented atValencina de la Concepción, no cases have beenidentified of clear visibilisation of social leader-ship. Considering the dominance of collectiveburial rituals, and despite the fact that, as men-tioned earlier, this issue has not been well stud-ied, the allocation of grave goods (especially inrelation to articles made of exotic or costly mate-rials) does not suggest the existence of a pro-nounced social hierarchy. The only possible ex-ception to this general rule is tomb A of LosCabezuelos, a tholos that was initially used toinhume a group of at least 12 individuals, abovewhom were placed two individual in clear ana-tomical connection that the stratigraphy clearlyshows to be of a later date (Arteaga Matute andCruz-Auñón Briones 1999a: 596). One of the in-dividuals, a female, lacked any grave goods,while the other, a male between 30 and 45 yearsold, came with burial goods consisting of adagger (“puñal de lengüeta”) and five copperpoints of the Palmela type. This individual is theonly one of the 135 identified in this study thatshows an obviously customised set of prestigemetal grave goods. It should be noted, however,that the excavators considered this particularburial to be of the “bell-beaker group and transi-tional to the Early Bronze Age” (Arteaga Matuteand Cruz-Auñón Briones 1999a: 596), so it maybe representative of a late stage and/or the end ofthe occupation of Valencina de la Concepción,and not of its earlier Copper Age occupation.

Likewise, attention must be drawn to the factthat the largest deposit of prestige objects foundin a megalithic context, the javelin points of LaPastora, has no obvious or discernible funerarysignificance (until further research has been con-ducted, doubts will persist about the real nature oftheir context). This finding reinforces the notionthat, within the funerary ideology of Copper Agesocieties in the Guadalquivir valley and the Ibe-rian southwest, the display and use of metal ob-jects for the expression (or reinforcement) of in-dividual social status had a fairly limited role(especially if compared to what happens in the

Bronze Age, for example) (García Sanjuán 1999,2006). The predominant orientation of metallur-gical production to the manufacture of tools andweapon-tools (saws, axes, sickles, chisels, awls,etc.) and not of objects of prestige (such as per-sonal ornaments or weapons), in both the South-west and the Southeast, supports this idea (Mon-tero Ruiz 1994; García Sanjuán 1999).

4.6. Social inequality, social complexity,social stratification

The population aggregation from which thesettlement of Valencina may have resulted oc-curred around 3000-2800 cal BC, when southernIberia was experiencing a major population ex-pansion, as a consequence of which many newsettlements were established. The communitythat occupied the northern area of El Aljarafe pla-teau enjoyed a physical environment with excep-tional biotic and abiotic resources, which mayhave facilitated its demographic and economicgrowth, in turn fostering an increase in the com-plexity of social relationships. The physical envi-ronment of 3rd millennium Valencina, combiningcoastal and fluvial resources with soils of highagricultural potential plus the availability of sig-nificant forest and abiotic resources in the vicin-ity, matches exactly what Elman Service (1975:94-95) considered the most suitable setting forthe formation of “villages with diversified re-sources” likely to evolve into large scale chief-doms (16).

In recent years several papers have assigned tothe settlement of Valencina the role of a politicalcentre of a state-like polity that spread throughoutthe lower Guadalquivir Valley (Nocete Calvo2001; Nocete Calvo et al. 2007; Arteaga Matute2000; López Aldana and Pajuelo Pando 2001;Lazarich González et al. 2004). According to thisview, the settlement of Valencina, along with theprehistoric settlement of El Gandul, would haveformed a “dípolis” (or two-headed state) exercis-ing economic, social, and political coercion overa number of smaller communities spread out overthat region (López Aldana and Pajuelo Pando

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

110 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

(16) Similarly, P. Díaz del Río (2004: 91) has emphasisedthe strategic importance of the combination of natural resourcesin the population aggregation that, in the early centuries of the3rd millennium cal BC gave way to the 113 ha settlement ofMarroquies Bajos.

2001: 216 and 221). In a variant of this proposal,the role of “dípolis” would have been played bythe Copper Age settlements of Valencina andCarmona (Nocete Calvo 2001: 95).

As seen in the preceding pages, the main indi-cators of social stratification, which show posi-tive results when they are studied in certain Euro-pean societies from the Bronze Age and IronAge, are either inconclusive or negative in thecase of Valencina. The interpretation of this set-tlement as the political centre of a territorial statesystem has the potential value of pushing theanalysis of the social formations of the 3rd mil-lennium BC toward a spatial reference frame-work, while at the same time emphasising the im-portance of inter-group relations in the analysisof social complexity and inequality in Late Pre-history. However, it does not agree with the cur-rently available evidence. Moreover, the interpre-tation of settlements contemporary with (andgeographically close to) Valencina, such as ElGandul or Carmona, as part of a state-like socialsystem presents serious empirical and method-ological problems. Regarding El Gandul, the onlyinformation available on its prehistoric occupa-tion is a stratigraphic sondage (2 x 2 metres)made in 1986 which identified strata from the 3rdand 2dn millennia cal BC. This excavation re-mains basically unpublished except for a brief re-

port (Pellicer Catalán and Hurtado Pérez 1987).Since there is no data on the extent, morphology,or internal organization that 3rd-millennium ElGandul may have had, it is difficult to see howone can attribute to it a role as a “political centre”(López Aldana and Pajuelo Pando 2001: 216 and221) or indeed make any other interpretationabout its political status. Exactly the same prob-lem arises with the analogous interpretation ofCarmona, where, despite recent new light of theCopper Age occupation (Conlin Hayes 2003,2004), there are no data of sufficient precision topermit such broad interpretations.

On the other hand, the distribution of settle-ments in the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC currentlydocumented in the lower Guadalquivir valleycannot be easily interpreted in spatial terms. Inthis region the disparity in the data available fromarchaeological surveys is very great, so that insome areas numerous sites have been identified,while in other areas there is no information at all(Fig. 10). Furthermore, as a result of the practicesin use when some of these surveys were made, inalmost no case is there any reliable data concern-ing the main parameters for analysis of the terri-torial dimension of social hierarchy, such as, forexample, the extension of settlements, the pres-ence of walled structures, their internal organiza-tion, association with monumental buildings, etc.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 111

Fig. 10. Map of the location of Valencina de la Concepción withrespect to the settlements of Late Prehistory recorded in the lowerGuadalquivir valley.

Moreover, the approach that presents the 3rd-mil-lennium population of the lower Guadalquivir asa hierarchical system of a centralized andstate-like character is not based on a methodolog-ically formalized spatial analysis. A “formalizedmethodology” is one based on the description andjustification of the criteria used in the selection ofvariables and in data collection (including ex-plicit discussion of the problems inherent inthem), the use of a quantitative methodology (de-scriptive and inferential statistics), the use ofproper methods and procedures in the analysis ofthe spatial relationships among the entities underinvestigation, as well as their later reflection inarchaeological cartography, and the critical eval-uation of the results and their limitations (GarcíaSanjuán in press).

The interpretation of social complexity de-mands robust methodologies and good empiricalevidence. The assessment in terms of empiricalindicators of social stratification suggests that inValencina there is a group of indicators that givean inconclusive result (either because they pres-ent significant empirical problems, or simply be-cause they are ambiguous), and another group ofindicators which are negative. Some of the evi-dence considered in this study shows that therewere significant differences between Valencinaand other Copper Age villages physically demar-cated with stone enclosures that are known invarious regions of southern Iberia. Similarly, thedegree of specialisation in the organization ofspace in this settlement appears to have been lim-ited, and there is no indication of social zoning(such as an acropolis, specially designed houses,enclosed areas of significant size, or defensivewalls), nor remarkable concentrations of highvalue luxury or prestige items, nor funerary evi-dence of a military elite.

The evidence regarding demographics, orga-nizational and functional specialization of space,the scale of metallurgical production, labour in-vestment in monumental works, and the visibilityof the social hierarchy within the funerary ideol-ogy, all suggest a system of social organizationbasically akin to the notion of communal rankingproposed in relation to the Copper Age societiesof the southwestern Iberian Peninsula (GarcíaSanjuán 1999: 64-67). This notion is based onthat of corporate or group oriented society(Blanton et al. 1996; Earle 2001; Renfrew 1973;2001), which has also been used in relation with

Marroquíes Bajos, a large Copper Age settlementsituated further up the Guadalquivir valley (Díazdel Río 2004: 93). Coercion does not seem toplay a major role in the mobilisation of labour ofsouthern Iberian Copper Age societies (Díaz delRío 2008: 135) or indeed in their structure of so-cial relations of production as a whole (GarcíaSanjuán 1999: 266)

Undoubtedly the data, analysis and interpreta-tion that have been discussed thoughout this pa-per have significant limitations, and it is verypossible that the excavations conducted in recentyears (but still unpublished), and also future in-vestigations, will serve to improve and qualifymany of our observations. Any rigorous assess-ment of the social and economic organization ofthe community that occupied Valencina duringthe 3rd and 2nd millennia BC must be based on arobust quantitative analysis of variables such assubsistence production, the investment of labour(especially in large underground structures suchas ditches, but also in funerary constructions,megalithic or otherwise) and the distribution ofgrave goods in burial contexts. The research pre-sented in this study in relation to demographicsand metallurgy is only a first step ahead in thedifficult task on interpreting the social organisa-tion of the Valencina prehistoric community.Given the complexity of the archaeological re-cord of this major prehistoric settlement, greatscientific rigour will be required in the handlingand interpretation of the available data as well asin the critical scrutiny of any premises derivedfrom alternative theories.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank I. Montero Ruiz and J.M. Vargas Jiménez for their valuable commentsand suggestions during the preparation of thiswork.

5. REFERENCES

Alcázar Godoy, J.; Martín Espinosa, A. and Ruiz Mo-reno, M.T. 1992: “Enterramientos calcolíticos enzona de hábitat”. Revista de Arqueología XII 137:18-27.

Almagro Basch, M. 1962: “El ajuar del Dolmen de laPastora de Valentina del Alcor (Sevilla). Sus para-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

112 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

lelos y su cronología”. Trabajos de Prehistoria delSeminario de Historia Primitiva del Hombre 5:5-35. Madrid.

Arteaga Matute, O. 2000: “El proceso histórico en elterritorio argárico de Fuente Álamo. La rupturadel paradigma del Sureste desde la perspectiva at-lántica-mediterránea del extremo occidente”. InH. Schubart, V. Pingel and O. Arteaga Matute(eds.): Fuente Álamo. Las Excavaciones Arqueoló-gicas (1977-1991) en el Poblado de la Edad delBronce. Arqueología. Monografías 8: 117-144. Se-ville. Junta de Andalucía.

Arteaga Matute, O. and Cruz-Auñón Briones, R.1999a: “El sector funerario de Los Cabezuelos (Va-lencina de la Concepción, Sevilla). Resultados pre-liminares de una excavación de urgencia”. AnuarioArqueológico de Andalucía/1995 III: 589-600. Se-ville. Junta de Andalucía.

Arteaga Matute, O. and Cruz-Auñón Briones, R.1999b: “Una valoración del Patrimonio Históricoen el campo de silos de la finca El Cuervo-RTVA(Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla). Excavaciónde urgencia de 1995”. Anuario Arqueológico deAndalucía/1995. III: 608-616. Seville. Junta deAndalucía.

Arteaga Matute, O. and Cruz-Auñón Briones, R. 2001:“Las nuevas sepulturas prehistóricas (tholoi) y losenterramientos bajo túmulos (Tartesios) de Casti-lleja de Guzmán (Sevilla). Excavación de Urgenciade 1996”. Anuario Arqueológico de Andalu-cía/1996: 640-651. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Arteaga Matute, O. and Roos, A.M. 1995: “El proyec-to geoarqueológico de las marismas del Guadalqui-vir. Perspectivas arqueológicas de la campaña de1992”. Anuario Arqueológico de Andalucía/1992II. Actividades Sistemáticas: 329-340. Seville. Jun-ta de Andalucía.

Arteaga Matute, O.; Schulz, H.D. and Roos, A.M.1995: “El problema del Lacus Ligustinus. Investi-gaciones geoarqueológicas en torno a las marismasdel Bajo Guadalquivir”. In Tartessos 25 años des-pués (1968-1993). Actas del Congreso Conmemo-rativo del V Symposium Internacional de Prehisto-ria Peninsular: 99-136. Jerez de la Frontera. Ayun-tamiento de Jerez de la Frontera.

Barral Muñoz, M.A. and Borja Barrera, F. 2002:“Aproximación a la evolución paleogeográfica his-tórica del sector sur del casco antiguo de Sevilla”.In A. Pérez-González, J. Vegas and M.J. Machado(eds.): Aportaciones a la Geomorfología de Espa-ña en el Inicio del Tercer Milenio: 19-23. Madrid.

Basabe, J.M. and Benassar, I. 1982: “Restos humanosde los yacimientos de Chichina y Valencina de laConcepción (Sevilla)”. In Homenaje a ConcepciónFernández Chicarro: 75-92. Madrid.

Bernabéu Aubán, J.; Molina Balaguer, L.; Díez Casti-llo, A. and Orozco Köhler, T. 2006: “Inequalities

and power. Three millennia of Prehistory in Medi-terranean Spain (5600-2000 cal BC)”. In P. DíazDel Río Español and L. García Sanjuán (eds.): So-cial Inequality in Iberian Late Prehistory. BritishArchaeological Reports International Series 1525:98-116. Oxford. Archaeopress.

Blanco Ruiz, A. 1991: “Excavaciones de urgencia enel solar de la calle Duero n.º 39. Valencina de laConcepción, Sevilla”. Anuario Arqueológico deAndalucía/1989. III: 430-431. Seville. Junta deAndalucía.

Blankholm, H.P. 1991: Intrasite Spatial Analysis inTheory and Practice. Aarhus. University of Aar-hus.

Blanton, R.; Feinman, G.; Kowalewski, S. y Peregrine,P. 1996: “A dual-processual theory for the evolu-tion of Mesoamerican civilization”. CurrentAnthropology 37: 1-14.

Borja Barrera, F. and Barral Muñoz, M.A. 1999: “Evo-lución histórica de la llanura aluvial del Guadalqui-vir y ocupación humana en el sector norte de la ciu-dad de Sevilla”. El Territorio y su Imagen. Actasdel XVI Congreso de Geógrafos Españoles: 25-35.Málaga.

Borja Barrera, F. and Barral Muñoz, M.A. 2003a:“Análisis geoarqueológico”. In M.A. Tabales Ro-dríguez (ed.): El Alcázar de Sevilla. Primeros estu-dios sobre Estratigrafía y Evolución Constructiva:235-251. Seville.

Borja Barrera, F. and Barral Muñoz, M.A. 2003b:“Urbe y vega de Sevilla. Estudio geoarqueológi-co”. In A. Vázquez Labourdete (ed.): Arqueologíay Rehabilitación en el Parlamento de Andalucía.Investigaciones Arqueológicas en el Antiguo Hos-pital de las Cinco Llagas de Sevilla: 103-113. Sevi-lle. Junta de Andalucía.

Bradley, R. 1998: The Significance of Monuments. Onthe Shaping of Human Experience in Neolithic andBronze Age Europe. Routledge, London.

Brothwell, D. 1987: Desenterrando Huesos. La Exca-vación, Tratamiento y Estudio de Restos del Esque-leto Humano. Mexico City. Fondo de Cultura Eco-nómica.

Buikstra, J.E. and Ubelaker, D.H. (eds.) 1994: Stan-dards for Data Collection from Human Skeletal Re-mains. Arkansas Archaeological Survey ResearchSeries 44.

Cabrero García, R. 1985: “El sepulcro megalítico deCaño Ronco (Camas, Sevilla) y su vinculación conel yacimiento calcolítico de Valencina de la Con-cepción”. Prehistoria 1 (Unpublished manuscript):1-16. Seville.

Cámara Serrano, J.A.; Costa Caramé, M.E. and OrtizMoreno, S. in press: “Jaén”. In L. García Sanjuánand B. Ruiz González (eds.): La Grandes Piedrasde la Prehistoria. Sitios y Paisajes Megalíticos deAndalucía. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 113

Caro Gómez, J.A.; Álvarez García, G. and RodríguezVidal, J. 2003: “Memoria de los trabajos arqueoló-gicos realizados en el abrigo y cueva de Los Cova-chos (Almadén de la Plata, Sevilla)”. Anuario Ar-queológico de Andalucía/1999. II. ActividadesPuntuales y Sistemáticas: 248-258. Seville. Juntade Andalucía.

Carriazo y Arroquia, J. de M. 1962: “El dolmen deOntiveros (Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla)”.In Homenaje al Profesor Cayetano de Mergelina:209-229. Murcia. Universidad de Murcia.

Castaño, C. 1987: “La vivienda y el enterramientocomo unidades de interpretación. Anatomía de doscasos de transición del modelo de cacicazgo”. InR.D. Drennan and C.A. Uribe (eds.): Chiefdoms inthe Americas: 231-248. Landon. University Pressof America.

Castro Martínez, P.; Lull Santiago, V. and Micó Pérez,R. 1996: Cronología de la Prehistoria Reciente dela Península Ibérica y Baleares (c. 2800-900 calANE). British Archaeological Reports. Internatio-nal Series 652. Oxford.

Conlin Hayes, E. 2003: “Los inicios del III milenioa.C. en Carmona. Las evidencias arqueológicas”.Carmona. Revista de Estudios Locales 1: 83-143.

Conlin Hayes, E. 2004: “El poblado calcolítico deCarmona (Sevilla)”. Actas de los Simposios dePrehistoria de la Cueva de Nerja. La Problemáticadel Neolítico en Andalucía. Las Primeras Socieda-des Metalúrgicas en Andalucía: 370-378. Nerja.Fundación Cueva de Nerja.

Collantes de Teran, F. 1969: “El dolmen de Matarrubi-lla”. Actas del V Symposium Internacional dePrehistoria Peninsular. Tartessos y sus Problemas(Jerez, 1968): 47-61. Barcelona.

Cruz-Auñón Briones, R. and Arteaga Matute, O.1999a: “La Alcazaba. Un espacio social aledaño ala periferia del poblado prehistórico de Valencinade la Concepción (Sevilla). Excavación de urgenciade 1996”. Anuario Arqueológico de Andalu-cía/1995. III: 701-710. Sevilla. Junta de Andalucía.

Cruz-Auñón Briones, R. and Arteaga Matute, O.1999b: “Acerca de un campo de silos y un foso decierre prehistóricos ubicados en la Estacada Larga(Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla). Excavaciónde urgencia de 1995”. Anuario Arqueológico deAndalucía/1995. III: 600-607. Seville. Junta deAndalucía.

Díaz del Río, P. 2004: “Factionalism and collective la-bor in Copper Age Iberia”. Trabajos de Prehistoria61 (2): 85-98.

Díaz del Río, P. 2008: “El contexto social de las agre-gaciones de población durante el Calcolítico penin-sular”. Era Arqueologia 8. A Ideia de Recinto e asua Expressão Ibérica na Pré-Historia Recente:129-137.

Earle, T.K. 2001: “Economic support of Chaco Can-yon society”. American Antiquity 66 (1): 26-35.

Evans, J.G.; Limbrey, S.; Mate, I. and Mount, R. 1993:“An environmental history of the upper Kennet va-lley, Wiltshire, for the last 10,000 years”. Procee-dings of the Prehistoric Society 51: 305-20.

Fernández Gómez, F. and Ruiz Mata, D. 1978: “Eltholos del Cerro de la Cabeza, en Valencina de laConcepción (Sevilla)”. Trabajos de Prehistoria 35:193-224.

Fernández Gómez, F. and Oliva Alonso, D. 1980:“Los ídolos calcolíticos del Cerro de la Cabeza(Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla)”. MadriderMitteilungen 21: 20-44.

Fernández Gómez, F. and Oliva Alonso, D. 1986: “Va-lencina de la Concepción (Sevilla): Excavación deurgencia”. Revista de Arqueología 58: 19-33.

Fernández Gómez, F.; Ruiz Mata, D. and Sancha, J.1976: “Los enterramientos en cista del Cortijo deChichina (Sanlúcar la Mayor, Sevilla)”. Trabajosde Prehistoria 33: 351-386.

García Sanjuán, L. (ed.) 1998: La Traviesa. Ritual Fu-nerario y Jerarquización Social en una Comunidadde la Edad del Bronce de Sierra Morena Occiden-tal. Spal Monografías 1. Seville. Universidad deSevilla.

García Sanjuán, L. 1999: Los Orígenes de la Estratifi-cación Social. Patrones de Desigualdad en la Edaddel Bronce del Suroeste de la Península Ibérica(Sierra Morena Occidental c. 1700-1100a.n.e./2100-1300 A.N.E.). British ArchaeologicalReports S823. Oxford. Archaeopress.

García Sanjuán, L. 2006: “Funerary ideology and so-cial inequality in the Late Prehistory of the IberianSouth-West (c. 3300-850 cal BC)”. In P. Díaz delRío and L. García Sanjuán (eds.): Social Inequalityin Iberian Late Prehistory. British ArchaeologicalReports International Series S1525: 149-170.Oxford. Archaeopress.

García Sanjuán, L. - in press: “Análisis espacial y pa-trones de asentamiento: una revisión de los estu-dios del III y II milenios ANE en el Sur de Espa-ña”. Actas del V Simposio Internacional deArqueología de Mérida. Sistemas de InformaciónGeográfica y Análisis Arqueológico del Territorio(Mérida, 7-10 de Noviembre de 2007).

Gillings, M.; Pollard, J.; Wheatley, D.W. and Peterson,R. 2008: Landscape of the Megaliths: Excavationand Fieldwork on the Avebury Monuments1997-2003. Oxford. Oxbow.

Gómez de Terreros Guardiola, M.G. 2005: Intervencio-nes en Dólmenes, 1953-1964. Proyectos y Obras deFélix Hernández Giménez. Dólmenes de Matarrubi-lla y Cueva de la Pastora (Valencina de la Concep-ción, Sevilla), Dolmen de Zancarrón de Soto (Tri-gueros, Huelva). Seville. Universidad de Sevilla.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

114 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Gómez de Terreros Guardiola, M.G. 2008: “Dólmenesde Cueva de la Pastora, Matarrubilla y Zancarrónde Soto. Historia de sus intervenciones”. In L. Gar-cía Sanjuán (Coord.): Patrimonio Megalítico. PH67 Boletín del Instituto Andaluz del PatrimonioHistórico: 146-157. Seville. Instituto Andaluz delPatrimonio Histórico.

González González, B.; Linares Catela, J.A.; Vera Ro-dríguez, J.A. and González Batanero, D. 2008:“Depotfund zylinderförmiger Idole des 3. Jts. v.Chr. aus La Orden-Seminario (Prov. Huelva)”. Ma-drider Mitteilungen 49: 1-28.

González Marcén, P.; Lull Santiago, V. and Risch, R.1992: Arqueología de Europa 2250-1200 a.c. UnaIntroducción a la “Edad del Bronce’. Madrid. Sín-tesis.

González Vilchez, M.C. 1982: Estudio Físico-Quími-co y Tecnológico de una Serie de Productos Cerá-micos del Yacimiento Arqueológico de Valencinade la Concepción (Sevilla). Unpublished doctoralthesis. Seville. Universidad de Sevilla.

González Vilchez, M.C.; García Ramos, G.; GonzálezGarcía, F.; González Rodríguez, M. and FernándezGómez, F. 1999: “Estudio arqueométrico de unconjunto de piezas cerámicas del yacimiento ar-queológico de Valencina de la Concepción (Sevi-lla)”. In Capel Martínez, J. (ed.): Arqueometría yArqueología: 69-76. Granada. Universidad de Gra-nada.

Guijo Mauri, J.M.; Pecero Espín, J.C. and López Flo-res, I. 1996: “Traumatismo mandibular en un indi-viduo del tercer milenio BC procedente de Valenci-na de la Concepción (Sevilla)”. Actas del III Con-greso Nacional de Paleopatología: 239-243.Barcelona.

Haas, J. 1982: The Evolution of the Prehistoric State.New York. Columbia University Press.

Hain, F.H. 1982: Kupferzeitliche Tierknochenfundeaus Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla.

Hendon, J.A. 1991: “Status and power in classic Mayasociety. An archaeological study”. AmericanAnthropologist 39 (4): 894-918.

Hodder, I. and Orton, C. 1976: Spatial Analysis inArchaeology. Cambridge. Cambridge UniversityPress [Spanish translation published by Crítica1990].

Hunt Ortiz, M.A. 2003: Prehistoric Mining and Meta-llurgy in Southwest Iberian Peninsula. BAR Inter-national Series 1188. Oxford. Archaeopress.

Hunt Ortiz, M. and Hurtado Pérez, V. 1999: “Extrema-dura”. In G. Delibes de Castro and I. Montero Ruiz(eds.): Las Primeras Etapas Metalúrgicas de la Pe-nínsula Ibérica II. Estudios Regionales, 214-274.Madrid. Instituto Universitario Ortega y Gasset.

Hunt Ortiz, M.; Vázquez Paz, J.; García Rivera, D.and Pecero Espín, J.C. 2008: “Dataciones radiocar-bónicas de las necrópolis de la Edad de Bronce,

SE-K, SE-B y Jardín de Alá (Salteras y Gerena, Se-villa)”. In S. Rovira Llorens, M. García-Heras,M. Gener Moret and I. Montero Ruiz (eds.): Actasdel VII Congreso Ibérico de Arqueometría (Ma-drid, 8-10 de Octubre de 2007): 226-235. Madrid.CSIC.

Hurtado Pérez, V. and Amores Carredano, F. 1984: “Eltholos de Las Canteras y los enterramientos delBronce en la necrópolis de El Gandul (Alcalá deGuadaira, Sevilla)”. Cuadernos de Prehistoria dela Universidad de Granada 9: 147-174.

Hurtado Pérez, V.; Mondejar Fernández de Quincoces,P. and Pecero Espín, J.C. 2002: “Excavaciones enla Tumba 3 de La Pijotilla”. In J.J. Jiménez Ávilaand J.J. Enríquez Navascués (eds.): El Megalitismoen Extremadura. Homenaje a Elías Diéguez Luen-go. Extremadura Arqueológica VIII: 249-266. Mé-rida. Junta de Extremadura.

Jiménez Jáimez, V. and Márquez Romero, J.E. 2008:“Aquí no hay quien viva. Sobre las casas-pozo enla Prehistoria de Andalucía durante el IV y el IIImilenios AC”. Spal. Revista de Prehistoria yArqueología 15: 39-50.

Lacalle Rodríguez, R.; Guijo Mauri, J.M. andCruz-Auñón Briones, R. 2000: “Estudio antropoló-gico de cinco sepulturas prehistóricas de Castillejade Guzmán (Sevilla)”. Actas do 3.º Congresso deArqueología Peninsular Vol IX: 343-359. Porto.ADECAP.

Lara Montero, D.A.; Barragán Mallofret, D. and Ga-rrido Martín, M. 2006: “El asentamiento calcolíticodel Parque de Miraflores: resultados preliminares”.Spal. Revista de Prehistoria y Arqueología 13:245-256.

Lazarich González, M.; Richarte, M.J. and Ladrón deGuevara, I. 2004: “El Jadramil (Arcos de la Fronte-ra). Un asentamiento agrícola de la primera mitaddel II milenio A.C. en la campiña gaditana”. InR. García Huerta and J. Morales Hervás (eds.): LaPenínsula Ibérica en el II Milenio A.C. Poblados yFortificaciones: 87-114. Cuenca. Universidad deCastilla-La Mancha.

López Aldana, P. and Pajuelo Pando, A. 2001: “Estra-tegias político-territoriales de un poder central: elbajo Guadalquivir en el III milenio a.n.e.”. RevistaAtlántica-Mediterránea de Prehistoria y Arqueolo-gía Social 4: 207-227.

López Aldana, P.; Sánchez Liranzo, O.; Pajuelo Pan-do, A.; Ruiz Aguilar, S.; Vera Fernández, A.; Gar-cía Morales, I. and Velasco Contreras, M. 2001:“Excavación de Urgencia en una estructura habita-cional en Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla)”Anuario Arqueológico de Andalucía/1997:623-630. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Márquez Romero, J.E. 2002: “De los campos de silosa los agujeros negros: sobre pozos, depósitos y zan-jas en la Prehistoria Reciente del Sur de la Penínsu-

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 115

la Ibérica”. Spal. Revista de Prehistoria y Arqueo-logía 10. Homenaje al Profesor Pellicer (I):207-220.

Márquez Romero, J.E. 2006: “Neolithic and CopperAge ditched enclosures and social inequality in theIberian south (IV-III millennia cal BC)”. In P. DíazDel Río Español and L. García Sanjuán (eds.): So-cial Inequality in Iberian Late Prehistory. BritishArchaeological Reports International Series 1525:171-184. Oxford. Archaeopress.

Márquez Romero, J.E. 2008: “Sobre los depósitos es-tructurados de animales en yacimientos de fososdel Sur de la Península Ibérica”. In E. Weiss-Krej-ci, C. Duarte and J. Haws (eds.): Animais naPré-história e Arqueologia da Península Ibérica.Actas do IV Congresso de Arqueologia Peninsular(Faro, 14 a 19 de Setembro de 2004): 15-26. Faro.Universidade do Algarve.

Márquez Romero, J.E. and Jiménez Jáimez, V.J. 2008:“Claves para el estudio de los recintos de fosos delSur de la península Ibérica”. Era Arqueologia 8. AIdeia de Recinto e a sua Expressão Ibérica naPré-Historia Recente: 159-171.

Martín de la Cruz, J.C. and Miranda Ariz, J.M. 1988:“El poblado calcolítico de Valencina de la Concep-ción (Sevilla). Una revisión crítica”. Cuadernos dePrehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad Autó-noma de Madrid 15: 37-67.

Martín Espinosa, A. and Ruiz Moreno, M.T. 1992:“Excavación de urgencia en la finca La Gallega,1.ª Fase. Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla”.Anuario Arqueológico de Andalucía/1990. TomoIII: 455-458. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Martín Espinosa, A. and Ruiz Moreno, M.T. 1995:“Excavación en el dolmen de La Pastora (Valenci-na de la Concepción, Sevilla). Revisión y actualiza-ción de las investigaciones”. Actas del XXII Con-greso Nacional de Arqueología (Vigo, 1993) I:417-420. Vigo. Xunta de Galicia.

Martín Espinosa, A. and Ruiz Moreno, M.T. 1996:“Dos ídolos calcolíticos en La Gallega, Valencinade la Concepción, Sevilla”. Madrider Mitteilungen37: 1-9.

Mcnutt, C.H. 1981: “Nearest neighbors, boundary ef-fect and the old flag trick: a general solution”.American Antiquity 46 (3), 571-592. Salt LakeCity.

Mederos Martín, A. 1998: “La cronología absoluta deAndalucía Occidental durante la Prehistoria Re-ciente (6100-850 A.C.)”. Spal. Revista de Prehisto-ria y Arqueología 5: 45-86.

Mederos Martín, A. 2000: “Puntas de jabalina de Va-lencina de la Concepción (Sevilla) y del área pales-tino-israelita”. Madrider Mitteilungen 41: 83-111.

Molina González, F. and Cámara Serrano, J.A. 2009:“Almería”. In L. García Sanjuán and B. Ruiz Gon-zález (eds.): Las Grandes Piedras de la Prehisto-

ria. Sitios y Paisajes Megalíticos de Andalucía:¿¿páginas??. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Montero Ruiz, I. 1994: El Origen de la Metalurgia enel Sureste Peninsular. Almería. Instituto de Estu-dios Almerienses.

Montero Ruiz, I. and Teneishvili, T.O. 1996: “Estudioactualizado de las puntas de jabalina del Dolmen dela Pastora (Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla)”.Trabajos de Prehistoria 53 (1): 73-90.

Montero Ruiz, I.; García Heras, M. and López-Rome-ro de la Aleja, E. 2007: “Arqueometría: cambios ytendencias actuales”. Trabajos de Prehistoria 64(1): 23-40.

Murillo Díaz, M.T. 1991: “Excavaciones de urgenciaen el poblado calcolítico de Valencina de la Con-cepción. Sevilla, 1988-1989”. Anuario Arqueológi-co de Andalucía/1989. III: 561-562. Seville. Juntade Andalucía.

Murillo Díaz, M.T. 1997: “Estudio mineralógico de lasmaterias primas de la industria lítica tallada del ya-cimiento calcolítico de Valencina de la Concepción(Sevilla)”. Revista de Humanidades 8: 97-103.

Murillo Díaz, M.T. 1998: “Estudio analítico de la in-dustria lítica tallada del yacimiento calcolítico deValencina de la Concepción (Sevilla) (I)”. Revistade Humanidades 10: 94-103.

Murillo Díaz, M.T. 1999: “Estudio analítico de la in-dustria lítica tallada del yacimiento calcolítico deValencina de la Concepción (Sevilla) (II)”. Revistade Humanidades 10: 178-194.

Murillo Díaz, M.T. 2000: “Estudio analítico de la in-dustria lítica tallada del yacimiento calcolítico deValencina de la Concepción (Sevilla) (III)”. Revistade Humanidades 11: 164-168.

Murillo Díaz, T. 2001: “Historia de las investigacionesy bibliografía del asentamiento prehistoria de Va-lencina de la Concepción (Sevilla)”. Revista de Hu-manidades 12: 29-44.

Murillo Díaz, M.T.; Pérez, C.; Blanco, A. and Larrey,E. 1987: “Excavación en el yacimiento calcolíticodel Polideportivo de Valencina de la Concepción(Sevilla), 1985”. Anuario Arqueológico de Andalu-cía/1985. III. Actividades de Urgencia: 311-315.Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Murillo Díaz, M.T.; Cruz-Auñón Briones, R. and Hur-tado Pérez, V. 1990: “Excavaciones de urgencia enel yacimiento calcolítico de Valencina de la Con-cepción (Sevilla)”. Anuario Arqueológico de Anda-lucía/1988: 354-359. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Nocete Calvo, F. 2001: Tercer Milenio Antes de Nues-tra Era: Relaciones y Contradicciones Centro-Pe-riferia en el Valle del Guadalquivir. Barcelona. Be-llaterra.

Nocete Calvo, F. (Coord.) 2004: Odiel. Proyecto deInvestigación Arqueológica para el Análisis delOrigen de la Desigualdad Social en el Suroeste dela Península Ibérica. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

116 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.

Nocete Calvo, F.; Queipo de Llano, G.; Sáenz, R.;Nieto, J.M.; Inácio, N.; Bayona, M.R.; Peramo, A.;Vargas Jiménez, J.M.; Cruz-Auñón Briones, R.;Gil-Ibarguchi, J.I. and Santos, J.F. 2007: “Thesmelting quarter of Valencina de la Concepción(Seville, Spain): the specialised copper industry ina political centre of the Guadalquivir valley duringthe Third Millennium BC (2750-2500 BC)”. Jour-nal of Archaeological Science 35: 717-732.

Obermaier, H. 1919: El Dolmen de Matarrubilla (Se-villa). Memorias de la Comisión de InvestigacionesPaleontológicas y Prehistóricas 26. Madrid. Museode Ciencias Naturales.

Orozco Köhler, T.; Bernabéu Aubán, J.; Molina Bala-guer, L. and Díez Castillo, A. 2008: “Los recintosneolíticos como expresión de poder en el Medite-rráneo peninsular”. Era Arqueologia 8. A Ideia deRecinto e a sua Expressão Ibérica na Pré-HistoriaRecente: 173-181.

Pellicer Catalán, M. and Hurtado Pérez, V. 1987:“Excavaciones en La Mesa del Gandul (Alcalá deGuadaira, Sevilla)”. Anuario Arqueológico deAndalucía/1986. II. Actividades Sistemáticas:338-341. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Perizonius, W.R. 1984: “Closing and non-closing su-tures in 256 crania of known age and sex fromAmsterdam (A.D. 1883-1909)”. Journal of HumanEvolution 13 (2): 201-216.

Pinder, D.; Shimada, I. and Gregory, D. 1979: “Thenearest-neighbor statistic: archaeological implica-tions and new developments”. American Antiquity44: 430-445.

Pollard, J. and Reynolds, A. 2002: Avebury: The Bio-graphy of a Landscape. Stroud. Tempus.

Renfrew, C. 1973: “Monuments, mobilisation and so-cial organisation in Neolithic Wessex”. En C. Ren-frew (ed.): The Explanation of Culture Change.Models in Prehistory: 539-558. London. Duck-worth.

Renfrew, C. 2001: “Commodification and institutionin group-oriented and individualising societies”.En Rucinman, W.G. (ed.): The Origins of HumanSocial Institutions. Oxford. Oxford UniversityPress: 93-117.

Queipo de Llano Martínez, G. 2002: Informe Prelimi-nar. Intervención arqueológica de urgencia. Sectorresidencial 1. Polígono 1-2. Plan Parcial Matarru-billa. Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla). Unpu-blished report.

Ramos Muñoz, J. 1992: “La industria lítica del CobrePleno del poblado de Valencina de la Concepción(Sevilla)”. Norba 11-12: 43-74.

Rodríguez Bayona, M. 2008: La Investigación de laActividad Metalúrgica Durante el III MilenioA.N.E. en el Suroeste de la Península Ibérica. LaArqueometalurgia y la Aplicación de Análisis Me-talográficos y Composicionales en el Estudio de la

Producción de Artefactos de Metal. BAR Interna-cional Series S1769. Oxford. Archaeopress.

Rodríguez Hidalgo, J.M. 1991: “Memoria de gestiónde las actividades arqueológicas de la provincia deSevilla, 1989”. Anuario Arqueológico de Andalu-cía/1989. Vol. I: 41-42. Seville. Junta de Andalu-cía.

Rovira Llorens, S. and Ambert, P. 2002: “Vasijas cerá-micas para reducir minerales de cobre en la Penín-sula Ibérica y en la Francia Meridional”. Trabajosde Prehistoria 59 (1): 89-105.

Ruiz Mata, D. 1975a: “Cerámicas del Bronce del po-blado de Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla)”.Madrider Mitteilungen 16: 80-110.

Ruiz Mata, D. 1975b: “Cerámicas del Bronce del po-blado de Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla): losplatos”. Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueologíade la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid 2:123-149.

Ruiz Mata, D. 1983: “El yacimiento de la Edad delBronce de Valencina de la Concepción (Sevilla) enel marco cultural del Bajo Guadalquivir”. Actas delI Congreso de Historia de Andalucía (Córdoba,Diciembre de 1976): 183-208. Córdoba. Monte dePiedad y Caja de Ahorros de Córdoba.

Ruiz Moreno, M.T. 1991: “Excavación arqueológicade urgencia en Valencina de la Concepción, urbani-zación La Cima (Sevilla), 1989-1990”. AnuarioArqueológico de Andalucía/1989: 461-464. Sevi-lle. Junta de Andalucía.

Ruiz Moreno, M.T. 1995: “Valencina de la Concep-ción. Avance a la Carta Arqueológica”. Actas delXXIII Congreso Nacional de Arqueología (Elche,1995): 37-42. Elche. Ayuntamiento de Elche.

Ruiz Moreno, M.T. 1999: “Excavación arqueológicade urgencia en la urbanización El Mirador de Itáli-ca (Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla)”. AnuarioArqueológico de Andalucía/1994. III. Actividadesde Urgencia: 511-516. Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Ruiz Moreno, M.T. and Martín Espinosa, A. 1993:“Excavación de urgencia en el dolmen de La Pasto-ra, Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla”. AnuarioArqueológico de Andalucía/1991: 554-558. Sevi-lle. Junta de Andalucía.

Ruiz Moreno, M.T. and Martín Espinosa, A. 1995:“Nuevos datos en torno al Dolmen de la Pastora(Valencina de la Concepción, Sevilla)”. Actas do1er Congresso de Arqueologia Peninsular (Porto,12-18 de Outubro de 1993) 5: 81-83. Porto. Ade-cap.

Sánchez Liranzo, O. and Vera Fernández, A. 2000:“Estudio de las herramientas de trabajo líticas deuna cabaña prehistórica en Valencina de la Concep-ción”. Spal. Revista de Prehistoria y Arqueología8: 295-309.

Santana Falcón, I. 1991: “Excavación arqueológica deemergencia en un dolmen del término municipal de

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

The Copper Age Settlement of Valencina de la Concepción (Seville, Spain): Demography, Metallurgy... 117

Castilleja de Guzmán (Sevilla)”. Anuario Arqueo-lógico de Andalucía/1989: 446-449. Seville. Juntade Andalucía.

Santana Falcón, I. 1993: “Excavación arqueológica deurgencia en El Algarrobillo, Valencina de la Con-cepción (Sevilla)”. Anuario Arqueológico de Anda-lucía/1991. III. Actividades de Urgencia: 548-553.Seville. Junta de Andalucía.

Service, E. 1984: Los Orígenes del Estado y la Civili-zación. El Proceso de la Evolución Cultural. Ma-drid. Alianza [1st Edition 1975].

Shennan, S. 1992: Arqueología Cuantitativa. Barcelo-na. Crítica.

Smith, I.F. 1965: Windmill Hill and Avebury. Oxford.Clarendon Press.

Smith, M.E. 1987: “Household possessions and wealthin agrarian states: implications for archaeology”.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6:297-335.

Tubino, F.M. 1876: “Los monumentos megalíticos deAndalucía, Extremadura y Portugal y los aboríge-nes ibéricos”. Museo Español de Antigüedades 7:303-364.

Vargas Jiménez, J.M. 2004: Carta Arqueológica Muni-cipal de Valencina de la Concepción. Seville. Juntade Andalucía.

Vargas Jiménez, J.M. 2004: “Elementos para la defini-ción territorial del yacimiento prehistórico de Va-

lencina de la Concepción (Sevilla)”. Spal. Revistade Prehistoria y Arqueología 12: 125-144.

Vera Fernández, A.; Ruiz Aguilar, S. and Lacalle Ro-dríguez, R. 2002: “Intervención arqueológica deurgencia en el M-1 del Plan Parcial 3. Castilleja deGuzmán. Sevilla”. Anuario Arqueológico de Anda-lucía/1999. III: 993-1004. Seville. Junta de Anda-lucía.

Wason, P.K. 1994: The Archaeology of Rank. Cam-bridge. Cambridge University Press.

Wheatley, D.W. and Gillings, M. 2002: Spatial Tech-nology and Archaeology. The ArchaeologicalApplication of Gis. London. Taylor & Francis.

Weiss-Krejci, E. 2005: “Formation processes of depo-sits with burned human remains in Neolithic andChalcolithic Portugal”. Journal of Iberian Ar-chaeology 7: 37-73.

Zafra de la Torre, N.; Hornos Mata, F. and Castro Ló-pez, M. 1999: “Una macro-aldea en el origen delmodo de vida campesino: Marroquíes Bajos (Jaén),c. 2500-2000 cal ANE”. Trabajos de Prehistoria56 (1): 77-102.

Zafra de la Torre, N.; Castro López, M. and HornosMata, F. 2003: “Sucesión y simultaneidad en ungran asentamiento: la cronología de la macro-aldeade Marroquíes Bajos (Jaén), c. 2500-2000 calANE”. Trabajos de Prehistoria 60 (2): 79-90.

T. P., 67, N.º 1, enero-junio 2010, pp. ???, ISSN: 0082-5638doi: 10.3989/tp.2010.10032

118 Manuel Eleazar Costa Caramé et al.