Forensic archaeology in Europe - Ausonius Éditions
16Forensic science (defined as any science used for the purpose of the law) goes back to the 18th and 19th c., with the development of modern day chemistry. E.
(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne -
 Forensic archaeology in Europe -
 Ausonius Éditions


[![OpenEdition Books logo](/assets/images/oebooks-logo.png)](/)

[Home](/)

[Catalogue of 14751 books](/catalogue)

[Publishers](/publishers)

[Authors](/authors)

EnglishEN

- Français

Share

[Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbooks.openedition.org%2F%2F&title=OpenEdition+Books)

[X](http://x.com/share?text=OpenEdition+Books&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbooks.openedition.org%2F%2F&via=OpenEditionActu)

OpenEdition SearchAll OpenEdition

Share

[Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbooks.openedition.org%2F%2F&title=OpenEdition+Books)

[X](http://x.com/share?text=OpenEdition+Books&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbooks.openedition.org%2F%2F&via=OpenEditionActu)

[Home](/) [Catalogue of 14751 books](/catalogue) [Publishers](/publishers) [Authors](/authors)

Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities

[OpenEdition](https://openedition.org)

Our platforms

[OpenEdition Books](https://books.openedition.org) [OpenEdition Journals](https://journals.openedition.org) [Hypotheses](https://hypotheses.org) [Calenda](https://calenda.org)

Libraries

[OpenEdition Freemium](https://www.openedition.org/14043)

Follow us

[Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/openedition "Facebook")[X](https://x.com/OpenEditionActu "X")[LinkedIn](https://fr.linkedin.com/company/cleo-centre-pour-l%27%E2%80%8B-dition-lectronique-ouverte- "LinkedIn")[RSS Feed](https://books.openedition.org/rss/?format=rss "RSS Feed")

[Newsletter](https://www.openedition.org/41045)

![OpenEdition Search logo](/assets/images/oesearch-logo-white.svg)

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search

In Ausonius Éditions

In all OpenEdition

Search

- [Ausonius Éditions](/ausonius)
›- [Scripta Mediævalia](/ausonius/15139)
›- [(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice ...](/ausonius/18143)
›- [3\. L'archéologue face à la fabrique judi...](/ausonius/18356)
›- Forensic archaeology in Europe


- [Ausonius Éditions](/ausonius)

[![Ausonius Éditions](/ausonius/file/options/15/download)](/ausonius)

[Ausonius Éditions](/ausonius)

[![Cover (Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne](/ausonius/file/18448/cover/couvsm35essai5bon.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/18143 "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne")[Cover information](/ausonius/18448)

Search inside the book


[Table of contents](/ausonius/18143?format=toc "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne") CiteShareCited byReviewed by

Links to the book


[![Cover (Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne](/ausonius/file/18448/cover/couvsm35essai5bon.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/18143 "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne")[Cover information](/ausonius/18448)

Search inside the book


[Table of contents](/ausonius/18143?format=toc "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne") CiteShareCited byReviewed by

Reading formats


Outline

[Detailed outline](#anchor-completeplan "Detailed outline") [Full text](#anchor-fulltext "Full text") [Forensic archaeology, an interdisciplinary field](#anchor-toc-1-1 "Forensic archaeology, an interdisciplinary field") [Differences between archaeology and forensic archaeology](#anchor-toc-1-2 "Differences between archaeology and forensic archaeology") [The interaction between archaeology and anthropology in the USA and Europe](#anchor-toc-1-3 "The interaction between archaeology and anthropology in the USA and Europe") [History of forensic archaeology](#anchor-toc-1-4 "History of forensic archaeology") [Dichotomy between the Anglo-Saxon world and Continental Europe](#anchor-toc-1-5 "Dichotomy between the Anglo-Saxon world and Continental Europe") [Excavation methods](#anchor-toc-1-6 "Excavation methods") [Forensic Archaeology in Europe](#anchor-toc-1-7 "Forensic Archaeology in Europe") [Standards and protocols: a European collaboration](#anchor-toc-1-8 "Standards and protocols: a European collaboration") [Conclusions](#anchor-toc-1-9 "Conclusions") [Bibliography](#anchor-bibliography "Bibliography") [Footnotes](#anchor-footnotes "Footnotes") [Authors](#anchor-persons "Authors")

Go to top of pageGo to bottom of page

(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne

This book is reviewed by


- Stéphanie Pirez-Huart,
_Criminocorpus, revue hypermédia_,
published on December 10, 2021.
URL: [https://journals.openedition.org/criminocorpus/7298](https://journals.openedition.org/criminocorpus/7298)
; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/criminocorpus.7298


[Previous](/ausonius/18415 "Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)")
Avant-propos

Les sciences archéologiques permettent-elles d’étudier la justice médiévale et moderne ?

1\. Les espaces et les équipements de la justice

\-\-\- Culture judiciaire et complexité sociale : le modèle général de l’Angleterre anglo-saxonne

\-\-\- An archaeological approach to modern justice in the Czech Republic, Lower Silesia and Upper Lusatia

\-\-\- Lieux de justice dans la seigneurie ecclésiastique de Meillerie

\-\-\- La tour de l’horloge du parlement de Toulouse

\-\-\- Redécouverte d’un équipement de justice des comtes d’Artois : la Maison Rouge d’Arras

\-\-\- Archaeological documentation of a place of execution: “The Court” – a Medieval Gallows Hill near Alkersleben (Germany)

\-\-\- Les fourches patibulaires en Dordogne. État des lieux et premières pistes de réflexions archéologiques sur la justice médiévale et moderne

\-\-\- Les fourches patibulaires médiévales et modernes en Touraine. De la constitution d’un groupe de travail interdisciplinaire aux premières investigations de terrain

\-\-\- Les fourches patibulaires de Draguignan (Var) (xive-xviie s.) : premiers résultats d’une investigation interdisciplinaire

2\. La justice et ses "objets"

\-\-\- “À chacun une gamelle”. Poteries du quotidien de la prison de Moulins (Allier) à la fin du xixe s.

\-\-\- Reliures de livres avec la peau du condamné : hommage et humiliation autour des corps criminels

\-\-\- Artefact assemblages collected on execution sites in Lower Silesia. Differences and similarities

\-\-\- The Sword, the Hand, the Account: Rereading Justice in the Museum Context

3\. L'archéologue face à la fabrique judiciaire des corps

\-\-\- La pendaison de Judas ou le châtiment sans fin (xiie-xive s.)

\-\-\- Deux dépôts osseux humains atypiques dans un silo du ixe s. à Villiers-le-Bel (Val d’Oise) : du châtiment judiciaire à l’infamie ?

\-\-\- The mass grave from Devnya and judicial culture in early medieval Bulgaria

\-\-\- L’inhumation des criminels aux fourches patibulaires de Lubań, de Miłków et de Lubomierz (Pologne). Résultats des premières analyses archéo-anthropologiques

\-\-\- Le “gibbeting” anglais : punir le cadavre du criminel dans la Grande-Bretagne des xviiie-xixe s.

\-\-\- Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)

\-\-\- Forensic archaeology in Europe

\-\-\- “La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire
[Next](/ausonius/18440 "“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire")

[Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)](/ausonius/18415 "Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)")[Table of contents](/ausonius/18143?format=toc "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne") [“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire](/ausonius/18440 "“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire")

# Forensic archaeology in Europe

[Eline M. J. Schotsmans](/ausonius/person/18431) and [Patrice Georges-Zimmermann](/ausonius/person/18436)

p. 343-364

## Detailed outline

[Full text](#anchor-fulltext "Full text") [Forensic archaeology, an interdisciplinary field](#anchor-toc-1-1 "Forensic archaeology, an interdisciplinary field") [Differences between archaeology and forensic archaeology](#anchor-toc-1-2 "Differences between archaeology and forensic archaeology") [The interaction between archaeology and anthropology in the USA and Europe](#anchor-toc-1-3 "The interaction between archaeology and anthropology in the USA and Europe") [History of forensic archaeology](#anchor-toc-1-4 "History of forensic archaeology") [Dichotomy between the Anglo-Saxon world and Continental Europe](#anchor-toc-1-5 "Dichotomy between the Anglo-Saxon world and Continental Europe") [Excavation methods](#anchor-toc-1-6 "Excavation methods") [Forensic Archaeology in Europe](#anchor-toc-1-7 "Forensic Archaeology in Europe") [Standards and protocols: a European collaboration](#anchor-toc-1-8 "Standards and protocols: a European collaboration") [Conclusions](#anchor-toc-1-9 "Conclusions") [Bibliography](#anchor-bibliography "Bibliography") [Bibliography](#anchor-toc-2-1 "Bibliography") [Webography](#anchor-toc-2-2 "Webography") [Footnotes](#anchor-footnotes "Footnotes") [Authors](#anchor-persons "Authors")

* * *

## Full text

1Forensic archaeology is practiced in numerous criminal, medico-legal and humanitarian contexts across the world. However, forensic archaeology is not defined and practised the same way in different continents and countries. This article provides a basic understanding of forensic archaeology but is by no means a solid overview. The practice of forensic archaeology varies worldwide as a result of historical, educational, legal and judicial backgrounds. Therefore, one article is too short to describe all the differences around the globe in detail. Moreover, the perception of forensic archaeology is changing rapidly in every country. For a detailed overview of the practice of forensic archaeology in different countries of different continents, the authors recommend the volume by W. J. M. Groen _et al_., containing 57 chapters from experienced forensic archaeological practitioners working in different countries, intergovernmental organisations or NGO’s[1](#ftn1).

2In this article the authors focus on the general lines of forensic archaeology. The aim of this paper is to give an overview of the situation of forensic archaeology in Europe and to trigger the reader more about the subject by providing a number of references.

# Forensic archaeology, an interdisciplinary field

3Generally speaking, forensic archaeology can be defined as “the application of archaeological theories, principles, methods and techniques in a legal context”[2](#ftn2). This shows that forensic archaeology is more than only the excavation of human remains. It deals, among other things, with predictive modelling, with searches for missing and presumably buried persons, with scattered human remains on the surface, with the recovery of human remains from fire scenes, with exhumations, with spatial (GIS-based) recording, with preservation of evidence, with analysis of the (post-) depositional environment and with interpretation and reconstruction. Moreover, forensic archaeologists are also involved in criminal investigations related to the recovery of buried (stolen) goods, weaponry or other items and, at times, with the illicit trade of historical artefacts. The important element in this definition is “in a legal context”. This means that the archaeological excavation of historical mass graves, battlefields, or execution sites is not included in this definition if the primary goal of excavation falls outside the criminal, medico-legal, humanitarian or civil law setting[3](#ftn3).

4W. J. M. Groen _et al_. state that archaeology could be used within the context of law in nine areas of engagement: domestic police service cases, mass fatality events (Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) or Mass Fatality Incidents (MFI)), investigations of human rights violations in a medico-legal setting, investigations of human rights violations in a humanitarian setting, recovery and repatriation of missing military service personnel, controlled exhumations at regular cemeteries outside a criminal, medico-legal or humanitarian setting, archaeological investigations in the context of civil law, on-site investigations related to the destruction of archaeological sites or monuments, and investigations related to illegal selling of archaeological or historical artefacts[4](#ftn4).

5Important key duties of the forensic archaeologist, as described in the British _Standard and guidance for forensic archaeologists_ by the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA)[5](#ftn5) and endorsed by the United Kingdom Forensic Science Regulator, are to understand their role, their obligations and the legislation within the criminal justice system of which they are working, to maintaining actively professional expertise through continuous self-development, and to communicate information of the investigative process in a professional and impartial manner.

6Forensic archaeologists need to be flexible, to be able to collaborate with other disciplines and therefore be knowledgeable about different disciplines, such as taphonomy, focussed on the chemical and biological processes of soft tissue decomposition of human remains, soil science, sedimentation and bioturbation, bone degradation in different depositional environments or the degradation of associated artefacts or textiles, particularly in the depositional environment. They also need to be able to distinguish human bone from animal bone and have good osteological and anatomical knowledge. Furthermore, a forensic archaeologist must understand the work of partner organisations, which provide, for example, search techniques such as cadaver dog searches, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), conductivity meters, resistivity meters, magnetometers, metal detectors, magnetic locators or side-scan sonars. In addition they need to understand insect life cycles and know the collection procedures for botanical evidence and of entomological evidence. Finally, they are required to master predictive modelling and apply survey and (GIS-based) mapping techniques, including new documentation techniques like photogrammetry and 3D laser scanning.

7As with conventional archaeology, excavation is destructive and cannot be repeated. In a forensic context there are additional requirements for precision and unambiguous interpretation and reconstruction. The forensic scientist must interpret his findings and communicate them effectively within a court of law, mostly using the Bayesian approach for evidence evaluation (ENFSI 2015). Additionally, all forensic archaeological field notes, sketches, drawings, plans, section drawings, and recording forms may be court-admissible and thus could be made available to the defence. Therefore, it is important that a forensic archaeologist knows more than “how to dig”, but that he knows “how to document and how to dig well”[6](#ftn6).

# Differences between archaeology and forensic archaeology

8Conventional archaeology is “the study of past societies primarily through material remains”[7](#ftn7). By comparing the definitions of archaeology and forensic archaeology, the main difference between the two disciplines becomes clear immediately: in archaeology the focus lies upon reconstructing societies and generally speaking on human history, while in forensic archaeology the focus is lies on one individual in a legal context. However, some forensic archaeologists also study and analyse past casework in order to be able to understand and predict offender behaviour, needed, for example, for the development of a reliable and valid search strategy for locating clandestine (mass) graves.

9Another difference between the two disciplines is related to the time factor. Archaeology covers all time periods and geographic regions inhabited by humans. This ranges from million-year old fossilised human ancestors to material remains from the 20th or 21st c. Forensic archaeology implies an application to the justice system or for the purpose of the law, therefore most forensic archaeology cases concentrate on the 19th, 20th and 21st c. Because of the difference in time periods, it is more likely that forensic archaeologists be confronted with soft tissue, while conventional archaeologist are more likely to be confronted with skeletal material. Another element related to the time difference between these two disciplines is the psychological factor. Working on recent cases implies that direct relatives of human remains are still alive, and may even be present during the excavation. Images of excavations of Spanish Civil War graves where relatives observe every uncovered bone and every movement of the forensic archaeologist are a case in point.

10The evidence used by the two disciplines may also differ. Archaeology mainly focuses on (excavated) material remains, while the focus in forensic sciences lies on (DNA) traces. A final difference is related to time pressure. While time pressure occurs in rescue archaeology, the urgency and time pressure applied by the authorities in a forensic case can be considerable. This depends hugely on the country. In general the same principles apply: the more pressure, the easier it is to make mistakes, and in forensic cases, the easier to lose, miss or destroy crucial evidence.

# The interaction between archaeology and anthropology in the USA and Europe

11In the United States, forensic archaeology is just another set of skills that the forensic anthropologist may attain. In Europe, including the United Kingdom, the discipline of forensic anthropology (biological anthropology) is practised separately from forensic archaeology and considered two distinctive disciplines[8](#ftn8). This means that the forensic anthropologist and the forensic archaeologist will, in Europe, generally work in conjunction with each other at the crime scene during casework related to skeletal human remains. Additionally, they will always be assisted by local law enforcement agencies. The archaeologist is responsible for the search, excavation and recovery of human remains and evidence. He or she analyses and reconstructs the burial, the burial cut and the immediate environment of the scene. They assess the (post-)depositional environment, intend to discriminate human behaviour from natural processes and try to understand what happened to the remains between death and recovery (taphonomy). The forensic anthropologist is often present during the excavation, but takes over once the human remains are lifted and analyses them off-site, usually in the morgue or forensic laboratory. When the human remains are still covered with soft tissue, the forensic pathologist performs the autopsy, with or without the presence of a forensic anthropologist.

12Importantly, the forensic archaeologist in Europe is always familiar with skeletal remains. In many cases, forensic archaeologists were taught biological anthropology during their archaeological studies. Similarly forensic anthropologists often have a background in archaeology. The two disciplines are necessary to each other when human remains are involved. This overlap between the two disciplines is not always easy to understand by other forensic investigators[9](#ftn9). Some authors have proposed uniting the two roles as this would imply broader skills[10](#ftn10). This recalls the French endeavour to integrate biological anthropology within conventional archaeology by studying skeletal remains in the field instead of in the laboratory. This so-called “field anthropology” or “archaeothanatology” was developed by Henri Duday in the 80s[11](#ftn11). For outsiders of both disciplines, it remains difficult to understand why this dichotomy exists and why integration has not (yet) been achieved.

13As mentioned above, it is also important to realise that forensic archaeology is more than the simple excavation of human remains. For example, forensic archaeologists also search, excavate and recover weapons and other evidence related to forensic cases. Furthermore, forensic archaeology does not only handle individual burials, many practitioners also excavate mass burials.

14Therefore the presence of forensic archaeologists in the Anglo-Saxon world, due to the legal context of criminal investigations, is particularly appreciated for the excavation of mass graves, where they have proved indispensable[12](#ftn12). Over the past two to three decades, forensic archaeologists have made significant contributions to mass burials in Latin America, Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. For instance, the Argentinean team of Forensic Anthropology (Equipo Argentino de Anthropologia Forense: EAAF) which intervened in Argentina, but also in Bolivia, Brazil, El Salvador, Côte d’Ivoire, Georgia, Spain, Sudan, etc. became well known and is now recognized for the training it provides to researchers outside Argentina[13](#ftn13).

15It must also be noted that the above-mentioned differences between forensic anthropology and forensic archaeology describe two general geographical areas (North-America and Europe) but that additional differences exist between countries. There is a dichotomy between the Anglo-Saxon world and Continental Europe (see below) and in Spain, for example, forensic anthropology is seen as a medical discipline[14](#ftn14).

# History of forensic archaeology

16Forensic science (defined as any science used for the purpose of the law) goes back to the 18th and 19th c., with the development of modern day chemistry. E. Locard (1877-1966) is considered one of the founders of forensic science based on the principle of “every contact leaves a trace”. A first example of forensic anthropology was made by A. Bertillon (1853-1914) who developed a number of indices and measurements of the body as diagnostic of criminal tendencies. While this proved unsuccessful, it was the first attempt in a criminal investigation to use a classification system based on scientific measurement[15](#ftn15). Another example of forensic anthropology appears in 1878 when T. Dwight, professor of anatomy, identified the legal implications of skeletal identification[16](#ftn16).

17The first application of forensic archaeology, although undefined as such, occurs in 1943 in the Katyń Forest, near Smolensk in Russia. In this forest, several mass graves were exhumed and investigated by several European forensic experts (mostly pathologists and anatomists) of the Red Cross and the International Katyń Commission, under the supervision of Nazi Germany. The investigation proved that the mass execution and burial of several thousand Polish nationals was not committed by Nazi Germany, but by the Soviet People’s Commissariat for International Affairs (NKVD) in the spring of 1940. Also in 1943, a second exhumation of 91 mass graves by the International Commission was undertaken near the town of Vinnytsia in Ukraine, led by Nazi Germany as an anti-Soviet campaign[17](#ftn17).

18It was only in the 1970s that the first articles on forensic archaeology were published[18](#ftn18). Then in the 1980s the first field manual of forensic archaeology and anthropology appeared, edited by D. Morse _et al_.[19](#ftn19). The publication of this guide showed the interest in the use of archaeological techniques for criminal investigations. However, the role of archaeology at that time remained limited to the use of relatively easy field techniques, often taught by non-professionals[20](#ftn20). A few years later a change was wrought by the work of B. Sigler-Eisenberg with a more theoretical approach and an extended use of archaeological techniques[21](#ftn21). Since the 1990s, forensic archaeology has become of far more interest to the police and the judiciary, particularly by its role in media crime investigations and greater public awareness.

19Nowadays the practice of forensic archaeology varies worldwide as a result of historical, educational, legal and judicial backgrounds. It is practiced by forensic archaeologists, forensic anthropologists, forensic pathologists or police officers. It is considered timely that an international recognised protocol be developed for single, as well mass, graves and recommend the formation of an internationally recognised committee in order to establish a cooperative multidisciplinary mode of investigation and research[22](#ftn22).

# Dichotomy between the Anglo-Saxon world and Continental Europe

20The acceptance and utilisation of forensic archaeologists in criminal investigations has developed since the 1980-1990s in Anglo-Saxon countries such as the United Kingdom, Ireland, USA and Australia. In Continental Europe, it has been a relatively new development and there are differences even within the Anglo-Saxon world. For example, there are relatively less occasions when forensic archaeologists are requested to participate in a forensic investigation in the United Kingdom, Ireland or Australia, compared with their North American counterparts. This is probably due to the higher number of homicides in the USA[23](#ftn23).

21Why is the discipline of forensic archaeology not so well developed in Continental Europe?

22In the Anglo-Saxon world, many forensic archaeologists and forensic anthropologists are employed, some by police forces to do their own forensic analyses, but most mostly by private organisations which work for forensic police cases. This is not the case in many European countries, where very often only a few individuals can earn thir living in a forensic position on a full-time basis. The same contrast is noticed in the academic degrees in forensic science provided by the universities. While the United Kingdom, USA and Australia are booming, the number of forensic courses offered is still very limited in continental Europe with few exceptions ( _e.g._ in the Netherlands).

23One reason for the above-mentioned is the different law systems. The European system is based on civil law, while the Anglo-Saxon world (the countries in the Commonwealth, former British colonies) has a common law system. Civil law goes back to Roman law, and in particular a compilation of rules that were issued by emperor Justinian I in the 6th c. ( _Corpus Juris Civilis_). Common law is a typical English development. In the 11th c. monarchs began to unite the laws using the king’s court. Justices created a common law by taking into account customs across the country and ruling monarchs. These rules developed organically and were rarely written down. Nowadays the difference between common and civil legal traditions lies in the main source of law. Judicial cases are regarded as the most important source of law, which gives judges an active role in developing rules. The elements needed to prove the crime of murder are contained in case law rather than defined by statute. To ensure consistency, courts abide by precedents set by higher courts examining the same issue. These precedent cases are referred to during the present court case. On the contrary, in civil-law systems, codes and statutes are designed to cover all eventualities. Judges have a more limited role of applying the law to the case in hand and past judgments, generally, are not really taken into account. In the case of trial, judges in civil-law systems tend to be investigators, while their peers in common-law systems act as arbiters between parties that present their arguments[24](#ftn24). This means that in the Anglo-Saxon world, even when a forensic archaeologist is not used, a defence barrister may call upon a forensic archaeologist to testify that the methodologies utilised were unsuitable, with the aim of having evidence collected by unspecialised investigators, dismissed from the court proceedings[25](#ftn25). Additionally, under common law, the highest standard of proof to be met by the prosecution’s evidence in a criminal prosecution is “beyond reasonable doubt”. This means that no other explanation can be derived from the facts, except that the defendant committed the crime, therefore overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty. If doubt affects belief that the defendant is guilty, the jury is not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt and the defendant remains innocent.

24In other words, and maybe caricaturally, the main difference between civil law and common law systems is the following: if investigators make a mistake in a country under common law ( _e.g._ losing evidence or missing evidence), the perpetrator can be freed. If investigators make a mistake under civil law, the perpetrator can still be jailed. This means that Anglo-Saxon countries are, generally speaking, under more pressure to ensure that investigations and excavations are carried out meticulously, thus, for example, requiring that forensic excavations be carried out by professional forensic archaeologists rather than any police officer. It goes without saying that the above-mentioned deduction does not apply for all countries that use civil law or common law systems.

# Excavation methods

25As stated above, forensic archaeology is more than mere excavation. For this article the authors will give a brief overview of different excavation techniques of a burial containing human remains, as the objective is to give the reader some literary references. It is evident that other steps such as predictive modelling, gathering of information, site preparation, securing the scene, and search and location of the remains precede the excavation and recovery. No two crimes are the same and the deployment of the correct excavation methods and techniques requires awareness of their advantages and limitations within different environments[26](#ftn26). It is also important to mention that many of the practitioners vary their excavation method depending on the archaeological site. This flexibility is related to several variables such as the scale of the site, the time available to conduct the excavation, the type of archaeological site, the number of archaeologists that are available, the documentation method to be used, or the sampling strategy that has been set by the director[27](#ftn27). Therefore, it is very important that the chosen strategy be discussed with the Director or Senior Investigator prior to excavation.

26A first method is the Half Sectioning excavation method, also called the Demirant excavation method. This method divides the archaeological feature into two halves. Each half is excavated separately following the burial cut. An advantage of this method is that it allows investigators to see what the feature contains without having to dig the entire feature or area. Another advantage is that the stratigraphic relationships between individual contexts in these features can be observed and recorded. This information is then used to guide the excavation of the remaining half of the feature. In some cases, a baulk of earth is left in the middle (fig. 1)[28](#ftn28). When using this excavation method, the Standard Context Recording system is used. For each context that is found, a context recording form is filled out but unlike the Single Context Recording system, this system does not rely on overlaying plans of individual context to determine stratigraphic relationships. Instead, it relies on using the section that was exposed and recorded during the excavation process. At the end, once stratigraphic relationships are established, they are recorded in the same way as for the Single Context Recording system[29](#ftn29).

Fig. 1. Example of the Half Sectioning excavation method, with a baulk left in the middle. This human skeleton model was excavated during a student exercise © E. Schotsmans.

![Image 100000000000062A0000062A5A2BBA43F2D61A71.jpg](/ausonius/file/18426/tei/img-1.jpg/download)

27A grave can also be divided into four different quarters following the grave cut, called the Quadrant excavation method. As with the Half Sectioning method, the archaeologist might leave a cross-shaped baulk along the axes of the feature during the excavation process. By examining the four parts, the archaeologist will be able to verify the presence of and the stratigraphic relationships between individual contexts. At the end, the standing baulks will be removed in order to ensure that any evidence or material in the baulk is recovered too[30](#ftn30). The Quadrant excavation method uses the same recording system as the Half Sectioning excavation method. But because of the four separate parts, the sections can be evaluated in both length and width so that stratigraphic relationships can be established[31](#ftn31).

28Other scholars claim that a burial is best excavated using the Stratigraphic Excavation method. In this method, the grave cut is maintained and each of the fills contained within the grave are defined and excavated in isolation, in the reverse order of their deposition. This method relies on the understanding that within any stratigraphic sequence, a chronologically earlier context will be found to be sealed or cut by a chronologically later context, and that by excavating each of these individual units in their entirety, it is possible to accurately reconstruct the formation sequence of an archaeological site or feature.The recording system tusedwith the Stratigraphic excavation method is the Single Context Recording system[32](#ftn32).

29Finally, older publications describe the pedestal method as the preferred excavation method. Access trenches should be excavated around the outline of the identified grave cut so that human remains and evidence are left upon a soil pedestal (fig. 2)[33](#ftn33). Similarly, some authors suggest that a trench should be excavated around the outline of the grave cut until the bottom of the grave has been reached. The graves should then be undercut and a platform slid underneath so that the grave block can be transported to the laboratory to be excavated in controlled conditions[34](#ftn34). The disadvantage of the pedestal method is that evidence might be damaged, lost or not noticed – and therefore destroyed – by digging the access trench. It is also hardly possible to establish stratigraphic relationships using the pedestal method. Given the above-mentioned, this method is not taught at universities or police academies in countries with a developed forensic archaeology curriculum ( _e.g._ United Kingdom, the Netherlands).

Fig. 2. Example of an access trench excavated around the outline of the identified grave cut so that human remains are left upon a soil pedestal. The aim of the paper bag around the foot is not to lose any nails. Case study described in Schotsmans et al. 2011.

![Image 10000000000005FE00000429ABCD1761E0D59DC3.jpg](/ausonius/file/18426/tei/img-2.jpg/download)

30Hardly anyone uses the Arbitrary Level excavation method where arbitrary levels are removed. This method is outdated, prone to destruction of evidence, and it excludes the possibility of establishing stratigraphic relationships. Therefore, it is strongly advised not to use this method.

31L. Evis evaluated the current archaeological excavation methods and recording systems, focusing on those used in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australasia and North America with an excavation experiment on 50 graves excavated by 40 conventional archaeologists and 10 control individuals without archaeological experience[35](#ftn35). The results from this study showed that the Quadrant excavation method with Standard Context Recording system was the most consistent, efficient and reliable archaeological approach to use to excavate and record clandestine burials and to formulate interpretation-based narratives of a grave’s formation sequence to court. If this approach cannot be used, the Half Sectioning excavation method and Standard Context Recording system, or the Stratigraphic Excavation method and Single Context Recording system should be used. It is important to emphasise that the archaeologists who participated in the above-mentioned study had, generally speaking, no or limited experience in forensic archaeology, a fact that could have influenced the conclusions reached.

32During the excavation it is important that the forensic archaeologist identifies and documents all taphonomic features. According to M. J. Hochrein these features can be categorised into six groups: stratification, tool marks, bioturbation, sedimentation, compression and depression, and internal compaction[36](#ftn36). These features can indicate the method by which the grave was constructed, whether the grave had been left open prior to the placing of the human remains, whether the perpetrator stood in the grave, whether the victim was alive when arriving at the crime scene, and whether the burial had been disturbed by scavengers during the time period between deposition and excavation. This can provide details concerning the premeditation of a crime and assist the forensic archaeologist in reconstructing the sequence of events that occurred from the point at which the burial was dug until its excavation[37](#ftn37). In comparison with conventional archaeologists, forensic archaeologists must be well informed about the decay of human remains starting from soft tissue. Furthermore, they need knowledge of other forensic disciplines such as pathology, anthropology, archaeology, entomology, botany, chemistry, microbiology and soil science because it is not always possible to call such specialists to the crime scene. It is therefore recommended for the forensic archaeologist understand taphonomy, focused on the chemical and biological processes of soft tissue decomposition of human remains and the degradation of associated artefacts or textiles, particularly in the depositional environment[38](#ftn38).

# Forensic Archaeology in Europe

33In general, forensic archaeology is is at an early stage in Europe. The only two countries well advanced in this discipline are the United Kingdom, mainly due to the Common Law system, and the Netherlands, due to its size and travelling distances and the fact that forensic archaeology is offered by a nationwide operating forensic institute, the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI).

34In Austria expertise in forensic archaeology and forensic anthropology is available, but as universities are semi-privatised rather than state-run, it is difficult for prosecutors and police to rely on civil servant specialists to conduct such investigations[39](#ftn39).

35In Belgium, when human remains are found, the Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) team is called to perform the excavation. Within the team there used to be police inspectors who also had a degree in conventional archaeology but currently the DVI consists of police officers who followed basic training in forensic archaeology[40](#ftn40).

36In Bosnia and Herzegovina forensic archaeology is one of several forensic sciences in a multidisciplinary system which assist criminal and missing persons investigations in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The work undertaken between 1996 and 2013 is one of the largest forensic operations where forensic archaeology and anthropology have contributed to death investigations and identifications, with more than 200 sites excavated per year and over 22, 000 people identified[41](#ftn41). Despite this, forensic archaeology is little used in criminal cases that are unrelated to the 1992-1995 war.

37In Bulgaria, forensic archaeology is in its infancy. Little by little they are becoming aware of forensic archaeology but at the moment the medical examiner is the only recognised available scientist during criminal investigations[42](#ftn42).

38In Croatia, the development of forensic archaeology rests on the interest, experience and persistence of a few individuals who practice these disciplines and who pursue additional training and accreditation outside Croatia[43](#ftn43).

39In the Czech Republic forensic archaeology has not been clearly defined. Forensic anthropology is better known and specialists can work as judicial experts for the identification of unknown human remains. They also work on cases related to the identification of historical individuals or World War I and II burials[44](#ftn44).

40Similarly, in Denmark forensic anthropology is better known than forensic archaeology. The Forensic Anthropology Unit is part of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at the University of Copenhagen and, at times, works with experienced archaeologists[45](#ftn45). For the last couple of years forensic archaeology has been offered by the Moesgaard Museum, in cooperation with the Danish police dog handling training centre.

41In France, the presence of forensic archaeologists is still rare, although the interest of the intervention of a specialist was noticed more than 15 years ago[46](#ftn46). Moreover, forensic pathologists do not feel competent to deal with this kind of field work[47](#ftn47). At present, the Forensic Institute of the National Gendarmerie (IRCGN) is the only official institution that has integrated archaeologists for the purpose of forensic excavations. They have also started delivering courses on the subject. However, there are still major bottlenecks concerning the intervention of forensic archaeologists at a crime scene. At the origin of the slow start to this discipline in France is the vast size of the French territory and the difficulties of outsourcing the job to external specialists. Furthermore there is a lack of information and awareness within the local police and gendarmerie forces[48](#ftn48). On the other hand, there is increasing interest from archaeologists at Inrap (the French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research) who are being trained and involved in forensic excavations. Experience in preventive archaeology is absolutely essential within forensic archaeology in general or, for instance, for the use of earth-moving machines to detect clandestine graves (fig. 3)[49](#ftn49). It would be recommended that these experts be included on a list of forensic experts, but this is not necessary in the French legal context (requisition procedure).

Fig. 3. The search for a buried body in the South of France, using a mechanical shovel. © P. Georges, Inrap.

![Image 10000000000006EC0000057586A4B81A32BCAA2E.jpg](/ausonius/file/18426/tei/img-3.jpg/download)

42Forensic archaeology was introduced in Finland by the excavation of a site thought to contain the remains of executed Finnish soldiers from World War II, but it appeared to be a 18th-19th c. mass grave. At present there is only one member of police staff who serves as both forensic archaeologist and anthropologist and as fingerprint specialist. For half of the year, most of the country is covered with snow, and the chances of buried human remains are smaller in frozen soil[50](#ftn50).

43In Germany, forensic archaeologists are not regularly employed by the police. However, awareness of a forensic archaeological approach to excavation is developing. Based on a criminal case, a Working Group Forensic Archaeology was established in 2002 at a Federal Criminal Police Level. Their objective is to advise to investigators, to assist in preparatory work and to support searchers and excavations. However, to date the total number of forensic excavations is low. Outside the police, excellent archaeological expertise is available at universities, cultural heritage institutes and through the work of the War Graves Commission[51](#ftn51).

44Despite its rich history of archaeological excavations in Greece, forensic archaeology as an individual discipline does not exist. Principles of forensic archaeology are employed by individuals who have been trained accordingly. This includes members of the Forensic Anthropology Unit (UoAFAU) at the University of Athens Medical School. These members actively participate in cases by providing anthropological examinations at the request of the Court, Prosecution Office or police. The application of archaeology in mass grave investigation is known because of the Cyprus Project, run by the non-governmental organisation Physicians for Human Rights. This project aims at the recovery, identification and repatriation of the remains of citizens of Cyprus and Greece who were killed during the 1974 invasion of Cyprus by Turkey[52](#ftn52).

45In Hungary, the concept of humanitarian archaeology is widely known. These excavations are conducted in the presence of relatives or those who requested the exhumation from the experts working to reconstruct past events. Forensic exhumations are conducted by institutes under the supervision of the Ministry of Justice, especially by the Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ISZKI) which consists of archaeologists and anthropologists. The purpose is mostly human identification, followed by reburial. The ISZKI group helps to clarify facts about recent historical events in Hungary but the concept of forensic archaeology employed by justice or police forces is unknown[53](#ftn53).

46In Ireland, forensic archaeology exist in conjunction with the Independent Commission for the Location of Victim Remains (ICLVR). This independent body is tasked with the search for, recovery, and repatriation of individuals who have been abducted and murdered during the course of the conflict in Northern Ireland (www.iclvr.ie). Additionally, and similar to the United Kingdom, there is the Institute of Archaeologists of Ireland as a professional body and there are policies for archaeologists and legislation within which they are required to work[54](#ftn54).

47In Italy, forensic archaeology is known but needs further recognition. A case study from 2001 proved to judges and police forces the benefits of using archaeologists in criminal cases. To date no forensic archaeologists work for the state. They may act as consultants to the Judicial Police and maybe requested in court, but in many cases the forensic pathologist, mortuary police or other police officers recover corpses from forensic scenes [55](#ftn55). Recently the Italian Carabinieri began employing one forensic anthropologist who is also responsible for the recovery of skeletal human remains at crime scenes.

48Although the term “forensic archaeology” is a relatively new concept in Lithuania, its practice dates from the early 1960s, with experience gained from earlier excavations of the mass graves of the Holocaust, exhumation and identification of historical individuals and numerous forensic osteological anthropological identifications. Recently the State Forensic Medicine Service (VTMT) was established under the Ministry of Justice located in Vilnius. The VTMT has specialised laboratories for serology and DNA, toxicology, histology and medical criminalistics. With increasing police awareness of the potential of archaeology in the investigation of contemporary crimes, the VTMT will probably be more involved in forensic archaeology in the future[56](#ftn56).

49In the Netherlands forensic archaeology was introduced in 2005, at the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI). The NFI is an agency of the Ministry of Security and Justice and provides services to clients within the criminal justice chain. The NFI employs two full-time forensic archaeologists who are specialised in spatial analysis and (GIS) predictive modelling, forensic geophysics, biological anthropology, human taphonomy and field archaeology. Dutch casework entails desktop analysis, survey for (buried) human remains or objects, the recovery of highly burned and/or scattered human remains above ground, dating analysis of skeletal human remains and buried objects, excavation of clandestine graves and exhumation at regular cemeteries. In addition they run a training course at the Dutch police academy and offer guest lectures at universities that offer a degree in Forensic Sciences[57](#ftn57). Both NFI forensic archaeologies are staff members at the Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University, where they lecture in Forensic Archaeology and run an internationally oriented summer course. In addition, they develop and refine archaeological methods and techniques that may be relevant in forensic cases and research human (belowground) taphonomy.

50In Norway there are no forensic archaeologists in the Norwegian police. There are some crime technician police officers that have a degree in archaeology, but in general the police is not trained in archaeological techniques although they are responsible for the recovery of bodies from crime scenes[58](#ftn58).

51In Poland, there are four main forms of forensic archaeology: excavations of war crimes or genocide sites, excavations of battlefields, historical research (conventional archaeology) and excavation of plane crash sites. The application of forensic archaeology in police investigations is not yet recognised. However, the University of Wrocław starteda course on Forensic Archaeology in 2010 that was successfully attended by prosecutors, historians, and occasionally policemen. In 2013 a manual of forensic archaeology was published[59](#ftn59).

52In Portugal, forensic anthropologists generally work with police forces in cases of missing persons and homicides, but not when international mass graves from conflict contexts are concerned. Forensic anthropologists are consultant professionals to the National Institute of Legal Medicine (INML). They give advice to police forces but they do not testify in court[60](#ftn60).

53In Romania, the concept of forensic anthropology has not been completely introduced but excavations and forensic anthropological methods are applied to the humanitarian investigation of (mass) graves such as Holocaust mass burials or victims of executions[61](#ftn61).

54In Russia, the involvement of biological anthropology and archaeological experts in medico-legal field work, does not exist yet as a separate science. However, historical excavations such as the exhumation and identification of a Russian Imperial family, the Romanovs or the search and excavation of Japanese World War II prisoners’ war graves demonstratess that the disciplines are not unknown in Russia[62](#ftn62).

55In Serbia there are no forensic archaeologists in the judicial system, but forensic archaeological methods have been used since 2001 for the excavation of mass graves related to World War II or the Kosovo conflict in 1999[63](#ftn63).

56In the Slovak Republic the Slovak police work closely with archaeologists only in cases of damage or devaluation of archaeological heritage sites. There is no systematic research of mass graves from WWI or WWII and associated identification of victims of wars undertaken in Slovakia[64](#ftn64).

57In Slovenia there are standards and regulations on how to excavate post-war mass graves. These were established with the collaboration of criminal forensics, forensic medicine, anthropology and archaeology, under the auspices of the Government Commission on Concealed Graves. The presence of archaeological experts during mass grave excavations has made the police aware that archaeological expertise might be useful during the investigation of criminal offences[65](#ftn65).

58In Spain, during the last 20 years, there has been an increased awareness of the value that archaeology can bring to criminal investigations. The leg work was done by the excavations and identifications of victims from the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) and the dictatorship that followed. Although at present mainly humanitarian in nature rather than for justsice, the concept of forensic archaeology is established in both theory and in practice. Step by step archaeologists are (voluntarily) assisting the armed forces[66](#ftn66).

59In Switzerland, due to the federal system which divides the country into sovereign cantons, each of Switzerland’s 26 cantons has its own court and police corps which complicates the introduction of forensic archaeology. When a body is found at a crime scene, the district medical examiner, who is a general physician with forensic training, is sent to the scene for inspection, but also for recovery of human remain, bones included. Bones are then taken to biological anthropologists (for example at the Department for Physical Anthropology at the Institute of Forensic Medicine at Bern University), but it is very uncommon for forensic anthropologists or archaeologists to be present at the crime scene[67](#ftn67).

60In the United Kingdom, the value of forensic archaeology was established in 1988 when J. Hunter and C. Roberts excavated, on behalf of the West Yorkshire Police, the remains of a young boy murdered by his stepfather some 25 years earlier. Since then archaeology applied to forensic investigations is an established discipline that is well accepted among police forces in the United Kingdom. Forensic archaeology is taught at several British Universities and a validation process of competence exists under the auspices of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA). In the past police forces could seek specialist support in areas such as fingerprints, firearms or forensic archaeology at a national service known as the Forensic Science Services that was nationally funded, nowadays these specialist services are privatised. Police forces are committed to work with forensic services, but can still choose their own forensic archaeology practitioners, irrespective of the provider that they are tied to for mainstream services. Forensic practitioners are based in independent forensic providers and forensic services, or are linked to museums, universities or non-profit organisations. Not all forensic archaeologists work full time in forensics, but if they perform case work they do it well and all maintain high standards[68](#ftn68).

61Within Europe, forensic archaeology is not officially practised or recognised in Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Sweden, Turkey and Ukraine[69](#ftn69).

62In summary, the concept of forensic archaeology is well established in a few countries ( _e.g._ United Kingdom and the Netherlands), in other countries forensic archaeologists are mostly used in humanitarian cases such as the excavation of mass graves ( _e.g._ Bosnia and Herzegovina, Servia, Slovak Republic and Slovenia) and in other countries the discipline is non-existent. In countries where there are no forensic archaeologists involved, often a forensic pathologist or police personnel (trained or not at all trained) are involved in the search, location and recovery of human remains. The cause of the lack of forensic archaeologists is due to different judicial systems, a lack of awareness, education and training, a lack of centralised units with too many districts or different armed forces (police and military) and a lack of communication. Furthermore, the medley within Europe is lacking unity through the lack of guidelines, standards and protocols. As mentioned above, it is timely for an international or European recognised protocol to be developed.

# Standards and protocols: a European collaboration

63A first attempt to provide European standards and protocols for forensic anthropology and archaeology was published in 2001 by police officers and forensic archaeologists from the United Kingdom, Belgium and the Netherlands[70](#ftn70). In 2010, the United Kingdom standards and guidelines for forensic archaeologists, based on documents developed earlier by the Council for the Registration of Forensic Practitioners (CRFP) and the British Chartered Institute for Archaeologists (CIfA), formerly known as the Institute for Archaeologists (IfA), were written[71](#ftn71). One year later, it was established that the CIfA should be the professional body for forensic archaeology in the United Kingdom. Subsequently a Forensic Archaeology Special Interest Group (FASIG) and a Forensic Archaeology Expert Panel (FAEP) were created within the CIfA, to promote the discipline generally and to offer a platform for practicing forensic archaeologists. The United Kingdom standards and guidelines for forensic archaeologists were endorsed by the UK Forensic Science Regulator in 2012[72](#ftn72).

64Also in 2012, the first European Meeting on Forensic Archaeology (EMFA) was organised in The Hague, the Netherlands, by the members of CIfA and the Dutch NFI. The EMFA subsequently developed into a two-day scientific meeting on (European) forensic archaeology and has been annually organised since then, in the Netherlands (2103 by the NFI), in theUnited Kingdom (2014 by the Cranfield University), in France (2015 by the Forensic Science Institute of the French National Gendarmerie), in Ireland (2016 by the ICLVR) and in Italy (2017 by the American University of Rome).

65One of the outcomes of the first EMFA meeting was the wish of the participants to collaborate within a European network concerning the use of forensic archaeology in a legal context. As such, a project group on Forensic Archaeology was created within the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENFSI) in 2013, to examine the feasibility of forensic archaeology in European forensic setting[73](#ftn73). In 2016, the ENFSI community recognised forensic archaeology as an official forensic discipline by merging it, together with the Blood Pattern Analysis (BPA) expertise, with the ENFSI Expert Working Group (EWG) Scene of Crime. At the time of writing the three groups are in the process of mering and the structure of the merged EWG is still unknown.

66As an ENFSI recognised forensic discipline, the forensic archaeology group is developing proficiency tests and collaborative exercises and is discussing the structure of the Best Practice Manual (BPM) on Forensic Archaeology. This is in compliance with the EU Council plan on the creation of an European Forensic Science Area adopted in June 2016. International collaborative exercises have already been organised in the Netherlands in 2016 and in Denmark in 2017. The next collaborative exercise is scheduled for April 2018, in Portugal. The still to be developed BPM on Forensic Archaeology will additionally raise awareness about forensic archaeology in Europe and describe commonly accepted methods and procedures concerning forensic archaeological practice. Additionally, forensic awareness and training in forensic archaeology is being developed for law enforcement and justice communities.

# Conclusions

67This paper has provided a general overview of the concept of forensic archaeology in Europe. It did not focus on mass grave excavations, nor on the work of non-governmental organisations such as the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) or the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Importantly, the concept of forensic archaeology is slowly emerging in Europe, although not yet well established in all European countries. The authors see a positive future for forensic archaeology. There is an increasing awareness of the discipline with increasing literature on the subject, the establishment of the annual European Meeting on Forensic Archaeology (EMFA) and the holding of the international collaborative ENFSI excavation exercises. One day there will be an ENFSI Best Practice Manual on Forensic Archaeology for – among other topics - the search, location, excavation, recovery and documentation of buried human remains.

## Bibliography

# Bibliography

Abramov, A., Veselovskaya, E., Dolgov, A., Engovatova, A. V., Mednikova, M. B., Nikitin S. et Safarov, A. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in the Russian Federation”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 139-148.

Adalian, P., Signoli, M., Lalys, Ardagna, L. Y., Piercecchi-Marti, M.-D., Dutour, O. et Léonetti, G. (2002): “Intérêt de la présence d’une équipe spécialisée pour la levée de corps en anthropologie médico-légale”, _Journal de Médecine Légale Droit Médical_, 45, 375-377.

Baccino, E. (2001): “L’Anthropologie forensique (AF), ou anthropologie médicolégale, est-elle un nouveau métier ?”, _La Revue de Médecine Légale_, 2, 1-3.

Blau, S. (2005): “Once chance only: advocating the use of archaeology in search, location and recovery at disaster scences”, _The Australian Journal of Emergency Management_, 20, 19-24.

Blau, S. et Ubelaker, D. H., ed. (2009): _Handbook of forensic anthropology and archaeology_, California.

Borrini. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Italy: the difficult birth of a discipline”, in: Groen _et al_., ed. 2015b, 91-97.

Boyanov, I. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Bulgaria - problems and perspectives”, in: Groen _et al._, ed. 2015b, 33-38.

Brooks, S. T. et Brooks, R. H. (1984): “Problems of burial exhumation, historical and forensic aspects”, in: Rathbun & Buikstra, ed. 1984, 64-86.

Cattaneo, C. (2009): “Forensic anthropology and archaeology: perspectives from Italy”, in: Blau & Ubelaker, ed. 2009, 42-48.

Cheetham, P. et Hanson, I. (2009): “Excavation and recovery in forensic archaeological investigations”, in: Blau & Ubelaker, ed. 2009, 141-149.

Congram, D. R. (2008): “A clandestine burial in Costa Rica: prospection and excavation”, _Journal of Forensic Sciences_, 53, 793-796.

Cox, M, Flavel, A., Hanson, I., Laver, J. et Wessling, R. (2008): _The scientific investigation of mass graves. Towards protocols and standard operating procedures_. Cambridge.

de Leeuwe, R. et Groen, W. J. M. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in the Netherlands: uncovering buried and scattered evidence”, in: Groen _et al._, ed. 2015b, 109-120.

Demoule, J.-P. et Stiegler, B., ed (2008): _L’avenir du passé. Modernité de l’archéologie_, Paris.

Diana, A. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Romania: present and future of a new discipline”, in: Groen _et al_., ed. 2015b, 129-137.

Dirkmaat, D. C., ed. (2012): _A companion to forensic anthropology_, Chichester.

Djuric, M. et Starovic, A. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Serbia: from exhumation to excavation”, in: Groen _et al_., ed. 2015b, 149-157.

Ducrettet, F., Georges, P., Nolot, F., Richebé, J. et Schuliar, Y. (2013): “Organisation, méthodes et recherches en archéologie criminalistique à l’institut de recherche criminielle de la gendarmerie nationale. À propos de 20 ans d’expérience”, _La Revue de Médecine Légale_, 4, 27-37.

Duday, H. et Masset, C., ed (1987): A _nthropologie physique et archeologie: Méthodes d’étude des sépultures, Actes du colloque de Toulouse, 4-6 novembre 1982_, Bordeaux.

Dupras, T. L., Schultz, J. J., Wheeler, S. M. et Williams, L. J. (2006): _Forensic recovery of human remains_. Boca Raton.

Dwight, T. (1878): _The identification of the human skeleton: a medico-legal study_, Boston.

ENFSI (2015): _ENFSI guideline for evaluative reporting in forensic science. Strengthening the evaluation of forensic results across Europe (STEOFRAE), ENFSI (EU ISEC 2010, Agreement Number: HOME/2010/ISEC/MO/4000001759)_.

Evis, L. (2016): _Forensic archaeology. The application of comparative excavation methods and recording systems_, Oxford.

Fondebrider, L. et Scheinsohn, V. (2015): “Forensic archaeology: the Argentinian way”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 369-378.

Georges, P., Ducrettet, F., Nolot, F., Richebé, J. et Schuliar, Y. (2012): “Problématiques et règles d’emploi criminialistiques des engins de chantier pour la recherche de cadavres enfouis. L’expérience de l’Institut de recherche criminielle de la Gendarmerie nationale (France)”, _Revue Internationale de Criminologie et de Police Technique et Scientifique_, 3, 363-374.

Groen, W. J. M. (2015): “Forensic archaeology: the European collaboration”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 207-211.

Groen, W. J. M., Marquez-Grant, N. et Janaway, R. C. (2015a): “Concluding remarks”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 517-536.

Groen, W. J. M., Marquez-Grant, N. et Janaway, R. C., ed (2015b): _Forensic archaeology: a global perspective_, Chichester.

Haglund, W. D. (2008): “L’archéologie et l’anthropologie médico-légales dans le contexte international”, in: Demoule & Stiegler, ed 2008, 114-131.

Haglund, W. D., Connor, M. et Scott, D.D. (2001): “The archaeology of contemporary mass graves”, _Historical Archaeology_, 35, 57-69.

Haglund, W. D. et Sorg, M. H. (1997): _Forensic taphonomy. The postmortem fate of human remains_, Boca Raton.

Haglund, W. D., and M. H. Sorg. (2002). _Advances in forensic taphonomy_, Boca Raton.

Hanson, I., Rizviç, A. et Parsons, T. J. (2015): “Bosnia and Herzegovina: forensic archaeology in support of national and international organisations undertaking criminial investigations and identifying the missing from 1996 to 2013”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 19-31.

Hochrein, M. J. (2002): “An autopsy of the grave: recognizing, collecting and preserving forensic geotaphonomic evidence”, in: Haglund & Sorg, ed 2002, 45-69.

Hochrein, M. J., Gabra, J. et Nawrocki, S. P. (1999): “The buried body cases content analyses project: Patterns in buried body investigations”, _Proceedings of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences_, 5, 60-83.

Hunter, J. (1996): “A background to forensic archaeology”, in: Hunter _et al._, ed 1996, 7-23.

Hunter, J. et Cox, M. (2005): _Forensic archaeology: advances in theory and practice_, Londres.

Hunter, J. et Cropper, C. (2015): “Introduction to forensic archaeology in the United Kingdom”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 189-195.

Hunter, J. et Dockrill, S. (1996): “Recovering buried remains”, in: Hunter _et al_., ed 1996, 40-57.

Hunter, J., Heron, C. P., Janaway, R. C., Martin, A. L., Pollard, A. M. et Roberts, C. (1994): “Forensic archaeology in Britain”, _Antiquity_, 68, 758-769.

Hunter, J., Roberts, C. et Martin, A. (1996): _Studies in crime. An introduction to forensic archaeology_, Londres.

Hunter, J., Simpson, B. et Sturdy, C., coll. (2013): _Forensic approaches to buried remains_. Chichester.

Hunter, J. , Brickley, M., Bourgeois, J., Bourguignon, L., Hubrecht, F., De Winne, J., Van Haaster, H., Hakbijl, T., De Jong, H., Smits, L., Van Wijngaarden, L. H. et Luschen, M. (2001): “Forensic archaeology, forensic anthropology and Human Rights in Europe”, _Science & Justice_, 41, 173-178.

Imaizumi, M. (1974): “Locating buried bodies”, _FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin_, 43, 2-5.

Jamnik, P. (2015): “Inclusion of archaeology in criminal investigations – Slovenia”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 165-172.

Janaway, R. C. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in the United Kingdom and quality assurance”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 197-206.

Jankauskas, R. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Lithuania”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 99-108.

Jorkov, M. L. et Lynnerup, N. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Denmark”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 55-57.

Kanz, F. et Cemper-Kiesslich, J. (2015): “Forensic archaeology and anthropology in Austria”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 3-7.

Larson, D. O., Vass, A. A. et Wise, M. (2011): “Advanced scientific methods and procedures in the forensic investigation of clandestine graves”, _Journal of Contemporary Criminial Justice_, 27, 149-182.

Lévy, A. (2008): _La police scientifique. La technologie de pointe au service des enquêteurs_, Paris.

Litherland, S., Marquez-Grant, N. et Roberts, J. (2012): “Forensic archaeology”, in: Roberts & Marquez-Grant, ed 2012, 23-48.

Lösch, S., Jackowski, C. et Zingg, C. (2015): “Forensic archaeology and anthropology in Switzerland”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 183-187.

Marquez-Grant, N. et Fibiger, L. (2011): _The Routledge handbook of archaeological human remains and legislation. An international guide to laws and practice in the excavation and treatment of archaeogical human remains_, Londres.

Marquez-Grant, N., Litherland, S. et Roberts, J. (2012): “European perspectives and the role of the forensic archaeologist in the UK”, in: Dirkmaat, ed 2012, 598-625.

Marquez-Grant, N., Vazquez Diaz, M. A., et Melendez Gonzalez, R. (2015): “The use of archaeology in the criminal and medico-legal context in Spain”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 173-182.

Masnicova, S., Benus, R. et Obertova, Z. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in the Slovac Republic”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 159-163.

McCullagh, N. A. et Knupfer, G. C. (2015): “Forensic archaeology and the independent commission for the location of victims’ remains”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 407-413.

McLaughlin, J. E. (1974): _The detection of buried remains_, Yuba City.

Moraitis, K. et Eliopoulos, C. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Greece”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 77-81.

Morse, D., Crusoe, D. et Smith, H. G. (1976): “Forensic archaeology”, _Journal of Forensic Sciences_, 21, 323-332.

Morse, D., Duncan, J. et Stoutamire, J., ed (1983): _Handbook of forensci archaeology and anthropology_, Tallahassee.

Neumann, R., Klenke, K. et Fischer, A. (2015): “The working group ‘forensic archaeology’ at the German Bundeskriminalamt”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 67-75.

O’Sullivan, J., Hallissey, M. et Roberts, J. (2002): _Human remains in Irish archaeology: legal, scientific, planning and ethical implications_, Kilkenny.

Oakley, K. (2005): “Forensic archaeology and anthropology: an Australian perspective”, _Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology_, 1, 169-172.

Pickering, R. P. et Bachman, D. (1996): _Use of Forensic Anthropology_, Boca Raton.

Pokines, J. et Symes, S. A. (2013): _Manual of Forensic Taphonomy_, Boca Raton.

Powers, N. et Sibun, L. (2014): _Standard and guidance for forensic archaeologists_, Reading.

Rathbun, T. A. et Buikstra, J. E. (1984): _Human identification: case studies in forensic anthropology_, Illinois.

Renfrew, C. et Bahn, P. (1991): A _rchaeology. Theories, methods and practice_, Londres.

Roberts, J. et Marquez-Grant, N., ed (2012): _Forensic ecology handbook from crime scene to court_, Chichester.

Ruffell, A., A., Donnelly, C., Carver, N., Murphy, E., Murray, E. et McCambridge, J. (2009): “Suspect burial excavation procedure: a cautionary tale”, _Forensic Science International_, 183, 11-16.

Schmitt, S., Sozer, A., Fowler, G. et Mazoori, D. (2015): “Physicians for human rights: the role of forensic archaeology in transitional justice contexts”, in Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 471-478.

Schotsmans, E. M. J., Marquez-Grant, N. et Forbes, S. L., ed (2017): _Taphonomy of human remains. Forensic analysis of the dead and the depositional environment_. Chichester.

Schotsmans, E. M. J., Van de Voorde, W., De Winne, J. et Wilson, A.S. (2011): “The impact of shallow burial on differential decomposition to the body: A temperate case study”, _Forensic Science International_, 206, 43-48.

Schuliar, Y., _et al._ (2015): “Forensic archaeology in the French context: the role of the Forensic Sciences Institute of the French National Gendarmerie”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 59-66.

Schultz, J. J. et Dupras, T. L.. (2008): “The contribution of forensic archaeology to homicide investigations”, _Homicide Studies_, 12, 399-413.

Scott, D. D. et Connor, M. (1997): “Context delicti: archaeological context in forensic work”, in: Haglung & Sorg, ed 1997, 27-38.

Sigler-Eisenberg, B. (1985): “Expanding the concentp of aplied archaeology”, _American Antiquity_, 50, 650-655.

Skinner, M., Alempijevic, D. et Djuric-Serejic, M. (2003): “Guidelines for international forensic bio-archaeology monitors of mass grave exhumations”, _Forensic Science International_, 134, 81-92.

Slaus, M. et Petaros, A. (2015): “Croatia (Hrvatska): from WWII and the 1991 war to contemporary forensic cases”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 39-45.

Spennemann, D. H. R. et Franke, B. (1995): “Archaeological techniques for exhumations: a unique data source for crime scene investigations”, _Forensic Science International_, 74, 5-15.

Susa, E., Ery, K., Kovacs, L., Szoke, M. et Molnos, M. (2015): “Forensic archaeology and anthropology in Hungary: current trends and future perspectives”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 83-90.

Tibbett, M. et Carter, D. O. (2008): _Soil analysis in forensic taphonomy_, Boca Raton.

Trzcinski, M. et Borkowski, T. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in Poland: theory and practice”, in: Groen _et al._, ed 2015b, 121-127.

Ubelaker, D. H. (1984): _Human skeletal remains: excavation, analysis, interpretation_, Washington D.C.

Ubelaker, D. H. (1989): _Human skeletal remains: excavation, analysis, interpretation_, Washington D.C.

Van Denhouwe, B. et Schotsmans, E. M. J. (2015): “DVI Belgium: victim identification and necrosearch”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 9-18.

Veleminsky, P., Dobisikova, M., Maxova, E. et Veleminska, J. (2015): “Forensic archaeology in the Czech Republic”, in: Groen _et al_., ed 2015b, 47-54.

White, P. (1998): _Crime scene to court. The essentials of forensic science_, Cambridge.

# Webography

Economist.com. Consulté en octobre 2017. URL:

https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/07/economist-explains-10

Independent Commission for the Location of Victims’ Remains. Consulté en novembre 2017. URL:

http://www.iclvr.ie/

## Footnotes

[1](#bodyftn1) Groen _et al_. 2015b.

[2](#bodyftn2) Groen _et al._ 2015b, ii.

[3](#bodyftn3) Groen _et al_. 2015b.

[4](#bodyftn4) Groen _et al._ 2015a.

[5](#bodyftn5) Powers & Sibun 2014.

[6](#bodyftn6) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[7](#bodyftn7) Renfrew & Bahn 1991, 9.

[8](#bodyftn8) Dupras _et al_. 2006, 1-3; Hunter 1996.

[9](#bodyftn9) Scott & Connor 1997.

[10](#bodyftn10) Skinner _et al_. 2003.

[11](#bodyftn11) Duday & Masset 1987.

[12](#bodyftn12) Haglund 2008.

[13](#bodyftn13) Fondebrider & Scheinsohn 2015; Lévy 2008.

[14](#bodyftn14) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2015\. For a detailed overview of the activities of forensic archaeologists and

forensic anthropologists the authors refer to Groen _et al_. 2015b and Marquez-Grant & Fibiger 2011.

[15](#bodyftn15) White 1998, 2.

[16](#bodyftn16) Dwight 1878.

[17](#bodyftn17) Groen _et al_. 2015b.

[18](#bodyftn18) _e.g._ Morse _et al_. 1976; Imaizumi 1974; McLaughlin 1974.

[19](#bodyftn19) Morse _et al_. 1983.

[20](#bodyftn20) Ubelaker 1984.

[21](#bodyftn21) Sigler-Eisenberg 1985.

[22](#bodyftn22) _e.g._ Groen _et al_. 2015a; Evis 2016, 214.

[23](#bodyftn23) Hunter _et al._ 1994.

[24](#bodyftn24) The Economist 2013; Vranken 2015.

[25](#bodyftn25) Hunter & Dockrill 1996.

[26](#bodyftn26) Hunter 1996.

[27](#bodyftn27) Evis 2016, 69.

[28](#bodyftn28) Dupras _et al_. 2006; Litherland _et al._ 2012; Hunter & Cox 2005; Ruffell _et al._ 2009; Hunter _et al_. 2013; Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[29](#bodyftn29) Evis 2016, 32.

[30](#bodyftn30) Congram 2008.

[31](#bodyftn31) Evis 2016, 33.

[32](#bodyftn32) Hochrein 2002; Skinner _et al._ 2003; Schultz & Dupras 2008; Cheetham & Hanson 2009; Blau 2005.

[33](#bodyftn33) Haglund _et al_. 2001; Pickering & Bachman 1996; Ubelaker 1989; Spennemann & Franke 1995; Oakley 2005; Brooks & Brooks 1984.

[34](#bodyftn34) Larson _et al_. 2011.

[35](#bodyftn35) Evis 2016.

[36](#bodyftn36) Hochrein 2002.

[37](#bodyftn37) Hochrein 2002; Hochrein _et al_. 1999; Cox _et al_. 2008.

[38](#bodyftn38) Pokines & Symes 2013; Tibbett & Carter 2008; Haglund & Sorg 1997 and 2002; Schotsmans _et al_. 2017.

[39](#bodyftn39) Kanz & Cemper-Kiesslich 2015.

[40](#bodyftn40) Van Denhouwe & Schotsmans 2015.

[41](#bodyftn41) Hanson _et al_. 2015.

[42](#bodyftn42) Boyanov 2015.

[43](#bodyftn43) Slaus & Petaros 2015.

[44](#bodyftn44) Veleminsky _et al_. 2015.

[45](#bodyftn45) Jorkov & Lynnerup 2015.

[46](#bodyftn46) Adalian _et al_. 2002.

[47](#bodyftn47) Baccino 2001.

[48](#bodyftn48) Ducrettet _et al_. 2013; Schuliar _et al_. 2015.

[49](#bodyftn49) Georges _et al_. 2012.

[50](#bodyftn50) Pers. Comm. N. Söderholm.

[51](#bodyftn51) Neumann _et al_. 2015.

[52](#bodyftn52) Moraitis & Eliopoulos 2015; Schmitt _et al_. 2015.

[53](#bodyftn53) Susa _et al_. 2015.

[54](#bodyftn54) McCullagh & Knupfer 2015; O’Sullivan _et al_. 2002.

[55](#bodyftn55) Cattaneo 2009; Borrini 2015.

[56](#bodyftn56) Jankauskas 2015.

[57](#bodyftn57) de Leeuwe & Groen 2015.

[58](#bodyftn58) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[59](#bodyftn59) Trzcinski & Borkowski 2015.

[60](#bodyftn60) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[61](#bodyftn61) Diana 2015.

[62](#bodyftn62) Abramov _et al_. 2015.

[63](#bodyftn63) Djuric & Starovic 2015.

[64](#bodyftn64) Masnicova _et al_. 2015.

[65](#bodyftn65) Jamnik 2015.

[66](#bodyftn66) Marquez-Grant _et al._ 2015.

[67](#bodyftn67) Lösch _et al._ 2015.

[68](#bodyftn68) Hunter & Cropper 2015; Janaway 2015; Hunter _et al_. 1996.

[69](#bodyftn69) Groen _et al_. 2015a.

[70](#bodyftn70) Hunter _et al_. 2001.

[71](#bodyftn71) Powers & Sibun 2014.

[72](#bodyftn72) Janaway 2015.

[73](#bodyftn73) Groen 2015.

## Authors

[**Eline M. J. Schotsmans**](/ausonius/person/18431)

[**Patrice Georges-Zimmermann**](/ausonius/person/18436)

[Previous](/ausonius/18415 "Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)")
Avant-propos

Les sciences archéologiques permettent-elles d’étudier la justice médiévale et moderne ?

1\. Les espaces et les équipements de la justice

\-\-\- Culture judiciaire et complexité sociale : le modèle général de l’Angleterre anglo-saxonne

\-\-\- An archaeological approach to modern justice in the Czech Republic, Lower Silesia and Upper Lusatia

\-\-\- Lieux de justice dans la seigneurie ecclésiastique de Meillerie

\-\-\- La tour de l’horloge du parlement de Toulouse

\-\-\- Redécouverte d’un équipement de justice des comtes d’Artois : la Maison Rouge d’Arras

\-\-\- Archaeological documentation of a place of execution: “The Court” – a Medieval Gallows Hill near Alkersleben (Germany)

\-\-\- Les fourches patibulaires en Dordogne. État des lieux et premières pistes de réflexions archéologiques sur la justice médiévale et moderne

\-\-\- Les fourches patibulaires médiévales et modernes en Touraine. De la constitution d’un groupe de travail interdisciplinaire aux premières investigations de terrain

\-\-\- Les fourches patibulaires de Draguignan (Var) (xive-xviie s.) : premiers résultats d’une investigation interdisciplinaire

2\. La justice et ses "objets"

\-\-\- “À chacun une gamelle”. Poteries du quotidien de la prison de Moulins (Allier) à la fin du xixe s.

\-\-\- Reliures de livres avec la peau du condamné : hommage et humiliation autour des corps criminels

\-\-\- Artefact assemblages collected on execution sites in Lower Silesia. Differences and similarities

\-\-\- The Sword, the Hand, the Account: Rereading Justice in the Museum Context

3\. L'archéologue face à la fabrique judiciaire des corps

\-\-\- La pendaison de Judas ou le châtiment sans fin (xiie-xive s.)

\-\-\- Deux dépôts osseux humains atypiques dans un silo du ixe s. à Villiers-le-Bel (Val d’Oise) : du châtiment judiciaire à l’infamie ?

\-\-\- The mass grave from Devnya and judicial culture in early medieval Bulgaria

\-\-\- L’inhumation des criminels aux fourches patibulaires de Lubań, de Miłków et de Lubomierz (Pologne). Résultats des premières analyses archéo-anthropologiques

\-\-\- Le “gibbeting” anglais : punir le cadavre du criminel dans la Grande-Bretagne des xviiie-xixe s.

\-\-\- Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)

\-\-\- Forensic archaeology in Europe

\-\-\- “La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire
[Next](/ausonius/18440 "“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire")

[Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)](/ausonius/18415 "Le procès d’un cadavre ? Une inhumation isolée sur l’ancienne place du Temple à Bègles (Gironde)")[Table of contents](/ausonius/18143?format=toc "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne") [“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire](/ausonius/18440 "“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire")

* * *

Only the text can be used under the [OpenEdition Books License](https://www.openedition.org/12554) license. Other elements (illustrations, attached files) are “All rights reserved”, unless otherwise stated.


In the same series


By the same person


[See more books](/ausonius/15139)

[![Cover Le duc et la société](/ausonius/file/15243/cover/couverture.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/15217 "Le duc et la société")

### [Le duc et la société](/ausonius/15217 "Le duc et la société")

#### Pouvoirs et groupes sociaux dans la Gascogne bordelaise au XIIe siècle (1075-1199)

Frédéric Boutoulle

2007

[![Cover Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans](/ausonius/file/18138/cover/mercenaires2.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/16277 "Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans")

### [Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans](/ausonius/16277 "Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans")

#### Hommage à Jonathan Sumption

Guilhem Pépin (ed.)


2016

[![Cover Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville](/ausonius/file/16801/cover/sm30.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/16586 "Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville")

### [Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville](/ausonius/16586 "Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville")

#### Les attributs matériels du gouvernement urbain dans le Midi médiéval

Ézéchiel Jean-Courret, Sandrine Lavaud, Judicaël Petrowiste et al.
(ed.)


2016

[![Cover (Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne](/ausonius/file/18448/cover/couvsm35essai5bon.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/18143 "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne")

### [(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne](/ausonius/18143 "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne")

Mathieu Vivas (ed.)


2019

[![Cover Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles](/ausonius/file/18646/cover/9782356134387.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/18621 "Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles")

### [Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles](/ausonius/18621 "Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles")

#### L'incidence des questions hiérarchiques sur l'architecture des cathédrales en France (XIIe-XVe siècles)

Yves Blomme

2021

[See more books](/ausonius/15139)

1 / 5

[![Cover Le duc et la société](/ausonius/file/15243/cover/couverture.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/15217 "Le duc et la société")

### [Le duc et la société](/ausonius/15217 "Le duc et la société")

Pouvoirs et groupes sociaux dans la Gascogne bordelaise au XIIe siècle (1075-1199)

Frédéric Boutoulle

2007

[![Cover Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans](/ausonius/file/18138/cover/mercenaires2.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/16277 "Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans")

### [Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans](/ausonius/16277 "Routiers et mercenaires pendant la guerre de Cent ans")

Hommage à Jonathan Sumption

Guilhem Pépin (ed.)


2016

[![Cover Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville](/ausonius/file/16801/cover/sm30.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/16586 "Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville")

### [Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville](/ausonius/16586 "Le bazar de l’hôtel de ville")

Les attributs matériels du gouvernement urbain dans le Midi médiéval

Ézéchiel Jean-Courret, Sandrine Lavaud, Judicaël Petrowiste et al.
(ed.)


2016

[![Cover (Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne](/ausonius/file/18448/cover/couvsm35essai5bon.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/18143 "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne")

### [(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne](/ausonius/18143 "(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne")

Mathieu Vivas (ed.)


2019

[![Cover Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles](/ausonius/file/18646/cover/9782356134387.jpg/download/200)](/ausonius/18621 "Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles")

### [Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles](/ausonius/18621 "Quand les cathédrales se mesuraient entre elles")

L'incidence des questions hiérarchiques sur l'architecture des cathédrales en France (XIIe-XVe siècles)

Yves Blomme

2021

[See more chapters](/ausonius/person/18436)

### [“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire](/ausonius/18440 "“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire")

Patrice Georges-Zimmermann

[See more chapters](/ausonius/person/18436)

### [“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire](/ausonius/18440 "“La fouille et le prisonnier”. Prison Saint-Michel de Toulouse : archéologie d’une évasion et recherche de restes humains liés au devoir de mémoire")

Patrice Georges-Zimmermann

![Open Access Freemium logo](/assets/images/freemium-logo.png)

Open Access Freemium

ePub

PDF

PDF of the chapter

Buy


Print edition


[amazon.fr](https://www.amazon.fr/dp/2356132430?tag=openeditionor-21&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1) [decitre.fr](https://www.decitre.fr/9782356132437.html?utm_source=affilae&utm_medium=affiliation&utm_campaign=revues#ae228) [mollat.com](https://www.mollat.com/livres/2312814/re-lecture-archeologique-de-la-justice-en-europe-medievale-et-moderne-actes-du-colloque-international-tenu-a-bordeaux-les-8-10-fevrier-2017) [leslibraires.fr](https://www.leslibraires.fr/livre/9782356132437) [placedeslibraires.fr](https://www.placedeslibraires.fr/livre/9782356132437-re-lecture-archeologique-de-la-justice-en-europe-medievale-et-moderne-mathieu-vivas/)

[ePub / PDF](https://www.7switch.com/fr/ebook/9782356135827/from/openedition)

[1](#bodyftn1) Groen _et al_. 2015b.

[2](#bodyftn2) Groen _et al._ 2015b, ii.

[3](#bodyftn3) Groen _et al_. 2015b.

[4](#bodyftn4) Groen _et al._ 2015a.

[5](#bodyftn5) Powers & Sibun 2014.

[6](#bodyftn6) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[7](#bodyftn7) Renfrew & Bahn 1991, 9.

[8](#bodyftn8) Dupras _et al_. 2006, 1-3; Hunter 1996.

[9](#bodyftn9) Scott & Connor 1997.

[10](#bodyftn10) Skinner _et al_. 2003.

[11](#bodyftn11) Duday & Masset 1987.

[12](#bodyftn12) Haglund 2008.

[13](#bodyftn13) Fondebrider & Scheinsohn 2015; Lévy 2008.

[14](#bodyftn14) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2015\. For a detailed overview of the activities of forensic archaeologists and

forensic anthropologists the authors refer to Groen _et al_. 2015b and Marquez-Grant & Fibiger 2011.

[15](#bodyftn15) White 1998, 2.

[16](#bodyftn16) Dwight 1878.

[17](#bodyftn17) Groen _et al_. 2015b.

[18](#bodyftn18) _e.g._ Morse _et al_. 1976; Imaizumi 1974; McLaughlin 1974.

[19](#bodyftn19) Morse _et al_. 1983.

[20](#bodyftn20) Ubelaker 1984.

[21](#bodyftn21) Sigler-Eisenberg 1985.

[22](#bodyftn22) _e.g._ Groen _et al_. 2015a; Evis 2016, 214.

[23](#bodyftn23) Hunter _et al._ 1994.

[24](#bodyftn24) The Economist 2013; Vranken 2015.

[25](#bodyftn25) Hunter & Dockrill 1996.

[26](#bodyftn26) Hunter 1996.

[27](#bodyftn27) Evis 2016, 69.

[28](#bodyftn28) Dupras _et al_. 2006; Litherland _et al._ 2012; Hunter & Cox 2005; Ruffell _et al._ 2009; Hunter _et al_. 2013; Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[29](#bodyftn29) Evis 2016, 32.

[30](#bodyftn30) Congram 2008.

[31](#bodyftn31) Evis 2016, 33.

[32](#bodyftn32) Hochrein 2002; Skinner _et al._ 2003; Schultz & Dupras 2008; Cheetham & Hanson 2009; Blau 2005.

[33](#bodyftn33) Haglund _et al_. 2001; Pickering & Bachman 1996; Ubelaker 1989; Spennemann & Franke 1995; Oakley 2005; Brooks & Brooks 1984.

[34](#bodyftn34) Larson _et al_. 2011.

[35](#bodyftn35) Evis 2016.

[36](#bodyftn36) Hochrein 2002.

[37](#bodyftn37) Hochrein 2002; Hochrein _et al_. 1999; Cox _et al_. 2008.

[38](#bodyftn38) Pokines & Symes 2013; Tibbett & Carter 2008; Haglund & Sorg 1997 and 2002; Schotsmans _et al_. 2017.

[39](#bodyftn39) Kanz & Cemper-Kiesslich 2015.

[40](#bodyftn40) Van Denhouwe & Schotsmans 2015.

[41](#bodyftn41) Hanson _et al_. 2015.

[42](#bodyftn42) Boyanov 2015.

[43](#bodyftn43) Slaus & Petaros 2015.

[44](#bodyftn44) Veleminsky _et al_. 2015.

[45](#bodyftn45) Jorkov & Lynnerup 2015.

[46](#bodyftn46) Adalian _et al_. 2002.

[47](#bodyftn47) Baccino 2001.

[48](#bodyftn48) Ducrettet _et al_. 2013; Schuliar _et al_. 2015.

[49](#bodyftn49) Georges _et al_. 2012.

[50](#bodyftn50) Pers. Comm. N. Söderholm.

[51](#bodyftn51) Neumann _et al_. 2015.

[52](#bodyftn52) Moraitis & Eliopoulos 2015; Schmitt _et al_. 2015.

[53](#bodyftn53) Susa _et al_. 2015.

[54](#bodyftn54) McCullagh & Knupfer 2015; O’Sullivan _et al_. 2002.

[55](#bodyftn55) Cattaneo 2009; Borrini 2015.

[56](#bodyftn56) Jankauskas 2015.

[57](#bodyftn57) de Leeuwe & Groen 2015.

[58](#bodyftn58) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[59](#bodyftn59) Trzcinski & Borkowski 2015.

[60](#bodyftn60) Marquez-Grant _et al_. 2012.

[61](#bodyftn61) Diana 2015.

[62](#bodyftn62) Abramov _et al_. 2015.

[63](#bodyftn63) Djuric & Starovic 2015.

[64](#bodyftn64) Masnicova _et al_. 2015.

[65](#bodyftn65) Jamnik 2015.

[66](#bodyftn66) Marquez-Grant _et al._ 2015.

[67](#bodyftn67) Lösch _et al._ 2015.

[68](#bodyftn68) Hunter & Cropper 2015; Janaway 2015; Hunter _et al_. 1996.

[69](#bodyftn69) Groen _et al_. 2015a.

[70](#bodyftn70) Hunter _et al_. 2001.

[71](#bodyftn71) Powers & Sibun 2014.

[72](#bodyftn72) Janaway 2015.

[73](#bodyftn73) Groen 2015.

(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne

Share URL


Embed


Copy

[X](https://x.com/intent/tweet?text=Forensic archaeology in Europe, Ausonius Éditions,Eline M. J. Schotsmans<span> and </span>Patrice Georges-Zimmermann%0a@OpenEditionActu%0ahttps://books.openedition.org/ausonius/18426 "X")[Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fbooks.openedition.org%2Fausonius%2F18426&src=sdkpreparse "Facebook")[Email](mailto:?subject=Forensic archaeology in Europe&body=Forensic archaeology in Europe.%0D%0A%0D%0AAusonius Éditions.%0D%0A%0D%0Ahttps://books.openedition.org/ausonius/18426%0D%0A%0D%0AEline M. J. Schotsmans<span> and </span>Patrice Georges-Zimmermann "Email")

Size

Small (500x375px)Medium (800x600px)Large (1024x768px)

Paste the following HTML code to embed this page on your website.Copy

(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne

This chapter is cited by


- Mäkinen, Taru. Maijanen, Heli. Seitsonen, Oula. (2022) The status and future of forensic archaeology and anthropology in Finland. _Scandinavian Journal of Forensic Science_, 28\. DOI: [10.2478/sjfs-2022-0013](https://dx.doi.org/10.2478/sjfs-2022-0013)

(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne

This book is distributed in Open Access Freemium. Access to online reading is available. Access to the PDF and ePub versions is restricted to libraries that have purchased it. You can sign in through your library at the following address: [https://freemium.openedition.org/oebooks](https://freemium.openedition.org/oebooks)

[Buy this book in PDF and ePub format](https://www.7switch.com/fr/ebook/9782356135827/from/openedition)

If you have any queries, you can write us at access\[at\]openedition.org


Digital reference of the chapter


Format


APA

Chicago

MLA


Schotsmans, E. M. J., & Georges-Zimmermann, P. (2019). Forensic archaeology in Europe. In M. Vivas (Ed.), _(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne_ (1–). Ausonius Éditions. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.18426

Schotsmans, Eline M. J., and Patrice Georges-Zimmermann. “Forensic Archaeology in Europe”. In _(Re)lecture archéologique De La Justice En Europe médiévale Et Moderne_, edited by Mathieu Vivas. Pessac: Ausonius Éditions, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.18426.

Schotsmans, Eline M. J., and Patrice Georges-Zimmermann. “Forensic Archaeology in Europe”. _(Re)lecture archéologique De La Justice En Europe médiévale Et Moderne_, edited by Mathieu Vivas, Ausonius Éditions, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.18426.

Digital reference of the book


Format


APA

Chicago

MLA


Vivas, M. (ed.). (2019). _(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne_ (1–). Ausonius Éditions. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.18143

Vivas, Mathieu, ed. _(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne_. Pessac: Ausonius Éditions, 2019. https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.18143.

Vivas, Mathieu, editor. _(Re)lecture archéologique de la justice en Europe médiévale et moderne_. Ausonius Éditions, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4000/books.ausonius.18143.

Zotero compliant
![Zotero Logo](/assets/images/zotero-logo.svg)

1 /
3

[![Ausonius Éditions](/ausonius/file/options/15/download)](/ausonius/ "Ausonius Éditions")

Ausonius Éditions


[Site map](/ausonius/sitemap "Site map") [Sign-in](                                    /login/ausonius
                                 "Sign-in")

Follow us


[Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/ausoniuseditions/ "Facebook")[X](https://twitter.com/i/flow/login?redirect_after_login=%2FAusoniusEdit "X")[RSS Feed](https://books.openedition.org/ausonius/backend/?format=rss "RSS Feed")

URL:
[http://ausoniuseditions.u-bordeaux-montaigne.fr](http://ausoniuseditions.u-bordeaux-montaigne.fr)

Email:
editions.ausonius@u-bordeaux-montaigne.fr


Address:


8, esplanade des Antilles


33607


Pessac


France


[![OpenEdition](/assets/images/oe-logo.png)](https://openedition.org "OpenEdition")

[Applying for OpenEdition Books](https://www.openedition.org/10829 "Applying for OpenEdition Books") [Learn more about the OpenEdition Freemium programme](https://www.openedition.org/14043 "Learn more about the OpenEdition Freemium programme") [Order books](https://www.openedition.org/13052 "Order books") [Subscribe to the OpenEdition Newsletter](https://www.openedition.org/41045 "Subscribe to the OpenEdition Newsletter") [TCU of OpenEdition Books](https://books.openedition.org/2979 "TCU of OpenEdition Books")

[Accessibility Statement](https://books.openedition.org/2404 "Accessibility Statement") [Personal data](https://www.openedition.org/19362 "Personal data") [Cookie policy](https://www.openedition.org/37235 "Cookie policy") [Reporting system](https://www.openedition.org/41101 "Reporting system")