Stories Dead Men Tell:
Investigating approaches used and the usefulness of
war graves from the Thirty Years’ War
by
Morgan Jones
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS IN
ARCHAEOLOGY:
ARCHAEOLOGY OF NORTH-WESTERN EUROPE
At the
Student: Morgan Jones Student number: 10849610 (UvA)/ 2566292 (VU) Date: 15/06/2015
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. J. (James) Symonds Second Supervisor: Dr. A.A.A. (Arno) Verhoeven
Contents:
Figure & Tables……….………3
Introduction………7
- Objectives……….7
- Methodology………..8
- An objective record………8
- Terminology……….9
- Transforming objectives into working hypothesis’s ………..10
- A brief history of battlefield archaeology………11
- A Brief History of Thirty Years’ War……….15
- Where was the Thirty Years’ War and who was involved? ………16
- The Stages of the War………17
- The Bohemian Revolt……….17
- The Danish Phase………..18
- Swedish Intervention……….…18
- French intervention and the Peace of Westphalia………19
- The Role of Fear……….20
Case studies………..………..22
- The Battle of White Mountain, Prague (Czech Republic)………...23
- Lambach, Upper Austria (Austria)……….…25
- Höchstadt, Bavaria (Germany)……….…26
- Stralsund, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Germany)………28
- Lützen, Saxony-Anhalt (Germany). ………..………31
- Nördlingen, Bavaria (Germany)………..36
- Hanau, Hessen (Germany)………..38
- Wittstock, Brandenburg (Germany)……….39
- Alerheim, Bavaria (Germany)………51
Discussion……….………54
- Forensic Archaeology……….60
- Evidence for Epidemics……….…61
- How was it was understood at the time?...62
- Why are there so few mass graves despite the high death toll in Thirty Years’ War?...64
- How can we use the information that has been collated in this thesis to advance archaeological understandings of the Thirty Years’ War?...66
- Future Directions……….…71
Conclusions……….71
Figures:
Cover photo: https://holocausthistorychannel.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/grab.jpg?w=640&h=944 Figure 1: bones of a human forearm and hand overlooked by the 1881 reburial party, and discovered during excavations. Hirst, K. (n.d.). Destination Little Bighorn Battlefield. Retrieved June 8, 2015, from http://archaeology.about.com/cs/military/bb/littlebighorn.htm
Figure 2: The Second Defenestration of Prague.
https://teachwar.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/defenestration.jpg
Figure 3: The Victory of Gustavus Adolphus at the Battle of Breitenfeld (1631).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Gustave_Adolphe_at_Breitenfeld-Johann_Walter-f3706497.jpg
Figure 4: Territory changes at the Peace of Westphalia (1648). http://media-1.web.britannica.com/eb-media/60/360-004-7EC5029D.jpg
Figure 5: The location of case studies on a modern map of central Europe. Author.
Figure 6: Two skulls showing fatal wounds. http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/mensch/fund-aus-dem-dreissigjaehrigen-krieg-massengrab-in-stralsunder-altstadt-entdeckt-a-695825.html
Figure 7: Stralsund A mass grave. Ansorge, J. (2010): Ein Massengrab aus der Zeit des Nordischen Krieges auf dem ehemaligen Frankenhornwerk in Stralsund. – Archäologische Berichte aus Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Bd. 17 (2010), 122-135.: 126
Figure 8: Impression left by a lead bullet on the thigh of skeleton 3. Ansorge2010: 130
Figure 9: Abrasions to incisors caused by heavy smoking using a pipe. Ansorge 2010: 132
Figure 10: Excavation of mass grave under laboratory conditions.
http://www.thehistoryblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Heiko-Heilmann-carefully-excavates-bones.jpg
Figure 11: One individual was buried face down.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/mass-grave-from-thirty-years-war-investigated-in-luetzen-germany-a-830203.html
Figure 12: Skeleton lying sprawled on its back. Plum, M. (2011). Archäologische Zeugnisse des Dreißigjährigen Krieges in Bayern: – Die Erstürmung von Höchstadt an der Aisch 1633 und die Schlacht bei Nördlingen 1634 –. Retrieved February 12, 2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/1235094/Archäologische_Zeugnisse_des_Dreißigjährigen_Krieges_in_B ayern_Die_Erstürmung_von_Höchstadt_an_der_Aisch_1633_und_die_Schlacht_bei_Nördlingen_16 34_
Figure 13: Two opposing rows of skeletons from the Wittstock mass grave. Eickhoff, S. (2012). 1636 - ihre letzte Schlacht Leben im Dreißigjährigen Krieg ; [Archäologisches Landesmuseum Brandenburg im Paulikloster, Brandenburg a. d. Havel, 31. März bis 9. September 2012 ; Archäologische
Staatssammlung München, Oktober 2012 - März 2013 ; Militärhistorisches Museum Dresden in Kooperation mit dem Landesamt für Archäologie Sachsen, April - August 2013]. Stuttgart: Theiss: 18
Figure 14: "Normal" tibia (Left), Tibia with Harris Lines (Right).
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/harris-lines-leh201compressed-1273400304-phpapp02/95/session-no-2-2010-harris-lines-amp-linear-enamel-hypoplasia-by-susan-aylard-4-728.jpg?cb=1273382771
Figure 15: Lateral grooves on teeth from vitamin deficiency. Eickhoff, 2012: 35
Figure 16: Thickening of the bone from third stage syphilis. Eickhoff, 2012: 128
Figure 17: Signs of parasite infestation on bones. Eickhoff, 2012: 125
Figure 18: Map plotting the origins of the dead from the Wittstock mass grave. Eickhoff 2012: 181
Figure 19: A malformed, but successful healing of a tibia. Eickhoff 2012: 124
Figure 20: Locations of gunshot wounds from all individuals in the grave. Green represents bullets recovered. Red represents where the bullet has shot straight through. Eickhoff 2012: 157
Figure 21: Forensic reconstruction based on injuries to the bone. Eickhoff 2012: 157
Figure 22: Forensic reconstruction demonstrating the presence of cavalry through injuries. Eickhoff 2012: 154
Figure 23: Musket balls displaying hammer and chisel marks. Eickhoff 2012: 79
Figure 24: Completed facial reconstruction of an individual from the grave. Eickhoff 2012: 160
Figure 25: Mapping of musket balls on the battlefield. Eickhoff 2012: 151
Figure 26: Alerheim mass grave. http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/rare-discovery-mass-grave-from-thirty-years-war- found-a-546079.html
Figure 27: Plague Doctor.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Paul_F%C3%BCrst,_Der_Doctor_Schnabel_v on_Rom_(Holl%C3%A4nder_version).png
Figure 28: Interior of the church Kaplica Czaszek. http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2011/10/Czermna_-_Chapel_of_Skulls.jpg
Figure 29: A modern map of the Rozvadov. Blažková, K., Hrnčiřík, P., Matoušek, V., & Šámal, Z. (2013, September 8). Metal Detector Prospection of Two Battlefields from the Beginning of the Thirty Years' War: Rakovník 1620 and Rozvadov 1621. Retrieved May 10, 2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/4426992/Metal_Detector_Prospection_of_Two_Battlefields_from_the_ Beginning_of_the_Thirty_Years_War_Rakovnik_1620_and_Rozvadov_1621
Figure 30: Historic illustration of the battlefield of Rozvadov. Blažková, K., Hrnčiřík, P., Matoušek, V., & Šámal, Z. (2013, September 8)
Figure 31: A graph displaying the relationship between bullet diameter and quantity. Blažková, K., Hrnčiřík, P., Matoušek, V., & Šámal, Z. (2013, September 8)
Figure 32: : A map of the Rozvadov battlefield, mapping the musket balls that were found. Blažková, K., Hrnčiřík, P., Matoušek, V., & Šámal, Z. (2013, September 8)
Tables:
Table 1: A comparison of the details from the graves. Author
Table 2: A comparison of information provided from each grave about the dead. Author
Introduction:
During the Thirty Years’ War death occurred everywhere, from wounds inflicted on the battlefield, from diseases and infections at encampments and hospitals, from exhaustion or famine. From the common foot soldier, to great generals, civilians, and other non-combatants, no one was exempt from a potentially gruesome death. After a battle, the corpses of ordinary soldiers were often buried in mass graves close to the battlefield, while the bodies of officers were more likely to receive a regular Christian burial at a nearby graveyard (Baumann 2004:271). Until relatively recently, most mass graves from the Thirty Years’ War have been discovered by chance during construction work, and this is still largely the case, as the case studies of this thesis will show. Of course some mass graves were unearthed in previous centuries, but very little useful information survives from these earlier excavations as prior to the second half of the 20th century human remains they were more often than not simply reburied at a local graveyard with little or no investigation (Homann 2013:218).
Objectives
The primary objective of this thesis is to identify possible correlations between burial practices and different phases of the Thirty Years' War. This will be done examining who conducted the burial and whether the mass graves followed a decisive or indecisive battle.
My second objective is to evaluate the techniques that have been used in the excavation and study of the mass graves from this period. It is my hope that the information gathered in support of this objective will identify evidence of best practice that may be used to inform future investigations of mass graves from this period.
My third objective is to investigate how the study of human remains from mass burials can enhance our knowledge of the Thirty Years’ War. Although it is unlikely that these graves will alter our knowledge on the course of the war, they may reveal a number of wider social issues such as the health and diet of the combatants and the central European populace during the war. ……….
Methodology
I will use a range of historical and archaeological sources in my investigation. Historical sources will be used to provide context for the study, and where possible written sources will be consulted where they refer to the treatment of the dead. A mixture of archaeological and anthropological sources will be used in the case studies, where I attempt to develop a strong foundation of empirical evidence to assist my analysis and conclusions. I have tried to incorporate evidence from all known mass graves from the Thirty Year’s War. This will allow me to undertake a comparative study highlighting differences between internments of different date and revealing different approaches to excavation and post-excavation study of the human remains and associated finds.
An Objective Record
As with any investigation, it is important to consider objectivity before proceeding. For this investigation we have to consider both the biases introduced by differential preservation, and the biases of interpretation. Firstly, all archaeological investigations have an unintentional bias, that being preservation, leaving us with us with only a partial view of the reality. Secondly, sources of evidence are never objective, as archaeological evidence cannot speak for itself, and is open to interpretation whereby the interpreter may intentionally or unintentionally impose their own bias onto the evidence (Freeman and Pollard 2001: 121). Similar factors must be considered when using historical sources, where an author may be biased. This investigation relies upon the author’s interpretation, as set out in the various archaeological reports that I have examined, in addition to my analysis of both primary and secondary evidence. Hence, while it can be difficult to overcome unintentional bias, it is important to acknowledge that this may exist in reports. Archaeological evidence, despite having its own potential issues of objectivity issues, is nevertheless useful in testing the reliability of historical sources. As a form of raw and independent data archaeological evidence can both confirm and reject hypothesizes created solely from historical sources. Such an integrated approach to analysis my allow us helping to construct a more complete and accurate view of historical events (Freeman and Pollard 2001: 122).
Terminology
When investigating graves from the Thirty Years’ War it is important to consider the terminology that will be used. Firstly, I will evaluate the use of the term ‘battlefield’ archaeology. In my view the term ‘battlefield’ does not necessarily imply combat between two armies, but could also include civilian combat against an army or authority. I also use the term ‘conflict’ archaeology with care, as some graves may not be directly related to combat but may still be connected to the effects of the war. Therefore, throughout this thesis, the term ‘battlefield’ archaeology will be the term primarily used as it implies that the site or grave is the direct result of combat and violence. While the term ‘conflict’ archaeology will be reserved for sites connected to the war, but not necessarily the result of pitched battle involving violence and armed combat.
The second term that is worth defining before we proceed is the term ‘mass grave’. Curiously, there is no widely accepted definition of what constitutes a mass grave. Skinner (cited in Jæger 2013: 1) defines a mass grave as a grave that contains a minimum of 6 individuals. Alternatively, Mant (cited in Jæger 2013: 1) suggests that a mass grave can contain as few as two individuals, so long as there is physical contact. More recently, Schmitt (cited in Jæger 2013: 1) has taken a socio-anthropological approach and building on Mant’s definition, adds that in the case of two burials in a grave both individuals must share a similar cause or background to their death. Jonas Holm Jæger (2013: 2) argues that we must turn to forensic science in order to find a clear definition as the term “mass grave” is strongly associated with genocides that are investigated by forensic scientists. Here, specific and clear terminology is required to avoid any misinterpretation. Forensic scientists define a mass grave as a grave that contains a minimum of three individuals, to set it apart from a joint grave. If a grave has been closed and then another internment has been placed on top at a later date then this is seen as two separate mass graves, thus allowing for multiple mass graves at one site (Jæger 2013: 2). Jæger (2013: 2) goes on to state that a mass grave is characterised by the unorganised and chaotic placement of the dead, reflecting the lack of respect due to the connection to war crimes. Whereas a communal burial is represented by the organised and systematic layout of the dead, supposedly reflecting respect. I would argue that a mass grave is a conflict grave, therefore encompassing all graves of three or more individuals that shared a similar fate as a result of conflict. Therefore a mass grave could still have an organised layout of the dead, demonstrating respect, as well as including both military and civilian deaths. Whereas the term ‘communal grave’ could be reserved for graves containing more than three individuals during periods of peace, therefore representing deaths stemming from famine or disease for example, rather than actual warfare. I will be use my definition throughout this thesis, referring too many of
the sites as mass graves as they are all connected to the conflict of the Thirty Years’ War. This definition could also be extended to shipwrecks where crewmen are known to have been lost along with the ship. ……….………
Transforming objectives into working hypothesis’s
While this thesis investigates the methodologies and information that may be gleaned from the study of graves from the Thirty Years’ War, it also hopes to place the results within a wider context of both battlefield archaeology and an overarching archaeology of the Thirty Years War. I argue that it is only through a better understanding of these conflicts and by combing both archaeology and historical sources, that the foundations can be laid for the appropriate protection of these war graves and the possible creation of memorial landscapes (Homann 2013:221). One must always remember that the material remains revealed from battlefield archaeology, in one way or another, affected human beings in events that caused unthinkable devastation and misery and should therefore be treated with the utmost respect. ………..………
When investigating an early modern grave, the burial customs of a region and the specific period must be considered, along with whether the condition of an event allowed for the burial of the dead, such as might occur after a decisive victory (Handrick 1991:214). It was not uncommon for local grave diggers and civilians to be enlisted to assist with the burial of the dead, as was the case at Liegnitz/Legnica (Poland, 1634), Alerheim (Germany, 1645). It should be noted that the circumstances of burial were highly dependent on events and local contexts and varied greatly. Hence it is not uncommon to encounter some graves that have been prepared with little care, and others, such as the mass grave discovered in 2007 on the battlefield of Wittstock (Germany, 1636) that reveal an orderly burial and could possibly be interpreted as a ‘proper’ military burial during the Thirty Years’ War (Handrick 1991:214). There are also a number of factors that can prevent the preservation of a burial. This includes soil chemistry; a soil with high acidity is more likely to break down bones. Other causes of destruction include agricultural land-use, such as deep ploughing, especially in the case of shallow burials. Another factor affecting recovering is the treatment of the dead immediately after the battle. At Hemmingstedt, Germany (1500), for example, the Dithmarsian ensured that enemy foot soldiers and mercenaries received a proper but left enemy knights unburied as deliberate indication of disrespect (Homann 2013: 219).
On the basis that a number of different burial scenarios are possible, a number of hypotheses may be generated. My first hypothesis is that an inconclusive battle result is likely to have resulted in a poorly organized burial as both surviving armies would too tired and wish to withdraw, putting little effort into the burial of the dead. A decisive victory for either side, on the other hand, is more likely to have led to the proper burial of the dead as the winning army would be in complete control of the battlefield and could afford the time to bury the dead. Furthermore, the burial customs mentioned above could have had a considerable bearing upon the organization and layout of the burials. Beyond such post-conflict practicalities, attitudes to burial will also have been shaped by ideological beliefs, and perhaps even ethnicity. Hence a Protestant army may have had different burial customs from a Roman Catholic army, and Swedes may have used different burial customs to Austrians, for example. ……….
Despite many of the case studies being discovered ahead of construction work, the second hypothesis hypothesises the ability to locate graves on a battlefield from what is learned during this investigation. Firstly sunken features on the battlefield may indicate the presence of mass grave (Schürger 2013: 8). Secondly, the historical sources suggest that after a battle, the local authorities, such as a major, or a military commander might often instruct their soldiers or local residents to bury the dead along the roadside (Eickhoff 2012: 14). The mapping of finds onto a battlefield, which include fired projectiles and struck off pieces of equipment, can help us to detect combat zones by identifying areas of a high density of items (Homann 2013: 210). It is very likely that a great number of soldiers were killed in the combat areas identified from the mapping of finds and it is only logical to hypothesise that grave would have been dug in close proximity to these combat zones, narrowing down the area to search for graves considerably. This thesis will test historical accounts and the hypothesis of ‘least effort’ internment through the analysis of a series of case studies. It is to be hoped that this corpus of material will allow guidelines to be created for future investigations of mass graves from the Thirty Years’ War. ………
A brief history of battlefield archaeology
Battlefields are a valuable source of information for archaeologists, especially when the evidence that they hold is used in conjunction with other archaeological and historical sources. The material remains of battlefields, especially during the Early Modern period can reflect the political, social, economic climate of the period and demonstrate technological innovation that were stimulated by the necessities of war. The early study of battlefields in the 19th century focused mostly on
battlefield sites from antiquity and some medieval sites as these sites were considered important as adequate documentation and precise locations of these battlefields had been lost (Homann 2013:204). Therefore, scholars felt the need to excavate battlefields from antiquity in order to resolve disputes over the contemporary interpretations of the events of a given battle.
In comparison, less attention was given to early modern battlefields, where it was deemed the technical ability and technology of the 19th and early 20th century could not contribute anything new to these sites which had ‘adequate’ documentation (Homann 2013:204). Therefore scholars relied on written sources and pictorial representations (paintings and engravings), in order to reconstruct the events of a battle. However eyewitness accounts are often vague and are of limited use to us as they soldiers and other observers will have viewed an engagement through a haze of smoke and fire; quite literally the ‘fog of war’. Their senses may therefore have been distracted and numbed by the sound of musket and cannon fire, the screams of the dying and the sound of their own heart beating against their chest as adrenaline kicked in, leading them to lose track of the events of the battle (Schürger 2013: 11). ………
Archaeological excavations can provide a critical analysis of battlefields through the mapping of archaeological finds and the forensic analysis of human remains found at the site, such as the investigations for the Battle of Little Bighorn which is discussed later in this section. It is sometimes possible to trace and reconstruct the sequence of events of a battle. These case studies demonstrates how battlefield archaeology has developed from its humble beginnings and efforts to discover lost relics or gun emplacements, battlefield archaeology has grown and matured into a fully-fledged field of study, providing a dynamic view of the battlefield while managing to put it into a wider social context (Freeman and Pollard 2001: 116).
The first significant modern archaeological excavation of a battlefield was carried out in the 1950s at the site of the Battle of Tannenberg (1410). Here, Polish archaeologists who utilized a comprehensive range of techniques to study the site, including metal detecting, soil phosphate analysis, and aerial photography (Homann 2013:206). While Poland led the way, other countries such as Germany and Austria attempted to focus on the distant past. The trauma of two world wars, in which nationalist sentiments played a major part led to early modern battlefield sites, and the earlier era of state formation to which they belonged to be viewed with suspicion. I would suggest that attitudes are changing in Germany, which is important as many of the case studies in this article are located in Germany, but the lack of preservation of mass graves until relatively
recent times poses considerable challenges to anyone wishing to study the battlefields of the Thirty Years’ War. An inability to preserve sites in situ has often resulted in large scale construction over battlefield sites, particularly in the last 70 years or so, limiting studies to often poorly resources rescue excavations ahead of development projects (Schürger 2013: 8).
As battlefield archaeology developed into an area of study, a number of specialisations began to branch off, such as the study of field fortifications and military earthworks, which emerged in Czechoslovakia during the 1980s (Homann 2013:206). The study of army encampments is valuable to us as camps were usually erected prior to a battle, and if discovered, they can help us to narrow down the location of a nearby battlefield (Homann 2013: 208). More importantly to this study is the systematic forensic investigation of the human remains from armed conflicts, which has grown exponentially on a global scale in recent years. The growing maturity of battlefield archaeology as an academic subject has been reflected with the ‘Fields of Conflict’ conference that was held in Glasgow in 2000 and the creation of the Journal of Conflict Archaeology, which is now an important source of information for this field of study (Homann 2013:207, Scott & Mcfeaters
2011: 104). ………
As mentioned above, battlefield reconstructions based solely on written or pictorial sources can only approximate the historical reality. Problems are exacerbated when historical documentation is either insufficient or contradictory. This is where archaeological investigation is most valuable. Field archaeology can provide a far more factual and dispassionate picture of the past to either confirm or discredit the various hypotheses that I have outlined, above. And yet, despite the obvious strengths of archaeological approaches to battlefields, there are also a clear number of limitations. It is often too time consuming, for example, and too costly to excavate a battlefield site in full and in many cases it is simply not possible to adequately survey the site due to modern building developments. This of course reinforces the need to develop robust sampling strategies that combining a range of complementary techniques, to investigate landscapes where conflicts are known to have occurred. It also makes the case for more attention to be placed on devising rigorous programmes of research which are adequately resources and can work beyond the confines of last minute rescue or salvage archaeology.
This thesis will hopefully illustrate the value of investigating mass graves from battlefield sites, but it must be acknowledged that we are only ever likely to gain a partial impression of the extent of fatalities as many graves will have been destroyed in the past, or remained undiscovered. The
hypothetical, best-case scenario would be to discover each grave connected to a known battle and to map the location and the clustering of graves in relation to combat zones. In this way the process of warfare might be more fully reconstructed. As it stands, it is far more likely that the mass graves presented in this investigation, which have for the most part been discovered by chance, will only represent a small fraction of the events of any battle. With these limitations taken into account, it is worth highlighting that the physical remains in a grave are often the only ‘hard’ evidence available to us to study and allow us to study the age, health, origins and cause of death of an individual (Homann 2013: 220). Analysis of biometric data can help us to determine whether certain factors influenced the outcome of a battle: the varying proportions of young or old, healthy or sick, or starving and dehydrated combatants could all could mean the difference between victory and defeat. The analysis of injuries visible on skeletal remains can be an extremely useful way of determining the cause of death, and may also allow insights into combat sequences, methods of fighting. When examined on a suitably large scale, the analysis of battlefield injuries may also inform us about the actual course of a battle. Were soldiers killed from gunfire or from close combat, were they fleeing, were the kills clean or was there a degree of ferocity and “overkill”? All of these questions can be addressed through the forensic analysis of the remains, helping us to reconstruct a battle (Homann 2012: 220). One of the first reconstructions of a battlefield was conducted from an intensive archaeological excavation carried out by Douglas Scott and Melissa Connor at the site of the Battle of Little Bighorn (1876), named after the Little Bighorn River in Montana, between 1985 and 1989 (Hirst n.d.). (The battle involved the U.S Army’s seventh cavalry against several war bands of Lokata Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho during a long war between American settlers and Native Americans. Although the Euro-American settlers won the war, the Native Euro-American warriors won the Battle of Little Bighorn and the 7th cavalry suffered approximately 210
casualties, while the Native Americans only lost 32 warriors (Hirst n.d.). The dead were left mutilated on the battlefield as was the cultural norm after a victorious battle for the Native Americans until they were reburied in 1881 by lay men. However they had clearly overlooked a number of small bones and fragments as they were discovered during the excavations which revealed evidence for the brutal slaughter
Figure 1: bones of a human forearm and hand overlooked by the 1881 reburial party, and discovered during excavations
of 44 individuals of the 7th cavalry, which were mapped to reconstruct the sequence of events of the battle (Fig. 1). This supported the account of the Indian Warrior, Black Elk, who was present at the battle and described how the final survivors of the 7th cavalry were butchered by hatchets and clubs (Eastman 2004: 300).
During the period under study in this thesis medical care was rarely able to successfully treat deep penetrating wounds from projectiles and often could not prevent the development of infections post-treatment (Homann 2013: 216). Although it is of course difficult, it is possible to reveal traces of medical treatment in the archaeological evidence. This might be seen in the loss or discard of medical equipment or removed lead musket balls from a field surgery near to a battlefield, however such valuable pieces of medical equipment are seldom found. The second and far more likely way to detect medical treatment is from the dead themselves. Evidence on human skeletal remains for both healed and unhealed traces of surgery can reveal a great deal of information regarding the type and quality of medical treatment that was common during a specific period (Homann 2013: 217). The most common wounds inflicted on soldiers during this period are deep lacerations from edged weapons such as swords and gunshot wounds from musket balls (Havels 1980, Plum 2011: 10). Although it was possible to survive many of these injuries, soldiers were expected to pay for the materials used in their treatment during this period. This resulted in the poorest soldiers, who were commonly foot soldiers, having the lowest survival rates after treatment, while richer soldiers, such as cavalrymen who were deemed more valuable, experienced far higher survival rates (Eickhoff 2012: 121).
A Brief History of Thirty Years’ War
It can be argued archaeological value does not lie in finds, alone but in the context in which they are discovered (Freeman and Pollard 2001: 121). Therefore, as this is an archaeological investigation into the approaches used and usefulness of graves connected to the Thirty Years’ War, it is important to provide a brief history of the Thirty Years’ War to place case studies within the wider context of the conflict.
The Thirty Years’ War encompasses a series of conflicts in Central Europe between 1618 and 1648, and is considered by many to be one of the most destructive conflicts in European history. Traditionally, academic debates have focused on the religious aspect of the war, but the current academic argument generally accepts that while religion had a significant role in providing a focus
for identity and triggering the war, it was not primarily a religious war. Instead, political, social and linguistic factors had a significant input on the outcome of the war (Wilson 2008: 514). The entanglement of dynastic ambitions and religious causes becomes clear to see as Catholic France fought alongside Protestant forces against the Catholic Habsburg dynasty during the later stages of the war (Hays 2005: 97). However, academic studies of the Thirty Years’ War have traditionally failed to provide a truly comprehensive account of the war. This is not surprising as the sheer volume of evidence is so extensive that it could take many lifetimes to analyze. This is partly due to the role the war played in accelerating the ‘media revolution’ of the early seventh century, which saw the printing of millions of pamphlets, newspapers and books (Wilson 2009: 4). And even this daunting mountain of evidence does not take into account the knowledge of the fourteen European languages required to understand and interpret the evidence (Wilson 2009: xxiii). Instead, scholars have often chosen to provide a general overview that excludes exact detail or to focus on specific personalities or events.
Where was the Thirty Years’ War and who was involved? ………
The majority of the engagements during this war took place within the boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire, which was fragmented by into a number of independent states. The Emperors of the Holy Roman Empire came almost exclusively from the Habsburg dynasty, which controlled vast Imperial territories. The Habsburgs dynasty, under a different king, also ruled Spain and the Spanish Netherlands, southern Italy, the Philippines and large tracts of the Americas. The other components of the Empire included the Duchy of Bavaria, the Electorate of Saxony, the Margraviate of Brandenburg, the Electorate of the Palatinate, Landgraviate of Hesse, the Archbishopric of Trier, the Free Imperial City of Nuremberg and numerous minor duchies, free cities and bishoprics. Out of all the political entities within the Empire, only Austria under the Habsburgs and Bavaria were capable of participating in European national politics. The Thirty Years’ War drew in many other European nations into the conflict, however, with Russia being the only major European nation to not be involved. Other nations such as Poland and the Ottoman Empire certainly had a great deal of influence on the war, but also managed to avoid direct engagement in the conflict. Britain played a significant role in supplying a large number of mercenaries to the Protestant armies of Sweden and the Netherlands, but again, avoided committing to the conflict in full (Wilson 2009: 9). The war was triggered by religious tensions between Catholics and Protestants that had been simmering under Europe’s surface for over half a century after the Peace of Augsburg (1555). The treaty, signed by the Holy Roman Emperor
Charles V, was a temporary solution to religious issues and hostilities that had arisen in Europe after the Protestant Reformation (Parker 1997:17-18). However, as the war progressed, it became less about religion and more about the rivalry between the French monarchy and Habsburg dynasty.
The Stages of the War The Bohemian Revolt
Figure 2: The Second Defenestration of Prague (1618)
The Bohemian Revolt, which is considered to be the trigger for the Thirty Year’s War, was the result of Emperor Matthias lack of heirs, leading him to name the almost fanatical Catholic, Ferdinand of Styria, later Ferdinand II, Holy Roman Emperor, as his heir. This troubled Protestant leaders in Bohemia who feared that they would lose their religious rights given to them by Emperor Rudolf II in his letter of Majesty (1609). Two Catholic councilors, Vilem Slavata and Jaroslav Borzitz, were sent to Hradčany castle in Prague in May 1618 to represent the Emperor. On 23 May, 1618, a group of Protestants seized and threw them out of the palace window. The two men and a servant who was also thrown out of window survived the 70ft fall. This event, however, which became known as the Second Defenestration of Prague, ignited the Bohemian Revolt which spread through all of Bohemia, Silesia, Upper and Lower Lusatia and Moravia. (Wilson 2009: 3-4). The Defenestration of Prague became the focus of one the most famous and instantly recognizable illustrations of the war, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 3: The Victory of Gustavus Adolphus at the Battle of Breitenfeld (1631)
The Protestant forces, also known as the Confederation, sought to rise up and exploit the inexperience of the newly elected Emperor, Emperor Ferdinand, upon the news of the death of Emperor Matthias on 20 March 1619. This led Emperor Ferdinand to seek assistance from the Spanish branch of the Habsburg dynasty. This consequently spread the war into Germany, as the Bohemians desperately searched for Protestant allies against the Emperor. Offers of Kingship in Bohemia were sent to a number of Electors, such as Frederick V of Palatine and the Elector of Saxony. However these letters were intercepted by the Imperial forces, exposing the Bohemian desperation, diminishing their support (Wallbank et al 1992: 15). The Bohemian Revolt concluded with the decisive defeat of the Protestant forces under Frederick V at the Battle of the White Mountain, near Prague, by the Catholic army under Count Tilly on 8 November 1620. As a result of the defeat at the White Mountain, the Elector of the Palatinate, Frederick V, was outlawed from the Empire and his lands were stripped and given to his distant Catholic cousin, Duke Maximilian of Bavaria (Wedgwood 1961: 50). This is known as the Palatinate sub phase between 1621 and 1625. Here we see the removal of the final obstacle obstructing Spain’s route to the Dutch Republic, which saw numerous defeats for the Dutch protestants forces, resulting in England, France, the Dutch Republic, Sweden, Denmark, Savoy, Venice and Brandenburg forming an anti-Hapsburg alliance to fight Spain and the Holy Roman Emperor in 1624.
The Danish Phase
The period between 1625 and 1629 has often been termed as the ‘Danish Phase’, due to Danish intervention. Christian IV of Denmark, Duke of Holstein (part of the Holy Roman Empire), was a Lutheran who supported the Lutheran cause of Lower Saxony against Imperial forces in 1625. His involvement can be attributed to his fear of Catholic success threatening his sovereignty as a Protestant nation. His participation was well rewarded. The German town of Hamburg, accepted Danish sovereignty, for example, and this brought a stability and wealth to Denmark that was unparalleled in Europe (Lockhart 2007:166).
Swedish Intervention
The ‘Swedish intervention’ phase (1630- 1635), saw King Gustavus Adolphus, the ‘Lion of the North’ as shown in figure 3, successively invade the Holy Roman Empire, coming to the aide of German Lutherans
(Schürger 2013: 10). This intervention was mostly intended to prevent the Imperial Habsburg dynasty gaining an economic influence on the German states along the Baltic Sea. The campaign was partially funded by Cardinal Richelieu, Chief Minister of Louis XIII of France and also by the Dutch Republic (Wilson 2009: 464). The Swedish campaign was largely successful and earned the Swedish Empire the reputation of championing the Protestant cause until the collapse of the Swedish Empire in 1721. The Swedish army did not exclusively consist of men from the Swedish empire however, and was augmented with many German and Scottish mercenaries. One estimate suggests that as many as 30,000 Scots fought for Sweden over the course of the war (Grosjean 2003:106). The Battle of Lützen (1632) between Gustavus Adolphus and the Imperial General, Wallenstein can be considered a major turning point for this phase. Despite being a Swedish victory, King Gustavus was killed, unravelling the early successes of the Swedish campaign.
………..
French intervention and the Peace of Westphalia ………..
The final phase saw the involvement of France under the Catholic King Louis XIII, who feared the growing power of the Imperial-Habsburg dynasty. The crumbling Swedish campaign was now propped up by the French declaration of war against Spain in August 1935. However, little headway was made by either side and with no end of the war in sight, the conflict quickly descended into a war of attrition. The war did not end with a single treaty as the titled ‘Peace of Westphalia’ suggests (Wilson 2009: 735). Negotiations between the warring sides had been ongoing for four years at both Osnabrück and Münster in Westphalia. A number of treaties were signed before the conflict ended, including the Treaty of Hamburg, the Peace of Münster on 15 May 1648 and the Treaty of Osnabrück was signed on 24 October 1648 (Atkinson 2005, Wilson 2009: 735-55). The treaties also led to a number of territorial changes in central Europe, with Brandenburg and Saxony being the biggest winners, as shown in figure 4.
These changes would have an enormous effect on the future of Germany, particularly with the rise of the Hohenzollern dynasty, which would later rule both Brandenburg and Prussia and unite Germany 1871 (Clark 2006: 48-49). The war saw the widespread devastation of Central Europe, not only through battles, but also through armies living off the land and providing for themselves through looting. This caused much hardship for non-combatants, with famine and disease contributing significantly to the death and misery of the period. A combination of violence, epidemics and famines, during the Thirty Years’ War, led to the death of c.5 million people in Central Europe (Schürger 2013: 8).
The Role of Fear ……….………
Although the brief history above provides an overview of the war, archaeology is renowned for focusing on the individual in the past and telling a story. Therefore, as this investigation will focus on graves, violence and destruction during the Thirty Years’ War, it would be worth considering the role fear played on human psyche during this period, which may have influenced the actions of individuals. The easiest way to understand and analyze the role of fear on the human psyche is through printed literature from the war. The development of print technology during the Protestant Reformation, also referred to as the ‘media revolution’, heralded the arrival of ‘mass-produced propaganda’ (Lederer 2004: 21). During the earlier stages of the war, the mass– produced literature followed confessional lines with either pro-Protestant or pro-Catholic propaganda. However, by the later stages of the war, these confessional lines had become lost as both sides had adopted a universal condemnation of the war (Lederer 2004: 22). Accounts from the period contain a significant theatrical element drawing upon biblical themes and the bizarre and horrible, typical of the Baroque period (Theibault 1993: 274, Wilson 2009: 611). Tales of wolves lurking in woods, for example, were quickly transformed into sightings of werewolves Figure 4: Territory changes at the Peace of Westphalia (1648)
(Lederer 2004: 21). The influence of religion was important as literature largely focused on tales of morality, specifically greed. Pamphlets were filled with local examples of the heads of families committing suicide after failing to support their family. In such examples, a rich local official or relative had failed their Christian duty to help, indicating a lack of social cohesion and moral decay (Lederer 2004: 26). There was also an emphasis on the horrors that people were driven to as a result of widespread famine and epidemics that ravaged the land. The most commonly cited tale accused civilians of turning to cannibalism, with civilians inviting wounded soldiers in for help and then butchering them for food. In the county of Zweibrücken, there was a tale of a woman who lured children into her home with the promise of food, before butchering them for food (Lederer 2004: 27). The war certainly have a profound on the Brothers Grimm who lived in Hanau during the war, which is is discussed later in this study. The stories they collected reflected many hardships and narratives of the time such as wicked step-parents (Cinderalla), hunger and poverty (Hansel and Gretel) and premature death (Sleeping Beauty) (munich found 1998). Other common tales told of people digging up the recently deceased at cemeteries for food. Therefore it is little wonder that as the war went on, both Catholics and Protestants cared less about who was going to win, but just wanted a universal end to the war (Lederer 2004: 28).
The war had a major influence on historical literature and has been viewed with renewed interest in recent years, however much recent scholarship has come from Britain and France, rather than Germany (Theibault 1993: 271). The academic debate has often become bogged down by debates over the reliability of sources from the period, leading many historians to shift their investigations onto large-scale trends, economics and causes of the war instead (Theibault 1993: 271). Scenes describing cannibalism, as described above, are considered by some historians to be exaggerations, while others consider the tales to be plausible due to the conditions of the war. Many historians, such as Gerhard Benecke (cited in Theibault 1993: 271) argue that damages were deliberately exaggerated in order to gain greater compensation, and he supports this assertion with a detailed analysis of urban debts and claims of damage in the town of Lemgo, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Benecke concludes that “a war damage claim was an unscrupulous attempt to get tax-reduction from territorial authorities, therefore not a credible account of actual war damage” (cited in Theibault 1993: 271). The biggest drawback of Benecke’s stance, however, is that he relies on the presumption of dishonesty in all reports.
The literature from the period suggests that descriptions of death and destruction as a tool of persuasion were only compelling when connected to specific events. For example, General Tilly
described the “distress and poverty of the currently completely exhausted and worn down lands” in 1626 which he used to justify extending the range of districts under his jurisdiction (Theibault 1993: 279). This also demonstrates that descriptions of suffering as a result of the war were both bottom up and top down, making these sources far more plausible as the rhetoric escalated, spreading fear through the lands.
Case Studies:
In the following section I will examine a series of case studies of mass graves, combining archaeological and historical evidence in an effort to identify differences and was well as recurrent patterns in the archaeological evidence. The case studies will be presented in chronological order, according to the year of burial. Figure… plots where each case study is located on a map showing current political borders in central Europe.
The Battle of White Mountain, Prague (Czech Republic). ………
On November 7, 1620, the Imperial-Bavarian army, under the leadership of General Tilly and Bucquoy, aimed to smash the Bohemian confederacy, by seizing the poorly garrisoned city of Prague where leader of the Confederate cause, Frederick, was stationed. In order to do this, Tilly needed to bypass the Bohemian confederate army under the command of Anhalt. He achieved this by distracting the Confederates with a small detachment of musketeers while the rest of the army looped around the other side (Wilson 2009: 347). Upon realising the situation, Anhalt force-marched his army to overtake the Imperial-Bavarian army and position his men on White Mountain at midnight, directly blocking the Imperial-Bavarian’s route to Prague, 8km to the west. The mountain earned its name from its chalk subsoil and numerous gravel pits. Anhalt had hoped to entrench his army firmly into the mountain, but poor morale and exhaustion among his army limited progress as many argued that digging was only for peasants (Wilson 2009: 304). The Confederate army consisted of 11,000 infantry, 5,000 cavalry alongside 5,000 Hungarian and Transylvanian light cavalry. The Imperial-Bavarian army had 2,000 more men and 2 more cannon than the Confederates. On Sunday 8 November, at fifteen minutes past midday, all twelve Imperial-Bavarian’s guns fired simultaneously, signalling the advance of their army who took advantage of thick fog across the battlefield (Wilson 2009: 304). Anhalt had opted for an active defence and under the leadership of Anhalt junior, Confederate infantry and cavalry moved down to engage the enemy as they struggled up the slope. This courageous act, for a few fleeting moments, appeared to put victory within the Confederates grasp. However Bucquoy, despite wounded, led the Imperial cavalry to rally their infantry, capture Anhalt junior, and began to break up the confederate army after an hour of intense fighting, forcing them to flee (Wilson 2009: 306). The battle was a decisive win for the Imperial-Bavarian forces at the cost of 650 dead and wounded, largely a result of Anhalt Junior brave offensive. The Confederates on the other hand left 600 dead on the battlefield and another 1,000 dead on their retreat back to Prague, many of whom drowned in the Moldau. Although the vast proportion of the Confederate army escaped to Prague, which was a strongly fortified city that would have been difficult to besiege through winter. However, Tilly’s strategy of relentless pressure to maximise his gains, prevented the Confederates from rallying their forces to defend Prague. Realising the hopelessness of the situation, Frederick, his royal entourage and many others fled the city (Wilson 2009: 307). What could have been an average victory was quickly transformed into a tremendous one for the Imperial-Bavarian forces, effectively crushing the Bohemian Confederation. This victory paved the way for the hostile re-Catholicisation and Protestant prosecution in Bohemia, leading to significant levels of emigration from the region (Wilson 2009: 313).The result of The Battle
of White Mountain and the Bohemian Revolt in general has been interpreted as a heroic but tragic episode of Czech’s long struggle for independence from the Austrian Habsburg dynasty. While those inclined to the Habsburgs argue that the result was a victory for progress and stopped Bohemia from falling into a ‘Polish future’ (Wilson 2009: 347). ………...
White Mountain mass grave A
A rescue excavation, in 1960, discovered a mass grave connected to The Battle of White Mountain (1620). Sadly, approximately half of the grave was destroyed prior to the arrival of professional archaeologists. The excavation recovered the remains of 44 individuals which were discovered stacked in four layers. The positions of the remains suggest that the individuals had been thrown into the pit reflecting a potential lack of respect to the dead. The anthropological analysis of the remains revealed that 40 of the individuals were men, 2 were women and 2 were unidentifiable (Matoušek in press). The individuals were then split into age groups. The largest group for the men was the 20-40 age range, consisting of 17 individuals. 15 men fell into the 40 – 50 age group, 4 were aged around 60 while another individual could be aged to around 15 years old. One of the women was aged between 20 – 30 and the other between 40 to 50 years old. Analysis of the bones revealed that many of the individuals died from laceration wound from either above or behind. One skull had suffered a gunshot wound and contained a lead ball from a cavalry pistol. Another individual suffered from a puncture wound to the back of their ribcage. The tip of a pike was found lodged in the puncture wound, attributing the weapon to a pike. From the study of the angles of the wounds, it was revealed that several individuals had been ‘finished off’ while they were lying on the ground. This information suggests that these individuals were fleeing when they were killed and therefore may have belonged to the retreating confederate forces. This interpretation is supported by evidence that the bodies had been thrown, therefore displaying disrespect to the dead, which the victorious Imperial-Bavarian army are unlikely to have shown their own dead. However, a significant proportion of the remains showed signs for an advance state of decay, reflected through disarticulation of the limbs. This information supports the historical evidence that the bodies were left unburied for a number of weeks before the ‘unbearable’ smell forced the locals to bury the remains (Janská 1966). Therefore the dead may not have necessarily have belonged to a single side and friend and foe could have possibly have been buried together and this is supported by the discovery of a small Bavarian coin that was also important in dating the grave (Matoušek in press).
White Mountain mass grave B
Construction workers stumbled across another mass grave in the White Mountain battlefield area in 1974. Prior to the arrival of professional archaeologists, the construction workers unprofessionally excavated five skeletons from the grave. The archaeologists recovered a further eight individuals from the grave. The grave measured 3.3m x 1.1m and all but two of the skeletons were laid on their backs, while the other two were laid down on their sides (Matoušek in press). This is interesting as this burial clearly did not follow Christian burial rituals as two were laid on their sides. Many of the skeletons revealed deep laceration wounds, similar to those found in White Mountain mass grave A. However these were largely concentrated around the back of the neck and the crown of the head. One individual had two leads musket balls firmly embedded between their cervical vertebrae while two more displayed gunshot wound to their skulls (Havels 1980). Interesting a number of iron pins and bronze loops and fragments were discovered among the dead, possibly reflecting the presence of clothing and equipment, possibly suggesting that the dead were not stripped before burial. It appears as though there are few finds that can illuminate to which side the dead belonged to, but they consist of a mix of both. ………
Lambach, Upper Austria (Austria). ………
In 1994, a series of mass graves were discovered in Austria. Although they were initially believed to be linked to the war crimes under the Nationalist Socialist regime (1933-1945), archaeological and anthropological analysis connected the graves to the peasant uprising of 1625 during the Thirty Years’ War (Miller 2003: 21). The precise dating was helped by the discovery of two coins linked to the period. The uprising was carried out by Protestant peasants in Upper Austria against the draconian rule of the Catholic Count Herberstorff. Even though the peasants were initially successful, the reinforcement of Bavarian soldiers to the region under the command of Pappenheim soon crushed the revolt, in 1626. It is believed that over 3,000 peasants died during the uprising and the grave discovered during the construction of a power plant near Lambach contained c. 102 individuals (Miller 2003: 21). Analysis of the skeletons revealed that the vast majority of the individuals had died from head wounds, although the report was not clear whether these had been inflicted by blades, blunt force weapons such as maces and hammers, or from projectile rounds fired by muskets and pistols. Sadly the report fails to describe how the dead were organized in the grave and overall the report is of limited use for the purposes of this discussion.
Höchstadt, Bavaria (Germany). ………..
In 1985, during the redevelopment of a basement in an 18th century house, a mass grave was discovered in Höchstadt. The house stands on the inner ring of the former northern outer town wall (Plum 2011: 2). As the foundations were pulled up a human skull was discovered, c. 30cm below the basement floor level. The Bavarian State Conservation Office and the Police were quickly notified and after initial investigation it was established that the skull belonged to an historical burial the Erlanger urban archaeological unit was brought in to carry out the excavation (Plum 2011: 2). The 3 week excavation discovered 30 individuals in a pit measuring c. 2.70m by c. 2.10m. The excavation revealed that the grave diggers had taken advantage of the natural gradient of the inner mounting ring beside the town wall. The fill of the pit appears to have been sourced from the towns debris after the assault as it contained a mix of rubble, ash and earth on top of the natural sandy soil below (Plum 2011: 3). The skeletons were stacked in a crisscross pattern to maximize the space of the pit and overall their preservation was good. Due to the nature of the fill, a range of small finds were discovered in the grave. These ranged from lead shot, ceramic fragments, the residue of clothing and a Salzburg Thaler (coin), dated to 1628. The archaeological team grave suggested that the grave could be connected to the 1633 siege of Höchstadt (Plum 2011: 3).
On March 10th 1633, the Catholic town of Höchstadt was assaulted several times by Swedish forces (Plum 2011: 1). The Swedish army was 1,000 men strong, whereas the defenders of Höchstadt consisted of a modest garrison of 60 men alongside its citizenry. The town walls were breached around two o’clock in the afternoon after substantial cannon fire, this was followed by a concentrated assault by the Swedish forces, killing the entire the garrison. First-hand accounts describe how the women of Höchstadt threw boiling water and stones down upon the Swedish attackers, this admirable defence of their town sadly led to the massacre of 300 civilians (Wilson 2009: 838; Plum 2011: 2). To put this number of deaths into context, in 1600 there were 160 families recorded in the town. Following the Swedish assault on the town, only 98 known families remained, and it is likely that 300 deaths would have been a very noticeable loss in such a small town (Plum 2011: 2).
Figure 6: Two skulls showing fatal wounds
Early anthropological reports revealed that two skulls showed fatal wounds as shown in Figure 6, this demonstrates the ferocity the Swedish soldiers unleashed during the assault as they do not appear to have discriminated between the garrison and the citizenry. Based on the historical evidence, as mentioned above, it is likely that these civilians put up a strong resistance against the Swedish attackers and that is why they were subsequently massacred. The information provided here comes from the reports of the initial archaeological investigation as all copies of the final excavation report by the Erlanger urban archaeological unit were lost in the early 1990s (Plum 2011: 3). This point aside, the investigation only partially excavated the mass grave due to health and safety concerns, so the opportunity exits to revisit the site if further redevelopment takes place. If this happens it is likely that the total number of skeletons recovered will rise significantly in number. ………
The remains from the 1985 excavation were ceremonially reburied at the town’s military cemetery in 2003 (Plum 2011: 3). The grave is useful in illustrating that even in a civilian context, mass graves from the Thirty Year’s War still followed a pattern of maximizing the space within the grave. The careful organization of burials may also indicate that respect was shown to the dead, imply that they were buried by friends and relatives. Despite the full report being lost, we can
assume that the grave contained a mix of both men and women, and therefore the residue of clothing indicates that the bodies were not striped, possibly revealing a degree of respect to the female bodies during this period of strong moral values, and again making it unlikely they attacking army participated in the interments. It is unfortunate that the information from this grave is of only of limited value as the detailed report is missing. However, the preliminary reports are still interesting and providing us with a valuable insight into the traumas that were faced by civilian populations. ……….
Stralsund, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Germany). ………
During the Thirty Years’ War, the Hanseatic city of Stralsund was one of the most heavily contested cities in northern Germany. The Imperial army besieged the city under General Wallenstein in the summer of 1628 (Wilson 2009: 431). However the siege was unsuccessful and the Imperial army later withdrew, emboldening the towns of the Hanseatic League, but this was not without a cost of lives. The historical records suggest that the brief and unsuccessful siege cost the lives of approximately 12,000 soldiers from both sides (Wilson 2009: 431).
Stralsund A
After the destruction of the town from bombing during the Second World War, two apartment buildings were built at Frankenhof, FPL. 333rd Genre Befunde. These buildings were demolished In 2009 and only after the demolition archaeologists discovered a mass grave that had now been partially disturbed by the demolition as shown in figure 7 (Ansorge 2010: 126). It was. The grave measured 4m x 1.60m, and contained a minimum of 25 individuals, based on the number of skulls and skull fragments, which were laid in an east-west direction (Ansorge 2010: 129). It was not east to determine whether the skeletons in this grave were victims of the 1629 plague, or dead soldiers from the siege of Stralsund, 1628. The anthropological study of the skeletons noted that the health of the individuals was good and therefore
uncharacteristic of soldiers from the period (Ansorge2010: 130). It is possible that these individuals belonged to the city’s garrison and therefore enjoyed better nutrition than their counterparts in field armies. Their identities as soldiers were confirmed by consistent traces of violence such as the impression of a bullet on the thigh shown in figure 8. The skull of skeleton 9 clearly shows a clean bullet hole. Analysis of the position of the hole suggests that the individual must have been either kneeling or lying down on the ground when shot. The shot has been interpreted as a mercy killing for a fatally wounded soldier (Ansorge 2010: 131). The teeth of many of the individuals show few abrasions or wear,
but one individual, as shown in figure 9, showed strong erosion between their incisors, suggesting that the individual had been an avid smoker; this was supported by the number of clay smoking pipes found within the grave itself (Ansorge 2010: 131). Metal detecting within close proximity of the grave recovered a large number of lead balls of all calibres and even some artillery fragments, suggesting that the area must have been under fire during the siege of 1628 (Ansorge 2010: 132).
Figure 8: Impression left by a lead bullet on the thigh of skeleton 3
Figure 9: Abrasions to incisors caused by heavy smoking using a pipe
Stralsund B ………
In April 2010, an area of 5,000 m² underwent redevelopment in the neighbourhood of Frankenhof, south of the old city of Stralsund. During construction work, two human skeletons were discovered in a trench that measured c. 7.5 metres long by c. 1.7 metres wide (Konze and Samaritan 2011: 15). The skeletons were quickly linked to the siege of Stralsund in 1628 during the Thirty Years’ War. The city was successively besieged by Imperial troops under the command of General Wallenstein. From the large number of musket balls in the trench, it is presumed that their position had come under heavy musket fire (Konze and Samaritan 2011: 15). Interestingly, there were a range of weapons found alongside the two soldiers. Firstly, two muskets with the initials “OM” and “WN” engraved into their stocks. There was also a mace, a pike, and several knives were also found among the bodies. X-ray scans of one of the blades revealed the inscription “IOHANNI” and many of the blades displayed impact marks (Konze and Samaritan 2011: 15).
……….
The anthropological investigation into the grave of two soldiers from Stralsund revealed a number of fascinating insights. One of the soldiers was aged between 18 to 22 years old and the other was aged between 45 to 50 years old when they died. Both skeletons showed traces of healed and unhealed wounds which suggests am intense melee of combat. The younger soldier showed one injury as may have been inflicted by a pike to his fourth thoracic vertebra, causing severe damage to the spinal cord. It is likely that this injury will have caused the soldier’s legs to be paralyzed immediately prior to his death (Konze and Samaritan 2011: 15). The skeleton of the older soldier revealed that he had been fatally shot through the chest. The remains of clothing indicated that the individuals had been wearing medium-high leather shoes, and a doublet jacket with ball buttons This information provides a useful indication of what an average soldier may have been wearing during the Thirty Years’ War. The question has also been raised as to whether these two burials had been related to one another due to the closeness and positions of the skeletons which had were touching at the shoulders and had heads facing one another perhaps suggesting some form of connection and closeness (Konze and Samaritan 2011: 15).
Friedländer Tor, Neubrandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (Germany).
In November 1991, an excavation at Friedländer Tor in Neubrandenburg revealed a number of human skeletons. Due to the traces of uniform and violence, the remains were linked to the conquest of Neubrandenburg by General Tilly in the spring of 1631 (Jungklaus 2011: 34). General
Tilly had been chasing the Swedish King Gustavus Adolphus across Pomerania and into Mecklenburg. Gustavus had sought a brief refuge in Neubrandenburg before Tilly assaulted the town. Although a third of the 750 Swedish defenders died during the brief assault, Tilly’s forces had been repulsed, providing a breathing space for Gustavus as Tilly rallied his forces (Wilson 2009: 468). By the time Tilly had raised 25,000 soldiers to storm the city, Gustavus had marched east collecting his forces before assaulting Frankfurt on the Oder, slaughtering a large portion of the Imperial garrison, seizing eastern Pomerania and the lower Oder for the Swedish Empire (Wilson 2009: 468).
In 2009, the remains were revisited and a new, more in-depth anthropological study was undertaken in an attempt to learn more about this mass grave. The grave contained a minimum of 13 individuals based on the number of skulls and skull fragments. The study revealed that the ages of the individuals ranged between 15 to 44 years old, but the average lay between 25 to 29 years old. The study of their nutrition suggests that these individuals were well fed and were living on an animal protein rich diet, of meat and dairy products (Jungklaus 2011: 34). The general hygiene and health of these individuals was poor, however, many showed evidence of parasites such as lice, which could be detected through damage caused to the bone surface such as bumps and a porous surface, and others suffered from paranasal sinuses and oral mucositis which typically appear in the form of painful ulcers (Jungklaus 2011:34, Eickhoff 2012: 128). It is clear that the individuals suffered a violent end, with 3 skulls showing evidence for blunt trauma impacts in the form of extensive fracture, two skulls showed deep cuts from bladed weapons and a further two died from being shot through the skull. The very high proportion of fatal wounds to the skull may suggest some form of execution of these individuals, however this is far from conclusive. The report fails to mention the gender of the individuals from the grave. This makes it much harder to determine whether these were civilians who were butchered by the Imperial army under Tilly or whether they were all male, and therefore more likely to be members of a local garrison who died whilst defending their town. ………
Lützen, Saxony-Anhalt (Germany). ………..………
In 1632, the Imperial General, Albrecht von Wallenstein, sick with gout, abandoned his desire to retreat to Leipzig and set up his force defensively along the Weissenfels-Leipzig road that crossed Lützen anticipating correctly, that Gustavus would avoid a frontal assault and attempt to outflank his army (Wilson 2009: 507). Under the cover of fog, Gustavus’s soldiers attempted to outflank
