The image on any culture would not be complete without the data provided by graves. I wish to specify from the beginning that this presentation is not meant as a thorough analysis of this subject matter, but just a review of the main Gumelniţa culture funerary finds on the territory of this country.

          The characteristic funerary form of this culture is the cemetery. There are also other funerary forms of manifestation: stray graves, graves inside the settlement and the cult of the skull.

          Unfortunately, the number of funerary finds is lower than that of the settlements of this culture (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Gumelniţa culture funerary finds (on Romania’s territory).	Fig. 2. General plan of the excavations at Vărăşti - Grădiştea Ulmilor	Fig. 3. Graves of the Vărăşti - Grădiştea Ulmilor cemetery

          We are not going to tackle a series of finds on which we lack sufficient data – Malu Roşu, Oinac, Crângu, Cuneşti (E. Comşa, 1960a, p. 8-13). We deal with stray human bones (that might come from disturbed graves) and a series of earlier graves that might not have belonged to Gumelniţa culture.

          All these funerary finds will be presented as follows: a) Cemeteries, b) Stray graves, c) Graves uncovered in settlements, d) Skulls and human bones uncovered in settlements, e) Anthropological consideration.

           a) Cemeteries

          In the case of the Gumelniţa culture, the dead were reserved a special place – the cemetery. Those are situated outside the inhabited space, therefore separated from the settlement.

          The largest Gumelniţa cemetery on the territory of this country is that of Vărăşti – Grădiştea Ulmilor (Călăraşi county) - (fig. 2).

          The borderlines of this cemetery could not be clearly established, because to the north, the bank was eroded by the waters of lake Boian, and to the south the area was cultivated. They uncovered 126 graves, some of which were assigned to the Boian culture – Spanţov phase, and others could not be assigned culturally (E. Comşa, 1995a, pp. 98-105).

          Within the excavated areas they uncovered 118 graves belonging to the Gumelniţa culture settlement. Of these graves 80 were for adults, 35 for children and 3 for teenagers (Fig. 3). They found also a few grave ovelappings, pointing to two burying stages. The pits of the graves were not identified but in two cases, their shapes being irregularly oval. Most skeletons were crouched on the left side, oriented bewteen E-NE 70° - E-SE 117°. In most cases the hands were bent at the elbows and laid with the palms opposite the faces (E. Comşa, 1995b, p. 260).

          The funerary inventory was not too rich, consisting of: silex tools, copper pins with rhombic, two-lobe or rhombic plate shaped head, biconical or flat clay artifacts, bone tips, shell pearls (Dentalium), amber beads, a few golden artifacts (E. Comşa, 1995a, p. 113-119).

          Another interesting cemetery was uncovered at Chirnogi – Şuviţa Iorgulescu*. We deal with a relatively large cemetery, comprising graves belonging to several historical periods. The Gumelniţa culture graves count 54. Men’s graves prevail, but women’s and children’s also exist. This cemetery comprises also double graves (four), as well as graves with individuals lying face down. Almost all the graves have funerary inventory, some of them a rich one: armrings and shell pearls (Dentalium, Spondylus Gaederopus), copper pearls, bone plates, vessels, silex tools, polished stone tools, golden artifacts and remains of funerary offerings (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu, 2000, p. 115).

Figs 4-6 – Graves of the cemetery at Chirnogi - Terasa Rudarilor.

          About 2 km from this cemetery, there is another one, that of Chirnogi - Terasa Rudarilor. It is a small cemetery, made up of 16 graves of the same culture (Figs 4-6). The positions of the skeletons vary. Some are in a strongly crouched position, others in a moderately crouched position. The inventory of these graves is poor (vessels, bone tools, beads). Starting from this inventory the graves could be dated to phase A2 of the Gumelniţa culture.

          On the territory of the commune of Căscioarele, in the location of “D’aia Parte”, they identified a cemetery comprising graves assigned to several historical periods. The Gumelniţa culture includes 28 graves. Their inventory is bulky: Spondylus and Dentalium shell pearls and armrings, a fragmentary bone belt. It is not out of question for this cemetery to belong to the occupants of the “Ostrovel” nearby, where the archaeological excavations uncovered a Gumelniţa settlement (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu, 2000, p. 115).

Fig. 7 – Graves uncovered at ISCIP – Ulmeni	Fig. 8 – The inventory of the grave M1 at ISCIP – Ulmeni	Fig. 9 – Hammer-axes coming from the damaged graves, uncovered at ISCIP – Ulmeni

          Not far from Olteniţa, on the bank opposite the dale separating the Gumelniţa hillock from the rest of the Danube terrace, there must be the cemetery of the eponymous settlement, only partially researched (Vl. Dumitrescu, 1996, p. 207).

          The same cemetery includes the group of graves uncovered on the occasion of some construction works, in the area of the former I.S.C.I.P. Ulmeni (the present COMSUIN Ulmeni). We deal with 4 graves with inventory (Fig. 7). One of the graves (M3), had been completely destroyed. The skeletons were in a crouched position, on the left side, with an eastward skull, with 48° - 90° deviations.

          The positions of the arms vary. The only grave that had an inventory was M1: a grey-bluish volcanic rock hammer-axe and a silex blade (Fig. 8). Not far from the place of discovery of this grave group they found, on the occasion of building the mentioned enterprise, 3 hammer-axes that came from the destroyed graves (D. Şerbănescu,1985, p. 25-34)- fig. 9.

          Another cemetery, that must have belonged to the same eponymous settlement, was identified in the north-west part of the Gumelniţa mound, about 1 km away, on the Valea Mare (Great Valley). Here, on the occasion of building the shooting ground, several graves were destroyed, that used to include in the inventory hammer axes (D. Şerbănescu, 1985, p. 33-34).

Fig.10 – Gumelniţa graves uncovered at Dridu

          A group of 9 graves, belonging to the Gumelniţa culture, was researched at Dridu. We deal with 8 graves for adults and one for a child (Fig. 10). All the skeletons were in a crouched position, both on the right side (5 skeletons), and on the left side (4 skeletons). Those crouching on the left side were NNe 23°-ENE 67° oriented, and those crouching on the right side were ESE 100°-WSW 246°. None of these graves had an inventory. They belonged to a larger cemetery (E. Comşa, 1995b, p. 261).

           In the year 1971, in the village of Cetatea Veche in the commune of Spantov, in the location of “Gradiştea”, while carrying out a ditch for mounting a pipe deep down, several graves were destroyed (6 or 7). 1. Some of them included a funerary inventory of hammer-axes, of the type of those mentioned above. These graves belonged to a Gumelniţa cemetery (D. Şerbănescu, 1985, p. 33).

           b) Stray graves

          This category includes graves uncovered outside settlements or cemeteries.

          At Cernavoda, in the location of “La Cetate” near the tell, a grave was uncovered (Fig. 11). The skeleton was in a crouched position, on the right side, with the left arm bent at the elbow towards the face, and the right arm along the trunk. It is SSE-NNW oriented. The funerary inventory was made up of a small biconical vessel, an askos, and a bowl, all specific of the Gumelniţa culture (P. Haşotti, 1997, p. 89).

Fig. 11 – Stray grave uncovered at Cernavoda and its inventory.	Fig. 12.a - Stray grave uncovered at Hârşova; b. Its inventory.	Fig. 13 – Artifacts uncovered in the stray grave at Curcani

          At Rasova, not far from the Gumelniţa settlement (about 3 km from the village), a grave assigned to this culture was uncovered (E. Comşa, 1977, p. 70).

          Near Constanta, at Palazu Mare, on the bank of the lake Siutghiol, they uncovered by chance a grave belonging to the early phase of the Gumelniţa culture (D. Galbenu, 1965, p. 415). The skeleton was lying on the back. The funerary inventory was made up of: a vessel with the conical neck, a bowl with the foot empty on the inside, a small support table, a small bowl, a small polished chisel, armring and shell beads (P. Haşotti, 1997, p. 89).

          At Zimnicea, they uncovered by chance a grave assigned to the Gumelniţa culture. The skeleton was crouching on one side, having as a funerary inventory shell pearls (E. Comşa, 1995a, p. 121).

          Another stray grave was uncovered at Hârşova, near the tell. The pit of the grave was oval in shape. This grave had been disturbed by another one from the Roman period. The skeleton was in a crouched position, on the left side, arms bent under the head. Its orientation was east-westward. The funerary inventory was made up of a bowl, a silex tip and a scraper (P. Haşotti, 1997, p. 89)-(fig. 12).

          Near Olteniţa, in the commune of Curcani, on the occasion of some construction works, a grave was uncovered. The skeleton was in a crouched position, the funerary inventory including: a flat volcanic rock axe, a bluish hammer-axe of the same rock, an orifice for fastening the handle, a rectangular copper chisel and a fragmentary bowl (E. Ghianopoulos, 1966, p. 447)-(Fig. 13).

           c) Graves inside the settlements

          Next to the stray cemeteries and graves, the Gumelniţa culture includes graves inside settlements, among or under dwellings.

          It has been noticed that, in most cases, the individuals buried were children or teenagers, more rarely adults.

          At Căscioarele – “Ostrovel”, in the layer belonging to phase A2 of the Gumelniţa culture, they uncovered 11 small children’s skeltons, buried under the level of the dwellings. The skeletons were very crouched on the left side, in small pits, usually ENE-WSW oriented. All the graves lacked an inventory (Vl. Dumitrescu et alli, 1983, p. 74).

          Similar finds were made also in other Gumelniţa settlements. Thus at Borduşani-Popină, in the present Ialomiţa Pond, they uncovered 4 children’s graves inside the settlement (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu et alli, 1997, pp. 93-95) (Fig. 14). At the same time, on the skeleton of a young man uncovered here, that presents some northern, dinaroid and east-European elements, it was found that all these bones were iced and slightly changed because of congenital diseases (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu, 2000, p. 116).

Fig.14. Children’s graves uncovered at Borduşani-Popină.	Fig.15. The isle of “La Ostrov”, the lake Taşăul, Navodari. The grave M1 uncovered in the last Gumelniţa A2 dwelling layer.	Fig.16. Grave uncovered at Vidra

          In the tell at Hârşova, two children’s graves were uncovered. One of them belonged to a 5-6 year old child, buried under the floor of a large dwelling. Its position was strongly contracted and had been deposited in a vessel of an organic materal (bag?), with the hands and legs tied. The excrements, preserved in the rectal area, make it possible to proffer the hypothesis that the death had violent causes. The tests performed proved that this child had suffered from a malformation both of the skull and backbone (D. Popovici, Y. Rialland, 1996, p. 56).

          At Bucşani, the location of “La Pod”, tell 1, in the first dwelling layer, under the floor of a dwelling (L10), was deposited, without a pit, a child. His or her age, estimated after what has been preserved of the teeth, must have been 4 at the most (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu et alii, 1996-1998, p. 111).

          These children’s graves uncovered inside the settlement between or under houses, raised some questions. It is hard to specify whether these children were sacrificed because of some diseases or the diseases themselves caused their deaths (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu, 2000, p. 116)..

          Near Năvodari, on the isle of “La Ostrov”, lake Taşaul, they uncovered, in the last Gumelniţa A2 dwelling layer, a grave that must have belonged to a teenager. The skeleton was in a crouched position, on the left side, NE-NW oriented. The funerary inventory included two broken vessels in situ and a model axe. One should remark the use of stone blocks for the grave, a pattern with analogies in the cemetery at Durankulak (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu et alii, 2000, p. 60)-fig. 15.

          Another group of graves was uncovered inside the tell at Vidra. We deal with three graves (two for children and one for an adult), found in a crouched position, on the right side. The adult’s skeleton was NW-SE oriented, having the right palm under the right knee. The funerary inventory included two silex blades (E. Comşa, 1960a, p. 12) – Fig. 16.

Fig.17. Graves uncovered in the settlement of Chitila-Fermă, Bucharest.

          In the tell type settlement of Chitila – Bucharest, in the Gumelniţa culture layer, they uncovered five graves (Fig. 17). The first grave belonged to an adult and was N-S oriented. Only the legs, some vertebras, a hip fragment and a few skull fragment are extant. The second grave was NE-SE oriented and belonged to an adult. The probable position of the individual was crouched. From that grave we have: the thighbones, hip bones, a temporal bone, cervical vertebras, a part of the occipital, the fragmentary jaw, a cubitus, the phalange and metacarpals. Close to the cubitus they discovered a spiral copper armring. The third grave, like the others, was incomplete (the tibias, the hip bone, two lumbar vertebras, skull fragments a part of the teeth). In this grave they uncovered a pig jaw, probably a funerary offering. The fourth grave comprises two crouched skeletons, with the heads oriented in various directions. One was orth-southward oriented, the other was south-north oriented. This double grave was disturbed by a child’s grave, west-eastward oriented. The last grave was uncovered at the edge of the tell. The pit was rectangular. The dead was lying on the back, SW-NE oriented. In the grave they uncovered a copper artifact and a female clay figurine(V. Boroneanţ, 1987, p. 128; idem, 1992, p. 71).

          At Luncaviţa, in the location of “Cetăţuia”, in the Gumelniţa A2 layer, under the floor of a fired dwelling, parts of a human skeleton was uncovered. We deal with the bones of the legs and a part of the hip bones (E. Comşa, 1960a, p. 9). In this case we might deal not with a grave, but with an individual caught in the fire, later entailing a disturbance of the skeleton (P. Haşotti, 1997, p. 89).

          As a matter of fact, a similar case was mentioned by Vladimir Dumitrescu, in the eponymous settlement on the Gumelniţa hillock. We deal with a human skeleton uncovered among the remains of a dwelling (Vl. Dumitrescu, 1925, p. 38).

           d) Stray skulls and bones

          In the Gumelniţa culture area, a few finds are known that can be assigned to this category.

          Thus, at Căscioarele – Ostrovel, close to the kiln of dwelling no. 1, under the clay floor on which its outer chime rises, 1.50 m to the south they found two human skulls, 60 cm away from each other. They were laid as if looking at each other. These belong to the Gumelniţa B1 layer (Vl. Dumitrescu, 1965, p. 223).

          Another human skull was found in the settlement, under the floor of a dwelling, in the Gumelniţa A2 layer. It lay with the glance towards the south-west, over a stag horn, a stone and various animal bone remains (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu , 2000, p. 116).

           In the eponymous settlement of Gumelniţa, they uncovered a broken child’s skull, close to a fireplace. It was associated with ash, red ochre, a broken vessel lid and other many pottery fragemtns (Vl. Dumitrescu, 1966, p. 56).

          At Vidra, within the Gumelniţa settlement, sometimes even near a fireplace, they uncovered many stray human skulls (E. Comşa, 1960b, p. 94).

           Within the tell type settlement, on the Măgura Cuneştilor, they uncovered a stray child’s skull top, made up of thin plates. The author of this find thinks that we deal with a child’s skeleton remains, “disturbed from ancient times” (E. Comşa, 1986, p. 57; idem, 2001, p.33).

          All these skull finds undoubtedly have a ritual significance. They are linked to a skull cult, practised both in the Near East and south-eastern Europe.

          Sometimes, next to the skulls, within the Gumelniţa settlements, they uncovered various stray human bones.

          Thus, in the settlement of Tangâru, they uncovered many stray human bones. We deal with a jaw fragment and many long bones (E. Comşa, 1960b, p. 92).

          In the settlement of the tell type of Borduşani-Popină, they uncovered many stray human bones. We mention three bone fragments coming from a young individual (18-20 years), probably female. They also uncovered a tibia fragment that belonged to a 5-6 year individual and a large bone fragment (forearm). The latter belongs to a female teenager (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu, 1997, p. 95).

          At Măgura Cuneştilor, within the settlement, they uncovered a stray human bone. We deal with a fragmentary radius (E. Comşa, 1992, p. 64).

          At the same time, at Hârşova-tell, within the Gumelniţa settlement, come more stray human bones. Some of them were found among the domestic waste (D. Popovici, Y. Rialland, 1996, p. 56).

          Many stray human bones were uncovered in the tell type settlement of Chitila-Fermă, near Bucharest (V. Boroneanţ, 1987, p. 128).

          These stray human bone finds were considered in the past as coming from graves disturbed in ancient times (E. Comşa, 1960b, p. 93-94). Nevertheless, the uncovering of such bones inside settements, sometimes even in domestic areas (Hârşova tell) led to the idea of the existence of ritual anthropofagy practices. In spite of that, it is complicated to lay out a definite opinion as to that.

           e) Anthropological Considerations

          Although the number of anthropological tests for Gumelniţa culture funerary finds is low, it would be useful to present in short the data available.

          The lot of graves from the cemetery at Vărăşti-“Grădiştea Ulmilor” is the most representative. The skull series from Gumelniţa skeletons from that cemetery is made up of 64 skulls. All the tested skulls belong to adults, namely: 38 male and 26 female (D. Nicolăescu-Plopşor, I. Popovici, 1967, pp. 3-4). If we draw a comparison between the two series of skulls, male and female, we will find two interesting elements deserving attention. The male skull lot includes four types – dolichocranial, hyperdolichocranial, mezzocranial, brachycranial, while the female skulls inlcudes just 3 types – dolichocranial, mezzocranial, brachycranial (E. Comşa, 1995a, p. 133).

          The study of these skeletons proved the existence of an important Mediterranean stock, with the following four functional variants:

          1. A massive dolichocranial variant, with a long narrow face, middle eyeballs, thin nose, having a tendency towards alveolar progmatism. That is a proto-Mediterranean variant.

          2. A mezo-skull rather than dolichocranial variant, with a middle rectangular face, relatively rectangular eyeballs and a strong jaw, reminding of Cro-Magnon.

          3. A brachycranial variant with short wide skulls, with a moderately developed front relief and an arched occipital.

          4. The last variant, represented by a single case, is a brachycranial, with a middle face, with high relatively rounded eyeballs with a superficial nose and narrow molars (D. Nicolăescu-Plopşor, I. Popovici, 1967, p. 13).

          From Dridu we have data for nine skeletons, eight adults and a child. The sex was determined at four male skeletons (dolichocranial type) and four female (mezzocranial type). A group had Mediterranean characteristics, and the second was mixed – Mediterranean elements with individuals who had blurred proto-European characters. The stature was small or middle, with a slender skeleton. The average age was 32 years (O. Necrasov, M. Cristescu, 1967, p. 612-613).

          Another set of important data from the anthropological tests performed on the skeleton lot from Borduşani-Popină. We deal with four children’s graves, with ages from 1 to 8 years. All these skeletons reveal a prevailing Mediterranean component. In a single case (M XV) we might deal with a mixed component – Mediterranean and proto-European. We identified two skull types: dolichocranial and brachycranial (S. Marinescu-Bîlcu et alii, 1997, p. 93-95).

          Here we should also mention the tests performed on a child’s skull uncovered in the eponymous settlement on Gumelniţa hillock. His or her age is 2-3 years, the sex remaining unknown.  The skull is mezzocranial type. The features are gracile Mediterranean, with certain grimaldi characters (D. Nicolăescu-Plopşor,1966, p. 109-111).

          In the end, to obtain a unitary view over the individuals who make up this culture, we should mention also the anthropological data on the funerary lots belonging to the Gumelniţa culture in Bulgaria.

          In the following we are going to refer to the data on the cemetery at Kubrat (the former Balbunar). From the lot of 25 skeletons, we could study 11 skulls (5 male and 6 female).

          All the 5 male graves belonged to adults. The skulls can be classified as follows:

          - one was the brachycranial type;

          - one was the mezzocranial type, with northern characteristics (the pentagon-shaped skull);

          - one was the mezzocranial type, with mixed characteristics – proto-Mediteranean with.

          The series of female graves was more diversified, comprising people: juvenis, adults and mature. The skull types comprise:

-         three were the dolichocranial type, with Mediterranean characteristics;

-         two were the mezzocranial type, with Mediterranean characteristics;

-         one was the mezzocranial type, with northern characteristics;

-         one was the brachycranial type.

          It can be noticed that the Kubrat skull lot lacks the hyperdolichocranial type.

          We can obtain more significant data from the anthropological tests of the skeleton lot from Ruse. Within it we could study and measure 75 skeletons. We researched 52 skulls, of which: 32 male and 20 female. Also 8 child skeletons were identified. The male skeletons were aged between 25 and 55 years, and the female ones between 20 and 25 years. It could be found that 59 of these sleletons belonged to the Mediterranean stock (E. Comşa, 1995a, p. 135-137).

          Instead, the tests performed on the skeleton lot from Varna, proved the existence also of other anthropological types. The individuals buried here belong to the European type, that can be assigned to the Dinaric-northern variant of the Dinaric racial type (Y.A. Yordanov, 1978, pp. 50-59; G. Marinov, Y. Yordanov, 1978, pp. 60-67).

***

          From the analysis of the complex subject  represented by the funerary finds in the Gumelniţa culture on Romania’s territory, we could formulate the foundation of a conclusion.

          First of all, the number of funerary finds of this culture is much lower than the number of known settlements.

          The exclusive funerary rite of the Gumelniţa culture bearers was inhumation.

           The dead were buried both in cemeteries and inside settlements.

          As regards the cemeteries, things are clearer. The cemetery is a site, a town of the dead, as its name reveals ‘necro-polis’ (V. Kernbach, 1983, p. 79). The cemeteries are a space with a special funciton, attributed to the dead, separated from the settlement (from the space of the alive). The emergence of these exclusive funerary areas is the result of a progressive evolutive process of the spatial organization of the graves, that developed over the entire Neo-Eneolithic.

          Instead, the graves inside settlements located under or among houses raise certain problems. From the beginning one should make the difference between the funerary events and the ritual event, as in most cases we deal with graves or children buried inside settlements. In some cases (Hârşova, Bucşani – La Pod, Borduşani-Popină, Căscioarele), it is clear that we deal with a ritual act, probably a “sacrifice for the durability” of the future dwelling. Soem of these children’s skeletons revealed that they had suffered from congenital diseases (Hârşova, Borduşani-Popină). We do not know whether these children were sacrificed because of the diseases or those diseases were the causes of their deaths.

          As regards the adults’ graves inside settlements, we might deal with the perpetuation of older funerary practices. The graves under and among dwellings are attested from the Near East and Anatolia to south-east Europe. The burying of individuals under or close to dwellings is linked to the cosmological symbolism of the dwelling, its ‘domestic’ function. The graves uncovered within the space of the alive suggest the aim of the funerary ritual, namely to ‘involve’ the dead in the space of the alive. That way the cycle of life evolves around the domestic space, around the house where the individual in question had been born, had lived and died. The dead body, buried in the space of the dwelling, got a new life in association with the house and its inhabitants (J. Chapman, 1983; D.W. Bailey, 1990, p. 25-27).

          The existence of stray graves, far or close to settlements raise certain questions. It is not out of the question, like in some cases, for these graves to have belonged to a cemetery that were not researched or identified until now. This assertion is supported by the fact that in most situations we deal with chance finds, not systematic researches.

          Another hypothesis linked to the interpretation of these graves might be that the dead in various occasions far from the settlement were buried there directly. Or, perhaps, there was a special ritual of isolating certain individuals who had failed to observe the rules of the group. Nevertheless, such an idea is hard to extrapolate from lack of solid arguments.

          As regards the stray human skull finds, within settlements, they are linked to the cult of the skull, a practice attested from the Near East to the Balkans.

          This special treatment of the skull is linked to the idea that the head or skull bears the symbol of the soul and of other virtues of the individual that the community wishes to preseerve (R. Vulcănescu, 1987, pp. 170-172; M. Eliade, 1991, p. 54).

          A special issue is the stray human bones finds inside settlements. In the older relevant literature these stray bones uncovered more often than not with no anatomical contexts were considered to come from graves disturbed in ancient times. However, the discovery of such bones in domestic areas raises some questions. Might we deal with “indifference” towards the dead?

          Some authors linked these stray bones uncovered inside settlements to a possible ritual canibalism. Nevertheless, the existence of anthropofagy practices, even ritual ones, it hard to prove from lack of a series of arguments.

          Beyond all these considerations we should understand that graves and funerary rituals represent an important source of information for researches.

           References:

D.W. Bailley, 1990	Bailley, D.W., The Living Houses: Signifying Continuity, In: Social Archaeology of Houses, Edinburgh, 1990, p. 19-49.
V. Boroneanţ, 1987	Boroneanţ, V., Les sepultures de la couche du tell de Chitila-Fermă Bucarest, In: Hugelbestattung in der Karpaten-Donau-Balkan-Zone wahrender Aeneolithischen Period, Belgrad, 1987, p. 127-129.
V. Boroneanţ, 1992	Boroneanţ, V. , Tell-ul neolitic de la Chitila Bucureşti, In: Materiale, XVII, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 69 – 72.
J. Chapman, 1983	Chapman, J., Meaning and Illusion in the Study of Burial in Balkan Prehistory, In: Ancient Bulgaria, vol. I, Nottingham, 1983, p. 1-42.
E. Comşa, 1960a	Comşa, E., Considerations sur la rite funeraires de la civilisation de Gumelniţa, In: Dacia, N.S.,IV, Bucureşti, 1960, p. 5-30.
E. Comşa, 1960b	Comşa, E., Contribuţie cu privire la riturile funerare în epoca neolitică de pe teritoriul ţării noastre, In: OmCD, Bucureşti, 1960, p. 83-103.
E. Comşa, 1973	Comşa, E., Complexul neolitic de la Grădiştea Ulmilor-Boian, In: Materiale, X, Bucureşti, 1973, p. 25-30.
E. Comşa, 1977	Comşa, E., Neoliticul judeţului Constanţa, In: RevMuz, V,  Bucureşti , 1977, p. 66-77.
E. Comşa, 1986	Comşa, E., Săpăturile de salvare de pe “Măgura Cuneştilor“, In: Materiale, XVI, Bucureşti, 1986, p. 53 – 57.
E. Comşa, 1992	Comşa, E., Staţiunea neolitică de la Cuneşti, jud. Călăraşi, In Materiale, XVII, Bucureşti, 1992, p. 63 – 68.
E. Comşa, 1995a	Comşa, E., Necropola Gumelniţeană de la Vărăşti, In: Analele Banatului, S.N., IV, 1, Timişoara, 1995, p. 55-193.
E. Comşa, 1995b	Comşa, E., Ritul şi ritualul funerar al purtătorilor culturii Boian şi Gumelniţa din Muntenia, In: ActaMN, XXXII, 1, Cluj-Napoca, 1995b, p. 257-268.
E. Comşa, 2001	Comşa E., Aşezarea Gumelniţeană „Măgura Cuneştilor”, In: Materiale, S.N., I, Bucureşti, 2001, p. 7 - 42 .
Vl. Dumitrescu, 1925	Dumitrescu, Vl., Fouilles de Gumelniţa, In: Dacia, II, Bucureşti, 1925, p. 29 – 103.
Vl. Dumitrescu, 1965	Dumitrescu, Vl., Principalele rezultate ale primelor două campanii de săpături din aşezarea neolitică târzie de la Căscioarele, în: SCIV, XVI, 2, Bucureşti, 1965, p. 215 – 238.
Vl. Dumitrescu, 1966	Dumitrescu, Vl., Gumelniţa. Sondajul stratigrafic din 1960, In: SCIV, XVII, 1, Bucureşti, p. 109 – 112.
Vl. Dumitrescu et alii,1983	Dumitrescu, Vl. et alii, Esquisse d’une préhistoire de la Roumanie jusqu’á la fin de l’âge du bronze,1983, Bucureşti.
Vl. Dumitrescu, 1996	Dumitrescu, Vl., Gumelniţa, In: Enciclopedia arheologiei şi istoriei vechi a României, vol. II, 1996, Bucureşti.
M. Eliade, 1990	Eliade, M., Istoria credinţelor şi ideilor religioase, vol. I, 1990, Bucureşti.
D. Galbenu, 1965	Galbenu, D., Aşezări neolitice pe teritoriul oraşului Constanţa, In: RevMuz, II, Bucureşti, 1965, p. 414 – 415.
E. Ghianopoulos, 1966	Ghianopoulos, E., Un mormânt neolitic la Curcani, In: RevMuz, V, Bucureşti, 1966, p. 446 – 447.
P. Haşotti, 1997	Haşotti, P., Epoca neolitică în Dobrogea, Constanţa, 1997.
V. Kernbach, 1983	Kernbach, V., Dicţionar de mitologie generală, 1983, Bucureşti.
S. Marinescu – Bîlcu et alii, 1997	Marinescu – Bîlcu, S. et alii, Archaeological Researches at Borduşani – Popină. Preliminary Raport 1993 – 1994, In: Cercetări Arheologice, Bucureşti,1997, p. 35 – 144.
S. Marinescu – Bîlcu et alii, 1998	Marinescu – Bîlcu, S. et alii, Şantierul arheologic Bucşani (jud.Giurgiu). Raport preliminar. Campania 1998, In: Buletinul Muzeului „Teohari Antonescu”, Giurgiu, 1998, p. 93 – 114.
S. Marinescu – Bîlcu et alii, 2000	Marinescu – Bîlcu, S. et alii, , Năvodari, jud. Constanţa, punctul Insula – La Ostrov, lacul Taşaul, In: Cronica cercetărilor arheologice din România. Campania 1999, Bucureşti, 2000, p. 65 – 67.
S. Marinescu – Bîlcu et alii, 2000	Marinescu-Bîlcu, S., Mormânt, In: Enciclopedia arheologiei şi istoriei vechi a României, vol. III, 2000, Bucureşti.
G. Marinov, Y.Yordanov, 1978	Marinov, G., Yordanov, Y., Preliminary Data from Studies Bone Material from Varna Chalcolithic Necropolis, In: Studia Praehistorica, 1-2, Sofia, 1978, p. 60-67.
O. Necrasov, M. Cristescu, 1967	Necrasov, O., Cristescu, M., Aspecte antropologice ale neoliticului şi eneoliticului românesc, In: SCA, IV, 2, Bucureşti, 1967, p. 159-169.
D. Nicolăescu-Plopşor, 1966	Nicolăescu-Plopşor, D., Expertiza antropologică a unui craniu de copil descoperit la Gumelniţa, In: SCIV, XVII, 1, Bucureşti, 1966, p. 109-112.
D. Nicolăescu-Plopşor, I. Popovici, 1967	Nicolăescu-Plopşor, D. Popovici, I. –1967, Les populations neolithique du Bas-Danube. Les tribus des civilisation de Boian et de Goumelnitza, In: Annuaire Roumain D’Anthropologie, IV, Bucureşti, p. 3-16.
D. Şerbănescu, 1985	Şerbănescu, D., Vestigii neolitice descoperite la Ulmeni, In: CCDJ, 1, Călăraşi, 1985, p. 25 – 35.
Popovici, D., Rialland, Y., 1996	Popovici, D., Rialland, Y., Viaţa pe malul Dunării acum 6500 ani, 1996, Paris.
R. Vulcănescu, 1979	Vulcănescu, R., Dicţionar de etnologie, 1979, Bucureşti.
Y. A. Yordanov, 1978	Yordanov, Y.A., Anthropologic Study of Bone Remains from Persons Buried in the Varna Eneolithic Necropolis, In: Studia Praehistorica, 1-2, Sofia, 1978, p. 50-59.