Notes
1. All dates in calibrated radiocarbon years BC.
2. The sites of Mariënberg, Dalfsen, Oirschot and Zoelen, are only described in that section to illustrate the variety in the treatment of the dead. As human bones are either absent or sparse these will not be representative for the underlying population, their traditions and biological parameters - these will remain unknown. Therefore they are excluded from the discussions on the topics on demography, health and diet.
3. Amber was not locally available but could have originated from the ice-pushed tertiary deposits or the coastal area in the Netherlands.
4. The applied methods of the age determination differ per population. These methods include the attrition of the teeth, internal suture closure, the degeneration of the spongy bone structure of the proximal femur and humerus and the degeneration of the pubic symphysis and microscopic evaluation of the femoral diaphysis (for more details on the used methods see the various references on the physical anthropological analyses). This has resulted in unstandardized age intervals. For the purpose of comparison the ages are recalculated and subsequently devided in 5 year age groups. The choice for 5 year instead of, for instance, 10 year intervals is to be able to differentiate the various age intervals of children and subadults below 20 years. The subadult - adult ratio is the main parameter used to compare the mortuary profiles. The mean age at death for men and women is presented but will not be used to draw any conclusions due to the problematic aging methods for adult individuals.
5. Generally the teeth were preserved well, therefore the statements about the occurence of enamel hypoplasia and caries can be seen as representative. See the original physical anthropological publications for detail information on the presence of teeth.
6. Stature is uncorrected for age as the health standard is of importance here and therefore the maximum stature is taken into account.
7. See also Louwe Kooijmans (in press).