 Well, good afternoon, thank you, Holland. Here I am once again. This paper, Burial Assemblages versus Resource Assemblages, a look into the economic background of Iberia and Cooper H. Megalithic graves, results from our ongoing discussions about resources in southern Iberia and collaboration between the University of Seville and the University of Tubingeng. And it's intended as a bit of an exploration of how we can connect the reality that we see inside these burials, the material reality, the deposits, especially as far as the lithics is concerned, and the geological landscapes or the geological resources or the geological environment, if you prefer, around surrounding these tombs at these sites and these locations. So in order to explore this, the relationship between society and resource use, we are making a particular focus on the role of resources in the construction of landscapes. The questions are the basic question is how do burial assemblages mirror resource assemblages if they do at all. In order to achieve this, we will be looking at two case studies from Cooper H, southern Iberia. Two tombs, Montelidio and Palafio III, which are contemporary, dated in the third millennium, probably in the early part of the third millennium. We have different chronologies for these two tombs. Montelidio is very well-dated by C14, by a series of 22 dates. And we know exactly when it was used in the 29th century BC. Whereas for Palafio III, unfortunately, nowhere the carbon date is available. But the fact that there is no bell beaker pottery associated with it makes it likely that it corresponds to the pre-beaker phase of the Cooper H, therefore roughly contemporary with Montelidio. These two tombs are located in rather different physical environments. Montelidio in the lowlands of the Guadalquivir river valley and Palafio III in the Sierra Morena highlands. They represent very different scales of monumentality, as we will see in a minute when I show some photos. And they both include or have now available detailed studies of the material culture, including quantification of all finds and provenancing of artifacts as well as to some extent functional analysis. This is, I would say, basically the only two coverage tombs in southern Spain for which at the moment this comparison is possible. Because for many other tombs that have been excavated, the data in terms of characterization of the raw materials is not there or is not complete very often. So some issues to look at for main issues. Was there a personal or group identification with the locally available resources? What was the role of non-local, even exotic, resources in these tombs? What are the similarities and differences in the relationship between local and non-local resources among both burial assemblages? And what does that tell us about the society, the ideology, and landscape making of that time? So a quick review of these two tombs, both located in southwestern Spain in the province of Seville. As I said, Montelidio is in the lowlands. You can see here the Guadalquivir River, which this is the paleo coastline of 5,000 years ago, 6,000 years ago, how it would have been approximately. Very different from what it is today. This is all marshes nowadays. And this is the location of modern-day Seville here. Parque de Miraflores is located within the city. And this is Valenzino de la Concepción, which is where Montelidio is located. So we have Palatio III here. And Montelidio here distance some 70 kilometers. Palatio III is a megalithic complex that includes various monuments. I will not dwell into the description of those monuments. The comparison we are making refers only to the Tholos-type monument from the Copper Age. You can see various photos of the excavation process of this monument. It's basically a corridor and circular chamber monument, the chamber being approximately two and a half meters in diameter. And no human remains were found here because of the high soil acidity, a problem that we encounter very frequently in this region. But a relatively sizable collection of artifacts and material evidence was recovered from this tomb. An interesting aspect of this tomb in particular is the use of these slate slabs that line and surround the chamber, which are very fine pieces of work because they have been cut and carved carefully and that then were used to paint decoration on them. So the remains of this decoration inside the burial chamber has been reconstructed by Professors Mimi Bueno and Rodrigo Valvin. What you see here is a reproduction from their work. And basically, this is an interesting example of how in this particular case, the stone is not used in the architecture with a functional sense or purpose, but rather simply as a canvas on which the painting was made. So the slate provides a smooth, regular surface, which is shiny, polished, and beautiful. And on top of this, the users of this tomb painted several motifs. Well, we could say a lot about this use of the stone here, but I will move on. So basically, when you look at the architecture of this tomb, and I think that could be extrapolated to practically any megalithic monument in Iberia and, of course, in Europe, you see that there's some strong patterns of use of different lithic resources and different rocks. To give you just a quick example, you see how this red conglomerate in this particular tomb was used exclusively to make an atrium at the entrance of the tomb that would have been separated from the rest of the corridor through a gate. We didn't find the gate, but we found a groove carved on the bedrock that fit exactly for a little portal made of wood, possibly, that would have closed and sealed the tomb while it wasn't used. So those three slabs, two marking the entrance and one as a capstone, symbolize the access to the tomb. And this is the only part of the tomb in which this particular type of rock was used. It is also interesting if you notice this. One of these slabs, it's actually a little sculpture. It's a stella. It's a very nicely carved piece of rock that, again, according to Mimi Buenos and Rodrigo Balvin's interpretation, would have represented a female figure, again painted and carved with various motifs. So this is interesting because the position of this figure of this stella is obviously protecting the entrance to this monument and it's presiding over the access into this burial chamber. So you can say that it has an apotropaic function. So it's a very precise use of a very specifically selected rock type within this tomb. So the same applies to another stella which was found on the upper part of the infill of the tomb, which represents the later stages in the use of this tomb. Again, I'm using here the interpretation by Mimi Bueno and Rodrigo Balvin. And this is a very interesting stella because it's morphology. It's very unlike most of what is known for the so-called megalithic art of this region. It is very parallely pipetic in shape. And then it was painted with anthropomorphic motifs, the eyes, nose, eyebrows, and possibly some kind of weapon. So this represents a later stage in the use of the monument. So the grave goods inside this burial chamber include pottery, a fair amount of lithics, including arrowheads, and long blades which are typical of the lithic technology of the Third Millenium. You have the counts up there. It's approximately 100 napped lithic items. Then some polystones as well of different material and fibrolite, which is interesting because this is not local volcanic rock and rock crystal. Rock crystal is a very interesting appearance, usually, in megalithic monuments. And then a number of other objects that we can consider perhaps more idea-technique, as it were, charms or personal amulets or personal objects. And all these objects, which are here shown in this photo, have specific properties. You see, for example, these two items are hexagonal prisons of milky quartz, which are difficult to find. Both of them show evidence of use wear through handling. The same applies to these white quartz, which, believe it or not, is white. But it has a very interesting property because it has veins of iron that make it reddish when it's placed against the light. Against the light, this oval-like object looks a bit like an egg and has a very strong organic appearance to it. So these are all special objects. This one here is fossil wood, which is interesting because in this region, there's evidence of fossil forests with fossil tree trunks and so on. So basically these people, the users of this tomb, wear new perfectly well every single detail of the geological environment in which they were living. And they were making use of all these resources very specifically for specific purposes, both in the architecture and in the portable material culture. Oops, sorry. OK. Just one fragment of a photo of one copper item, the only copper item in this tomb, which proves that this belongs to the copper age. Interestingly, against our assumption, when this was analyzed and the lead isotopes of this object were looked at by Peci Murillo Barroso, she found that this isn't local copper, which is a surprise to us because there's abundant local resources there in the region. The signature in the lead isotopes shows a provenance from eastern Sierra Morena some 200 kilometers to the east. Interesting, these people had this material locally available, but in this tomb, they chose to put something that was non-local. The copper is non-local. And a little female figurine in fire clay, like it's common in many of these tombs. So Montelidium, it's another copper age tomb. In this case, a much more massive in size instead of a chamber of 2 and 1 half meters and a corridor of 2 meters. We have a monument here with 36 meters of corridor and then a chamber of 5 meters, which would have been covered by a dome made of hardened clay, sand-dried clay that would have been as high, so probably 5 meters high. So it's a really, really big monument. OK, I'm not doing so well. So some quick photos of the images of Montelidium. The use of building materials here is very interesting. For example, there's a large number of slabs that were used in the corridor that are sandstone. And these sandstones were brought from a very specific location along what was then the sea or the coastline. And we know this because of the presence of several vibe albs, several mollusks that are marine mollusks that wear our lithophagic, literally rock-eating mollusks. And this we find in La Pastora as well, which is another mentalistic monument nearby. This is about 40 or 60 kilometers away, between 40 and 50 kilometers away from Montelidium. And it's interesting that the builders of this monument chose precisely these rocks to use for the roofing of the corridor. Again, it's a very deliberate choice of material, which we suspect has some strong symbolic connotations. Here you have a quick impression of the main burial chamber of Montelidium, where several individuals were buried, especially women, have to go a little fast. And the material culture, that interestingly in this case, does not include any copper. It doesn't include any copper, but it includes several very fine objects made of rocks of lithics, including these very special long barbed arrowheads, a flint halberd, you can see there on the right, and some objects made of rock crystal as well, which is notoriously difficult to work raw material, different properties from the flint. Ivory and amber as well appear in this tomb in large quantities compared to any other copper age monument in Iberia. Gold, and as I said, no copper. It's interesting that, again, gold seems to be a raw material with a very specific use. As it is used, these gold foils were used to represent this eye motif, or oculus, that is very omnipresent and pervasive in late Neolithic and copper age iconography, and in the world view of these two millennia. Interestingly, these cases of oculi portrayed or represented on gold foils are only found in the lower Wadalkeville Valley, and to date, no other instance has been detected in the whole of Iberia. So to finish this review and the choice of resources, of course, I cannot fail to mention what perhaps is the most striking find in this tomb, which is these attires that some of these people, some of these women mostly were wearing when they were buried, and which were made with the tens of thousands of perforated beads. Some of these beads were made with stone on stone, and some of them seem to have been made on shell, marine shell, but we still don't have a full analysis and study of this. These incredible garments or attires were decorated in some cases with pendants made of ivory. As you can see here, this is a little acorn made of ivory, and some other elements that were adornments, basically, for these attires. So to finish and comparing these two burial contexts, we can say that both Palatio III and Montelidio present carefully selected local materials. They are similar in this. The imagery shows us that rocks were used in a highly patterned way to convey some specific purported meanings, and this, again, is shared between the two tombs. The imagery in itself is represented in different ways. In Palatio III, the red conglomerate, as I explained, has an important protagonism at the entrance of the tomb. In Montelidio, a lot of protagonism is given to red cinnabar, which was used to paint the slabs and the walls of the tomb, both the corridor and the chamber. In the group of napped lithics, moving on into the finds, there's a predominantly non-local flint in both tombs, although in Montelidio, there's a very special kind of rock that was used for these long barbed arrowheads, which is mylonite, which has never been described in Iberian prehistory before. In the group of polystone, in Palatio III, there is a predominantly non-local rock fibrolite and amphibolite standing out. In Montelidio, there is no polished stone, which I think is interesting from the point of view of the people who use this tomb. Bodily ornaments, in Palatio III, we only have two perforated beads. In Montelidio, of course, there's tens of thousands of perforated beads, plus ivory, amber, and gold. In the Palatio III tombs, there are some personal objects, as I explained, that we interpret as charms or amulets made of rocks like chalcedony, milky quartz, and fossil wood. In Montelidio, no object of this type was found. Finally, in the domain of representations, sacred representations, or ideotechnic items, at Palatio, there's this one fire-clay female figurine. In Montelidio, only the repousse gold foils, which are exceptional. So as a conclusion, whereas in Palatio, there's a variety of pottery forms, a series of tools that we could call, perhaps, everyday daily tools, arrowheads, hand axes, and some personal objects with almost no bodily ornaments. At Montelidio, there is a visible lack of variety of pottery forms. No tools, arrowheads are artistic objects, not meant for use, and no personal objects, although there are super sophisticated and totally special bodily ornaments, including the garments. This suggests that in Palatio III, what we have is a regular, natural human group. Call it a family, a clan, or a community. At Montelidio, on the other hand, we don't seem to have that. We do have the benefit of the anthropological report, in this case, because the human remains were found. There is a non-natural group in so far. This could be more like a corporate group. We have interpreted it as a possible group of priestesses. Finally, in Palatio III, there is no extra-Iberian exotica, and the architecture is, of course, of a regular or small scale, which suggests, again, a regular community. At Montelidio, on the other hand, there is a large amount of extra-Iberian exotica, ostrich, axel, ivory, amber, and a totally out of the ordinary architecture. All this suggests a powerful community.