A Place for the Heathlands

The Lüneburg Heath is one of the most renowned heathland areas in northern Germany. It represents a cultural landscape that has been cultivated by humans for thousands of years. It consists of a mix of agricultural land and woodland, the latter having been intensively managed through pastoral farming practices. Due to the sandy soils, the region was long barren and sparsely populated, though it is now characterized by a dense network of prehistoric sites. The landscape continued to transform in modern times, resulting in its complex topography.

This contribution focuses on the archaeological site known as Oldendorfer Totenstatt and the surrounding areas within the heathland (referred to as Nordheide or Luheheide). The necropolis contains graves dating from the Neolithic period to the pre-Roman Iron Age. The site has served continuously as a ritual location and has expanded gradually with the addition of burials. It encompasses heathland, geest or sandy soil, and woodland, with much of the area protected as a nature reserve.

The archaeology of northeastern Lower Saxony is marked by a diverse range of sites from various periods.^{1 ( 1 )}
Both and Fansa 2004; Eger 1999; Laux 1971; Körner and Laux 1971; Pahlow 2018; Reichold 2006. This project explores prehistoric periods from the Neolithic to the early Middle Ages along the Luhe and Lopau rivers (Fig. 1).

Up to about 1800, much of the north German countryside was covered by heath and moor. However, beginning with governmental reforms in 1831, common land used by villages was divided among individual farmers (Preussische Agrarverfassung^{2 ( 2 )}
e.g. Pierenkemper 1989 ). By the end of the nineteenth century, traditional heath farming had disappeared, and the land was afforested, significantly reducing the extent of the heathland. Today, this vegetation has almost vanished, except in larger parts of the Lüneburg Heath.

Even at the turn to the nineteenth century, the barren and almost treeless heathland was seen as a threatening environment. Travelogues and famous poems like Friedrich Hebbel's Der Heideknabe ('The Heath Lad') (1844) tell of this former landscape, of which little now remains:

This heathland was shaped by overgrazing of the formerly widespread forests on the sandy geest, likely developing after the Neolithic. The ridges of the end moraine on the Luheheide have steep slopes that drop sharply into the Elbe Valley, and the landscape is cut by rivers such as the Aue, Seeve, Luhe, and Ilmenau, which drain northward to the Elbe. Today, little heathland remains, as the region has been largely reforested with pines.^{4 ( 4 )}
Meynen 1961; Naturraum 653/644.

Protection efforts for the heath began around 1900, eventually leading to the formation of a national park in the 1920s and 1930s. However, these efforts were reversed from the 1950s onwards due to British Army military exercises, which turned much of the heathland into large sand dunes. As a result, many renaturation projects were launched, and old signs at the sites still testify to these efforts (Fig. 2).

The landscape has continued to transform, leading to a complex terrain. Today, Oldendorfer Totenstatt area features renatured heathland, adjacent pine-rich mixed forests, and alder swamp forests. It is surrounded by intensive agriculture farming and pastoral farming. Until the 1970s, the area was dominated by pine overgrowth, displacing the heath. In the 1990s, extensive renaturation efforts were taken to restore the heath and the archaeological sites, leading to the landscape we see today.

The valley of the Luhe offers a rich archaeological landscape that spans multiple historical periods, with a particularly high density of findings along the watercourses, including the Luhe and Lopau rivers. These features include Neolithic megalithic graves, Bronze Age tumuli, and Iron Age flat grave fields. Despite this, evidence of settlements in the region remains sparse, likely due to a combination of erosion, landscape transformations from agriculture and forestry, preservation challenges, and gaps in research. This absence, paired with outdated archaeological and palynological data, makes this site particularly intriguing for contemporary focused study.

This contribution aims to explore the interaction between nature and society with the aim of shedding light on the interplay between human activity and the evolving heathland environment. The shifts in land use visible in the palynological and archaeological evidence reveal how human societies not only adapted to, but actively transformed their surroundings. The development of heathlands, in particular, reflects this interaction, as early agricultural practices, grazing, and forest clearings laid the groundwork for heathland expansion. These landscapes were not merely by-products of environmental change, but were shaped and sustained by human activity, offering insights into the relationship between ecological processes and social organization.

By investigating the impact of human activity on the environment, particularly in the construction of burial structures and of the surrounding landscapes, this study seeks to understand the intensity and nature of land use around the necropolis. The emergence and expansion of the heathlands offer a lens through which to examine population growth, changes in cultivation practice, and the hierarchical organization of societies. Burial practices – ranging from Neolithic megaliths to Bronze Age tumuli – reflect these broader dynamics, tying cultural expressions of death to the transformation of the living landscape.

This archaeobotanical perspective highlights not just the changes in vegetation, but also the enduring relationship between humans and heathlands, showing how these unique landscapes have been integral to societal development over millennia.

All the samples in this study originate from the Oldendorfer Totenstatt site in the Lüneburg administrative district of Lower Saxony, Germany. This archaeologically rich area is part of the prehistoric landscape of Lüneburg Heath, and features a variety of burial structures spanning multiple periods, forming a multiphase necropolis (Fig. 1).

Chronologically, the Neolithic megalithic tombs belong to the north central European Funnelbeaker culture (c. 3500–2750 BC).^{5 ( 5 )}
Fritsch u. a. 2010; Schirnig 1979; Laux 1996. These impressive collective graves, used by individual communities, contained grave goods such as ceramic vessels, stone tools, amber, and early copper artefacts. The Bronze Age (c. 2200/2000 to 800 BC) saw significant changes in burial and economic practices,^{6 ( 6 )}
Assendorp 1997; Laux 1971; Pahlow 2018; Probst 2011; Wegner 1996. marked by the increasing use of bronze objects (jewellery, tools, weapons), emergence of tumuli for body or cremation burials, and regional cultural diversification. The subsequent Iron Age (c. 800/600 – turn of the millennium) introduced flat graves, though this period remains poorly explored. Evidence suggests the site was used from the Mesolithic through the migration period.^{7 ( 7 )}
e.g. Körner and Laux 1980; Reichold 2006.

The necropolis includes four known megalithic graves, eighteen Bronze Age burial mounds, an Iron Age cemetery of an unknown size, and a Mesolithic site, with more likely undiscovered.^{8 ( 8 )}
Database of Lower Saxony State Office for Cultural Heritage. Nearby, within a few kilometres, numerous other prehistoric sites have been identified^{9 ( 9 )}
e.g. Ahrens 1975; Geschwinde 2000; Körner 1959. (Fig. 1). Excavations have uncovered extraordinary finds, establishing the region south of the Elbe as a significant cultural centre where diverse "cultural groups" interacted, particularly during the Metal Ages, creating a material culture reflective of this dynamic exchange.^{10 ( 10 )}
Brozio and Hage 2012; Geschwinde 1996; Körner and Laux 1980; Sprockhoff 1952.

The Oldendorfer Totenstatt has been under the protection extended to ancient monuments for more than 170 years due to its supra-regional cultural and historical significance.^{11 ( 11 )}
von Estorff 1846 Recognized for its potential as early as the 1850s, the site however remains under-researched, making it a unique repository of burial practices in northern Germany, characterized by continuity, diversity, and intensity.

The site first gained an archaeology focus in the 1920s, notably through the work of German archaeologist Ernst Sprockhoff, who catalogued burial mounds in northern Lüneburg and collaborated with painter Franz Krüger to document the graves.^{12 ( 12 )}
Krüger 1927; Sprockhoff 1975 Damages to the site in the 1930s prompted stronger preservation efforts. Excavations by Sprockhoff and others followed, but research was patchy until the 1970s, when parts of the megalithic graves were revisited.^{13 ( 13 )}
Excavations 1970, 1972 by F. Laux. Körner and Laux 1980. The present project, initiated in 2019, marks the first recent investigation of the site in decades.^{14 ( 14 )}
Menne and Pahlow 2021; Menne and Eckert 2021; Menne 2022.

In order to reconstruct the past vegetation, fire activity, and settlement history of the Oldendorfer Totenstatt site, we have analysed two distinct types of samples: those collected from the floodplain of the River Lopau, and those extracted from the surrounding heath's hardpan (Fig. 6). These samples were carefully processed to uncover the environmental and human impacts preserved in the sediment layers. This section outlines the methods used for coring, sampling, and processing the materials, as well as the analytical techniques employed to examine pollen, charcoal, and soil composition. Through these approaches, we aim to piece together a detailed picture of the prehistoric landscape and its interaction with past human activity.

The sediment core collected, named Oldendorfer Totenstatt (TS), is 123 cm long and was extracted from the floodplain of the River Lopau, near the base of the bordering geest, approximately 300 m from the burial sites. The core was taken in three sections, each 50 cm long. A total of 26 samples were collected at intervals of 8, 4, and 2 cm. For radiocarbon dating, two bulk samples (1 cm^3^ each) were taken from depths of 44 and 60 cm.

For charcoal analysis, a total of 123 samples of 1 cm^3^ were taken continuously along the core. The charcoal particles were chemically processed to enhance visibility, sieved, and counted under a binocular microscope.^{15 ( 15 )}
Processe according to Stevenson & Haberle (Stevenson and Haberle 2005). Macro-charcoal count results were calculated as a percentage of the pollen sum and presented graphically as a bar chart.

A total of 33 samples were collected from the hardpan from the Oldendorfer Totenstatt and its surroundings (Fig. 6). Samples of 1 cm^3^ were taken from the top of the black hardpan, just below the washed-out white/grey sandy soil. Some samples were collected directly from Neolithic or Bronze Age grave sites, while others were taken further away. Care was taken to ensure that samples near the graves were collected from the slopes of the mound, where the graves would have served as a protective layer for the pollen within the samples.

The soil type found at the site was podzol, and the samples were taken from this. Podzol forms through the downwards redistribution of organic matter, along with iron, aluminium, manganese, and phosphorus. The upper soil layers are depleted of these substances, but they accumulate in the lower layers, creating distinct soil horizons. Podzol formation requires specific conditions, including a cool and wet climate, nutrient-poor bedrock, and generally unfavourable conditions for soil fauna.^{16 ( 16 )}
Leitgeb u. a. 2013 There seems to be a link between heath vegetation and the development of podzol.^{17 ( 17 )}
Cruickshank and Cruickshank 1981

The pollen samples were prepared using standard acetolysis methods, which involve the removal of carbonates and silicates, the digestion of organic material, and the staining of pollen grains to enhance visibility under the microscope. Pollen grains were identified and counted under a light microscope.^{18 ( 18 )}
Processing of the sediment core and hardpan was carried out according to Fægri et al. (Fægri and Iversen 1989) including HCl, KOH, and HF treatment. A Lycopodium tablet containing 9,666 ± 212 spores was added to each sample for the later determination of the pollen concentration. The samples were passed through a 120 µm metal and 1 µm nylon sieve (allowing to pass practicals of up to 10 µm). A minimum of 500 pollen grains, from 26 samples from the drill core and 33 samples from the hardpan, were counted.

The radiocarbon dates for the core samples of 44 and 60 cm are presented in Table 1.^{19 ( 19 )}
OxCal v4.4.4 Bronk Ramsey 2021/Reimer et al. 2020 The pollen count results from the floodplain core are presented in a pollen diagram (Fig. 3).^{20 ( 20 )}
The percentages of individual pollen and non-pollen palynomorphs (NPPs) were calculated based on the total pollen sum (100%) using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The data was imported into C2 version 1.1.7 (Juggins 2007). Stratigraphic classification into pollen zones was based on our own assessment and a constrained cluster analysis of the sample similarity based on pollen percentages. This dendrogram was modified in TILIA version 2.6.1 (Grimm 1991–2019) using the CONISS function.

The pollen taxa were grouped into arboreal pollen, shrubs (mostly Calluna), and nonarboreal pollen. Nonarboreal pollen includes pollen from non-tree plants such as grasses, herbs, and shrubs, all of which are indicators for settlement. Primary settlement indicators, such as Secale (rye), Cerealia-type (cereal grains), Fagopyrum (buckwheat) and Cannabis-Humulus type (hemp), are associated with cultivated or directly human-influenced plants. Secondary settlement indicators, such as Plantago lanceolata (ribwort plantain) and Rumex (e.g. common sorrel), are plants that often thrive in disturbed or cultivated environments, reflecting human activity.

The taxa from the hardpan were also sorted into arboreal pollen, shrubs, and nonarboreal pollen,^{21 ( 21 )}
The counting results were digitizedin Microsoft Excel and put into TILIA version 2.6.1 (Grimm 1991–2019). and the same before-mentioned species were used as indicators of human activity.^{22 ( 22 )}
Lang 1994 Figure 4 shows the location of the samples and marks the indications of human activity.^{23 ( 23 )}
For the maps the programme QGIS (version 3.22) was used.

This section presents the results of the pollen and charcoal analysis from the Oldendorfer Totenstatt sediment core and hardpan samples. The findings illuminate the long-term changes in the landscape, including shifts in vegetation, human settlement, and fire activity. By examining the radiocarbon dates and pollen data, we trace the interaction between natural vegetation patterns and anthropogenic activities over millennia, providing a detailed record of how the environment evolved and how humans influenced the landscape throughout the Holocene.

The sediment core reveals significant insights into vegetation development over time. The oldest zone aligns with the Preboreal period, approximately 10,000 years uncalibrated before present^{24 ( 24 )}
Lang 1994 , a time when pine dominated over birch in northwest Germany.^{25 ( 25 )}
According to Lesemann (Lesemann 1968) This suggest an older age for the zone than that indicated by radiocarbon dates from depths of 44 and 60 cm (Tab. 1).^{26 ( 26 )}
However, additional radiocarbon dating is necessary and in process. The pollen diagram (Fig. 3) further highlights key periods of vegetation change. These are discussed in detail for each identified pollen zone (time span) later in the forthcoming sections.

During the early Holocene, encompassing the Preboreal and Boreal periods, the landscape was dominated by pine forests, as revealed by the high proportion of arboreal pollen in the sediment core. In the Preboreal period, starting 11700 cal BP,^{28 ( 28 )}
Kalis, Merkt, and Wunderlich 2003 pine (Pinus) was dominant, with hazel (Corylus) notably absent. However, around 6800 BC,^{29 ( 29 )}
Kubitzki and Münnich 1960 hazel began to expand significantly, marking the transition to the Boreal period. This shift resulted in a landscape shared by both pine and hazel, reflecting broader vegetational changes over time.

Heathland had not yet formed, as indicated by minimum presence of heather (Calluna) pollen. Nonarboreal pollen, primarily from grasses (Poaceae), suggests the existence of small, open areas within the floodplain, but the region remained largely forested. Signs of human activity during this period were minimal; small traces of Plantago lanceolata and Rumex pollen, typically associated with settlement, suggest limited human influence.

Charcoal values were generally low, with occasional spikes indicating localized fire events. A significant fire event at the end of this period coincided with a slight increase in heather, Calluna, which may signal the earliest stages of human activity in the area. The increased fire activity, often linked with Late Mesolithic communities,^{30 ( 30 )}
Innes, Blackford, and Simmons 2010 hints at a gradual shift in how humans interacted with the landscape.

The onset of the Atlantic period around 9000 cal BP brought significant shifts in the landscape. Pine forest began to decline, giving way to alders (Alnus),^{31 ( 31 )}
Singh and Smith 1973 which flourished in wetter conditions. Arboreal pollen decreases slightly from 85 to 80%, beginning approximately 9000 BP.^{32 ( 32 )}
Kalis, Merkt, and Wunderlich 2003 This period marks the gradual opening of the forested landscape, as suggested by increasing heather (Calluna) pollen, likely reflecting early human influence.

The consistent presence of settlement indicators like ribwort plantain (Plantago lanceolata) and moderate charcoal values hint at small-scale forest cleared and early settlement. These developments suggest that human communities were beginning to shape the environment, albeit in limited ways.

During this period, the forest landscape underwent more profound changes. Arboreal pollen dropped significantly, from 91 to 60%, as pine (Pinus) and hazels (Corylus) declined and heather (Calluna) expanded, signalling the spread of heathland. This shift likely reflects intensified human activity, including forest clearance for agriculture. Evidence of linden (Tilia) pollen at the start of this period suggests that settlers may have recognized the fertility of clay-rich soil near the site, clearing linden trees to cultivate crops.^{33 ( 33 )}
Also known as lime tree This contrasts with the nutrient-poor sandy soils of the Oldendorfer Totenstatt itself.

While beech (Fagus) dominance would typically characterize the Subatlantic period, its expansion appears to have been interrupted, likely due to sustained anthropogenic activity. Rising Calluna values point to the heathland spreading as the forests were cleared. The vegetation development suggests a transition from the Atlantic to the Subboreal periods, with the radiocarbon dating at 60 cm indicating an age of approximately 2550 BP, corresponding to the early Subatlantic.^{34 ( 34 )}
Van Geel u. a. 1997

The archaeological record aligns with this environmental transformation: the Bell Beaker culture was settling the Luhe valley during this time.^{35 ( 35 )}
Reichold 2006 Rye (Secale) pollen at a depth of 61 cm and Cerealia-type pollen at 58 cm indicate the onset of cereal cultivation, dating no earlier than 2800 BP, due to rye cultivation in Europe starting during the Iron Age.^{36 ( 36 )}
Reichold 2006

Charcoal data underscores this intensification of human impact. Peaks in macro-charcoal values, particularly at depths of 50 and 52 cm, correspond with sharp declines in arboreal pollen, documenting large-scale forest-clearing, likely through fire. These activities not only opened the landscape, but also shaped the environment into the heathland-dominated character still evident today.

This period marks a dramatic transformation of the landscape, as arboreal pollen decreases sharply from 71 to 43%, while heather (Calluna) pollen reaches its peak, reflecting the extensive spread of heathland. This expansion aligns with medieval land-use practices, which intensified landscape openness. Indicators of settlement, such as rye (Secale) and cereal-type pollen, increase during this time, alongside the first appearance of buckwheat (Fagopyrum) and hemp (Cannabis-Humulus pollen at depths of 32 and 40 cm respectively. These crops were introduced to northern Germany during the Middle Ages, marking an era of diverse agricultural practices.^{37 ( 37 )}
Behre 2008

The presence of cornflower (Centaurea cyanus), an arable weed associated with rye cultivation,^{38 ( 38 )}
Kirleis 2002 further underscores the prevalence of farming in the region, as the plant typically grew near fields.^{39 ( 39 )}
Gildenstern and Turner 2011 A significant charcoal peak at 40 cm depth suggests large-scale fire clearance, a method likely used to expand arable land and manage the heathland.

Together, these changes reflect the apex of human influence on the landscape, as the transition to the Middle Ages brought about the greatest degree of openness and agricultural exploitation in the region’s history.

From 1850, the landscape underwent a significant reversal, as widespread reforestation efforts replaced centuries of heathland expansion. This change was driven by the decline of the sod-based economy, which had previously caused severe erosion and landscape degradation.^{40 ( 40 )}
Behre 2008 The arboreal pollen percentage rises to its highest level in this period, dominated by alder (Alnus), reflecting the recovery of local floodplain vegetation.

Simultaneously, heather (Calluna) becomes increasingly rare, as reforestation efforts curtailed the heathland’s dominance.^{41 ( 41 )}
Behre 2008 Settlement indicators such as rye (Secale) pollen nearly disappear, with only two grains recorded at a depth of 8 cm, while the decrease in Rumex pollen suggests the gradual abandonment of intensive land around the burial site.

The near-absence of charcoal during this period further signals the end of fire-based land-clearing practices and a broader shift towards landscape reforestation.

A total of 49 pollen types, along with some non-pollen palynomorphs (NPPs) and charcoal fragments, were identified in the 33 podzol samples. Pollen was classified to the genus level whenever possible, or otherwise to the family level (Fig. 5). While not all the samples are discussed in detail here, their full pollen composition is presented in the diagram.

The map in Figure 6 illustrates the distribution of primary and secondary indicators of human activity^{42 ( 42 )}
Lang 1994) across the podzol samples.^{43 ( 43 )}
Notably, only samples 31 and 32 lack any signs of human influence, while samples 22, 24, 25, 3, 4, 8, 27, 20, 9, and 29 contain only secondary indicators.

When interpretating pollen from the hardpan samples, several factors must be considered. One significant challenge is bioturbation, a process that mixes pollen from different time periods in the soil up until the podzol fully forms.^{44 ( 44 )}
Havinga 1968 This makes precise dating of such samples difficult, if not impossible.^{45 ( 45 )}
Tipping u. a. 1999 Despite these challenges, podzol samples offer unique advantages. Unlike lake sediments or peat samples, soil samples provide a highly localized snapshot of vegetation, often capturing the landscape just before a site was occupied.^{46 ( 46 )}
Tipping u. a. 1999 This specificity, especially when combined with sediment core data, makes them invaluable for understanding site-level vegetation history.^{47 ( 47 )}
Overland and Hjelle 2013

Dating the podzol samples is inherently tricky, as radiocarbon dating was not performed on the samples. However, approximate ages can be inferred by associating the samples with the archaeological features they were collected from. For example, podzol samples beneath Neolithic graves likely represent vegetation from 3700 to 3100 BCE,^{48 ( 48 )}
Cruickshank and Cruickshank 1981 while those beneath Bronze Age graves date to approximately 1600 to 1200 BCE – provided the samples remain undisturbed.^{49 ( 49 )}
Cruickshank and Cruickshank 1981

Another approach to dating involves identifying human activity indicators, such as specific plants whose presence in central Europe is tied to known historical periods. For instance: Cerealia first appeared in the Neolithic, rye (Secale) dates to the Bronze Age, hemp (Cannabis) becomes common in the Iron Age, buckwheat (Fagopyrum) emerged around 1400 CE,^{50 ( 50 )}
Lang 1994 and cornflower (Centaurea cyanus) is associated with the early Middle Ages.^{51 ( 51 )}
Kirleis 2002 Using this framework, samples containing these indicators can sometimes be identified as “contaminated” if their age does not align with the grave they were associated with.^{52 ( 52 )}
For example: Samples 16 and 23, collected from Neolithic graves, contain later indicators and are likely contaminated. Sample 6, from a Bronze Age grave, includes Cannabis, suggesting contamination. Samples 14, 11, and 5 contain Secale, indicating they are younger than 2000 years.Conversely, samples without later human activity indicators may correspond to older periods. For example, samples 12, 13, 19, 7, and 33 contain only Cerealia, potentially dating them to the Neolithic. Samples 3, 8, and 20 contain only secondary indicators, while samples 31 and 32 show no evidence of human activity, possibly predating the Neolithic.It is worth noting that signs of human activity in some samples might have been missed due to insufficient counting thresholds. Further efforts to refine sample dating will be integrated into discussions about the vegetation history of the study area.

During the Neolithic Age, the landscape was dominated by mixed forests, with linden trees forming a key component. These forests were gradually opened up by early settlers, and small patches of heathland began to emerge, marking the early signs of human influence.^{53 ( 53 )}
Behre 2008

Sample 21 stands out due to the abundance of well-preserved hazel (Corylus) pollen. This could reflect the vegetation from the Mesolithic period, when hazel was widely distributed as a food source before agriculture began.^{54 ( 54 )}
Lang 1994 The sample shows minimal signs of human activity and has the lowest proportion of heathland pollen among the Neolithic samples, suggesting it could date to the end of the Mesolithic or the early Neolithic. Sample 22 (60:40 ratio of arboreal pollen to nonarboreal pollen) suggests an open mixed forest interspersed with heathland. The presence of Plantago major-media, Caryophyllaceae, Apiaceae, and Asteraceae points to the existence of pastures.^{55 ( 55 )}
Kirleis 2002 Sample 26 is similar but includes evidence of agricultural fields. Sample 4, while resembling the other, has a higher percentage of linden (Tilia) pollen. This unique aspect will be addressed later in the analysis.

By the Bronze Age, advancements in agriculture techniques and population growth had transformed the landscape. Heathland areas now expanded, and a greater variety of cultivated plants appeared. Samples 10 and 27 (both with a 50:50 ratio of arboreal pollen to nonarboreal pollen), show a landscape with fewer trees than the Neolithic period. Fields and pastures were likely present, but overall, the landscape is still quite similar to the earlier Neolithic. Samples 5, 9, 11, and 14 form a distinct group, reflecting a shift in the environment. Here, the arboreal to nonarboreal pollen ratio drops to 45:55, marking the first time there is more heathland and shrubs than trees. An increase in heather (Calluna) suggests larger heathland areas, alongside evidence of agricultural fields. Sample 29 differs significantly from the other Bronze Age samples. Its arboreal to nonarboreal pollen ratio is 70:30, and Tilia accounts for the largest percentage of tree pollen. The samples contain fewer species overall, and particularly herbaceous taxa. This could suggest that the area around sample 29 was less open when the graves were constructed, or that fields and pastures were present, but too distant from the sampling site to be detected. Another possibility is that the high percentage of Tilia pollen overshadowed other pollen types, masking their presence in the sample.

The samples that were not taken near graves show distinct difference, and will be grouped for clearer interpretation.

Samples 31 and 32 have an arboreal to nonarboreal pollen ratio of 95:5, with heather (Calluna) as the only non-tree species. There are no clear signs of human activity, and it is possible that these samples are older than the Neolithic Age. However, the high percentage of Tilia pollen could be masking other indicators (as possibly also in sample 29). Samples 25 and 7 show a ratio of 75:25 for arboreal to nonarboreal pollen, suggesting that the landscape was starting to open up. The higher percentage of Calluna indicates more open vegetation, and there are indicators of fields and pastures.

A group of samples – 8, 1, 19, 30, 13, 2, 15, 3, and 12 – appear to reflect a gradual opening of the landscape. The arboreal to nonarboreal pollen ratio starts at 65:35 in sample 8 and ends at 40:60 in sample 12. All these samples show evidence of agriculture or pastures. Since samples 1, 2, and 15 can be dated to the Bronze Age, it is likely that the entire group dates to around that time. However, since not all these samples can be definitively dated in the interpretation, caution is needed in interpreting them.

Sample 30 contains Fagopyrum, suggesting it dates to 1400 AD, though it is also possible that this pollen grain is a contaminant. Sample 15, with Centaurea cyanus, could be from medieval times, or it could indicate that pollen has been relocated.

Sample 20 has a ratio of 40:60 for arboreal to nonarboreal pollen, and could belong at the bottom of this group. Unlike the others, it only contains one herbaceous species. This may suggest period of low human activity, or it could indicate that the high percentages of Calluna and Tilia pollen have masked other trends. The high percentage of Calluna very strongly indicates human activity despite the lack of other indicators.

One of the most notable aspects of the podzol samples from the Oldendorfer Totenstatt is the variability of pollen percentages from linden across the samples. This variation can be explained by stemflow. Linden trees, which are pollinated by insects, produce large pollen grains that tend to stick to the tree stems and are washed into the soil during rain. As a result, the linden pollen percentage is higher around the tree stems, typically within 30 cm.^{56 ( 56 )}
Keatinge 2009

It is known that linden trees were present in the area in the Neolithic Age. Pollen analytical studies from the 1970s found high concentrations of linden pollen in a beaker from Grave IV, which was interpreted as having possibly contained mead or honey made from linden.^{57 ( 57 )}
Körber-Grohne 1979

Neolithic settlers seem to have favoured areas with linden trees for their settlements, likely because they indicate nutrient-rich soil.^{58 ( 58 )}
Lang 1994 The pollen analysis, combined with the approximated dating of the samples, provides insight into the presence of linden in the study. During the Neolithic, it is highly probable that there were linden trees around Grave IV and Grave II. By the Bronze Age, linden trees were present near Grave III, south of Grave IV, east of the field, and around the eastern Bronze Age grave mounds.

For samples that were not taken near graves, the age is less clear. If samples 31 and 32 are indeed Mesolithic, it would suggest that there had been linden trees south of the site at that time. The subsequent group of samples indicate the presence of linden near Grave III and north of the field, then near Grave IV, east of Graves I and II, and around the eastern group of Bronze Age grave mounds.

Finally, whether the linden trees in the area led the settlers to choose the place, or whether the settlers actively helped the spreading of linden trees in the area, remains unclear.

The results of this study illuminate a dynamic and enduring transformation of the vegetation and landscape surrounding the necropolis, including the evolving role of heathlands. From dense forests to the expansive heathlands of later periods, these changes were gradually but deeply influenced by human activity. Over millennia, people shaped and adapted the environment to suit their economic and cultural needs, leaving clear imprints on the vegetation and land use. This study traces the vegetation development and the development of heathlands together with their interaction with human activity from the Holocene onward, uncovering a history of gradual shifts in plant species.

The earliest evidence shows forests dominated by pine and birch, followed by the spread of hazel and, later, mixed oak forests. While the natural expansion of broadleaved species and beech was underway, human interventions interrupted this progression, driving the growth of heathlands.

Pollen data from the Lopau floodplain core reveal different phases of landscape use, detectable from the fourth millennium BC, with the intertwining of human activity and heathland expansion being a central issue.^{59 ( 59 )}
Due to limitations of the 14C data, firm conclusions about the timing of these activities can only be drawn from around 3500 cal BC.

Overall, four distinct phases of land use emerge before modern times:

This period marks the earliest signs of heathland development, evident in rising heath (Calluna) pollen concentrations. A significant shift in vegetation is evident, particularly through a rise in hazel and heath. The construction of the megalithic tombs coincides with this shift, indicating a new phase of human environmental manipulation. Settlement indicators suggest that early agricultural practices, including forest clearings, contributed to the initial expansion of heathlands, signalling a break from the Mesolithic period.

In this phase, heathland expansion appears to stall, with lower levels of heath pollen and minimal evidence of human settlement. The landscape remained relatively closed, with limited agricultural activity.

Heathland expansion accelerates significantly during this period, driven by intensified land use. Charcoal particles in the pollen record suggest forest clearings for settlements, and the presence of linden trees (lime trees) at the start of this period suggests that parts of the landscape supported good soil quality. These areas may have been intentionally cleared to make way for crops or pastures, with heathlands filling the spaces left behind. The formation of podzol – a soil type characteristic of heathlands – further underscores the impact of human activity on the landscape.

This phase represents the most dramatic shift towards open landscapes, with heathlands reaching their maximum extent. The presence of pollen from hemp, rye, and buckwheat highlights increased human influence on the landscape, further evidenced by higher levels of settlement. Heath pollen dominates the record, indicating its role as a defining feature of the landscape. The absence of beech expansion during this time could be due either to deliberate human clearing or to a hiatus in the sediment in the Lopau floodplain core.

Throughout these phases, heathlands emerged not merely as a by-product of environmental changes, but as a landscape deeply influenced by human practices. Early agricultural activities and settlement patterns created the conditions for heathlands to thrive, while subsequent land management choices – such as deliberate forest clearings and grazing practices – reinforced their dominance.

The Neolithic period, in particular, saw a marked shift in vegetation. Pine decreased significantly, while alder expanded. At the same time, heath and hazel pollen spiked, before subsiding again during the Bronze Age. These changes align with the construction of the megalithic tombs around 3500 BC, suggesting a complex interplay between cultural practices and ecological transformations.

Compared to the postmillennial period, the Bronze and Iron Age show significant changes in how the landscape – and particularly the heathlands – was used. This can be seen in the density of archaeological sites. While the burial mounds of the Metal Ages are abundant in the study area, later human activity appears less frequent. This decline in activity continued into the early post-Christian centuries, with a notable resurgence in the early Middle Ages. The strong connection between the linden tree and prehistoric religious or ritual practices is well documented in literature,^{60 ( 60 )}
Blench and Spriggs 1999; De Benedetti et al. 2022; Ţenche-Constantinescu et al. 2015 and at Oldendorfer Totenstatt, the tree appears more frequently near the burial mounds, suggesting its symbolic significance.

In the last two to three hundred years, changes in land use have led to a decline in heathland extent, as extensive farming practices diminished and forests expanded. In marshy areas, alder has spread naturally, while in the sandy soils of the Lüneburger Heathland, pine has been deliberately planted, marking the shift to more modern landscape management practices. Heathlands, once a vital part of human livelihood and cultural expression, now serve as a historical testament to the deep and enduring relationship between people and their environment.

These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the long-term interplay between human activity and environmental transformation. The Lüneburg Heath serves as a microcosm of these dynamics. The enduring presence of heathlands, shaped by millennia of agricultural, cultural, and ritual practice, underscores their role as both a functional and a symbolic landscape. The Oldendorfer Totenstatt, with its multiphase necropolis and surrounding heathlands, reflects the profound ways in which societies have continuously adapted to and reshaped their environments. By tracing these interactions, this study not only illuminates the complex history of the heathlands, but also highlights their significance as a cultural and ecological archive, offering insights into how past societies responded to changing landscapes. These insights resonate today, as the preservation and renaturing of such landscapes remind us of the delicate balance between human activity and environmental sustainability.