The Relative Value of Fragmentary Mammalian Remains

1961 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 538-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. J. Olsen
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Limb Bones ◽  
Foot Bones ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Relative Value

AbstractThe diagnostic value of animal remains from archaeological sites is discussed in the following order of importance of the various osteological elements which can be used for interpreting the fauna they represent: teeth, skull fragments, articular ends of limb bones, foot bones, portions of the pectoral and pelvic girdles, and vertebrae.

On Ch'arki Consumption in the Ancient Central Andes: A Cautionary Note

2000 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 567-572 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidio M. Valdez
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limb ◽  
Central Andes ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Cautionary Note ◽  
Fresh Meat ◽  
Limb Bones ◽  
Foot Bones

Recently, Andeanist zooarchaeologists have introduced the so-called "ch'arki effect": a taphonomic factor to explain the disproportional occurrence of some camelid skeletal parts at archaeological sites. Briefly, it has been argued that the lower frequency of head and foot bones is the by-product of ch'arki (dried meat) exchange and therefore indicative of ch'arki consumption. This generalization, however, is problematic. When fresh meat is distributed (by trade) and consumed, exactly the same pattern as with ch'arki distribution is produced. To infer ch'arki consumption on the basis of the absence of head and lower limb bones is therefore misleading.

scholarly journals Close Companions? A Zooarchaeological Study of the Human–Cattle Relationship in Medieval England

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 1174
Author(s):  
Matilda Holmes ◽  
Helena Hamerow ◽  
Richard Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Eleventh Century ◽  
Ninth Century ◽  
Social Practices ◽  
Fifth Century ◽  
Social Value ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Limb Bones ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Medieval Europe ◽  
Changing Roles

Across medieval Europe, cattle commanded a major, if shifting, economic and social value, and their use for meat, milk, and traction is well established. Although the changing roles of cattle throughout this period may have influenced relationships between humans and cattle, this has been largely neglected in historical and zooarchaeological studies. Data from nearly 700 archaeological assemblages of animal remains have been used to provide an overview of the herd structures (age and sex) of cattle populations for England between AD 450 and 1400. These have been analysed alongside pathological and sub-pathological changes in over 2800 lower limb bones of cattle from seventeen archaeological sites to provide a better understanding of the use of cattle for ploughing, hauling, and carting. The findings were considered alongside historical documents and ethnographic evidence to chart changing human–cattle relationships. Results indicate that human–cattle relations varied with changing economic, agricultural, and social practices. From the mid-fifth century, cattle were a form of portable wealth, however, by the mid-ninth century, they were perceived as a commodity with monetary value. From this period, close human–cattle bonds are likely to have been widespread between plough hands and working animals. Such bonds are may have diminished with the increasing number of young beef cattle kept to supply the urban population from the mid-eleventh century.

scholarly journals Biodiversity of Early Holocene large mammals from the territory of Bulgaria according to remains from archaeological sites

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadezhda Karastoyanova
Keyword(s):  
Early Holocene ◽  
General Idea ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Large Mammals ◽  
General Picture ◽  
Wild Mammals ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Good Sample ◽  
Major Factors

Animal remains from archeological sites give a rather good sample of data, showing habitats and biodiversity during the early Holocene . In multiple settlements in the Eastern Balkans, there are numerous remains of wild mammals that were hunted by humans through the prehistory (7200-5800 BP). This gives a general idea of the habitats around and near the settlements. Such deposits of animal remains are the main source of data on fauna during this period and give us information on the processes leading to the extinction of some species. This paper analyzes more than 26000 animal remains (bones, horns, antlers and teeth) from large mammals from orders: Аrtiodactyla, Perissodactyla and Carnivora from 4 still unpublished deposits from Bulgaria. I summarize data from already published remains from 33 sites in East Balkans. These analyses provide a general picture of both habitats and biodiversity and some of the major factors that caused extinction of some large mammals in Bulgaria during the early Holocene.

Bone Remains from Archaeological Sites in the Podravina Area with Traces of Metallurgical Activity

2021 ◽  
pp. 227-232
Author(s):  
Snježana Kužir ◽  
Lucija Bastiančić ◽  
Nikolina Škvorc
Keyword(s):  
Middle Ages ◽  
Late Antiquity ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Species Determination ◽  
Early Middle Ages ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Bone Remains

The studied material includes animal remains from the four archaeological sites in the Podravina region of Croatia. The animal remains originate from sites with traces of metallurgical activity as well as from some settlement features which were also investigated. According to C14 analysis, and comparison with archaeological finds excavated in the vicinity of Torčec, the majority of the finds date from the period of Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages. At all four sites, the animal remains were damaged, sporadic findings, which made a complete archaeozoological analysis impossible. A descriptive primary analysis (element representation and taxonomic interpretation) was carried out. At all sites the remains were mainly from domestic mammals. One fragment of a bird bone was also found, but species determination was not possible. Particular attention was paid to the taphonomic effects on the bones.

Archaeozoology: Methods

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veerle Linseele
Keyword(s):  
Human Life ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Mesh Size ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Complete Understanding ◽  
The Past ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Efficient Communication ◽  
Additional Loss ◽  
Taphonomic Processes

Archaeozoology is the study of animal remains, mainly bones and other hard parts, from archaeological sites. It contributes to a more complete understanding of various aspects of human life in the past. Ideally, archaeozoologists, like other specialists, should be involved in the entire process of an archaeological research project, from its design, to fieldwork and data collecting, to final reporting and publication. For efficient communication and fruitful collaboration, the archaeologists involved in this process need to understand the basics of archaeozoological methodology and the range of questions that the discipline can answer. Methods vary among archaeozoologists—not least with regard to quantification—and it is important to be aware of these differences and their possible impact on results when comparing data for different sites. While the actual analysis of animal remains is done by the archaeozoologists, preferably in circumstances where they have access to a comparative collection of recent animal skeletons, the excavation and collection of remains is often the responsibility of the archaeologists. Animal remains are affected by a host of taphonomic processes of loss that are beyond our control. To avoid additional loss of information at the fieldwork stage, appropriate methods are particularly important. The use of sieves with a mesh size no greater than 2 mm is essential in order not to miss the smaller, but no less informative, animal remains. Project leaders play an important role in providing good storage facilities for archaeozoological remains after excavation and after study. With the rapid development in analytical methods, it can be extremely interesting to return to previously studied remains and sample them.

On the Methodology of Faunal Analysis

1973 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 432-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald K. Grayson
Keyword(s):  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Faunal Analysis ◽  
Reliable Analysis ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Minimum Number ◽  
Minimum Number Of Individuals ◽  
Minimum Numbers ◽  
Faunal Studies ◽  
Number Of Individuals ◽  
Proper Unit

AbstractAlthough faunal analysis has a long history in archaeological studies, little emphasis has been placed upon the development of methodologies which would allow the valid and reliable analysis of animal remains from archaeological sites. The most crucial decision which a faunal analyst must make as regards the statistical manipulation of his data concerns the proper unit to use in that manipulation. The 2 units which seem to have gained most popularity in faunal studies are discussed, as are the generally non-comparable results which stem from the various ways in which 1 of these units—the minimum number of individuals—has been applied. Finally, suggestions for the standardization of the use of minimum numbers in faunal analysis are made.

Flotation Techniques for the Recovery of Small-Scale Archaeological Remains

1968 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 353-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Struever
Keyword(s):  
Small Animal ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Water Separation ◽  
Small Plant ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Animal Bone ◽  
Animal Bones ◽  
Plant Remains ◽  
Flotation Technique

AbstractThis paper outlines the procedures and equipment necessary for applying a simple flotation technique to recover animal bone, seeds, and other small cultural remains lost in the normal screening of soils from archaeological sites. Soil is initially processed in the field by a water-separation technique. The resulting concentrate is later treated, in the laboratory, by chemical flotation, to separate faunal from plant remains.This simple, inexpensive technique enables processing of soil in quantity, thereby allowing recovery of small plant and animal remains from midden or feature fills where they occur in very low densities.It is argued that, without use of such a flotation procedure, inferences about prehistoric subsistence patterns from faunal and floral remains are sharply biased in favor of larger animals and in favor of hunting, over natural plant food collecting, since conventional screens are not adequate for recovery of most plant remains or small animal bones.

Kill-off Patterns in Sheep and Goats: the Mandibles from Aşvan Kale

1973 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 281-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Payne
Keyword(s):  
Seasonal Variation ◽  
Weight Gain ◽  
Environmental Factors ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Meat Production ◽  
Young Males ◽  
Animal Bones ◽  
Relative Value ◽  
Mandibular Teeth

Reports on animal bones from archaeological sites often include information about the “kill-off pattern” for each species – i.e. the relative representation of different age-groups in the sample. Osteologists believe that this information can be used as evidence for whether an animal was wild or domesticated, and, if domesticated, about the way in which man managed the animal. In this paper a method is described for recording such data for sheep and goat using mandibles and mandibular teeth; the analysis and interpretation of such data is discussed using excavated samples from Aşvan Kale.When people keep sheep or goats, the age at which the animals are slaughtered depends on a range of factors: on the relative value placed on the different products, on the characteristics of the stock, and on a range of environmental factors – in particular, seasonal variation in the availability of grazing and feed. If meat production is the aim, most of the young males are killed when they reach the optimum point in weight-gain, only a few being kept for breeding.

scholarly journals Excavations at a Neolithic Enclosure on The Peak, near Birdlip, Gloucestershire

2011 ◽  
Vol 77 ◽  
pp. 139-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Darvill ◽  
Alex Bayliss ◽  
Debra Costen ◽  
Ellen Hambleton ◽  
Frances Healy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Material Culture ◽  
Outer Boundary ◽  
Body Parts ◽  
Group Vi ◽  
Radiocarbon Dates ◽  
Human Foot ◽  
Foot Bones ◽  
The North ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Single Complex

Surveys and excavations in 1980–1 confirmed Peak Camp as a Neolithic enclosure on a flat promontory of the Cotswold escarpment overlooking the Severn Valley just 1 km south of Crickley Hill. Although heavily eroded by quarrying the site can be reconstructed as having two concentric arcs of boundary earthworks forming an oval plan which was probably open to the north where a steep natural slope defined the edge of the site. A section through the outer boundary showed four main phases of ditch construction, at least one causewayed. An extensive series of radiocarbon dates shows construction began in the late 37th century calbcand probably continued through successive remodellings into the 33rd century calbcor beyond. An internal ditch or elongated pit situated in the area between the inner and outer boundary earthworks had a similar history. Where sampled, the ditch and internal feature were rich in material culture, including a substantial assemblage of plain bowl pottery; flint implements and working waste; animal remains dominated by cattle but including also the remains of a cat; human foot bones; slight traces of cereal production; a fragment of a Group VI axe; part of a sandstone disc; and a highly unusual shale arc pendant of continental type. It is suggested that the ditch fills represent selectively redeposited midden material from within the site that started to accumulate in the late 5th or early 4th millennium calbc. The construction and use of Peak Camp is contemporary with activity on Crickley Hill, and the two sites probably formed components of a single complex. Its use was also contemporary with the deposition of burials at local long barrows in the Cotswold-Severn tradition which are linked by common ceramic traditions and the selective deposition of human body parts.

A Comment on Nomenclature in Faunal Studies

1981 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 192-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra L. Olsen ◽  
John W. Olsen
Keyword(s):  
Broad Spectrum ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Faunal Remains ◽  
Animal Remains ◽  
Current Usage ◽  
Faunal Studies

The study of faunal remains from archaeological sites has been described using a variety of terms including: zooarchaeology, archaeozoology, osteoarchaeology, and ethnozoology. With such a broad spectrum of terms in current usage, we feel that the contradictions and errors inherent in some of this nomenclature need to be corrected. We prefer the term zooarchaeology, as a contraction of the word zoologico-archaeology proposed by Lubbock in 1865, to define the study of animal remains from archaeological sites and their relationship to humans.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document