Mandibular tooth wear patterns are important in zooarchaeological research as they can be used as... more Mandibular tooth wear patterns are important in zooarchaeological research as they can be used as a record of age at death. Age profile comparisons between different archaeological assemblages, therefore, rest on the assumption that tooth wear rates are consistent across groups. Consequently, Salvagno et al. [Journal of Archaeological Science, 127, pp. 1–17 (2021)] recently devised a method to determine relative tooth wear rate (TWR) of pig molars and assess the comparability of archaeological kill-off patterns. Their method quantifies the relative tooth wear rate between two adjacent mandibular molars and uses this to calculate the average wear rate (AWR) of an archaeological population. This paper adapts their method for use on cattle molars, to evaluate whether differences in relative tooth wear rates both within, and between, different archaeological cattle assemblages may affect age estimations.
The method is applied to two case studies: Iron Age and Roman assemblages from Elms Farm, Heybridge, UK and Houten-Castellum, Netherlands. These are compared to two outgroups: a collection of European aurochs data, and a modern cattle assemblage from Germany. The method is additionally tested across species, by comparing cattle and pig relative tooth wear rates from Heybridge. Methodological considerations regarding the use of scoring systems to assess wear rate are identified and discussed. The potential causes of variation in tooth wear rates - such as diet, environmental inclusions, dental abnormalities, and genetic variation - are also considered.
This study demonstrates the ease and affordability with which the tooth wear rate method can be employed. The results provide no evidence to suggest that comparisons of cattle age profiles between the Iron Age and Roman period at Heybridge or Houten-Castellum may be significantly compromised. However, differences in relative tooth wear rate were found between these two sites, and when comparing them to aurochs and modern outgroups. On this basis, it is suggested that caution be used when comparing kill-off patterns from different archaeological cattle assemblages, and that this methodology be employed routinely to increase the reliability of archaeological interpretations.
The study of the goat has been largely disregarded by British archaeologists, partly because ther... more The study of the goat has been largely disregarded by British archaeologists, partly because there is a methodological problem related to the difficulty of distinguishing goat remains from those of the more common sheep, and partly because the relative rarity of this species during the Middle Ages has contributed to the perception that this animal was not important. Despite the fact that different methodological approaches have been proposed, problems still affect our ability to correctly differentiate sheep and goat bones. The most commonly used approach relies on morphological traits that have been established by analysing goat specimens from many different parts of the world, and not all of them may necessarily apply to British populations. In addition, these criteria are based on morphological differences whose assessment may be highly subjective. The development of a more objective methodology is of paramount importance in order to address the various historical and archaeologi...
This paper presents a summary of an on-going PhD project that aims to re-assess the role of goats... more This paper presents a summary of an on-going PhD project that aims to re-assess the role of goats in the medieval economy and society of England. Distinguishing between sheep and goats still is one of the most challenging issues in zooarchaeology; problems with identification must first be addressed. The most commonly used criteria for sheep/goat postcranial identification were published more than 40 years ago, while studies on the discrimination of teeth are much more recent. Nevertheless, they are all based on morphological differences whose assessment may be highly subjective. One of the goals of this research is to establish reliable criteria for distinguishing between sheep and goat by establishing the reliability of known morphological traits through the analysis of modern reference collections. Particular attention will be put on trying to translate morphological differences into biometrical indices in order to obtain a more objective tool for the proposed identification. The...
Riassunto - I resti faunistici provengono da un’area posta sulle ultime propaggini del colle del ... more Riassunto - I resti faunistici provengono da un’area posta sulle ultime propaggini del colle del Principe (Colli Euganei occidentali), localita non lontana dal luogo di rinvenimento, nel 1936, della cosiddetta stipe di Caldevigo (bronzi e lamine votive) datata al V-I secolo a.C. Benche si tratti di un lotto esiguo (NR 627 di cui 178 determinabili), lo studio appare interessante per il particolare carattere funzionale riconosciuto al sito. Le specie attestate sono quelle legate all'economia e all'ecologia del sito: i caprovini sono la categoria meglio rappresentata (NR 54), seguiti dal maiale (NR 46) e dal bue (NR 39). I selvatici sono sporadicamente attestati (cervo, NR 10, e cinghiale, NR 3). Summary - The Faunal remains from the Iron Age ste of Este - Via Caldevigo (Padova) The faunal remains come from the last ramification of “Del Principe” hill (western Euganei Hills), this site not far from the locality where in 1936, the so called “Stone of Caldevigo”, dated to V-I ce...
The recording of age at death is an important aspect of zooarchaeological analysis as it provides... more The recording of age at death is an important aspect of zooarchaeological analysis as it provides evidence about a variety of research questions, spanning from the origins of domestication to husbandry strategies. Age estimation based on tooth eruption and wear is a commonly used method to establish the age at death of archaeological populations. However, this approach has its limitations. It relies on the principle that tooth wear rate is relatively constant in different populations but, since no method has ever been developed to quantify the rate of wear, such an assumption has never been fully verified. As a consequence, the extent to which variable speeds of wear in different populations may affect age estimations is still unknown. To clarify this bias and offer transparency into the issue, the development of a method to assess wear rate in archaeological teeth is of paramount importance. In this paper, we propose a simple system that allows such an assessment to be un-dertaken. The system has been developed for pig mandibular/lower teeth but can also be extended to other species. The methodology is then tested on several English Late Medieval and Early Modern pig assemblages which represent ideal case studies as they cover a historical period when extensive changes in pig dietary regimes occurred. The evidence reassuringly suggests that differences in wear rates between these periods were not substantial, which bodes well for the comparability of kill-off patterns. However, comparisons with several outgroups indicate that the potential range of wear rates is much greater than attested in our core case study. Wild boars and prehistoric pigs, in particular, appear to wear their molars more slowly. Caution is therefore needed and it is suggested that tooth wear rates (TWR) and average wear rates (AWR) should routinely be calculated when tooth-based age profiles are analysed.
There are important gaps in the historical and archaeological evidence that have, so far, preclud... more There are important gaps in the historical and archaeological evidence that have, so far, precluded us from reliably assessing the role of the goat in the English Middle Ages. This, in part, is the direct consequence of the absence of a methodology allowing the confident identification of sheep and goat bones. On the other hand, the fact that the goat has always been perceived as rare has led us to think that medieval goats did not deserve much attention. Thanks to a recently developed new morphometric approach, which allows taxonomic identifications to be based on more objective criteria and results to be scrutinised, we are provided with a new tool to reassess the role that this species played in English medieval husbandry. This paper presents the results of the application of this new methodology on three archaeological medieval sheep/goat assemblages. Previous research suggested that the goat was not abundant in medieval England, but has also raised the possibility that this may be a consequence of an underestimation by zooarchaeologists, due to identification difficulties. The basic outcome of our paper is to provide, for the first time, unambiguous evidence that the goat was genuinely uncommon. In the medieval archaeological record, sheep remains are overwhelmingly better represented than goat remains-all three case studies confirmed the pattern. Although these examples cannot be taken to represent the situation everywhere in the country, they provide clear-cut indication that the zoorchaeological interpretation of caprine remains from English medieval sites has so far been largely reliable. The three sites offer the opportunity to investigate different dimensions of the problem and to discuss the role of the goat in different contexts.
Atti 8° Convegno Nazionale di Archeozoologia (Lecce, 2015), pp. 267-274., 2019
L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla defini-zione del carattere funzionale di un sito (i.e.... more L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla defini-zione del carattere funzionale di un sito (i.e. insedia-tivo, cultuale, votivo, "religioso" etc.), e non di rado le conclusioni a cui essa perviene sulla base dello studio dei resti faunistici confermano, integrandole, quelle cui si perviene attraverso le analisi di contesto e lo studio della cultura materiale. Questo contributo intende delineare i limiti metodologici di tale operazione, con speciale riferimento alla discriminazione tra deposi-to speciale e deposito rituale, e definire, attraverso la presentazione di alcuni casi-studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana, i criteri utili alla caratterizzazione funzionale di un campione faunistico. Di fronte a un deposito di tipo speciale, in quanto "diverso" rispetto a quello che ci si aspetta da una tipi-ca fauna di abitato, l'interpretazione spesso adottata è quella di "deposito di natura rituale". Ma non sempre deposito speciale significa deposito rituale. uMBerto tecchIatI 1 , lenny salvagno 2 Deposito rituale o deposito speciale? Il contributo dell'archeozoologia alla definizione dei contesti cultuali: alcuni casi di studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana
A ritual deposit or a special deposit? The contribution of Archaeozoology to the definition of ritual contexts: a few case studies from the Italian Pre and Proto-History Troppo spesso l'etichetta di "deposito di natura rituale" è stata attribuita a quei depositi considerati speciali in quanto "diversi" rispetto a quello che viene considerato un tipico campione faunistico d'abitato. Ma un deposito speciale non è necessariamente un deposito rituale. È ben noto all'archeozoologo come in determinati casi, (i.e. resti rinvenuti in sepolture, o vere e proprie sepolture di animali), il carattere simbolico dei resti faunistici sia spesso chiaro e ricostruibile. Molto più arduo è invece rilevare il significato simbolico in contesti insediativi dove non sempre è possibile distinguere resti oggetto di deposizione intenzionale con finalità cultuali da resti faunistici legati ad altre attività di natura non rituale. L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla definizione del carattere eventualmente simbolico (i.e. cultuale, votivo, «religioso» etc.) di un sito, molto spesso confermando e integrando le conclusioni a cui si perviene attraverso gli studi di contesto e della cultura materiale. Questo contributo propone, attraverso l'analisi di alcuni casi-studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana, alcuni criteri utili alla definizione rituale di un sito. Le conclusioni a cui si perviene sono le seguenti: data la pluralità di forme con cui il simbolico si manifesta, l'etichetta "rituale" deve essere attribuita con molta cautela e soprattutto deve basarsi sull'integrazione delle informazioni di tipo archeozoologico con le altre evidenze disponibili contestualmente. Too often the label 'ritual deposit' has been given to those deposits which were considered 'special' because of their different nature compared to what we would expect from a typical faunal assemblage from a settlement. However, a special deposit is not always a ritual deposit. It is well known to zooarchaeologists that, in some cases (i.e. animal bones found in human burials or in so called 'animal burials'), the symbolic character of the faunal assemblages is clear and possible to reconstruct. However, much more challenging is defining the ritual value of some contexts when they are found in settlements. It is, in fact, very complicated to distinguish between remains intentionally deposited with a ritual aim and remains which are the result of activities of a non-ritual nature. Zooarcheology actively contributes to the definition of the possible symbolic ritual character of a site (i.e. ritual, votive, "religious" etc.) integrating and confirming conclusions drawn through the study of contextual information and material culture. This contribution intends to establish, through the use of case-studies from Italian pre and proto-history, useful criteria for the definition of a ritual context. The conclusions of the authors are the following: considering the variety of ways through which ritual manifests itself, the label of 'ritual deposit' should be attributed very cautiously and, as always, based on integration of the zooarchaeological evidence with all other available contextual information. Parole chiave: Deposito rituale, Deposito speciale, Faune d'abitato, Interpretazione.
Many sites dating from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age have been investigated in northern Italy a... more Many sites dating from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age have been investigated in northern Italy and have provided important zooarchaeological data. These sites are mostly settlements, but also places of worship and necropoli. While there are few zooarchaeological studies for the northwestern part of Italy, the northeast and the Po Valley have been better investigated. Particularly important are the pile-dwellings and the Terramare sites of the Po Valley as they have a long chronological span, the animal bone assemblages are large and, therefore, highly statistically reliable, and have been excavated relatively recently. There is evidence of functional and social differentiation in the Bronze Age which coincided with the evolution of more complex societies. The most common type of functional differentiation began when human communities started to settle and is visible in the zooarchaeological record. Until the end of the Copper Age, animal bone assemblages are characterized by the presence of both domestic animals and a relatively important proportion of wild animals. In the early Bronze Age, domestic animals dominated, if not entirely, the assemblages, and a growing interest in secondary products is evident. From the Middle Bronze Age, the foundation of semi-permanent settlements multiplied in the Alpine area, in the internal areas (secondary valleys and areas far from the main watercourses) and at medium-high altitudes. This was coupled with the seasonal occupation of sites at a high altitude, used for the practice of vertical transhumance (alpine pasture). This phenomenon implies the existence of a settlement hierarchy and, therefore, of forms of social stratification within the framework of the settlement system. Unfortunately, the few zooarchaeological studies of sites located in the Emilia Apennines do not currently allow us to confirm the existence of such links between the mountain sites and those on the plain. Nevertheless, other evidence, such as the introduction of the horse, which is attested from the late Early Bronze Age onwards, can be interpreted as proof of social differentiation; the horse was, in fact, considered a status symbol of the emerging warrior elite. Very few animal burials, dated to the period studied, show the link between animal species (such as dog, cattle, deer) and cultural practices, although a number of examples of such a relationship are provided by the terramare necropoli. In conclusion, in light of current knowledge, it seems that zooarchaeology cannot confirm the existence of important forms of social stratification. This does not mean that they cannot necessarily be postulated: the complex use of territory and the evidently communal nature of funerary and cult ceremonies (which often involved animals) that characterize the Bronze Age make it difficult to exclude the existence of such stratification.
The animal bone assemblage from Castelrotto, although composed of a number of specimens which can... more The animal bone assemblage from Castelrotto, although composed of a number of specimens which cannot be considered statistically representative, provides important information about the animal-human interaction occurred during a long chronological span. The site, located at c. 1000 metres on the Fié-Castelrotto plateau (left hydrographic side of the Isarco valley, on the north of Bolzano), presents a continuity of occupation from the late Neolithic to the Modern era. Thus, it has the potential to reveal changes in the use of animal species which may have occurred over time. The most important occupation phase is the one related to the Late Neolithic period. Even though it has released only a few animal bone remains, several radiometric dating attributed it to a period between the 3800 and 3600 BC, as such it has important cultural similarities with the " Fiavé 1 " culture. The animal bone assemblage is composed of 695 fragments of which 229 were taxonom-ically identified. The domestic animals (cattle, sheep/goat and pig) outnumber wild animals in all phases. This contribution presents the analysis of the animal bone assemblage with a focus on trying to understand which type of animals were present and their role in the economy of the site. Riassunto La fauna di Castelrotto, sebbene costituita da una quantità di reperti per fase/periodo lungi dall'es-sere statisticamente rappresentativa, fornisce importanti informazioni riguardo all'interazione uo-mo-animale durante un lungo periodo cronologico. Il sito, ubicato a 1000 metri circa di quota sull'altipiano di Fié-Castelrotto (versante idrografico sinistro della Valle dell'Isarco a Nord di Bolzano) presenta infatti una continuità di frequentazione che va dal Neolitico Tardo fino all'Età moderna e contemporanea e, in quanto tale, permette di visualizzare, per quanto a grandi linee, eventuali cambiamenti nell'uso degli animali in senso diacronico. La fase di occupazione più significativa è quella tardoneolitica, dalla quale provengono peraltro scarsi resti faunistici: le numerose datazioni radiometriche la collocano temporalmente tra 3800 e 3600 cal. BC. Essa mostra importanti affinità culturali con l'orizzonte Fiavé 1. Il lotto faunistico consta di 695 reperti di cui 229 pienamente de-terminati. Gli animali domestici (bue, piccoli ruminanti domestici, maiale) prevalgono in tutte le fasi. Il presente articolo espone i dati relativi all'analisi dei reperti faunistici cercando di ricostruire non solo i caratteri generali di questi animali, ma anche il ruolo che rivestivano per l'economia del sito.
Distinguishing between the bones of sheep and goat is a notorious challenge in zooarch-aeology. S... more Distinguishing between the bones of sheep and goat is a notorious challenge in zooarch-aeology. Several methodological contributions have been published at different times and by various people to facilitate this task, largely relying on a macro-morphological approach. This is now routinely adopted by zooarchaeologists but, although it certainly has its value, has also been shown to have limitations. Morphological discriminant criteria can vary in different populations and correct identification is highly dependent upon a researcher's experience, availability of appropriate reference collections, and many other factors that are difficult to quantify. There is therefore a need to establish a more objective system, susceptible to scrutiny. In order to fulfil such a requirement, this paper offers a comprehensive mor-phometric method for the identification of sheep and goat postcranial bones, using a sample of more than 150 modern skeletons as a basis, and building on previous pioneering work. The proposed method is based on measurements—some newly created, others previously published–and its use is recommended in combination with the more traditional morphological approach. Measurement ratios, used to translate morphological traits into biometrical attributes, are demonstrated to have substantial diagnostic potential, with the vast majority of specimens correctly assigned to species. The efficacy of the new method is also tested with Discriminant Analysis, which provides a successful verification of the biometrical indices , a statistical means to select the most promising measurements, and an additional line of analysis to be used in conjunction with the others.
The assemblage from Greenwich High Road has interesting implications for our understanding of 18t... more The assemblage from Greenwich High Road has interesting implications for our understanding of 18th- and early 19th-century tanneries and also of the use of bones as building material. The study of the age at death of the animals revealed that the horncores are mostly from fully adult individuals, probably culled draught animals. This hypothesis is supported by biometrical analysis. The comparison of the Greenwich horncores with modern data and archaeological evidence suggests that the Greenwich assemblage is predominantly composed of oxen. The horncores were used to line a drain on the site and are likely to represent waste material resulting from the activities that took place in the nearby tannery. Skins and horns were removed for craft purposes, while the bony cores, with no economic value, were simply used as cheap and ready material to help the construction of the drain.
Mandibular tooth wear patterns are important in zooarchaeological research as they can be used as... more Mandibular tooth wear patterns are important in zooarchaeological research as they can be used as a record of age at death. Age profile comparisons between different archaeological assemblages, therefore, rest on the assumption that tooth wear rates are consistent across groups. Consequently, Salvagno et al. [Journal of Archaeological Science, 127, pp. 1–17 (2021)] recently devised a method to determine relative tooth wear rate (TWR) of pig molars and assess the comparability of archaeological kill-off patterns. Their method quantifies the relative tooth wear rate between two adjacent mandibular molars and uses this to calculate the average wear rate (AWR) of an archaeological population. This paper adapts their method for use on cattle molars, to evaluate whether differences in relative tooth wear rates both within, and between, different archaeological cattle assemblages may affect age estimations.
The method is applied to two case studies: Iron Age and Roman assemblages from Elms Farm, Heybridge, UK and Houten-Castellum, Netherlands. These are compared to two outgroups: a collection of European aurochs data, and a modern cattle assemblage from Germany. The method is additionally tested across species, by comparing cattle and pig relative tooth wear rates from Heybridge. Methodological considerations regarding the use of scoring systems to assess wear rate are identified and discussed. The potential causes of variation in tooth wear rates - such as diet, environmental inclusions, dental abnormalities, and genetic variation - are also considered.
This study demonstrates the ease and affordability with which the tooth wear rate method can be employed. The results provide no evidence to suggest that comparisons of cattle age profiles between the Iron Age and Roman period at Heybridge or Houten-Castellum may be significantly compromised. However, differences in relative tooth wear rate were found between these two sites, and when comparing them to aurochs and modern outgroups. On this basis, it is suggested that caution be used when comparing kill-off patterns from different archaeological cattle assemblages, and that this methodology be employed routinely to increase the reliability of archaeological interpretations.
The study of the goat has been largely disregarded by British archaeologists, partly because ther... more The study of the goat has been largely disregarded by British archaeologists, partly because there is a methodological problem related to the difficulty of distinguishing goat remains from those of the more common sheep, and partly because the relative rarity of this species during the Middle Ages has contributed to the perception that this animal was not important. Despite the fact that different methodological approaches have been proposed, problems still affect our ability to correctly differentiate sheep and goat bones. The most commonly used approach relies on morphological traits that have been established by analysing goat specimens from many different parts of the world, and not all of them may necessarily apply to British populations. In addition, these criteria are based on morphological differences whose assessment may be highly subjective. The development of a more objective methodology is of paramount importance in order to address the various historical and archaeologi...
This paper presents a summary of an on-going PhD project that aims to re-assess the role of goats... more This paper presents a summary of an on-going PhD project that aims to re-assess the role of goats in the medieval economy and society of England. Distinguishing between sheep and goats still is one of the most challenging issues in zooarchaeology; problems with identification must first be addressed. The most commonly used criteria for sheep/goat postcranial identification were published more than 40 years ago, while studies on the discrimination of teeth are much more recent. Nevertheless, they are all based on morphological differences whose assessment may be highly subjective. One of the goals of this research is to establish reliable criteria for distinguishing between sheep and goat by establishing the reliability of known morphological traits through the analysis of modern reference collections. Particular attention will be put on trying to translate morphological differences into biometrical indices in order to obtain a more objective tool for the proposed identification. The...
Riassunto - I resti faunistici provengono da un’area posta sulle ultime propaggini del colle del ... more Riassunto - I resti faunistici provengono da un’area posta sulle ultime propaggini del colle del Principe (Colli Euganei occidentali), localita non lontana dal luogo di rinvenimento, nel 1936, della cosiddetta stipe di Caldevigo (bronzi e lamine votive) datata al V-I secolo a.C. Benche si tratti di un lotto esiguo (NR 627 di cui 178 determinabili), lo studio appare interessante per il particolare carattere funzionale riconosciuto al sito. Le specie attestate sono quelle legate all'economia e all'ecologia del sito: i caprovini sono la categoria meglio rappresentata (NR 54), seguiti dal maiale (NR 46) e dal bue (NR 39). I selvatici sono sporadicamente attestati (cervo, NR 10, e cinghiale, NR 3). Summary - The Faunal remains from the Iron Age ste of Este - Via Caldevigo (Padova) The faunal remains come from the last ramification of “Del Principe” hill (western Euganei Hills), this site not far from the locality where in 1936, the so called “Stone of Caldevigo”, dated to V-I ce...
The recording of age at death is an important aspect of zooarchaeological analysis as it provides... more The recording of age at death is an important aspect of zooarchaeological analysis as it provides evidence about a variety of research questions, spanning from the origins of domestication to husbandry strategies. Age estimation based on tooth eruption and wear is a commonly used method to establish the age at death of archaeological populations. However, this approach has its limitations. It relies on the principle that tooth wear rate is relatively constant in different populations but, since no method has ever been developed to quantify the rate of wear, such an assumption has never been fully verified. As a consequence, the extent to which variable speeds of wear in different populations may affect age estimations is still unknown. To clarify this bias and offer transparency into the issue, the development of a method to assess wear rate in archaeological teeth is of paramount importance. In this paper, we propose a simple system that allows such an assessment to be un-dertaken. The system has been developed for pig mandibular/lower teeth but can also be extended to other species. The methodology is then tested on several English Late Medieval and Early Modern pig assemblages which represent ideal case studies as they cover a historical period when extensive changes in pig dietary regimes occurred. The evidence reassuringly suggests that differences in wear rates between these periods were not substantial, which bodes well for the comparability of kill-off patterns. However, comparisons with several outgroups indicate that the potential range of wear rates is much greater than attested in our core case study. Wild boars and prehistoric pigs, in particular, appear to wear their molars more slowly. Caution is therefore needed and it is suggested that tooth wear rates (TWR) and average wear rates (AWR) should routinely be calculated when tooth-based age profiles are analysed.
There are important gaps in the historical and archaeological evidence that have, so far, preclud... more There are important gaps in the historical and archaeological evidence that have, so far, precluded us from reliably assessing the role of the goat in the English Middle Ages. This, in part, is the direct consequence of the absence of a methodology allowing the confident identification of sheep and goat bones. On the other hand, the fact that the goat has always been perceived as rare has led us to think that medieval goats did not deserve much attention. Thanks to a recently developed new morphometric approach, which allows taxonomic identifications to be based on more objective criteria and results to be scrutinised, we are provided with a new tool to reassess the role that this species played in English medieval husbandry. This paper presents the results of the application of this new methodology on three archaeological medieval sheep/goat assemblages. Previous research suggested that the goat was not abundant in medieval England, but has also raised the possibility that this may be a consequence of an underestimation by zooarchaeologists, due to identification difficulties. The basic outcome of our paper is to provide, for the first time, unambiguous evidence that the goat was genuinely uncommon. In the medieval archaeological record, sheep remains are overwhelmingly better represented than goat remains-all three case studies confirmed the pattern. Although these examples cannot be taken to represent the situation everywhere in the country, they provide clear-cut indication that the zoorchaeological interpretation of caprine remains from English medieval sites has so far been largely reliable. The three sites offer the opportunity to investigate different dimensions of the problem and to discuss the role of the goat in different contexts.
Atti 8° Convegno Nazionale di Archeozoologia (Lecce, 2015), pp. 267-274., 2019
L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla defini-zione del carattere funzionale di un sito (i.e.... more L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla defini-zione del carattere funzionale di un sito (i.e. insedia-tivo, cultuale, votivo, "religioso" etc.), e non di rado le conclusioni a cui essa perviene sulla base dello studio dei resti faunistici confermano, integrandole, quelle cui si perviene attraverso le analisi di contesto e lo studio della cultura materiale. Questo contributo intende delineare i limiti metodologici di tale operazione, con speciale riferimento alla discriminazione tra deposi-to speciale e deposito rituale, e definire, attraverso la presentazione di alcuni casi-studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana, i criteri utili alla caratterizzazione funzionale di un campione faunistico. Di fronte a un deposito di tipo speciale, in quanto "diverso" rispetto a quello che ci si aspetta da una tipi-ca fauna di abitato, l'interpretazione spesso adottata è quella di "deposito di natura rituale". Ma non sempre deposito speciale significa deposito rituale. uMBerto tecchIatI 1 , lenny salvagno 2 Deposito rituale o deposito speciale? Il contributo dell'archeozoologia alla definizione dei contesti cultuali: alcuni casi di studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana
A ritual deposit or a special deposit? The contribution of Archaeozoology to the definition of ritual contexts: a few case studies from the Italian Pre and Proto-History Troppo spesso l'etichetta di "deposito di natura rituale" è stata attribuita a quei depositi considerati speciali in quanto "diversi" rispetto a quello che viene considerato un tipico campione faunistico d'abitato. Ma un deposito speciale non è necessariamente un deposito rituale. È ben noto all'archeozoologo come in determinati casi, (i.e. resti rinvenuti in sepolture, o vere e proprie sepolture di animali), il carattere simbolico dei resti faunistici sia spesso chiaro e ricostruibile. Molto più arduo è invece rilevare il significato simbolico in contesti insediativi dove non sempre è possibile distinguere resti oggetto di deposizione intenzionale con finalità cultuali da resti faunistici legati ad altre attività di natura non rituale. L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla definizione del carattere eventualmente simbolico (i.e. cultuale, votivo, «religioso» etc.) di un sito, molto spesso confermando e integrando le conclusioni a cui si perviene attraverso gli studi di contesto e della cultura materiale. Questo contributo propone, attraverso l'analisi di alcuni casi-studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana, alcuni criteri utili alla definizione rituale di un sito. Le conclusioni a cui si perviene sono le seguenti: data la pluralità di forme con cui il simbolico si manifesta, l'etichetta "rituale" deve essere attribuita con molta cautela e soprattutto deve basarsi sull'integrazione delle informazioni di tipo archeozoologico con le altre evidenze disponibili contestualmente. Too often the label 'ritual deposit' has been given to those deposits which were considered 'special' because of their different nature compared to what we would expect from a typical faunal assemblage from a settlement. However, a special deposit is not always a ritual deposit. It is well known to zooarchaeologists that, in some cases (i.e. animal bones found in human burials or in so called 'animal burials'), the symbolic character of the faunal assemblages is clear and possible to reconstruct. However, much more challenging is defining the ritual value of some contexts when they are found in settlements. It is, in fact, very complicated to distinguish between remains intentionally deposited with a ritual aim and remains which are the result of activities of a non-ritual nature. Zooarcheology actively contributes to the definition of the possible symbolic ritual character of a site (i.e. ritual, votive, "religious" etc.) integrating and confirming conclusions drawn through the study of contextual information and material culture. This contribution intends to establish, through the use of case-studies from Italian pre and proto-history, useful criteria for the definition of a ritual context. The conclusions of the authors are the following: considering the variety of ways through which ritual manifests itself, the label of 'ritual deposit' should be attributed very cautiously and, as always, based on integration of the zooarchaeological evidence with all other available contextual information. Parole chiave: Deposito rituale, Deposito speciale, Faune d'abitato, Interpretazione.
Many sites dating from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age have been investigated in northern Italy a... more Many sites dating from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age have been investigated in northern Italy and have provided important zooarchaeological data. These sites are mostly settlements, but also places of worship and necropoli. While there are few zooarchaeological studies for the northwestern part of Italy, the northeast and the Po Valley have been better investigated. Particularly important are the pile-dwellings and the Terramare sites of the Po Valley as they have a long chronological span, the animal bone assemblages are large and, therefore, highly statistically reliable, and have been excavated relatively recently. There is evidence of functional and social differentiation in the Bronze Age which coincided with the evolution of more complex societies. The most common type of functional differentiation began when human communities started to settle and is visible in the zooarchaeological record. Until the end of the Copper Age, animal bone assemblages are characterized by the presence of both domestic animals and a relatively important proportion of wild animals. In the early Bronze Age, domestic animals dominated, if not entirely, the assemblages, and a growing interest in secondary products is evident. From the Middle Bronze Age, the foundation of semi-permanent settlements multiplied in the Alpine area, in the internal areas (secondary valleys and areas far from the main watercourses) and at medium-high altitudes. This was coupled with the seasonal occupation of sites at a high altitude, used for the practice of vertical transhumance (alpine pasture). This phenomenon implies the existence of a settlement hierarchy and, therefore, of forms of social stratification within the framework of the settlement system. Unfortunately, the few zooarchaeological studies of sites located in the Emilia Apennines do not currently allow us to confirm the existence of such links between the mountain sites and those on the plain. Nevertheless, other evidence, such as the introduction of the horse, which is attested from the late Early Bronze Age onwards, can be interpreted as proof of social differentiation; the horse was, in fact, considered a status symbol of the emerging warrior elite. Very few animal burials, dated to the period studied, show the link between animal species (such as dog, cattle, deer) and cultural practices, although a number of examples of such a relationship are provided by the terramare necropoli. In conclusion, in light of current knowledge, it seems that zooarchaeology cannot confirm the existence of important forms of social stratification. This does not mean that they cannot necessarily be postulated: the complex use of territory and the evidently communal nature of funerary and cult ceremonies (which often involved animals) that characterize the Bronze Age make it difficult to exclude the existence of such stratification.
The animal bone assemblage from Castelrotto, although composed of a number of specimens which can... more The animal bone assemblage from Castelrotto, although composed of a number of specimens which cannot be considered statistically representative, provides important information about the animal-human interaction occurred during a long chronological span. The site, located at c. 1000 metres on the Fié-Castelrotto plateau (left hydrographic side of the Isarco valley, on the north of Bolzano), presents a continuity of occupation from the late Neolithic to the Modern era. Thus, it has the potential to reveal changes in the use of animal species which may have occurred over time. The most important occupation phase is the one related to the Late Neolithic period. Even though it has released only a few animal bone remains, several radiometric dating attributed it to a period between the 3800 and 3600 BC, as such it has important cultural similarities with the " Fiavé 1 " culture. The animal bone assemblage is composed of 695 fragments of which 229 were taxonom-ically identified. The domestic animals (cattle, sheep/goat and pig) outnumber wild animals in all phases. This contribution presents the analysis of the animal bone assemblage with a focus on trying to understand which type of animals were present and their role in the economy of the site. Riassunto La fauna di Castelrotto, sebbene costituita da una quantità di reperti per fase/periodo lungi dall'es-sere statisticamente rappresentativa, fornisce importanti informazioni riguardo all'interazione uo-mo-animale durante un lungo periodo cronologico. Il sito, ubicato a 1000 metri circa di quota sull'altipiano di Fié-Castelrotto (versante idrografico sinistro della Valle dell'Isarco a Nord di Bolzano) presenta infatti una continuità di frequentazione che va dal Neolitico Tardo fino all'Età moderna e contemporanea e, in quanto tale, permette di visualizzare, per quanto a grandi linee, eventuali cambiamenti nell'uso degli animali in senso diacronico. La fase di occupazione più significativa è quella tardoneolitica, dalla quale provengono peraltro scarsi resti faunistici: le numerose datazioni radiometriche la collocano temporalmente tra 3800 e 3600 cal. BC. Essa mostra importanti affinità culturali con l'orizzonte Fiavé 1. Il lotto faunistico consta di 695 reperti di cui 229 pienamente de-terminati. Gli animali domestici (bue, piccoli ruminanti domestici, maiale) prevalgono in tutte le fasi. Il presente articolo espone i dati relativi all'analisi dei reperti faunistici cercando di ricostruire non solo i caratteri generali di questi animali, ma anche il ruolo che rivestivano per l'economia del sito.
Distinguishing between the bones of sheep and goat is a notorious challenge in zooarch-aeology. S... more Distinguishing between the bones of sheep and goat is a notorious challenge in zooarch-aeology. Several methodological contributions have been published at different times and by various people to facilitate this task, largely relying on a macro-morphological approach. This is now routinely adopted by zooarchaeologists but, although it certainly has its value, has also been shown to have limitations. Morphological discriminant criteria can vary in different populations and correct identification is highly dependent upon a researcher's experience, availability of appropriate reference collections, and many other factors that are difficult to quantify. There is therefore a need to establish a more objective system, susceptible to scrutiny. In order to fulfil such a requirement, this paper offers a comprehensive mor-phometric method for the identification of sheep and goat postcranial bones, using a sample of more than 150 modern skeletons as a basis, and building on previous pioneering work. The proposed method is based on measurements—some newly created, others previously published–and its use is recommended in combination with the more traditional morphological approach. Measurement ratios, used to translate morphological traits into biometrical attributes, are demonstrated to have substantial diagnostic potential, with the vast majority of specimens correctly assigned to species. The efficacy of the new method is also tested with Discriminant Analysis, which provides a successful verification of the biometrical indices , a statistical means to select the most promising measurements, and an additional line of analysis to be used in conjunction with the others.
The assemblage from Greenwich High Road has interesting implications for our understanding of 18t... more The assemblage from Greenwich High Road has interesting implications for our understanding of 18th- and early 19th-century tanneries and also of the use of bones as building material. The study of the age at death of the animals revealed that the horncores are mostly from fully adult individuals, probably culled draught animals. This hypothesis is supported by biometrical analysis. The comparison of the Greenwich horncores with modern data and archaeological evidence suggests that the Greenwich assemblage is predominantly composed of oxen. The horncores were used to line a drain on the site and are likely to represent waste material resulting from the activities that took place in the nearby tannery. Skins and horns were removed for craft purposes, while the bony cores, with no economic value, were simply used as cheap and ready material to help the construction of the drain.
Have you ever wondered which species are native to Britain and which have been introduced? Or ho... more Have you ever wondered which species are native to Britain and which have been introduced? Or how animals have adapted to changing environmental conditions and increasing human interference?
This 3-day course will use lectures and hands-on activities to give you a basic knowledge of the development of the British fauna from the Pleistocene through to the Modern day. Topics such as evolution, extinction, introduction, domestication and zoogeography will be addressed, including how humans and animals interacted through history.
‘Understanding Zooarchaeology II’ is a more advanced version of our foundational course and is i... more ‘Understanding Zooarchaeology II’ is a more advanced version of our foundational course and is ideal for professionals, students and enthusiasts who have attended ‘Understanding Zooarchaeology I’ or already have a basic knowledge of Zooarchaeology. During this four-day course, participants will have the opportunity to practice the identification of closely related species, of working on a real archaeological faunal assemblage, and will be provided with suggestions concerning how to write their own faunal report. As always, lectures, case studies and discussions will be coupled with practical activities.
Animal bones and teeth are among the most common remains found on archaeological sites. The Unive... more Animal bones and teeth are among the most common remains found on archaeological sites. The University of Sheffield Zooarchaeology short course uses practical activities, short lectures, and discussions to provide insight into the theory and methods that are used to understand animal bones in archaeology.
An intensive two-day course for professionals, students, and enthusiasts of bioarchaeology and fo... more An intensive two-day course for professionals, students, and enthusiasts of bioarchaeology and forensic science. This short course will focus on a comparison between human and other animal remains. By using both macro-and microscopic analyses along with insights into biomolecular investigations, the course will illustrate some basic tools used to distinguish human remains from those of other animals. Different methodologies and research approaches that characterise the different disciplines of human osteoarchaeology, zooarchaeology and forensic science will be discussed. This multidisciplinary approach will make use of short lectures, hands-on activities, and case studies.
The Sheffield Zooarchaeology Research team is organising for January 2021 'Understanding Zooarcha... more The Sheffield Zooarchaeology Research team is organising for January 2021 'Understanding Zooarchaeology II' short-course. This short-course is ideal for people who already have some basic knowledge of Zooarchaeology. The course focuses on developing a whole range of skills required by the discipline and also offers you the possibility to work with a real animal bone assemblage!
The Sheffield Zooarchaeology Research Group is organising in January 2021 'Understanding Zooarcha... more The Sheffield Zooarchaeology Research Group is organising in January 2021 'Understanding Zooarchaeology I' short-course. Through the use of short theoretical lectures, practical sessions and case studies, this course will provide you with training in the theory and methods used to understand animal remains in archaeology.
We undertake assessment and analysis of animal bone assemblages from most periods (Upper Palaeoli... more We undertake assessment and analysis of animal bone assemblages from most periods (Upper Palaeolithic to Modern) and all areas of Britain and Europe.
A short course for those who have a basic knowledge of Zooarchaeology. 23rd-25th April 2020, Shef... more A short course for those who have a basic knowledge of Zooarchaeology. 23rd-25th April 2020, Sheffield.
Understanding Zooarchaeology Short course (Sheffield, April 2020) is ideal for archaeology and he... more Understanding Zooarchaeology Short course (Sheffield, April 2020) is ideal for archaeology and heritage professionals, students and enthusiasts who want to know more about Zooarchaeology.
Course For more information, please email: zooarch-shortcourse@sheffield.ac.uk With sessions on B... more Course For more information, please email: zooarch-shortcourse@sheffield.ac.uk With sessions on British birds and the species most commonly found in archaeological sites, teaching will be delivered through hands-on practical activities, short lectures and case studies.
Animal bones and teeth are among the most common remains found on archaeological sites. The Unive... more Animal bones and teeth are among the most common remains found on archaeological sites. The University of Sheffield Zooarchaeology short course uses practical activities, short lectures, and discussions to provide insight into the theory and methods that are used to understand animal bones in archaeology. Department of Archaeology @ZooarchLab Sheffield Sheffield Zooarchaeology Short Course For more information, please email: zooarch-shortcourse@sheffield.ac.uk UNDERSTANDING ZOOARCHAEOLOGY I A short course for archaeology and heritage professionals, students and enthusiasts.
Animal bones and teeth are among the most common remains found on archaeological sites. The Unive... more Animal bones and teeth are among the most common remains found on archaeological sites. The University of Sheffield Zooarchaeology short course uses practical activities, short lectures, and discussions to provide insight into the theory and methods that are used to understand animal bones in archaeology. Department of Archaeology @ZooarchLab Sheffield Sheffield Zooarchaeology Short Course For more information, please email: zooarch-shortcourse@sheffield.ac.uk UNDERSTANDING ZOOARCHAEOLOGY I A short course for archaeology and heritage professionals, students and enthusiasts.
Course For more information, please email: zooarch-shortcourse@sheffield.ac.uk With sessions on B... more Course For more information, please email: zooarch-shortcourse@sheffield.ac.uk With sessions on British birds and the species most commonly found in archaeological sites, teaching will be delivered through hands-on practical activities, short lectures and case studies.
Distinguishing between the bones of sheep and goat is a notorious challenge in zooarchaeology (th... more Distinguishing between the bones of sheep and goat is a notorious challenge in zooarchaeology (the study of animal remains from archaeological sites). Several methods have been proposed to facilitate this task, largely based on macro-morphological traits. This approach, which is routinely adopted by zooarchaeologists, although still valuable, has also been shown to have limitations: morphological discriminant traits can differ in different sheep/goat populations and a correct identification is highly dependent upon experience, as well as the availability of appropriate reference collections and the degree to which a researcher is prepared to ‘risk’ an identification. This study provides a new, more objective and transparent methodology, based on a combination of morphological and biometrical analyses, to distinguish between sheep and goat post cranial bones. Additionally, on the basis of the newly proposed approach, it re-assesses the role that the goat played in medieval England. There are several historical and archaeological questions concerning the role of this animal that have so far remained un-answered: why is the goat commonly recorded in the Domesday Book, when it appears to be so scarce in the contemporary archaeological record? Is the goat under-represented in the archaeological record or over-represented in the Domesday Book? Why is this animal, when identified in English medieval animal bone assemblages, almost exclusively represented by horncores? Through the investigation of a number of English sheep and goat medieval assemblages, this study sheds light on these questions, suggesting that the goat was indeed genuinely rare.
Uploads
Papers
The method is applied to two case studies: Iron Age and Roman assemblages from Elms Farm, Heybridge, UK and Houten-Castellum, Netherlands. These are compared to two outgroups: a collection of European aurochs data, and a modern cattle assemblage from Germany. The method is additionally tested across species, by comparing cattle and pig relative tooth wear rates from Heybridge. Methodological considerations regarding the use of scoring systems to assess wear rate are identified and discussed. The potential causes of variation in tooth wear rates - such as diet, environmental inclusions, dental abnormalities, and genetic variation - are also considered.
This study demonstrates the ease and affordability with which the tooth wear rate method can be employed. The results provide no evidence to suggest that comparisons of cattle age profiles between the Iron Age and Roman period at Heybridge or Houten-Castellum may be significantly compromised. However, differences in relative tooth wear rate were found between these two sites, and when comparing them to aurochs and modern outgroups. On this basis, it is suggested that caution be used when comparing kill-off patterns from different archaeological cattle assemblages, and that this methodology be employed routinely to increase the reliability of archaeological interpretations.
A ritual deposit or a special deposit? The contribution of Archaeozoology to the definition of ritual contexts: a few case studies from the Italian Pre and Proto-History Troppo spesso l'etichetta di "deposito di natura rituale" è stata attribuita a quei depositi considerati speciali in quanto "diversi" rispetto a quello che viene considerato un tipico campione faunistico d'abitato. Ma un deposito speciale non è necessariamente un deposito rituale. È ben noto all'archeozoologo come in determinati casi, (i.e. resti rinvenuti in sepolture, o vere e proprie sepolture di animali), il carattere simbolico dei resti faunistici sia spesso chiaro e ricostruibile. Molto più arduo è invece rilevare il significato simbolico in contesti insediativi dove non sempre è possibile distinguere resti oggetto di deposizione intenzionale con finalità cultuali da resti faunistici legati ad altre attività di natura non rituale. L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla definizione del carattere eventualmente simbolico (i.e. cultuale, votivo, «religioso» etc.) di un sito, molto spesso confermando e integrando le conclusioni a cui si perviene attraverso gli studi di contesto e della cultura materiale. Questo contributo propone, attraverso l'analisi di alcuni casi-studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana, alcuni criteri utili alla definizione rituale di un sito. Le conclusioni a cui si perviene sono le seguenti: data la pluralità di forme con cui il simbolico si manifesta, l'etichetta "rituale" deve essere attribuita con molta cautela e soprattutto deve basarsi sull'integrazione delle informazioni di tipo archeozoologico con le altre evidenze disponibili contestualmente. Too often the label 'ritual deposit' has been given to those deposits which were considered 'special' because of their different nature compared to what we would expect from a typical faunal assemblage from a settlement. However, a special deposit is not always a ritual deposit. It is well known to zooarchaeologists that, in some cases (i.e. animal bones found in human burials or in so called 'animal burials'), the symbolic character of the faunal assemblages is clear and possible to reconstruct. However, much more challenging is defining the ritual value of some contexts when they are found in settlements. It is, in fact, very complicated to distinguish between remains intentionally deposited with a ritual aim and remains which are the result of activities of a non-ritual nature. Zooarcheology actively contributes to the definition of the possible symbolic ritual character of a site (i.e. ritual, votive, "religious" etc.) integrating and confirming conclusions drawn through the study of contextual information and material culture. This contribution intends to establish, through the use of case-studies from Italian pre and proto-history, useful criteria for the definition of a ritual context. The conclusions of the authors are the following: considering the variety of ways through which ritual manifests itself, the label of 'ritual deposit' should be attributed very cautiously and, as always, based on integration of the zooarchaeological evidence with all other available contextual information.
Parole chiave: Deposito rituale, Deposito speciale, Faune d'abitato, Interpretazione.
Riassunto La fauna di Castelrotto, sebbene costituita da una quantità di reperti per fase/periodo lungi dall'es-sere statisticamente rappresentativa, fornisce importanti informazioni riguardo all'interazione uo-mo-animale durante un lungo periodo cronologico. Il sito, ubicato a 1000 metri circa di quota sull'altipiano di Fié-Castelrotto (versante idrografico sinistro della Valle dell'Isarco a Nord di Bolzano) presenta infatti una continuità di frequentazione che va dal Neolitico Tardo fino all'Età moderna e contemporanea e, in quanto tale, permette di visualizzare, per quanto a grandi linee, eventuali cambiamenti nell'uso degli animali in senso diacronico. La fase di occupazione più significativa è quella tardoneolitica, dalla quale provengono peraltro scarsi resti faunistici: le numerose datazioni radiometriche la collocano temporalmente tra 3800 e 3600 cal. BC. Essa mostra importanti affinità culturali con l'orizzonte Fiavé 1. Il lotto faunistico consta di 695 reperti di cui 229 pienamente de-terminati. Gli animali domestici (bue, piccoli ruminanti domestici, maiale) prevalgono in tutte le fasi. Il presente articolo espone i dati relativi all'analisi dei reperti faunistici cercando di ricostruire non solo i caratteri generali di questi animali, ma anche il ruolo che rivestivano per l'economia del sito.
The method is applied to two case studies: Iron Age and Roman assemblages from Elms Farm, Heybridge, UK and Houten-Castellum, Netherlands. These are compared to two outgroups: a collection of European aurochs data, and a modern cattle assemblage from Germany. The method is additionally tested across species, by comparing cattle and pig relative tooth wear rates from Heybridge. Methodological considerations regarding the use of scoring systems to assess wear rate are identified and discussed. The potential causes of variation in tooth wear rates - such as diet, environmental inclusions, dental abnormalities, and genetic variation - are also considered.
This study demonstrates the ease and affordability with which the tooth wear rate method can be employed. The results provide no evidence to suggest that comparisons of cattle age profiles between the Iron Age and Roman period at Heybridge or Houten-Castellum may be significantly compromised. However, differences in relative tooth wear rate were found between these two sites, and when comparing them to aurochs and modern outgroups. On this basis, it is suggested that caution be used when comparing kill-off patterns from different archaeological cattle assemblages, and that this methodology be employed routinely to increase the reliability of archaeological interpretations.
A ritual deposit or a special deposit? The contribution of Archaeozoology to the definition of ritual contexts: a few case studies from the Italian Pre and Proto-History Troppo spesso l'etichetta di "deposito di natura rituale" è stata attribuita a quei depositi considerati speciali in quanto "diversi" rispetto a quello che viene considerato un tipico campione faunistico d'abitato. Ma un deposito speciale non è necessariamente un deposito rituale. È ben noto all'archeozoologo come in determinati casi, (i.e. resti rinvenuti in sepolture, o vere e proprie sepolture di animali), il carattere simbolico dei resti faunistici sia spesso chiaro e ricostruibile. Molto più arduo è invece rilevare il significato simbolico in contesti insediativi dove non sempre è possibile distinguere resti oggetto di deposizione intenzionale con finalità cultuali da resti faunistici legati ad altre attività di natura non rituale. L'archeozoologia concorre attivamente alla definizione del carattere eventualmente simbolico (i.e. cultuale, votivo, «religioso» etc.) di un sito, molto spesso confermando e integrando le conclusioni a cui si perviene attraverso gli studi di contesto e della cultura materiale. Questo contributo propone, attraverso l'analisi di alcuni casi-studio della preistoria e protostoria italiana, alcuni criteri utili alla definizione rituale di un sito. Le conclusioni a cui si perviene sono le seguenti: data la pluralità di forme con cui il simbolico si manifesta, l'etichetta "rituale" deve essere attribuita con molta cautela e soprattutto deve basarsi sull'integrazione delle informazioni di tipo archeozoologico con le altre evidenze disponibili contestualmente. Too often the label 'ritual deposit' has been given to those deposits which were considered 'special' because of their different nature compared to what we would expect from a typical faunal assemblage from a settlement. However, a special deposit is not always a ritual deposit. It is well known to zooarchaeologists that, in some cases (i.e. animal bones found in human burials or in so called 'animal burials'), the symbolic character of the faunal assemblages is clear and possible to reconstruct. However, much more challenging is defining the ritual value of some contexts when they are found in settlements. It is, in fact, very complicated to distinguish between remains intentionally deposited with a ritual aim and remains which are the result of activities of a non-ritual nature. Zooarcheology actively contributes to the definition of the possible symbolic ritual character of a site (i.e. ritual, votive, "religious" etc.) integrating and confirming conclusions drawn through the study of contextual information and material culture. This contribution intends to establish, through the use of case-studies from Italian pre and proto-history, useful criteria for the definition of a ritual context. The conclusions of the authors are the following: considering the variety of ways through which ritual manifests itself, the label of 'ritual deposit' should be attributed very cautiously and, as always, based on integration of the zooarchaeological evidence with all other available contextual information.
Parole chiave: Deposito rituale, Deposito speciale, Faune d'abitato, Interpretazione.
Riassunto La fauna di Castelrotto, sebbene costituita da una quantità di reperti per fase/periodo lungi dall'es-sere statisticamente rappresentativa, fornisce importanti informazioni riguardo all'interazione uo-mo-animale durante un lungo periodo cronologico. Il sito, ubicato a 1000 metri circa di quota sull'altipiano di Fié-Castelrotto (versante idrografico sinistro della Valle dell'Isarco a Nord di Bolzano) presenta infatti una continuità di frequentazione che va dal Neolitico Tardo fino all'Età moderna e contemporanea e, in quanto tale, permette di visualizzare, per quanto a grandi linee, eventuali cambiamenti nell'uso degli animali in senso diacronico. La fase di occupazione più significativa è quella tardoneolitica, dalla quale provengono peraltro scarsi resti faunistici: le numerose datazioni radiometriche la collocano temporalmente tra 3800 e 3600 cal. BC. Essa mostra importanti affinità culturali con l'orizzonte Fiavé 1. Il lotto faunistico consta di 695 reperti di cui 229 pienamente de-terminati. Gli animali domestici (bue, piccoli ruminanti domestici, maiale) prevalgono in tutte le fasi. Il presente articolo espone i dati relativi all'analisi dei reperti faunistici cercando di ricostruire non solo i caratteri generali di questi animali, ma anche il ruolo che rivestivano per l'economia del sito.
This 3-day course will use lectures and hands-on activities to give you a basic knowledge of the development of the British fauna from the Pleistocene through to the Modern day. Topics such as evolution, extinction, introduction, domestication and zoogeography will be addressed, including how humans and animals interacted through history.
This approach, which is routinely adopted by zooarchaeologists, although still valuable, has also been shown to have limitations: morphological discriminant traits can differ in different sheep/goat populations and a correct identification is highly dependent upon experience, as well as the availability of appropriate reference collections and the degree to which a researcher is prepared to ‘risk’ an identification.
This study provides a new, more objective and transparent methodology, based on a combination of morphological and biometrical analyses, to distinguish between sheep and goat post cranial bones. Additionally, on the basis of the newly proposed approach, it re-assesses the role that the goat played in medieval England.
There are several historical and archaeological questions concerning the role of this animal that have so far remained un-answered: why is the goat commonly recorded in the Domesday Book, when it appears to be so scarce in the contemporary archaeological record? Is the goat under-represented in the archaeological record or over-represented in the Domesday Book? Why is this animal, when identified in English medieval animal bone assemblages, almost exclusively represented by horncores?
Through the investigation of a number of English sheep and goat medieval assemblages, this study sheds light on these questions, suggesting that the goat was indeed genuinely rare.