Research Problems in Zooarchaeology

D.R. Brothwell, D.R. Brothwell, Kenneth D Thomas, Juliet Clutton-Brock, D.R. Brothwell, Kenneth D Thomas, Juliet Clutton-Brock

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Topic: Social Sciences
• eBook ISBN:
  9781315421070
• Subtopic: Archaeology
• Index: Social Sciences

Papers from an important conference on zooarchaeology, reflecting state-of-the-art work on the study of human relationship to animals in ancient times.

THE RELEVANCE OF SMALL MAMMAL STUDIES TO ARCHAEOLOGY

D. Brothwell and R. Jones

For the past century, zooarchaeology has to a great extent been concerned with larger mammals. They were saved from deposits more easily, were better preserved in more destructive burial environments, and seemed more relevant to most prehistorians. There were, however, exceptions to the rule, and Richard Owen, for instance, described the remains of Castor fiber from East Anglian deposits, as well as Arvicola? amphibia from a number of caves (Owen, 1846). About 20 years later, also in Britain, Sanford (1870) described both fossil and more recent rodents found in Somerset caves. Blackmore and Alston (1874) provided an important classification of fossil voles, and in the final quarter of the century additional studies appeared, but for the most part these were generally of a palaeontological flavour and predominantly concerned with Pleistocene fossils. It is only really within the last quarter of a century that small mammal studies have been drawn squarely into the field of archaeology - and not just the prehistoric phase either. It could well be that we have arrived at a critical point in the development of this aspect of zooarchaeology. For this reason, we offer below a brief review of the situation as we see it, suggesting tentatively the prospects for the future.

SMALL MAMMALS: A DEFINITION

Archaeologists, and one suspects some zoologists and palaeontologists, are not too clear as to what genera fall into this category. It may be that the definition for one of these disciplines need not necessarily be acceptable to the others, but it seems to us that the following would fit well enough for archaeological species. Although as Delany (1974) points out, the term ‘small mammal’ does not usually mean to embrace all small mammals - in fact, generally referring to small rodents and insectivores - we feel for archaeological purposes it is important at this stage to emphasise the relevance, and need to recover literally all small mammals. In fact, the International Biological Programme would seem to have retained the broader view of this size class and the varieties which should be included in it. Mammal species are not distributed evenly along a linear weight gradient, but tend to cluster more to the poles of ‘large’ and ‘small’ - a fact probably related to the strategies available to mammal populations in the exploitation of their environments. Considering the small end of the range, species to be included would have had in life a weight range from below 2 grams to about 5 kilograms (Bourliere, 1975). Some indication of the orders and species involved is given in Table 7, based on recent mammals only. Clearly most terrestrial mammal species fall into this category, a fact which alone suggests the need for more consideration of them in archaeology. In contrast to larger mammals, this group exploits a considerable range of food resources and can take advantage of a variety of microclimates. Survivorship from predators is relatively good although numerous archaeological samples are, in fact, the result of their elimination by avian predators (Mayhew, 1977). There is a high rate of conception, large litters, and a short growth phase. This has permitted quick recovery following such natural disasters as fire, flooding and disease - a fact which may well have made them an important fall-back protein source for man at times in the past.

But there are disadvantages in being a small mammal. Maintenance of body temperature demands an increased metabolic rate. Life expectation for some species may be less than a year. In cooler regions many small mammals may in fact be at a marked disadvantage in conserving body heat, a fact at the root of their use as climatic indicators.

RECOVERY AND SAMPLING

Small skeletal fragments may occur in a wide variety of situations. Cave sediments, rock fissures, lacustrine deposits, habitation sites, wells and refuse pits are just a few of the situations in which small bones and teeth may occur. Ideally, and to prevent the differential loss of the really small pieces, a sieve with about 1 mm. spacing should be used. In the case of large sites, and especially where rapid flotation techniques are not employed, some form of sampling strategy is demanded: A policy of sampling should be related to archaeological levels and/or a fixed sequence of, say, 5 cm. levels. In our experience at a number of sites, the distribution of small mammals may be extremely heterogeneous even within features such as pits, so that sampling should concentrate on the more productive zones or levels. The larger the samples, the more meaningful the conclusions will be. A considerable number of species may be present, as, for instance, in the cave breccias in South Africa, where at 7 sites, no less than 50 species were identified (Cooke, 1964). Ossom’s Eyrie Cave in Central England produced the remains of 2905 small mammals from 8 3-inch levels, and comprised 11 species (Yalden, 1977). There may be differential survival of areas of the skeleton, and, for example, the identifiable small mammal fragments from Gamtoos Valley rock shelters were predominantly from the skull (232 pieces - an estimated 51 individuals), with only 147 post-cranial fragments representing 27 individuals (Hendey and Singer, 1965). It should perhaps be mentioned here that retrieval from some deposits demands techniques other than sieving. Acetic acid treatment of consolidated matrix from Cyrenaica, for instance, permitted the removal and identification of a small Mesolithic Microtus species (Bate, 1950).

Table 7

Number of terrestrial genera and species, food habits and size category of contemporary terrestrial mammals. (From Bourlière, 1975)

QUESTIONS OF TAXONOMIC IDENTIFICATION

As in palaeontology and zoology, problems of correct identification and naming occur when dealing with archaeological small mammals. The problem is far greater with post-cranial material. This is not the place to comment at length on this matter, but it seems important that every care be taken to identify specimens correctly, and to register uncertainty if there is any. Thus, Pernetta and Handford (1970) were uncertain of an Iron/Bronze Age specimen from the Isles of Scilly which could have been the earliest example in Britain of the House mouse Mus musculus, but could alternatively have been an immature Apodemus. Similarly, from a Bronze Age fissure cave burial in Derbyshire, the hares Lepus timidus and L. europaeus have been provisionally identified (Turk, 1964a); although hybrid forms could have occurred, and one might well question the degree of variation in each of these species 4000 years ago. In the case of subspecific recognition and naming, Corbet (1970) rightly urges caution in their use, considering the question by reference to Erinaceus europaeus, Elephantulus rufescens and members of the genus Rhynchocyon. The problem of subspecific naming in relation to archaeological small mammals is raised by Turk (1964b) in a consideration of the Bronze Age remains of the vole Arvicola terrestris, and the possible microevolution of A. t. amphibius and A.t. reta.

Fig. 23 The present range (A) of the vole Microtus xanthognathus compared with Late Pleistocene evid...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• MICRO-EVOLUTIONARY STUDIES IN ANIMALS: THEIR RELEVANCE TO ARCHAEOLOGY
• POPULATION STUDIES ON MOLLUSCS IN RELATION TO ENVIRONMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY
• INTERPRETING BURIED LAND-SNAIL ASSEMBLAGES FROM ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES - PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS
• THE VALUE OF INSECT REMAINS AS EVIDENCE OF ECOLOGICAL CONDITIONS ON ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
• A SYSTEM FOR THE RECORDING AND PROCESSING OF DATA RELATING TO ANIMAL REMAINS FROM ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES
• THE RELEVANCE OF SMALL MAMMAL STUDIES TO ARCHAEOLOGY
• A MULTIVARIATE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF SMALL MAMMAL BONES
• PROBLEMS OF IDENTIFICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL FISH REMAINS
• MITES AND THEIR POTENTIAL USE IN ARCHAEOLOGY
• THE APPLICATION OF FOSSIL INSECT STUDIES TO THE SOMERSET LEVELS
• GROWTH AND DEMOGRAPHY: NEGLECTED ASPECTS OF MAMMAL STUDIES IN RELATION TO ARCHAEOLOGY
• THE INTERPRETATION OF EPIPHYSEAL FUSION DATA
• VARIATION IN DENTAL ATTRITION IN MAMMALS AND ITS RELEVANCE TO AGE.. ESTIMATION
• THE DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF BONE DISEASE
• RESEARCH PROBLEMS REGARDING THE DOMESTICATION OF SOUTH AMERICAN MAMMALS
• TOWARDS A BLUEPRINT FOR ANIMAL BONE REPORTS IN ARCHAEOLOGY
• ARCHAEOZOOLOGY - OR ZOOARCHAEOLOGY?
• SOME MINOR SKELETAL DIFFERENCES IN SHEEP
• COMPARATIVE COLLECTIONS FOR ZOOARCHAEOLOGY