Social zooarchaeology

Over the past two decades, archaeology has been confronting an ethical crisis with regards to the past treatment of human remains by specialists and institutions. From the creation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the United States (McManamon 2000), to further calls for the repatriation of remains and artefacts to colonised communities from European countries (Fforde 2003), the archaeological community has been actively attempting to become more respectful in their approach to the handling and curation of human remains.
However, there has been less consideration to the ethics of handling and curating faunal remains. This is arguably due to the inherent anthropocentrism of archaeology as a discipline, which automatically “others” animals and, in some cases, literally “objectifies” them as “artefacts” rather than the remains of a once-living creature. This can be observed in the process of handling faunal remains post-excavation, the lack of legal procedures regarding the ethicality of remains, and even the emotional reaction to remains on display (Fitzpatrick 2018).
This paper utilises recent work in social zooarchaeology and post-humanist studies (Russell 2012; Overton and Hamilakis 2013) to critically examine the role of ethics in zooarchaeology, specifically from a non-anthropocentric perspective. By drawing comparisons with ethical concerns for human remains, this paper will further explore the possible reasons that cause such a different ethical approach for animal remains, as well as propose alterations to the currently accepted form of ethics in zooarchaeology.

Over the past two decades, archaeology has been confronting an ethical crisis with regards to the past treatment of human remains by specialists and institutions. From the creation of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act in the United States (McManamon 2000), to further calls for the repatriation of remains and artefacts to colonised communities from European countries (Fforde 2003), the archaeological community has been actively attempting to become more respectful in their approach to the handling and curation of human remains.
However, there has been less consideration to the ethics of handling and curating faunal remains. This is arguably due to the inherent anthropocentrism of archaeology as a discipline, which automatically “others” animals and, in some cases, literally “objectifies” them as “artefacts” rather than the remains of a once-living creature. This can be observed in the process of handling faunal remains post-excavation, the lack of legal procedures regarding the ethicality of remains, and even the emotional reaction to remains on display (Fitzpatrick 2018).
This paper utilises recent work in social zooarchaeology and post-humanist studies (Russell 2012; Overton and Hamilakis 2013) to critically examine the role of ethics in zooarchaeology, specifically from a non-anthropocentric perspective. By drawing comparisons with ethical concerns for human remains, this paper will further explore the possible reasons that cause such a different ethical approach for animal remains, as well as propose alterations to the currently accepted form of ethics in zooarchaeology.

According to the Oxford Dictionary (2017) a pest is ‘a destructive insect or other animal that attacks crops, food, livestock, etc.’ or, alternatively, ‘an annoying person or thing; a nuisance’. The red fox (Vulpes vulpes) fits both those categories in contemporary society where the ‘urban fox’ creates problems by taking chickens and other pets, rummaging through rubbish bins, and disturbing our sleep with loud screams in the middle of the night.
The extent to which foxes were perceived as pests, or otherwise, in the past is the focus of a new PhD project that will investigate human-fox relationships in England over the past 10,000 years. The project will combine zooarchaeological evidence, isotopic analysis, written and visual sources to reconstruct the changing perceptions of foxes through time. This poster will introduce the research project and illustrate the complexity of human attitudes and responses to human-fox relations in the medieval period, drawing upon multiple lines of evidence.

The Albert Porter Pueblo great house, located in the central Mesa Verde region, was surrounded by numerous residential structures during the Pueblo II and Pueblo III periods. Using a variety of exploitation measures of wild game and turkeys,we test three hypotheses to see if there are meaningful similarities or differences in the faunal assemblages from the great house and the domestic households that surrounded it. Although the great house was a unique and prominent architectural featureat AlbertPorter Pueblo, thefaunas from the great house are generally similar to those from surrounding structures. However, there is some evidence that more meat of cottontails and turkeys was consumed in the great house compared to domestic structures during Pueblo III. Overall, all members from Albert Porter had equal access to animal food and those used in rituals and ceremonies. We explore different interpretations of social organization suggested by faunal remains.

Die vorliegende Studie legt die Tierknochenfunde aus dem awarischen Gräberfeld an der Wiener Csokorgasse (11. Bezirk) vor. Sie hat zum Ziel, über eine detaillierte archäozoologische Analyse dieses Faunenmaterials neue Erkenntnisse darüber zu gewinnen, welche Rolle Tiere und Tierteile im awarischen Bestattungsritual spielten.
Das Gräberfeld wurde im Vorfeld von Baumaßnahmen in den Jahren 1976 und 1977 im Auftrag des Historischen Museums Wien (heute Wien Museum) unter der Leitung von L. Streinz vollständig ausgegraben. Es umfasst 705 Körpergräber mit teils mannigfaltiger Beigabenausstattung und wurde von der Frühawarenzeit II (2. Viertel 7. Jh.) bis in die Spätawarenzeit II bis III (2. und 3. Drittel 8. Jh.) kontinuierlich belegt.
In 491 (70 %) der 705 Gräber wurden Tierknochen gefunden. In den weitaus meisten Gräbern fanden sich Reste vom Huhn sowie von Schaf bzw. Ziege. Auch Funde vom Rind und vom Schwein treten in vielen Gräbern auf. Das Huhn wurde in verschiedenen Vollständigkeitsgraden beigegeben. Von den Haussäugetieren wurde bevorzugt die das Femur enthaltene Fleischpartie in das Grab gelegt. Hinzu kommen Skelettreste von Haus- oder Graugans, Dohle, Habicht, Feldlerche, Taube, Seeadler, Zwergsäger, Rebhuhn, Waldschnepfe sowie einige unbestimmbare Vogelreste, sowie von Fischen (Hechte, ein Wels und verschiedene Cypriniden – unter letzteren Nase, Döbel, Brachsen [?], Rapfen [?], Karpfen, Plötze und Barbe [?]). Vier gut ausgestatteten spätawarenzeitlichen Bestattungen wurden geschirrte Pferde beigegeben. Drei dieser enthielten zudem vollständige Skelette ausgewachsener großer Rüden.
Die kulturhistorische Auswertung stützt sich auf Erkenntnisse aus einem publizierten Grabkatalog von L. Streinz, einer unveröffentlichten anthropologischen Dissertation von K. Grossschmidt und einer jüngst von L. Streinz und F. Daim erstellten noch unveröffentlichten Belegungschronologie. Anhand dieser Daten wird geprüft, ob Korrelationen der Beigaben tierlicher Provenienz mit Alter, Geschlecht und Status des Toten festzustellen sind, die Hinweise auf die Hintergründe bzw. Motivation der Beigabe geben könnten. Diese werden sodann unter Hinzuziehung ethnologischer und soziologischer Erkenntnisse diskutiert.
Eine abschließende Eingliederung des Knochenmaterials aus dem Gräberfeld an der Wiener Csokorgasse in das anhand publizierter Tierknochenfunde aus anderen awarischen Gräberfeldern zu rekonstruierende Gesamtbild des die Tiere betreffenden Bestattungsrituals gibt Hinweise auf die Genese desselben in der autochthonen Bevölkerung. Die Regionalität einiger Parameter entspricht der historischen Aufteilung der ungarischen Tiefebene in das ehemals römische, dann langobardisch geprägte Pannonien westlich der Donau einerseits und das gepidisch beeinflusste ehemalige »Barbaricum« östlich der Theiss, und auch ein suebisch-slawisch geprägter Landstrich in der heutigen Slowakei lässt sich abgrenzen.

Los perros ocupan un lugar especial en el elenco de interacciones que los seres humanos tenemos con otros animales, siendo la primera especie animal en participar en un proceso de domesticación. Esta dimensión particular del perro se manifiesta simbólicamente a través de su presencia en enterramientos desde el Paleolítico Superior. Esta domesticación es, además, la única que parece preceder al desarrollo de las primeras sociedades agrícolas. A través de una relación simbiótica, los humanos accedieron a la capacidad cinegética y de transporte de material en ambientes fríos de los perros a cambio de comida y abrigo. En este artículo,
trataré la evidencia morfométrica, isotópica y genética que nos permite distinguir los orígenes de la domesticación del perro.
Mucho se ha especulado sobre qué acercó a los lobos a los campamentos humanos, hablándose principalmente del hambre y la posibilidad de carroñear los huesos y otros despojos abandonados por los seres humanos. Sin embargo, pocas veces se ha intentado demostrar científicamente esta hipótesis mediante un estudio tafonómico sistemático de conjuntos óseos en yacimientos paleolíticos para determinar la acción oportunista de carnívoros con acceso secundario a los restos de comida de grupos cazadores-recolectores.
En este contexto, el excelente estado de  conservación del registro faunístico de Cueva Negra del Estrecho del Río Quípar (La Encarnación, Murcia), promete arrojar
información fundamental al respecto. Conocer la naturaleza y la profundidad cronológica de este fenómeno comensalista durante el Pleistoceno euroasiático es clave para entender el marco socio-ecológico que pudo favorecer la domesticación del perro.

Research into the processing of marine resources along the Mediterranean coasts in antiquity reveals an uneven picture. The archaeological evidence for the systematic processing
of fsh and seafood in the western part is abundant and varied. Here, the production of
salted fsh and fsh sauces seems to have been an important factor contributing to economic
growth in many locations. In the eastern part of the Mediterranean, however, archaeological evidence for the processing of marine resources is much less common and is often indirect. Large-scale processing plants are virtually absent from the archaeological record and
there are few studies of the remains of fsh and shellfsh or of other material evidence relating to fsh preservation and commerce. Yet written evidence on the subject abounds, but
places heavy emphasis on consumption and commerce rather than production. This paper
describes the evidence and explores possible reasons for this imbalanced representation in
an attempt to assess the actual importance of the processing of marine resources across the
whole Mediterranean region. Issues discussed are the shifting emphasis on fsh processing across space and through time, archaeological research agendas and methodologies,
resource availability and abundance and, fnally, issues of scale and visibility.

Mutokolwe is located in the northern part of South Africa. The site was occupied by Venda-speaking farmers during the Late Iron Age. One of the most unusual aspects from this faunal assemblage is the presence of complete metapodia of cattle and sheep. No other faunal assemblage from farming sites in southern Africa contains as many complete specimens, including long bones, as that from Mutokolwe. Skeletal completeness is one of the signatures which signal feasting activities from the archaeological record. Feasting has been recognised in different parts of the world, including Africa. Based on ethnographic
accounts, feasting was also common amongst Bantu-speaking farmers of southern Africa, and in particular, Venda-speakers. Taking into account limitations posed by archaeological, ethnography and early historical descriptions, we suggest that the complete long bones of livestock signal feasting activities at Mutokolwe. The faunal assemblage from the site contains an unusual high percentage of identifiable remains, indicating that it was likely subjected to biased sampling. Moreover, few wild animals are present in the assemblage, which suggests, sampling biases aside, that domestic animals were favoured in feasts possibly due to their association with people and ancestors.

The common interaction between both humans and foxes has led to a variety of differing relationships between the two. In this article, a discussion of the differing roles and interaction dynamics seen in past societies is made in comparison to what we can see in modern history and contemporary societies. Further, the piece also discuss the potential issues that modern perceptions of the fox may hold over current archaeological study.

Sheep and goats have been kept by Bantu-speaking farmers since their arrival during the Early Iron Age in southern Africa. Published samples dating from the Early, Middle and Late Iron Ages are used in this paper to investigate the exploitation of these two domestic animals. A Caprine Index is introduced to measure the ratio of sheep and goats in samples. In almost all cases, samples from the entire Iron Age are dominated by sheep, although the representation of goats increases slightly towards the Middle and Late Iron Age. Three exceptions to the pattern exist in the region, namely Mapungubwe Hill (Middle Iron Age), Nyanga and Hill X (Late Iron Age). At Mapungubwe Hill, the possibility exist that the dominance of goats over sheep is a factor of identification limitations when the original study was conducted in the late 1970s. However, a study is currently underway to re-analyse the fauna from this site. By the middle of the 20th century, goats are more common than sheep under Bantu-speaking farmers in South Africa, a pattern that may be attributed to social, economic, political and/or environmental changes.

Food taboos are probably universal, yet difficult to study in prehistory.  Recent ethnoarchaeological work provides tools that enable us to identify prehistoric animal taboos from faunal remains, and even to distinguish different forms of prohibition: prohibiting all contact with an animal, proscribing the consumption of its meat, forbidding the meat to certain kinds of people or at certain times, and so on.  The rich contextual record of Neolithic Çatalhöyük in Anatolia offers evidence of multiple types of taboo.  It is likely that killing leopards, or at least bringing them to the site, was taboo for everyone.  Bears may have been taboo to eat, but their skins and teeth were more freely allowed on site.  Deer and boar may have been taboo to only some segments of the population.

The Vinča culture site of Opovo Ugar-Bajbuk in the Vojvodina is less elaborately structured, but here, too, some signs of the operation of taboos are present.  Contextual analyses of taxa, body part representation, and treatment of animal remains may reveal more cases that will elucidate prehistoric belief systems and social structure.


Russell, Nerissa
2018 Neolithic taboos in Anatolia and Southeast Europe. In Social Dimensions of Food in the Prehistoric Balkans. M. Ivanova, B. Athanassov, V. Petrova, D. Takorova, and P. W. Stockhammer, eds. Pp. 14-30. Oxford: Oxbow.