Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages Perspectives across disciplines Edited by Francisco de Asís García García Mónica Ann Walker Vadillo María Victoria Chico Picaza BAR International Series 2500 2013 Published by Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports Gordon House 276 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7ED England bar@archaeopress.com www.archaeopress.com BAR S2500 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives across disciplines © Archaeopress and the individual authors 2013 ISBN 978 1 4073 1116 6 Printed in England by CMP (UK) Ltd All BAR titles are available from: Hadrian Books Ltd 122 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7BP England www.hadrianbooks.co.uk The current BAR catalogue with details of all titles in print, prices and means of payment is available free from Hadrian Books or may be downloaded from www.archaeopress.com  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... – VIII – THE DRAGON’S SKULL:   HOW CAN ZOOARCHAEOLOGISTS CONTRIBUTE TO OUR  UNDERSTANDING OF OTHERNESS IN THE MIDDLE AGES? Aleksander PLUSKOWSKI Department of Archaeology, University of Reading, UK a.g.pluskowski@reading.ac.uk   Abstract  Perspectives of the ‘other’ in medieval European society have been almost exclusively constructed and debated by historians, literary historians and art historians within medieval studies. The ‘other’ was defined, in part, through definitions of the normative. Within Christian theology, animals were separated from humans, although some were more familiar than others, and the true ‘monsters’ lived beyond the realm of individual experience; whether in a lake or some remote land. People who crossed these cosmic boundaries (or were perceived as crossing this boundary through their projected appearance or behaviour) were by definition ‘monstrous.’ Since zooarchaeologists are concerned with animals, conceptually separated from humans within medieval Christian society, they are well placed to contribute to our understanding of otherness. This paper explores how the study of animal bones, and the material practices associated with responses to other species, can build on the foundations of existing scholarship on otherness, alterity and monstrosity. Keywords  Zooarchaeology; archaeology; alterity; hybridity; monstrosity; dragons Introduction  particularly Jewish communities within medieval Christian towns (e.g. Hinton 2003; Codreanu- In recent years, the notion of otherness has Windauer 2004). Visual and literary constructions developed into an important area of enquiry of otherness in medieval Christian (as well as within medieval studies, naturally dominated by Jewish and Muslim) societies often employed the multiple expressions of the ‘other’ constructed animal metaphors in a process of graphic de- and documented in written and artistic sources; humanisation (Cuffel 2007, 198). If social the blurred spectrum from ethnic and social differences were deliberately emphasised through difference through to physical monstrosity and the projection of animalistic characteristics, hybridity (e.g. Melinkoff 1993; Williams 1996; aberrant behaviour was readily associated in the Merback 1999; Bildhauer and Mills 2003; minds of religious commentators with meat Strickland 2003; Moore 2007). Archaeologists have consumption and its related vices: gluttony and also contributed to our understanding of sexual promiscuity (Bazell 1997). In the most otherness, particularly through the study of burial striking conceptualisations of alterity, there was a rites in both the early (e.g. Reynolds 2009) and semiotic chain linking the animal, its meat and its later Middle Ages (e.g. Gilchrist and Sloane 2005), human consumers, or abstainers. Food – how it as well as the physical traces of minorities, was prepared, presented, eaten, and with whom it 109 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  was shared – was more than simply a nutritional are numerous studies of divergent communities, intake, it could also be used to reinforce social ethnic minorities as well as controversial differences, group identities and even perceived intellectual and popular movements. In some cosmological truths. regions of Europe there were multi-cultural societies which accommodated significant cultural Levels of meat and fish consumption varied differences. The zooarchaeology of otherness, then, according to social group and in different regions is first and foremost an investigation into whether of Europe (Banegas López 2010; Adamson 2002). variables in animal exploitation can be linked to Both were expensive and their consumption the deliberate promotion of group identity, and relatively infrequent within peasant communities whether there are differences in the ecological before the fourteenth century (Woolgar 2006a). profiles of sites inhabited by minorities. However, Nonetheless, the waste products of carcass it is also concerned with the otherness assigned to processing and meat preparation, and in some animal bodies, where in some cases their treatment cases fish processing, represent one of the most embodied them with supernatural qualities. This is abundant sources of archaeological data which can most commonly encountered by zooarchaeologists further our understanding of the relationship where animals feature as unusual deposits or as between cultural norms and heterogeneity in foci for ritual behaviour, and such uses have medieval European societies. The remains of traditionally been excluded from our animals recovered in vast quantities from understanding of medieval Christian society. archaeological sites across Europe are typically the However, it is increasingly evident that end result of human activity. Aside from the use of transformations of normative animal roles were certain species as ecological proxies in widespread and associated with a range of reconstructing past habitats, the study of these different communities. They were not restricted to remains has been used for reconstructing local and the peripheries of mainstream Christianity but also regional husbandry practices, alimentary (or featured within its cores, where animal bodies can culinary) cultures of different social groups, as be most readily understood as material culture well as the use of deadstock in various industrial (Pluskowski 2005a and 2007). processes, such as leather, horn and bone working. All of these multiple aspects of animal exploitation In fact zooarchaeologists working with were accommodated within a complex world- medieval contexts in Europe have rarely engaged view, which included value systems prioritising or with scholarly discourse on otherness, mainly for emphasising select species. In an important sense, two reasons. Firstly, whilst the recovery of it is possible to link food culture – where animal individual animal bone fragments can be at a products played a vital role – with group identity, relatively high resolution (e.g. from individual particularly in the case of the polarised identities features, pits, ditches), by the conclusion of many juxtaposed in scholarly studies of otherness, such zooarchaeological studies this resolution has been as Christians, Jews, Muslims and other non- reduced in favour of a broader, diachronic Christians (i.e. various so-called ‘pagan’ societies) perspective. There are a number of exceptions (Pluskowski 2010). which retain the focus of analysis on individual micro-assemblages, but this is only possible where Medieval societies across Europe certainly enough material has been preserved in contexts shared comparable signatures of faunal that are datable and understandable. A number of exploitation. The processed remains of cattle, these exceptions are discussed below as important sheep, goats and pigs are found in various contributions to our understanding of alterity. combinations at every site of human occupation; Secondly, a normative model of a medieval their variable presence interpreted through the Christian (or non-Christian) lifestyle is often used interplay of local social, economic and implicitly and only examined critically in cases environmental contexts. Combined with where divergent world-views are known or documentary sources for food consumption they suspected, such as at sites associated with the represent a normative model of medieval Christian process of religious conversion, explicit forms of alimentation (Woolgar 2006b). We do not need to inter-cultural dialogue or ethnogenesis. But if an look far for deviations from this model, as there integrated (i.e. interdisciplinary) understanding of 110  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... the treatment of animals can be linked to cultural linked heresy with dietary restrictions, and went norms, faunal assemblages represent invaluable on to accuse religious deviants within Christian and largely untapped datasets for investigating communities of ‘Judaising’ tendencies (Bazell 1997, European social heterogeneity at, potentially, a 90). Dietary restrictions were certainly a flashpoint high resolution. This paper aims to encourage a for both Christian and Jewish polemicists, and stronger inter-disciplinary discourse on otherness Jewish dietary laws were visibly maintained. One by surveying the zooarchaeological contribution to of the most important archaeological contributions three broad themes: diet, ritual depositions and to our understanding of medieval Jewish religious foci, culminating in a case study where communities within Christian Europe, has been to the value of a contextually specific, integrated demonstrate that alongside the organisation of approach is demonstrated with the example of the space within synagogues and distinctive religious quintessential medieval hybrid: the dragon. paraphernalia, tombstones, as well as religious   texts, there were also levels of material   enculturation, particularly in terms of buildings Defining cultural norms through diet (Codreanu-Windauer 2004; Berend 2001, 232). Zooarchaeologists, in turn, have also tried to Christian polemicists consistently argued that define Jewish communities by their distinct dietary humans were separated from all other species in profiles, linking faunal assemblages with kosher creation. Whilst the increasing popularity of regimes. In terms of medieval faunal assemblages, metaphorical uses of animals in literature and art the best documented example of this has been from the twelfth century has been interpreted as a demonstrated by an absence of pig bones and the blurring of species boundaries (Salisbury 2011), the presence of kosher species, specifically non-scaled clear separation is most evident in the treatment of fish, linked to the location of the early Jewish their respective remains: people were buried, community in medieval Buda (Daróczi-Szabó 2004; usually in cemeteries, whilst domestic and wild Bartosiewicz 2003). animals were typically treated as waste associated with food preparation, manufacturing and natural The pig certainly features as the most expiration. The shift from non-Christian to prominent animal in the antagonistic dialogue Christian world views in northern Europe is between medieval Christians and Jews, and was paralleled by the abandonment of animal regularly deployed as a symbol of the spiritual depositions in funerary contexts, although the shortcomings of Jews, and more broadly as an chronology of this process is in fact complex and embodiment of alimentary vices such as lust and not always synchronised with the development of gluttony. In the minds of medieval Christian ecclesiastical administration (see Pluskowski 2011). commentators, who asserted that what was eaten This general picture masks a diversity of attitudes directly influenced the body, passions and will, to animals, and specifically to animals as food. persistent Jewish abstinence from pork was Early Christians gradually abandoned Jewish interpreted as an avoidance of exacerbating the dietary restrictions and these were replaced by negative qualities they shared with pigs (Resnick ecclesiastical ordinances proscribing a calendar of 2011, 6). The effect of these dietary prohibitions fasting and associated penitential foods, whilst early was to prevent social interaction between Jews and monastic communities adopted a stricter dietary Christians; in the late twelfth and thirteenth regime which was eventually compromised, century, Canon law increasingly sought to restrict prompting revivals of rigorous diets within commensal meals between Christians, Jews and reformed orders such as the Cistercians and Muslims (Freidenreich 2008). The effective Carthusians (Bazell 1997, 84–85), although levels of enforcement of these restrictions has been meat consumption continue to vary, even within questioned, and the evidence for Jewish-Christian these communities (Bond 2001, 77–80). However, conversions with equivalent dietary changes, as monastic dietary regimes were carefully well as the selling of pork by Jewish butchers to distinguished from seemingly parallel attempts at Christian consumers and the sharing of waste asceticism, which were not ratified by religious disposal sites by different communities, makes it authorities. These distinctions are evident from the difficult to consistently map alterity in the earliest years of religious policing: the inquisitor medieval urban landscape on the basis of faunal Moneta of Cremona, writing in c. 1225, explicitly assemblages. Moreover, abstinence from culturally 111 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  mainstream diets was only one response from consumption (Rackham 2004, 22) such in York minority or subversive groups; English Lollards, in (O’Connor 1989). Significant assemblages of horse the fifteenth century, deliberately challenged bones from late medieval urban contexts in Bedford religious ordinances by admitting to eating meat and Market Harborough have been linked to and hunting on fast days (Grumett and Muers industrial processing, particularly leather working, 2010, 53). rather than meat removal for consumption (Baxter 1996), and the fifteenth/sixteenth century horse In his diatribe against heresy, Moneta of disposal site in Westminster, London, which, Cremona suggested that true Christians could eat alongside the remains of seventy six horses, also virtually anything, but encountering evidence for included several dog carcasses buried in four pits the consumption of horse meat in medieval (Figure 8-1), and has been interpreted as a European society often prompts zooarchaeologists knackers’ yard which processed horse and dog to invoke dietary prohibitions. In fact, there is hides (Cowie and Pipe 1998). It seems that the persistent assumption that the ‘horse meat taboo’ largest assemblages of horse remains from was consistently maintained since the late-eighth medieval English sites do not show even century papal bans to aid St. Boniface’s missionary opportunistic exploitation for meat, most likely due activities. Horse consumption is certainly evident to the absence of a market. in a number of pre-Christian north European societies, but where it was raised as an issue by Episodes of mass starvation are plausible Christian authorities it can be related to the role of explanations for butchered horse bones found the horse in public (or at least publicly visible) cult within a collapsed building in the outer bailey of activity, which, given the importance of food to Cēsis castle in Latvia, perhaps relating to a religious identity outlined above, clearly presented documented episode of horse consumption during a major obstacle to effective conversion. In tenth- the Livonian War in the 1578 (Kalniņš, pers. century Iceland, horse sacrifice was associated with comm). A thirteenth-century deposit of seventy ritualistic consumption during funerals (Loumand nine cats in a well in Cambridge, with evidence of 2006), which were also expressions of family wealth cut marks linked to meat removal, may represent within a different social setting to that found in the an even more unusual response to mass starvation colonists’ homeland (Leifsson 2012). The use of the or alternatively attempts at passing off cat meat as horse in sacrificial contexts was far more intensive hare (Luff and Moreno García 1995). Normal diets in Iceland than elsewhere in Scandinavia – 34% of were reinforced by such episodes which are clearly burials in Iceland include a horse compared with, linked in contemporary sources with drastic for example, around 7% in Norway – representing responses to crises, particularly sieges (Bartlett a particularly striking link between pre-Christian 2000, 667). But what was a normal diet? food culture and religious identity (Sikora 2003– Zooarchaeologists and historians have been able to 2004). In Hungary, whilst banning the consumption profile the dietary regimes of different social horse meat was a direct confrontation with pre- groups based on their variable access to foodstuffs Christian pastoral lifestyles in the eleventh century (Ervynck 2004; Wooglar 2006b), and diverse, (Bartosiewicz 1998, 163), evidence for its infrequent regional cuisines are attested around late medieval consumption is found in later medieval Europe (Adamson 2002; Banegas López 2010). But archaeological contexts, such as at Buda (Daróczi- the conceptual entanglement between food, Szabó 2011), whilst some Cumans continued to religion and social differences remains to be include horses (or horse proxies such as equestrian investigated. The lamb, recognised as a equipment) in solitary graves in the thirteenth and fundamental Christological symbol (see early-fourteenth century (Berend 2001, 249–250), Pluskowski 2005b), a source of meat and in and perhaps even eat horse meat as late as the adulthood wool and dairy, represented all of these fifteenth century (Bartosiewicz 1998, 163). In meanings during festive meals, when its raising, England, the horse played an equally important slaughter, preparation and consumption were role in the elite culture and cult practice of early intimately associated with the retelling of the life Anglo-Saxon society from the fifth to seventh of Christ (Fabre-Vassas 1997). Food, then, could be centuries (Bond 1996; Fern 2012), and subsequently a focus for ritual associated with religious there are only sporadic examples of horse identification, however, where animals were 112  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... Figure  8‐1.  Plan  showing  the  distribution  of  deposited  horses  at  Elverton  Street,  London,  UK  (by  permission  of  Alan  Pipe  and  the  Royal  Archaeological Institute). deliberately deposited in contexts other than goats, sheep, hawks (e.g. Eschwege) and deer (e.g. rubbish pits and ditches they also challenge our in a seventh-century pit at Schretzingen) in their normative models of medieval society.  own pits suggests complex relationships with   animals (Gerken 2009), and an equally rich suite of   fauna is evident in the diverse mortuary theatre of Animals as ritual foci  southern Scandinavia (Svanberg 2003). To the east, amongst the Balts, horses were assigned funerary The complex shift from pre-Christian to roles since the first century AD, and from the Christian practices is at the heart of understanding eighth century through to the eleventh century the transformation and reconfiguration of cultural significant numbers were being buried in the norms in European societies. The interface largest cemeteries in Lithuania such as at Marvelė between contrasting cosmologies during the longue  (Figure 8-2), within a regionally unique fusion of durée of the Conversion Period in northern Europe politics and increasingly institutionalised cult is strikingly reflected in the treatment of animals. practice (Bertašius 2009 and 2012). These horses, Between the fifth and eleventh century, horses and ritually killed, deposited and in the process dogs were the most popular animals deposited sacralised, moved from the domestic sphere to the with or alongside people buried in Germanic realm of the dead, transforming from something cultures; i.e. much of north-western Europe with a familiar to a supernaturally empowered other. The final phase in Scandinavia (Müller-Wille 1970– gradual or, in some regions, sudden disappearance 1971; Prummel 1992). In Germany, the presence of of this public ritual use of animals characterises the cats in pits above graves, interpreted as mostly acceptance of Christian customs (see relevant killed by stoning, and the presence of cattle, pigs, papers in Pluskowski 2011). This trend is not 113 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  Figure 8‐2. Plan showing the distribution of deposited horses in the cemetery at Marvelė, Lithuania (by permission of Mindaugas Bertašius).  straightforward, as in some regions practices end practices, perhaps only superficially related to and change before the appearance of previous customs, which are at the heart of institutionalised Christianity. Interpretations of the communal life (see Hutton 2001). The topic unusual treatment of animals in the later medieval demands more attention from zooarchaeologists, period typically fall into two categories: a who are most likely to provide new examples of continuation of earlier practices, preserving some such unusual deposits, but here the creative use of form of cultural memory but moving from the animal remains within later medieval public centre of public life to the margins, and a religious contexts will be considered in more detail. discontinuous reinvention or creation of new 114  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... Figure 8‐3. Excavated articulated dogs from medieval contexts in Kana, Hungary (by permission of Márta Daróczi-Szabó).  Vocal religious commentators have been cited whole or partial animals in medieval Christian as evidence for the Catholic (and eastern cultural contexts. In southern Scandinavia, Carlie’s Orthodox) Church’s institutional disapproval of (2006) survey of building deposits suggests that heterodoxy, and a papal agenda for religious cranial and jaw fragments of domestic animals uniformity across Christendom is particularly continue to be used in such ritualistic contexts into evident from the thirteenth century. There is the sixteenth century. Further north, in Finland, certainly evidence for the prohibition of practices building traditions beginning in the twelfth that strayed beyond what was considered century are associated with special deposits, with acceptable by certain religious authorities. The the oldest dating to c. 980–1220 and consisting of thirteenth-century healing cult focused on the an entire sheep carcass placed under a stone grave of a dog in the Dombes region of south- foundation of a timber building (Hukantaival 2007, eastern France was suppressed (as it turns out, 66). The use of skull or jaw fragments is a recurring unsuccessfully) by the inquisitor Stephen of theme of structured deposits in medieval contexts, Bourbon, demonstrating the disparity between with one of the most striking examples including institutional religious authority and local (or ‘folk’) carefully placed sheep mandibles on the beliefs. Unlike other interpretations of animal fourteenth-century bridge foundations at the deposits (see below), this local cult was not Thames waterfront in London (Merrifield 1988). In interpreted as the remnant of pre-Christian fact, Morris’ demonstration of dynamic trends in, practice, but rather as a peculiar reinterpretation of for example, the type of species being deposited in the symbolic role of the dog in the life of St. the early and later medieval periods, suggests Guinefort (Schmitt 1983). If deposited animal discontinuous practices that emerged to meet bodies could be foci for what Bourbon swept specific needs. In some regions there is evidence under the umbrella of superstitio – a degraded and for persistent practices, at least where there is an perverted form of religion – then the use of animal overlapping chronology of deposits on either side bodies in what can be critically defined as of the appearance of Christian infrastructure. ‘ritualistic contexts’ surely represents a move Excavations at the village of Kana in Hungary beyond regular expressions of religious praxis. uncovered the burials of twenty five dogs in pits dating from the mid-twelfth to early-fourteenth The existence of such data has been elegantly century; ten dogs had been buried in outdoor pits demonstrated by Morris’ (2011) quantitative, and four newborn puppies had been placed in pots comparative study of associated bone groups and buried upside down, a dozen others were (ABGs) in select regions of Britain from the buried under houses and interpreted as foundation Neolithic through to the post-medieval period. His deposits (Figure 8-3). What is interesting is that systematic approach remains to be adopted across these practices took place within sight of the Europe, but there are numerous incidental case village church (Daróczi-Szabó 2009). In southern studies which verify the geographically Greenland, the burial of twenty to thirty walrus widespread practice of deliberately depositing skulls and four or five narwhal skulls in the 115 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  churchyard and chancel of the cathedral at Garðar, the basis for luxury artefacts, many of which have is a more explicit case of acceptable praxis at the survived in museum collections and cathedral heart of a Christian community (Pingel 1834, 310; treasuries. The most important of these was ivory, Pluskowski, 2005a). This particular example has obtained from African elephants and Arctic been somewhat ambiguously interpreted as walruses, which was most often chopped up but ‘hunting magic,’ with an understanding that occasionally preserved intact, as in the case of religion and magic exist alongside each other as Norman elephant tusk tip ‘oliphants’ and a few parallel streams. It has no parallels in other examples of whole walrus tusks, sometimes with Scandinavian regions and appears to be a purely cranial fragments attached (Roesdahl 1998). Where indigenous practice in the colony, perhaps the visible zoological identity of the animal was reflecting a meeting between the conceptual lost in the process of manufacturing, the worlds of Scandinavian Christians and Inuit. Such commercial, aesthetic and religious significance of animal deposits appear to have been ‘normal’ the material was highlighted. Animal remains within the lives of these communities, and were could, in this way, be transformed into physical evidently sanctioned by local religious authorities. evidence of the monstrous. These creatures This clearly demonstrates that the enforcement of transgressed the elemental boundaries set out in religious orthodoxy, especially in the case of medieval intellectual thought, but they were attacks on superstition, was driven by individual deployed in churches to attract an attentive personalities – by the actions of particularly audience and to focus devotional activity. People industrious bishops or inquisitors. Carlo continued to value the supernatural power Ginzburg’s (1992) study of shamanic practices in mediated through the relics themselves, rather sixteenth/seventeenth century north-eastern Italy than their containers, but some treasuries demonstrates that inquisitors required their contained natural marvels including shells and attention to be drawn to illicit activity, and even ostrich eggs, precursors of the early modern then it was not always easy to persuade them to Wunderkammern. But they were different insofar as launch investigations. The study of medieval they represented testimonia, as evidence of gifts – inquisitors has also highlighted the role of thus relics communicated the wealth and piety of networks of informers and witnesses (Ormerod the sponsor, the host institution as well as the and Roach 2004), and so the policing of irregular power of the saint (Mariaux 2006, 220). religious activities, including superstitions, was ad  hoc rather than institutionalised (Kieckhefer 1995), Relics were framed within a staged context and only sustained by established networks in initiating a sense of wonder in the viewer (Bynum specific regions (e.g. thirteenth-century Languedoc; 2001, 62–63). The triggering of astonishment, the Given 1997). A more comprehensive, inter-regional focusing of attention and, from the perspective of diachronic study of such unusual animal deposits intellectual commentators, admiratio was the first and their contexts, in relation to the activities of step towards knowledge of the divine. This religious authorities, will shed important new light provides a context for the deliberate incorporation on European heterogeneity. of animal bodies into sacred spaces. Natural curiosities could function as exempla, and as a In many excavations unusual deposits are means of attracting the faithful to incite admiration difficult to contextualise, as in the case of a human with a moral intent. The popularity of ostrich eggs burial accompanied by bones from ox, pig and in churches in well attested, and has been linked to horse in a roughly cut grave in a rocky field, the ostrich as a prompt for people to return to God datable most likely by associated artefacts to the through good works (Mariaux 2006, 221). fourteenth or fifteenth century near Moytirra (c. However, it appears that some objects had their Sligo) in Ireland (Rynne and Erskine 1961). Various own supernatural biographies. In the setting of explanations for ‘non-rational’ depositions of church interiors and town halls they appeared to animal bones have been proposed, which include the viewer not as mere curiosities but rather as strategies for waste disposal (O’Connor 1993). unique historical exempla representing local history There is, however, a category of animal remains as a legitimised and important part of biblical which can definitely be linked to deliberate chronology. One of the best examples of this was constructions of otherness. Skeletal fragments from the material culture associated with dragons. a range of species imported into Europe provided   116  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... The Caput Draconis and dragon material culture:  A case study of embodying otherness  The dragon was one of the most widely used symbols of power (alongside the lion) in the Middle Ages, and only saints and exceptional heroic figures were capable of overcoming this monster; the encounter highlighting their own supernatural efficacy (Riches 2003, 198). The dragon, like the lion, was a multi-faceted symbol, featuring as a heraldic emblem, a proxy for its slayer, usually a saint, and perhaps most commonly a signifier for the devil, sometimes in his many-headed apocalyptic form (Figure 8-4). The head of the dragon vividly represented the mouth Figure 8‐4. Part of a mural showing the apocalyptic dragon from the  of hell, and the caput  draconis was a regularly Church  of  Our  Lady  in  Karlštejn  Castle,  Czech  Republic,  completed  before 1363 (by permission of Lukáš Kunst, Karlštejn Castle).  employed metaphor for sin; its destruction, in turn, The castle was decorated with a range of dragon imagery, representing  stood for salvation, resonating with the common the divine struggle against the infernal.   motif of Christ or Mary crushing the head of the serpent underfoot, drawing on Genesis 3:15 (Robertson 2006, 547–557) and Psalm 74:13–14 fourteenth and fifteenth century) most likely which referred to the breaking of the heads of reflecting the ‘charter myths’ of particular dragons and Leviathan. Although sculpted aristocratic families whose claim on property was vignettes of dragons and their holy slayers are a justified by an ancestral slaying of monsters, staple of late medieval religious art, even appearing emulating the model of St. George (Simpson 1978, on reliquaries as proxies for the remains of saints 85). What is interesting is that in many of these contained within (Kovačević 2009), their physical stories, although recorded much later, there is remains confirmed their reality, something that is material culture connected with the dragon which noted in vivid accounts of individuals (typically confirms the validity of the story, such as the saints) encountering monsters in specific weapon of its celebrated slayer, representations of geographic locations within a historical timeframe. dragons on tombs or heraldic emblems, the They were obtained, like other monsters, from the transformation of its body into striking edges of the civilised world; their natural topographic elements or sometimes surviving environment was the wilderness, situated at the anatomical elements. There are some examples of fringes of human experience and control (Riches these from other regions of Europe. The church of 2003, 204; see also Pluskowski 2005a). A recurring St. George in Velabro, Rome, contained the saint’s theory for the construction of dragon stories is spear used to kill the dragon, whilst St. Michael’s based on discoveries of fossil finds, or from sword and buckler were on display at Mont-Saint- encounters with real, albeit exotic and unfamiliar Michel until the French Revolution (Bonser 1962, beasts. But the evidence suggests a reverse 237). A twelfth-century manuscript from Rheinau procedure, where the reality of dragon encounters abbey in Switzerland claimed possession of the is confirmed by their remains. fragment of rock (an interpretation of loco or place) where Michael had fought and slain the dragon The body parts reflect well-established features (Ruggerini 2001, 36). Bones found in the ‘dragon’s of dragon anatomy disseminated through cave’ under the Wawel in Cracow were transferred countless artistic representations from the eleventh to the cathedral, and have been identified as century: their reptilian/serpentine nature and their deriving from a mammoth, woolly rhino and size. The details of the remains themselves are of whale. Softer parts were also preserved and secondary importance compared to what Amy documented: the antiquarian Johann Fuchsmagen Remensnyder (1996) has described as ‘imaginative sent the smoked tongue of the dragon killed by memory’ in the context of designating relics. An Haymon/Hoyme to the relic collector Florian analysis of the topography in British dragon Waldauf in the late fifteenth century (Wood 2005, narratives points to a late medieval origin (i.e. 1148, n84), whilst a fragment of the ‘Lambton 117 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  Worm’s’ hide was allegedly displayed at Lambton whales and prehistoric megafauna such as Castle (c. Durham) in the nineteenth century mammoths could be interpreted as either the (Simpson 1978, 87). The well-known pigment of remains of dragons, giants or monstrous fish dragon’s blood first described by Pliny originated (Wood 2005, 1149). The source of these bones was from the struggle between the serpent and itself a landscape of alterity (Szabo 2008), and with elephant that resulted in the mixture of their experiences of large marine animals for the blood. Chemical analyses of this pigment have majority of the population limited to occasional identified a series of resins sold under the name of strandings, whale bones in particular were ‘dragon’s blood,’ was traded and made available conceptually malleable and suitable for (Pearson and Prendergast 2001). Identification of reconfiguring as equally fantastic species. pigments as the congealed blood of animals was not particular to medieval Europe, but was also The public deployment of the dragon was found in China (Schafter 1957). particularly vivid in Bohemia in the late-fourteenth century, which brings us to the example of the dragon’s skull in Karlštejn Castle, identifiable as a Nile crocodile (Figure 8-6). Was this simply a marvel from a foreign land? Ecclesiastical treasuries contained many artefacts which represented donated gifts of diverse value. Exotic animal parts fell into this category, such as the presentation of the unicorn horn from the French king to the Abbey of St. Denis (Alcouffe 1991, 310– 311, no. 68). However, at Karlštejn the dragon may have functioned as something more than simply a North African marvel. The castle was constructed Figure 8‐5. The whale bones suspended behind the altar in St. Mary at the instigation of the celebrated Holy Roman and St. Donato on Murano, Italy (by permission of Kathleen Walker‐ Emperor Charles IV, where he deposited the Meikle).  imperial treasure and relics of Christ’s Passion within the Chapel of the Holy Cross, consecrated More commonly surviving elements are in 1365. The iconographic programme of the represented by examples such as the bones Chapel includes three dragon slayers: St. Michael, attributed to the dragon slain by St. Crescentinus, St. Margaret and St. George. Furthermore, the originally housed in the church of Pieve de’ Saddi story of St. Margaret, when the dragon reappears until they were moved to the cathedral in Città di in the form of a man, he is thrown to the ground Castello, where they are still stored, and a second and his neck is crushed under her foot, is found as rib bone, measuring over two metres and derived a decorative motif in a number of parts of Karlštejn from a whale was kept in a small church of San Castle. The cult of St. George, originally a Byzantine Pietro di Carpini. Whale bones are regularly saint from Cappadocia, spread into Central and identified with the remains of dragons. In  the Western Europe with important devotional centres church of St. Mary and St. Donato on the island of focused on the presence of the saint’s relics. The Murano in the Venetian lagoon, four large whale cult was particularly popular in late medieval bones are traditionally identified as those of a Central Europe, and the saint would be associated dragon slain by St. Donato (Figure 8-5). Klaus with two Hungarian chivalric orders (or societies); Barthelmess (2008) and Nicolas Redman (2004) the Order of St. George founded by Charles I and have documented around two hundred cases of the Order of the Dragon, founded by Sigismund whale bones hung in European churches, castles with an explicit sacral purpose of defending and town halls, the majority situated in German Catholic orthodoxy (Boulton 2000, 348–349). and Swedish churches, as well as British castles – many of them now lost – and categorise them as His presence in Prague from the tenth century hierozoika, the Greek term referring to the was revived in the early fourteenth century, at a sacralisation of items from the natural world with time when the arm of the saint kept in the Convent biblical references or precedents. Depending on of St. George was encased in a new reliquary the monstrous heritage of the locality the bones of (Otavský 2005). The head of the Karlštejn dragon is 118  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... Figure 8‐6. The crocodile skull in Karlštejn Castle, Czech Republic (by permission of Lukáš Kunst, Karlštejn Castle).  first documented in 1355 and is subsequently the infernal, but also proof that the devil could be identified as such in an inventory of 1515. overcome. Its particular audience in Karlštejn was However, by the eighteenth century this identity private, but in the context of Charles IV’s ‘relic had been transformed into a crocodile. The castle’ its context should not be understood as a emerging story situated the animal in a cave before collection of curiosities, as a wunderkammer, but as the castle was built, from where it terrorised the something embodied with supernatural agency. local population (Pujmanová 1980, 321, n21). In This manifestation of the demonic was emulated in fact, the link between dragons and crocodiles had the public domain with equivalent dragon proxies. already been made in the minds of some late Mock dragons were paraded in Chartres and medieval artists. Representations of St. Margaret Tours on Palm Sunday to signify the presence of emerging from yellow or gilded dragons may have evil in the world. In the processions during the alluded to the gold colour of the Nile crocodile as three Rogation days leading up to the Ascension described in bestiaries. The encounter between and on the Ascension itself, churches displayed another Nile-dwelling animal – the hydrus – and representations of dragons in a ritual both the crocodile, paralleled the vignette of St. confirming and banishing the presence of evil in Margaret bursting out of the dragon; medieval the world, a transition from the ‘time of the illuminators clearly drew the visual connection dragon,’ to the ‘time of grace’; the dragon’s head between dragons, crocodiles and the jaws of hell was even crushed to music in the short-lived Caput  (Lippincott 1981, 12). This is perhaps most explicit masses of the mid-fifteenth century (Robertson in a mid-fifteenth century sculpture of a crocodile 2006, 575–578). The use of the dragon to represent placed underneath St. Theodore in Venice to God’s sovereignty was not restricted to mainstream represent a dragon, and so the original Christian culture. Medieval Jewish renditions of identification of the Karlštejn dragon skull was not dragons, in text and iconography, could also much of a conceptual leap. function as a ‘fulcrum between the divine and the demonic’ – a signifier of the ultimate power of God The dragon’s skull, as a proxy for St. George, – however, this apparent similarity masks the gulfs functioned as much as a relic, as a marvel. It between the two worldviews (Epstein 1997, 82). provided a reminder of the physical presence of 119 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  The transformation of animal bodies obtained medieval attitude to the natural world, and the from exotic locations into material culture that values attached to different species (Szabo 2008, provided physical proof of the existence of 19). It is clear that our understandings of otherness monsters, facilitated experiences of the divine are inextricably linked to definitions of the through the mechanism of admiratio. Medieval lay normative, and so the ‘other’ is never studied in religion was, above all, a religion of activity isolation, but situated within the broader spectrum experienced through practice (Arnold 2005, 231). of responses to animals from the level of the Moreover, animal bodies appear to have been individual household, through to the largest more widely passed off as relics, a practice polities encompassing diverse communities and extensively attacked during the Reformation. truly multi-cultural societies. Zooarchaeological Hugh Latimer famously dismissed saints’ bones as contributions, to date, can be divided into two the remains of pigs (Corrie 1845, 55), and they also main categories. Firstly, the quantification of continued to resonate in the ecclesiastical significant amounts of data enables the legislation issued by Edward VI and Elizabeth I; a investigation of cultural norms defined by the key passage of the Church of England’s official group-specific trends in animal exploitation. This homily on the sin of idolatry attacked the ‘wicked, can be compared and contrasted with written impudent, and most shameless men’ who sources for divergent practices, although the latter substituted horse bones for the limbs of saints and usually relate to very specific communities, as well encouraged credulous laypeople to pay homage to as potentially misleading exaggerations and the tail of a donkey (Walsham 2010, 124). In fact, misunderstandings. This is as true of texts dealing the number of osteoarchaeological studies with non-Christians as it is with polemics on confirming the presence of animal bones in heretics (Biller 2001). Secondly, zooarchaeologists medieval reliquaries has been extremely limited; can contribute to investigations of the use of the relics of Joan of Arc containing a fragment of a animal bodies as physical proxies for the other, cat femur turned out to be a nineteenth-century where the dislocation of biological identity is forgery (Charlier et  al. 2010), whilst relics central to understanding the biographies of associated with St. John the Baptist on Sveti Ivan in artefacts manufactured from skeletal elements. Bulgaria included three animal bones, although Various social groups within Christian Europe their context remains to be clarified.1 Irrespective used animal bodies outside the normal sphere of of the real or perceived role of animal remains in alimentation and manufactured goods, and relic culture, the shift in attitudes towards multiple meanings were readily accommodated constructions of the monstrous and sacred ‘other’ within the same animal – whales were both underlies its intimate link with the pre- ‘monsters at sea and mundane as meals’ (Szabo Reformation Catholic world view and 2008, 25), and perhaps re-contextualised as experiencing the sacred through physical exempla. dragons when their bones were suspended in public spaces. Zooarchaeologists, above all, work with physical animal bodies, which in the past and Conclusion  today have enabled people to confront and experience the reality of the other. This paper has suggested how   zooarchaeologists can and are contributing to   furthering our understanding of heterogeneity in Bibliography  medieval European society on either side of the widespread acceptance of Christianity, by Adamson, Melitta Weiss, ed. 2002. Regional  mapping the development of cultural norms Cuisines  of  Medieval  Europe:  A  Book  of  Essays. through the study of the varied treatment of London: Routledge. animal remains in the context of religious self- Alcouffe, Daniel, ed. 1991. Le  trésor  de  Saint‐Denis:  identification. By drawing attention to the Musée  du  Louvre,  Paris,  12  mars‐17  juin,  1991. conceptual plasticity of animals in medieval Paris: Réunion des musées nationaux. society, zooarchaeologists will also contribute to Arnold, John. H. 2005. Belief  and  Unbelief  in  breaking down the notion of a single, simple Medieval Europe. London: Hodder Arnold.                                                              1 http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2012/120615.html 120  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... Banegas López, Ramón A. 2010. “Consumption of Bond, James. 2001. “Production and Consumption Meat in Western European Cities during the of Food and Drink in the Medieval Monastery.” Late Middle Ages: A Comparative Study.” In Monastic  Archaeology, edited by Graham Food and History 8/1: 63–86. Keevill, Mick Aston and Teresa Hall, 54–87. Barthelmess, Klaus. 2008. Die  Walknochen  der  Oxford: Oxbow. Nordseeinsel  Borkum:  Zur  Kulturgeschichte  der  Bond, Julie. 1996. “Burnt Offerings: Animal Bone in bedeutsamen  Denkmäler  aus  der  Blütezeit  des  Anglo-Saxon Cremations.” World  Archaeology europäischen Arktiswalfangs mit Überlegungen zu  28/1: 76–88. ihrer  Konservierung. Norderstedt: Books on Boulton D’Arcy, Jonathan Dacre. 2000. The Knights  Demand GmbH. of  the  Crown:  The  Monarchical  Orders  of  Bartlett, Robert. 2000. England under the Norman and  Knighthood in Later Medieval Europe, 1325–1520. Angevin  Kings,  1075–1225. Oxford: Clarendon Woodbridge: Boydell. Press. Bynum, Caroline Walker. 2001. Metamorphosis  and  Bartosiewicz, László. 1998. “Mobile Pastoralism Identity. New York: Zone Books. and Meat Consumption: An Archaeozoological Carlie, Anne. 2006. “Ancient Building Cults. Perspective.” In Tender  Meat  Under  the  Saddle, Aspects of Ritual Traditions in Southern edited by Jószef Laszlovszky, 157–178. Krems: Scandinavia.” In Old  Norse  Religion  in  Long‐ MAQ. term  Perspectives,  edited by Anders Andrén, Bartosiewicz, László. 2003. “Eat Not this Fish – A Kristina Jennbert and Catharina Raudvere, Matter of Scaling.” In Presencia  de  la  206–211. Lund: Nordic Academic Press. arqueoictiología  en  México, edited by Ana Charlier, P., et al. 2010. “The ‘Relics of Joan of Arc’: Fabiola Guzmán, Óscar J. Polaco and Felisa J. A Forensic Multidisciplinary Analysis.” Aguilar, 19–26. México D. F.: Conaculta– Forensic Science International 194/1–3: 9–15. INAH. Codreanu-Windauer, Silvia. 2004. “Regensburg: the Baxter, Ian. 1996 (for 1993). “Medieval and Early Archaeology of the Medieval Jewish Quarter.” Post-medieval Horse Bones from Market In The Jews of Europe in the Middle Ages (Tenth to  Harborough, Leicestershire, England, UK.” Fifteenth Centuries), edited by Christoph Cluse, Circaea 11/2: 65–79. 391–403. Speyer: Historisches Museum der Bazell, Diane M. 1997. “Strife among the Table- Pfalz. Fellows: Conflicting Attitudes of Early and Corrie, George Elwesm, ed. 1845. Sermons  and  Medieval Christians toward the Eating of Remains  of  Hugh  Latimer,  Sometime  Bishop  of  Meat.”  Journal  of  the  American  Academy  of  Worcester,  Martyr,  1555. Cambridge: Parker Religion 65/1: 73–99. Society. Berend, Nora. 2001. At the Gate of Christendom: Jews  Cowie, Robert and Alan Pipe. 1998. “A Late Muslims  and  ‘Pagans’  in  Medieval  Hungary,  c.  Medieval and Tudor Horse Burial Ground: 1000–c.1300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Excavations at Elverton Street, Westminster.” Press.  Archaeological Journal 155: 226–251. Bertašius, Mindaugas. 2009. Marvelė:  ein  Gräberfeld  Cuffel, Alexandra. 2007. Gendering  Disgust  in  Mittellitauens  2,  Ein  Bestattungsplatz  mit  Medieval  Religious  Polemic. Notre Dame, Ind.: Pferdegräbern. Kaunas: Kaunas Technologijos University of Notre Dame Press. Universitetas. Daróczi-Szabó, László. 2004. “Animal Bones as Bertašius, Mindaugas. 2012. “Horse Burials as Indicators of Kosher Food Refuse from 14th Public Ritual: Lithuanian Perspectives.” In The  century AD Buda, Hungary.” In Behaviour  Ritual  Killing  and  Burial  of  Animals:  European  Behind  Bones:  The  Zooarchaeology  of  Ritual,  Perspectives, edited by Aleksander Pluskowski, Religion,  Status  and  Identity, edited by Sharyn 61–75. Oxford: Oxbow.   Jones O’Day, Wim Van Neer and Anton Bildhauer, Bettina and Robert Mills, eds. 2003. The  Ervynck, 252–261. Oxford: Oxbow. Monstrous  Middle  Ages. Cardiff: Cardiff Daróczi-Szabó, Márta. 2009. “Secular and Sacred University Press. Dogs from a Medieval Village in Hungary.” Biller, Peter. 2001. “Through a Glass Darkly: Seeing Journal of Veterinary Behavior 4/2: 64. Medieval Heresy”. In The  Medieval  World, Epstein, Marc M. 1997. Dreams  of  Subversion  in  edited by Peter Linehan and Janet L. Nelson, Medieval  Jewish  Art  &  Literature. University 308–326. London: Routledge. Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press. 121 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  Ervynck, Anton. 2004. “Orant, Pugnant, Laborant. Hutton, Ronald. 2001. The  Rise  and  Fall  of  Merry  The Diet of the Three Orders in the Feudal England:  The  Ritual  Year,  1400–1700. Oxford: Society of Medieval North-western Europe.” Oxford University Press. In Behaviour Behind Bones: The Zooarchaeology of  Ijzereef, F. G. 1989. “Social Differentiation From Ritual,  Religion,  Status  and  Identity, edited by Animal Bones Studies.” In Diet  and  Crafts in  Sharyn Jones O’Day, Wim Van Neer and Towns; The Evidence of Animal Remains from the  Anton Ervynck, 215–223. Oxford: Oxbow. Roman to Post‐Medieval Periods, edited by Dale Fabre-Vassas, Claudine. 1997. The  Singular  Beast.  Serjeantson and Tony Waldron, 41–53. Oxford: Jews,  Christians  and  the  Pig. New York: Archaeopress, BAR British Series 199. Columbia University Press. Kieckhefer, Richard. 1995. “The Office of Inquisition Fern, Chris. 2012. “Early Anglo-Saxon Horse and Medieval Heresy: The Transaction from Culture and Funerary Ritual (c. AD 450-650): Personal to Institutional Jurisdiction.” The  Active  Mythology in a European Context.” In Journal of Ecclesiastical History 46/1: 36–61. The  Ritual  Killing  and  Burial  of  Animals:  Kovačević, Marijana. 2009. “The Images of European  Perspectives, edited by Aleksander Dragons in the Gothic Style Goldsmiths’ Work Pluskowski, 164–183. Oxford: Oxbow. of Zadar.” Ikon 2/2: 217–228. Freidenreich, David. M. 2008. “Sharing Meals with Laszlovsky, Jozsef, ed. 1998. Tender Meat Under the  Non-Christians in Canon Law Commentaries, Saddle:  Customs  of  Eating,  Drinking  and  Circa 1160-1260: A Case Study in Legal Hospitality  among  Conquering  Hungarians  and  Development.” Medieval Encounters 14: 41–77. Nomadic  Peoples. Medium Aevum Gerken, Julia. 2009. “Human-Animal Relationships Quotidianum, Sonderband VII. Wein: Krems. Reflected in Early Medieval Horse Burials in Leifson, Rúnar. 2012. “Evolving Traditions: Horse Germany.” In Csontvázak  a  szekrényből Slaughter as Part of Viking Burial Customs in (Skeletons  from  the  Cupboard), edited by László Iceland.” In The  Ritual  Killing  and  Burial  of  Bartosiewicz, Erika Gál and István Kováts, 65– Animals:  European  Perspectives, edited by 71. Budapest: Martin Opitz Kiadó. Alekander Pluskowski, 184–194. Oxford: Gilchrist, Roberta and Barney Sloane. 2005. Oxbow. Requiem:  the  Medieval  Monastic  Cemetery  in  Lippincott, Louise W. 1981. “The Unnatural Britain. London: Museum of London History of Dragons.” Philadelphia  Museum  of  Archaeology Service. Art Bulletin 77/334: 2–24. Ginzburg, Carlo. 1992. The  Night  Battles:  Witchcraft  Loumand, Ulla. 2006. “The Horse and its Role in and  Agrarian  Cults  in  the  Sixteenth  and  Icelandic Burial Practices, Mythology and Seventeenth Centuries. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Society.” In Old  Norse  Religion  in  Long‐term  University Press. Perspectives, edited by Anders Andrén, Kristina Given, James B. 1997. Inquisition  and  Medieval  Jennbert and Catharina Raudvere, 130–134. Society:  Power,  Discipline  and  Resistance  in  Lund: Nordic Academic Press. Languedoc. New York: Cornell University Press. Luff, Rosemary M. and Marta Moreno García. Grumett, David and Rachel Muers. 2010. Theology  1995. “Killing Cats in the Medieval Period. An on  the Menu: Asceticism, Meat  and the  Christian  Usual Episode in the History of Cambridge, Diet. London: Routledge. England.” Archaeofauna 4: 93–114. Hinton, David. 2003. “Medieval Anglo-Jewry: the Mariaux, Pierre-Alain. 2006. “Collecting and Display”. Archaeological Evidence.” In The  Jews  in  In A Companion  to  Medieval  Art:  Romanesque  and  Medieval  Britain.  Historical,  Literary  and  Gothic  in  Medieval  Europe, edited by Conrad Archaeological  Perspectives, edited by Patricia  Rudolph, 233–252. Malden: Blackwell. Skinner, 97–111. Woodbridge: Boydell. Melinkoff, Ruth. 1993. Outcasts: Signs of Otherness in  Hukantaival, Sonja. 2007. “Hare’s Feet under a Northern  European  Art  of  the  Late  Middle  Ages.  Hearth – Discussing ‘Ritual’ Deposits in Berkeley, CA – Oxford: University of California Buildings.” In Hortus  Novus.  Fresh  Approaches  Press. to Medieval Archaeology in Finland. Archaeologia  Merback, Mitchell, B. 1999. The Thief, the Cross and  Medii  Aevi  Finlandiae  XIV, edited by Visa the  Wheel:  Pain  and  the  Spectacle  of  Punishment  Immonen, Mia Lempiäinen and Ulrika in  Medieval  and  Renaissance  Europe. London: Rosendahl, 66–75. Turku: Suomen keskiajan Reaktion Books.  arkeologian seura. 122  A. Pluskowski: The Dragon’s Skull: How Can Zooarchaeologists Contribute... Merrifield, Ralph. 1988. The  Archaeology  of  Ritual  Pluskowski, Aleksander, ed. 2011. The  Ritual  and Magic. New York: New Amsterdam. Killing  and  Burial  of  Animals  in  the  Past:  Moore, Robert, I. 2007. The  Formation  of  a  European Perspectives. Oxford: Oxbow. Persecuting  Society:  Power  and  Deviance  in  Prummel, Wietske. 1992. “Early Medieval Dog Western  Europe,  950–1250. Oxford: Blackwell Burials Among the Germanic Tribes.” (second edition). Helinium 32/1–2: 132–194. Morris, James. 2011. Investigating  Animal  Burials;  Pujmanová, Olga. 1980. “Několik poznámek k Ritual,  Mundane  and  Beyond. Oxford: dílům Tomasa da Modena na Karlštejně.” Archaeopress. BAR, British Series 535. Uměni 28: 305–332. Müller-Wille, Michael. 1970–1971. “Pferdegrab und Rackham, James D. 2004. “Physical Remains of Pferdeopfer im fruhen Mittelalter.” Berichten  Medieval Horses.” In The  Medieval  Horse  and  van  de  Rijksdienst  voor  het  Oudheidkundig  its  Equipment, edited by John Clark, 19–32. Bodemonderzoek 20/21: 119–248. Woodbridge: Boydell (second edition). O’Connor, Terry. 1989. Bones  from  Anglo‐ Redman, Nicolas. 2004. Whales’  Bones  of  the  British  Scandinavian Levels at 16‐22 Coppergate. London: Isles. Teddington: Redman publishing. CBA. Redman, Nicolas. 2009. Whales’  Bones  of  Germany,  O’Connor, Terry. 1993. “Process and Terminology Austria,  Czech  Republic  and  Switzerland. in Mammal Carcass Reduction.” International  Teddington: Redman publishing. Journal of Osteoarchaeology 3/2: 63–67. Remensnyder, Amy. 1996. “Legendary Treasure at Ormerod, Paul and Andrew P. Roach. 2004. “The Conques: Reliquaries and Imaginative Medieval Inquisition: Scale-Free Networks Memory.” Speculum 71/4: 884–906. and the Suppression of Heresy.” Physica  A:  Resnick, Irven. 2011. “Dietary Laws in Medieval Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 339/3– Christian-Jewish Polemics: A Survey.” Studies  4: 645–652. in Jewish‐Christian Relations 6/1: 1–15. Otavský, Karel. 2005. “Arm Reliquary”. In Prague:  Reynolds, Andrew. 2009. Anglo‐Saxon  Deviant  The  Crown  of  Bohemia,  1347–1437, edited by Burial  Customs. Oxford: Oxford University Barbara Drake Boehm and Jiri Fajt, 160–161. Press. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art – Riches, Samantha J. E. 2003. “Encountering the New Haven: Yale University Press. Monstrous: Saints and Dragons in Medieval Pearson, Jane and Hew D. V. Prendergast. 2001. Thought.” In The  Monstrous  Middle  Ages, “Daemonorops, Dracaena and Other Dragon’s edited by Bettina Bildhauer and Robert Mills. Blood.” Economic Botany 55/4: 474–477. 196–218. Cardiff: University of Wales Press. Pingel, Christian. 1834. Grønland:  antiqvariske  Robertson, Anne Walters. 2006. “The Savior, the Efterretninger. Copenhagen. Woman and the Head of the Dragon in the Pluskowski,  Aleksander. 2005a. “Narwhals or Caput Masses and Motet.” Journal  of  the  Unicorns? Exotic Animals as Material Culture American Musicological Society, 59/3: 537–630. in Medieval Europe.”  European  Journal  of  Roesdahl, Else, 1998. “L’ivoire de morse et les Archaeology 7/3: 291–313.  colonies noroises du Groenland.” Proxima  Pluskowski, Aleksander. 2005b. “Wolves and Thulé 3: 9–48. Sheep in Medieval Semiotics, Iconology and Ruggerini, Maria, Elena. 2001. “St Michael and the Ecology: A Case Study of Multi- and Inter- Dragon from Scripture to Hagiography.” In disciplinary Approaches to Human-Animal Monsters  and  the  Monstrous  in  Medieval  Relations in the Historical Past”. In Animal  Northwest  Europe, edited by R. Olsen and K. Diversities, edited by Gerhard Jaritz and Alice Olsen, 23–58. Leuven – Sterling, Va.: Peeters. Choyke, 9–22. Krems: M.A.Q. Rynne, Etienne and C. A. Erskine. 1961. “A Pluskowski, Aleksander. 2007. “Communicating Medieval Burial at ‘Slagfield’, near Moytirra, through Skin and Bone: The Appropriation of County Sligo.” Journal  of  the  Galway  Animal Bodies in Medieval Western Archaeological and Historical Society 29/3–4: 71– Seigneurial Culture.” In Breaking  and  Shaping  73. Beastly Bodies: Animals as Material Culture in the  Salisbury, Joyce E. 2011. The  Beast  Within:  Animals  Middle Ages, edited by Aleksander Pluskowski, in the Middle Ages. London: Routledge (second 32–51. Oxford: Oxbow. edition). 123 Animals and Otherness in the Middle Ages: Perspectives Across Disciplines  Schafer, Edward H. 1957. “Rosewood, Dragon’s Blood and Lac.” Journal  of  the  American  Oriental Society 77/2: 129–136. Schmitt, Jean-Claude. 1983. The  Holy  Greyhound:  Guinefort, Healer of Children since the Thirteenth  Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sikora, Maeve. 2003–2004. “Diversity in Viking Age Horse Burial: A Comparative Study of Norway, Iceland, Scotland and Ireland.” The  Journal of Irish Archaeology 12–13: 87–109. Simpson, Jacqueline. 1978. “Fifty British Dragon Tales: An Analysis.” Folklore 89/1: 79–93. Strickland, Debra Higgs. 2003. Saracens,  Demons,  and  Jews.  Making  Monsters  in  Medieval  Art. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Svanberg, Fredrik. 2003. Death Rituals in South‐east  Scandinavia,  AD  800–1000. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wicksell. Szabo, Vicki Ellen. 2008. Monstrous  Fishes  and  the  Mead‐Dark  Sea:  Whaling  in  the  Medieval  North  Atlantic. Leiden: Brill. Walsham, Alexandra. 2010. “Skeletons in the Cupboard: Relics after the English Reformation.” Past and Present 206/5: 121–143. Williams, David. 1996. Deformed  Discourse:  the  Function of the Monster in Medieval Thought and  Literature. Exeter: University of Exeter Press. Wood, Christopher S. 2005. “Maximilian I as Archaeologist.” Renaissance  Quarterly 58/4: 1128–1174. Woolgar, Christopher M. 2006a. “Meat and Dairy Products in Late Medieval England.” In Food  in  Medieval  England:  Diet  and  Nutrition, edited by Christopher Woolgar, Dale Serjeantson and Tony Waldron, 88–101. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Woolgar, Christopher M. 2006b. “Group Diets in Late Medieval England.” In Food  in  Medieval  England:  Diet  and  Nutrition, edited by Christopher Woolgar, Dale Serjeantson and Tony Waldron, 191–200. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 124