Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology

2014 Edition
| Editors: Claire Smith

Zooarchaeology

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_2160
How to cite

Introduction

Animals have played key roles in society, evolving alongside people from the Paleolithic right up until today. First they served as a source of food: animals were killed or scavenged for their meat, fat, and marrow as well as their skins and bones for manufacturing. Since domestication, secondary products such as milk, wool, or labor have also been provided by animals. Alongside practical innovation, perceptions of animals also evolved into a range of often subtle varieties. Human–animal interactions are therefore of utmost interest in reconstructing ancient cultures. Moreover, animals are often used as media-conveying messages that reflect relationships between people: they have formed an integral part of our mentality. Animal remains are usually brought to light in substantial quantities during archaeological excavations. As such, they potentially offer statistically reliable information on how humans interacted with their environments and with one another.

Definition

Zoo...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Binford, L. R. 1981. Bones. Ancient men and modern myths. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bookstein, F. 1991. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bökönyi, S. 1984. Animal husbandry and hunting in Tác–Gorsium. The vertebrate fauna of a Roman town. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
  4. Braidwood, R. J. 1967. Prehistoric men. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Brochier, J.É. 2012. The use and abuse of culling profiles in recent zooarchaeological studies: some methodological comments on “frequency correction” and its consequences. Journal of Archaeological Science 40(2): 1416–1420.Google Scholar
  6. Brothwell, D. & E. Higgs. (ed.) 1969. Science in archaeology. New York: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  7. Buckley, M., S. W. Kansa, S. Howard, S. Campbell, J. Thomas-Oates & M. Collins. 2010. Distinguishing between archaeological sheep and goat bones using a single collagen peptide. Journal of Archaeological Science 37: 13–20.Google Scholar
  8. Collins, M., M. Buckley, H.H. Grundy, J. Thomas-Oates, J. Wilson & N. van Doorn. 2010. ZooMS: the collagen barcode and fingerprints. Spectroscopy Europe 22: 2–2.Google Scholar
  9. Craig, O. E., J. Chapman, C. Heron, L.H. Willis, L. Bartosiewicz, G. Taylor, A. Whittle & M. Collins. 2005. Did the first farmers of central and eastern Europe produce dairy foods? Antiquity 79: 882–894.Google Scholar
  10. Duerst, J.U. 1926. Vergleichende Untersuchungsmethoden am Skelett bei Säugern, in O. Abderhalden (ed.) Handbuch der biologischen Arbeitsmethoden 7/2:125–530.Bern; Wien; Berlin: Urban und Schwarzenberg.Google Scholar
  11. Efremov, I.A. 1940. Taphonomy: new branch of paleontology. Pan-American Geologist 74: 81–93.Google Scholar
  12. Enghoff, I.B., B.R. MacKenzie & E.E. Nielsen. 2007. The Danish fish fauna during the warm Atlantic period (ca. 7,000-3,900 BC): forerunner of future changes? Fisheries Research 87: 167–180.Google Scholar
  13. Evershed, R. P., H. R. Mottram, S. N. Dudd, S. Charters, A.W. Stott, G.J. Lawrence, A.M. Gibson, A. Conner, P. Blinkhorn & V. Reeves. 1997. New criteria for the identification of animal fats in archaeological pottery. Naturwissenschaften 84: 402–406.Google Scholar
  14. Forchhammer, G., J.C.H.R. Steenstrup & J. Worsaae. 1851–1856. Undersøgelser i geologisk-antikvarisk retning. København: Kongliga Hofbogtrykker Bianco Luno.Google Scholar
  15. Grayson, D.K. 1984. Quantitative zooarchaeology (Studies in Archaeological Science). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Harris, D.R. (ed.) 1996. The origins and spread of agriculture and pastoralism in Eurasia. Washington (DC): Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  17. Higuchi, R., B. Bowman, M. Freiberger, O. A. Ryder & A.C. Wilson. 1984. DNA sequences from the quagga, an extinct member of the horse family. Nature 312: 282–284. doi:10.1038/312282a0Google Scholar
  18. Larson, G., U. Albarella, K. Dobney, P. Rowley-Conwy, J. Schibler, A. Tresset. J.-D. Vigne, C. J. Edwards, A. Schlumbaum, A. Dinu, A. Bălăşescu, G. Gaynor Dolman, A. Tagliacozzo, N. Manaseryan, P. Miracle, L. Van Wijngaarden-Bakker, M. Masseti, D. G. Bradley & A. Cooper. 2007. Ancient DNA, pig domestication, and the spread of the Neolithic into Europe. PNAS 104 (39): 15276–15281.Google Scholar
  19. Marciniak, A. 2005. Placing animals in the Neolithic. Social zooarchaeology of prehistoric farming communities. London: University College of London Press.Google Scholar
  20. Morales, A. & K. Rosenlund. 1979. Fish bone measurements. An attempt to standardize the measuring of fish bones from archaeological sites. Copenhagen: Steenstrupia.Google Scholar
  21. Outram, A. K., N. A. Stear, R. Bendrey, S. Olsen, A. Kasparov, V. Zaibert, N. Thorpe & R. P. Evershed. 2009. The earliest horse harnessing and milking. Science 323(6): 1332–1335.Google Scholar
  22. Payne, S. 1973. Kill-off patterns in sheep and goats: the mandibles from Aşvan Kale. Anatolian Studies 23: 281-303.Google Scholar
  23. Pedrosa, S., M. Uzun, J.-J. Arranz, B. Gutiérrez-Gil, F. San Primitivo & Y. Bayón. 2007. Evidence of three maternal lineages in near eastern sheep supporting multiple domestication events. Proceedings of the Royal Society B (2005) 272: 2211–2217. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3204Google Scholar
  24. Peters, J. 1997. Der Hund in der Antike aus archäozoologischer Sicht. Anthropozoologica 25–26: 511–523.Google Scholar
  25. Price, T. D., J. Burton & R. A. Bentley. 2002. The characterization of biologically available strontium isotope ratios for the study of prehistoric migration. Archaeometry 44: 117–135.Google Scholar
  26. Robison, N. D. 1987. Zooarchaeology: its history and development, in A. E. Bogan & N. D. Robison (ed.) The zooarchaeology of eastern North America: history, method and theory, and bibliography(Miscellaneous Paper 12): 1–26. Knoxville (TN): Tennessee Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
  27. Russell, N. 2012. Social zooarchaeology: humans and animals in prehistory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rütimeyer, L. 1861. Die Fauna der Pfahlbauten der Schweiz. Untersuchungen über die Geschichte der wilden und der Haus-Säugetiere von Mittel-Europa. Allgemeine Schweizerische Gesellschaft für die Gesamten Naturwissenschaften/Société Helvétique des Sciences Naturelles 19.Google Scholar
  29. Schiffer, M. B. 1987. Formation processes of the archaeological record. Salt Lake City (UT): University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schmid, E. 1972. Atlas of animal bones/Knochenatlas. Amsterdam, London, New York: Elsevier Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  31. Semenov, S. A. 1964. Prehistoric technology: an experimental study of the oldest tools and artefacts from traces of manufacture and wear. London: Cory, Adams & Mackay.Google Scholar
  32. Van der Merwe, N. J. 1982. Carbon isotopes, photosynthesis, and archaeology. American Scientist 70: 596–606.Google Scholar
  33. Vigne, J.-D. & D. Helmer. 2007. Was milk a ‘secondary product’ in the old world neolithisation process? Its role in the domestication of cattle, sheep and goats. Anthropozoologica 42: 9–40.Google Scholar
  34. Virchow, R. C. 1872. Über moderne Pfahlanlagen und Küchenabfälle in Berlin. Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte October 1871–November 1872: 123–124.Google Scholar
  35. Von den Driesch, A. 1976. Das Vermessen von Tierknochen aus vor- und frühgeschichtlichen Siedlungen. Dissertation, Institut für Paläoanatomie, Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Tiermedizin der Universität München.Google Scholar
  36. White, T. E. 1953. A method of calculating the dietary percentage of various food animals used by aboriginal peoples. American Antiquity 18: 396–398.Google Scholar
  37. Wyman, J. 1868. An account of some kjoekkenmoeddings, or shell-heaps, in Maine and Massachusetts. American Naturalist 1(11): 561–584.Google Scholar

Further Reading

  1. Bökönyi, S. 1974. History of domestic mammals in central and eastern Europe. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
  2. Higgs, E. S. (ed.) 1972. Papers in economic prehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Matolcsi, J. (ed.) 1973. Domestikationsforschung und Geschichte der Haustiere: Internationales Symposion in Budapest 1971. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.Google Scholar
  4. Reitz, E. J. & E. S. Wing. 1999. Zooarchaeology (Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Van der Warker, A. M. & T. M. Peres.(ed.) 2010. Integrating zooarchaeology and paleoethnobotany. A consideration of issues, methods, and cases. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Archaeological Sciences, ELTEBudapestHungary